MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027534247 · doi:10.1139/l04-106

Finite element analysis and theoretical study of punching shear strength of concrete bridge decks

2005· article· en· W2027534247 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aftab A. Mufti, Tarek K. Hassan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringFinite element methodReinforcementPunchingBridge (graph theory)EngineeringFlexural strengthNonlinear systemShear (geology)Materials scienceComposite materialMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of punching shear usually arises in reinforced concrete slabs subjected to concentrated loads and particularly in concrete bridge decks due to development of an internal arching system. Ongoing research revealed that the governing mode of failure of concrete bridge decks is not flexure and that using a flexural design method usually led to unnecessary high levels of steel reinforcement. This paper examines the applicability of nonlinear finite element formulation of restrained concrete bridge decks. A general purpose finite element program ANACAP was employed in this study. The accuracy of the nonlinear finite element analysis is demonstrated using test results conducted by other researchers. The results of the finite element analysis are also compared with those obtained from a rational model. The experimental results and the theoretical model provide insight to the fundamental behavior of concrete bridge decks.Key words: bridges, concrete, deflections, FRP, punching, reinforcement, slabs.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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