Mechanical Performance of Polyurethane and Epoxy Adhesives in Connections with Glued-in Rods at Elevated Temperatures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glued-in rods have succesfully been used for connections of reinforcement of timber structures due to their high strenght and stiffness. However, their performance is potentially sensitive to temperature. This paper deals with an experimental investigation of the connections and adhesives in elevated temperatures. First, dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA) tests were performedto characterize an epoxy (EPX) and a polyurethane (PUR) adhesive. The evolution of the stiffness and the glass transition temperature, Tg, were measured in the range of 30°C to 120°C. Then, a total of 66 specimens with glued-in rods and the same adhesives were tested under a static tensile load at 20°C, 40°C, 50°C, 60°C, and 70°C. In both types of tests, the EPX outperformed PUR due to its higer stiffness at temperatures of up tu 40°C; however, it showed a more rapid degradation of the stiffness and strenght than the PUR at higher temperatures. No direct correlation was established between the Tg and the performance of the connections. The test results suggest that timber structures with glued-in rods may be vulnerable in service at temperatures above 40°C.
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) | 0.001 | 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".