MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Glulam connections assembled with screws in different installation angles

2021· article· es· W3195104164 on OpenAlexaff
D.C. Hanna, Thomas Tannert

Bibliographic record

VenueMaderas Ciencia y tecnología · 2021
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStiffnessFastenerTappingStructural engineeringDuctility (Earth science)Joint (building)Deformation (meteorology)Materials scienceComposite materialEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-tapping screws are the recognized state-of-the-art in fastener technology for timber structures.Combining fasteners of different stiffness, such as self-tapping screws with different installation angles, can be advantageous to simultaneously achieve high connection stiffness and ductility.In this paper, experimental investigations on a total of 65 glued-laminated timber joints assembled with a variety of installation angles including several combinations of self-tapping screws acting axially in withdrawal with self-tapping screws acting laterally are presented.The connection performance was analyzed in terms of the load-carrying capacity, the deformation capacity, the stiffness, and the ductility.The findings demonstrated that joint assemblies with self-tapping screws loaded primarily laterally exhibit low stiffness but high ductility, whereas joint assemblies with self-tapping screws loaded primarily in withdrawal are very stiff but exhibit low ductility.Combining screws in different installation angles created glued-laminated timber connections that combine high stiffness with high ductility.Existing analytical expressions were deemed suitable to estimate load-carrying capacity through simple summation of the different screws' individual resistances.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaderas Ciencia y tecnologíaSame topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207