MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of New ACI 318 Flexural Resistance Factor on Bond Failures

2003· article· en· W2063436803 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityBuckland & Taylor (Canada)
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFlexural strengthStructural engineeringReinforcementMaterials scienceBar (unit)Consistency (knowledge bases)Composite materialEngineeringMathematicsPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monte Carlo simulation is used to quantify the reliability of reinforced concrete cantilever beams without stirrups designed using ASCE 7-98 load factors with strength reduction factors given in Appendix C of ACI 318-99 and the main body of ACI 318-02. Limit states corresponding to flexural failure neglecting strain hardening of the reinforcement, flexural failure considering strain hardening, and bond failure are investigated for various dead-to-live load ratios, reinforcing bar sizes, and flexural reinforcement ratios. Development lengths for the simulated beams were computed using ACI 318-02 Eq. (12-1). Computed mean-value, first-order, second-moment reliability indices confirm the simulation results, but in all cases slightly overestimate the reliability. Bond failures are more probable than flexural failures, and more probable for beams with small diameter bars than for beams with large diameter bars. Flexure and bond reliabilities are lower for the beams designed to ACI 318-02 than for the beams designed to ACI 318-99 for reinforcement ratios less than 0.023. Flexural reliability indices are more consistent for the beams designed to ACI 318-02, but bond reliability indices are more variable. To improve the consistency and magnitude of bond reliability indices for beams designed to ACI 318-02 the reinforcement bar size factor γ could be increased from 0.8 to 0.85 and development lengths could be increased by 22 to 27% for small diameter bars and up to 19% for large diameter bars. The bar size factor may have to be increased further to accommodate bars with confining reinforcement and also reinforcement detailed using the simplified equations in Section 12.2.2 of ACI 318-02.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.280 · 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