Embedment Strength of Cross-Laminated Timber for Smooth Dowel-type Fasteners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Embedment strength is a significant property in the dowel type connection in timber structure, i.e. cross-laminated timber (CLT). The CLT design properties are different from those of sawn timber (ST) and glued-laminated timber (GLT) because of the orthogonal structure, which may particularly have influence on the design of connections. The layup feature, i.e. the thickness ratio of transverse layer (TRTL) was considered as an effective factor on CLT embedment strength in this study, except for other factors, i.e. wood density, smooth dowel diameter, and loading angle. Approximate 660 embedment tests were performed according to ASTM D5764 half-hole test method. A few of existing design models for CLT embedment strength were evaluated using experimental data. It was found that different factors had different effect tendency and each factor had statistically significant impact on CLT embedment strength. The embedment strength and failure modes of CLT were obviously different from those of GLT due to the existence of transverse layer in CLT. The existing design equations should be improved. Based on the test results, a new design equation was proposed which had better prediction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".