MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Curvature Limitations for Slab-on-I-Girder Bridges

2014· article· en· W2000137043 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bridge Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStructural engineeringCurvatureGirderSlabFinite element methodParametric statisticsBridge (graph theory)EngineeringBendingGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, horizontally curved bridges have been widely used in congested urban areas, where multilevel interchange structures are necessary for modern highways. In bridges with light curvature, the curvature effects on bending, shear, and torsional stresses may be ignored if they are within an acceptable range. Treating horizontally curved bridges as straight bridges with certain limitations is one of the methods to simplify the design procedure. Bridge design specifications and codes have specified certain limitations to treat horizontally curved bridges as straight bridges. However, these limitations do not differentiate between bridge cross section configurations, in addition to being inaccurate in estimating the structural response. Moreover, these specifications were developed primarily for the calculation of girder bending moments. To investigate the accuracy of these limitations, a series of horizontally curved, braced concrete slab-over steel I-girder and slab-on-concrete I-girder bridges were analyzed, using three-dimensional finite-element modeling, to investigate their behavior under dead loading. The major internal forces developed in the members were determined, namely, girder longitudinal bending stresses, vertical deflections, vertical support reactions, and bridge fundamental flexural frequencies for different degrees of curvature, span length, bridge width, and span continuity. Empirical equations for these straining actions were developed as a function of those for straight bridges. The stipulations made in bridge codes for treating a curved bridge as a straight bridge were then correlated with the obtained values from the finite-element modeling. Results proved that such code limitations were unsafe. Based on the data generated from this parametric study, sets of empirical expressions were developed to determine such limitations more accurately and reliably.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.200 · 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