Numerical Study of Performance of Alternate Closed Opening Castellated Beam Using Double Steel Channel Shapes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This numerical study presented and analysed a new technic of castellated steel beam "Alternate Closed Opening Castellated Beam" applied only to double steel channel shapes connected back to back.ABAQUS/2019 program employed to create modelling and analysis for two groups of models with the same length and conditions of loading.The first group has three noncomposite beam models: the first reference model without castellated, the second model with normal castellated and the third model with new castellated, also the second group has three composite beam models: the first reference model without castellated, second model with normal castellated and the third model with the new castellated.According to the analysis results; For the first noncompsite group, ultimate load for the second and third models increased by 8.84% and 16.63%, respectively, compared to the reference model, with local buckling in the top flanges under concentrated loads and lateral-torsional buckling as the failure modes.For the second composite group, the ultimate load for the second and third models increased by 41.83% and 62.19%, respectively, compared to the first reference model, with the flexural mechanism as the main failure mode.This enhancement in the load-carrying capacities of the new Alternate Closed Opening Castellated Beams is due to the limit states mode of failures resulting from web holes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".