MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Local Buckling Tests on Cold-Formed Steel Beams

2003· article· en· W2004889927 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cheng Yu, Benjamin W. Schafer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBucklingCold-formed steelStructural engineeringClassification of discontinuitiesBendingCold formingFlexural strengthAxial symmetryMaterials scienceEngineeringMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

C and Z sections are two of the most common cold-formed steel shapes in use today. Accurate prediction of the bending performance of these sections is important for reliable and efficient cold-formed steel structures. Recent analytical work has highlighted discontinuities and inconsistencies in the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) and Canadian Standards Association (S136) design provisions for stiffened elements under a stress gradient (i.e., the web of C or Z sections). New methods have been proposed for design, and an interim method has been adopted in the North American Specification (NAS). However, existing tests on C and Z sections do not provide a definitive evaluation of the design expressions, due primarily to incomplete restriction of the distortional buckling mode. Described in this paper is a series of flexural tests with details selected specifically to insure that local buckling is free to form, but distortional buckling and lateral-torsional buckling are restricted. The members selected for the tests provide systematic variation in the web slenderness (h/t) while varying other relevant nondimensional parameters (i.e., h/b,b/t,d/t,d/b). Initial analysis of the completed testing indicates that overall test-to-predicted ratios for AISI, S136, NAS, and the direct strength method are all adequate, but systematic differences are observed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations162
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Structural EngineeringSame topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207