## 4 Results and Discussion  
### Experimental Results and Comparison  
#### 4.1.1 Comparison Between FEM and Experimental Data for the 260 mm Frame  
Figures 13-15 illustrate the relationship between simulated and experimental displacements as a function of the applied force for the respective models. The Finite Element Model Curve (FEMC) and the Experimental Curve (EXPC) are presented to compare numerical and test data. The curves represent vertical displacements recorded by various gauges (C1 to C8). The FEMC curves (dashed lines) and EXPC curves (solid lines) are nearly superimposed, indicating a strong correlation between the simulation and experimental results. The numerical and experimental results exhibit a high correlation, exceeding 97% for all models with a 260 mm frame, demonstrating strong agreement between FEM and experimental data. The high correlation was confirmed through statistical analysis. The coefficient of determination (\(R^{2}\)) values ranged from 0.9989 to 0.9995, and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) values varied between 0.2507 mm and 0.3823 mm across the different test configurations. These results validate the strong agreement observed between finite element simulations and experimental measurements under service-level loading conditions. This correlation is evident in the near superimposition of FEMC (dashed lines) and EXPC (solid lines) curves, as shown in Figures 13-15. Minor deviations observed at higher force levels are within the expected range for this type of structural analysis and do not affect the overall correlation between FEM and experimental data. These variations can be attributed to inherent material properties and assembly tolerances, which are consistent with typical manufacturing and testing conditions. Pre-tension forces were controlled using a torque-based method to ensure uniform initial conditions, and post-test verification confirmed no loss of pre-tensioning, ensuring stable clamping force throughout loading. These factors reinforce the FEM model's reliability in accurately capturing load distribution and structural stiffness within the tested range. Beyond the strong correlation between FEM and experimental results, the findings also highlight the practical advantages of clamp-based connections. These systems streamline assembly, reduce labor time, and minimize installation errors by eliminating the need for permanent modifications. The use of standardized profiles for columns and beams further simplifies structural reconfiguration, making them particularly suitable for industrial environments requiring frequent adjustments. Additionally, this standardization allows for a clearer understanding of connection behavior, facilitating more accurate analysis and predictive modeling. Unlike bolted or welded joints, clamp-based connections preserve component integrity, extending service life and enhancing long-term sustainability. These characteristics reinforce the versatility and efficiency of the system while aligning with circular economy principles [59; 60]. Influence of Clamps and Load Capacity  
The relationship between the number of clamps and the set's load capacity was analyzed based on the three configurations tested, corresponding to the size of the frame  
Figure 15: Force (N) vs. displacement (mm) for frame 260 mm with two-clamp configuration. applied to the set. The maximum applied loads for each configuration were 40.08 kN for four clamps (Figure 13), 37.41 kN for three clamps (Figure 14), and 29.39 kN for two clamps (Figure 15), respectively. The reduction in load capacity due to the decrease in the number of clamps follows a nonlinear trend. Reducing the number of clamps from four to three resulted in a 6.67% decrease in load capacity, while reducing the number of clamps from three to two led to a 21.43% decrease. Removing half of the clamps resulted in a cumulative 26.67% decrease in the system's load capacity.