MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Concrete capacity design of Cazaly hangers in shallow members

2010· article· en· W2315015110 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePCI Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Engineering and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForensic engineeringEngineeringStructural engineeringGeotechnical engineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper evaluates the behavior of the Cazaly hanger under vertical load and proposes an additional design requirement for the connection. In 1965, Canadian PCI instigated a research program to evaluate the behavior of the hanger, which led to the shear-friction design basis for the hanger in the third edition of the PCI Design Handbook: Precast and Prestressed Concrete. Current tests show that in shallow sections the hanger does not follow shear-friction behavior but instead behaves more closely to a concrete-breakout model. Reassessment of the 1965 specimens revealed shear-friction to be a poor predictor of capacity in shallow sections, while the concrete-breakout models provide conservative predictions. A proposed revision to the sixth edition of the PCI Design Handbook based on concrete-breakout capacity is recommended for Cazaly hanger design method.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.264
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.189 · 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