MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1481862042

Thermal strengthening of limestone: monument preservation during fire

2010· article· en· W1481862042 sur OpenAlexaff
Michael J. Heap, Yan Lavallée, Philip Benson, Kai‐Uwe Hess, Donald B. Dingwell

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe EGU General Assembly · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueFire effects on concrete materials
Établissements canadiensMcGill University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCarbonateRock mass classificationGeologyDeformation (meteorology)Mining engineeringGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceComposite materialMetallurgy
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The use of natural rocks in the construction of buildings and monuments predates the use of commercially engineered materials such as concrete. Such building material can be subject to elevated temperatures in the misfortunate event of a fire. In civil engineering, it is generally appreciated that the strength of rock is decreased when it is or has been exposed to elevated temperatures. This is due the formation of thermal microcracks, a result of the thermal expansion mismatch between different minerals in the rock. Even today, fire is by no means an uncommon occurrence and approximately one historic building is lost to fire in the European Union every day (COST C17 2001). A large number of historically significant buildings and monuments are constructed from carbonate material. However, could the paradigm of thermal weakening of limestone construction material be in part, a paradox? We report new findings on the thermal strengthening of the Solnhofen limestone (Solnhofen, Germany), a carbonate rock traditionally used in construction of building and statues in central Europe. Two types of deformation experiments were performed to investigate: (1) the strength of samples at elevated temperatures (i.e. during fire) and (2) the strength of samples at room temperature after heat-treatment (i.e. after fire). During experimentation, microcracking was monitored by the output of acoustic emissions (AE). Thermo-gravimetric (TG) analysis was also undertaken to measure the mass loss during heating. For the experiments ‘during fire’, samples were heated to temperatures of 25°, 200°, 400°, 500°, 600°, 650° and 800°C at a controlled rate of 5°C/min and deformed until failure in a uniaxial press at a constant strain rate of 10-5 s-1. For the experiments ‘after fire’, samples were heat-treated to each 100°C increment up to 800°C, they were then cooled at the same rate and their strength tested at room temperature. The mechanical data demonstrate that, during fire, the strength of the limestone increases up to 400°C, from 117MPa at 25°C to 215MPa at 400°C. Above 400°C the strength decreases significantly (down to 20MPa at 800°C) and the deformation behaviour becomes increasingly ductile and aseismic. After a fire event, the strength remains essentially constant up to samples heat-treated to 200°C. For samples heat-treated between 300°-700°C, the strength increased by about 60% from the ‘as received’ (i.e. no heating) sample. However, the sample heat-treated to 800°C saw a significant reduction in strength (down to 25MPa). All of the heat-treated samples deformed in a brittle manner and AE (seismicity) was recorded in each case. TG analysis demonstrates that decarbonation (the decomposition of calcite in the reaction CaCO3 ! CaO + CO2) at 760°C, explaining the significant weakening at temperatures above 700°C. The TG analysis also shows that, at 800°C, the sample has lost 35-40% of its mass. Over the course of history, a significant amount of monuments and buildings were crafted in limestone. Our findings suggest that it may be advisable, although feasibly expensive, to carefully heat-treat them to medium temperatures (300-500°C) in order to strengthen them and prolong their lifespan. Furthermore, in the event of a fire, it is of paramount importance to keep the temperature of a structure below the decarbonation temperature. Furthermore, heating-induced colour changes in limestone (cream-pink-grey-white), as observed in this study, could be used as a proxy for the temperatures previously experienced by a limestone monument or building.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,050
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,467

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,005
Tête enseignante GPT0,202
Écart entre enseignants0,197 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe EGU General AssemblyMême sujetFire effects on concrete materialsTravaux en français237 207