Assessment techniques for the evaluation of concrete

structures after fire

Group 9
Haisam Bin Mahbub (0423042318)
Md. Zubayer Yeaser (0423042334)

Submitted To:
Dr. Tanvir Manzur
Dr. Ishtiaque Ahmed

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

BANGLADESH UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

DHAKA, BANGLADESH

i
 Abstract

Fire incidents are a major cause of damage of the integrity of any structure. Fires cause

structural damage by causing intense heat to weaken materials and damage support elements,

often resulting in collapse. After a fire incident, one of the major tasks is to make an

investigation on the structural integrity of the structure , to understand the source of fire, the

impact of the damage and the possible recovery options. A decision can be made based on the

outcome of the damage evaluation on whether the building can be restored or repaired and

whether it will be feasible from the economic and social point of view.

The evaluation of fire damaged structures starts with a visual survey of the structural and non-

structural elements. This gives an idea for the possible steps of further evaluation. There are

several nondestructive and destructive methods for assessing the residual strength of the

structural components. In recent times, mathematical models have been developed to get a

better clear picture of the damage.

This study aims to review the existing codes and guidelines for post fire damage assessment

and the methods that are practiced. A comparison of these techniques discusses their

advantages and disadvantages, will assist researchers and practitioners in choosing appropriate

methods based on specific scenarios. The research findings contribute to the development of

comprehensive and reliable procedures for assessing fire-damaged concrete structures,

ensuring enhanced safety standards and effective restoration processes in the aftermath of fire-

related disasters.

ii
Table of Contents

Abstract ii

Introduction 1

Behavior of Concrete under fire 2

Post Fire Investigation Strategy 3

Initial Assessment 4

Test Methods For Assessment 7

Compressive Strength Test 8

Rebound Hammer 9
Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity 10
Pullout Test 13
BRE Internal Fracture Test 13
CAPO Test 14
Winsor Probe 14

Conclusions 16

References 17

iii
 Introduction

In the modern society, where disasters are a few occurrence, fire is one of the worst causes of

destruction that leaves a scar which can’t be recovered quickly. It causes loss of life and property

and mostly it raises questions on the safety of human lives even in this modern era of science. Fire

hazard in structure is a more common occurrence in developing structures due to lower

precautionary measures and unwillingness to invest for fire protection. After the occurrence of any

fire, the main task of the owner is to decide on the refurbishment or demolition of the structure.

The extent of the damage of the structural components, the refurbishment options, economy and

the importance of the structure , all of these factors contribute to the decision making process.

A thorough investigation program has to be developed for the damage review. A damage

classification can be done to further understand the extent of damage of the structure. Then the

necessary tests can be done in the field and in the laboratory to understand the extent of damage.

Finally alternative options can be presented for the decision of possible refurbishment or

demolition.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a guide for professionals to use in assessing and repairing

fired-damaged concrete structures. The current study's methodology is to review the existing

literature, including case studies of fire-damaged structures reported, to recommend the best

approach for assessing fire damage to concrete building structures and the necessary repairs

appropriate for the assessed fire damages.

1
 Behavior of Concrete under fire

Concrete structures have higher natural fire resistance than steel and wood structures. This is due

to the relatively large size of the members and concrete's low thermal diffusivity. Because of this

property, heat slowly penetrates the member cross-section, and the reinforcement is insulated by

the concrete cover. This allows a structure to retain a relatively high load bearing capacity during

and after a fire. The concrete coating insulates the reinforcement from heat as it penetrates deeper

into the member cross-section. This allows a building's load-bearing capacity to remain relatively

high during and after a fire. High-strength concrete, on the other hand, is less resistant to fire

compared to ordinary concrete, whereas lightweight concrete is more fire-resistant.

Concrete strength deteriorates at elevated temperatures due to chemo-physical processes and

mechanical damage within the concrete microstructure. Many factors, including aggregate type,

concrete porosity, member dimensions, heating time and rate, and applied load, influence concrete

strength reduction at high temperatures. According to the Eurocode, Fig. 1 depicts the relative

reduction of compressive strength (fcθ/fc) at high temperature for ordinary and high-strength

concrete. Concretes containing calcareous or basalt aggregate (not specified in the Eurocode) have

slightly higher compressive strength than concrete containing siliceous aggregate. Strength

decreases faster with increasing temperature in high-strength concrete than in ordinary concrete,

and it increases with the class of concrete. In terms of practicality, taking into account the structural

load-bearing capacity, Concrete heated to 500-600 C may be regarded as damaged.

2
 Fig. 1. Concrete compressive strength degradation (fcθ/fc) at high temperature: 1 – ordinary strength concrete

with siliceous aggregate, 2 – ordinary strength concrete with calcareous aggregate, 3 – C55/67, C60/75, 4 –

C70/85, C80/95, 5 – C90/105; diagram prepared by authors on the basis of Eurocode

Post Fire Investigation Strategy

The first stage in evaluating and assessing a fire-damaged structure is to create a framework that

will allow the assessment to be carried out efficiently. Molkens et al. (2017) provided a flowchart

that can be followed in Figure 2. Step 1 of the post-fire assessment involves an on-site inspection

of the structure. This on-site examination includes a visual evaluation of the structure, deformation

measurement when possible, and gathering key necessary details about the fire occurrence.

Excessive deformations, local failures, and twisted connections all suggest that the associated

elements may need to be replaced. These are referred to as "excessive fire damage."

3
 Fig. 2. Flowchart of the proposed approach for a post-fire assessment of load bearing capacity

of a structural element.

Initial Assessment

The assessment of fire damage to a concrete structure usually begins with a visual inspection to

examine the changes induced by heat exposure. The goals of this investigation are to provide

information on the structure's conditions, the kind and degree of problems in affected areas, the

potential benefits of rehabilitating the structure, and the need for a thorough examination. The first

phase of the preliminary examination is to visually examine the structural elements in affected

spots. Cracking, spalling, deflections, distortions, misalignment, and exposed steel reinforcement

4
should all be documented. Geometry, deflections, deformations, and other measures can be

collected of uncertain members and compared to undamaged members of the same structure. It is

helpful to document and identify the type of damage and its severity by building element, such as

beams, slabs, columns, and walls, during the inquiry. A damage schedule that is summarized

allows for a broader image of damaged members that require a more extensive inquiry, and it is

useful in evaluating the extent and character of the repair process.

Table 1 Classes of damage according to Concrete Society (2008)

5
Table 2 provides a summary of helpful temperature indicators for the general inspection. During

the initial inspection, using a hammer and chisel can provide valuable insights. Variances in sound

can reveal fire damage on the surface, while low-frequency sound responses can identify

delaminated areas.

Table 2 Effect of temperature on common materials (Concrete Society, 2008).

6
 Test Methods For Assessment

Concrete can endure high temperatures since it is non-flammable and has a low thermal

conductivity. However, because of its low thermal conductivity, there is a substantial temperature

difference near the exposed surface, resulting in a rapid reduction in thermal damage within a short

distance away from the exposed portion, specifically the reinforcing cover. Only long-term fires

have an impact on the deeper areas of a concrete structure. As a result, analyzing reinforced

concrete structures following a fire is necessary for planning essential strengthening measures.

Figures 10 shows computed temperature profiles in a concrete specimen exposed to temperature

increments in accordance with ISO 834-1:1999 standards, with temperature-dependent material

data from EN 1992-1-2 used in the computations..

Fig. 3. Calculated temperature in a concrete specimen exposed to elevated temperature. Material

properties in accordance with EN 1992-1-2.

There are several worldwide recognized test procedures for evaluating the properties of

undamaged concrete. Assessing fire-damaged concrete, a complex, layered material, poses

substantial difficulties. Non-destructive testing, such as examining the average response of the

concrete cover, are one way for this assessment. As shown in Table 2, this involves analyzing

7
small samples taken at various levels with specific procedures in order to interpret the general

behavior of the concrete element following a fire.

Table 3 Possible approaches to Non-Destructive assessment of fire-damaged concrete structures

(fib, 2008).

Compressive Strength Test

The assessment of compressive strength in a destructive test is the most accurate and widely used

standardized method for measuring concrete in constructions. In most cases, cylindrical specimens

with diameters ranging from 50 to 250 mm are utilized in the test, which are cut from a structure

using a core drilling machine. According to the Eurocode the core height should be equal to the

diameter (d). In practice, 100/100 mm specimens are most usually utilized since the acquired

findings match to the compressive strength of 150 mm cubes, according to the Eurocode. This

variable accounts for sample damage (micro-cracks, aggregate losses) in cores with small

diameters . When applied to structures following a fire, the approach has significant limitations ,

particularly in the case of members having a strong temperature gradient in the cross section.
8
Concrete is no longer uniform in the heated member cross-section. The destructive test ignores the

variation in mechanical characteristics of concrete along the core height. The strength of concrete

positioned in the middle third of the specimen height has the greatest influence on the test result .

Furthermore, the friction and pressure between the press platen and the top layer of the specimen

minimize the effect of concrete strength in this layer on the obtained result significantly. If the

damaged layer thickness is minor, the strength test result may be unaffected .

As a result, results for specimens taken from a structure after a fire should be interpreted with

caution, as false (usually overestimated) values of concrete compressive strength may be obtained.

Rebound Hammer

One of the main methods for determining concrete state is to listen to the sound produced by

hammer percussion. The Schmidt Rebound Hammer is a more uniform approach. This method,

however, is not adequate for measuring strength in fire-damaged concrete (Concrete Society,

1978). The Schmidt Rebound Hammer is recommended by a fib journal (2008) for immediately

identifying locations where the surface has lost 30-50% of its original strength. Figure 13 depicts

the components of the Rebound Hammer, which include an exterior body, plunger, hammer mass,

spring, latching mechanism, and sliding rider. The spring is tensioned when the plunger makes

contact with the concrete surface. When the plunger reaches its final position, the locking

mechanism releases the hammer mass, striking the plunger. The rebound distance is measured on

a scale marked 10 to 100, termed the Rebound Number.

A spring system releases a hammer mass when the Rebound Hammer is applied to a structural

element. The mass impacts a steel plunger in contact with the concrete surface and then rebounds

at a specific distance known as the rebound number. Furthermore, the test should be carried out on

9
structure core specimens in order to determine the rebound number - compressive strength

correlation for a certain concrete or, alternatively, to calibrate the standard relationship . The

compressive strength of the near surface concrete can then be calculated using the average rebound

number and correlation formulas or curves. The concrete layer probed with a Schmidt hammer has

a rather thin thickness (about 30 mm) . Testing should be avoided in areas where the reinforcing

bars are situated in concrete at a depth of less than 30 mm. Otherwise, the obtained results may be

unreliable. In application to structures after fire, this test can be a good tool for preliminary

identification of areas with damaged surface concrete layer. The rebound number value obtained

on a deteriorated surface is lower than for undamaged concrete

Fig. 4. Rebound hammer

Figure: 13: Rebound hammer, (a) spring relaxed (b) spring tensed (Photograph: Joakim Albrektsson)

Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity

The time of travel of compressional waves propagating in concrete between transmitting and

receiving transducers is measured in the UPV (ultrasonic pulse velocity) test. The concrete

surfaces to which the transducers are attached must be smooth and grease-coated in order to enable

good acoustic coupling. The concrete compressive strength can be evaluated using the wave speed

10
correlation, taking into account elements such as concrete mix composition and moisture. The

approach may be a good indicator of the extent of concrete damage after fire due to the association

between ultrasonic pulse velocity and the value of concrete modulus of elasticity and moisture

content. Concrete gradually loses contained water as the temperature rises, and the modulus of

elasticity falls as a result of chemical and physical reactions occurring in the heated part. The

velocity of ultrasonic wave propagation through concrete is reduced as a result. This test enables

for the preliminary identification of places where the concrete has lower parameters or where

relatively big (over 100 mm) faults or voids are present inside the member .

Table-4: Guidelines for characterizing UPV results

A pulse generator, a transmitting head, a receiving head, and a measurement unit are all part of the

test equipment. The concrete surface must be smooth to assure accuracy, and both the transmitting

and receiving heads must maintain solid contact with the concrete. As indicated in Figure 14, the

heads can be organized in three ways: the direct technique (180-degree angle between heads), the

semi-direct method (90-degree angle), and the indirect surface method (0-degree angle). Although

the direct method is favored for maximum pulse energy reception, it is frequently problematic due

to structural geometry. The acquired wave velocity and linked concrete compressive strength are

average values for the entire thickness of the member. The semi-direct strategy is useful for

avoiding concentrations of reinforcement. While not as precise as the direct and semi-direct

methods, the indirect method can estimate the thickness of the poor-quality layer. It is appropriate

in situations where other treatments are ineffective.The heads are initially close together and then

11
gradually moved apart in the indirect method for assessing a poor-quality layer. The thickness of

the poor-quality layer can be measured by graphing the arrival time versus the distance between

the heads, especially when this layer is distinct. When the heads are close together, the waves

travel through the upper layer, which contains an abundance of fine material, resulting in a reduced

velocity. The waves travel both the upper and lower layers as the gap between the heads expands.

Fig. 5. Different configurations for measurements of the ultrasonic pulse velocity.

The pulse velocity in concrete is affected by elements such as aggregate type, water-cement ratio,

degree of hydration, and reinforcing presence. Low strength concrete with a high aggregate-

cement ratio has a larger pulse velocity, whereas increasing the water-cement ratio lowers both

compressive strength and pulse velocity. Because of its smaller porosity, high-strength concrete is

less vulnerable to saturation than saturated concrete. Initial water losses produce a drop in pulse

velocity in fire-damaged concrete, making it a tool for mapping damaged regions rather than

providing exact numerical data.

The method's advantage is its ability to assess concrete uniformity, which aids in the identification

of fire-damaged areas. However, interpreting results can be difficult due to a variety of influencing

factors. As a result, using pulse velocity to estimate compressive or flexural strength without

correlation testing is not recommended.

12
Pullout Test

Pullout test procedures were developed to determine when formwork removal, post-tensioning

application, and cold weather protection may begin (Carino N. J., 2004). These methods entail

measuring the force necessary to extract a metal insert from a concrete structure and calculating

the compressive strength of the concrete. Unlike other approaches, pullout tests use a gradually

increasing load to determine an actual strength feature. Inserts had to be pre-installed at first, but

the method evolved to allow for post-installation.

However, analyzing fire-damaged concrete using pullout tests is more difficult than the other

methods outlined earlier. Several methods have been developed, with the two most significant

ones summarized below.

BRE Internal Fracture Test

In this method, a 6 mm hole is drilled into concrete, cleaned, and an anchor bolt is inserted to a

depth of 20 mm using a spit-sleeve. Circular support transmits reaction forces to the concrete

surface, and initial tension load expands the sleeve. Load is increased until concrete fails, and the

ultimate tension load needed to extract the anchor is recorded. Compared to traditional pullout

tests, this method exhibits higher variation, likely due to drilling and preparation inconsistencies.

Aggregate particles influence load transfer and failure initiation. The static load allows analytical

treatment, revealing a non-linear relationship between tensile force and concrete compressive

strength.

13
CAPO Test

In this approach, a 6 mm hole is bored into concrete, cleaned, and a spit-sleeve anchor bolt is

inserted to a depth of 20 mm. The response forces are transmitted to the concrete surface by the

circular support, and the initial tension load expands the sleeve. The weight is increased until the

concrete fails, at which point the ultimate tension load required to retrieve the anchor is measured.

This approach has larger variation than typical pullout testing, most likely due to errors in drilling

and preparation. Load transfer and failure start are influenced by aggregate particles. Analytical

study of the static load reveals a non-linear relationship between tensile force and concrete

compressive strength.

Winsor Probe

A metal probe fired at a concrete surface assesses hardness or penetration resistance, which is used

to estimate concrete strength. This method is becoming more popular for in-situ quality control

and strength estimation. It is applicable to both vertical and horizontal surfaces. The probe, which

is propelled by a powder-actuated pistol, breaks the surface layer and penetrates deeper, with

penetration depth proportional to the parameters of concrete strength. The qualities of coarse

aggregate have a considerable impact on penetration depth, but other parameters such as mixture

properties, moisture content, curing regime, and concrete age all play a role.

When compared to other in situ strength testing, the Windsor probe method has fewer variables

and a high repeatability. A sample thickness of at least three times the estimated penetration depth

is required for reliable findings. Points of measurement should be at least 150-200 mm apart and

away from edges. The depth of penetration is affected by its proximity to reinforcement. While

this method is non-destructive, it does cause surface disturbances and leaves an 8 mm hole. It is

14
usually necessary to repair the surface after testing. The correlation between penetration depth and

concrete strength is slightly better than other methods, but accurate results require comparison with

non-fire damaged areas. This method is useful for determining strength profiles on surfaces that

have been cut to various depths.

A comparison between the tests showing the advantages and disadvantages between the tests are

given in table 5.

Table-5 Comparison of the tests

15
 Conclusions

Reinforced concrete structures are naturally resistant to fire. They are usually not completely

destroyed as a result of high temperature exposure. This implies that the condition of concrete in

structures after a fire must be assessed. Concrete in fire-prone structures has nonuniform properties

in the member cross-section. The near-surface layer of concrete experiences the most significant

degradation. When assessing structures after a fire, it is critical to determine the thickness of the

external cross-section layer in which concrete has been so severely damaged that it should be

considered destroyed. The standardized method for determining the compressive strength of cores

extracted from a structure should not be used blindly to evaluate the residual conditions of concrete

after a fire.

Only an indirect UPV method is appropriate for assessing concrete damage in a structure exposed

to high temperatures. The concrete in a structure is usually not uniform after a fire. The near-

surface zone of the member cross-section experiences the most concrete degradation. Direct

ultrasonic wave velocity measurement would yield an average value for the entire thickness of

tested members. In comparison to the actual concrete condition in the near-surface zone, these

results would be exaggerated.

Engineers can choose between simple in-field approaches and complex laboratory techniques. The

first, while typically sufficient, merely allow for an imprecise estimate of the concrete's properties.

Laboratory testing are more precise, but they are also more costly and time consuming. In practice,

numerous techniques should be combined to obtain a sufficiently detailed and accurate

representation of the concrete piece in question.

16
References

1. ACI (American Concrete Institute). 2019. Code requirements for assessment, repair and

rehabilitation of existing concrete structures. ACI 562. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI.

2. Albrektsson, J., M. Flansbjer, J. E. Lindqvist, and R. Jansson. 2011. Assessment of

concrete structures after fire. SP Rep. No. 2011:19. Borås, Sweden: SP Technical Research

Institute of Sweden.

3. Annerel, E. V., and L. R. Taerwe. 2013. “Assessment techniques for the evaluation of

concrete structures after fire.” J. Struct. Fire Eng. 4 (2): 123–130.

https://doi.org/10.1260/2040-2317.4.2.123

4. Concrete Society. 2008. Assessment, design and repair of fire-damaged concrete

structures. Technical Rep. No. 68. London: Concrete Society

5. Carino N. J. 2004. “Pull out test” Chapter 3 in Handbook on Nondestructive Testing of

Concrete, Second edition, CRC Press, 2004

6. Kog, Y. C. 2019. “Testing plan for estimating in-situ concrete strength.” Pract. Period.

Struct. Des. Constr. 24 (2): 04019001.

7. BSI (British Standards Institution). 2004b. Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures. Part

1-1: General rules and rules for buildings. Part 1-2: General rules—Structural fire design.

BS EN 1992. London: BSI.

8. fib (Fédération internationale du béton). 2008. Fire design of concrete structures: Structural

behaviour and assessment. State of the Art Rep., fib Bulletin 46. Lausanne, Switzerland: f

9. Wróblewska, J. and Kowalski, R. 2020. ‘Assessing concrete strength in fire-damaged

structures’, Construction and Building Materials, 254, p. 119122.

doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119122.

17