Full scale fire tests for cables in plenums
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a joint research project involving ASHRAE and the National Research Council Canada (RP 1108), the effect of fires involving communication cable installed in air-handling plenums was investigated. The project included surveys in North American office buildings to determine the type and quantities of cable in return air plenum and fire scenarios that could potentially ignite the cables. It also included fire tests performed at three scales: small, medium and full. The bench-scale tests were conducted using a cone calorimeter. In addition, medium-scale tests were conducted using a modified standard room fire test facility. Testsconducted in this facility were used to determine the behaviour of communications cable with exposure to air heated to 200, 325 and 450°C as well as direct flame impingement. Finally, a series of full-scale fire tests were conducted in a full-scale facility set-up specifically for this project. Tests in this facility were used to determine the behaviour of communication cables in plenums with fully-developed fires in the compartment below the plenum. In this paper, data from the tests are used to investigate the potential effect of fires involving cables in plenum spaces on the hazard to building occupants in compartments contaminated by smoke distributed through a building HVAC system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".