Mechanical performance of three types of connections used in orthogonal ribbed beams made of poplar laminated veneer lumber
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study elucidated the mechanical performance of different connections used in orthogonal ribbed beams made of poplar laminated veneer lumber (LVL). Three types of connections (namely, U-, T-, and L-shape) were fabricated and used to connect the second beam and the middle part of a main beam to form an orthogonal rib beam. A concentrated load was applied to the intersection between the main beam and the second beam. The results showed: (1) all three types of ribbed beam connection specimens showed good connecting performance and the ductile failure, including the pull-out of partial self-tapping screws, crushing of LVL at the end of the ribbed beam, and connection failure; (2) the variation of load capacity of JD2-type specimens was approximately 3.2%, which was smaller than that of the JD1- and JD3-type specimens, slightly less than 10%; (3) the ultimate bearing capacity of a connection specimen was proportional to the number of self-tapping screws; and (4) the mechanical performance of the U-shaped connection specimens was worse than that of the L-and T-shaped connection specimens. The L-shaped connection was recommended due to its better mechanical performance, simpler configuration, and more convenient fabrication.
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".