Truss plate reinforced bolted connections in parallel strand lumber
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper summarizes the results of an investigation into the behaviour of truss plate reinforced single and multiple bolted connections in parallel strand lumber (PSL) under static tension loading. Sixty single-bolt connections were tested with bolt and PSL size combinations of 12.7 mm bolts in 38×140 mm specimens, 15.9 mm bolts in 89×140 mm specimens, and 22.2 mm bolts in 133×191 mm specimens. Another sixty multiple-bolt specimens were tested, using the above-mentioned PSL size and bolt combinations. The multiple-bolt connections consisted of two rows of five bolts in the 38×140 mm and 89×140 mm specimens and two rows of two bolts in the 133×191 mm specimens. Each connection was configured according to the Canadian Standard for Engineering Design in Wood (CAN/CSA 086.1-94) in terms of bolt spacing, edge distances, and end distances. All reinforced single-bolt connections had average ultimate strength increases, compared to unreinforced connections, of 3% for the 133×191 mm, 12% for the 89×140 mm, and 37% for the 38×140 mm specimens. Reinforcement had little effect on the strength of multiple-bolt connections in both the 38×140 mm specimens and the 89×140 mm specimens. The reinforced four-bolt connections in the 133×191 mm specimens had a 7% increase in average ultimate strength. Reinforcement significantly improved the ductility in all the connections tested. Key words: timber connections, parallel strand lumber, multiple bolts, reinforcement, truss plates, ductility, composite wood products, testing, experimental, composite structural lumber.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".