Strength of Joints that Combine Bolts and Welds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The capacity of each connector type in a shear-splice type of joint is reflected by its shear strength and shear deformation characteristics. When two or more types of fasteners share the load, it is clear that it is not satisfactory to simply combine the ultimate strength of each individual fastener type. Each of the different fastening elements has a different ductility and, in general, each reaches its ultimate strength at a different value of overall connection deformation. The strength of joints that combine bolts and fillet welds that act in the same shear plane has been examined. The study has shown that the rules provided in the AISC LRFD Specification do not adequately reflect the actual strength of this type of joint. Using test results from the University of Alberta and others, expressions are presented for the capacity of the various elements that make up a bolted-welded joint. These expressions enable the capacity of a combined bolted-welded joint to be predicted with a reasonable degree of accuracy. The examination showed that transverse fillet welds do not work well in combination with bolts because of the limited ductility of the former.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".