Seismic Design of Metal Arch Culverts: Design Codes Vs. Full Dynamic Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Corrugated steel plate (CSP) culverts have been used successfully in diverse applications throughout North America and worldwide. Seismic loading has a considerable effect on the performance of large-span culverts. However, there is a lack of comprehensive studies in the literature concerning the seismic performance of these structures. In this study, full dynamic finite element modelling was used to investigate the seismic performance of large-span CSP culverts. First, the static behavior of a long-span culvert was verified using a field case study. Dynamic analyses were then performed with the aid of seismic records with different levels of seismicity. The finite element analysis results were subsequently compared with commonly used simplified seismic provisions to evaluate their suitability. Furthermore, a parametric study was developed to investigate the seismic behavior of CSP culverts under different subsurface conditions, and to examine the effect of changing the culvert rigidity and configuration. This study clearly shows that the commonly used simplified equations underestimate the internal forces, and consequently, for culverts located in zones of high seismicity, a full dynamic finite element analysis is required.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".