Strength of biaxially loaded slender I-section beam-columns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The strength of a slender section is governed by local buckling of its elements. The local buckling mode is mainly affected by the width to thickness ratios of elements forming the section and the member slenderness ratio. A nonlinear finite element model was developed in this paper to study the effect of the mentioned factors on the capacity of biaxially loaded slender I-section beam–columns. A group of I sections was selected with varying flange width to flange thickness and web width to web thickness ratios. Different member slenderness ratios were chosen to study the different modes of failure. The results show that the linear interaction equation is safe and provides a good fit to the ultimate capacity of members with intermediate slenderness ratios. It is conservative, however, for short member slenderness ratios. Lastly, compared with the newly developed finite element model, the 1996 edition of the American Iron and Steel Institute specification for cold-formed steel structural members and the European Committee for Standardization Eurocode 3 conservatively predict the capacity of members, especially for large ratios of minor axis to major axis bending.Key words: structural engineering, steel, stability, buckling, biaxial loads, ultimate strength.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".