MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407091609 · doi:10.1016/j.tws.2025.113041

A comparative study on the stability of double-curvature and conventional cable domes

2025· article· en· W4407091609 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThin-Walled Structures · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersMinistry of Higher Education, Egypt
KeywordsCurvatureGeologyStructural engineeringStability (learning theory)GeometryEngineeringMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Four cable domes with different curvature are developed and optimized. • The ultimate stability loads are calculated using nonlinear Arc-Length method. • Geometric and material imperfections and initial defects are considered. • Local buckling of struts is also considered by modeling them as beam elements. • Negative-curvature domes are more stable than positive- and zero-curvature domes. Cable domes are lightweight structures used for covering large areas such as arenas and stadiums. The aesthetic view and versatile forms of cable domes attracted many designers to develop new forms with better stability and rigidity. The roof curvature has crucial effect on the stability performance of cable domes. Compared to the traditional forms of cable domes with positive-Gaussian curvature, a newly developed double-curvature cable dome is intended to have better stability and rigidity due to the saddle roof surface. To investigate this, this study compares the stability performance of four cases of cable domes of Geiger type: a positive-, zero, and two negative-Gaussian curvature cable domes with different sag values of the saddle surface. The four case studies have the same cable-struts arrangement and dimensions in plan, the same length of struts and mid-point height above the lowest point in the roof. The domes are designed and optimized under external loading 1.0 kN/m 2 . The external loads are then increased incrementally to 10.0 kN/m 2 using Arc-Length method and the total deformation and stresses in all elements are monitored and compared for all cases. Geometric and material nonlinearities and the initial defect are considered. Struts are modeled using beam elements to consider the flexural rigidity of struts with the aim to investigate the effect of local buckling instability of struts on the ultimate stability load of cable domes. The load-carrying capacity is obtained, and the comparison shows that negative-curvature domes are more stable than zero- and positive-curvature domes. However, more attention is required when designing the outermost struts in negative-curvature domes to increase dome's stability. Moreover, considering the local imperfection in negative-curvature domes decreases the ultimate stability load by approximately 7.5 % and as such considering the flexural rigidity of struts is recommended when investigating the ultimate stability load in this type of domes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.245 · 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