Fire Performance of Cedar Shingles under Radiant Heat
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
Wood as a building material is a common roofing material in both contemporary homes and older properties such as heritage buildings. As a combustible material, wood can be associated with higher rates of building damage from wildfires. This study investigates the spontaneous ignition of contemporary Eastern white cedar shingles (Thuja occidentalis), a commonly used roofing product in older houses and heritage properties in Ontario. The samples were tested with a cone calorimeter under radiant heat without a spark igniter. The samples were conditioned under three moisture content categories: (1) ambient; (2) dry; and (3) wet. They were tested using incident radiative heat for 15 min or until 2 min after flameout under three heat fluxes: (1) 20 kW/m2, (2) 30 kW/m2, and (3) 40 kW/m2. Moisture content and heat flux had a clear impact on ignition and pyrolysis. All samples ignited at 40 kW/m2 and the dry samples ignited at 30 kW/m2. In samples which did not ignite, indicators of pyrolysis such as off-gassing, charring, and ember formation were delayed as the moisture content increased. However, dry samples at 40 kW/m2 had a slower average ignition time by 20 s and a lower average peak HRR than the ambient samples by 8 kW/m2. It was posited that it could be due to the char layer forming faster at the lower moisture content, creating a protective layer that delayed ignition. Future research will investigate the impact of incident heat flux and moisture content on piloted ignition of cedar shingles via firebrands, which is common during wildfires. Research to evaluate the performance and ignition of heritage cedar shingles versus contemporary cedar shingles is also recommended.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it