Effect of Directly Welded Stringer-To-Beam Connections on the Analysis and Design of Modular Steel Building Floors
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modular Steel Buildings (MSBs) are fast evolving as an effective alternative to conventional on-site steel construction. An explanation of the concept of modular steel design, including its unique detailing requirements is given in this paper. The paper also focuses on a typical MSB floor system which is achieved by welding the webs of the stringers directly to the floor beams. A typical modular floor grid structure is designed using conventional methods. The floor is then modelled using the finite element method and analyzed under the effect of dead and live service loads. This allows an assessment of the effect of direct welding between stringers and floor beams on the analysis and design of floor beams, stringers, and welded connections. The results reveal that consideration of the true behaviour of direct welding leads to a distribution of forces and moments which is different from those found in conventional steel buildings. A simplified analytical model is proposed to capture such behaviour. Regression functions have been developed to describe the model. In practice, the proposed model can predict the actual forces and moments, leading to a reliable design of modular steel floors.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 it