MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W804473397

An Availability Analysis on the Gap K-Joints using High Strength Circular Hollow Section Members

2010· article· en· W804473397 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kwan-Su Ahn, Young Cheol Choi, Young-Suk Oh, Jae-Woon Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Korean Society of Steel Construction · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Load-Bearing Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigh strength steelStructural engineeringBucklingFinite element methodYield (engineering)Materials scienceBrittlenessCompression (physics)Composite materialEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are many restrictions in the application of high-strength HSSs, including yield strength and yield ratio for the 600-MPa steel. The AISC and Canadian codes recommend that the yield strength and yield ratio of HSS members be 360 MPa and 80%, respectively. It is important to understand the true buckling behaviors of HSSs using high-strength steel at the limit states. There are many experimental data regarding the rectangular HSSs, and the circular ones are not enough for high-strength steel. Therefore, this study was conducted to create a better understanding of the buckling behaviors of the 600- and 400-MPa steels based on the results of the finite-element analysis that was done before the experiment. To understand the structural behaviors of the aforementioned steels, the width-to-thickness ratios, the angle of the web members, the yield strength, and the gap of the web members were selected as the main parameters in this study, and ABAQUS, a general finite-element program, was used.As a result, the compression web member reached elastic buckling in the 600-MPa steel and inelastic buckling in the 400-MPa steel. A brittle fracture occurred in the case where the yield ratio was greater than 80%. At the same time, it was found that the limit strength determined via FEM analysis had a higher value compared to the code evaluation with the variation of the width-to-thickness ratio in the main code member. The change in the connection load in high-strength steels was not identified by the other factors.

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 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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Korean Society of Steel ConstructionSame topicStructural Load-Bearing AnalysisFrench-language works237,207