Simplified design equations for Plate‐to‐CHS T and X joints for use in codes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper deals with revised, simplified, consistent equations for plate‐to‐Circular Hollow Section (CHS) joints for inclusion in codes. After a short review of the background to these resistance equations in the current consolidated version of EN 1993‐1‐8 and those in ISO 14346, the background to these simplified new equations is discussed. The equations for Plate‐to‐Circular Hollow Section T and X joints (called TP and XP joints respectively) in the current EN 1993‐1‐8 are based on experimental data available up to 1991. They are further related to the equations for CHS T and X joints. Most of the data used are based on the ultimate joint resistance. A similar approach is used for the TP and XP equations in ISO 14346, but these are related to the updated equations for CHS T and X joints. Since the drafting of ISO 14346, new consistent numerical data from Voth became available where the resistance is not only based on the ultimate resistance but also takes the 3 %d0 joint deformation limit into account. The new equations in prEN 1993‐1‐8 are based on the Voth data, the de Winkel data and the Voth‐Packer equations, but use a simplified uniform presentation which permits one to relate joints with an I, H and RHS brace‐to‐CHS chord to these basic equations. Furthermore, the presented equations are based on the case of axial compression load in the plate, which is the lower bound of the compression and tension load cases.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.006 |
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".