MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380449480 · doi:10.52202/069179-0421

NAIL-LAMINATED TIMBER-CONCRETE COMPOSITE BEAMS WITH NOTCHED CONNECTIONS AND STEEL FIBRE REINFORCEMENT

2023· article· en· W4380449480 on OpenAlexafffund
Hamidreza Chaboki, Lei Zhang, Thomas Tannert, Jianhui Zhou

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsMaterials scienceStructural engineeringComposite numberReinforcementStiffnessComposite materialBeam (structure)BrittlenessShear (geology)BendingBending stiffnessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The utilization of timber-concrete composite (TCC) floors, which involves connecting a wood beam or panel to a concrete layer via shear connectors, has experienced a surge in popularity in recent years.Although notched connections have proven to be cost-effective shear connections, without proper concrete reinforcement, cracks can develop in the notched area and ultimately lead to brittle shear failure.In this paper, we present research aimed at mitigating crack growth in concrete and preventing notch shear failure in concrete by employing steel fibre reinforcement.Eight groups of nail-laminated TCC beams with varying notch depth, location and number of notches, and thickness ratio of concrete to timber were tested under third-point bending.The results demonstrated that the number of notches and thickness ratio had the greatest impact on beam bending properties, while the influence of notch location and depth was marginal.Furthermore, the steel fibres effectively delayed crack propagation in the concrete notches, resulting in timber failure in all tested specimens.The notches cut on NLT and filled with concrete affect the modulus of elasticity of NLT and need to be considered for the calculation of composite efficiency and effective TCC beam bending stiffness.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWood Treatment and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207