Cyclic Testing of Pre-engineered Beam-Hanger Connections & Reinforcement of Holes in Glulam Beams Using Self-tapping Screws
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis is split into two sections: the first evaluates the performance of pre-engineered beam-hanger connections under cyclic loading, and the second evaluates the reinforcement of holes in glulam beams using self-tapping screws. Chapter 3 describes laboratory testing of the Megant 430x150x50 beam-hanger connector under applied interstorey drift deflections based on a modified version of the CUREE loading protocol. The performance of the Megant 430x150x50 connector was evaluated and it was determined that the connector surpassed interstorey drift limits of 2.5%, outlined in the 2015 National Building Code of Canada. The failure of the connector was due to a combined tension and pull-out failure of the wood screws. It was observed that the gravity load has a significant effect on the interstorey drift capacity and energy dissipation by the connector. Chapter 4 describes experimental tests conducted on different size glulam beams: 6-layer, 9-layer and 11-layer. Each beam is tested under three test configurations: no hole, a 2-inch hole at ¼ span and a reinforced 2-inch hole at ¼ span. It was determined that when a hole is introduced, the overall strength capacity of the beam decreases. When self-tapping screws are used as reinforcement around the hole, the strength capacity of the beam can increase up to 34.4% compared to a hole with no reinforcement, and can even over-reinforce the beam by 6.2%, as seen in the 9-layer beam, when compared to its reference beam. The depth-to-span and diameter-to-depth of beam (d/h) ratios have a large impact on the strength and behavior of the beam.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".