Finite Element Modelling of the Fire Resistance of Double Skin Composite Walls Subjected to Monotonic Compressive Loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fire resistance of double skin composite wall (DSCW) system composed of two profiled steel sheets and concrete infill is investigated through use of finite element (FE) methods. The fire resistance of DSCW when exposed to elevated temperature and a constant axial compressive load with different infill materials such as self-consolidating concrete (SCC), engineered cementitious concrete (ECC) and ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC) is investigated. The influence of parameters such as load level, thickness of steel sheets, depth of concrete core and fastener arrangement on the fire resistance of the DSCW are established. The performance of SCC-based DSCW has the best fire resistance followed by ECC and UHPC-based composite walls. The increase in load level decreases the fire resistance while the increase in depth of concrete infill increases the fire resistance of the composite wall. The fastener arrangement and steel thickness have no significant influence on the resulting fire resistance.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".