MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966241195 · doi:10.1108/02644400210444320

Thermo‐hydro‐mechanical modelling of high performance concrete at high temperatures

2002· article· en· W1966241195 on OpenAlexaff
Bernhard A. Schrefler, C.E. Majorana, G. A. Khoury, Dariusz Gawin

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Computations · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire effects on concrete materials
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpallContext (archaeology)ThermalStructural engineeringTension (geology)Fire performanceEngineeringMechanical engineeringMaterials scienceCompression (physics)Fire resistanceComposite materialGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the physical, mathematical and numerical models forming the main structure of the numerical analysis of the thermal, hydral and mechanical behaviour of normal, high‐performance concrete (HPC) and ultra‐high performance concrete (UHPC) structures subjected to heating. A fully coupled non‐linear formulation is designed to predict the behaviour, and potential for spalling, of heated concrete structures for fire and nuclear reactor applications. The physical model is described in more detail, with emphasis being placed upon the real processes occurring in concrete during heating based on tests carried out in several major laboratories around Europe as part of the wider high temperature concrete (HITECO) research programme. A number of experimental and modelling advances are presented in this paper. The stress‐strain behaviour of concrete in direct tension, determined experimentally, is input into the model. The hitherto unknown micro‐structural, hydral and mechanical behaviour of HPC/UHPC were determined experimentally and the information is also built into the model. Two examples of computer simulations concerning experimental validation of the model, i.e. temperature and gas pressure development in a radiatively heated HPC wall and hydro‐thermal and mechanical (damage) performance of a square HPC column during fire, are presented and discussed in the context of full scale fire tests done within the HITECO research programme.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.166 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations99
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineering ComputationsSame topicFire effects on concrete materialsFrench-language works237,207