Influence of size on punching shear strength of concrete slabs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The punching shear behaviour of interior slab-column connections in flat plates is investigated. The response of six two-way slab specimens, which were designed such that they would fail in punching shear, are presented. The parameter introduced in the experimental program is member depth. The effects of this parameter on the punching shear capacity of slab elements are investigated. The results show a strong "size effect", with deeper members having a smaller shear stresses at failure than shallow ones. Test results obtained from this experimental program are compared with the punching shear predictions of the Canadian CSA A23.3-94 Standard, the American ACI 318-95 Code, the British BS 8110-85 Standard and the European CEB-FIP 1990 Model Code. Predictions were also made using computer program "Response 2000", assuming an equivalent beam analogy to represent the slab. It is concluded that the shear design of slabs, according to the current Canadian and American codes, can be unconservative under certain conditions, particularity for thick slabs. It is recommended that the punching shear expressions of the CSA Standard and the ACI Code be modified to take into account the "size effect" on the punching shear strength of slabs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".