Dimensional changes of cross-laminated timber basement walls under ambient humidity variation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advancements in cross-laminated timber (CLT) applications have introduced the potential to use it as an alternative to reinforced concrete in basement construction. Understanding dimensional stability is crucial to ensure the reliability and safety of CLT in below-grade environments. An experimental CLT basement was constructed in Edmonton, Canada, and monitored over a period of two years. Field measurements were analyzed to estimate the dimensional changes and understand the deformation modes of the CLT panels resulting from changes in boundary conditions. A supporting laboratory experiment with specimens made from single pieces of dimensional lumber was conducted to establish a basis for comparing field-measured dimensional changes in CLT and determining the effects of cross-lamination on swelling and shrinkage coefficients. The average swelling and shrinkage coefficients calculated for CLT were approximately twice as large as the longitudinal and 20 times smaller than the transverse coefficients obtained from the laboratory experiments on solid wood specimens, indicating the influence of cross-lamination on these coefficients. Four deformation modes were identified based on measurements from field-installed strain gauges. The study provides new insights into the impact of water ingress on the swelling coefficient and the effects of different drying conditions on the shrinkage coefficients of CLT.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".