MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2940660271 · doi:10.1061/9780784482247.013

Design and Analysis of Unretrofitted and Retrofitted Glulam Beams and Columns under Blast Loading

2019· article· en· W2940660271 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueStructures Congress 2019 · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCellular and Composite Structures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFibre-reinforced plasticStructural engineeringDuctility (Earth science)Materials scienceJoint (building)Flexural strengthComposite materialFoundation (evidence)Beam (structure)Reinforced concreteCreepEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The findings of a comprehensive study involving the static and dynamic investigation of seventy unretrofitted and FRP retrofitted glulam structural elements are presented in this paper. Key observations made in the experimental program regarding material properties, effect of combined axial and out-of-plane blast loading, and strengthening strategies using FRP are used as foundation for design recommendations. Based on the experimental results, unretrofitted glulam beams and columns were shown to have no significant post-peak resistance and thus it is recommended that such members be modeled using a linear flexural resistance curve with a ductility ratio of unity. A dynamic increase factor was found to only be present in beams with no continuous or closely aligned finger-joints. In cases where the finger-joint distribution is not known, a DIF of unity is recommended. Fibre-reinforced polymers (FRP) were shown to only provide significant post-peak resistance when bidirectional fabrics were used as confinement.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.193 · 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