Response of Long-Span Box Type Soil-Steel Composite Structures during Ultimate Loading Tests
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil-steel composite structures are getting more popular in recent years. With the introduction of more sophisticated structures such as box culverts with flexural stiffeners, the review of largely experience based design models became inevitable. The paper presents the ultimate loading part of full-scale testing conducted on corrugated steel box culverts. Structures with two different spans of 14 and 8 m and different crown stiffness were investigated using different cover depths. The tests indicate that the response of the structure to the depth of the cover is not linear. The structures become more vulnerable to applied loads as the soil cover decreases. The increase in the load-bearing capacity with increasing soil covers is linear, which agrees with the theoretical models. The crown stiffening, however, is more effective under shallow soil covers. The load resistance of the structures is doubled at the crown level with the crown stiffening. The Swedish design method overestimates live load moments but underestimates live load thrusts. An adjustment to the calculation of the thrusts is proposed. The Canadian design method estimates the moments relatively well but it does not cover larger spans than 8 m.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it