MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2093035092 · doi:10.1139/l04-058

Nonlinear modeling of concentrically loaded reinforced blockwork masonry columns

2004· article· en· W2093035092 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hasan Orhun Köksal, Bilge Doran, Ayse Elif Özsoy, Sema Alacalı

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasonryStructural engineeringFinite element methodIsotropyNonlinear systemUltimate loadMaterials scienceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since only a limited number of experimental and analytical studies have been carried out for the purpose of developing strength design procedures for reinforced blockwork masonry columns, there is a certain need for further studies that reflect material properties and behavior of blockwork masonry more closely. This paper deals with a nonlinear finite element modeling of the concentrically loaded reinforced blockwork masonry columns making use of both elasto-plastic and isotropic damage models. If the damage model is enriched with the introduction of a simple relation for the material damage parameter that accounts for the mesh size effect, three-dimensional finite element analyses of columns for the well-known experimental works in the literature are accomplished. Finally, the predictions from both the numerical analyses and the existing expressions for the ultimate load of the masonry columns are compared with the experimental results.Key words: compressive strength, reinforced blockwork masonry column, finite element method, Drucker-Prager yield criterion, isotropic damage theory.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.162 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis→French-language works237,207→