MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394784041 · doi:10.1061/jsendh.steng-12831

Short-Term, Long-Term, and Vibration Performance of TCC Floors Using Mass-Timber Panels

2024· article· en· W4394784041 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalPositive Living Society of British ColumbiaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural engineeringCross laminated timberStiffnessVibrationDeflection (physics)Laminated veneer lumberSlabBending stiffnessShear (geology)Natural frequencyBendingEngineeringMaterials scienceComposite materialVeneer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing availability of mass timber panels has expanded the possibilities for using timber-concrete-composite (TCC) flat floors beyond the traditional TCC T-beams. While TCC floors often easily satisfy ultimate limit state requirements, their stiffness, vibration characteristics, and long-term performance are critical design considerations. This research aimed to validate the bending, vibration, and long-term performance for nine different TCC floor systems through full-size tests with a span of 5.8 m. The tested floor systems used laminated-veneer-lumber, laminated-strand lumber, and cross-laminated-timber (CLT) panels connected to a concrete slab with and without an interlayer. Three types of shear connections were employed: self-tapping screws; glued-in steel mesh; and a combination of STS and adhesive bond. First, the shear connection properties were determined via 54 small-scale push-out tests. Then, 18 floors were tested in bending and vibration shortly after fabrication, and an additional nine floors were subjected to service loading for 32 months under variable climatic conditions, after which they were subjected to bending and vibration tests. The results confirmed that the calculations based on the γ-method accurately predict the stiffness, natural frequency, and governing failure modes of TCC floors. The long-term exposure to service loading had minimal effect (within 10%) on resistance, stiffness, and natural frequency of TCC floors, except for the TCC using CLT, which showed the highest creep deflection and stiffness reduction among the tested configurations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.204 · 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