MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315479985 · doi:10.1061/jpcfev.cfeng-3899

Blast-Resistant Window Anchors. II: Numerical Investigation

2023· article· en· W4315479985 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Performance of Constructed Facilities · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis of Composite Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringParametric statisticsMasonryEngineeringImpulse (physics)Window (computing)Computer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A combined experimental and analytical investigation was conducted at the University of Ottawa to assess the performance of blast-resistant window retention anchors to generate design information. The experimental phase of research involved 46 full-scale window tests with different parameters. The analytical investigation included numerical modeling and dynamic analysis of windows to expand the experimental results and to assess the significance of design parameters. Computer software LS-DYNA was selected for the analyses. Analytical models of selected test windows with aspect ratios of 1.0 and 3.0 anchored on structural steel, reinforced concrete, concrete block masonry, and stone masonry substrates were modeled. The models were validated against experimental data. Additional windows with aspect ratios of 1.5 and 2.0 were also modeled for investigation. The models were used to conduct a parametric investigation with the parameters consisting of substrate flexibility, anchor fixity conditions, window size and aspect ratio, frame rigidity, number and spacing of anchors, and the threat level as defined by reflected pressure-impulse combinations. The significance of each parameter is illustrated with emphasis placed on the magnitude of anchor shear and tension design forces. The distribution of anchor forces is obtained numerically. Anchor forces and distributions are compared with those observed experimentally. Design force distribution along the perimeter of window frames is recommended for use in design. The paper provides the results of numerical simulations illustrating the significance of design parameters on anchor design force levels and their distributions.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.183 · 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