Mechanical Properties of Unidirectional Oriented Strand Board with Flat Vertical Density Profile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the effect of the relative humidity (RH) and density of unidirectional oriented strand board (OSB) on parallel, perpendicular and through-the-thickness elastic modulus (E1, E2 and E3) and interlaminar shear modulus (G13 and G23). The relationships between these parameters and density were determined on unidirectional OSB panels with a flat density profile. The target densities were: 550 kg/m3, 700 kg/m3 and 850 kg/m3. Two RH levels at a constant temperature of 20°C were used to determine relationships between OSB mechanical properties and moisture content (MC). The analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated that only density had a significant effect on the mechanical properties considered. Even though the effect of RH was not significant, a trend could be observed. Oriented strand board E1, E2, E3, G13 and G23, increased with an increase in density and decreased with an increase in RH. Finally, a regression procedure was used to determine the linear or quadratic equation necessary to predict the mechanical properties of the OSB panels as a function of density. A positive correlation was observed between the unidirectional OSB properties considered and density. These data will support the modeling of the hygromechanical behaviour of the OSB used as component in wood composite constructions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".