Comparison of Simplified and Advanced Design of Steel Structures in Fire

Jerneja Kolšek; Andrej Rebec

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1147.24

Paper Titles

Properties of Polysiylate Binders for Sol-Silicate Pains
p.1

Composite Materials Monitoring by Fiber Optic Sensors
p.5

Monte Carlo Simulation of Photon-Skeletal Muscle Interaction in Human Tissue Model
p.12

Fresh and Hardened Properties of Concrete Produced with Different Particle Sizes of Coarse Aggregate
p.18

Comparison of Simplified and Advanced Design of Steel Structures in Fire
p.24

Comparison of Simplified and Advanced Simulation of a Fire in a Factory of XPS Panels
p.30

Concretes Using Modified Mineral Extenders
p.36

Effect of Variation of Injection Moulding Parameters on Static and Dynamic Material Characteristics of Filled Polymer Materials
p.42

The Influence of «DORLUK» Impregnation on Physical and Mechanical Characteristics of Asphalt Pavements
p.48

HomeAdvanced Materials ResearchAdvanced Materials Research Vol. 1147Comparison of Simplified and Advanced Design of...

Comparison of Simplified and Advanced Design of Steel Structures in Fire

Abstract:

This paper presents the possible deviations between “realistic” (performance-based) calculations of fire resistance of steel structures and corresponding calculations made by one of the often used simplified (prescriptive) procedures of EN 1993-1-2 i.e. the method of critical temperature (MCT). The comparison is done for a case of an assembly consisting of a steel beam and a steel girder connected to each other by a bolted fin-plate connection. For such structure the MCT method suggests that the structural fire resistance is 50 minutes. However, the realistic fire resistance calculated by an advanced performance-based procedure is evaluated to 44 minutes. Although the discrepancy between the results of both methods is not significant in the presented case, this finding implies that MCT can be on the unsafe side for some cases. More future debates and clarifications are therefore encouraged regarding the actual limits of the applicability of the simplified procedures.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volume 1147)

Pages:

24-29

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1147.24

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

May 2018

Authors:

Jerneja Kolšek*, Andrej Rebec

Keywords:

Eurocode 3, Fire, Intumescent Coating, Performance-Based Modelling, Prescriptive-Based Calculations, Steel

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions:

Request Permissions

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] EN 1993-1-2, Design of steel structures, Structural fire design. European Committee for Standardization; (2004).

Google Scholar

[2] F. Wald, L. S. da Silva, D. B. Moore, T. Lennon, M. Chladna, A. Santiago, et al. Experimental behaviour of a steel structure under natural fire. Fire. Saf. J. 41 (2006) 509–522.

DOI: 10.1016/j.firesaf.2006.05.006

Google Scholar

[3] J. Kolšek, P. Češarek, Performance-based fire modelling of intumescent painted steel structures and comparison to EC3, J. Constr. Steel. Res. 104 (2015) 91–103.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.08.007

Google Scholar

[4] M. E. Garlock, S. Selamet, Modeling and behavior of steel plate connections subject to various fire scenarios. J. Struct. Eng. 136 (2010) 897–906.

DOI: 10.1061/(asce)st.1943-541x.0000179

Google Scholar

[5] ABAQUS version 2016; Documentation, DS-Simulia. Providence, R.I.: AISC. (2016).

Google Scholar

[6] Kirby B.R. The behavior of high-strength grade 8.8 bolts in fire. J. Constr. Steel. Res. 33 (1995) 3–38.

Google Scholar

[7] EN 1363-1, Fire Resistance Tests, Part 1: General Requirements, European Committee for Standardization. (2012).

Google Scholar