General Anchorage Zones of Post-Tensioned Box Girder Bridges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Post-tensioned box girder bridges are widely used for bridge construction.The post-tensioning anchorage zone is a critical part affecting bridge performance.Very large prestressing forces are applied to the box girder, and then spread till uniform stress distribution is obtained within the box section.In order to study the performance of anchorage zones, four box girders end zones were instrumented in the field in California.These four bridges cover wide variety of anchorage zone configuration including different diaphragm width, number of girders, box girder height and openings in the end diaphragm.The field investigation led to the measurement of the actual flow of strains in the general anchorage zone.Also, experimental work was conducted at the Large Scale Structures Laboratory at University of Nevada, Reno.This experimental investigation included two single girders half-scale I-sections with rectangular solid end diaphragms.The main parameter investigated in these specimens was the diaphragm width.Loading was applied with post-tensioning tendons to represent different design levels as well as to reach the ultimate load of the anchorage zone.Increasing of diaphragm width reduces the effect of bursting forces developed in different directions of the general anchorage zones.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".