Sunteți pe pagina 1din 10


Ul\IE 11
/O/ lf~N:\f, OJ'
NUl\lllfn 2 JOUJ~NAL OF
Engi11eering Fire
71 Letter to the Editor
Robert M. Rogers
72 Fire Suppression with Inert Gas Agents
Joseph Z. Su, Andrew K. Kim, George P. Crampton
and Zhigang Liu, Canada
88 Human Variability Correction Factors for Use
with Simplified Engineering Tools for Predicting :;
Pain and Second Degree Skin Burns
Christopher J. Wieczorek and Nicholas A. Dembscy, USA
112 N umerieal Modeling of Lateral-Torsional Buckling
of Steel I-Beams under Fire Conditions-Comparison
with Eurocodc 3
Paulo M. M. Vila Real, Portugal and Jean-Mme fransscn,

ISSN I 012 )()I 1
\< 1-,; !'Pl ll Ill llll:
I , I'<'' I\! ;r
11\'-l''- I It. I'\ I :i;1
l'l l~\111 '>(I ~
Numerical Modeling a.f Lateral-Torsional Buckling o( Stec/ /-llca111s 111

The capabilily or Ibis code to model lhe laleral-lorsional b11ckli11g or beams has
been demonstrated [4J al room lemperalurc by comparisons wilh lhc rormulas or
Eurocode3, Part 1-1 f5].
Numerical Modeling of Lateral-Torsional Particular altenlion was paid lo !he possibilily or using the same model as
Buckling of Steel I-Beams under Fire the one proposed in Eurocode 3, Parl 1-1 f51, simply modirying malcrial propcr-
Lies depending on !he lemperalure. This is !he procedure currenlly proposed
Conditions-Comparison with Eurocode 3 in Euroeode 3, Part 1-2 (6], although ils accuracy has never been demon-
slraled al elevated temperatures. Some points have never been clearly addressed
such as the facl !hat the stress-strain relationship or steel at clcvaled lcmper-
PAULO M. M. VILA REAL. 1 * JEAN-MARC FRANSSEN 2 atures does not remain elastic-perrectly plastic (which is !he basic hypoth-
1Dc11arlamenlnde Engenharia Civil. Uni\lcrsidade de esis of the model developed at room temperature) or the inlluencc or lhcrmal
A veiro-Campus de Santiago, 3810 A veiro, Pnrt11gaf stresses, created by higher temperatures, which usually develop al the end or the
2Uni\lcrsite de Liige, lnstitut de Mecanique et Genie Ci1i/, Chemin
In !he numerical analyses, a lhrcc-dimcnsional (:ID) beam clc111c111 has been
des Chc\lrc11ifs. I, 4000 Lic\~e /, Rcfgi11111
used. II is based 011 the l'ollowing for11111l11tio11s 1111d hypollll'sl's:
AfiSTRACT: A geo111elrieally and materially non-line;ir finite elemenl program, i.e., a Displaccmcnt lypc clement in a total co-rolalion:ll dcscriplion.
general model, has been used In determine the laleral-lorsional resislance of slecl I-beams
Prismatic element.
under fire conditions, according lo the same material properties of Eurocmle 3, !'art 1-2.
Two yield strengl hs. (1ne cross section, one type of Jo;id and four di fJ'erent t imc exposures to The displacement of the node line is described by !he displacements or Ihe I hrcc
the ISO 834 standard fire have been considered. The numerical results have been compared nodes or the clement, two nodes at each end supporting seven degrees or rrec-
to the resulis of the simple model preseniecl in Euroeode 3, P;irt 1-2. When compared with dom, three lranslalions, three rotations and !he warping ampli1ude. plus one
the ecneral model, I his simple model leads lo a safety level thal depends on the slenderness node al the mid-length supporting one degree of freedom. lhc 11011-lincar p;irl of
of t~e beam, being unsal-e for intermediate non-dimensional slenderness. A new proposal
the longitudinal displacement.
has been made for ;i simple model I hat enwres a conservative result when compared lo lhe
gcneral model.
In pure bending the cross section remains plane and perpendicular lo the longi-
tudinal axis. This hypothesis due lo Bernoulli neglects lhc shear energy.
KEY V1'0RDS: lalcral-lorsion:il buckling, rire, numerical modeling. new proposal, No local buckling is taken into account, which is !he reason why lhc propos:il in
Emocode 3. ISO 834. this paper is valid only for Class I and Class 2 sections 151.
The strains are small (von Karman hypothesis), i.e.,

LTffOUGll TllE PROBLEMof lalcral-lorsional buckling or steel beams at room
A lcmpcralure is well known r 11. the same problem at elevaled lcmperalure is
1101. Among 1hc work done in this field !here is lhc paper rrom Bailey cl al.121 who
2 CJx
where u is the longitudinal displaccmenl and xis lhc longiludinal co-ordinalc.
use a three-dimensional compu(cr model to investigate lhe ullimale behavior of The angles between !he deformed longitudinal axis and lhc unclcrnrmcd bu!
unirormly heated unreslrnincd beams. In this paper, a simple model ror rirc resis- translated longitudinal axis arc small, i.e.,
tance or lalcral-lorsional buckling or steel I-beams is presented. ll is based on !he
numerical results of the S/\rIR program, a gcomelrically and malerially non- sin <p =<p and cos<p =I
1i ne:1r code specially established for lhe :111alysis or slruclurcs suh111illcd lo rirc 111.
where <pis the angle between lhc arc and lhc cord of !he beam rinilc elc111c11l.
The longiluclinal inlcgralions arc numerically calnilalcd using Clauss's 1nelhod.
1 Author lo who111 cnrrespondc1ice o..:hnuld lw ;1ddrcssed. E-111ail: pvn.;d(r1 1 The cross section by 111cansoflriangularorqu:1dril;1teral rihers. At
every longiludinal pninl or inlcgr:ition, all vari;1blcs. such as lcmpcralurc.
112 Jo11mol o( FIHF PROTECTION ENc;1NEFIUN(;, \Inf. 11 - /\for 2001
strain. slrcss. rlt' __ arr u11ifnr111 in rcwh f'ihrr
114 PAllLO M. M. VIL/\ RE/\L /\Nil .11'/\N-M/\RC Fl</\NSSEN N11111erica/ Modcli11g r~( l -<llaal-Torsio11al B11ckli11g rl Stcl'i l-/lc(fl11s 115

I w,,1,y is the plastic section modulus

ky.O,cnm is the reduction factor for the yield strength <it the maximum lempcralure
in the compression fl<inge 8""""" le;ichecl <it time I is the partial safely factor for the fire situation (usually YM.ti = 1)

lv1 < lv1 This equation is used if the non-dimensional slenderness 'A 1," for the tem-
(<7Y IPE 220
. / /
x perature reached al lime t, exceeds the value of 0.4.
The const:int 1.2 is an empirically determined value and is used as a correction
factor which allows for a number of effects.
L ;>I
~ The reduction factor for lateral-torsional buckling in a fire design situation.
Figure 1. Simply supported beam submitted to moments at the ends. Xr.TJi must be determined in the same way as it is al room temperature, hul using
the non-dimensional
slenderness 'A 1_,ro.
(or 'A,.r fi if lhc lcmper;it11rc field in
, '
The tangcnl stiffness matrix is evaluated at each iteration of the convergence() the cross section is uniform) given by
process (pure Ncwlon-Raphson method).
Residual stresses are considered by means of initial and constant strains 17]. ky,0,01111
The material behavior in case of strain unloading is elastic, with the elastic x:IT
... 0 ,conr = X:11, .,(i, ='f._11, (2)
modulus equal lo Young's modulus at the origin of the stress-strain curve. In
one cross section, some fibers that have yielded may therefore exhibit a de- where
creased t<ingcnl moclulus because they are still on the loading branch, whereas,
al lhc same Lime, some other fibers behave cl<istically. The plastic strain is pre-
A. 11 is the no11-di111ensional slenderness al room temperature given by 151 (for
Class 1 or Class 2 cross sections)
sumed not lo be affected by a change in temperature [8].
;\simply supported steel beam has been studied to compare the results between
Eurocode 3, Part 1-2 [6] and the S/\FIR code under fire conditions. The bca111 has (2a)
been submitted lo a uniform moment (see Figure l) and cannot dcnccl laterally or
l wist al lhc supports.
The results of Eurocodc 3 and the SAFIR code were compared for the unpro-
tected beam after 10, 15, 20 and 30 min of exposure to the ISO 834 standard fire: (2b)


Analysis According to Eurocodc 3

The temperature of the beam after the desired time has been obtained using the
simplified equation of Eurocodc 3, Part 1-2f6]. From this temperature (which is where Mer is the elastic critical moment for lateral-torsional buck Ii ng of
uniform in the beam cross section), the buckling resistance moment, M1.,(r,1,Rd the beam. Substituting from Equations (2b) and (2c) in Equation (2a)
al time t has been determined according to (for Class I or Class 2 cross sections):

!111,,p,1.Rrl = -
k 1
- -wpl.y -.e.crmrfr - - (I) ~ _ -w"'>
"'LT- t;. --~1
-. .-
-- (2d)
1. 2 A1cr M,.,.

where: where M1,1 is the plastic moment resistance or lhc gross cross section: is the reduction faclor for l;1lcrnl-torsional buckling in !he fire design sit- k1,.e.rnm is the reduction factor for the slope of the linc;ir clast ic r:111gc al lhc maxi-
1111in11 m11m stcrl lr1111wrat11rr rp;icfwd ;it timr I
11ri PAULO M. M. VILA REAL AND JEAN-MARC Fl{ANSSEN Numerical Modeliflg <~{ Lateral-Torsioflal B11ckli11g <~{ Sreel l-!Jeo111s 117

i\ccorcling lo Equation (2), the factor ~ky,O,rnm I k/i,O,com is !he raclor Iha! lllllili-
M /1,j1,1,Rd
. IM .fi.O,Rd
plies the non-dimensional slenderness at room temperature in order lo yield the
nrn1-cli111e11sional slenderness al elevated temperature 'i..1.T,O,mm. Its variation with 1.2
temperature is represented in Figure 2 and shows a particular reature or the non- 0 20 C
di rnensional slenderness. Il could be expected th al this slenderness would increase 20 "C / 1.2
constantly with the temperature but, according lo !he Eurocode 3 material model, 0.8
this is clearly not the case. 0
0.6 - 0
The full line or Figure 3 shows the design curve for lateral-torsional buckling
:iccorcling lo Eurocode 3. For all temperatures greater than 20C this curve 0.4
is unique and named EC3Ji in !hat figure. On the vertical axis is the ratio

M1,,Ji,1J1r1 0 ---+---~------~-~--~--.------- '~--1--- ---

(1) 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
~elative Slenderness at Failure Temperature Ar.T./i

where Figure 3. Beam design curve of Eurocode 3 for fire situation (EC3Ji) and at room temrera-
ture (20C).
/'v!l>.fi.t.lld is !he design lateral-torsional buckling resistance moment al lime I or a
laterally unrestrained beam given by Equation (I) and
Mri.fl.lld is the design moment resistance of a Class I or 2 cross section with a where YMo = 1.0, YMJi = l .O and M Rd is the plastic resistance or the gross cross sec-
unirorm lemperalure 8"" I! may be determined from: tion M,,t.Rrl for normal lcmperature, which is given by

(4) (5)

where YMo = 1.0.

This figure also shows that Lhe lateral buckling design curve at elevated
P<..~/k~.e- temperature is different from the curve at 20C by the empirical factor 1.2 (!he
1.4 ---------------------------- curve al elevated temperature, EC3,fi, is the curve al 20C divided by 1.2).
Therefore, it must be emphasized that, throughout this paper, the ratio
1.2 MbJi.1,nr11Mfl.O,Rd will be used for the purposes of comparison. It is obtained as the
reduction factor for lateral-torsional buckling in the fire design situation Xr.T.fl di-
vided by 1.2, for the Eurococle 3, Part 1-2 results, i.e.,
0.6 . Xi,T,fl for the Eurocode 3, Par! 1-2 results (6a)
Mji,O,Rd 1.2

0.2 or directly from

0 ~-j-----1-~--1--~---+--~--1
M,\/\FIR , for the Si\FIR results
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 M ji.0,Rd
Temperature [ C] 0

Figure 2. Dependency wit/1 temperature of //le factor. II 11ll1Sl also hr. mentioned !hat !he class or llw ;rn;ilV'/f'ci nns<;-S('('lirn1 w:I'
118 PAULO M. M. VIL/\ REAL /\ND JE/\N-M/\RC FRANSSEN Numerical !vlodeli11g <~( Lateral-Torsio11al lJ11ckli11g of St<'cl l-li<w11s 119

checked for all the analyzed temperatures to see if it remained a Class I cross
section as al room temperature. This was done using the modified v;lluc of c Mb,.fi.t.lid I
given by 101: 1.2. --

c = [(235 I fy )(kr::.o I k_\., 0 ) J- 5 (7) -Ec53 1

1 ->---o~ o SAFIR, Fe 360
o SAFIR, Fe 510
l - ----- -- - -- --
It has been concluded thal, in this case, the class of the cross section doesn't 0.8.
change with temperature.
0.6. D
Analysis with the SAFIR Code
An unprotected !PE 220 section is supposed to be healed 011 4 sides by the ISO
834 time temperature curve. The evolution of the lemperalure field is obtained us- N.1 fl n
ing a finite ele111ent analysis. So the temperature field is not uniform like the one
obtained with the simplified equation of Eurococle 3.
For the temperature fields reached al time t = 10, 15, 20 and 30 min, the moment 0 ---.-------.,--~ --~-~

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

was applied with step increments of 100 Nm.
Relative Slenderness at Failure Temperature "-t.r./i
The numerical simulations were carried out under lhe following assu111ptions:
Figure 5. Beam design curve after 10 minutes. Comparison between the Eurocode 3 and
Beam lateral imperfection: sinusoidal, with a maximum value of L/1000 SAFIR, for Fe 360 and Fe 510 steel.
[9-11 ].
Longitudinal integration: two Gauss points.
The warping function is assu111cd not lo be affected by temperatures but the tor-
M,,,fi.t,Rd I A1fi,O.lld
sional sliff ness is adapted, according lo the variation of the steel properties, with
1.2 .. -- -------- ---
Residual stresses: constant across the thickness of the web and of the flanges. -EC3 1
Triangular distribution as in Figure 4, with a maximum value of 0.3 x 235 MPa 6 0 .SAFIR, Fe 360
o SAFIR, Fe 510
[ 12], for the Fe 360 steel as well as for the Fe 5 10 steel. l
The beam design curves for all the time instants studied arc shown in Fig-
ures 5-8 for the Fe 360 and Fe 510 steel. In these figures, M li.Ji.t.lld is the design lat-
eral-lnrsional buckling resistance moment at lime I of a laterally unrestrained 0.6

f'---~ 0.3
I o.3


\ 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2

Relative Slenderness at Failure Temperature
1.4 1.6 1.8
"-1.r. /i

Figure 6. Beam design curve after 15 minutes. Comparison between the Eurocode 3 and
SAFIR, for Fe 360 and Fe 510 steel.
N11111rricnl ModelinR rf Lateral-Torsional B11ckfi11g rf Stcd f-l/cm111 121
beam given by Equal ion (I) or calculaled by lhc SJ\FIR code and Ille design 1110-
ment resistance Mfi.O.Rd of a Class I or 2 cross seclion is given by Equal ion (4) eval-
1H,.. /i.JJld I'"' (i.O.Rd
uated for the tcmperalmes obtained wilh the simpliried equal ion or Eurocode 3,
------ ' .. 1
i.e., 554C. 680C, 733C and 827C for the limes of I 0, 15, 20 and :m min respec-

-- EC3
tively. The relative slenderness was calculated al f'ailurc lcmperalure ;icconling lo
SAFIR, Fe 360
o SAFIR, Fe 510 Equation (2).
0 ------ - - ------
Figure 9 shows lhe beam design curve obtained wilh lhc SJ\FIR resulls ror
0.8 the times of I 0, 15, 20 and 30 min, all plotted al lhe same chart for the re 360
0 and Fe 5 I 0 steel. These curves arc not coincidcnl as in lhc case of lhc Eurncodc 3
0.6 curve al. elevated temperatures (sec, for instance, curve in rigurc 3, or cmve

EC3 in Figures 5 lo 8) .
OA From Figures 5 to 9, it can be seen that the numerical values arc higher on the
vertical axis for Fe 510 lhan they are for Fe 360. J\s staled in Rcf'crcnce [ 11 I, "This
is due to the fact that the residual stresses do not depend on lhc yield slrcnglh. Their
rel<ilivc inrlucncc is lhcrcfore smaller when the yield slrcnglh is increased. This
phenomena is not accounted for in the simplified model of Eurocode 3, where lhc
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 buckling curve does not vary with lhe yield slrenglh." In facl, lhc red11c1inn
0 0.2
Relative Slenderness at Failure Temperature factor for lateral-torsional buckling, Xu, depends on Ilic yield slrcnglh as well as
the non-dimensional slenderness, "A1.r. but the laleral-torsional buckling curves
Figure 7. Beam design curve after 20 minutes. Comparison between the Eurocode 3 and
from Eurocodc 3 do not depend on the yield strength as can be seen in Figure 12.
SAFIR, for Fe 360 and Fe 510 steel.
The reason why, in Figures 5, 6 and 9, lhe ratio Ms11 ,..11,./Mfi.O.lid ror low values of

111,,,.fi,1,Rd I Mfi,O,Rd M h,Ji.1,Rd I l'vfp.0.1u

=Ec3 . 1 o S/\FIR after 10 rninules
SAFIR, Fe 360
ll L lo SAFIR, Fe 510
----------- --
o SAFIR '1fter 15 minules
SAFIR after 20 minutes
0.8 SAFIR after JO minutes
0 0.8






0.20 I
- - - - - - . - - - - - , - - - 1--
-- ------,....-------.----r----,--------r-------
0.8 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.'8 2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.6 1.8 2
Relative Slenderness at Failure Temperature Al.T,(i
Relative Slenderness at Failure Temperature
Figure 8. Beam design curve after 30 minutes. Comparison between the Eurocode 3 and
Figure 9a. Beam design cwve obtained with Eurocode 3 and SAFIR, for Fe 360 (after 10, 15,
SAFIR, for Fe 360 and Fe 510 steel. 20 and 30 minutes).
PA\11.0 M. M. VILA REAL AND .l"/\N-M1\RC Fl\ANSSF.N N11//lerical M11dcli11g r~f' Lalcral-T11rsio110/ B11ckli11g 1f St<'f'i /-/1111111.1 12.1

;\ f 1., ti.1. 1M I M 1;. o. 11,i

Xu .Ji = c,_ ....:: --- - "
1.2 2
EC3 <P1.r.o.10111 + \(lclJ1:r.o .....,,, I -IA1.r.o,,,,,11 I
" SAFIR after 10 minutes
13' o SAFIR after 15 minutes
'o. :~-i_ o SAFIR after 20 minutes
, SAFIR aflcr 30 minutes 2.
<P1:r.o.,0111 = Ir I+ a'A1:r.o.,.,,,,,
- -
+ (A1:r.o.,.,,, 11 t
'] ( I())
and, as in Equation (2)

0.4 ky.O.ro111
5;:/'/' 0 = 5;:/'/'
A 11
. o'f,
, . '"''" '

0 'X 1:r is the non-dimensional slenderness al roo111 le111pcr:1ltm. and wilh ct -- !Ir
0.6 0.8 1.2 1.4 1.6 UJ 2
0 0.2 0.4 the imperfection factor
Relative Slenderness at Failure Temper<> lure A1T./i [3 is the severity l'aetor, lo he chosen i11 onln lo \'l1smc lhl' :q1prop1 i:1lt
Figure 9b. Beam design curve obtained with Eurocode 3 and SAFIR, for Fe 510 (after I 0, 15, safely level
and F = ~235/ J;., with/,. in MPa as the yield strrngth
20 and 30 minutes).

Comparing Equal inns (I) and (8), we can vcri l'y 1h:11. wilh this new propos:il. we
the slenderness and for times or I 0 and IS min. is greater th;111 I. is that the lc111pcr- do not use the empirical constant 1.2 which is used as a l'OITel'I ion f;1clor in the pro-
aturc field obtained with SAFIR is not uniform. with temperatures in the flanges posal of the Eurococlc '.\.
lower than the uniform temperature given by the simplil'icd equation of the Equations (9) and (I 0) arc in fact exactly the same as those dcl'incd al roo111 lcm-
Eurococle 3 used lo calculnle M 1;,o,1i<1 bcc:rnse the flnngcs arc thicker than Ihe wch. pcralure in Eurocodc 3, Part 1-1 151, except lhal the threshold li111il oro.20 l'or 'A.I/
The unil'onn tcmpcr:1ture after 10 min calcnlalcd with the Eurocodc 3 is 554"C, docs nol appear in Equation (I 0). The fncl th;1t thc threshold limit docs not ap11car
which is higher than the lcmpernlure in the flanges calculated with S;\Flff For changes the shape of the buckling curve. It differs from that al room temperature.
!on!2,cr durations. this effect tends lo disappear because the tcmpcralurc field he- The new curve starts al Xi:r = 1.0 for X1:r = 0.0 hut it decreases even for very
con;cs more and more uniform. Aflcr 30 min, the uniform temperature field oh- low slenderness, instead of having ;i horizont:1l plateau up In X, 1 == 0.'1 (sec
t:1ined with the simplified equal ion of the Eurncodc 3 is 827C. The maximum Figures I 0 and l I).
1c111pc1:1lurc difference :ilkr .10 111i11, for the S;\FIR results. is only I J .l)'T while, The lnleral-lorsional buckling curve now varies with the yield slrcnglh due lo
alkr 10 min. it is .'i5.9"C. the parameter E which appears in the impcrl'cetion L1l'lor, Cl, of Eq11alio11 (I 0) II
must be c111ph;1sizcd lhal lhc corresponding factor of the E11rococlc .1 is co11s1a111
NE\V PROPOSAL and lakes the value of 0.21 for hot-rolled profiles. leading lo the sa111c buckling
curve for all steel grades. As can he seen in Figmc 12. with Ihis 11cw propos:11. the
;\clop! ing the same proposal as Franssen cl al. 111 ]. our approach lo a new pro- beam design curve for lateral-torsional buckling now depends 011 the slccl grade
posal is given below. The later:il-lorsional buckling resistance rnomrnl is whereas the prnposnl of the Eurncode 3 docs not. This clcpcndcnce of the !:11cr:il
buckling curve with the steel grade can he numerically supported with the rcs11lts
nlrcady shown in i'igures I 0 ;incl I I.
When comparing this simple model with experimental results for the f'irL
resistance or axially-lo;1dcd lllC'lllhers I 1.11. Frnnssen C'I al. clctcr111i1wcl ;t S\'Vl'I'
ity f:1ctor with a val11C' nl' 0.65. It must hC' 111cntio11cd that tk v:il11c of 0.<15 l'or
124 PAllLO M. M. VILA REAL AND Jl'AN-M1\RC FRANSSEN N11111eric11f Modeling o( Lalcrnl-Torsio1111f IJ11ckli11g of' Steel l-flc11111.1 125

Mh.Ji,1,t?tl I !,O,Rtf
l\11>,fi,t,Rd IM ji,O,/id 1.2 --
1.2 ~---------------------------

-D - Nr.w Proros~I - Fe JGO
a SAFIR after 10 minutes
o SAFIR after 15 minutes
SAFIR after 20 minutes O.fl
l--o-Ncw Proposcil - Fe :i10

0.8 . ;_ SAFIR after 30 minutes

0.4 .. '

0 - ---
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.4 16 1.B 2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.4 Relative Slenderness at Failure Temperature

Relative Slenderness at Failure Temperature

1.6 1.8 2
Au. r1
Figure 12. Beam design curves at elevated temperature obtained with the proposal of tl1e
Figure 10. Beam design curve o/Jtained with Eurocode 3, SAFIR (after 10, 15, 20 and 30 min- Eurocode 3 and with the new proposal with p = 0.65.
utes) and with the new proposal, with p = 0.65 (Fe 360 steel).
the severity factor is the adopted value in lhe Belgian and French Nalio1rnl
Application Documents of Eurocode 3, Part 1-2 I I <I, 1'i I.
Mb,ji,r,Rl /Mfi,O,Rl The same value has been used in Figure I 0 rm
Fe 360 steel and in Figure I I !"or
1.2 Fe 510 steel and it can be seen that the proposal safely covers the 11111nerical resulls.
a SAFIR after 10 minutes
SAFIR after 15 minutes
o SAFIR after 20 minutes
0.8. SAFIR after 30 minutes The physical fact that Young's modulus decreases fosler limn the yield strength
-Beta=0.65 when the temperature increases, plus the ract that the stress-strain relationship al
elevated temperatures is not the same as at roo111 lemperature. produces a modifi-
cation of the lateral-torsional buckling curve al elevaled temperatures. The hori-
zontal plateau valid al 20C up lo a non-dimensional slenderness ol"0.4. vani.~hcs
al elevated temperatures [ 111. The simple models based on lhe l;11eral lorsirn1al
buckling curve that is valid at room temperature led lo a safety level thal depends
0.2 on the slenderness of the beam, the results being uns;ife for inlermediale lenglh
beams. It hns been possible to make a new proposal of a lateral-lnrsional buckling
curve for hot-rolled I-section beams submitted lo fire, based on the proposal sug-
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 gested earlier [ 111 for axially-loaded hot-rolled I I-sections submitted lo fire. The
Rolatlvo Slondornoss at Failure Tomporature x l.T,fi beam design curve based on the red11clio11 ractor for lateral-torsional buckling in
Figure 11. Beam design curve obtained with Eurocode 3, SAFIR (after 10, 15, 20and 30 min- fire design situation and the non-dimensional slenderness evaluated al !he ult i nwll'
utes) and with the new proposal, with [l = 0.65 (Fe 510 steel). temperature now depends on the slecl grnde. which is not the case in E11rocodc 1.
Parl 1-2.
12(1 1'1\llLO M. M. Vil./\ REAL i\NIJ .IEi\N-M1\R(' l'l(i\NSSEN N11111eriral Modeling <f [,afem/-Torsional /Jirckling o( S!<'l'i f-lln1111s 127

It has been found lhal the same severity f'aclor as lhc one used for the case Greek
of' axially-loaded columns, i.e., ~ = 0.65 113] could also he used here. This
leads to the same rhilosophy as the one of Eurocodc 3. i.e., lo use the same a imrcrfcction factor
rormulas for the reduction factor ror lateral-torsional buckling and for flexural ~ severity factor
buckling. AMO partial safety faclor (usually AAfo = 1.0)
The severity factor~ or the proroscd simple calculation model has been cslab- ~fJi partial saf'ety factor for the fire silual ion (usually AM.ti= 1.0)
lished analyzing only the behavior of !he IPE 220 pro rile. Further analysis or the '?::.1.T non-dimensional slenderness at room temperature .
numerical results should be done considering different steel I-sections. A1.r.O,rn111 non-dimensional slenderness for the maxin111111 temper:1lu1-e 111 the
It would also he worth having rcsulls of well instrumented and c:1rcl"ully compression llangc e<l,l"0/11
carried out experimental tests lo verify whether the present proposal can actu- 'Al.'f,Ji non-dimensional slenderness in !he rire design situation
ally rcrroducc the tcsl results and lo fix def'initely the value of !he severity Xl.TJi reduction factor for lateral-torsional buckling in the rirc design silua-
factor. As there is a low probability f'or the lwo structural impcrfcclions, resid- tion
ual stresses and initial imrerfcclion, being simultaneously in a test with the
high amplitude assumed here in the numerical simulations, this could lead to
the fact !hat the final adopted severity factor will be less severe than the one REFERENCES
proposed in this parer.
I. Eurocmlc :l, Design or Slee.I Slrnclures, l'arl I. G<ncral Rules and Rules for lluildi111'.'. ll:wl-
ground Doc11111cnlalion. Cap. 5 Documcnl 5.0J, l~vol111i1111 orT1s1Resnlls011 lk:un' \\'ilh ( ""'
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Seclional Classes 1--J in Order lo Ohl a in Slrcnglh Fune Iions and Suilahlc Mod,l l'aclors. ( kloh11
2. IJailcy, C.G., Burgess. l.W. and l'l:mk. R..I., "The l.a1cral-Torsio11al Buckling or l1111n11:1i11cd
This work was carried oul al the University of Liege, Belgium during !he sab- Slee! Beams in Fire," Journal Conslrucl. Slccl Research. Vol. }(1. 199(1. pp. 101-119.
hatical rcriod of lhe first author who wishes to thank the lnslilulc of Civil :l. Franssen. Jean-Marc. PROGRAM SAFIR, Ver. I .:I. Uscrs Manual, I lniversilc de I .icgc. l11sti1u1
Engineering, Service Ponls cl Charpenlcs, of lhc University of Liege for this du Genie Civil. Service Ponls cl Charpcntcs, Dccc111lwr I <JW1.
orportunity and the FCT-the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technol- 4. Vila Real, I'. M.M. and Franssen. J.-M .. "Lateral Buckling or Slccl I lk:u11s al Roo111 Te111pcra-
lure--Co111parison helween the Eurocmle 3 and the SAFIR Code Considering or Nol !he Residual
ogy for their surport. Slresscs." lnlernal Report No. 99/() I. ln.slillllc or Civil l'.nginccring. Service l'onls cl ('harpenlcs.
University or Liege. January I ')99.
5. Eurocodc :I, Design nfSlccl Slruclurcs, l'arl 1-1. <:cnnal I<11ies and Rules for lluildi11p. ll1al1
NOMENCLATURE ENV I993-1-1, Commission of lhe European Cn1nn11111i1il's, llrnssels. llelgi11111. I'J'l2.
6. Eurncode 3, Design of Steel Structures, Part 1-2. General Rules and Rules for i111ildi11gs. S1111c-
f~- yield strength lural Fire Design, Draft ENV 1993-1-2. Commission or Ilic European Co1111111111i1ies. llr11sscls.
reduction factor for the yield strength al the maximum temperature in Belgium. 1995.
7. Franssen. J.M., "Modelling nf lhc Hcsid11al Slrcsscs lnflt1cnLT in lhe lh-havi1111r 111 11111 l~nlled
the compression lfonge 0 0 1.,,111 , re;1ched al time I
l'rorilcs under Fire ('ondilions" (in French), Co11slrnclin11 M\'1:illiq1u. Vnl. 1. l'IX'l. l'I' \') -1.'
reduction l'aclm ror the slope or the linear el;1slic rnnge :ti the 111:1xi- 8. Franssen, .J.M., "The Unloading or Building Malcrials S11l1111i11ed In Fire," !'ire Sail-ly .l1H111i:d.
mu111 slecl Lcmrcralurc in the com pres ion rl;111gc 80 _. 0111 reached al lime I Vol. 16, 1990, pp. 21:1-227.
1\1h.{i.r.lld buckling resistance moment in the f'irc design silualion 9. Talamona, IJ., f'rnnsscn, J.M., Schleich . .I.fl .. Kruppa. J .. "S1ahilily nf' Slecl C11l11m11s in (a"'
design momenl resistance of a Class I or 2 cross scclion with a uni- of rirc: Numerical i\fodclling," Journal or Slrnclural F11gi11eering, Vnl. 12.1. N11. <i .l11n. 1'l'l7.
pp. 713-720.
form temreralure e" 10. Franssen, .1.-M .. "Numerical Modelling oflhe Slructurcs llchavirnir under Fire Co11di1i1111S: (in
buckling resistance moment in the lire design situation given by French). Thesis s11hmi11cd lo ohlain lhe degree "Agrcgc de l'l~nseignemcnl Sup<'ric111" l')'J7.
SA FIR 11. Franssen, J.-lvl.. Schleich, .1.-13. and Cajol. L.-G .. "A Simple Model f'nr f'irc Resislancc 111' i\x,
rlasl ic moment resistance of the gross cross sect ion. M 1,1_11t1 for normal Ml'n1hcrs According lo Eurncndc :l," .lo11mal Conslrucl. Siccl Research. Vol. Yi.
1995, pp. 49-69.
lemrcrat ure
12. ECCS--F.uropc:111 Convention for Cnnslrnclional S1ccl\\'11rk. Tcdmi,al \11111111illcc X -Slr11c-
l i lllC lt1ral Stabilily. Technical Working Group 8.2--Syslcm. "lfl1i111:11c l.i111i1 Slale Cakulalion or
plastic section modulus Sway f'rnmcs wilh Rigid Joints." Firsl Edi lion. 1984.
Pi\ULO M . M . VII .I\ l~F/\I
. /\Nil
. -11- I I -B . Cajnl L.-G. and . . W .. "/\ .Silllplc Model.. ror Fire
I \ zpiam. . I Rcsis-
C nil -
I."\. Franssen . .1.-M .. Sc 1 Cl< 1... . , .. 11 F cri111c11lal Rcsulls . .lnu111.1
. . r /\ .. l\y-1 oadcd Mc111hcrs-Cn111pa1 ISOll WI 1 ,xp
\,1nccn x"' ., '.. \I 0 117 199 6.pp.17.'i-204. . . .
slnicl. Slee\ Rcsc;uch. G I Rules ind Rules ror ll111ld1ngs. Slruc-
. r Si I Sln1clurcs l"1rl I- 2 Cl\CI 1 ' 8
14. h1rncodc 3, Design cc _ . ' N .,, Ari1 Jicilinn Doc11111cnl), .July llJ9
__ . D/\N n I 'C (Be 1g1a11 a11011. . . ..
1ural \'Ire Design. cg G .. IR lcs ind Rules ror Build111gs. S1111c-
Eurncodc 3, Design or S1ccl Slruclures, Pan I- 2 , ,~11e1.1 u .
I .'i. lural Fire Design, French Nalional /\ppl1cal1011 11ocu111cnl.

TECHNOMIC'S web sile is your so1m 1 for <11nssihl1 i111"or111.1lirn1

on <ill ;ispecls of our publishing progr.1111, f1;illlli11g:

g Search by H. Order Online

Aulhor -- Ilooks
ISBN Journ;d~
Suhjccl ;ind Keyword -- ViclP11s
UsinT Our Online - Soflvv;m
J<1se Srnrd1 E11gi1H

g H Sign Up for
Our Secure Encrypled
Order Area
SPminars 011li1w
Prolecls Your lnfmm;il ion
,111d Keeps II ConfidC'11li;1I

http://www. tech