MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149573345 · doi:10.1260/2040-2317.4.4.259

Review of the Punching Shear Behavior of Concrete Flat Slabs in Ambient and Elevated Temperature

2013· article· en· W2149573345 on OpenAlexaff
Mehrafarid Ghoreishi, Ashutosh Bagchi, Mohamed A. Sultan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Fire Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire effects on concrete materials
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlabPunchingStructural engineeringFormworkShear (geology)Geotechnical engineeringReinforced concreteEngineeringMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are a number of benefits associated with two-way concrete flat slab construction for office buildings, parking garages and apartments - for example, reduced formwork, prompt erection, flexibility of partitions, and minimal increase in story heights. However, concrete flat slabs could be quite vulnerable to punching shear failure in the event of a fire. The objective of the present article is to provide a state of the art review of the existing research and the issues associated with concrete flat slabs in fire and elevated temperature. There are a number of experimental and analytical studies on the punching shear behavior of concrete flat slabs in ambient conditions, available in the literature. Based on these studies, it is found that punching shear capacity in ambient condition is affected by many factors, which may not remain constant during a fire exposure. Only a limited number of studies on concrete flat slabs for punching shear failure in fire are available. This paper reviews the available experimental and analytical studies, standards and codes to address the research gap in estimating of punching shear strength of concrete flat slab-column connections without shear 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 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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Structural Fire EngineeringSame topicFire effects on concrete materialsFrench-language works237,207