An Analysis of the Fire Performance of Small-Scale Canadian Heritage Hardwood and Softwood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A common consideration in the rehabilitation of historic timber structures is addressing the concerns for fire safety. Heritage structures can have softwoods but depending on the time they were built they may also have hardwoods present. Currently, there is a lack of knowledge on the char rate of heritage hardwood and softwood. This study presents initial findings into the charring of these historic materials as they would be encountered in practice through samples taken from pre-existing aged timber structures in Canada that are greater than 100 years old. The materials were tested in a cone calorimeter following a modified ASTM 1354 procedure. Hardwood samples typically exhibited a faster charring rate than the softwoods but the charring rates converged at 1.05 mm/min when exposed to higher fluxes of 50 kW/m<sup>2</sup>. As rehabilitation and readaptation may require performance-based approaches such as structural fire modelling, a provisional framework for a numerical model using LS DYNA for historic timber members is presented. The objective is to identify future research and testing areas to develop a higher certainty model. In the a-priori model presented, results showed conservative charring rate results with charring trends seen in the experiment generally being followed.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".