MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Behavior of Structural Insulated Panels Subjected to Short-Term Axial Loads

2019· article· en· W2969339741 on OpenAlexafffund
Eric Jacques, J.M. Makar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Analysis of Composite Materials
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsStructural engineeringSandwich-structured compositeConcentricOriented strand boardEngineeringCore (optical fiber)Frame (networking)Structural systemLimit state designMechanical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structural insulated panels, commonly known as SIPs, constitute a panelized building system composed of external facer panels, such as oriented strandboard (OSB) sheets, bonded to a lightweight foam core. As the demand for SIPs increases as an alternative to light-frame construction in residential and light-commercial buildings, so too does the need for proper design requirements to satisfy regulatory agencies and building officials. This paper describes a combined experimental and analytical study whose objective was to investigate the structural behavior of OSB-faced SIPs subject to short-term axial loading. A total of 53 panels with varying types of foam core, thickness, and other construction details were subjected to concentric and eccentric loading. The test results indicated that the strength of SIPs was primarily influenced by the panel slenderness and the type of foam core. Reliability-based design expressions were developed for the ultimate limit state of SIPs subjected to short-duration concentric and eccentric axial loading. The results were also compared to current allowable stress design practices. In addition to presenting important test data for researchers, this paper presents a number of practical design recommendations to improve the performance of SIPs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Structural EngineeringSame topicStructural Analysis of Composite MaterialsFrench-language works237,207