MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analytical Evaluation of Seismic Performance of RC Frames Rehabilitated Using FRP for Increased Ductility of Members

2008· article· en· W2136369840 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Performance of Constructed Facilities · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsStructural engineeringDissipationDuctility (Earth science)Fibre-reinforced plasticMaterials scienceDisplacement (psychology)Failure mode and effects analysisGeotechnical engineeringShear strength (soil)Shear (geology)AccelerationSeismic analysisEngineeringComposite materialGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many reinforced concrete (RC) frame structures designed according to pre1970 strength-based codes are susceptible to abrupt strength deterioration once the shear capacity of the columns is reached. Fiber composites are used to increase the shear strength of existing RC columns and beams by wrapping or partially wrapping the members. Increasing the shear strength can alter the failure mode to be more ductile with higher energy dissipation and interstorey drift ratio capacities. The objective of this study was to analytically evaluate the effect of varying distributions of fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) rehabilitation on the seismic performance of three existing RC frames with different heights when subjected to three types of scaled ground motion records. The FRP wrapping is designed to increase the displacement ductility of frame members to reach certain values representing moderate ductility and high ductility levels. These values were assumed based on previous experimental work conducted on members wrapped using FRP. The study also investigates the effect of the selected element’s force–displacement backbone curve on the capacities of the structures with respect to maximum interstory drift ratio, maximum peak ground acceleration, or peak ground velocity resisted by the frames, maximum storey shear-to-weight ratio and maximum energy dissipation. It was found that for low-rise buildings, the FRP rehabilitation of columns only was effective in enhancing the seismic performance; while for high-rise ones, rehabilitation of columns only was not as effective as rehabilitation of both columns and beams. Ignoring representing the postpeak strength degradation in the hysteretic nonlinear model of FRP-rehabilitated RC members was found to lead to erroneous overestimation of the seismic performance of the structure.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.228 · 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