Review on Reinforced Concrete Slabs behavior with Presence of Openings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Openings in slabs are an important issue that needs to be studied carefully because these openings have an important effect on load capacity and the general behavior of RC, reinforced concrete slabs. This research aimed to review the previous studies that highlighted the impact of presence of opening in RC one-way and two-way slabs in addition to a review of four important codes, ACI Code, British Standard, Canadian Standard, and European Standard, that focused on this topic. The review of previous studies is divided into two sections, the first is the effect of opening in one-way slabs and the second is the effect of opening in two-way slabs. These studies produced that the opening size and position significantly affect load capacity, flexural, shear resistance, and deflection of slabs. The opening in the slab reduces the load capacity and shear resistance by reducing the concrete mass of the section where the concrete is cut. The flexibility of that slab is reduced in the existence of the opening caused by reinforcement cutting. The effect of opening can be reduced by using additional reinforcements or by using CFRP, carbon fiber reinforced polymer-strengthening.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".