Evaluation of Quality in the Adhesion of Glued Laminated Timber (Glulam) of Paricá and Lyptus Wood Species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aims to study the shear strength of species-adhesive-moisture-waterproofing combinations and delamination of Glued Laminated Timber (Glulam) made with Paricá (Schizolobium amazonicum Herb) and Lyptus Wood species, using two different adhesives, the bicomponent resorcinol-formaldehyde based adhesive (CASCOPHEN RS-216-M) with catalyst FM-60-M and the bicomponent melamine-urea based adhesive with catalyst AkzoNobel MUF 1242/2542, both in a proportion of 100 parts/adhesive mass and 20 parts/catalyst mass and waterproofed by the commercial product ProtectGuard. Shear strength tests in adhesion line were performed according to North American Standard AITC 190: 2007 and delamination tests were carried out obeying Canadian Code CSA 0177: 2006. The results show that average values of great shear strength were obtained in tests on the glue line of the specimens treated with the waterproofer, however, within them, the timber was dry. Lyptus Glulam beams did not present a performance in delamination that was compatible to external applications, but Paricá beams are fit to this use, once they are previously treated.
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".