Shaking table tests of a one-quarter scale model of concrete hollow block masonry houses retrofitted with fiber-reinforced paint
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Unreinforced Masonry (URM) buildings are prone to significant damage when subjected to ground motion. Some strengthening methods have been proposed to increase the seismic capacity. However, the widespread adoption of these methods faces various challenges, including economic constraints experienced by common people in developing countries, the complexity of implementation, efficiency, and seismic safety of each technique. This paper introduces a new retrofitting method of fiber-reinforced paint using fiberglass as the primary reinforcing material. The advantage of this technique lies in its simplicity and ease of application, with the added benefit of using the paint to improve the appearance of the house. Two 1:4 scale Concrete Hollow Block (CHB) masonry houses were constructed to represent unreinforced masonry and retrofitted masonry structures using Fiber-Reinforced Paint (FR-Paint). The shake table test results indicate that the retrofitted house model showed improvements of up to 18 times in deformation capacity and up to 13 times in energy dissipation compared to the non-retrofitted model. FR-Paint has a robust performance even in high input motion at a seismic intensity JMA of 7 (Japan Meteorological Agency). This confirms that this retrofitting method has a high earthquake-resistant performance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".