MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004894204 · doi:10.1260/136943309788708400

Effect of Directly Welded Stringer-To-Beam Connections on the Analysis and Design of Modular Steel Building Floors

2009· article· en· W2004894204 on OpenAlexaff
Charles-Darwin Annan, Maged A. Youssef, M. Hesham El-Naggar

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Structural Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStringerWeldingStructural engineeringModular designEngineeringBeam (structure)GridFinite element methodMechanical engineeringComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations96
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Structural EngineeringSame topicStructural Engineering and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207