Effect of Abutment Shear Keys on the Seismic Response of Bridges
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
Seismic analysis results of typical post-tensioned concrete bridges are presented considering the nonlinear behavior of transverse abutment shear. Current Caltrans and AASHTO bridge design criteria present overly general assumptions for the boundary conditions provided by abutment shear keys. This work uses a suite of ground acceleration time histories to compare the code specified assumptions to a more rigorous abutment shear key model that includes the lateral gap between the superstructure and the keys as well as the non-linear material response of the key itself. With the exception of the abutment shear key elements, the bridges are modeled using linear-elastic frame elements, as is typical in practice. Results of a sensitivity analysis are presented for typical parameters, including: record variability, bridge skew, bridge length, and bent heights. The analysis results precede a discussion which demonstrates the necessity for experimental work on this topic to verify the adequacy of the existing design code.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it