Experimental and numerical investigation for steel shear panels of modular bridge
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shear truss steel panels are the main constituents in the construction of modular steel Bailey bridges. Buckling characteristics, and ultimate capacity of the panels are the main design parameters to be rationally predicted. The present paper presents full-scale tests on two types of typical shear panels. In addition, two distinctive three-dimensional finite element models were developed to analyze the response of the tested shear panels using beam-column elements and shell elements, which represent the simplified macro and micro modeling techniques, respectively. Both the eigenvalues (buckling) analysis and the nonlinear response analysis were conducted to predict both the buckling characteristic, and ultimate capacities, respectively. Correlation between predicted buckling loads from different modeling techniques revealed that to introduce an adjustment length factor K in the AASHTO-LRFD standards to accommodate rational end conditions and lengths of the compression members. Furthermore, the study revealed that the conservative prediction of buckling load stemmed from the method employed to calculate the buckling length, which leads to a conservative estimate of the compressive strength.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it