Axial load behaviour of steel tube columns in-filled with various high performance concretes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research concentrates on the axial load behaviour of circular, square and rectangular concrete filled steel tube (CFST) columns incorporating high-performance self-consolidating concretes such as ultra-high strength concrete (UHSC), engineered cementitious composite (ECC), lightweight concrete (LWC), and crumb rubber concrete (CRC). Seventy-four CFST specimens with varying slenderness, shape, concrete type and presence of internal bar reinforcements are tested experimentally under axial compression loading. The effect of these variables on axial load-deformation response, strain characteristics, failure modes, concrete confinement and axial strength are evaluated through experimental results. Performance of existing analytical/code based models for axial strength and concrete confined strength is evaluated. Concretes without coarse aggregates including UHSC proved less effective at enhancing axial strength of filled tube columns through confinement. In contrast, confinement in filled steel tube columns was found most effective with the use of concretes with coarse aggregates such as LWC and CRC.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".