MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951343514 · doi:10.3390/ma12132139

Research on Concrete Columns Reinforced with New Developed High-Strength Steel under Eccentric Loading

2019· article· en· W2951343514 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yonghui Hou, Shuangyin Cao, Xiangyong Ni, Yizhu Li

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province
KeywordsDuctility (Earth science)Eccentricity (behavior)ReinforcementMaterials scienceBearing capacityStructural engineeringUltimate tensile strengthComposite materialYield (engineering)Bearing (navigation)Transverse planeEngineeringCreepComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of new developed high-strength steel in concrete members can reduce steel bar congestion and construction costs. This research aims to study the behavior of concrete columns reinforced with new developed high-strength steel under eccentric loading. Ten reinforced concrete columns were fabricated and tested. The test variables were the transverse reinforcement amount and yield strength, eccentricity, and longitudinal reinforcement yield strength. The failure patterns were compression and tensile failure for columns subjected to small eccentricity and large eccentricity, respectively. The same level of post-peak deformability and ductility could only be obtained with a lower amount of transverse reinforcement when high-strength transverse reinforcements were used in columns subjected to small eccentricity. The high-strength longitudinal reinforcement improved the bearing capacity and post-peak deformability of the concrete columns. Furthermore, three different equivalent rectangular stress block (ERSB) parameters for predicting the bearing capacity of columns with high-strength steel are discussed based on test and simulated results. It is concluded that the China Code GB 50010-2010 overestimates the bearing capacity of columns with high-strength steel, whereas the bearing capacities computed using the America Code ACI 318-14 and Canada Code CSA A23.3-04 agree well with the test results.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207