Wood I-Joist Model Sensitivity to Oriented Strandboard Web Mechanical Properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on wood I-joist design has often used laboratory testing, but simulation using the finite \nelement method (FEM) offers advantages, including the possibility to separately study different joist \ncomponents. The objective of this project was to perform a sensitivity analysis using FEM to determine \nwhich oriented strandboard (OSB) properties have higher impact on I-joist shear strain and deflection. OSB \nmechanical properties were changed from 50 to 200% of the reference value to determine their impact on \nweb shear strain and I-joist deflection. The model was primarily sensitive to in-plane web shear stiffness, \nwhich changed I-joist deflection up to 23%. The model was also sensitive to the web tensile modulus of \nelasticity parallel and perpendicular to joist length and, to a lesser extent, to web shear stiffness. These \nproperties changed I-joist deflection up to 2 and 1%, respectively. These findings will be used to plan future \nwork to experimentally determine sensitive OSB web properties required to develop a finite element model \nof the mechanical behavior of wood I-joists.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".