Alternative Reinforcing Details in Dapped Ends of Precast Concrete Bridge Girders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ends of precast girders often have a reduced depth over short lengths in the form of dapped ends. Girders with dapped ends normally are used in parking structures and pedestrian bridges. Because of the reduced depth at the girder ends, the shear stresses are high, and, therefore, the design of dapped ends requires special consideration. Dapped ends typically are reinforced with conventional stirrups and longitudinal reinforcing bars, which require hooks and bends and even welded plates to ensure sufficient anchorage. The efficiency of use of studs with single or double heads for reinforcing dapped ends is investigated. Strut-and-tie models are used to develop different layouts of the reinforcement. Two analytical methods based on the shear friction and diagonal bending theories are used to determine the location of the critical crack at failure and to examine the effectiveness of the reinforcement layouts. An experimental program is conducted on a series of dapped-end beams to corroborate the analytical study. The use of studs in dapped-end zones is shown to provide an efficient and reliable solution that prevents premature failure caused by inadequate anchorage of conventional reinforcement.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".