Experimental and reliability assessment of fire resistance of glue laminated timber beams
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
Glue-laminated timber (GLT) is an engineered wood product widely used in mass timber construction for its strong structural and fire-resistant properties. However, the fire performance of GLT varies significantly due to the natural and uncertain phenomena (moisture, exposure time, isotropic, homogenous properties, etc.) of fire and timber. This makes it difficult to predict the fire behaviour of the GLT structural elements. To ensure building safety, it is crucial to assess GLT's fire behaviour and post-fire structural integrity during the design stages. This study conducted the experimental tests of GLT beams (280 mm × 560 mm) without loading (1.4 m) and under a four-point bending load (5.4 m). Tests identified thermal behaviour and charring rates of GLT beam. Then, the residual stiffness of the GLT beam was calculated, and the charring rates of the beams were compared with Australian and European standards. Reliability analysis was conducted for beams for a fire exposure of 120 min, considering the charring rates observed through the analysis and simulating the fire insulations. Results show that the charring rate of GLT made with spruce pine timber varied between 0.43 and 0.81 mm/min, with a mean rate of 0.7 mm/min, aligning with both Australian and European standards. However, considering timber density and moisture content, the charring rates in Australian standards were conservative. The study also found that structural capacity significantly degrades under fire, with a 22 % reduction in flexural stiffness after 120 min of exposure. Additionally, GLT beams can safely function for 30 min under 75 % of their design moment capacity and for 60 min under 50 % capacity.
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