Numerical and Experimental Study on Modular-Based Timber Structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Building with prefabricated light-frame volume modules is a prevalent and innovative construction method for low and mid-rise timber buildings. Compared to traditionally site-built constructions this method is very advantageous due to its high prefabrication level and the fast on-site assembly of the modules. The focus of this project is to study and optimise the global shear stiffness of the volume modules and to secure a large enough shear and uplift stiffness of the mechanical (or friction based) connections between the modules. Some companies assume that the friction between the modules is sufficient to transfer the wind stabilization forces down through the entire building. Regarding structural safety, connection design is an important task that needs to be numerically studied and experimentally verified. The paper presents numerical and experimental results obtained from two ongoing research projects concerning modular-based timber buildings in Sweden. The final aim of this work is to develop an efficient three dimensional finite-element model to analyse both the global and detailed structural behaviour of these types of buildings. To study the overall shear stiffness of the volume modules, eight different test-modules are to be tested. The test results will be used to calibrate the numerical model.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".