Shear capacity of single- and double-layered gypsum board to steel stud screw connections in non-structural partitions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gypsum steel-stud partition walls are composed of light-gauge, cold-formed steel studs and gypsum boards attached with self-drilling screws. These non-structural elements are commonly used in volumetric modular building structures serving as partitions or exterior walls. Volumetric modular building structures are prefabricated, prefinished constructions where three-dimensional units, known as modules, are built in a factory and then transported to the construction site where they are placed and interconnected. The volumetric modules experience different loading scenarios during handling and transportation. While the modules may be designed to resist transportation and handling loads structurally, damage to nonstructural elements, such as gypsum board to stud connections, can still occur even under lower amplitude excitations. These non-structural damages, if not avoided, will require additional on-site repairs, leading to an increase in the overall costs of modular projects. This study investigates the shear capacity and damage mechanisms of gypsum board to steel stud screw connections. A series of experimental tests are performed to determine the capacity of these connections varying with the number of gypsum board layers (one- or two-layer), fastener edge distance and direction of loading (parallel or perpendicular to the edge). Finally, an analytical formulation was proposed to estimate the shear capacity of these connections. Results indicate that the distance of fasteners to the gypsum board edges dramatically affects the behavior of these connections. The connection capacity at the damage state and the failure modes can fairly be predicted through the proposed analytical approach, showing a reasonable match with experimental results. • Shear capacity of the single- and double-layered GSCs is investigated. • Loading direction effect, parallel and perpendicular to gypsum edge, on GSC capacity. • Minimum edge distances are proposed for GSCs under different loading directions. • Analytical formulations are proposed for predicting the shear capacity of GSCs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".