MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7037768533

Experimental modal analysis of reinforced concrete square slabs

2015· article· en· W7037768533 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNottingham Trent University's Institutional Repository (Nottingham Trent Repository) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEntomological Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTrent UniversityNottingham Trent University
KeywordsModal testingModal analysisModalModal analysis using FEMVibrationNatural frequencyFrequency responseFast Fourier transformSlab
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is to perform experimental modal analysis (EMA) of reinforced concrete (RC) square slabs. EMA is the process of determining the modal parameters (Natural Frequencies, damping factors, modal vectors) of a structure from a set of frequency response functions FRFs (curve fitting). Although, experimental modal analysis (or modal testing) has grown steadily in popularity since the advent of the digital FFT spectrum analyzer in the early 1970’s, studying all types of members and materials using such method have not yet been well documented. Therefore, in this work, experimental tests were conducted on RC square slab specimens of dimensions 600mm x 600mmx 40mm. Experimental analysis was based on freely supported boundary condition. Moreover, impact testing as a fast and economical means of finding the modes of vibration of a structure was used during the experiments. In addition, Pico Scope 6 device and MATLAB software were used to acquire data, analyze and plot Frequency Response Function (FRF). The experimental natural frequencies which were extracted from measurements exhibit good agreement with analytical predictions. It is showed that EMA method can be usefully employed to investigate the dynamic behavior of RC slabs.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
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 score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.192 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNottingham Trent University's Institutional Repository (Nottingham Trent Repository)Same topicEntomological Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207