MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404871286 · doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2024.107923

Experimental study of static and fatigue push-out test on headed stud shear connectors in UHPC composite steel beams

2024· article· en· W4404871286 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mohit Gyawali, Khaled Sennah, Mizan Ahmed, Ahmed Hamoda

Bibliographic record

VenueStructures · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringComposite numberShear (geology)Materials scienceComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Steel-concrete composite girder bridges utilize shear connectors to connect concrete deck slabs and steel girders . In current practice, the headed shear stud connector is the most used due to its reliability and ease of installation. Several studies are available on the static and fatigue behavior of welded-headed shear studs embedded in normal-strength concrete. However, relatively little is known about the static and fatigue behavior of headed shear connectors in composite beams when shear studs are embedded in ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC). This study reports a series of pushout results carried out on headed shear connectors embedded in UHPC at pre-fatigue and post-fatigue stages. Six pushout specimens were first tested under static load to collapse. The precast normal-strength concrete slabs in the pushout specimens were reinforced with glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) bars to promote sustainable construction. This practice, commonly used in Canada, aims to eliminate the corrosion of steel bars caused by de-icing salts used during winter. The results from these tests were used to determine the applied fatigue stress range of another six identical pushout specimens, which were subjected to constant amplitude fatigue loading over 2 million cycles. Results show that the fatigue cycles applied to the specimens prior to testing them to collapse did not alter the failure mode or the crack pattern of the tested specimens . Furthermore, the studied pushout specimens considered 6 different shapes of shear pockets in which the arrangement and spacing of studs were varied. It was found that the studs in a square pocket form yielded a shear capacity of 13.9 % and 16.7 % greater than those for similar studs arranged in a single row-oriented longitudinally and transversally, respectively. The accuracy of the various design formulas specified in design codes in estimating the shear resistance of the tested specimens, as well as empirical formulas proposed to develop load-slip curves of tested specimens, is studied. It was found that the European and Japanese codes significantly underestimated the stud shear capacity, whereas the Canadian code provides a more accurate estimation.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStructuresSame topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207