MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Three-Dimensional Finite-Element Modeling of Nailed Connections in Wood

2010· article· en· W2048340832 on OpenAlexaff
Jung-Pyo Hong, David J. Barrett

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbedmentFinite element methodStructural engineeringFoundation (evidence)IsotropyNonlinear systemNail (fastener)Slip (aerodynamics)Materials scienceConnection (principal bundle)Geotechnical engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A three-dimensional nonlinear finite-element model of single nail connection was developed based on transversely isotropic plasticity. In order to have the connection model account for crushing behavior of wood during the nail embedment, a procedure was studied to implement the theory of a beam on a nonlinear foundation in the solid element modeling. Within a prescribed volume of wood surrounding a nail, a wood foundation was defined with the foundation material parameters, which were determined through nail-embedment tests. Introduction of the wood foundation to the connection model was justified by comparing the results of nail-embedment simulations with or without a wood foundation. Three-dimensional finite-element analyses of single nail connections incorporated with wood foundations were compared with the results of lateral resistance tests of the connections under parallel to grain loading and perpendicular to grain loading. The model predictions showed good agreement with the load-slip relations and the actual deformed shapes of the connections.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations76
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Structural EngineeringSame topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207