EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF A SCREW-GLUED SHEAR CONNECTION FOR USE IN MASS TIMBER COMPOSITE PANELS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ribbed or box section mass timber composite (MTC) panels offer a potential solution to the floor span limitations of conventional mass timber panels due to vibration.Glued connections have shown to be a viable shear connection in MTCs due to their high strength and stiffness.Investigated herein is the behaviour of a screw-glued connection of commercially available construction adhesive and self-tapping screws, to assess its viability to adequately transfer forces between the flanges and webs of MTCs.Shear tests on four 400mm long dimensional lumber T-sections yielded an average slip modulus of 17.63N/mm per mm 2 of glue, with an average yield stress of 4.59MPa and 3.47MPa from two bilinear data fit models.The connection was used to fabricate six 1.8m long dimensional lumber T-beams which were tested in flexure and used to validate a numerical model capable of capturing the behaviour.The results agreed well, with the average experimental midspan deflection being 0.98 of the average numerical midspan deflection.Overall, when used on a 10m HMT panel, analytical results using the γ-method indicated a nearly fully composite shear connection was achieved, and a vibration-controlled span of 10.4m was possible for the 455mm deep section.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".