Modellerings- og analyseprogrammer for treindustrien
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sammendrag \nTre som byggemateriale har lang tradisjon i Norge. For bolighus er det mest anvendte \nbyggemateriale trevirke. Endring av teknisk forskrift gir større muligheter for å benytte \ntrevirke som bærende konstruksjon i større bygg. Lærdom fra USA og Canada, som har brukt \ntre som bærende konstruksjoner i mange tiår allerede, har bidratt til økt forskning og \ninnovasjon. \nMed økende interesse for trevirke som bærende konstruksjoner dukker det opp flere \nproblemstillinger som må løses. Denne masteroppgaven vil ha fokus på programvare for \nfullmodellering og konstruksjonsanalyse av trekonstruksjoner. Første del er en undersøkelse \nav treindustrien for å kartlegge hvilke programmer som blir benyttet i dag. Her ble de tre \nhovedaktørene i bransjen kontaktet; limtreindustrien, takstolindustrien og ferdighusindustrien. \nNeste del belyser mulighetene ved å benytte seg av mer avanserte modelleringsprogrammer. \nFem programmer blir belyst: Tekla Structure, Revit Structure, Data Design System \n(modellering). SAP2000 og Robot Structural Analysis Professional (analyse). Et \neksempelbygg ble modellert i Tekla og overført til SAP2000 for analyse. Det er lagt vekt på \nstabilitetsanalyser, siden dette er en viktig analyse av bærende trekonstruksjoner for større \nbygg. \n3D-modeller kan inneholde mengder med informasjon og på den måten fungere som \ninformasjonsbærer for hele prosjektet (BIM). En modell inneholder all informasjon for hele \nbygget og det kan gjennomføres kollisjonstester, produksjonsdetaljering, \nfremdriftsplanlegging, osv, mellom forskjellige faggrupper. Dette gir store muligheter for \ntreindustrien slik det har gjort for stål og betong i flere år allerede. \nUndersøkelsen viser at treindustrien ligger etter stål- og betongindustrien. Dette grunnet \nmanglende programvare for 3D-modellering. Derimot er det satsning på trekonstruksjoner hos \nprogramvareleverandørene og det er kommet programmer som er konkurransedyktige og gir \ntreindustrien muligheter for mer avanserte modeller. Det er viktig at treindustrien viser \ninteresse og blir med for å drive utviklingen videre. \n \n \nAbstract \nWood as a building material has a long tradition in Norway. For housing, however, the most \ncommon method is wood construction. Change of technical regulations has provided greater \nopportunities for using timber structures in larger buildings. Experience from the U.S. and \nCanada, where timber structures are widely used for high raised buildings up to 8 storey’s, has \ncontributed to improve research and innovation in Scandinavia. \nThe increased interest for load bearing timber structures illuminate several issues that must be \nresolved. This thesis will focus on software for design and engineering analysis of timber \nstructures. The first part is a survey of the timber industry to evaluate which programs are \nused in the timber industry today. It deals with the three main players in the timber industry; \nglulam-, truss- and building prefabrication industry. \nThe next section highlights the possibilities for use of more advanced design applications. \nFive programs are examined: Tekla Structure, Revit Structure, Data Design System (design), \nSAP2000 and Robot Structural Analysis Professional (analysis). An example building is \ndesigned in Tekla and transferred to SAP2000 for static analysis. It emphasize on stability \nanalysis, since this is an important analysis for multi-storey buildings made of timber. \n3D models can hold a lot of information and thus serve as an information carrier for the entire \nproject (BIM). A model could hold all information for the entire building, and therefore allow \ncrash tests to be carried out, documentation of production details, progress planning, etc. This \nprovides the same opportunities for the timber industry as for steel and concrete structures, \nwhere this has been used for several years already. \nThe survey concludes that the timber industry is behind steel and concrete industry due to lack \nof software for 3D design of timber structures. However, software vendors are now having \nmore focus on timber structures. This provides opportunities for more advanced design of \ntimber structures. It is important that the timber industry contributes to further development.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".