MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008756401 · doi:10.1139/l05-107

Parametric finite element analysis of a glass fibre reinforced polymer (GFRP) deck-to-girder connection for bridges

2006· article· en· W2008756401 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ki-Tae Park, Sang-Hyo Kim, Hyeong-Yeol Kim, Sun-Myung Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPultrusionFibre-reinforced plasticStructural engineeringDeckStiffeningFinite element methodGirderGlass fiberConnection (principal bundle)EngineeringShear (geology)Materials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new method for deck-to-girder connections of glass fibre reinforced polymer (GFRP) bridge decks. To design the connection system, a GFRP deck in a rectangular cross-sectional shape is considered. The size of the shear bolts, bolt location, bolt spacing, and the size and type of stiffening plate are the variables considered in the design. The behavior of the proposed deck-to-girder connection system was analysed using commercial finite element analysis software. The failure of the connection system was checked by the Tsai–Hill criterion. Effective deck-to-girder connection details for GFRP bridge decks are identified and presented based on the results of the analysis.Key words: bridge decks, glass fibres, bolted connections, pultrusion.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207