MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Behavior of Seismically Detailed Reinforced Concrete Block Shear Walls with Boundary Elements under Out-of-Plane Loading

2020· article· en· W2999089184 on OpenAlexaff
Tarek El-Hashimy, Mohamed Ezzeldin, Wael El‐Dakhakhni, Michael J. Tait

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforced concreteShear (geology)Shear wallStructural engineeringBlock (permutation group theory)GeologyBoundary (topology)Materials sciencePlane (geometry)Seismic loadingGeotechnical engineeringComposite materialEngineeringGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although boundary elements have been known to enhance the in-plane performance of reinforced concrete block shear walls under seismic loading, research examining their influence on the walls’ out-of-plane performance (e.g., due to blast loading) is very scarce. Unlike conventional walls with rectangular cross sections, boundary elements allow the use of closed ties and multiple layers of vertical reinforcement, thus enhancing the wall’s overall out-of-plane resistance and stiffness. Nevertheless, the corresponding wall performance and damage sequence beyond peak resistance have been neither experimentally nor analytically quantified to date. Therefore, current blast standards do not assign unique design requirements or response limits for reinforced concrete block walls with boundary elements due to the limited number of relevant studies published when these standards were originally developed. To address this knowledge gap, an experimental program was initiated to investigate the out-of-plane performance of seven scaled seismically-detailed reinforced concrete block axially loaded walls with boundary elements under quasi-static displacement-controlled cyclic loading. Several design parameters were considered in the test matrix, which included the wall vertical reinforcement ratio and distribution, the boundary elements alignment relative to the wall web, the wall aspect ratio, and axial load level. The resistance function of the walls and the corresponding damage sequence, as well as the ductility capacity were also used to assess the walls’ out-of-plane performances. Finally, two experimentally validated models, based on plastic analysis, were developed to generate the resistance functions of all walls. The experimental and analytical results in the current study demonstrated the importance of considering the two-way bending mechanism associated with reinforced concrete block walls with boundary elements when their performance is evaluated under out-of-plane loading demands.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Structural EngineeringSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207