Simplified Structural Analysis of Laminated Glass Panels during Fire Exposure
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
Due to their high aesthetic value, energy-efficient properties, and contribution to daylighting, the demand for using glass panels in modern buildings has considerably increased over the past decades. However, ordinary glass panels are highly susceptible to cracking during a fire because of the temperature difference between the part of the glass exposed to the fire and the part protected by the frame. Damage to the glass can allow additional oxygen intake, leading to the flashover phenomenon significantly increasing fire severity. Laminated glass is superior to ordinary glass in its impact resistance, sound insulation, and ability to maintain post-breakage integrity. This paper provides a simplified method to study the effect of temperature gradients on the cracking behaviour of laminated glass panels. The temperature of the unprotected portion of the glass panel is first estimated by evaluating the mid-thickness temperature using the general heat transfer equation. Then, equations developed based on a parametric study that utilized ABAQUS are proposed to estimate the exposed and unexposed surface temperatures. This step was followed by evaluating the temperature of the protected glass portion. Subsequently, a method based on strain-equilibrium principles was developed to predict the corresponding maximum thermal stress. Comparisons with experimental and numerical work by others validated the proposed method.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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