Experimental evaluation of an orthotropic, monolithic, modular wooden-dome structural system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian Wooden Dome (CWD) is an innovative orthotropic, monolithic modular sectional building system. The main frame of these structures is built using mill trim ends that are normally chipped or used for finger-jointing. The structure, in comparison to conventional wood-frame single-family housing, has a rapid manufacturing process, and quick, on-site assembly attempts to reduce overall construction time. Presented with these advantages and the uniqueness of the wooden-dome system, a technical study was initiated to investigate the structural performance of the modular wooden dome in earthquake-prone areas and to examine its load resistance to heavy snow. This paper describes the results from a series of static and dynamic load tests conducted on the CWD as part of this study. The test results generally indicated that based on the structural performance of the CWD under static and dynamic loads, the CWD could be an alternative to the conventional wood-frame construction system. The test results are then compared with those obtained from the tests conducted on conventional single-family wood-frame houses as part of the Earthquake 99 (EQ-99) Woodframe House Project at The University of British Columbia. The seismic performance of the CWD was superior to that of the nonengineered housing system and comparable to that of the engineered wood-frame housing system.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".