Lateral Cyclic Response of Bridge Columns Reinforced with CSA G30.18 500W High-Strength Steel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RC structures that are expected to experience significant inelastic deformation require reinforcing steel bars that can endure substantial plastic displacements. Bridge columns’ longitudinal reinforcing rebars have shown buckling, followed by fatigue fracture, especially on the tension side of the RC members. The current research presents the results of an experimental investigation conducted on the seismic performance assessment of two circular RC bridge columns with varying aspect ratios, both reinforced with CSA G30.18 500W. The seismic performance of the bridge columns is evaluated by comparing the hysteresis response, dissipated energy, drift, and ductility measurements against those of columns reinforced with regular-strength steel. A parametric numerical study is also conducted to understand the effect of reinforcement grade, axial load ratio, and aspect ratio on the seismic response of RC bridge piers. The results show that CSA G30.18 500W exhibits acceptable performance where ultimate drifts of 6.35% and 7.3% were achieved for aspect ratios of 3 and 6, respectively.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".