Inelastic modeling and analysis of RC structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper studies the nonlinear static (pushover) and nonlinear dynamic (time-history) analyses of the prototype reinforced concrete frame-wall structure using macroscopic method. A prototype was selected as eight-story RC building with 3×5 bay frame and shear wall designed on the basis of Iranian code for earthquake loading by Equivalent static analysis method and US ACI 318 code for members design. The structure was idealized as parallel plane frames with three different macroscopic member models. The analysis utilized four different hysteresis models for components of member models. The forced-deformation relationships of member models were evaluated based on AIJ Design Guidelines. Nonlinear seismic analyses were carried out for the wall-frame structure subjected to 10 major earthquakes as EL Centro NS 1940, Kobe 1995, Kushiro 1993, Miyagiken 1978, Northridge 1994, Mexico 1985, Tokachi 1968, San-Fernando 1971, Naghan and Tabas (Iran). The RC frame-wall structure was reduced to an equivalent single-degree-of freedom system to estimate nonlinear seismic response of the building from linear response spectrum, which called Equivalent linearization using capacity-demand diagram method. It was shown equivalent linear responses of the prototype structure did not converge to nonlinear time history responses for some of the earthquakes. It converged in many cases but not to the exact deformation determined by nonlinear time history analysis. It could be possible to estimate the nonlinear response by rational method to formulate the equivalent period and damping.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".