MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403484254 · doi:10.1061/jsendh.steng-13554

Fire Testing and Modeling of a Novel Hybrid Timber Floor System

2024· article· en· W4403484254 on OpenAlexaff
Zhiyong Chen, Christian Dagenais, Dorian P. Tung, Thomas Wu, Mark Gaglione

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Structural Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire dynamics and safety research
Canadian institutionsStornoway Diamond (Canada)EllisDon (Canada)FPInnovations
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectural engineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceForensic engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To maximize the amount of carbon-sequestering mass timber and demonstrate the potential for mass timber across a range of building types and scales, DIALOG and EllisDon have developed a hybrid timber floor system (HTFS) that is composed of post-tensioned (PT) concrete beams, cross laminated timber (CLT) panels, and concrete topping connected to each other through self-tapping screws and kerf plates. This paper presents the fire performance of this novel HTFS through a combination of testing and modeling. Two mid-span sectional specimens of HTFS without concrete topping were exposed to the standard fire of CAN/ULC S101. The char depth and char rate of CLT were measured, and the temperature at specific locations were recorded to verify the design and the developed advanced finite element models. Advanced 2D models were developed to investigate the influence of steel properties and the effect from concrete spalling, and the modeling approach adopted in the refined 3D model. The developed models can estimate the char depth with difference less than 5%, and the temperature in reinforcing bars, PT duct, and concrete comparable to the average of the test results. The experimental and simulation results give an insight into the fire performance of this novel HTFS.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Structural EngineeringSame topicFire dynamics and safety researchFrench-language works237,207