MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W645087772 · doi:10.1002/9780470261316

Structural stability of steel : concepts and applications for structural engineers

2008· book· en· W645087772 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Theodore V. Galambos, Andrea Surovek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSection (typography)BucklingStructural engineeringTangent modulusDeflection (physics)Materials scienceEngineeringGeometryModulusMathematicsPhysicsComputer scienceClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chapter 1: Fundamentals of Stability Theory. Section 1.1 Introduction. Section 1.2 Basics of Stability Behavior : The Spring-Bar System. Section 1.3 Fundamentals of Post-Buckling Behavior. Section 1.4 Snap-Through Buckling. Section 1.5 Multi-Degree-of-Freedom Systems. Section 1.6 Summary. Problems. Chapter 2: Elastic Buckling of Planar Columns. Section 2.1 Introduction. Section 2.2 Large-Deflection Solution of an Elastic Column. Section 2.3 Differential Equation of Planar Flexure. Section 2.4 The Basic Case: Pin-Ended Column. Section 2.5 The Five Fundamental Cases. Section 2.6 The Effect of Imperfections. Section 2.7 Stability of A Rigid Frame. Section 2.8 End-Restrained Columns. Section 2.9 Restrained Column Examples. Section 2.10 Continuously Restrained Columns. Section 2.11 Summary. Problems. Appendix. Chapter 3: Inelastic Column Buckling. Section 3.1 The Tangent and Reduced Modulus Concepts. Section 3.2 Shanley's Contribution. Section 3.3 Example Illustrating the Tangent Modulus and the Reduced Modulus Concepts. Section 3.4 Buckling Strength ff Steel Columns. Section 3.5 Illustration Of The Effect of Residual Stresses on the Buckling Strength of Steel Columns. Section 3.6 The Effect of Initial Out-of-Straightness and Load Eccentricity. Section 3.7 Design Formulas For Metal Columns. Section 3.8 Summary. Problems. Chapter 4: Beam-Columns. Section 4.1 Introduction. Section 4.2 General Discussion Of The Behavior Of Beam-Columns. Section 4.3 The Elastic In-Plane Behavior Of Beam-Columns. Section 4.4 Elastic Limit Interaction Relationships. Section 4.5 Example Problems Of Beam-Column Strength. Section 4.6 Systematic Methods Of Analysis: Flexibility Method. Section 4.7 Systematic Methods Of Analysis: The Stiffness Method. Section 4.8 Inelastic Strength Of Beam-Columns. Section 4.9 Design Of Beam-Columns. Problems. Chapter 5: Frame-Stability. Section 5.1 Introduction. Section 5.2 Two-Bay Frame Examples. Section 5.3 Summary. Problems. Chapter 6: Lateral-Torsional Buckling. Section 6.1 Introduction. Section 6.2 Basic Case: Beams Subjected To Uniform Moment. Section 6.3 The Effect Of Boundary Conditions. Section 6.4 The Effect Of Loading Conditions. Section 6.5 Lateral-Torsional Buckling Of Singly-Symmetric Cross Sections. Section 6.6 Beam-Columns And Columns. Section 6.7 Inelastic Lateral-Torsional Buckling. Section 6.8 Summary. Problems. Chapter 7: Bracing. Section 7.1 Introduction. Section 7.2 Discrete bracing. Section 7.3 Relative Bracing. Section 7.4 Lean-on Bracing. Section 7.5 Effects of Imperfections. Section 7.6 Column Bracing Provisions. Section 7.7 Beam Bracing. Section 7.8 AISC Design Provisions for Beam Bracing. Section 7.9 Summary. Suggested Reading. Problems. Chapter 8: Specification - Based Applications of Stability in Steel Design. Section 8.1 Introduction. Section 8.2 Development of the beam-column interaction equations. Section 8.3 Assessment of Column Strength. Section 8.4 Assessment of beam strength. Section 8.5 Specification Based Approaches for Stability Assessment. Section 8.6 Effective Length Factors, aka K-factors. Section 8.7 Design Assessment Example. Section 8.8 Frame Design Requirements in Canada and Europe. Section 8.9 Summary. Problems.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.007

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations109
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207