4.6 Article

Observational Analysis of Fire-Induced Spalling of Concrete through Ensemble Machine Learning and Surrogate Modeling

Journal

Publisher

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0003525

Keywords

Concrete; Fire; Spalling; Machine learning; Artificial intelligence

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The research demonstrates the importance of utilizing modern computing techniques, such as data science and machine learning algorithms, in structural fire engineering applications for analyzing and predicting fire-induced spalling phenomenon.
Despite ongoing research efforts, we continue to fall short of arriving at a consistent representation of fire-induced spalling of concrete. This is often attributed to the complexity and randomness of spalling as well as our persistence in favoring traditional approaches as a sole mean to examine this phenomenon. With the hope of bridging this knowledge gap, this paper demonstrates how utilizing surrogate modeling via data science and machine learning algorithms can provide us with valuable insights into fire-induced spalling. In this study, nine algorithms, namely naive Bayes, generalized linear model, logistic regression, fast large margin, deep learning, decision tree, random forest, gradient boosted trees, and support vector machine, are applied to analyze observations obtained from 185 fire tests (collected over the last 65 years). The same algorithms were also applied to identify key features that govern the tendency of fire-induced spalling in reinforced concrete columns and to develop tools for instantaneous prediction of spalling. The results of this comprehensive analysis highlight the merit in utilizing modern computing techniques in structural fire engineering applications given their extraordinary ability to comprehend multidimensional phenomena with ease, high predictivity, and potential for continuous improvement.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available