ZH - 2005 RC

ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED
CONCRETE BUILDINGS IN FIRE
Dr Zhaohui Huang
University of Sheffield
6 May 2005
11
VULCAN layered slab elements: connection

to beam elements
Plate Element
Slab nodes
y
x
Reference Plane
h
z
Distributed Steel Layers
Beam node offset

Concrete Layers
Connector node
22
Beam Elements
Development of VULCAN slab elements:

Material Nonlinear Slab Element
Layered element.
Temperature distributionsGeometric
through non-linearity of slab
thickness of slab.
elements:
Models thermal bowing of slab.
Allows investigation of tensile
membrane action at high
Thermal degradation of material for
temperatures/deflections.
each layer.
Also predicts thermal buckling
Biaxial failure surface for concrete.
(compressive membrane action) at
Failure layer-by-layer basedlower
on principal
temperatures.
stress levels at Gauss points.
Cracking perpendicular to principal
tensile stress, crushing removes all
strength of layer for element.
Uniaxial steel reinforcement layers.
33
Concrete stress-strain curves at high

temperatures
Stress ratio (c / fc'(20 C ))
Concrete also loses

strength and stiffness
from 100C upwards.
Does not regain strength
on cooling.
1.0
0.8
20 C
200 C
0.6
400 C
0.4
600 C
0.2
0
800 C
1000 C
1.0
2.0
3.0
Strain (%)
44
4.0
5.0
Steel stress-strain curves at high

temperatures
Steel softens progressively

from 100-200C up.
Only 23% of ambienttemperature strength
remains at 700C.
At 800C strength reduced
to 11% and at 900C to
6%.
Stress ratio (st / fy (20 C))

1.0
0.8
0.6
600 C
0.4
0.2
800 C
1000 C
Melts at about 1500C.

0
55
< 100 C
200 C
400 C
12
8
Strain (%)
16
20
Concrete biaxial failure envelopes: solid

slabs
c2
fc '
A
Cracking
c1
fc'
Cracking
Increasing
temperature
- 0.75
C
- 1.0
66
Crushing
Crushing
c1 > c2
c1
=
c2
Concrete tension curve used in VULCAN

Stress
t
Cracking
ft
0.33ft
ft=0.3321
fc
cr 4.44cr
20cr
Strain
77
ct
Membrane actions in slabs

X
At low deflections
slabs may show:
compressive
arching against
boundaries
thermal buckling
At high deflections:
88
biaxial tension in
mesh at centre
compressive ring in
concrete around
periphery
Boundary Conditions to mobilise

this effect ?
A square plate simply supported on four

edges
y
Uniform loading (q)
h = 152.4 mm
E = 206840 MPa
= 0.316
x
Quarter-plate analysed
a =15240 mm
99
Normalised plot of central deflection of

square plate
v/h
3
2.5
2
1.5
Geometrically linear
1
Geometrically non-linear
0.5
Chia (1980)
25
50
75
(qa4) / (Eh4)
10
10
100
125
Distribution of principal membrane tractions

for the quarter-plate modelled
q = 0.24 MPa
11
11
Predicted cracking pattern for reinforced

concrete slabs (specimen B1)
q = 8.4 kN/m2
12
12

for reinforced concrete slabs (specimen B1)
q = 45.5 kN/m2
13
13
Predicted cracking pattern for reinforced

concrete slabs (specimen C1)
q = 12 kN/m2
14
14

for reinforced concrete slabs (specimen B1)
q = 85 kN/m2
15
15
Three-dimensional three-noded beamcolumn element configuration

2
Reference axis
3
Segments
Vr
z'
Vs
x'
Vt
y'
1
r
Beam neutral axis

s
bk
16
16
ak
z
y
x
The main assumptions of the model:

Plane sections originally normal to the reference
axis remain plane and undistorted under
deformation, but are not necessarily normal to this
axis.
The displacements and rotations of the element
can be arbitrarily large but the element strains are
still assumed to be small .
Each segment within the cross-section can have
a different temperature, but this is uniform along
the element.
17
17
The main assumptions of the model:

The initial material properties of each segment
may be different, and the stress-strain
relationships may change independently for each
segment .
For each segment only the longitudinal stress and
two shear stresses are non-zero .
18
18
The Cartesian coordinates of a point in an

element with N node points at time t
s bk
t ak
k
t k
+ s k hk t Vsxk
+ t hk Vtx +
x(r , s, t ) = hk x +
k =1
k =1 2
k =1 2
N
N
N
t ak
sb
k
t k
t
t k
+ t hk Vty + k + s k hk t Vsyk
y (r , s, t ) = hk y +
k =1 2
k =1 2
k =1
N
N
N
t ak
s bk
t
t k
k
t k
k
+ t hk Vtz +
+ s hk t Vszk
z (r , s, t ) = hk z +
k =1
k =1 2
k =1 2
N
19
19
The total displacements of a point in an

element with N node points at time t
N
t ak
sb
0 k
k
t k
+ t hk Vtx Vtx + k + s k hk tVsxk 0Vsxk
u (r , s, t ) = hk u +
k =1 2
k =1 2
k =1
N
N
N
t ak
sb
k
t k
0 k
t
t k
+ t hk Vty Vty + k + s k hk tVsyk 0Vsyk
v(r , s, t ) = hk v +
k =1 2
k =1 2
k =1
N
w(r , s, t ) =
k =1
20
20
N
t ak
sb
k
t k
0 k
hk w +
+ t hk Vtz Vtz + k + s k hk tVszk 0Vszk
k =1 2
k =1 2
N
The incremental displacements of a point in

an element with N node points at time t
N
s bk
t ak
k
k
k
+ s hk Vsxk
u (r , s, t ) = hk u +
+ t hk Vtx +
k =1
k =1 2
k =1 2
N
N
N
t ak
s bk
k
k
k
v(r , s, t ) = hk v +
+ t hk Vty +
+ s k hk V syk
k =1 2
k =1 2
k =1
N
N
N
t ak
sb
k
k
k
w(r , s, t ) = hk w +
+ t hk Vtz + k + s k hk V szk
k =1
k =1 2
k =1 2
N
21
21
Using the second

-order approximations for
second-order
the vector of nodal rotational degrees of
freedom
(
(
k
t k 1
t k
Vt = k Vt + 2 k k Vt
V k = t V k + 1 t V k
k
s
k
k
s
s
2
22
22
)
)
The constitutive matrix of a cracked

concrete segment
'
D c = 0
0
23
23
0
0
Gc 0
0 Gc
Cantilever beam subjected to concentrated end

moment: cantilever beam and its finite element
model
z
L = 304.8mm
x
Fixed end
M=fm
E = 206850 MPa
= 0.0
h
b = h = 25.4 mm
M=fm
m = EI/L = 73.94 kN-m
z
y
x
Four three-node parabolic
elements
24
24
Cantilever beam subjected to concentrated end

moment: Load
-deflection behaviour
Load-deflection
Normalized displacements and rotations
1.5
x /L
(Current model)
zz /L (Current model)
/2 (Current model)
1.2
x /L (Surana et al 1989)
z /L (Surana et al 1989)
/2 (Surana et al 1989)
0.9
0.6
0.3
0
0
25
25
0.4
0.8
1.4
Load factor f
1.6
2.0
A full
-scale ISO384 standard fire test on a Slimflor
Slimflor
full-scale
beam: details of the Silimflor beam tested
P = 84.6kN
P
P
1125
1125
562.5
P
1125
562.5
Concrete:
ISO384 Fire
fck = 45MPa
4500
15
A142 mesh
Steel:
180
Steel
18
28
fyk = 402 MPa

80
280
210
Concrete
335
19.5
280
18
335
Cross-section of the beam

(All in mm)
26
26
Reinforcement:
fyk = 460 MPa
A full
Slimflor
full-scale
beam: element segmentation mesh adopted
950
P6
37
80
70
72
59
9
280
ISO384 Fire
(All in mm)
27
27
P5
P4
P3
P2
P1
20
228
A full
Slimflor
full-scale
beam: temperatures at steelwork
Temperature (C)
1200
Tested
P1
Predicted
P2
900
P3
600
P4
P5
300
P6
60
120
Time (min)
28
28
180
240
A full
Slimflor
full-scale
beam: deflections at mid
-span
mid-span
Mid-span deflection (mm)
0
-250
Tested
-500
Predicted
-750
-1000
60
120
Time (min)
29
29
180
240
A full
Slimflor
full-scale
beam: deflections at mid
-span for different end
mid-span
support conditions
Mid-span deflection (mm)
0
-250
Tested
-500
Simply supported
Actual column stiffness
-750
-1000
30
30
Fully braced column stiffness
60
120
Time (min)
180
240
A generic 37.5 x 37.5 m reinforced concrete

structure (whole floor heated using ISO384 fire )
A
F
6
Nominal cover for 2 hours

fire resistance (BS8110)
Beam: 30mm
Column: 25mm
Slab: 25mm
C
3
Design load at fire limit

state: 10.75 kN/m2
Concrete:
7.5m
fck = 45 MPa
A
1
7.5m
31
31
Quarter structure
analysed
Axis of symmetry
Reinforcement:
fyk = 460 MPa
Cross
-sections of beam and column
Cross-sections
2T12
6T32
56
50
56
50
350
500
3T32
56
50
50
350
56
Bar 1
350
Bar 1
Bar 2
Cross-section of column
Cross-section of beam
(All dimensions in mm)
32
32
Bar 2
Temperatures of reinforcement within cross

cross-sections of members (whole floor heated)
Temperature (C)
800
2T12
6T32
56
50
56
600
50
350
500
3T32
56
50
50
350
56
Bar 1
350
Bar 1
Bar 2
Cross-section of beam
(All dimensions in mm)
400
Beam bar 1
Beam bar 2
Column bar 1
Column bar 2
200
Slab mash
0
33
33
60
120
Time (min)
180
240
Bar 2
Cross-section of column
Deflection (mm)
Deflections at key Position A, B

and C (whole floor heated)
0
Position A
Position B
-100
Position C
-200
-300
-400
34
34
50
100
Time (min)
150
200
Vertical deflections of columns

(whole floor heated)
Deflection (mm)
30
20
10
Column A1
Column B2
Column C3
-10
35
35
50
100
Time (min)
150
200
Deflection profile (whole floor heated)

0 min
36
36

15 min
37
37

30 min
38
38

45 min
39
39

60 min
40
40

75 min
41
41

90 min
42
42

105 min
43
43

120 min
44
44

135 min
45
45

150 min
46
46
0 min
Slab principal force vectors (whole floor

heated)
P3
P2
P1
47
47
15 min

heated)
P3
P2
P1
48
48
30 min

heated)
P3
P2
P1
49
49
45 min

heated)
P3
P2
P1
50
50
60 min

heated)
P3
P2
P1
51
51
75 min

heated)
P3
P2
P1
52
52
90 min

heated)
P3
P2
P1
53
53
105 min

heated)
P3
P2
P1
54
54
120 min

heated)
P3
P2
55
55
P1
135 min

heated)
P3
P2
56
56
P1
150 min

heated)
P3
P2
57
57
P1
Axial forces of beams at key Position

P1, P2 and P3 (whole floor heated)
Axial force of beam (kN)
1200
Force at P1
Force at P2
900
Force at P3
600
300
0
58
58
50
100
Time (min)
150
200
A generic 37.5 x 37.5 m reinforced concrete

structure (compartment fire)
A
F
6
4
Case III
3
Case II
2
7.5m
Case I
1
7.5m
59
59
Quarter structure
analysed
Axis of symmetry
Deflection (mm)
Comparison of central deflections with

different fire compartment positions
-100
-200
Case-I
Case-II
-300
Case-III
-400
60
60
50
100
Time (min)
150
200
0 min
61
61
Slab principal force vectors (compartment

fire case-I)
15 min
62
62

fire case-I)
30 min
63
63

fire case-I)
45 min
64
64

fire case-I)
60 min
65
65

fire case-I)
75 min
66
66

fire case-I)
90 min
67
67

fire case-I)

fire case-I)
105 min
68
68

fire case-I)
120 min
69
69

fire case-I)
135 min
70
70

fire case-I)
150 min
71
71

fire case-I)
165 min
72
72

fire case-I)
178 min
73
73
0 min
74
74

fire case-II)
15 min
75
75

fire case-II)
30 min
76
76

fire case-II)
45 min
77
77

fire case-II)
60 min
78
78

fire case-II)
75 min
79
79

fire case-II)
90 min
80
80

fire case-II)

fire case-II)
105 min
81
81

fire case-II)
120 min
82
82

fire case-II)
135 min
83
83

fire case-II)
150 min
84
84

fire case-II)
165 min
85
85
0 min
86
86

fire case-III)
15 min
87
87

fire case-III)
30 min
88
88

fire case-III)
45 min
89
89

fire case-III)
60 min
90
90

fire case-III)
75 min
91
91

fire case-III)
90 min
92
92

fire case-III)

fire case-III)
105 min
93
93

fire case-III)
120 min
94
94

fire case-III)
135 min
95
95

fire case-III)
150 min
96
96

fire case-III)
165 min
97
97
Conclusions
It is clear from this study that relatively small areas of tensile
membrane force were formed within the concrete slabs, and
large areas of the slabs were subject to compressive
membrane force during the fire.
As a result the downstand concrete beams were subjected
to enhanced tension during the fire, especially in the initial
stages, and these tensions were mainly carried by their
tensile reinforcement. It is therefore very important to
keep the temperature of the reinforcement within certain
limits.
98
98
The covers to reinforcement specified in current design

codes are reasonable provided that concrete spalling does
not occur during the fire. Designers should therefore pay
attention to measures to prevent concrete spalling, in order
to enable structures to satisfy their fire resistance
requirements.
It is evident that adjacent cool structure provides restraint
and continuity, increasing the fire resistance of the
structure within the fire compartment.
As for composite structures, the fire resistance of columns
is vitally important for reinforced concrete buildings. In all
cases analysed in this study the eventual structural
failures were due to buckling of the heated columns.
99
99

ZH - 2005 RC

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ZH - 2005 RC

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED

CONCRETE BUILDINGS IN FIRE

VULCAN layered slab elements: connection

Beam node offset

Development of VULCAN slab elements:

Concrete stress-strain curves at high

Concrete also loses

Steel stress-strain curves at high

Steel softens progressively

Stress ratio (st / fy (20 C))

Melts at about 1500C.

Concrete biaxial failure envelopes: solid

Concrete tension curve used in VULCAN

Membrane actions in slabs

Boundary Conditions to mobilise

A square plate simply supported on four

Uniform loading (q)

Normalised plot of central deflection of

Distribution of principal membrane tractions

Predicted cracking pattern for reinforced

Distribution of principal membrane tractions

Predicted cracking pattern for reinforced

Distribution of principal membrane tractions

Three-dimensional three-noded beamcolumn element configuration

Beam neutral axis

The main assumptions of the model:

The main assumptions of the model:

The Cartesian coordinates of a point in an

The total displacements of a point in an

The incremental displacements of a point in

Using the second

The constitutive matrix of a cracked

Cantilever beam subjected to concentrated end

Cantilever beam subjected to concentrated end

fyk = 402 MPa

Cross-section of the beam

Fully braced column stiffness

A generic 37.5 x 37.5 m reinforced concrete

Nominal cover for 2 hours

Design load at fire limit

Temperatures of reinforcement within cross

Deflections at key Position A, B

Vertical deflections of columns

Deflection profile (whole floor heated)

Deflection profile (whole floor heated)

Deflection profile (whole floor heated)

Deflection profile (whole floor heated)

Deflection profile (whole floor heated)

Deflection profile (whole floor heated)

Deflection profile (whole floor heated)

Deflection profile (whole floor heated)

Deflection profile (whole floor heated)

Deflection profile (whole floor heated)

Deflection profile (whole floor heated)

Slab principal force vectors (whole floor

Slab principal force vectors (whole floor

Slab principal force vectors (whole floor

Slab principal force vectors (whole floor

Slab principal force vectors (whole floor

Slab principal force vectors (whole floor

Slab principal force vectors (whole floor

Slab principal force vectors (whole floor

Slab principal force vectors (whole floor