Behavior of Steel Shear Connections under Column-Removal Demands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An understanding of the behavior of shear connections in steel gravity frames under the unique combinations of moment, shear, and axial force relevant to extreme loading conditions is necessary to assess the vulnerability of a structure to disproportionate collapse. However, such an understanding is currently limited by a deficiency of physical test data. To investigate the inherent robustness of commonly used steel shear connections, an experimental program consisting of 35 full-scale physical tests was completed. Specimens included shear-tab, welded-bolted single-angle, bolted-bolted single-angle, and bolted-bolted double-angle connections. A testing procedure was developed that imposed on a connection the force and deformation demands that would be expected in the bays immediately adjacent to a compromised column in a symmetrical multibay frame. Various geometric arrangements of each connection type were tested, and each arrangement was subjected to a range of loading histories representing different column-removal scenarios. The test results characterize the load-development history, deformation mechanisms, and expected failure modes following column removal for each type of connection. Connection strength and ductility limits under the effects of this unique type of combined loading are quantified.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".