MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767042270

Compressive strength of solid round steel leg and bracing members of lattice communication towers reinforced with rods or angles.

2004· article· en· W2767042270 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Cindy Kumalasari

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsBracingRodStructural engineeringCompressive strengthMaterials scienceForensic engineeringComposite materialEngineeringBraceMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the increase in voice and data communication and the advent of digital television, there is a need to reinforce the solid round steel leg and bracing members of existing guyed lattice communication towers to carry additional antenna loads.Reinforcement is generally in the form of rods or angles connected to the leg and bracing members either by U-bolts only or by means of U-bolts and end welding.The sizes of reinforcing members were in accordance with industry practice.Finite element models were built to compute the compressive strength of such members using modified static Riks method.Tests were carried out on 45 leg members and seven bracing members.Of the 45 leg member specimens, 15 were unreinforced and the remaining 30 test specimens were reinforced with angles.Of the seven bracing member specimens, two were unreinforced, three were rodreinforced, and two were angle-reinforced.During experimental investigation, the effect of the failure of one leg member on the compressive strength of the remaining leg members was studied.In addition, the effect of (i) end welding, (ii) compressive pre-loading of leg members, (iii) number of U-bolts used to attach the reinforcing angle, and (iv) torque applied to U-bolts was investigated.The effectiveness of rod reinforcement and angle reinforcement to the compressive strength of bracing members were also compared by testing the bracing member specimens.From experimental results, it was concluded that (i) the failure of one leg member has no effect on the strength of the remaining leg members, (ii) end welding provides additional reserve strength to the leg members, (iii) compressive pre-loading has no effect on the strength, (iv) the number of U-bolts has an effect on the strength, but the location of bolts is more important than the number, and (v) increased bolt torque results in an increase in the strength.It was also found that angle reinforcement is more effective than the rod reinforcement.The finite element analysis results agree well with the experimental failure loads, thus the models can be used to determine the compressive strength of leg and bracing members reinforced with any size round bar or any size angle.Based on the finite element analysis and test results, a simplified and conservative design procedure is proposed to determine the compressive strength of solid round steel leg and bracing members reinforced with rods or angles.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor)Same topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207