MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079549913 · doi:10.1520/jte20130229

Impact of Moisture and Load on Vertical Movement of a Simulated Platform Frame Wood Structure

2014· article· en· W2079549913 on OpenAlexaff
Jieying Wang, Luke King

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Testing and Evaluation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMasonry and Concrete Structural Analysis
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Institute of TechnologyFPInnovations
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShrinkageStructural engineeringFraming (construction)MoistureStructural loadGeotechnical engineeringStiffnessDisplacement (psychology)Vertical displacementGeologyEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The objective of this study was to assess the relative contributions of wood shrinkage and building dead loads to vertical displacement in the form of height loss for wood-frame structures. Identifying the relative contributions of these factors while monitoring full-sized buildings presents significant challenges; therefore, a laboratory test was conducted under controlled hygrothermal conditions and loading. Two small-scale wood-frame structures were constructed with dimension lumber wall assemblies and floor joists. Both model structures were equipped with vertical movement and moisture content (MC) monitoring systems. The structures were conditioned in a chamber to a MC of approximately 20 %, and then moved into the laboratory environment for drying and loading. Model Structure No. 1 was loaded immediately; model Structure No. 2 was not loaded until after the wood had dried to the equilibrium MC. By using a unique lever system, the applied load simulated a dead load that could be experienced by the bottom floor of a six-story wood-frame building. Shrinkage coefficients were measured using samples cut from the horizontal framing members. The results suggested that the loads “forced” the structures to displace downward. At the driest time in the laboratory, the total movement of model Structure No. 1 reached a maximum of about 19 mm after 10 months, which is comparable to in situ recorded measurements from the bottom floor of a four-story wood-frame building in coastal British Columbia. Shrinkage appeared to account for 70 % of the total vertical movement, with the remaining 30 % contributable to load-induced displacement under the conditions of this test. Model Structure No. 2 showed less vertical movement but more initial displacement than model Structure 1 due to a larger settlement. This study suggested that there may be a need to consider the effect of loads in addition to wood shrinkage when estimating building height loss.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Testing and EvaluationSame topicMasonry and Concrete Structural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207