MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394833987 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2023-0014

Mechanical grouting sleeve of rebars: experimental investigations

2024· article· en· W4394833987 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zengqiang Zhang, Jie Li, Shuhe Dai, Jingbo Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRebarStructural engineeringJoint (building)Ultimate tensile strengthDeformation (meteorology)Tension (geology)Materials scienceEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To ensure the reliability of prefabricated concrete structures and reduce the cost of sleeve, a new type of mechanical grouting sleeve of rebars was designed. According to the specification of the rebar joint, monotonic axial tension test and cyclic load test of the new rebar sleeve were performed. The working mechanism and connection performance of sleeve were studied. The results show that the unidirectional tensile strength of the sleeve joint can meet the requirement of 1.1 times of the tensile strength of the rebar. The deformation of mechanical grouting meets the requirements of standard under cyclic load. The strength and deformation properties of the rebar joint meet the requirements of standard of JGJ107-2010 for I level joint when the grouting length is large. The working mechanism of the mechanical grouting sleeve is discussed, which provides a new design method for the connection of rebar with different diameters. The research results are of great significance for promoting the development of prefabricated concrete structures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207