MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2002339691 · doi:10.3141/2131-03

Development of a Procedure for Fatigue Design of Slender Support Structures Subjected to Wind-Induced Vibration

2009· article· en· W2002339691 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Byungik Chang, Brent Phares, Partha P. Sarkar, T J Wipf

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIowa Department of Transportation
KeywordsStructural engineeringAeroelasticityEngineeringVibrationWind tunnelVortex sheddingTime domainFrequency domainExtrapolationMarine engineeringAerodynamicsComputer scienceMeteorologyTurbulenceAcousticsAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cantilevered signal, sign, and light support structures are used nationwide on major Interstate highways, national highways, local highways, and at local intersections for traffic control. Recently, a number of failures of these structures have been characterized as wind-induced fatigue failures. It is widely accepted that there is considerable lack of accuracy in the calculation of wind-induced loads on high mast light poles (HMLPs) in both the AASHTO and the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code provisions. A coupled model for predicting buffeting- and vortex shedding–induced response for slender support structures was developed. To accomplish this, monitoring of long-term response behavior of an HMLP subjected to wind-induced vibration and wind tunnel experiments was used to study global behavior and to extract important parameters. From the long-term field monitoring and wind tunnel experiments, the two critical types of wind vibration (natural wind gusts or buffeting and vortex shedding) were individually identified for in-depth analysis. Finally, a coupled dynamic model in time domain was developed for predicting the wind-excited response and was validated by comparing the simulation results with the field-collected data. The fatigue life of a specific HMLP was also estimated with the stress amplitudes predicted by the time-domain model and was validated with statistical extrapolation of the field data.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations18
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board→Same topicWind and Air Flow Studies→French-language works237,207→