Failure Modes and Mechanical Properties of Bracket Anchor Connections for Cross-Laminated-Timber
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper presents some experimental data and phenomenon on bracket anchor connections for Cross-Laminated-Timber. The goal of this research is to provide a better understanding of the seismic performance of bracket connections subjected to seismic actions and how to choose and design bracket connections for Cross-Laminated-Timber structures. Test configuration and experimental setups are illustrated in details; cyclic displacement schedules of the connections in two directions are presented considering that CLT wall has horizontal sliding in the plane and uplift at the end in quasi-state tests. Different failure modes and force transmission mechanisms of different connections under the loading protocol were analysed. And important quantities for seismic design such as strength, and stiffness, equivalent yield load, peak load and ductility of the connections are evaluated and compared among different kinds of connections; an excellent connector is revealed in ductility and load capacity by test data analysis. In addition, some suggestions to choose and design bracket anchor connections are given.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it