5th International Conference

Structures in Fire (SiF ‘08)

Abstract Review Form

Reviewer:[Kazunori HARADA]

No. / Abstract ID.% / Q1 – Y / N / Q2 / Q3
Abstract fit with the topic of the conf.? / Rating
out of 10 / Comments
(Min. of 3 lines)
1 / C1
Robert at al. / Y / 7 / The content seems to be interesting if the relationship between concrete properties and mechanical strength are made clear as the authors point out. To examine, it is necessary to include information of specimen properties and discuss on the relationships. It is questionable to say that the type of aggregate does not affect concrete strength.
2 / C6
Abu et al. / Y / 8 / It is important to clarify the mechanism of tensile membrane action in order to facilitate the design process. It is in question if the rotational restriction by the edge beam may play the important role in real slab behavior. The reviewer hopes that the author will give some comments on this issue in the final manuscript.
3 / C5
Fletcher et al. / Y / 4 / The relevance with Winsor Tower fire and slab analysis is not clear. It sounds like just a example of slab analysis. To accept, it is necessary to explain the meaning of slab analysis, selection of fire conditions and so on. At the first part of abstract and final paragraph, the authors state the effect of load redistribution, however, the contents seems no connection with it.
4 / C4
Watanabe et al. / Y / 5 / As the submitted abstract is too short, it is difficult to understand the whole contents. However, the result seems to be interesting. Description of specimen and fiber properties are necessary in the final manuscript (if accepted)
5 / C3
Bostrom / Y / 5 / Even though the abstract says nothing, conclusions are expected to understand the feature and mechanism of spalling, and the method of control its occurrence.
6 / C2
Nadjai et al. / Y / 7 / The importance of the problem is clear. As described in abstract, the authors could develop a formula for failure load at ambient temperature. It is interesting if the method is applied to elevated temperature. The meaning of final sentence is unclear. Is the role of FEM analysis for temperature analysis or mechanical analysis?
7 / C18 Giang A Hoang et al / Y / 4 / Description of experimental findings is missing. Are the experiments are only for calibrating numerical method?
8 / C12 Lange et al / Y / 6 / The concept and viewpoint are appropriate. More specific descriptions are required in the final manuscript. Two questions arise: (1)Is the approach for specific to concrete (or other?) structures? (2) Stochastic approach of mechanical load is easy, but stochastic approach of fire severity is quite difficult at this stage. How the authors deals with it?
9 / C-8 Jansson and Bostrom / Y / 7 / The experimental data to be presented would be fascinating. The interpretation of results would results in understanding of mechanism of spalling. To do it, the authors should give necessary information in the final manuscript.
10 / C-7 Huang and Burgess / Y / 6 / Comparisons with experiments are important to discuss this type of issue. Especially in case of concrete-filled columns, initial elongation may cause unpredictable cracks in the core concrete. How did the authors deal with them in numerical analysis?
11 / C-21 Chang et al / Y / 8 / The paper contains analysis of hollow core slab and discuss on the fire resistance increase due to the benefit of side support. In the final part of abstract, the authors propose fire emergency beams, which should be clarified in the final manuscript.
12 / C-25 Susan_Deeny et al / Y / 5 / Objective of the paper is unclear. The authors deal with non-uniform heating condition. Then, what the conclusion would be? Do the authors intend to examine the appropriateness of using uniform heating condition for design?

* C: Concrete track; S: Steel track; T: Timber track; N: Numerical modeling track

% Replace with appropriate abstract Number (such as C1, C2,…..etc) in the column