Reply to the discussion by Bakht et al. on "An experimental investigation of steel-free deck slabs"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors are now in complete agreement with the discussers that the longitudinal crack of the steel-free concrete slabs is not a danger to the ultimate strength of these slabs. After the original experiment, we have since turned our focus to the fundamental behaviour of the steel-free concrete members, which is thought to be essential before further developing the system. One part of this research dealt with steel-free slab strips, which act in bending and is yet unpublished. Another part tested the change of failure mode of steel-free beam-like members and will be published soon (Hassan et al. 2004). The authors came to believe that the behaviour of steel-free concrete members after cracking is better simulated by using models of masonry structures. Arching action would completely dominate after a steel-free concrete member had substantially cracked (in terms of crack width not crack numbers) and therefore turned into separate blocks. The discussers stated this fact when they mentioned that all steel-free slabs had developed full length longitudinal cracks. Consequently, the new system of concrete blocks restrained by the straps and the girders could be considered as any well-restrained masonry arch. This approach would help allay the concerns and fears of many engineers that the longitudinal crack is a menace to the strength of the system. Heyman (1969) in his fundamental and pioneering studies of masonry arches and vaults showed, for example, that cracking state in a masonry arch, similar to the one present in the steel-free slab after appearance of a longitudinal crack, is completely safe and might transfer the structure to a better shape to resist applied loading. Heyman (1969) also proved that a perfectly flat arch (a slab) has an infinite geometrical factor of safety, meaning that the structure failure would be initiated only by material crushing (punching in the case of slabs) or by failure of the restraining system. In brief, the fear of the longitudinal crack in the steel-free slab is due mainly to the belief that this system is merely a variation on the conventional slab. When a consideration such as the one mentioned above is introduced to explain the behaviour of the steel-free concrete slab after cracking, better understanding of the longitudinal crack would be expected.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".