A Test Protocol to Quantify the Uplift Resistance of Adhesive Applied Roofing Specimens Subjected to Tensile Loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Adhesive applied roofing systems (AARS), a new generation of built-up roofs, are gaining popularity in North American low slope application. AARS uses no fasteners and all components (e.g., deck, vapour barrier, insulation board, and membrane) are integrated by the use of adhesives. As there are no metal fasteners, AARS can offer an advantage of reduction in condensation and thermal bridges for the roof assemblies. Even though, AARS have been in use, there have been no standard that exists to quantify its wind uplift performances. An industries-university-Canadian government collaborative research project, “Development of Wind Uplift Standard for Adhesive Applied Low Slope Roofing System,” has been initiated with three major tasks: Experimental investigation, formulation of a numerical model and development of wind design guide and standards. This paper documents a standardized small scale laboratory test method for the quantification of uplift resistance subject to tensile loading. As part of Task 1 of the project, this systematic investigation focuses on three key parameters: Loading rate, specimen size and end condition. The investigations were completed by constructing over 400 specimens. Both the maximum uplift resistance and the consistence in the failure plane are equally considered during the test method standardization. The data from this small scale testing can facilitate roofing industries to optimize the material combinations such that the uplift resistance data can be used as an indicator before performing a full-scale wind uplift testing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".