MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028421863

Evaluation of seismic performance of a pre-cast concrete block arch system through testing and numerical modeling

2016· other· en· W7028421863 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArchComputer simulationArch damNumerical modelsNumerical modelingBlock (permutation group theory)Finite element methodNumerical analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lock-Block Ltd. from Vancouver, Canada, has developed an arch structural system made from modular pre-cast concrete blocks. The intention of the arch is to provide an easy to construct, cost effective and long lasting structure. This could be achieved with a modular, steel-free system. This study aims to assess the seismic performance of these arches characterizing their seismic behavior using a combination of experimental testing and numerical modeling. Several small scale unreinforced and reinforced arch models were subjected to quasi-static and dynamic testing. For the dynamic testing, a suite of earthquake records was selected of varying magnitudes, types and locations, and applied on a shake-table. From the results of the shake-table testing on the unreinforced models it was found that the arches tend to collapse by the four-hinge mechanism which is typical for these types of structures. For the reinforced arch testing, a steel band was instrumented to provide information on the loads. The reinforced arch performed well when subjected to the same suite of earthquakes. A numerical distinct element model was developed using 3DEC software and calibrated to the quasi-static test. The response of the numerical model matched the experiments with the arch exhibiting the same four-hinge failure mechanism. From numerical analysis, sensitivity studies were performed on various parameters of the arch. This included geometry, material properties and boundary/interface conditions. It was found that in this configuration, the arches are vulnerable to seismic excitation and at risk of collapse when unreinforced and unconfined. There are several solutions to reduce that risk based on the results of this work: 1) addition of external or internal reinforcement to prevent hinge opening 2) restraint of the bottom courses of blocks and 3) modification of the geometry at the base to improve stability.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.963

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 head0.187
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicMasonry and Concrete Structural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207