MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306737483 · doi:10.3390/buildings12101724

Progressive Collapse Resistance of RC Beam–Slab Substructures Made with Rubberized Concrete

2022· article· en· W4306737483 on OpenAlexaff
Ibrahim M.H. Alshaikh, Aref A. Abadel, Khaled Sennah, Moncef L. Nehdi, Rabin Tuladhar, Mohammed Alamri

Bibliographic record

VenueBuildings · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsProgressive collapseStructural engineeringFinite element methodCatenarySlabBeam (structure)TrussFull scaleResilience (materials science)Reinforced concreteMaterials scienceEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abnormal loads can produce localized damage that can eventually cause progressive collapse of the whole reinforced concrete (RC) structure. This might have devastating financial repercussions and cause numerous severe casualties. Numerical simulation, using the finite element method (FEM), of the consequences of abnormal loads on buildings is thus required to avoid the significant expenses associated with testing full-scale buildings and to save time. In this paper, FEM simulations, using ABAQUS software, were employed to investigate the progressive collapse resistance of the full-scale three-dimensional (3D) beam–slab substructures, considering two concrete mixes, namely: normal concrete (NC) and rubberized concrete (RuC) which was made by incorporating crumb rubber at 20% by volume replacement for sand. The FEM accuracy and dependability were validated using available experimental test results. Concrete and steel material non-linearity were considered in the FE modelling. The numerical study is extended to include eight new models with various specifics (a set of parameters) for further understanding of progressive collapse. Results showed that slabs contribute more than a third of the load resistance, which also significantly improves the building’s progressive collapse resistance. Moreover, the performance of the RuC specimens was excellent in the catenary stage, which develops additional resilience to significant deformation to prevent or even mitigate progressive collapse.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations29
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuildingsSame topicStructural Response to Dynamic LoadsFrench-language works237,207