Seismic behavior of a masonry chimney retrofitted with composite materials: A preliminary approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a structural analysis of a masonry chimney, which is being catalogued as local interest heritage, according Eurocode 8.The chimney, located in Alicante (Spain), is severely damaged, and it shows several longitudinal cracks, and mortar loss between bricks.In order to guarantee the structural safety under seismic forces, the chimney was retrofitted with composite materials.This reinforcement comprised an internal textile reinforced mortar (TRM) layer, i.e. glass fiber mesh and cement matrix, and local reinforcement with longitudinal carbon fiber bands.This study consisted of two stages: first, numerical and experimental analyses of the original chimney were done.Second, design of an internal reinforcement scheme was done.The experimental text includes acceleration measures under ambient vibration for an operational modal analysis.And laboratory test for bricks and mortar to study the mineralogical composition and mechanical properties.The numerical analysis includes, preliminary pushover analysis before and after the reinforcement was done, and second, linear response spectrum analysis to evaluate the structural stability under the seismic demand.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".