MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analysis of Flange Transverse Bending of Corrugated Web I-Girders under In-Plane Loads

2007· article· en· W2072140904 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed Abbas, Richard Sause, Robert G. Driver

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersPennsylvania Department of Transportation
KeywordsFlangeGirderStructural engineeringFinite element methodTransverse planeBendingShear (geology)EngineeringBending momentBeam (structure)Shear forceT-beamMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents theoretical, experimental, and finite-element analysis results for the linear elastic behavior of corrugated web steel I-girders under in-plane loads. A typical corrugated web steel I-girder consists of two steel flanges welded to a corrugated steel web. Previous research has shown that a corrugated web I-girder under primary moment and shear cannot be analyzed using conventional beam theory alone, and a flange transverse bending analysis is required. A theoretical method, the fictitious load method, is presented herein as an analytical tool for quantifying flange transverse bending in corrugated web I-girders. To validate this method, four-point bending experimental results for a large-scale corrugated web I-girder are presented. The measured flange transverse displacements and flange stresses were in good agreement with the theoretical results especially in regions of constant shear. To gain additional insight, finite- element analysis results for the test girder are presented, and compared to both the experimental and theoretical results.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.213
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations109
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Structural EngineeringSame topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207