MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411209765 · doi:10.4028/p-mea0ar

Structural Response of Tall RC Systems under Blast Pressure Loading

2025· article· en· W4411209765 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

VenueKey engineering materials · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringMaterials scienceReinforced concreteComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tall buildings with different structural systems can be exposed to explosive loading, and a proper understanding of their structural response under blast loads is crucial for robust structural design. This study investigates the structural performance of selected tall structural systems - shear wall frame, outrigger, and tube-in-tube systems - under different blast load effects. Nonlinear finite element analysis was performed using commercial package ETABS with blast loads applied as time-history functions for various charge weights and standoff distances. Structural responses were compared in terms of displacement and inter-story drift. Results showed that the tube-in-tube system performed relatively better in terms of displacement and inter-story drift as standoff distance increased and charge weight was constant. When explosive charge weights increased, and standoff distance was constant, the tube-in-tube system displayed better performance with respect to displacement, whereas the outrigger system was the optimum with reference to inter-story drift. The overall study indicates that selecting a tall structural system for better resilience against blast loading depends on specific aspects of structural behavior, identified as the required criteria.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.198 · 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