Experimental Investigation of the Shear Resistance of CLT Panels with Unreinforced and Reinforced End Notches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a comprehensive experimental investigation into the shear resistance and failure of both unreinforced and reinforced notched cross-laminated timber (CLT) panels. It also includes an in-depth statistical analysis, employing both one-way and three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), to interpret the experimental findings. A total of 162 test specimens with various notch sizes in both minor and major strength directions and reinforcement using self-tapping screws (STS) were tested in bending. Unnotched CLT panels primarily failed due to rolling shear in the transverse layers. Notches reduced shear resistance and influenced failure mode and crack propagation. STS were effective in increasing shear resistance, with inclined screws being slightly more effective compared to vertical screws. For CLT panels oriented in the minor strength direction, a notch with a depth of 40% of the panel’s depth resulted in a 60% reduction in shear resistance. For these specimens, approximately half of the resistance of un-notched panels could be achieved by reinforcement. Comparing experimentally observed shear resistances to predicted values based on the available design approaches revealed that these approaches might not be conservative, particularly when the notch was within a transverse layer of CLT oriented in the minor strength direction. The findings offer insights for engineers involved in designing notched and reinforced CLT and can contribute toward developing future design guidelines.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".