Tensile Performance of a Novel Glue-Laminated Cornstalk Scrimber
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glue-laminated cornstalk scrimber is a novel composite to substitute timber. This composite can be prepared in three steps: selecting flawless cornstalks, laying them parallel to grain, and gluing the scrimbers under high pressure. Compared with ordinary timber, glue-laminated cornstalk scrimber excels in the resistance to water, damping, insect, and fire. It is therefore widely recognized as novel eco-friendly and cost- effective composite with great potential in the building industry. The tensile strength of glue-laminated cornstalk scrimber mainly depends on the parallel-to-grain strength of its fibers. The mechanical performance parallel to grain directly determines that of this composite. Hence, this paper carries out experimental analysis on the Young’s moduli and parallel-to-grain tensile strengths of cornstalk scrimber and glue-laminated cornstalk scrimber. The results show that the load-strain curve of glue-laminated cornstalk scrimber basically changed linearly parallel to grain, and the material exhibited stable Young’s modulus and good strength; the glue-laminated cornstalk scrimber had a slightly higher tensile strength than cornstalk scrimber, and could thus replace timber as a building material.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".