fire
Article
Fire Protection of Steel Structures of Oil and Gas Facilities:
Multilayer, Removable, Non-Combustible Covers
Marina Gravit 1 , Vasiliy Prusakov 2 , Nikita Shcheglov 1 and Irina Kotlyarskaya 1, *
Citation: Gravit, M.; Prusakov, V.;
Shcheglov, N.; Kotlyarskaya, I. Fire
Protection of Steel Structures of Oil
and Gas Facilities: Multilayer,
Removable, Non-Combustible
Covers. Fire 2024, 7, 86. https://
doi.org/10.3390/fire7030086
Academic Editors: Fang Liu,
Shengzhong Zhao and Longxing Yu
Received: 31 January 2024
Revised: 5 March 2024
Accepted: 9 March 2024
Published: 14 March 2024
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Fire 2024, 7, 86. https://doi.org/10.3390/fire7030086
1 Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, 195251 St. Petersburg, Russia;
marina.gravit@mail.ru (M.G.); tsheglov.ne@edu.spbstu.ru (N.S.)
2 LLC “RPC PROMIZOL”, 121087 Moscow, Russia; v.prusakov@tdpromizol.com
* Correspondence: vasilieva_il@spbstu.ru
Abstract: Fire protection is required to protect metal structures of oil and gas facilities from fires. Such
fire protection should provide high fire resistance limits: 60, 90, 120 and more minutes. Specialists of
LLC “RPC PROMIZOL ” developed a multilayer, removable type of fire protection made of superfine
basalt fibre and ceramic materials for operation in Arctic conditions. Five experimental studies were
carried out in standard and hydrocarbon fire regimes. The fire protection effectiveness of the products
for I20 beams without load was obtained: a 50 mm thick coating provided 130 min of a standard
fire regime; a 15 mm thick coating provided 60 min. The 15 mm thick coating provided 30 min
of a hydrocarbon fire regime and the 50 mm thick coating provided 93 min of a hydrocarbon fire
regime. The I40 beam under a load of 19.9 tf showed an R243 for the standard fire regime. The
coefficients of effective thermal conductivity and specific heat capacity of fire-retardant compositions
were determined by solving the inverse heat conduction problem. The problem was solved by
modelling using the QuickField 7.0 software package, which implements FEM. Modelling showed
that for obtaining the fire resistance limit R120 under the standard fire regime for the sample steel
structure from an I40 beam, it is enough to apply fire protection with a thickness of 25 mm instead of
50 mm, which agrees with the experimental data. For the hydrocarbon regime, it is predicted that
R120 can be obtained at a thickness of 45 mm instead of 50 mm.
Keywords: buildings; oil and gas facility; fire resistance; fire protection; structural protection;
removable fireproofing; Arctic climate; fireproof fabric; basalt fibre
1. Introduction
Buildings and structures located at the poles are Arctic stations and plants for oil and
gas production, processing and transportation. Steel bearing and enclosing structures of
such facilities should be protected with special materials; in particular, fire protection means
increasing their fire resistance limits [1–3]. There are precedents for offshore platform fires,
such as the world’s largest offshore platform disaster, Piper Alpha, in the North Sea, which
led to a series of explosions on major oil and gas pipelines [4–6]. The Deepwater Horizon
platform fire and explosion resulted in loss of life, destruction and a negative environmental
impact and is considered the largest industrial disaster [7,8]. Fires have also occurred at
Arctic and Antarctic stations, whose supporting elements are steel structures. For example,
a fire destroyed the Commander Ferraz Antarctic research station located on King George
Island in Antarctica [9,10].
Various fire protection coating systems are used to protect the metal structures of floors
and trestles of oil and gas facilities from low (in case of cryogenic liquids spilling) and high
(in case of possible development of hydrocarbon fire regime) temperatures. Requirements
for the fire resistance limits of structures are fixed in the normative documents of oil and gas
complexes, for example, in international standards, American and Norwegian standards,
and standards of large concerns based on fire risk calculations [11].
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/fire
 Fire 2024, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 16
Fire 2024, 7, 86 2 of 16

There are three main methods of fire protection for steel structures: intumescent coat-
There are three main methods of fire protection for steel structures: intumescent
ings [12–15], plaster compositions [16] and structural fire protection [17–19]. Figure 1
coatings [12–15], plaster compositions [16] and structural fire protection [17–19]. Figure 1
shows a scheme of the means and methods of fire protection for steel structures used at
shows a scheme of the means and methods of fire protection for steel structures used at oil
oil and gas facilities [20].
and gas facilities [20].

Figure 1. Means
Figure1. Means and
and methods
methods of
of fire
fireprotection
protectionfor
forsteel
steelstructures
structuresfor
forthe
theoil
oiland
andgas
gasindustry.
industry.

According
Accordingto tothe
theCode
Codeof ofPractice
Practice[21],
[21],the
the Arctic
Arctic climate
climatebelongs
belongsto to category
category3, 3, “most
“most
severe conditions”, with absolute minimum temperatures between − 54 ◦ C and −71 ◦ C.
severe conditions”, with absolute minimum temperatures between −54 °C and −71 °C. Ac-
According
cording to the to the Köppen
Köppen international
international climate
climate classification,
classification, the Arctic
the Arctic belongsbelongs
to polarto polar
zone
zone
E [22]. Zone E is a group of zones, namely, “Et - tundra” and “Ef - ice cap zone”, zone”,
E [22]. Zone E is a group of zones, namely, “Et – tundra” and “Ef – ice cap which
which are characterized by permanent ◦
are characterized by permanent snow snow
cover cover and average
and average temperatures
temperatures belowbelow 10 °C.10 C.
In
In polar
polar conditions,
conditions, the the following
followingrequirements
requirementsare areimposed
imposedfor forthethe fire
fire protection
protection of
of building structures: preservation of reliability (serviceability) in the Arctic climate for
building structures: preservation of reliability (serviceability) in the Arctic climate for at
at least 10 years, ease of installation and replacement, and resistance to extreme effects in
least 10 years, ease of installation and replacement, and resistance to extreme effects in the
the form of liquid hydrocarbon spills, with the subsequent ignition and development of a
form of liquid hydrocarbon spills, with the subsequent ignition and development of a hy-
hydrocarbon fire regime [23–26]. Fire protection in the form of intumescent coatings and
drocarbon fire regime [23–26]. Fire protection in the form of intumescent coatings and
plasters is of little use in such conditions since these are wet processes.
plasters is of little use in such conditions since these are wet processes.
Such requirements are best satisfied by structural fire protection, which is often used
Such requirements are best satisfied by structural fire protection, which is often used
in harsh climatic conditions. Thus, in [27], experiments on an example of steel structures
in harsh climatic conditions. Thus, in [27], experiments on an example of steel structures
with structural fire protection based on basalt superfine fibres in the Arctic region were
with structural fire protection based on basalt superfine fibres in the Arctic region were
conducted to evaluate various means of fire protection, the results of which showed that
conducted to evaluate various means of fire protection, the results of which showed that
the most effective coatings for harsh Arctic conditions are materials containing basalt su-
the most effective coatings for harsh Arctic conditions are materials containing basalt su-
perfine fibres. Structural protection based on boards with various binders has a number
perfine
of fibres.advantages
significant Structural protection
over otherbased types:onitboards
provideswith various
high binders has
fire resistance a number
limits from
120 min and higher for structures, even with a small cross-section; relative ease offrom
of significant advantages over other types: it provides high fire resistance limits 120
installa-
min and higher for structures, even with a small cross-section;
tion; and resistance to climatic conditions. The disadvantages of board materials includerelative ease of installation;
andpossibility
the resistanceoftocracking
climaticwhenconditions. The disadvantages
the structure is loaded. For of board materials
example, [28] showsinclude that usingthe
possibility
gypsum slabsof up
cracking
to 20 mm when thickthetostructure is loaded.concrete
protect reinforced For example,
columns [28]exposed
shows directly
that using to
gypsum slabs up to 20 mm thick to protect reinforced concrete
fire flames reduces by one-third the amount of heat penetration during the period of higher columns exposed directly
to fire flames
exposure reduces
compared by one-thirdones.
to unprotected the amount
However, ofthe
heat penetration
slabs during displacement.
show significant the period of
higherThe most common thermal insulation materials in applied means of fire protectiondis-
exposure compared to unprotected ones. However, the slabs show significant for
placement.
structures are thermal insulation wools of various types, and about 60% of all used thermal
The most
insulation uses common thermal
fibre materials: insulation
glass, mineralmaterials
and basaltin wool
applied basedmeans of fire
on fine andprotection
ultrafine
for structures
fibres are athermal
[29]. In [30], insulation
roll crosslinking wools made
material of various types, basalt
of ultrafine and about 60% aofthickness
fibre with all used
thermal
from 5.0 toinsulation
16.0 mm,uses fibre materials:
laminated on one side glass,
with mineral and basalt
aluminium foil, waswool based on fine
considered. The and
fire
ultrafine fibres [29]. In [30], a roll crosslinking
resistance limit of the fireproofing material was EI90. material made of ultrafine basalt fibre with
a thickness
The resultsfromof5.0[31]toconfirm
16.0 mm, laminated
that basalt fibreon has
onethe
sidegreatest
with aluminium
advantagesfoil, for was consid-
the produc-
ered.ofThe
tion fire resistancefabric.
flame-retardant limit of the fireproofing
Thus, basalt fibre ismaterial
widely was
usedEI90.in fire retardant materials,
shrouds,The curtains
results of and[31] confirm
covers both that
on basalt fibreand
structures hason
theproducts
greatest to advantages
ensure high forfire
theresis-
pro-
duction
tance of flame-retardant
limits [32–34]. fabric. Thus, basalt fibre is widely used in fire retardant mate-
rials,Toshrouds,
predict curtains and covers
the fire resistance bothof
limits onstructures,
structuresincluding
and on productsthose with to ensure high fire
fire protection,
resistance limits
calculations [32–34].
in modern software packages using the finite element method are used. In [35],
a FEM model (ANSYS 15 software) was used for double-slope brick cladding depending on
 To predict the fire resistance limits of structures, including those with fire protection,
calculations in modern software packages using the finite element method are used. In
[35], a FEM model (ANSYS 15 software) was used for double-slope brick cladding de-
Fire 2024, 7, 86 3 of 16
pending on the position of a steel-framed column with different types of fire protection.
The modelling showed that fire protection in the form of a 30 mm thick layer of rock wool
allowed a temperature of 500 °C to be reached in 7.5 min on an unheated surface; a 40 mm
the position
thick layer reachedofthisa steel-framed
temperature column
in 8.5 with different
min and a 50 types of firelayer
mm thick protection.
reachedThe modelling
it after
showed
more than that fire protection in the form of a 30 mm thick layer of rock wool allowed a
60 min.
Intemperature
[36,37], the of 500 ◦ Cconducted
authors to be reached in 7.5 min on
experimental and annumerical
unheated studies
surface; (Abacus
a 40 mm 2023thick layer
software was used) to study the characteristics of loaded glass fibre-reinforced polymer than
reached this temperature in 8.5 min and a 50 mm thick layer reached it after more
beams60 min.standard fire conditions.
under
For theInoil[36,37], the industry,
and gas authors conducted experimental
fire protection for metaland numerical
structures studies
requires (Abacus 2023
non-com-
bustiblesoftware
thermalwas used) tomaterials
insulation study the thatcharacteristics
do not contain of flammable
loaded glass fibre-reinforced
polymers and that do polymer
beams under standard fire conditions.
not crack under load. Such combined materials, stitched with non-combustible threads
and fasteners,For can
the oil
beand
used gas
toindustry, fire protection
protect shut-off for metal
equipment andstructures requiresand
various valves non-combustible
critical
thermal insulation materials that do not contain flammable
sections of pipelines, as well as for the manufacture of covers for valves [38–40]. However, polymers and that do not
crack under load. Such combined materials, stitched
such solutions are not used practically for the protection of building structures.with non-combustible threads and
fasteners, can be used to protect shut-off equipment and
Specialists of LLC ”RPC PROMIZOL (Moscow, Russian Federation) [41] developed various valves and critical sections
of pipelines, as well as for the manufacture of covers for valves [38–40]. However, such
a multi-layer, removable type of fire protection made of superfine basalt fibre and ceramic
solutions are not used practically for the protection of building structures.
materials for Arctic LNG 2. [42], a project of NOVATEK Gas Concern (Moscow, Russian
Specialists of LLC “RPC PROMIZOL” (Moscow, Russia) [41] developed a multi-layer,
Federation) on the Yamal Peninsula in the Arctic climate of Russia related to the produc-
removable type of fire protection made of superfine basalt fibre and ceramic materials for
tion of liquefied natural gas. A programme of experimental research was developed, in-
Arctic LNG 2. [42], a project of NOVATEK Gas Concern (Moscow, Russia) on the Yamal
cluding a study of the effect of a fire regime on steel according to ASTM-119 [43] and its
Peninsula in the Arctic climate of Russia related to the production of liquefied natural gas.
analogue for the temperature curve of the standard [44] and hydrocarbon fire regimes,
A programme of experimental research was developed, including a study of the effect of
according to UL 1709 [45] and its European analogue EN 1363-2 [46] in terms of the hy-
a fire regime on steel according to ASTM-119 [43] and its analogue for the temperature
drocarbon fire regime.
curve of the standard [44] and hydrocarbon fire regimes, according to UL 1709 [45] and its
This paper presents data on the study of combined coating for steel structures based
European analogue EN 1363-2 [46] in terms of the hydrocarbon fire regime.
on BSTFs and ceramic fibres during fire tests with standard and hydrocarbon temperature
This paper presents data on the study of combined coating for steel structures based
regimes onwith
BSTFs different layer fibres
and ceramic thicknesses.
duringBy firesolving the standard
tests with inverse problem of heat conduc-
and hydrocarbon temperature
tion using a numerical model, the thermophysical characteristics
regimes with different layer thicknesses. By solving the inverse problem of heat of the flame retardant
conduction
composition
using awere obtained.
numerical model, Thetheoptimization
thermophysical problem of the reduction
characteristics of material
of the flame retardantcon-compo-
sumption at the achievement of necessary fire protection efficiency was
sition were obtained. The optimization problem of the reduction of material consumption solved.
at the achievement of necessary fire protection efficiency was solved.
2. Materials and Methods
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials
2.1. Materials
Basalt superfine fibres (BSTFs) have an elementary fibre thickness of 1–3 µm and a
Basalt
length of more thansuperfine
50 mm, fibres
while (BSTFs) have
basalt fine an (BFTs)
fibres elementary
have an fibre thicknessfibre
elementary of 1–3 µm and a
thick-
length of more than 50 mm, while basalt fine fibres (BFTs) have an elementary
ness of 5–15 µm and a length of up to 50 mm (Figure 2). Glass fibre, slag fibre and mineral fibre thickness
of also
fibre are 5–15called
µm and fineafibre
length of upthe
because to 50 mm (Figure
average diameter 2).ofGlass
these fibre,
fibres slag fibre
is 4–12 µm. and mineral
This
fibreofare
structure finealso called
fibres fine fibre
deprives thebecause
productthe average diameter
of strength. Therefore, of phenol
these fibres is 4–12 µm. This
formaldehyde
structure
or other organicofresins
fine fibres deprives
are used to bindthe product
thin fibresofat strength.
an amount Therefore,
of 2–10%phenol formaldehyde
[29]. Reducing
or other organic resins are used to bind thin fibres at an amount
the fibre diameter leads to an increase in the thermal resistance of the material due to of 2–10% [29]. Reducing
a
the fibre diameter leads to an increase
decrease in the contact area between the fibres [29,47]. in the thermal resistance of the material due to a
decrease in the contact area between the fibres [29,47].

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 2. Basalt fibres: (a) basalt superfine fibres with fibre diameter 1–3 µm; (b) basalt ultrafine fibres
with fibre diameter 0.6–1 µm; (c) basalt microfine fibres with fibre diameter less than 0.6 µm [48].

When changing the diameter from 0.6 to 20 µm, the thermal conductivity increases
from 0.0237 to 0.375 at t = 25 ◦ C. Thus, the optimal density of laying in the thermal insulation
structure should be 80–110 kg/m3 for BSTF wool, 140 kg/m3 for BSTF, 150–160 kg/m3
for glass wool and about 200 kg/m3 for slag wool. Thus, achieving the same thermal
 fibres with fibre diameter 0.6–1 µm; (c) basalt microfine fibres with fibre diameter less than 0.6 µm
[48].

When changing the diameter from 0.6 to 20 µm, the thermal conductivity increases
from 0.0237 to 0.375 at t = 25 °C. Thus, the optimal density of laying in the thermal insula-
Fire 2024, 7, 86 4 of 16
tion structure should be 80–110 kg/m3 for BSTF wool, 140 kg/m3 for BSTF, 150–160 kg/m3
for glass wool and about 200 kg/m3 for slag wool. Thus, achieving the same thermal con-
ductivity characteristics of basalt superfine fibre products requires several times less den-
conductivity
sity than characteristics
that for basalt of basalt
fine fibre, glass woolsuperfine fibre products
and slag wool products requires
[29]. several times less
density than that for basalt fine fibre, glass wool and
The multifunctional thermal insulation system PROIMZOL-MIX PROPLATEslag wool products [29]. (man-
ufacturer LLC ”RPC PROMIZOL”, Moscow, Russia) is a fireproof composite coating con-(manu-
The multifunctional thermal insulation system PROIMZOL-MIX PROPLATE
sistingfacturer LLC “RPCof
of a combination PROMIZOL”,
non-combustible Moscow, Russia)
materials, is a fibre
glass fireproof
and composite
silica, and coating
is a flex-consist-
ing of a combination of non-combustible materials,
ible roll web that is fixed with special tapes and fasteners [49]. glass fibre and silica, and is a flexible
roll web that is fixed with special tapes and fasteners [49].
A multilayer product for the fire protection of building structures is an insulating
cover madeAofmultilayer productflexible,
non-combustible, for the fire protection
multilayer of building
materials. structures
The layers of the is an insulating
cover are
sewn together with non-combustible and heat-resistant ceramic, glass fibre orthe
cover made of non-combustible, flexible, multilayer materials. The layers of cover are
silica
sewn together with non-combustible and heat-resistant ceramic, glass
threads. The cover is stitched with clamp fire-resistant tapes, which are made of twisted fibre or silica threads.
The cover is stitched with clamp fire-resistant tapes, which are made of twisted basalt and
basalt and silica yarns and have a self-tightening fastening knot for fixing the cover that is
silica yarns and have a self-tightening fastening knot for fixing the cover that is stretched
stretched on building structures. A scheme of the composite layers of this product is pre-
on building structures. A scheme of the composite layers of this product is presented in
sented in Figure 3.
Figure 3.

(a) (b)
Figure Figure
3. Composite layers layers
3. Composite of the of
product: (a) under
the product: conditions
(a) under of standard
conditions (cellulose)-type
of standard com-
(cellulose)-type combus-
bustiontion
andand
(b)(b)
under conditions of hydrocarbon-type combustion, where 1—heat-strengthened
under conditions of hydrocarbon-type combustion, where 1—heat-strengthened basalt
basalt fabric,
fabric, 2—ceramic
2—ceramic fibre
fibre fabric,
fabric, 3—mineral
3—mineral wool,
wool, 4—metal
4—metal alloy
alloy sheets,
sheets, 5—glass
5—glass cloth
cloth [49].
[49].

A multifunctional
A multifunctionalthermal insulation
thermal systemsystem
insulation contains BSTFsBSTFs
contains and mineral wool with
and mineral wool with
a density of at least
a density of at100 kg/m
least 100 .kg/m
3 BSTF is3 a layer
. BSTF is of stapleoffibres
a layer staplewith a diameter
fibres of 1 to 3of 1 to
with a diameter
microns, intertwined
3 microns, and bound
intertwined andwith bound ether
withinether
the form
in theofform
high-quality basalt fibre
of high-quality basalt canvas.
fibre canvas.
The content of solid
The content ofnon-fibre inclusions
solid non-fibre larger larger
inclusions than 0.25thanmm 0.25does
mmnot exceed
does 10% of10%
not exceed the of the
total filler
totalfraction. The cover
filler fraction. The is coverwrapped with silica
is wrapped with cloth
silica with
clothawith vermiculite filler. The
a vermiculite filler. The
tapes are
tapesmade of twisted
are made basalt basalt
of twisted and silica
andthreads in the in
silica threads ratio
theofratio
70–90% basalt basalt
of 70–90% threadthread
to to
30–10% silica thread.
30–10% Technical
silica thread. characteristics
Technical of the of
characteristics tape:
thewidth 10–50 mm;
tape: width 10–50linear
mm; density
linear density
not less
notthan
less002
thankg/min; working
002 kg/min; temperature
working range from
temperature range−200from°C−to ◦ C to°C.
200+1200 +1200 ◦ C.
The tapesThe tapes
are sewnare sewn
to theto cover
the cover
andandareare
oneone piece
piece withitit(which
with (whichisis especially
especially important
im-
portantforfor
cases
casesofofcomplex
complex shape,
shape, forfor
example,
example, fastening
fastening nodes
nodes or or
joints, where
joints, wherethethetightening
tight- line
ening must
line mustbe precisely defined).
be precisely defined).The fastener design
The fastener is robust
design and designed
is robust for repeated
and designed for re- use.
The total density of the cover is 125–130 kg/m 3 and depends on the product configu-
peated use.
ration.
The totalTemperature
density of the shrinkage is up to 3%.
cover is 125–130 kg/m3 and depends on the product configu-
ration. Temperature shrinkage is up to 3%.
2.2. Methods
2.2.1. Experimental Studies
2.2. Methods
The experiments
2.2.1. Experimental Studies were carried out for sample nos. 1–4 in accordance with [50]. For an I-
beam with height (1700 ± 10) mm profile 20B1 [51] and a volume coefficient of 294 m−1 [52],
The experiments were carried out for sample nos. 1–4 in accordance with [50]. For an
the covers were wrapped and strapped (Figure 4). The temperature at which the metal of
I-beam with height (1700 ± 10) mm profile 20B1 [51] and a volume coefficient of 294 m−1
the samples on the unheated surface reached the critical temperature of 500 ◦ C was taken
[52], the covers were wrapped and strapped (Figure 4). The temperature at which the
as the limit state.
 Fire7,
Fire 2024, 2024, 7, xPEER
x FOR FOR REVIEW
PEER REVIEW 5 of 16
5 of 16

Fire 2024, 7, 86 5 of 16
metalmetal
of theofsamples
the samples
on theonunheated
the unheated surface
surface reached
reached the critical
the critical temperature
temperature of 500of°C
500 °C
was taken
was taken as theaslimit
the limit
state.state.

(a) (a) (b) (b)

FigureFigure
The4.furnace
4.Figure The furnace
4. The furnaceaccording
according to GOST
accordingto GOST 53295-2009
53295-2009
to GOST [50]
[50] for
53295-2009 for1–4:
nos.
[50] nos.nos.
for 1–4:
(a) (a) main
main
1–4: view
(a) view
mainandview andtop
(b) (b) (b)
and toptop
view,view,view, where (1) is a fire chamber, (2) is a furnace masonry, (3) is a nozzle heating channel, (4)ais a
where where
(1) is (1)
a is
fire a fire chamber,
chamber, (2) is (2)
a is a furnace
furnace masonry,
masonry, (3) is (3)
a is a
nozzle nozzle
heatingheating
channel, channel,
(4) is (4)
a is
nozzle,
nozzle, (5) is a(5)smoke
nozzle, is aissmoke
(5) aduct,
smoke duct, (6)(6)
(6)duct,
is an is an
exhaust exhaust
is an umbrella,
umbrella,
exhaust (7) is a(7)furnace
umbrella, is is
(7) a furnace
vault,vault,
a furnace (8) is a(8)(8)
vault, isisasample,
test atest
testsample,
(9) (9)
sample, (9) is
is an
is an air air duct,
duct, (10) is(10) is a thermocouple,
a thermocouple, (11) is(11) is an inspection
an inspection hatch.hatch.
an air duct, (10) is a thermocouple, (11) is an inspection hatch.

Specimen
Specimen no. 5 no.
Specimen was5 awas
no. a column
5column
was ofofI-beam
of I-beam
a column profile
profile
I-beam no. 40IK
no. 40IK
profile no. 40IK with
withwith aaheight
a heightheight ofof
of (2700 (2700
± ±10)
± 10)
(2700 10)mm
mm
mm andand and
waswaswas
testedtested
under
tested under a
a static
under static load
load load
a static of
of 195.22 195.22 kN
kN (19.9
of 195.22 (19.9
kN tf). tf).
The
(19.9 The
tests
tf). Thetests
were were carried
testscarried out
out in out
were carried in in
accordance
accordance with with
accordance [51,52]
[51,52]
with (Figure
(Figure
[51,52] 5). 5).type
The
(Figure TheThe
5). type of sample
of sample
type of was waswasselected
selected
sample bycustomer.
by the
selected thethe
by customer.
The TheThe
customer.
specimen
specimenspecimenwaswas
equipped
was equipped with with
equipped40 with
mm 40 thick
mm
40 mm thick support
support
thick platesplates
support underunder
plates the thethe
condition
condition
under of vertical
of vertical
condition of vertical
compression,
compression, with with articulated
articulated resting
resting on one on one
side side
and and
rigid rigid pinching
pinching on on
the
compression, with articulated resting on one side and rigid pinching on the other the
other other
side sideside
of of of
thethe
column.
the column. The The vertical
vertical strainstrain
after after
loadingloading
was was
0.7 mm.
column. The vertical strain after loading was 0.7 mm.0.7 mm.

(a) (a) (b) (b)

Figure FigureTest5.sample
5.Figure Test sample
5. Test no. 5 no.
sample 5 infurnace
in the
no. 5the furnace
in the (a) (a) before
before
furnace the
(a) theand
test
before test(b)
the and
testthe(b)schematic
and thethe
(b) schematic
diagram
schematic diagram
of theof the
diagram of the
installation
installation for for
for firing
installation firing
tests tests
of
firing of aof
atests
steel steel
column column
a steel under
columnunder
load loadload
[53],
under [53],[53],
where where is (1)
(1)wherethe is the
firing
(1) firing
chamber
is the chamber
firing of theof the
chamber of the
furnace,furnace,
(2) is (2)
furnace, is
(2)aisprototype
a prototype of aofcolumn,
of a steel
a prototype steel column,
a steel (3) is (3)
column, is aishinged
a hinged
(3) asupport,
hinged support,
(4) is (4)
support, is aisloading
a loading
(4) a device,
loadingdevice,
(5) is (5) (5)
device, is is
upperupper and lower
and lower support support elements
elements that ensure
that ensure the operation
the operation of theof the loading
loading system system
of theof the prototype,
prototype,
upper and lower support elements that ensure the operation of the loading system of the prototype,
(6) is a(6)device
is a device
for hardfor clamping
hard clampingof theof the prototype,
prototype, (7) is thermal
(7) is thermal insulation.
insulation.
(6) is a device for hard clamping of the prototype, (7) is thermal insulation.

In Figure 6, the cross-sections of the I-beams for specimen nos. 1–4 and specimen no.
5 and the locations of thermocouple installation are shown (Figure 6a).
 Fire 2024, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 16

Fire 2024, 7, 86 6 of 16
In Figure 6, the cross-sections of the I-beams for specimen nos. 1–4 and specimen no.
5 and the locations of thermocouple installation are shown (Figure 6a).

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 6.Figure
I-beam:6. (a)
I-beam: (a)view,
general general
(b)view,
I-beam(b)profile
I-beam profile
IB20, IB20, (c)profile
(c) I-beam I-beam profile IK40.
IK40.

Table 1 shows
Table 1the characteristics
shows of the cross-sections
the characteristics of the I-beams.
of the cross-sections of the I-beams.

Table 1. Cross-section characteristics

Table 1. Cross-section of the IB20
characteristics of and I40Kand
the IB20 beams.
I40K beams.

Type Type h, mm h, mm
b, mmb, mmS, mmS, mm t, mm t, mmR, mm
R, mm F, cm2 F, cmI2x , cm4 Ix, cm 4 4
Iy , cm Iy, cm4
20B1, nos.
20B1, sample sample
1–4 nos. 1–4 200 200 100 100 5.6 5.6 8.5 8.5 12 12 28.49 28.49 1943 1943142.3 142.3
IK40-beam,
IK40-beam, sample
sample no. 5 no.383
5 383 299 299 9.5 9.5 12.5 12.5 22 22 112.91 112.9130,556 30,556
5575.4 5575.4

Tests of sample nos. 2 and 4 were carried out until a temperature of 500 °C was
Tests of sample nos. 2 and 4 were carried out until a temperature of 500 ◦ C was reached
reached during the firing process under the condition of creating a hydrocarbon temper-
during the firing process under the condition of creating a hydrocarbon temperature regime
ature regime in the firing chamber of the furnace according to [46], characterized by de-
in the firing chamber of the furnace according to [46], characterized by dependency (1):
pendency (1):
 
T − T0𝑇= 1080 − 0.3251·e−0.167
𝑇 · 11080 0.325 ·t
𝑒 . ·e−2.5·0.675
− 0.675 t
, 𝑒 . , (1) (1)

where Twhere T is the temperature

is the temperature inside theinside the furnace
furnace in °C, corresponding
in ◦ C, corresponding to the relevant
to the relevant time t; time t;
T 0 is the temperature
◦ in °C inside the furnace prior to the start of heat
T0 is the temperature in C inside the furnace prior to the start of heat impact; and t is the impact; and t is the
time in minutes
time in minutes from thefrom
startthe start
of the of the test.
test.
Sample Sample
nos. 1, 3nos.
and1,53were
and tested
5 wereaccording
tested according to the standard
to the standard temperature
temperature regime regime
according to [52], characterized by
according to [52], characterized by relationship (2):relationship (2):
𝑇 𝑇 345 𝑙𝑔 8 𝑡 1 , (2)
T − T0 = 345·lg(8·t + 1), (2)
The specimen types, coating thicknesses and resulting flame retardant effectiveness
The specimen types, coating thicknesses and resulting flame retardant effectiveness of
of the structural covers (PE) obtained from the experiments are summarized in Table 2.
the structural covers (PE) obtained from the experiments are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Types of samples and thickness of the covers for different types of experiments.
Table 2. Types of samples and thickness of the covers for different types of experiments.
Thickness,
Sample Cross-Section H, mm Aρ/V, Thickness,
m−1 Fire Regime PE, min
Sample Cross-Section H, mm Aρ/V, m−1 mm Fire Regime PE, min
mm
Sample No. 1 I20B1 1700 294 15 S* 60
Sample No. 1
Sample No. 2 I20B1 I20B11700 294
1700 294 15 15 S* H 60 30
Sample No. 2 I20B1 1700 294 15 H 30
Sample No. 3I20 B1
Sample No. 3
I20 B11700 1700
294
294 50
50 S
S 130
130
Sample
Sample No. 4 No. 4I20B1 I20B11700 1700
294 294 50 50 H H 93 93
Sample
Sample No. 5 No. 5 I40-beam/19.9
I40-beam/19.9 tf 2700 tf 2700
134 134 50 50 S S 243/180 243/180
** **
Note. S*—standard temperature regime, H—hydrocarbon regime. ** Sample no. 5 had a fire resistance limit
of 243 min at the deflection critical value [53] and a fire protection efficiency (PE) of 180 min when the critical
temperature of 500 ◦ C was reached by the specimen [50].
Fire 2024, 7, 86 7 of 16

2.2.2. Simulation in SP QuickField 7.0

All structural calculations were performed in SP QuickField 7.0 using the finite element
method based on a two-dimensional finite element model [54]. SP QuickField 7.0 (in another
version, SP ELCUT) was repeatedly used by the authors to solve thermophysical problems
with the purpose of verifying the experimental data [20,55,56].
QuickField packages can be applied to various aspects of thermal model design: heat
transfer, temperature distribution, evaluation of local overheating, transient heating processes.
The Heat Transfer module is used to analyse the temperature distribution in static
and transient heat transfer processes. The heat sources in the Heat Transfer module can be
specified directly and/or imported from other QuickField problems (coupled problems) as
Joule Losses. The Heat Transfer module can be used to design and analyse many different
electrical and mechanical systems. Steady-state heat transfer analysis is possible not only
in 2D Plane-Parallel and 2D axisymmetrical formulations but also as a 3D Extrusion and
3D Import.
Mathematical models of the heat conduction process were applied and the method
of solving inverse problems by heat conduction was used according to the system of
Equations (3)–(6) [57,58]:
- Equation of heat conduction:

∂θρ ∂θ
Cρ ρρ = ∂x ∂
(λρ ∂xρ )
∂t (3)
0 < x < dρ ; θρ = θρ ( x, t); 0 < t < tmax

- Initial condition:
θρ ( x, 0) = θρ (4)
- Boundary condition on the surface of the inverse heat conduction task at x = dp :

θρ (dρ , t) + 273.15 4
(  )
∂θρ (dρ , t) θt + 273.15 4
 
c0 ε
λρ = α ∗ [θt − θρ (dρ , t)], Γдeα∗ = αc + − (5)
∂x θt − θρ (dρ , t) 100 100

- Boundary condition on the inner surface of the fireproof coating at x = 0:

∂θρ (0, t) V ∂θρ (0, t)

λρ = cα ρα × × (6)
∂x Aρ ∂t

where
x—coordinate in the fire protection coating (x = 0 corresponds to the point of contact
between the coating and the metal where the sample is measured, temperature θ a = θ ρ
(0, t));
cρ ρρ —specific heat capacity, J/(kg·K);
Aρ /V—section ratio, mm−1 ;
λρ —heat conductivity coefficient, W/(m·K);
t—time, s;
C0 = 0.57;
dρ —thickness of fireproof coating, mm;
tmax —the maximum heating time of the sample, s;
αc —heat transfer coefficient on the outer surface of the fireproof coating, W/(m2 ·K);
ε = 0.7—the degree of blackness of the surface of the mineral coating [59];
θ 0 —initial temperature of the sample, ◦ C;
θ t —temperature in the firing furnace, ◦ C.
Initial characteristics of steel: grade C245 [60] density 7800 kg/m3 ; thermal conductiv-
ity and heat capacity variable depending on temperature (values taken from the programme
reference book). The boundary conditions are presented in Table 3.
 θ0—initial temperature of the sample, °C;
θt—temperature in the firing furnace, °C.
Initial characteristics of steel: grade С245 [60] density 7800 kg/m3; thermal conductiv-
ity and heat capacity variable depending on temperature (values taken from the pro-
gramme reference book). The boundary conditions are presented in Table 3.
Fire 2024, 7, 86 8 of 16

Table 3. Boundary conditions defined in SP QuickField 7.0.

NameTable
of the Value conditions defined in SP QuickField
3. Boundary Value7.0. Information Source
Convection heat transfer coefficient with
Name of the Value Value 50 Information[61]
Source
hydrocarbon temperature regime, W/(m2K)
ConvectionConvection heat
heat transfer transferwith
coefficient coefficient with
2 K) 50 25 [61][61]
hydrocarbon temperature regime, W/(m
standard temperature regime, W/(m2K)
Convection heat transfer coefficient with
Surface absorption coefficient 25 0.5 [61][62]
standard temperature regime, W/(m2 K)
Initial ambient temperature,
Surface absorption coefficient °C 0.5 20 [62] -
Density
Initial of the
ambient temperature, ◦
thermal insulation
C cover, kg/m3
20 125 - -
Density of the thermal insulation cover, kg/m3 125 -
For the boundary solutions of the third kind, material density was assumed to be
independent of temperature. To solve the problem with boundary conditions of the first
For the boundary solutions of the third kind, material density was assumed to be inde-
kind, then the temperature should be set according to Equations (1) and (2) for the corre-
pendent of temperature. To solve the problem with boundary conditions of the first kind,
sponding mode. To determine the characteristics of the fire resistance of structures, math-
then the temperature should be set according to Equations (1) and (2) for the corresponding
ematical
mode. To models of thethe
determine heat conduction process
characteristics were
of the fire applied and
resistance the method
of structures, of solving
mathematical
inverse problems of heat conduction was used, defined by the system
models of the heat conduction process were applied and the method of solving inverse of Equations (3)–
(6).
problems of heat conduction was used, defined by the system of Equations (3)–(6).
Based
Basedon onthe
theobtained
obtainedexperimental
experimentaltemperature–time
temperature–timedependences
dependencesofofthe thesamples,
samples,
the
the thermophysical properties of the flexible covers were determined. The finiteelement
thermophysical properties of the flexible covers were determined. The finite element
diagrams
diagramsofofthethemodelling
modelling samples
samples areare shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 7.7. The
Thefinite
finiteelement
elementmesh
meshspacing
spac-
ing
on the faces was set to 20 mm. It was not reasonable to set the grid spacing to lessthan
on the faces was set to 20 mm. It was not reasonable to set the grid spacing to less than
2020mm
mmininthis
thistask
taskbecause
becausethe thecalculation
calculationtimetimewould
wouldincrease
increasesignificantly.
significantly.Further,
Further,the
the
grid
gridsize
sizewas
wasdivided
dividedautomatically
automaticallyunder
under the
the size
size of
of the
the faces, but there
faces, but there was
was the
the possibility
possibil-
ity
toto manually
manually adjust
adjust thethe sizes.
sizes. InIn each
each block,
block, thethe grid
grid waswas generated
generated automatically.
automatically.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure
Figure7.7.Finite
Finiteelement
elementdiagrams
diagrams of the design
design sections
sectionsofofspecimen
specimennos.
nos.(a)(a)1 and
1 and
2, 2,
(b)(b) 3 and
3 and 4,
4, and
and (c) 5.
(c) 5.

3.3.Results
Results
Accordingtoto
According the
the results
results of the
of the tests,
tests, it was
it was established
established that sample
that sample no. a
no. 4 with 4 thick-
with a
ness of 50 mm provided fire protection efficiency under the conditions of exposure to ato
thickness of 50 mm provided fire protection efficiency under the conditions of exposure
a hydrocarbon
hydrocarbon combustion
combustion regime
regime forfor
90 90
min min
of of
thethe steel
steel columnofofthe
column theI-beam
I-beamsection
sectionofof
profileno.
profile no.20B1
20B1[51],
[51],height
height1700
1700 mm,mm, section
section ratio
ratio Ap/V
Ар/V ==294
294 mm−1−1[52].
[52].The
Theexperiment
experiment
was terminated in 93 min after the sample reached the critical temperature of 500 ◦ C in
accordance with [50].
During the testing of sample nos. 1–4, no visible changes in the appearance of the
samples were recorded (Figure 8).
 Fire 2024, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 16

was terminated in 93 min after the sample reached the critical temperature of 500 °C in
accordance with [50].
was terminated in 93 min after the sample reached the critical temperature of 500 °C in
accordance the
During withtesting
[50]. of sample nos. 1–4, no visible changes in the appearance of the
Fire 2024, 7, 86 9 of 16
samples
During the testing(Figure
were recorded 8). nos. 1–4, no visible changes in the appearance of
of sample the
samples were recorded (Figure 8).

Figure 8. Specimen no. 1 before starting the test (left), during the test (centre) and after the test
(right).
Figure8.8.Specimen
Specimenno.
no. 1 before starting
Figure 1 before starting the the
test test
(left),(left),
duringduring the(centre)
the test test (centre) and
and after theafter the test
test (right).
(right).
According
According to to the
the results
results ofof the
the tests
tests for
for specimen
specimen no. no. 5,5, itit was
was found
found that that aa cover
cover
thickness of 50 mmto provided
the results fire
of protection
the tests efficiency
for specimen under
no. the
5, it conditions
thickness of 50 mm provided fire protection efficiency under the conditions of exposurecover
According was found of exposure
that a to a
to a hydrocarbon
thickness
hydrocarbon of mode
50 mmmode of combustion
ofprovided
combustion of steel
the steel
fireofprotection
the column
efficiency
column of I-beam
under
of the thethe I-beam section
conditions
section of
of aof a wide-
exposure
wide-shelf
shelf
I-beam I-beam
withwith
to a hydrocarbon amode
a height height
ofof of 2700
mmmm
combustion
2700 andandof section
the
sectionsteel ratio
column
ratio Ap/VАр/V
of=the= 134
134 mm
I-beam [52]. During
−1−1 [52].
section the
of a wide-
During the
test,
test, the
shelfthe outer
I-beam layer
outerwith of
layeraof the
height shroud was
of 2700was
the shroud covered
mmcovered with
and section molten
with ratio
molten basalt,
Ар/V = 134
basalt, which
m [52].
which−1 appeared
During
appeared after
the
after
prolonged
prolonged exposure
test, the outer layer to
exposure ofthe
to thestandard
the shroud was
standard fire regime
regime (Figure
fire covered 9).
with molten
(Figure 9). basalt, which appeared after
prolonged exposure to the standard fire regime (Figure 9).

Figure
Figure 9.
9. Specimen no. 55before
Specimen no. beforestarting
starting
thethe
testtest (left),
(left), during
during the (centre)
the test test (centre) andthe
and after after
testthe test
(right).
(right).
Figure 9. Specimen no. 5 before starting the test (left), during the test (centre) and after the test
Figure 10 shows the graphical dependences of the averaged thermocouple readings
(right).
underFigure 10 protection
the fire shows thecovergraphical dependences
for the thicknesses of of the
the steel
averaged thermocouple
structure. readings
It can be seen that a
under the of
thickness fire
Figure 50protection
10mm wasthe
shows cover
optimal for
forthe
graphical thicknesses
achieving of
ofthe
thesteel
fire protection
dependences structure.
efficiency
averaged of It canthan
more
thermocouple be seen
180 that
min
readings
aand
under the fire protection cover for the thicknesses of the steel structure. It can be seen180
thickness
243 min of 50
in mm
terms was
of optimal
fire for
resistance achieving
loss fire
(critical protection
deflection), efficiency
in of
accordance more
withthan
[53].
that
min and 243of
a thickness min
50 mmin terms of fire resistance
was optimal for achievingloss fire
(critical deflection),
protection in accordance
efficiency of more than with
180
[53].
min and 243 min in terms of fire resistance loss (critical deflection), in accordance with
[53].Also, the dotted line in the graph shows the time to reach 140 °C for the steel I-beam
specimen,
Also,and
the itdotted
was also
linepossible to estimate
in the graph the time
shows the time toto reach
reach 140
140 °C
°C for
for the
15 mm
steeland 50
I-beam
mm thick composites under different fire regimes.
specimen, and it was also possible to estimate the time to reach 140 °C for 15 mm and 50
mm thick composites under different fire regimes.
 Fire2024,
Fire 2024,7,7,86
x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 16
10 of 16

Figure10.
Figure 10.Temperature
Temperatureand
anddeformation
deformationcurves
curvesof
ofsamples
samplesduring
duringfire
firetests.
tests.

As can
Also, thebedotted
seen from Figure
line in 10, sample
the graph shows no. the 1time
withtoareach 140 ◦of
thickness 15 mm
C for and I-beam
the steel density
of 130 kg/m 3 reached a temperature of 500 °C in 60 min; sample no. 3 ◦with a thickness of
specimen, and it was also possible to estimate the time to reach 140 C for 15 mm and
50mm
50 mmthick
reached a temperature
composites of 500 °Cfire
under different in 130 min in standard mode. Sample no. 2 with
regimes.
a thickness
As can be of seen
15 mm fromandFigure
density10,of 150 kg/m
sample no. 31reached 500 °C inof3015min.
with a thickness mmSample no. 2
and density
of 130akg/m 3 reached a temperature of 500 ◦ C in 60 min; sample no. 3 with a thickness
with thickness of 50 mm reached 500 °C in 93 min in hydrocarbon mode. Heating went
of 50 mm reached ◦ C in 130 min in standard mode. Sample no. 2
uniformly, withoutakinks,
temperature
and up of 500 °C
to 140 was reached on the unheated surface, depend-
with a thickness of 15 kg/m3(the ◦ C in 30 min. Sample
ing on the thickness ofmm and density
the coating and theof fire
150 regime reached 500the
greater thickness, the longer
no. 2 with a thickness of 50 mm reached 500 ◦ C in 93 min in hydrocarbon mode. Heating
the time to reach the critical temperature). The average temperature according to the read-
went uniformly, without kinks, andonuptheto metal ◦
140 Cofwas reached
ings of the thermometers installed sample no. 5on at the unheated
critical surface,
deflection was
depending
749.5 °C, and on the thickness ofofthe
a temperature 500coating
°C wasand the fireafter
reached regime
180 (the
min.greater
After 48 theh thickness,
of testing, the
the
longer
specimenthe structures
time to reach werethedisassembled
critical temperature). The average
and the insulating temperature
material according
was removed to
from
the
thereadings
structure. of When
the thermometers
exposed to installed
temperatureson theabove
metal500–600
of sample °C,no. 5 at critical deflection
embrittlement and sur-
was ◦ of 500 ◦ Cglass
face749.5
failureC,ofandthe ainner
temperature
layer containing was reached after 180 min. After 48 h of testing,
fibre occurred.
the specimen
Figure 11 shows specimen no. 1 after testing and removalmaterial
structures were disassembled and the insulating was retardant
of the flame removed fromfrom
the structure. When exposed to temperatures above 500–600 ◦ C, embrittlement and surface
the I-beam. As can be seen from Figure 11, there was no visible change in the main filler,
failure
and theofcolour,
the inner layer containing
thickness glassoffibre
and elasticity occurred. remained unchanged.
the materials
Figure 11 shows specimen no. 1 after testing and removal of the flame retardant from
the I-beam. As can be seen from Figure 11, there was no visible change in the main filler,
and the colour, thickness and elasticity of the materials remained unchanged.
Figure 12 shows specimen no. 5 after testing and removal of the flame retardant from
the I-beam. As can be seen from Figure 12, there was no visible change in the main filler,
and the colour, thickness and elasticity of the materials remained unchanged. The clamping
straps were also not damaged.
The inner layer of the glass fabric was completely embrittled and was mostly destroyed
when attempting to remove the cover. At the joint of the cover, in places of loose fit, signs
of embrittlement and melting were visible. Therefore, the issue of quality joints is one of
the most difficult for such fireproof covers.

Figure 11. Specimen no. 1 after testing.

 ings of the thermometers installed on the metal of sample no. 5 at critical deflection was
749.5 °C, and a temperature of 500 °C was reached after 180 min. After 48 h of testing, the
specimen structures were disassembled and the insulating material was removed from
the structure. When exposed to temperatures above 500–600 °C, embrittlement and sur-
face failure of the inner layer containing glass fibre occurred.
Fire 2024, 7, 86 Figure 11 shows specimen no. 1 after testing and removal of the flame retardant from11 of 16
the I-beam. As can be seen from Figure 11, there was no visible change in the main filler,
and the colour, thickness and elasticity of the materials remained unchanged.

Fire 2024, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 16

Figure 12 shows specimen no. 5 after testing and removal of the flame retardant from
Fire 2024, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 16
the I-beam. As can be seen from Figure 12, there was no visible change in the main filler,
and the colour, thickness and elasticity of the materials remained unchanged. The clamp-
ing straps were also not damaged.
Figure 12 shows specimen no. 5 after testing and removal of the flame retardant from
the I-beam. As can be seen from Figure 12, there was no visible change in the main filler,
and the11.
Figure colour, thickness
Specimen and
no. 1 after elasticity of the materials remained unchanged. The clamp-
testing.
Figure 11. Specimen
ing straps were alsono.not
1 after testing.
damaged.

Figure 12. Specimen no. 5 after testing.

The inner layer of the glass fabric was completely embrittled and was mostly de-
stroyed when attempting to remove the cover. At the joint of the cover, in places of loose
fit, signs
Figure 12.of embrittlement
Specimen and
no. 5 after melting were visible. Therefore, the issue of quality joints
testing.
Figure 12. Specimen no. 5 after testing.
is one of the most difficult for such fireproof covers.
The inner layer ofofthe glass to
fabric was completely embrittled and thickness
was mostly de-
InInaddition,
addition,
ititwas
was interest
of interest to obtain
obtaindata
dataononthe
theoptimum
optimum coating
coating under
thickness under
stroyed when attempting to remove the cover. At the joint of the cover,
different fire regimes to ensure the same flame retardant performance using simulations.in places of loose
different fire regimes to ensure the same flame retardant performance using simulations.
fit, signs of 13
Figure embrittlement and melting
shows a visualisation were
of the visible.
heating ofTherefore, the issue
the specimens in theofsimulation
quality joints
for
Figure 13 shows a visualisation of the heating of the specimens in the simulation for
is one
25 minofofthe
firemost difficult
exposure underfor different
such fireproof covers.
fire regimes.
25 min of fire exposure under different fire regimes.
In addition, it was of interest to obtain data on the optimum coating thickness under
different fire regimes to ensure the same flame retardant performance using simulations.
Figure 13 shows a visualisation of the heating of the specimens in the simulation for
25 min of fire exposure under different fire regimes.

(a) (b) (c) (d)

Figure13.
Figure 13.Visualisation
Visualisationof
of heating
heating of
of sample
sample nos.
nos.33and
and4 4during
duringsimulation in in
simulation S (a) and
S (a) H (b)
and modes
H (b) modes
at 25th min and visualisation of column heating of sample no. 5 during simulation in S (c) and H (d)
at 25th min and visualisation of column heating of sample no. 5 during simulation in S (c) and H (d)
modes at 25th min.
(a) modes at 25th(b) min. (c) (d)
The
Figure 13.temperature variation
Visualisation of curves
heating of sampleatnos.
controlled pointssimulation
3 and 4 during on the surface
in S (a)of
andfire-resistant
H (b) modes
specimens nos.visualisation
at 25th min and 3, 4 and 5 during
of columntheheating
experiment andno.
of sample simulation are shownininS (c)
5 during simulation Figure
and H14.
(d)
modes at 25th min.

The temperature variation curves at controlled points on the surface of fire-resistant

Fire 2024, 7, 86 12 of 16

Fire 2024, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 16

The temperature variation curves at controlled points on the surface of fire-resistant

specimens nos. 3, 4 and 5 during the experiment and simulation are shown in Figure 14.
T, °C T, °C
800 800
700 700
600 600
500 500
400 400
300 300
200 200

100 100

0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 0 50 100 150 200 250
t, min t, min

(a) (b)

Temperature of (a) sample no. 3, experiment and (b) sample no. 4, experiment.
Temperature of (а) sample no. 3, modelling and (b) sample no. 4, modelling.
Temperature of (а) sample no. 5, experiment.
Temperature of (а) sample no. 5, modelling and (b) sample no. 5, modelling.
Figure14.
Figure 14. Test
Testand
andmodelling
modellingresults
resultsfor
for(a)
(a)no.
no.33under
underS-
S-and
and(b)
(b)nos.
nos. 44 and
and 55 under
under H-
H- fire
fire regimes
regimes
(modelling).
(modelling).

Theanalysis
The analysisofofthe themodelling
modellingresults
resultsshowedshowed that
that thethe average
average difference
difference in the
in the heat-
heating
ing temperature of the I-beam structure between the experimental
temperature of the I-beam structure between the experimental and calculated data under and calculated data
under
the the standard
standard fire regime
fire regime was not was
morenotthanmore5%. than The5%.results
The results
of theof the structural
structural mod-
modelling
elling correlated
correlated with the with the results
results of the
of the fire testsfire tests obtained
obtained during during the experiment.
the experiment.
Thecalculated
The calculatedfire fireresistance
resistance limit
limit of of
thethe structure
structure waswas130130
minmin underunder the standard
the standard fire
regime for sample no. 3 and 93 min under the hydrocarbon fire regime for sample no.no.
fire regime for sample no. 3 and 93 min under the hydrocarbon fire regime for sample 4.
4. The
The modelling
modelling results
results correlated
correlated withwith
thethe firefire
testtest results
results obtained
obtained fromfromthethe experiment.
experiment.
To optimize
To optimize the consumption
consumptionof offire
fireprotection
protectioncoatings,
coatings, calculation
calculation models
models of aofcol-
a
umn specimen
column specimen with
withtwo twotypes of cross-sections
types of cross-sections were weredeveloped:
developed: Aρ/V Aρ/V= 294=m 294 m−1Aρ/V
−1 and and
= 134 m
Aρ/V with
=−1134 −1 with different
mdifferent coating thicknesses. The graphsThe
coating thicknesses. in Figure
graphs15inshow Figurethe15 dependence
show the
of the time to
dependence of reach
the time thetocritical temperature
reach the on the coating
critical temperature on the thickness under theunder
coating thickness standard
the
standard and hydrocarbon
and hydrocarbon fire regimes.fire regimes.
To obtain Toaobtain a fire protection
fire protection efficiency efficiency
of 120 minof 120 formin for
a steel
acolumn
steel column of I-beam cross-section 294 m − 1
of I-beam cross-section 294 m −1 in theinstandard
the standard fire fire regime,
regime, it was
it was sufficient
sufficient to
to apply
apply a afire
fireprotection
protectionthickness
thicknessofof45 45mm mm(Figure
(Figure 15a);15a); in
in the hydrocarbon regime at at aa
thickness
thickness of of 45
45 mm,
mm, the the fire
fire protection
protection reached
reached the the fire
fire resistance
resistance limit
limit R90
R90 (Figure
(Figure 15b).
15b).
To
Toobtain
obtainthe thefire
fireresistance
resistancelimit limitR120
R120in inthethestandard
standardfire fireregime
regimefor forthe
thesample
sampleof ofsteel
steel
structure made of the I40 beam (134 m − 1 ), it was enough to apply fire protection with
structure made of the I40 beam (134 m ), it was enough to apply fire protection with a
−1

athickness
thicknessofof2525mm mminstead
instead ofof5050
mm mm according
according to to experimental
experimental data data (Figure
(Figure 15c);
15c); in
in the
the hydrocarbon regime, a thickness of 45 mm was required,
hydrocarbon regime, a thickness of 45 mm was required, according to modelling data according to modelling data
(Figure
(Figure15d).
15d).
 Fire2024,
Fire 2024,7,7,86x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of16
13 of 16

time, min time, min

140 100
120
80
100
60
80
60 40

40 20
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
thickness, mm thickness, mm
(a) (b)
t, min t,min
180 140
160 120
140 100
120 80
100 60
80 40
60 20
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
thickness, mm thickness, mm
(c) (d)
Figure15.
Figure 15.Graph
Graphofofdependence
dependenceofofthe
thetime
timetotoreach
reachthe
thecritical
criticaltemperature
temperatureofofthe
thespecimens
specimenswith
with
Aρ/V 293 m− −1 and Aρ/V 134 m−1 on the thickness of the protective coating under S- (a,c) and H- (b,d)
1 − 1
Aρ/V 293 m and Aρ/V 134 m on the thickness of the protective coating under S- (a,c) and H-
fire regimes.
(b,d) fire regimes.

Whenmodelling
When modellinga astructure
structure with
with a fire-protected
a fire-protected beam
beam (no.(no. 5), dependences
5), the the dependences
of theof
the thermophysical characteristics on the temperature were obtained
thermophysical characteristics on the temperature were obtained (Table 4).(Table 4).

Table4.4.Calculated
Table Calculatedcoefficients
coefficientsofofthermal
thermalconductivity
conductivityand
andheat
heatcapacity
capacityofofstructural
structuralcoating
coatingfor
for
specimen no. 5 obtained from modelling as a function of temperature.
specimen no. 5 obtained from modelling as a function of temperature.
Т, °С 20 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1200
T, ◦ C 20 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1200
λ, W/К·m 0.17 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.10 0.15 0.21 0.29 0.36 0.44 0.60
W/K·m
λ, J/kg·m
C, 2190.17 0.07
276 0.04
348 0.04
420 0.06
492 0.10
564 0.15
636 0.21
708 7800.29 8520.36 9240.44 0.60
1069
C, J/kg·m 219 276 348 420 492 564 636 708 780 852 924 1069

The coefficients in Table 4 were obtained by fitting the corresponding temperature

curves
The(insulation
coefficients cover heating)
in Table 4 wereso that the heating
obtained matched
by fitting the experimental
the corresponding data of the
temperature
curves (insulation cover heating) so that the heating matched the experimental data of then
average thermocouple readings according to the test reports. These coefficients could the
be set again
average in the heating
thermocouple calculation
readings in SP
according toQuickField 7.0 and
the test reports. checked
These to see ifcould
coefficients the model
then
beand
setexperimental temperatures
again in the heating matched.
calculation in SP QuickField 7.0 and checked to see if the model
and experimental temperatures matched.
4. Conclusions
4. Conclusions
The most effective means of fire protection for structures and products are composite
The most
materials madeeffective
of variousmeans of fire protection
combinations for structures thermal
of non-combustible and products are composite
insulation materials,
materials
providing made of various
a “dry” method combinations of non-combustible
of installation, long service lifethermalin harshinsulation
conditions, materials,
and re-
providing a “dry” method of installation, long service life in harsh
sistance to hydrocarbon fire regimes. PROMIZOL-MIX PROPLATE coating consists of ul- conditions, and resistance
totra-thin
hydrocarbon fire regimes.
basalt and PROMIZOL-MIX
ceramic fibres, PROPLATE
as well as additional coating
spacers madeconsists of ultra-thin
of various fire-re-
basalt and ceramic fibres, as
sistant fabrics and aluminium foil. well as additional spacers made of various fire-resistant fabrics
and aluminium foil.a combined type of coating was presented that, depending on the task,
In this paper,
In this paper, a combined
shows good fire protection type
results of to
due coating was presented
the combination of thethat, depending
selected layers. onIt isthe
ex-
task, shows good fire protection results due to the combination of the
pedient to use new effective flame retardant materials with the possibility of dry installa- selected layers. It
istion
expedient to use new effective
in Arctic and Antarctic conditions. flame retardant materials with the possibility of dry
installation in Arcticapplication
The practical and Antarctic conditions.
of this research is that a removable, non-combustible type
The practical application of
of fire protection for steel structures this research
providingis that a removable,
high non-combustible
fire resistance limits has been type ob-
of
fire protection for steel structures providing high fire resistance limits has been obtained.
tained. Such products can be used for steel structures of trestles and decks, structures of
Fire 2024, 7, 86 14 of 16

Such products can be used for steel structures of trestles and decks, structures of offshore
platforms, and tunnel structures located in the epicentre of a fire under scenarios calculated
in accordance with the concept of fire risk.
In the future, wide application of combined fire protection means is predicted for
the development of fire-resistant fabrics for caps, covers and fire curtains using basalt,
perlite, aerogel, vermiculite, graphite and other materials. For application in the oil and gas
industry, in the construction of tunnels, and at hazardous chemical production facilities,
such materials should have resistance to hydrocarbon fire regimes and the spillage of
cryogenic liquids, maintainability, and high durability under various climatic conditions.

5. Patents
Prusakov, V.A.; Gravit, M.V.; Antonov, S.P. RU2725720C1—Fire-resistant multilayer
article for fire protection of building structures. 2020.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.G.; methodology, M.G.; software, N.S.; investigation,

V.P.; resources, V.P.; data curation, I.K.; writing—original draft preparation, I.K. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Russian Science Foundation (RSF) under grant no. 23-29-
00618. URL: https://rscf.ru/project/23-29-00618/ (accessed on 11 March 2024).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data are contained within the article.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Imran, M.; Liew, M.s.; Nasif, M.S.; Niazi, M.U.K.; Yesreen, A. Hazard Assessment Studies on Hydrocarbon Fire and Blast: An
Overview. J. Comput. Theor. Nanosci. 2017, 23, 1243–1247. [CrossRef]
2. Kim, J.H.; Baeg, D.Y.; Seo, J.K. Numerical Investigation of Residual Strength of Steel Stiffened Panel Exposed to Hydrocarbon Fire.
J. Ocean Eng. Technol. 2021, 35, 203–215. [CrossRef]
3. Gravit, M.; Golub, E.; Klementev, B.; Dmitriev, I. Fire protective glass fiber reinforced concrete plates for steel structures under
different types of fire exposure. Buildings 2021, 11, 187. [CrossRef]
4. Shallcross, D.C. Using concept maps to assess learning of safety case studies—The Piper Alpha disaster. Educ. Chem. Eng. 2013, 8,
e1–e11. [CrossRef]
5. Zybina, O.; Gravit, M. Intumescent Coatings for Fire Protection of Building Structures and Materials; Springer Series on Polymer and
Composite Materials; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020.
6. Akporjevwe, U.G. The Piper Alpha Disaster—Impacts to Safety. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/34
9278316_The_Piper_Alpha_Disaster-_Impacts_to_Safety (accessed on 24 January 2024).
7. Chen, D.; Werder, E.J.; Stewart, P.A.; Stenzel, M.R.; Gerr, F.E.; Lawrence, K.G.; Groth, C.P.; Huynh, T.B.; Ramachandran, G.;
Banerjee, S.; et al. Exposure to volatile hydrocarbons and neurologic function among oil spill workers up to 6 years after the
Deepwater Horizon disaster. Environ. Res. 2023, 231, 116069. [CrossRef]
8. McClain, C.R.; Nunnally, C.; Benfield, M.C. Persistent and substantial impacts of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill on deep-sea
megafauna. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2019, 6, 191164. [CrossRef]
9. Evangelista, H.; Sodré, E.D.; Lima, A.C.M.e. Preliminary Investigation on the Atmospheric Dispersion of Pollutants Due to Ferraz
Fire. INCT-APA Annu. Act. Rep. 2013, 35–42. [CrossRef]
10. Pongpiachan, S.; Hattayanone, M.; Pinyakong, O.; Viyakarn, V.; Chavanich, S.A.; Bo, C.; Khumsup, C.; Kittikoon, I.; Hirunyatrakul,
P. Quantitative ecological risk assessment of inhabitants exposed to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in terrestrial soils of King
George Island, Antarctica. Polar Sci. 2017, 11, 19–29. [CrossRef]
11. Gravit, M.; Gumerova, E.; Bardin, A.; Lukinov, V. Increase of Fire Resistance Limits of Building Structures of Oil-and-Gas Complex
Under Hydrocarbon Fire. Adv. Intell. Syst. Comput. 2018, 692, 818–829. [CrossRef]
12. Eremina, T.; Korolchenko, D. Fire Protection of Building Constructions with the Use of Fire-Retardant Intumescent Compositions.
Building 2020, 10, 185. [CrossRef]
13. Kandola, B.K.; Luangtriratana, P.; Duquesne, S.; Bourbigot, S. The Effects of Thermophysical Properties and Environmental
Conditions on Fire Performance of Intumescent Coatings on Glass Fibre-Reinforced Epoxy Composites. Materials 2015, 8,
5216–5237. [CrossRef]
Fire 2024, 7, 86 15 of 16

14. Jimenez, M.; Bellayer, S.; Revel, B.; Duquesne, S.; Bourbigot, S. Comprehensive Study of the Influence of Different Aging Scenarios
on the Fire Protective Behavior of an Epoxy Based Intumescent Coating. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2013, 52, 729–743. [CrossRef]
15. Morys, M.; Häßler, D.; Krüger, S.; Schartel, B.; Hothan, S. Beyond the standard time-temperature curve: Assessment of intumescent
coatings under standard and deviant temperature curves. Fire Saf. J. 2020, 112, 102951. [CrossRef]
16. Chen, Y.; Jiang, M.; Shan, Y.; Yin, W.; Liu, X.; Hu, L.; Li, P.; Liu, J.; Zhang, C. Plastering Gypsum Construction Method of Steel
Structure Wall Face With Anti-Corrosion Coating, and Fireproof Protection Device of Steel Structure Components. CN 110130533
A, 16 August 2019.
17. Elbasuney, S.; Maraden, A. Novel Thermoset Nanocomposite Intumescent Coating Based on Hydroxyapatite Nanoplates for
Fireproofing of Steel Structures. J. Inorg. Organomet. Polym. Mater. 2020, 30, 820–830. [CrossRef]
18. Mahmud, H.M.I.; Mandal, A.; Nag, S.; Moinuddin, K.A.M. Performance of fire protective coatings on structural steel member
exposed to high temperature. J. Struct. Fire Eng. 2021, 12, 193–211. [CrossRef]
19. Jiang, S.; Wu, H. An Experimental Investigation on the Fire Resistance of the Integrated Envelope-Fire Protection Material for
Steel Buildings. Prog. Steel Build. Struct. 2021, 23, 77–84. [CrossRef]
20. Gravit, M.; Shabunina, D.; Shcheglov, N. Thermal Characteristics of Epoxy Fire-Retardant Coatings under Different Fire Regimes.
Fire 2023, 6, 420. [CrossRef]
21. SP 131.13330.2020 Building Climatology. Available online: https://docs.cntd.ru/document/573659358 (accessed on 29
January 2024).
22. Kottek, M.; Grieser, J.; Beck, C.; Rudolf, B.; Rubel, F. World Map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorol.
Zeitschrift 2006, 15, 259–263. [CrossRef]
23. Abramov, I.V.; Gravit, M.V.; Gumerova, E.I. Increase in the fire resistance limits of ship and building structures with hydrocarbon
fire. GAS Ind. 2018, 768, 108–117.
24. Palazzi, E.; Fabiano, B. Analytical modelling of hydrocarbon pool fires: Conservative evaluation of flame temperature and
thermal power. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2012, 90, 121–128. [CrossRef]
25. Li, J.; Hao, H. Internal and external pressure prediction of vented gas explosion in large rooms by using analytical and CFD
methods. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 2017, 49, 367–381. [CrossRef]
26. Hassel, M.; Utne, I.B.; Vinnem, J.E. Allision risk analysis of offshore petroleum installations on the Norwegian Continental
Shelf—An empirical study of vessel traffic patterns. WMU J. Marit. Aff. 2017, 16, 175–195. [CrossRef]
27. Prusakov, V.A.; Gravit, M.V.; Simonenko, Y.B. Superthin Basalt Fiber as the Base of a Matrix of the Fire-Resistant Filling of
Deformation Joints in Building Structures. Glas. Phys. Chem. 2023, 49, 75–80. [CrossRef]
28. Al-Jadiri, M.S.F.; Said, A.M.I. Reinforced Concrete Columns Insulated by Different Gypsum Layers Exposed to 900 ◦ C One Side
Fire Flame. Eng. Technol. Appl. Sci. Res. 2023, 13, 11586–11592. [CrossRef]
29. Batiz. Comparative Characteristics of Thermal Insulation Wool Obtained from Various Raw Materials. Available on-
line: http://batis.ru/kompaniya/eto-interesno/30-sravnitelnaya-kharakteristika-teploizolyatsionnoj-vaty-poluchennoj-iz-
razlichnogo-syrya/ (accessed on 24 January 2024).
30. Budykina, T.; Anosova, Y. Thermal resistance of fire retardant materials. Mag. Civ. Eng. 2022, 112, 11213. [CrossRef]
31. Pang, Y.; Zhong, Z.; Liu, H.; Rao, L. Research on Fire-Resistant Fabric Properties of Basalt Fiber. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2012, 217–219,
1151–1154. [CrossRef]
32. Wang, K.; Fu, C.; Xu, A.; Wu, M.; Jia, L.; Xu, W.; Su, B.; Xia, Z. Skin-friendly and highly fireproof fabric up to 1142 ◦ C weaved by
basalt @ polyimide yarns. Compos. Part B Eng. 2022, 246, 110238. [CrossRef]
33. Ming, H. Fire-Proof Basalt Fiber Cloth. CN 105088794 A, 25 November 2015.
34. Xiang, W.; Maolin, L.; Xiaolong, T. Multi-Functional Basalt Fiber Fire Blanket. CN 207768955 U, 28 August 2018.
35. Bezas, M.Z.; Nikolaidis, T.N.; Baniotopoulos, C.C. Fire Protection and Sustainability of Structural Steel Buildings with Double-
Shell Brickwork Cladding. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2017, 38, 298–305. [CrossRef]
36. Mahmood, E.M.; Allawi, A.A.; El-Zohairy, A. Analysis and Residual Behavior of Encased Pultruded GFRP I-Beam under Fire
Loading. Sustainability 2022, 14, 13337. [CrossRef]
37. Mahmood, E.M.; Ibrahim, T.H.; Allawi, A.A.; El-Zohairy, A. Experimental and Numerical Behavior of Encased Pultruded GFRP
Beams under Elevated and Ambient Temperatures. Fire 2023, 6, 212. [CrossRef]
38. Sotoodeh, K. Valve operability during a fire. J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng. 2019, 141, 044001. [CrossRef]
39. Rezayiye, R.K.; Laurent, K.; Nooralishahi, P.; Ibarra-Castanedo, C.; Maldague, X. Thermal Data Augmentation Approach for the
Detection of Corrosion in Pipes Using Deep Learning and Finite Element Modelling. Eng. Proc. 2023, 51, 20. [CrossRef]
40. Shammazov, I.; Karyakina, E. The LNG Flow Simulation in Stationary Conditions through a Pipeline with Various Types of
Insulating Coating. Nurse Res. 2023, 8, 68. [CrossRef]
41. Home—Promizol. Available online: http://tdpromizol.com/home/ (accessed on 2 March 2024).
42. PAO NOVATEK Business: Project Arctic LNG 2|Arctic LNG 2. Available online: https://www.novatek.ru/en/business/arctic-
lng/ (accessed on 2 March 2024).
43. ASTM E119; Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials. ASTM International: West Con-
shohocken, PA, USA, 2022. Available online: https://www.astm.org/e0119-00a.html (accessed on 29 January 2024).
44. UL 1709-2017; Standard for Safety Rapid Rise Fire Tests of Protection Materials for Structural Steel. Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
(UL): Northbrook, IL, USA, 2017. Available online: https://docs.cntd.ru/document/550713257 (accessed on 29 January 2024).
Fire 2024, 7, 86 16 of 16

45. Vorobev, N.N.; Barinov, D.Y.; Zuev, A.V.; Pakhomkin, S.I. Computational and experimental study of the effective thermal
conductivity of fibrous materials. Proc. VIAM 2021, 7, 95–102. [CrossRef]
46. Sound Insulation, Thermal Insulation and Refractory Materials|MIC-Izol. Available online: https://mikizol.ru/ (accessed on 24
January 2024).
47. Prusakov, V.A.; Gravit, M.V.; Antonov, S.P. Fire-Resistant Multilayer Article for Fire Protection of Building Structures.
RU2725720C1, 3 July 2020.
48. GOST 53295-2009; Russian State Standard, Fire Retardant Compositions for Steel Constructions. General Requirement. Method
for Determining Fire Retardant Efficiency. Standartinform Publ.: Moscow, Russia, 2009. Available online: https://docs.cntd.ru/
document/1200071913 (accessed on 29 January 2024).
49. GOST 26020-83; Russian State Standard, Hot-rolled Steel I-Beam with Parallel Flange Edges. Dimensions. IPK Izdatelstvo
Standartov: Moscow, Russia, 2003. Available online: https://internet-law.ru/gosts/gost/21141/ (accessed on 29 January 2024).
50. Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures; CEN (European Committee for Standardization): Brussels, Belgium, 2011; pp. 1–78.
51. GOST 30247.1-94; Russian State Standard, Elements of Building Constructions. Fire-Resistance Test Methods. Loadbearing and
Separating Constructions. IPK Izdatelstvo Standartov: Moscow, Russia, 1995. Available online: https://docs.cntd.ru/document/
9055247 (accessed on 24 January 2024).
52. GOST 30247.0-94; Russian State Standard, Elements of Building Constructions. Fire-resistance Test Methods. General Require-
ments. IPK Izdatelstvo Standartov: Moscow, Russia, 2003. Available online: https://docs.cntd.ru/document/9055248 (accessed
on 29 January 2024).
53. EN 1363-2:1999; Fire Resistance Tests—Part 2: Alternative and Additional Procedures. CEN (European Committee for Standard-
ization): Brussels, Belgium, 2001.
54. QuickField Support Site. Available online: https://quickfield.com/ (accessed on 29 January 2024).
55. Gravit, M.; Shabunina, D.; Nedryshkin, O. The Fire Resistance of Transformable Barriers: Influence of the Large-Scale Factor. Fire
2023, 6, 294. [CrossRef]
56. Gravit, M.; Shabunina, D. Numerical and Experimental Analysis of Fire Resistance for Steel Structures of Ships and Offshore
Platforms. Fire 2022, 5, 9. [CrossRef]
57. Wang, J.X.; Liu, K.; Zhao, C.S.; Wang, Z.L. Research on the theoretical calculation method of dynamic response of the stiffened
plate on the accommodation of offshore platforms under blast. Chuan Bo Li Xue/J. Sh. Mech. 2020, 24, 1495–1506. [CrossRef]
58. Kim, T.K.; Kim, S.K.; Lee, J.M. Dynamic Response of Drill Floor Considering Propagation of Blast Pressure Subsequent to Blowout.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 8841. [CrossRef]
59. Kung, F.; Yang, M.C. Improvement of the Heat-Dissipating Performance of Powder Coating with Graphene. Polymer 2020,
12, 1321. [CrossRef]
60. GOST 27772-2015; Russian State Standard, Rolled Products for Structural Steel Constructions. General Specifications. Standartin-
form Publ.: Moscow, Russia, 2016. Available online: https://docs.cntd.ru/document/1200133727 (accessed on 29 January 2024).
61. EN 1991-1-2; Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures—Part 1–2: General Actions—Actions on Structures Exposed to Fire. CEN
(European Committee for Standardization): Brussels, Belgium, 2002.
62. Markus, E.S.; Snegirev, A.Y.; Kuznetsov, E.A. Numerical Simulation of a Fire Using Fire Dynamics; St. Petersburg Polytech-Press:
St. Petersburg, Russia, 2021.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.