Racking performance of poplar laminated veneer lumber frames and frame-shear hybrid walls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the racking performance of poplar laminated veneer lumber (LVL) frames using bolted steel filling plates to connect beam-column joints, poplar LVL frames using the embedment bars to connect beam-column joints, and frame-shear hybrid walls made of poplar LVL studs and oriented strand board (OSB) sheathing panels. A new design load spreader beam was used on the side of the top of a specimen to apply monotonic and cyclic loadings. It was found that the lateral force resistance, stiffness, and ultimate loads of poplar LVL pure frames with bolted steel filling plate connections and closed rod connections were much lower than those of the poplar LVL frame-shear wall hybrid structure. The highest initial stiffness of the poplar LVL hybrid frame-shear wall was 1.77 kN/mm, which was 24% and 22% lower than that of the conventional shear wall made with spruce-pine-fir studs and OSB or plywood sheathing panels, respectively. The poplar LVL frame-shear wall hybrid structure showed lower degradation in stiffness than the conventional shear wall. The hybrid frame-shear wall structures made of poplar LVL could meet the requirements of Chinese standard; however, diagonal braces were required in use of poplar LVL pure frames.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".