MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409595547 · doi:10.1016/j.istruc.2025.108886

A novel analytical model for axial load and coupling ratio of balloon-type cross-laminated timber coupled shear walls

2025· article· en· W4409595547 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueStructures · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWood Treatment and Properties
Canadian institutionsFPInnovationsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStructural engineeringShear (geology)Shear wallMaterials scienceCoupling (piping)BalloonComposite materialEngineeringSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study proposes a novel analytical model to calculate the coupling ratio (CR), axial load in the wall piers, and lateral deformation of balloon-type cross-laminated timber coupled shear walls (BCSWs) with a free-rocking system under lateral loads . With ongoing research efforts to enhance energy dissipation and self-centering of the coupling beams and hold-downs, BCSWs with discrete steel link beams have emerged as a promising structural system for mid- to high-rise mass timber buildings. The performance of BCSWs at both the component and system levels primarily depends on the induced axial force in the wall piers, resulting from the cumulative effect of shear forces in the coupling beams under lateral loads . The current analytical methods for calculating axial load in the wall piers and lateral deformation of conventional coupled shear walls (CCSWs) and hybrid coupled shear walls (HCSWs) with fixed bases are no longer applicable to BCSWs with a rocking system. The analytical method proposed in this study addresses this limitation by predicting the mentioned demands for BCSWs in addition to CCSWs and HCSWs. The proposed method is validated through two case studies , demonstrating its effectiveness in calculating the interest demands in CCSWs, HCSWs, and BCSWs under reverse triangular, uniform, and top-concentrated loads. The results indicate that under a concentrated load at the top of the wall, considered a critical loading condition, the proposed method achieves a maximum normalized root mean square error of 7.25% and a normalized mean absolute error of 6.65% for the case study of BCSWs. These remarkable error metrics, obtained by comparing the predicted responses of the proposed method with numerical simulations using SAP2000 and OpenSees finite element software, underscore the method’s accuracy in predicting the demands on BCSWs under lateral loads in elastic range.

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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.252 · 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