MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399766005 · doi:10.1177/13694332241254601

Full scale testing of ultra-high performance concrete closure joint for prefabricated full-depth precast concrete bridge deck panel system

2024· article· en· W4399766005 on OpenAlexafffund
Heather L. Stefaniuk, Ali A. Semendary, Dagmar Svecova

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Structural Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPrecast concreteStructural engineeringJoint (building)Full scaleClosure (psychology)Bridge (graph theory)DeckBridge deckEngineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of the transverse joint between prefabricated full-depth precast concrete deck panels is to prevent the relative vertical movement between the panels and to transfer the loads between adjacent panels without cracking. The most common failure mode for these types of joints during their service life are the interface cracks. Such cracks serve as a conduit for ingress of water into the superstructure, leading to further deterioration requiring frequent maintenance. UHPC is known for its high tensile and bond strengths and is often considered as a joint fill material that has the potential to make this connection more durable. This research has been initiated to investigate if closure joints cast using UHPC material can compete with the performance of monolithic deck systems. The experimental program consisted of two full-scale concrete bridge decks that were statically tested until failure. One bridge deck was a jointed panel deck (JPD) consisting of two half-size panels connected by UHPC closure joint, while the control deck was a full panel deck (FPD) cast as one monolithic specimen. Both decks were connected to the steel girders with UHPC shear pockets that contained four to six shear studs welded to the girder flange. The JPD had rectangular tapered shear pockets and the FPD had circular shaped pockets. The results indicated that the JPD and FPD reached the same ultimate loads, and both failed via concrete punching at the load point situated adjacent to the closure joint of JPD. The results demonstrated that using UHPC closure joint resulted in similar performance and behaviour under loading as the monolithic deck. The interfacial failure was not indicated even at ultimate loads. This confirms the ability of the UHPC closure joint to transfer the load to the adjacent panel. The results also indicated the use of circular or rectangular pockets led to similar behaviours.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Structural EngineeringSame topicStructural Behavior of Reinforced ConcreteFrench-language works237,207