MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311047379 · doi:10.3389/fbuil.2022.1029237

Design of stick-framed wood roofs under tornado wind loads

2022· article· en· W4311047379 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Caspar L. D. Bain, Gregory A. Kopp, Ayman M. El Ansary

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Built Environment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRoofTornadoFraming (construction)GableLow-riseStructural engineeringEngineeringTrussArchitectural engineeringConstructabilityWind engineeringCivil engineeringForensic engineeringMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Light-frame wood construction comprises nearly 90% of the housing industry in Canada and the United States. The roofs of these houses can be constructed either entirely on site or using prefabricated trusses. Assembling the roof structure on site, otherwise known as stick-framing, is a framing technique with current code guidelines that are based on past practice and limited consideration of wind loads. This makes these roof structures susceptible to failure in high-speed wind events, such as tornadoes. This research proposes improved stick-framing guidelines that would work for EF-2 tornadoes. Using non-linear finite element analysis, a stick-framed roof was designed following the guidelines in the National Building Code of Canada. Non-linear links were used to model all of the connections between the members in the roof structure, with frame elements used to represent the members. Increasing wind loads were applied to the structure and the first elements of the roof that failed were improved using an iterative performance-based design approach until the performance target of resistance to EF-2 tornadoes was achieved. The failure of the roof-to-wall-connections and the lack of members used in the framing were the two main issues highlighted and addressed. Damage survey photos were used to compare failures observed in the model with failures after real tornado events, which demonstrate many similar failure modes. The research recommends the requirements to ensure stick-framed roofs can withstand EF-2 tornadoes. Most notable is an improved gable end frame, which gives the structure more roof-to-wall connections, as well as a more structurally sound frame where the loads are the highest. Other additions include struts, hurricane ties at all roof-to-wall connection locations and increased number of nails in various connections throughout the repeating inner frames. Minimum member sizes and qualities for each type of member used in the roof structure are also recommended.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Built EnvironmentSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207