MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980735655 · doi:10.1139/l05-057

Simple beam connections in combined shear and tension

2006· article· en· W1980735655 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
S. J. Guravich, J. L. Dawe

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsServiceability (structure)Structural engineeringShear (geology)Materials scienceSimple shearShear and moment diagramBeam (structure)Composite materialEngineeringBending stiffness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An investigation into the behaviour of simple beam-to-column connections subjected to combined shear and tension was carried out by testing 108 full-scale specimens, including header angle, knife angle, single angle, and shear tab configurations. Specimens were rotated 0.03 rad, and a prescribed shear between zero and the design shear resistance was held constant while the specimens were loaded in tension to failure. Results showed significant differences in serviceability, ductility, interactions, and ultimate tension strength. Ductility was provided through yielding in bearing at bolt holes, bending of angle legs, and shear yielding of the gross section of connection elements. Tension and shear load versus displacement plots were acquired for all tests because of ductility and serviceability considerations in design. Existing methods of determining connection resistance, including bolt shear, net section shear, and bearing resistance, were used to compare predicted capacity with test results. The findings of the test program indicate that most simple connections can sustain significant amounts of tension in combination with design shear capacity.Key words: beam, connections, shear, tension, experimental, design, steel.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.159 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations16
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207