MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313161718 · doi:10.1061/41000(315)50

Field and Wind Tunnel Experiments to Evaluate Wind-Induced Cladding and Structural Loads on a Low Wooden Building

2008· article· en· W2313161718 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueStructures Congress 2008 · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRoofWind tunnelWind engineeringCladding (metalworking)Low-riseStructural engineeringFinite element methodFull scaleBuilding envelopeHypersonic wind tunnelEnvelope (radar)Environmental scienceEngineeringMarine engineeringMeteorologyThermalMaterials scienceAerospace engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Full-scale studies, wind tunnel experiments and finite element modeling were used for the study of a wooden low-rise building subjected to wind loads. The conclusions of this study can be summarized as follows: 1) The pressure distribution comparison between the wind tunnel and the full-scale results shows good agreement. Some discrepancies can be justified by the high fluctuations of the wind direction in the full-scale records. The peak pressure coefficient comparison is characterized by higher discrepancies. 2) The wind tunnel / full-scale general agreement allows the use of wind tunnel data for numerical simulation. 3) The comparison between the full-scale load cell readings and the base reactions computed by the finite element analysis made in the form of force coefficients shows good agreement, as far as mean values are concerned. Higher values of forces have been found by using the measured pressure coefficients on the building envelope in comparison with those recorded directly by load cells placed on building foundation. 4) The experimental critical local pressures (suctions) tend to be higher (lower) in comparison to the code suggested values. Topography and surrounding structures effects can justify these discrepancies. 5) Field pressure data are, in some cases, significantly higher than the corresponding ASCE 7 values for components and cladding. The study confirms that full-scale structural monitoring is very difficult, time-consuming, yet necessary task. The ongoing collection of data will lead to more complete outcomes. Furthermore, roof load cells have been installed on the base of roof trusses and a more detailed picture of the structural response will be available in the near future.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.259 · 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