Design of Class 4 hollow structural section compression members
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a study on the CSA S16:19, AISC 360-16, and EN 1993-1-1 approaches to determine the nominal capacity (C n ) of Class 4 hollow structural section compression members. Class 3 limits and effective width (b e ) equations are compared, and the effect of member slenderness (KL/r), width-(or diameter-)to-thickness ratio, and height-to-width (or aspect) ratio on the relative C n predictions are evaluated. For Class 4 rectangular hollow sections, CSA S16:19 is shown to under-predict C n by up to 34% relative to AISC 360-16. A more economical, yet still safe, method to calculate b e (and hence, C n ) is proposed. For Class 4 circular hollow sections, a new method to calculate C n utilizing the “effective area method” is proposed. This new method removes the need for having an “effective yield stress method” in CSA S16 Clause 13.3.4.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".