Wood-Dowel Bonding by High-Speed Rotation Welding — Application to Two Canadian Hardwood Species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The aim of this work was to investigate the possibility to apply high-speed rotation-induced wood-dowel welding technique to two Canadian hardwood species commonly used for furniture and structural applications, sugar maple (Acer saccharum) and yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis). Different factors have been evaluated such as the wood species, the grain orientation, the rotation rate, as well as the receiver hole diameter. The results indicate that high-speed rotation-induced wood-dowel welding can be suitable for these two wood species with average tensile strength values comparable to their respective PVAc-glued joints. Additionally, wood-welded joints presented higher water resistance than their glued-joint counterparts. The results of the temperature measurements confirm that the softening and degradation temperatures of wood components have been reached during the welding process. The X-ray microdensitometry analyses show an increase of density for the interfacial material between the wood substrate and the dowel, the profile of which is more uniform for sugar maple than for birch. The scanning electron micrographs of the interfacial contact zone confirm the different extents of wood-to-wood welding.
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) | 0.002 | 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".