MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065998599 · doi:10.1139/l08-076

Experimental evaluation of the compressive resistance of non-stress-relieved solid round steel columns

2008· article· en· W2065998599 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Khaled Sennah, Moussa Saliba, M. Al-Hashimy, John Wahba

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityTurris (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompressive strengthDiagonalStructural engineeringColumn (typography)Stress (linguistics)Materials scienceComposite materialEngineeringMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solid round steel columns are commonly used as legs and also as diagonal and horizontal members of communication towers. The Canadian standard Antennas, towers, and antenna supporting structures, CSA S37–01, specifies empirical expressions for the compressive resistance of solid round columns based on the Structural Stability Research Council (SSRC) column curves for non solid round columns as well as the results from experimental investigations on solid rounds that have been carried out since 1965. As such, it was felt necessary to conduct an experimental study on non-stress-relieved steel solid round columns to refine the available design equations for such columns. This paper provides a summary of a recent test program on the compressive resistance of non-stress-relieved steel solid rounds. Correlation between the results from these tests and the current practice for the design of solid rounds is investigated. The paper concludes with a proposed compressive resistance equation for economical design of such columns.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.633
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207