Experimental Investigation on the Behavior of Extended Shear Tabs with Different Flexibilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shear tab connections are considered amongst the most popular shear connections in design and construction. Low fabrication expenses and ease of assembly are the two key factors contributing to the desirability of this type of connection. In spite of the benefits, some problems appear in the construction of special cases. When the shear tab is intended to be framed into the web of a supporting column or girder, the flanges of the supporting element form an obstacle in field construction. To overcome this issue, one solution is to extend the shear tab beyond the supporting element flanges. This configuration is referred to as an “extended shear tab”. Although extended shear tabs are negligibly different from conventional shear tabs in terms of fabrication and erection costs, their behavior is significantly changed due to the considerably increased length. Moreover, instability issues may arise resulting from the increased slenderness. To investigate the behavior of extended shear tabs, a comprehensive research program consisting of both numerical and experimental studies has been defined. This paper outlines some of the results and observations acquired from the testing phase of the program, which is conducted on full-scale extended shear tab specimens. The test matrix is organized to investigate the effect of a number of connection parameters on the overall behavior of the extended shear tab connection. The parameters subjected to investigation in this paper include shear tab length, shear tab thickness and bolt configuration. The behavior of these specimens is studied in terms of connection capacity, failure mode and shear load eccentricity. Results of the tests together with those of the numerical modelling will be used to propose reliable and efficient guidelines for the design of extended shear tabs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".