Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis reports on research, performed at McGill University, on the experimental responses of four deep beams forming part of a larger research program involving eight deep beams. The other four beams are reported by BouSaleh (2006). The beams reported in this thesis were tested in an attempt to obtain crushing at the support nodal zones through the provisions of inadequate bearing area for beams with different tension tie anchorage details. In order to study the influence of different anchorages of the main tension tie, the beams were designed with the same strut-and-tie model in accordance with the CSA Standard (2004). The four full-scale simply supported deep beams had similar dimensions of 1000 mm in height, 350 mm in thickness, and a span of 2000 mm centre-to-centre between the supports. The four beams contained two layers of five 15M reinforcement. However, the length of each specimen varied according to the different anchorage details. The tension tie reinforcement anchored by straight bar embedment resulted in the longest beam. Identical overall lengths were provided for the specimens anchored using 90° standard hooks and friction-welded headed bars of head size 1.5 in. (38 mm). Finally, the shortest beam was anchored using friction welded headed bars of 2 in. (50 mm) head size. The beam containing hooked anchorages performed better than the beam with straight bar embedment, with higher capacity and ductility. The reduced head size friction-welded headed bars, further anchored with a lead-in length, resulted in a higher nodal zone bearing stresses, better confinement for the concrete and higher ductility compared to the straight bar embedment and the hooked anchorage. The friction-welded headed bars having heads with an area equal to ten times the bar area not only reduced the length of the beam significantly and were capable of developing the full yield strength of the bar at the inner side of the head. The beam with full size heads achieved a higher capacity than the beam with the straight bar embedment and reached about the same capacity as the beam with hooked end anchorage. This research also demonstrates the beneficial effect of the confining transverse pressure provided at the support nodal zones by the support reactions, in improving the bond. This effect resulted in higher bar stresses than those predicted using the CSA and ACI code development length expressions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".