Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of scarf joints to join panel products can be found in structural applications such as wood I-joists and stress-skin panels. Design specifications for plywood scarf joints have been available for decades. Corresponding information on oriented strandboard (OSB) is not yet available despite its status as a suitable alternative to plywood as a structural panel product. This project was conducted to provide such design information. Three hundred joints were fabricated and tested in tension in a dry condition. These included two nominal thicknesses of OSB (11 mm and 18 mm) from two manufacturers. The adhesive used for the joints was a resorcinol formaldehyde. The joint strengths were compared with the material strengths in tension. The results showed that optimum joint strength was reached when the scarf slope was about 1 in 7 irrespective of manufacturer and thickness. At the optimum joint slope, no loss of strength was observed compared with unjointed material. For slopes less than the optimum slope, normalized joint strength decreased slightly. As the scarf slope increased from the optimum value, normalized joint strength decreased to a value of about 0.35 for a vertical scarf (butt) joint.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".