MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308864932 · doi:10.5267/j.esm.2022.8.002

The analysis of numerical self-compacting concrete wall panel models with variations of shear reinforcement

2022· article· en· W4308864932 on OpenAlex
Siti Aisyah Nurjannah, Saloma Saloma, Yulindasari Yulindasari, Kiagus Muhammad Aminuddin, Gilbert Chuhairy

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Solid Mechanics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical and construction materials studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitas Sriwijaya
KeywordsShear wallReinforcementStructural engineeringMaterials scienceDuctility (Earth science)Shear (geology)StiffnessComposite materialShear strength (soil)Boundary value problemGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reinforced concrete wall critical zones are the responsive areas of dissipated earthquake loads. They are formed in the connection of the wall panels and the fixed restraints. The longitudinal and transversal steel reinforcements with certain spacing are designed according to the required nominal strength at the connections. Under certain conditions, the reinforcement distance becomes very tight, making working on castings using normal concrete difficult. This condition also occurs in boundary elements consisting of longitudinal and transversal reinforcements in tight spaces. A concrete material that flows easily and solidifies itself is required to avoid segregation. One type of this material is Self-Compacting Concrete (SCC). The SCC performance as a wall panel material that withstands gravity and cyclic lateral loads still require further research. This study aimed to analyze the hysteretic performance of reinforced SCC wall panels with variations of shear reinforcement in resisting cyclic lateral loads. The analysis used software based on numerical analysis. The drift ratios, hysteretic curves, stress patterns, ductility, and stiffness of the wall panels were analyzed. The SCC wall panel with ordinary shear reinforcement resisted lateral positive and negative loads of 152.32 kN and 143.09 kN, respectively. In comparison, the wall panel with boundary elements and tighter shear reinforcements could withstand the positive and negative lateral loads of 187.62 kN and 145.98 kN, respectively. The SCC wall panel reached the best ductility of 21.38 with ordinary shear reinforcement because the yield occurred faster than in other wall panels. The results showed that the boundary elements and shear reinforcements of reinforced SCC wall panels affected the performance in resisting cyclic lateral loads.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.176 · 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