Bibliographic record
Abstract
This project is written in an informative manner and discusses design process, and requirements with examples for anchors and anchor groups in concrete which are used to transmit forces to concrete elements by tension, shear, or a combination of the two. Various different anchor types, such as cast-in place anchors, post-installed anchors, adhesive anchors, expansion anchors, hooked bolts and undercut anchors are analyzed in this report. The critical effects of factored loads which the anchors and anchor groups are designed for, are determined by elastic analysis. Seismic effects which include load combinations with earthquake effects are out of this project’s scope. Discussed in this project, the background of theory, analytical analysis, and design equations provided in this project for determining the performance of a specific anchor have been calibrated from an extensive database of experimental tests which have been conducted over the last 30 years. The equations are designed with a 5% fractile failure level from these tests, meaning that 95 times out of 100, the actual strength of the anchor will exceed the nominal strength which is key in providing a more consistent level of safety for a wider range of failure modes in both cracked and uncracked concrete. In addition, this report also provides the design process of the same anchor types aforementioned, with design equations, in The American Concrete Institute codes. Key differences and similarities are paid particular attention to and discussed in depth compared to Canadian Standards in this report.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".