Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 94 views

    BRE Digest 462 Fire PDF

    Uploaded by

    Louis Bir

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    BRE Digest 462 Fire PDF

    Uploaded by

    Louis Bir
    94 views12 pages

    Original Title

    BRE Digest 462 Fire.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    94 views12 pages

    BRE Digest 462 Fire PDF

    Uploaded by

    Louis Bir

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 12
    RG CY/SfB Hh2 (K2) Steel structures supporting composite floor slabs: design for fire Colin Bailey [BRE Centre for Stuctural Engineering Test results and observations from real fires in real buildings have continually shown that steel framed structures comprising composite floor slabs and downstand steel beams perform far better than current fire design methods suggest. Designers commonly perceive that steel structures will perform badly in fire, resulting in the general practice of protecting or partially protecting exposed parts ofa steel frame. Steel as with all materials, loses strength and stiffness a its temperature rises and ifthe building structure is considered on an element by element basis, the perception of bad performance of exposed steel members in ire is reasonable, However, tests (Figure 1) and observations from real fires in real steel st a composite flooring system with, have ictures, which incorporate downstand steel beam shown that these types of structures perform far better than current design methods suggest. Itis possible, by considering the true erent fire performance ofthese structures, that a significant amount of passive fire protection that is currently specified for the steel beams is unnecessary. Ai test esults "! has shown that the Joad path mechanisms of steel constructing the future This Digest shows how the true structural behaviour of these types of buildings can be calculated in fire, allowing a reduction in the amount of passive fire protection currently used. structure, acomposite slab, during a supportin fire are different from those normal use of the building. In particular membrane action ofthe composite slab at large 1s is the predominate behaviour in sumed during the displacem: afire (fire-limit state). This Digest shows how the membrane action of the composite slab can be incorporated into the structural fre design ‘and how passive fire protection is required only upporting downstand steel beams. Figure 1 Fire test ona steel framed structure with a composite floor 2 Membrane action of composite slabs in fire: basic design philosophy Formembrane action to occur in composite/concrete slabs, the structure as a whole must be designed to behave ina specific manner: For example, ifthe floor plate shown in Figure 2, which consists ofa slab supported by a grillage of beams and columns, loaded with a continually increasing uniform vertical load, two modes, offlexural failure are possible. Ifthe design of the beams is such that plastic hinges form, as shown in Figure 2b, a mechanism consisting of yield-lines across the whole floor plate occurs, with the floor plate effectively folding along the yield-lines. Membrane action cannot occur in this mechanism, since restraint against lateral movement is not available. However, ifthe beams are designed such that no plastic hinges form, the ultimate flexural resistance will be due to individual slab panel behaviour (Figure 2c). For this flexural mechanism, provided the panels are vertically supported around their edges, membrane action can occur in the slab irrespective of whether horizontal restraint around the edge of each panel is provided or not If full horizontal restraint is assumed to the slab panels, membrane action in each panel occurs with the reinforcement effectively acting as a tensile net supporting the applied vertical load. If, however, no horizontal restraint is assumed, the resistance of the slab is based on membrane action consisting ofa compressive ring forming around the perimeter and tensile membrane action occurring in the central region of the panel (Figure 3). This is analogous to a bicycle wheel: the spokes represent tensile membrane action and the rim represents a compressive ring. “The same basic principle of forcing’ membrane action to occuriin the floor slab by dividing the floor plate into. (a) Floor plate (b) Beam and panel (No membrane action) Column e — Supporting beam panels, which are vertically supported around their edges, ‘can be used for the fire design of composite slabs, supported bya grillage of steel beams. By using membrane action the steel beams can be left unprotected within each slab panel, with the beams around the perimeter of each panel protected, partially protected or designed to support the vertical load during the fire. The slab is designed such that the vertical load during a fireis redistributed to the protected beams around the edge of cach panel. These beams will need to be designed to support this additional load and is discussed in more detail laterin this Digest. The number of unprotected steel beams will depend on the size of the slab panels (Figure 4). To inerease the slab panel size, and thus the number of unprotected beams, the strength of the composite slab will need to be increased; the designer can control this by increasing the mesh reinforcement. Once the floor plate is divided into slab panels, the question now arises as to whether these panels can be considered as unrestrained or restrained against horizontal movement, during a fire. Horizontal restraint s beneficial to the ultimate strength of the slab since it controls the magnitude of membrane action and thus the load-carrying capacity of the slab. Ifthe edge of the slab panel coincides with the edge of a building ora service duct, itis unrestrained along that edge. However, ifthe slab panel is in the centre of the floor plate, it could be argued that the panels are restrained horizontally, because the reinforcement is continuous over its boundaries. Large hogging moments will occur over the vertical support which, together with the membrane forces, will generally lead to fracture of the reinforcement in this area. Therefore, a conservative assumption of each slab panel having no horizontal restraint (the reinforcement fractures in the hogging regions) should be assumed. (©) Panel failure (Membrane action) Plastic hinge in beam — Sagging moment yield line = = = Hogging moment yield line Figure 2 Types of flexural failure of floor plates Compressive Floor plate divided into lab panels that incorporate unprotected beams Denotes unprotected beams — — beams (or beams Denotes protected designed to support the applied load during the fire). Floor plate divided into slab panels incorporate unprotected ‘beams beams (or beams esigned to support the applied load ‘during the fire). Figure 3 Membrane action of horizontally unrestrained composite slab (a) Square slab panels {(b) Rectangular slab panels Figure 4 vo possible options for diving the Structural fire design ‘These sections describe the desig of steolframed structures comprising downstand steel beams and composite lors atthe fresmit state. The load- careyng capacty of te Noor plate is determined by ‘considering membrane action ofthe composite slab. ‘Guidance is also given on the design of cols, ‘compartmentation, averall stably ofthe structure and incorporating the method nto an overall fre strategy. ‘The design method has been used to develog simple

    You might also like