Structural Evaluation and Load Rating of Lorne Bridge: A Historic Open-Spandrel Arch Bridge-Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Open-spandrel arch bridges possess a unique combination of elegant architectural aesthetics and robust structural behaviour. While classified as such, Lorne Bridge, further, presents a historic icon and landmark of the city of Brantford, Ontario, Canada. The bridge was built in 1923 with three continuous arch spans that range between 42m and 47m, crossing the Grand River, and annexed to a 20m single span railway overhead structure. The steel-reinforced concrete superstructure of each of the main bridge spans consists of an arch and variable height solid spandrel walls supporting the bridge deck. Massive plain concrete piers and abutments carry the superstructure and are ultimately founded on bedrock.</p><p>Recently, a broad study including site inspection, condition survey and structural evaluation was carried out as a step towards maintaining both the heritage and function of the bridge in the future. The age, condition and complexity of the bridge warranted a sophisticated analysis method in order to achieve reliable evaluation conclusions. Therefore, the bridge was analyzed using a non-linear three Dimensional Finite Element Modelling (3D-FEM). The analysis represented the major surveyed concrete cracks of the bridge as well as investigating the influence of post-steel yielding of various individual superstructure components on the global behaviour and strength of the bridge.</p><p>The evaluation concluded that specific loads such as temperature, which only marginally utilize the strength of most structures, can dictate the load rating herein. Moreover, utilizing two dimensional/simplified methods of analysis for such bridges can neither predict the actual structural behaviour nor interpret the associated deficiencies. Finally, the study recommends that future design standards mandate more stringent requirements for evaluating open-spandrel arch bridges.</p>
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 | 0.001 | 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".