Numerical study of I-joists with wood-based corrugated panel web
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oriented strand board (OSB) panels are widely used as the best web solution for wooden I-joists. Many previous studies have focused on testing various new web materials, but few have examined the contribution of other web shapes to the I-joists’ behavior. The use of corrugated wood-based panels as I-joist web has been investigated. The aim of this study was to analyze the sensitivity of the joist in bending tests to the elastic properties of the corrugated web using a numerical approach with the finite element method. Joists with a corrugated web were manufactured and tested in long- and short-span bending tests and compared to traditional I-joists with an OSB web. The results obtained were encouraging. Results show that the in-plane shear modulus is the most critical elastic property in the behavior of the joist and is estimated at 1300 MPa to reproduce the same behavior of the corrugated web joist as that experimentally tested. The numerical approach also enabled determination of the corrugated web’s shear failure mode. This mode of failure manifested itself as interactive buckling, followed by the creation of diagonal tension lines.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".