MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A contact-based constitutive model for the numerical analysis of masonry structures using the distinct element method

2024· article· en· W4401358073 on OpenAlexaff
Yopi Prabowo Oktiovan, Francesco Messali, Bora Pulatsu, José V. Lemos, J.G. Rots

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers & Structures · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasonryConstitutive equationStructural engineeringMaterials scienceShear (geology)Finite element methodUnilateral contactHardening (computing)Nonlinear systemMechanicsComposite materialEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents a robust contact constitutive model in the distinct element method (DEM) framework for simulating the mechanical behavior of masonry structures. The model is developed within the block-based modeling strategy, where the masonry unit is modeled as deformable blocks with potential crack surfaces in the middle of the bricks, while the mortar joints are defined as zero-thickness interfaces. The modeling strategy implements multi-surface plasticity with damage mechanics, including a tension cut-off, Coulomb failure criterion, and an elliptical compressive cap for the damage in tension, shear, and compression, respectively. Two new features are introduced in this contact model: a piecewise linear softening function for strength degradation in tension and shear and a hardening/softening function to phenomenologically define the compressive damage of masonry composite into the unit-mortar interface. The constitutive model is implemented in commercial DEM software using the small displacement configuration and validated against material and experimental tests on masonry walls subjected to constant pre-compression and monotonically increasing in-plane load. The experimental and numerical results regarding the force-displacement relationship and damage pattern produced by the proposed constitutive model are compared and critically discussed, demonstrating the capability of DEM coupled with the suitable constitutive law in simulating the behavior of masonry structures.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations23
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputers & StructuresSame topicMasonry and Concrete Structural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207