Effects of vertical irregularity and thickness of unreinforced masonry infill on the robustness of RC framed buildings
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
SUMMARY Presence of irregularities in reinforced concrete (RC) buildings increases seismic vulnerability. During severe seismic shaking, such buildings may suffer disproportionate damage or even collapse that can be minimized by increasing robustness. Robustness is a desirable property of structural systems that can mitigate susceptible buildings to disproportionate collapse. In this paper, the effects of vertical irregularity and thickness of unreinforced masonry infill on the robustness of a six‐story three‐bay RC frame are quantified. Nonlinear static analysis of the frame is performed, and parametric study is undertaken by considering two parameters: absence of masonry infill at different floors (i.e., vertical irregularities) and infill thickness. Robustness has been quantified in terms of stiffness, base shear, ductility, and energy dissipation capacity of the frame. It was observed that the infill thickness and vertical irregularity have significant influence on the response of RC frame. The response surface method is used to develop a predictive equation for robustness as a function of the two parameters. The predictive equation is validated further using 12 randomly selected computer simulations. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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) | 0.001 | 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