⁵As quoted by [21].

          ⁶It should be recognized that this thickness is contrary to that proffered by Roberts [22], DeHaan [38], and NFPA 921 [39] as discussed above.

          ⁷There is no mention made here of other factors which may affect char patterns, such as wood species, ring orientation, relative size of the “lands,” or area surveyed for the relative size of the lands and cracking.

          ⁸For the purpose of this dissertation, the use of “industry standard” will mean 0.635 mm/min or 1 inch/40 minutes.

          ⁹Lawson’s original equation was given as V = 0.041t inches/minute,where V = rate of charring in inches per minute and t = time in minutes. The equation given in the text above has been converted to metric units.

          ¹⁰Wood species can influence the density and moisture content as well.

          ¹¹For an uncontrolled fire.

          ¹²For the research conducted here, we split a wood slab into different, parallel zones. Zone 0 is the zone from 0-4 mm from the exposed surface. Zone 1 is the region which is 4-12 mm from the exposed surface. And Zone 2 is the region which is 12-24 mm from the exposed surface. The junctions between the zones correspond to the thermocouple locations.

          ¹³Oxygen consumption, rate of heat release and CO generation measurements derived through the use of the cone were acquired during testing but were considered secondary and not the focus of this research.

          ¹⁴Note the original surface may no longer be available. The protocol to use is described in item 8.2 of the Wood Protocol (Section 7.1).

          ¹⁵Slight variation may have been seen in the maple wood specimens; however, the data was insufficient to draw conclusive results.

          ¹⁶In the hcp, the capillary pore size may range between 10 and 100 nanometers. The average aggregate is 10 micrometers.

          ¹⁷“Well-aged” concrete is defined as that which has been “cured many months in a humid atmosphere.” [79, p. 29]

          ¹⁸Common chemistry notations are used: C = CaO; S = SiO₂; A = Al₂O₃; H = H₂O.

          ¹⁹The data from Zoldners [74] was cited by Neville [69].

          ²⁰Not all researchers agree on this point. See Short [101] for a paper which determines pink is not due to iron oxide.

          ²¹Midkiff [86;104], citing B. Kennedy, found that gasoline penetrated into concrete at a rate of one inch per hour, but he does not discuss the physical attributes of the concrete from which this penetration rate was derived.

          ²²Pun not intended!

          ²³ACI 211.1 Standard, Recommended Practice for Selecting Proportions for Normal Weight Concrete.

          ²⁴The compression strengths were measurably lower then the theoretical strengths. This can be attributed to the failure to remove the plastic cylinder forms from the specimens until the day of testing. This inhibited the rate of curing and thus the measured 28-day strength. This would not have affected the strength of the cone calorimeter specimens since they were not cured in plastic containers.

          ²⁵See the description in the wood section for details; the calorimeter used is the same. (Section 2.6.2)

          ²⁶Found in the Appendix.

          ²⁷In particular, there was no difference in physical characteristics on a macro scale between specimens with no fibers, specimens with polymer fibers, and specimens with steel fibers.

          ²⁸Again, for a complete description of the calorimeter, see the wood section for details. (Section 2.6.2)

          ²⁹Timed insertion and cool down variables can also be introduced.

          ³⁰The control specimen was from the same batch of wallboard as the subject specimens.

          ³²See the explanation in Footnote 30.

          ³³Note that all the problems are one dimensional, so a measure of x alone will suffice. The y and z dimensions are not necessary.

          ³⁴Within certain bounds.

          ³⁵Recall the clean analytic solution presented in Section 5.2 was only an approximation of the thin-slab with a semi-infinite slab.

          ³⁶Note in the Sample ID, an “X” (as in 1OX_1) indicates a radial end-grain exposure. An “L” (as in 1OL_1) indicates a transverse (longitudinal) exposure.

          ³⁷Char depth was determined as per item 8 of the Wood Protocol in 7.1.

          ³⁸Note in the Sample ID, an “X” (as in 1OX_1) indicates a radial end-grain exposure. An “L” (as in 1OL_1) indicates a transverse (longitudinal) exposure.

          ³⁹The zones were defined in Section 2.7.1, which begins on page 29.

          ⁴¹Samples which were exposed for 4500 seconds are denoted with an asterisk (*). All other samples were exposed for 1500 seconds.

          ⁴²Zone 0 is 0-4 mm from exposed surface.

          ⁴³Zone 1 is 4-12 mm from exposed surface.

          ⁴⁴Zone 2 is 12-24 mm from exposed surface.

          ⁴⁵Samples which were exposed for 4500 seconds are denoted with an asterisk (*). All other samples were exposed for 1500 seconds.

          ⁴⁶Effective strength is expressed as a percentage of the theoretical maximum strength. For example, if a sample was supposed to have a strength of 21 Mpa,, but only measured at 10.5 Mpa,, its effective strength would be measured as 50%.

          ⁴⁷Recall that Zone 0 was between 0 and 4 mm from the exposed surface. Zone 1 was the region 4-12 mm from the exposed surface. Zone 2 was the region 12-24 mm from the exposed surface for the 24 mm (1 inch) gypsum; the region 12-16 mm from the exposed surface for the 16-mm gypsum. Because of the difference in gypsum widths, Zone 0 and Zone 1 were more heavily relied upon.

          ⁵²Zone 0 is 0-4 mm from exposed surface.

          ⁵³Rate calculation represents distance traveled (in mm) divided by time (in seconds).

          ⁵⁶Zone 1 is 4-12 mm from exposed surface.

          ⁵⁷Time is a prediction based upon the rates of isotherm progression calculated from the data observed by thermocouples.

          ⁵⁸Time is a prediction based upon the rates of isotherm progression calculated from the data observed by thermocouples.

          ⁵⁹N/A denotes data was not available.

          ⁶⁰Time is a prediction based upon the rates of isotherm progression calculated from the data observed by thermocouples.

          ⁶¹Time is a prediction based upon the rates of isotherm progression calculated from the data observed by thermocouples.

          ⁶²Time is a prediction based upon the rates of isotherm progression calculated from the data observed by thermocouples.

          ⁶³Time is a prediction based upon the rates of isotherm progression calculated from the data observed by thermocouples.