MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2495198550 · doi:10.2495/safe-v6-n2-406-417

Performance of one-way reinforced concrete walls subjected to blast loads

2016· article· en· W2495198550 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. Abdel-Mooty, Sayed Alhayawei, Mohamed Issa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringExplosive materialDetonationMaterials scienceParametric statisticsReinforced concreteDisplacement (psychology)ReinforcementEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of one-way reinforced concrete walls in resisting blast loads is numerically evaluated in this paper.Reinforced concrete wall strips of dimension 4.0 × 1.0 m and different thicknesses and supported on two sides spanning in the long direction are subjected to blast loads produced by the detonation of high explosive charges.The modelling and analysis was carried out using ANSYS AUTODYN solver.The accuracy of the modelling and its parameters is numerically verified against published experimental results of blast load tests on reinforced concrete slabs.The model was capable of simulating the observed damage and displacement with reasonable accuracy.The verified model is then used for extensive parametric study to examine the effect of different design parameters on the performance of reinforced concrete walls under the effect of blast loads.The design parameters considered in this study include the effect of concrete compressive strength of RC wall, the wall thickness, the reinforcement amount and details, and reflected peak pressure.The wall performance was evaluated considering maximum displacement, extent of damage and energy absorbed within the wall through damage.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Safety and Security EngineeringSame topicStructural Response to Dynamic LoadsFrench-language works237,207