MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214523293 · doi:10.1108/ijsi-01-2022-0004

An investigation of the effects of aspect ratio and opening on CSPSW and TSCSW

2022· article· en· W4214523293 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Structural Integrity · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceDissipationStructural engineeringShear wallStiffnessDuctility (Earth science)Shear (geology)Composite numberAspect ratio (aeronautics)Composite materialSteel plate shear wallSquare (algebra)Core (optical fiber)EngineeringCreepGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper aims to study, the effects of opening shape, size and position as well as the aspect (height-to-length) ratio on the shear capacity, stiffness, ductility and energy dissipation capacity of triple-skin profiled steel-concrete composite shear wall (TSCSW) and investigate and compare them to those of concrete-stiffened steel plate shear walls (CSPSW). Two kinds of opening, circular and square, with different sizes and positions and two aspect ratios of 1:1 and 3:1 are considered in the simulations. Design/methodology/approach This study presents a novel TSCSW and compares its behavior with the existing CSPSW under the effect of monotonic and cyclic loadings. TSCSW is composed of three corrugated steel plates filled with concrete. The two external side plates are connected to the concrete core by means of several intermediate fasteners and the third one is an inner steel plate embedded within the concrete panel. The internal plate is a buckling restrained plate surrounded by concrete. This is the main superiority of TSCSW over other kinds of existing composite shear walls. Findings The results show that the shear capacity and the energy dissipation capacity of the proposed composite wall, TSCSW, are respectively about 16 and 12% higher than those of CSPSW when there is no opening. If an opening is considered in the wall, as the size of the opening is increased, the shear capacity, stiffness, ductility and absorbed energy of the two walls are decreased similarly. The destructive effect of square openings on the performance of the walls is more than that of circular openings. Originality/value This is an original work.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.237 · 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