MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Utilization of Numerical Techniques to Predict the Thermal Behavior of Wood Column Subjected to Fire Part C: Sensitivity Analysis

2006· article· en· W2032529602 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohamed Elshayeb, Abdul Malik, Fazril Ideris, Zolman Hari, Norhaida Ab Razak, Jacqueline Eng Ling Siang, Zulfika Anuar

Bibliographic record

VenueKey engineering materials · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire dynamics and safety research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Column (typography)Materials scienceThermalStructural engineeringFire resistanceComposite materialForensic engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Theoretical studies have been carried out to predict the fire resistance of different configuration of wood columns as done in Part A and Part B of this set of research papers. This theoretical study is a continuation of previous studies which were carried out at National Research Council Canada. Mathematical models to calculate the temperatures, deformations and fire resistance of the columns have been developed for Part A and Part B. Calculated results are compared with those measured in several tests. The results indicated that the model is capable of predicting the fire resistance of wood columns with an excellent accuracy. By using the model, the fire resistance of wood columns can be evaluated for any value of the significant parameters such as load, physical dimensions, mechanical properties and even the chemical properties without the necessity of experiment. This research paper carried out sensitivity analysis of a square column at elevated temperature in order to know the effect of some parameters towards the mechanical strength of the column. The parameters that have been studied are initial moisture content, Young’s modules, initial compression stress, specific gravity, thermal conductivity and the physical dimension of the column cross section. Both of the temperature history versus time for the selected elements and the fire resistance has been analyzed using existing results. All the analyses have been carried out for the square cross-section under axial

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKey engineering materialsSame topicFire dynamics and safety researchFrench-language works237,207