Design of slender concrete columns using compatibility and equilibrium approach (Dual project)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the project is to evaluate the safety and reliability of the Compatibility and Equilibrium Approach to bring about a quick analysis and prediction of the failure load of reinforced concrete slender columns. Slender columns used in the analysis were taken to be pin-ended and uniaxial loaded allowing only bending in the minor axis. A computer program was developed using C programming language, in accordance to the proposed method, to predict the failure load of the test columns. Failure load from other design approaches such as Transformation approach, American Concrete Institution (ACI 318-2014) and Canadian Standards (CSA 2010) were obtained from various existing programs. \nTo justify the creditability of the proposed compatibility and equilibrium approach, the ratio of the experimental failure load to calculated failure load (N experimental / N calculated) was used as the basis for the comparisons. The ratio of failure load obtained from the 148 test columns were used in an extensive comparison based on the slenderness ratio (L/h) from 10 to 57.69, eccentricity to depth ratio (e/h) from 0.03 to 0.83, compressive concrete strength (fcu) from 19.74 to 112 MPa, steel strength (fy) from 272 to 625 MPa and reinforcement ratio (ρ) from 0.78% to 5.24%. \nBy comparing the ratio of failure loads, it was observed that various design parameters have different effects on the ratio of failure load. Increase in the slenderness ratio, eccentricity to depth ratio and improvement to the material properties such as an increase in the compressive concrete strength and steel strength will cause a decrease in the ratio of failure load. Furthermore, it was found that the slenderness ratio have a smaller effect on the change of the ratio of failure load when the eccentricity to depth ratio becomes higher. \nWhen compared to other design approaches, the failure load predicted by the proposed method is the closest to the experimental failure load. As the overall mean ratio of failure load is 1.31 with a coefficient of variation of 32.95%. However, the proposed method overestimates the failure load for slender columns that fail by material failure only, thus additional factor of safety should be considered when such slender columns are designed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".