Strength and ductility of laterally confined concrete columns
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study is to determine experimentally and analytically the magnitude of the strength enhancement of concrete confined by lateral ties. Sixty-five reinforced concrete columns with a 200 mm square cross section were tested. Experimental parameters include the compressive strength of concrete; the volumetric ratio, strength, and confinement type of rectilinear ties; and the distribution of longitudinal reinforcement bars. The confinement effects are explained by utilizing an effectively confined distance ratio. Tie stress caused by lateral concrete pressure is presented as a function of the volumetric ratio and configuration of ties, and the strength of concrete based on the experimental data and the nonlinear multiple regression method. Based on the empirical data and the nonlinear multiple regression method, this paper presents an empirical equation to determine the strength enhancement as a function of the tie stress, the effectively confined distance ratio, the volumetric ratio of ties, and the strength of concrete. The validity of the American Concrete Institute and Canadian Standards Association specifications for minimum tie spacing and the design of cross ties are examined.Key words: high-strength concrete, ductility, strength enhancement factor, confinement type of ties, volumetric ratio of ties, effectively confined distance ratio, nonlinear multiple regression method.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it