ASCE/COPRI 61-14 Analysis and Detailing Next Steps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ASCE/COPRI 61-14 “Seismic Design of Piers and Wharves” (ASCE 61-14) was developed specifically for piers and wharves not occupied by the public, as these and other similar transportation related structures such as bridges are specifically excluded in ASCE 7-10. The seismic behavior of piers and wharves is similar to bridges and many of the seismic provisions in ASCE 61-14 have their roots in bridge design. One of the goals of the ASCE 61-14 committee was to develop design and detailing provisions for the most commonly used pile-to-deck connections based on available research. However, as the document evolved, it became apparent that much of the recent research and testing was performed on prestressed concrete pile dowelled connections while only limited testing has been performed on other types of piles and connections, and that testing was dated and not always appropriate for application to the displacement-based design approach used in ASCE 61-14. As a result, the analysis and detailing and provisions in the document were not as comprehensive as originally envisioned, and improvements are needed for the next edition, ASCE 61-19. As ASCE 61-14 was being finalized, a significant amount of research related to bridge columns and connections funded by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) was published that appears to be useful for piers and wharves. This paper will summarize the findings of some of the recent bridge research and suggest revisions to ASCE 61-19 related to analysis and detailing of pile-to-deck connections and in ground hinges.
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 | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.052 | 0.054 |
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".