Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most research on circular hollow section (CHS) flange-plate connections deals with axial tension loading, yet bending action is a common load case. Prior researchers have studied both ring and blank-flange-plate connections, using a four-point-bending setup, generating a database of 10 experimental tests and five numerical models on bolted blank-flange-plate connections under pure bending. This limited data is extended herein by two large-scale laboratory tests with blank-flange-plate connections having a large span-to-tube diameter ratio, and 120 numerical models. Flange-plate plastification and bolt fracture are the valid failure modes for this splice, so all data was meticulously assessed to exclude experimental tests or numerical models not governed by connection failure. Existing design models for calculating the connection capacity under pure bending are evaluated and revised. Moreover, based on rectangular flange-plate connections, a novel method is proposed to design its circular counterpart under pure bending. For all methods, the difference in using the ultimate stress for flange-plate moment capacity—instead of the conventional yield stress—is also analyzed. Lastly, a reliability analysis is conducted to support the proposed design method.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".