MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019269032 · doi:10.1002/bate.201300016

Faltung von textilen Membranen bei wandelbaren Leichtbaukonstruktionen

2013· article· de· W2019269032 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Knut Göppert, Christoph Paech, Markus Balz

Bibliographic record

VenueBautechnik · 2013
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEngineeringMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Unlängst wurden zwei der weltweit größten wandelbaren Dächer fertig gestellt. Die faltbaren Dächer des Nationalstadions Warschau und BC Place in Vancouver sind beide nahezu 10000 m2 groß. Während das Stadion in Warschau mit einer mechanisch vorgespannten Membran realisiert wurde, erhielt das Stadion in Vancouver aufgrund der hohen Schneelasten pneumatisch stabilisierte Kissen. Im folgenden Bericht wird speziell auf die erforderlichen Materialeigenschaften für wandelbare Membrankonstruktionen eingegangen, da ein immer wiederkehrender Faltungsvorgang eine signifikante Beanspruchung für das Material und seine Beschichtung bedeutet. Anhand von neu entwickelten Testmethoden wird beschrieben, wie in Abhängigkeit des Entwurfes die passenden Materialien gewählt wurden. Folding of textile membranes in retractable lightweight structures Two of the largest retractable membrane roofs in the world were recently completed. The National Stadium in Warsaw and BC Place Stadium in Vancouver have retractable membrane portions each with sizes up to 10000 m2. The Stadium in Warsaw has a mechanically pre‐stressed membrane while the structure in Vancouver uses inflated membrane cushions to withstand severe snow loading. In the following article required material properties for retractable membrane solutions will be discussed, since the repetitive folding of the membrane during the retraction puts significant demands to the textile material and its coating system. By means of especially developed testing methods it is described how the most suitable membrane material can be found, taken into account the concept design of the project.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBautechnikSame topicStructural Analysis and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207