Seismic behaviour of self-insulating inner-framed bearing walls with openings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional masonry structures have prominent problems, such as high building energy consumption and poor seismic performance. In view of this situation, the research group proposed a structural system of self-insulating inner-framed bearing walls (SIBWs) based on the integration of seismic and energy conservation. In this paper, five SIBWs were designed and manufactured. The influence of openings on the seismic performance of the structures was studied, and the unified calculation formula for the seismic bearing capacity was established by a low cycle cyclic loading test. The results showed that all five specimens had a high seismic bearing capacity; ductility coefficients of 2.95, 3.03, 4.09, 3.55, and 3.67, indicating good ductility and deformation capacity; and that the failure modes were all ductile failure modes. The openings had a significant influence on the hysteretic curve, skeleton curve, stiffness, and energy-dissipation capacity of the SIBWs. The failure process of the test wall was characterized by the interaction, transition, and weak framework stages. In theory, based on the equivalent elastic plate model, the unified calculation method of the wall cracking load was established. Based on the idea of the shear resistance mechanism, the diagonal compression bar model of the rigid frame was proposed, and the unified calculation method of the ultimate load of the wall was also established. A comparison with the measured values shows that the calculation method is accurate and that it helps to promote the integrated development of seismic and energy conservation for masonry structures, especially in rural areas.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".