GLUED TIMBER TRUSSES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current timber trusses are mainly made using steel fasteners, nail plates, or dowels with slotted plates. Glued timber trusses are applied commercially by two companies: German PERI produces trussed joists for concrete casting and Canadian Barret Structural makes trussed joists for residential floors. These trusses are based on finger joints made using a cursor. Recently, a Finnish company Teeri-Kolmio Oy started manufacturing glued trusses for residential floors with the joint processed using a saw blade. The such joint enables deep chord routings up to through the chord, long fingers, large web-chord glue areas, minimal timber splitting, and high resistance and reliability. There are further special characteristics. Top chord support is possible without hangers. The truss can be manufactured as a long billet, stored at lumberyards, and cut for actual needs. The truss can be manufactured without open routings and water pockets. The truss is strong and reliable and can be applied for the roofs of commercial buildings up to about 30 m spans. Our study shows that the trussed roof is more cost-effective than the glulam roof which opens a promising new business possibility.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.009 |
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".