Seismic Retrofit of Concrete Block Wall Intersections Using Composite Laminates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experimental study was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of strengthening the intersection of flanged concrete block shear walls using surface-bonded composite laminates. A total of 15 specially designed flange-web intersecting wall specimens were tested using four different retrofit schemes. Tests included wall intersections reinforced with unidirectional laminate with the fibers oriented perpendicular to loading direction (90°), and bi-directional laminate with orientations of (90°/0°), (90°/0°) 2 , and (45°/135°) to the applied load direction. The behavior of each specimen type is discussed with respect to its failure mode, strength, and deformation characteristics. Results showed that the composite laminates significantly increased the shear strength of concrete block shear wall intersections. In addition, the fiber orientation influenced the failure mode and controlled the development of the post-peak deformation capacity of the flange-web intersection. The improved post-peak behavior demonstrated the benefits of retrofitting concrete block wall intersections for strength enhancement. The retrofit scheme resulted in 100%—400% increase in strength compared to non-retrofitted specimens constructed with traditional steel joint reinforcement.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".