MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387080961 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2023-0207

Bolted end-plate tube connections subject to tension and bending

2023· article· en· W4387080961 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Augusto Fidalgo, Jeffrey A. Packer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsStructural engineeringTension (geology)Parametric statisticsFinite element methodBendingEngineeringConnection (principal bundle)Bolted jointUltimate tensile strengthMaterials scienceComposite materialMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A large amount of research has been undertaken on tubular bolted end-plate connections loaded in axial tension, and considerably less on such connections in flexure. This paper studies the combined effects of these two loads and presents the first laboratory tests on these connections under combined tension and flexure. Using validated finite element models, a parametric study with 360 numerical models is performed on these connections under axial and eccentric tension loads. After screening this database of experimental tests and numerical results to isolate only connection failure modes, current design methods for predicting the connection capacity under eccentric tension are evaluated and revised. In addition, based on interaction curves, a novel approach is proposed to design these splices under combined loads. For all methods, the use of the plate ultimate and yield stress was compared for the end-plate material strength parameter. Lastly, a reliability analysis is performed for the application of the recommended design methods to Canadian practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207