MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115683239 · doi:10.71846/18-wcee-2585

SEISMIC RETROFIT OF REINFORCED CONCRETE FRAMES BY PROGRESSIVELY ENGAGING TENSION ONLY BRACES

2025· article· en· W7115683239 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Conference of Earthquake Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBracingReinforced concreteSeismic retrofitStiffeningTension (geology)DissipationRigidity (electromagnetism)Shear wallStiffness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-ductile reinforced concrete frame buildings built prior to the enactment of modern seismic codes are often seismically deficient in terms of strength and ductility. Most of the conventional retrofit techniques, such as adding reinforced concrete shear walls or structural bracing systems, require intrusive construction practices, resulting in lengthy down times and expensive structural interventions. An alternative to conventional techniques can be use of high-strength prestressing strands or cables, diagonally placed as tension elements, either prestressed for increased building rigidity or non-prestressed tension elements. While the use of prestressing strands as tension bracing elements proves to be an effective technique, pinching of hysteresis loops associated with slack caused by yielding of the strands reduce potential energy dissipation capacity of the system. Furthermore, initial prestressing of the strands and the resulting stiffening effect on the frames lead to higher seismic forces, further reducing the effectiveness of the system. This paper aims to improve the previously observed deficiencies of the system, involving the use of progressively engaging prestressing strands. Accordingly, the strands are placed loosely as tension elements such that each strand engages in resisting lateral forces progressively when needed. The strands initially remain unstressed until the lateral drift becomes sufficiently high and the frame requires further lateral resistance. As the first strand yields and dissipates energy, the second and possibly the third stand starts engaging in lateral load resistances, while some strands remain elastic, recovering some of the inelastic deformations. Two tests have been conducted on existing concrete frames designed and built based on 1970 National B uilding Code of Canada, representing older construction practices. During the first test, the frame was retrofitted by one high strength strand while in the second test the frame was retrofitted by three strands, engaging in lateral force resistance at different stages. A numerical investigation of the concept was also conducted, using non-linear time history analysis of the frames, illustrating the performance of the cables.

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)
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 score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Conference of Earthquake EngineeringSame topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207