Vibration Performance and Stiffness Properties of Mass Timber Panel–Concrete Composite Floors with Notched Connections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mass timber panel–concrete composite (MTPCC) floors combine timber and concrete through high-performance connections to create an efficient floor system with high stiffness, high strength, and low self-weight. Previous research on MTPCC floors focused on improving the composite efficiency of floors under static loadings by testing different types of shear connectors. The dynamic performances of MTPCC floors, which can govern the floor span and thickness, have not been well investigated. In this study, vibration tests were conducted on glued-laminated timber panels and notch-connected MTPCC floors with different spans, thicknesses, and connection layouts. The dynamic properties, including natural frequencies, damping ratios, and mode shapes, were obtained for floors under different supporting conditions. Test results showed that MTPCC floors with a 6-m span had fundamental natural frequencies generally higher than 8 Hz. The addition of the concrete layer to the bare timber panels improved the floor fundamental natural frequency and damping. Deflection tests and walking tests were performed on MTPCC floors to evaluate the floor vibration serviceability performance, and it was found that the existing design criteria predicted inconsistent results. The flexural stiffness of MTPCC floors determined from vibration and deflection tests was close to full composite, while only partial composite action in the composite floors was achieved under a higher load level in destructive bending tests.
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) | 0.000 | 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".