MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2290569376 · doi:10.18186/jte.75509

Coupled Flexural-Lateral-Torsional of Shear Deformable Thin-Walled Beams with Asymmetric Cross-Section – Closed Form Exact Solution

2015· article· en· W2290569376 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Ali Hjaji

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Thermal Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComposite Structure Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceCross section (physics)Shear (geology)Exact solutions in general relativityFlexural strengthStructural engineeringComposite materialPhysicsMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper develops the exact solutions for coupled flexurallateral-torsional static response of thin-walled asymmetric open members subjected to general loading. Using the principle of stationary total potential energy, the governing differential equations of equilibrium are formulated as well as the associated boundary conditions. The formulation is based on a generalized TimoshenkoVlasov beam theory and accounts for the effects of shear deformation due to bending and warping, and captures the effects of flexural– torsional coupling due to cross-section asymmetry. Closed-form solutions are developed for cantilever and simply supported beams under various forces. In order to demonstrate the validity and the accuracy of this solution, numerical examples are presented and compared with well-established ABAQUS finite element solutions and other numerical results available in the literature. In addition, the results are compared against non-shear deformable beam theories in order to demonstrate the shear deformation effects.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Thermal EngineeringSame topicComposite Structure Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207