Scholarlink

<p>The performance of steel structures under fire is highly dependent on their ability to maintain strength and stiffness at elevated temperatures. To delay collapse, Passive Fire Protection (PFP) materials are typically applied based on standard critical temperatures, such as 550&#xa0;°C for columns and 620&#xa0;°C for beams—values that disregard the specific characteristics of each structural element. This study presents a computational tool developed to automate the estimation of critical temperatures for steel columns, beams, and beam-columns, and to determine the corresponding thickness of three PFP materials: intumescent paint, sprayed mortar, and rigid board. A comprehensive parametric study involving 166 structural models was carried out to evaluate the influence of element geometry, loading conditions, buckling coefficient, and steel grade on the critical temperature. The results were compared against fixed temperature values commonly used in practice. Significant discrepancies were observed between the calculated critical temperatures and the standard specified temperature values, with deviations exceeding 10% in 32% of cases. These variations led to considerable overestimation or underestimation of required PFP thickness—up to 58% reduction or 223% increase in the case of intumescent paint. The findings underscore the importance of calculating element-specific critical temperatures to ensure both safety and material efficiency in fire protection design.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

On the differences between prescriptive and calculated critical temperatures of steel elements under fire and their impact on fire protection design

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月17日

查看全文
  • Thayná Couto dos Santos Marcelino,
  • João Victor Fragoso Dias,
  • Macksuel Soares de Azevedo,
  • Adenilcia Fernanda Grobério Calenzani

摘要

The performance of steel structures under fire is highly dependent on their ability to maintain strength and stiffness at elevated temperatures. To delay collapse, Passive Fire Protection (PFP) materials are typically applied based on standard critical temperatures, such as 550 °C for columns and 620 °C for beams—values that disregard the specific characteristics of each structural element. This study presents a computational tool developed to automate the estimation of critical temperatures for steel columns, beams, and beam-columns, and to determine the corresponding thickness of three PFP materials: intumescent paint, sprayed mortar, and rigid board. A comprehensive parametric study involving 166 structural models was carried out to evaluate the influence of element geometry, loading conditions, buckling coefficient, and steel grade on the critical temperature. The results were compared against fixed temperature values commonly used in practice. Significant discrepancies were observed between the calculated critical temperatures and the standard specified temperature values, with deviations exceeding 10% in 32% of cases. These variations led to considerable overestimation or underestimation of required PFP thickness—up to 58% reduction or 223% increase in the case of intumescent paint. The findings underscore the importance of calculating element-specific critical temperatures to ensure both safety and material efficiency in fire protection design.