MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407134828 · doi:10.1061/jsendh.steng-13968

Hybrid Simulation Testing of Normal and High-Strength RC Shear Walls in Nuclear Facilities under Ground Motion Sequences

2025· article· en· W4407134828 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround motionStructural engineeringShear (geology)Shear strength (soil)Materials scienceGeotechnical engineeringGeologyComposite materialEngineeringSoil scienceSoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reinforced concrete (RC) shear walls are widely used as a seismic force–resisting system in nuclear facilities. Such walls are designed to be relatively thick with a few openings for radiation shielding as well as for blast and fire protection. These geometrical requirements typically result in low-aspect-ratio walls with high reinforcement ratios that are provided by two or more mats, leading to complex construction activities and high construction costs. The use of high-strength reinforcement (HSR) has the potential to address such constructability and economic issues by reducing the required steel areas and rebar congestion. However, because relevant nuclear design standards restrict the use of HSR in their safety-related structures, most previous experimental studies to date focused on investigating the seismic performance of nuclear low-aspect-ratio RC shear walls when only normal-strength reinforcement (NSR) was used. To tackle this knowledge gap, the current study utilizes the pseudodynamic hybrid simulation testing technique to experimentally compare the performance of nuclear low-aspect-ratio RC shear walls with HSR and NSR when subjected to ground motion sequences. In this respect, two RC shear walls (i.e., W1-NSR and W2-HSR) with an aspect ratio of 0.83 were tested, where both walls were designed to have a similar lateral strength; however, Wall W2-HSR had a reduced reinforcement ratio of 1.23% compared with Wall W1-NSR, which had a reinforcement ratio of 2.20%. The two walls were subjected to several ground motion records to investigate their force-displacement responses, lateral strengths, ductility, stiffnesses, deformation capacities, cracking patterns, rebar strains, and failure modes. A numerical model was then developed and experimentally validated to simulate the response of the two test walls under such ground motion records. The results show that both walls achieved similar ultimate strength values; however, relevant nuclear design standards were not able to accurately estimate these values for Wall W2-HSR. In addition, although Wall W2-HSR had wider cracks relative to Wall W1-NSR during all ground motion sequences, the former wall achieved a high displacement ductility value without any premature brittle shear failure. The experimental results presented in the current study are expected to facilitate the adoption of HSR in low-aspect-ratio RC shear walls within nuclear construction practice.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.238 · 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