Residual Axial Behavior of Restrained Reinforced Concrete Columns Damaged by a Standard Fire
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A simplified procedure to predict the residual axial capacity and stiffness of both rectangular and circular reinforced concrete (RC) columns after exposure to a standard fire provides the means to replace the current descriptive methods. The availability of such a procedure during the design phase provides engineers with the flexibility to come up with better designs that ensure safety. In this paper, finite difference heat transfer and sectional analysis models are combined to determine the axial behavior of RC columns with various end-restraint conditions at different standard fire durations. The influence of cooling phase on temperature distribution and residual mechanical properties is considered in the analysis. The ability of the model to predict the axial behavior of the damaged columns is validated in view of related experimental studies and shown to be in very good agreement. A parametric study is then conducted to assess the axial performance of fire-damaged RC columns. A procedure is proposed to determine the residual strength and stiffness of fire-damaged RC columns in typical frame structures.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it