ArticleScientific reports2026
Advanced single-strut modelling of lightweight in-filled RC frames: validation and seismic performance assessment.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate numerical simulation of masonry-infilled reinforced concrete (RC) frames is essential for seismic performance assessment, particularly with modern lightweight infill systems like hollow clay bricks (HCB), gypsum blocks (GB), and autoclaved lightweight concrete (ALC) panels. This study presents an advanced single-strut macro-modeling framework, implemented in SAP2000, designed to overcome the limitations of conventional approaches in capturing the distinct nonlinear behavior of these systems. The core innovation involves the development of material-specific nonlinear axial hinges, meticulously calibrated against the full-scale experimental dataset from Cai et al. (J. Earthq. Eng. 23(9):1531-1559, 2019) to replicate crushing (HCB), shear-sliding (GB), and slip-hardening (ALC) mechanisms. The calibrated model demonstrates high predictive accuracy, with errors in lateral capacity and initial stiffness below 10% for all systems. Leveraging this validated model, a comprehensive comparative seismic performance analysis was conducted. The results quantify a critical performance trade-off: HCB infills increased initial stiffness by 471% but exhibited brittle failure, while ALC panels provided superior ductility (µ = 5.39) and stable energy dissipation up to 4.06% drift. The gypsum system confirmed its seismic inadequacy due to abrupt strength degradation. The study concludes that the proposed modeling strategy provides a reliable tool for performance-based design and analysis, enabling engineers to efficiently conduct parametric studies and evaluate the seismic viability of different infill systems at a fraction of the cost and time of full-scale testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.