The document discusses thermal analysis of reinforced concrete cross sections under fire exposure. It compares temperature fields calculated using the new Frilo TA application, which uses finite element analysis, to the temperature profiles provided in Annex A of EN 1992-1-2, which are based on simplifying assumptions. The TA application provides more accurate temperature results for cross sections of varying size and reinforcement details. For standard cross section dimensions, the differences between the two methods are small, but larger deviations occur for smaller or larger cross sections. The TA application also allows varying other parameters like material properties or boundary conditions, while Annex A uses standardized default values.
The document discusses thermal analysis of reinforced concrete cross sections under fire exposure. It compares temperature fields calculated using the new Frilo TA application, which uses finite element analysis, to the temperature profiles provided in Annex A of EN 1992-1-2, which are based on simplifying assumptions. The TA application provides more accurate temperature results for cross sections of varying size and reinforcement details. For standard cross section dimensions, the differences between the two methods are small, but larger deviations occur for smaller or larger cross sections. The TA application also allows varying other parameters like material properties or boundary conditions, while Annex A uses standardized default values.
The document discusses thermal analysis of reinforced concrete cross sections under fire exposure. It compares temperature fields calculated using the new Frilo TA application, which uses finite element analysis, to the temperature profiles provided in Annex A of EN 1992-1-2, which are based on simplifying assumptions. The TA application provides more accurate temperature results for cross sections of varying size and reinforcement details. For standard cross section dimensions, the differences between the two methods are small, but larger deviations occur for smaller or larger cross sections. The TA application also allows varying other parameters like material properties or boundary conditions, while Annex A uses standardized default values.
The document discusses thermal analysis of reinforced concrete cross sections under fire exposure. It compares temperature fields calculated using the new Frilo TA application, which uses finite element analysis, to the temperature profiles provided in Annex A of EN 1992-1-2, which are based on simplifying assumptions. The TA application provides more accurate temperature results for cross sections of varying size and reinforcement details. For standard cross section dimensions, the differences between the two methods are small, but larger deviations occur for smaller or larger cross sections. The TA application also allows varying other parameters like material properties or boundary conditions, while Annex A uses standardized default values.
TA - the new Frilo application for temperature analyses of
rectangular and circular cross sections The TA application is used for the calculation of temperature fields in rectangular and circular concrete cross sections under fire exposure. The fire load is taken into account via the standard temperature-time curve as per DIN EN 1991-1-1-:2010-12. In terms of mathematics, the transient heat conduction in a solid body is described with a partial differential equation of second order. Since material properties such as heat conductivity, bulk density and specific thermal capacity depend on temperature themselves, the solution is obtained numerically with the help of the Finite Element Method. Reinforcement is disregarded in temperature analyses of reinforced concrete cross sections, because the influ- ence of the reinforcement steel is negligibly low (compare /3/4.3.2 (4)). At the borders, thermal radiation and convection must be taken into account in addition.
Essential input parameters are:
Component moisture 1-3% Bulk density of the concrete [T = 20° C] = 2200 - 2500 kg/m³ Heat transfer coefficient c = 25 W/(m²∙K) for the exposed side as per /3/ 3.2.1 (2) c = 4…9 W/(m²∙K) for the unexposed side as per /5/ Emission value of the component surface concrete: m = 0.7 as per /1/ 2.2 (2) Thermal conductivity concrete: between upper and lower limit
Friedrich + Lochner GmbH June/2011 1
Thermal Analysis
Comparison between the accurate temperature analysis and the temperature assessment on the basis of temperature profiles as per DIN EN Annex A
Until recently, the temperature profiles stated by DIN EN 1992-1-2 Annex A were used in fire safety analyses. The profiles were based on the following border conditions:
Flame exposure on four sides in accordance with the standard temperature-time curve Specific heat = 0.7 Component moisture 1.5 % Thermal conductivity with its lower limit Convective heat transfer coefficient c = 25 W/(m²∙K) Circular cross section, d = 300 mm and square cross section, h = 300 mm Fire resistances R30, R60, R90 and R120
These relatively inflexible assumptions required a typical design solution by approximation with other cross section sizes. The calculation was based on the assumption that the spacing of the temperature ISO-lines to the border in good approximation can also be used with larger or smaller cross sections. Therefore, the tempera- tures are slightly higher with larger cross sections (h > 30 cm), i.e. they are on the safe side. With smaller cross sections (h < 30 cm), the temperatures are slightly too low. The deviations become greater with increasing fire resistance.
The thermal analysis feature of the TA application assesses temperature fields accurately for any cross section dimensions and border conditions. The comparison below shows the difference in temperature between the approximation and the more accu- rate method whereby the other border conditions remain unchanged. The temperatures in the corner bars are considered. The required reinforcement was calculated with the reinforced concrete column application B5 and the B5 hot design add-on module.
Standard cross section 30 cm
First, the results for a circular cross section with a diameter of 30 cm (C30) and a square with a side length of 30 cm (S30) are compared to each other. The dimensions are the default ones specified by Annex A. The temperature in the reinforcement of the circular section and that in the corner bars with a spacing d1= 3 cm in the rectangular cross section are compared to each other.
Cantilever column l = 3 m Approximation Frilo TA application
Reinforcement spacing d1= 3 cm as per Annex A Grid 1 cm Grid 2 cm NEd T req. As T req. As T req. As Cross section Fire resistance [kN] [°C] [cm²] [°C] [cm²] [°C] [cm²] R60 300 470 19.3 452 18.0 462 18.5 C30 R120 100 680 20.6 668 18.3 R60 300 612 22.9 610 22.7 S30 R90 100 744 15.1 741 14.8 743 14.8 R120 100 828 24.5 828 24.5
Friedrich + Lochner GmbH June/2011 2
Thermal Analysis
The result of the thermal analysis depends also on the selected grid. The results match best with the tempera- ture profiles as per Annex A if a coarser grid is used.
Smaller cross sections
Cantilever column l = 3m Approximation Frilo TA application
Reinforcement spacing d1= 3 cm as per Annex A Grid 1 cm Cross Fire NEd T req. As T req. As section resis- [kN] [°C] [cm²] [°C] [cm²] C20 R60 100 470 15.2 500 16.2 S20 R60 100 612 18.5 611 18.5
With cross sections differing from the original dimensions, the deviations vary more or less as expected. With smaller cross sections, the temperatures assessed in accordance with Annex A tend to be slightly too low due to the overestimated thermal capacity.
In the example, the temperatures on the squared cross section are identical for both methods whereas those on the circular cross section differ considerably by approximately 60 °C.
Larger cross sections
Cantilever column l = 6m Approximation TA application
Reinforcement spacing d1= 5 cm as per Annex A Grid 1 cm NEd Reinforcement T req. As T req. As Cross section Fire resistance [kN] location [°C] [cm²] [°C] [cm²] C60 R120 800 500 42.2 431 33.1 Corner 615 55.8 614 52.3 S60 R120 1000 Middle 424 387
1000 Corner 615 51.7 615 49.6
R40X80 R120 (H=50) Middle 424 394
Due to the approach by approximation, the thermal capacity of larger cross sections is underestimated and the temperatures are slightly too high. On the S60 squared cross section, the differences are relatively low and range from 6 to 16 °C. The differences in the corner reinforcements (item E) are the lowest. They increase in the middle bar (item M) and in the interior of the cross section (item I). On the C60 circular cross section, however, considerable deviations from 40 °C can be observed.
The examples show that the TA application produces more economic results in some cases and prevents uncertain results in others.
Friedrich + Lochner GmbH June/2011 3
Thermal Analysis
Temperature profiles with border conditions as per DIN EN 1992-1-2/NA: 2010-12
Germany's National Annex specifies other values than the border conditions stipulated for the temperature profiles in Annex A of the General Eurocode. According to 3.3.3 (1), the upper limit of the thermal conductivity should be assumed.
The component humidity and the bulk density are not specified as such but the assumption of k = 3 % and = 2400 kg/m for the assessment of the design diagrams with the simplified method as per Annex A can be 3
interpreted as a kind of recommendation for a practice-oriented approach.
First, the influence of the parameters is examined individually for each parameter on the S30 cross section with R90 fire resistance. In the examination, the temperatures in the corner bar (point 1 (X1 = 12 cm, Y1 = 12 cm)) and the inner cross section (point 2 (X2 = 7.5 cm / Y2 = 7.5 cm)) are considered. The coordinates refer to the centre of the column.
Component Density Conductiv- Temperature Difference to Annex A
moisture 3 [kg/m ] ity 0 [ C] [%] Point 1 Point 2 Point 1 Point 2 Annex A 1.5 2300 l 741 308 3 2300 l 734 290 -7 -18 1.5 2400 l 732 297 -9 -11 1.5 2300 u 760 365 +19 +47
The examination reveals that higher component moisture produces lower temperatures and so does higher bulk density, whereas a higher limit of thermal conductivity produces higher temperatures.
Fire resis- Compo- Density Conductiv- Temperature Difference to Annex A
ity 3 tance nent mois- [kg/m ] 0 [ C] R90 ture [%] Point 1 Point 2 Point 1 Point 2 Annex A 1.5 2300 l 741 308 NA Ger 3 2400 u 746 337 +5 +30
When you compare the parameter sets of Annex A and Germany's NA, the following can be observed: In the corner bar, the temperature increases only slightly by approximately 5 °C whereas, in the inner concrete cross section, it increases considerably by 30 °C.
The next step is to combine the influencing parameters in such a manner that a minimum and maximum steel temperature results for the corner bar. For a simple cantilever column, the effects on the hot design are dem- onstrated.
Friedrich + Lochner GmbH June/2011 4
Thermal Analysis
G = 132 kN CC 30/37 30/37BSt 500 BStS(A) 500 S(A) Phi= 2.46 Phi = 2.46 Bewehrung in den Ecken Reinforcement in the corners
z 3.00
3.0
y 3.0
30
30 Ric_y
Component Density Conductivity Temperature Difference to req. As
The maximum temperature specified in the table above corresponds also to the most unfavourable value stated in the German NA, unless the most favourable assumption of a high component moisture and a high density is considered to be justified as in the validation example CC 4.10 (in German) , for instance. The minimum temperature can result in combination with other National Annexes (see the following page, e.g. Austria), if applicable, and if a favourable bulk density (high) and component moisture (high) are assumed. The resulting temperature values vary considerably which also affects the design results of course.
Temperature variations of such order can have considerable effects on the fire safety verifications. There- fore, the input parameters for the thermal analysis should be selected with utmost care.
Friedrich + Lochner GmbH June/2011 5
Thermal Analysis
Comparison of temperature profiles with the border conditions of various National Annexes Compo- Density Conductivity Default in Tempera- nent as per NA TA application ture 3 moisture [kg/m ] 0 [ C] [%] Austria 1.5 2300 Standard l l 741 High strength u u 760 UK 1.5 2300 Standard l l 741 High strength u u 760 Netherlands 1.5 2300 Lime aggregate l l 741 Gravel aggregate u u 760 Belgium 1.5 2300 Lime aggregate l l 741 Gravel aggregate m u 760 *1 Lightweight concrete l 741 *2 n Czech Republic 1.5 2300 l … u l 741 *3 Germany 3 2400 u u 746
*1 According to the Belgian NA, a conductivity value m between the upper and the lower limit applies with gravel aggregate. When using the upper limit, the results are on the safe side. *2 According to the Belgian NA, a conductivity value n below the lower limit applies with lightweight ag- gregate. When using the lower limit, the results are on the safe side. *3 According to the Czech NA, the conductivity value is freely selectable within the limits of l and u. The default value is l in accordance with the assumptions of Annex A.
Since specifications concerning the component moisture and the bulk density are not given with the exception of the German NA (see above), the assumptions forming the basis of the temperature profiles of Annex A are used .
Currently, a thermal conductivity beyond the limits l and u cannot be taken into account.
For reasons of comparison, the table above indicates the steel temperatures with the default settings of the application for the example S30/R90.
Friedrich + Lochner GmbH June/2011 6
Thermal Analysis
Application of TA in combination with other FRILO software
Fire safety analyses in accordance with DIN EN 1992-1-2/NA cannot be based on the temperature profiles of Annex A any longer. Since Germany's NA was introduced in the beginning of 2011 and the hot design is per- formed in accordance with the Eurocode in particular cases, the regulations of the NA apply also to the hot design.
The new FRILO TA application allows the temperature assessment for rectangular and circular cross sections with any dimensions typical for reinforced concrete in accordance with Germany's NA and other National An- nexes to the Eurocode.
Temperature analysis TA is available as optional add-on feature and currently implemented with the following applications:
B5 - fire safety analysis of columns in accordance with the general method
Friedrich + Lochner GmbH June/2011 7
Thermal Analysis
B2 - cross section design and stiffness assessment in the accidental design situation fire
Due to the great impact the assumptions have on the resulting temperature, the editing of the default thermal parameters in B2 requires the explicit confirmation of the experienced user.
Preview In addition to flame exposure on four sides, future versions will provide options for exposure on one, two or three sides in the fire safety analysis of columns. In principle, you can optionally take fire curves other than the standard temperature-time curve and natural fire models as per EN 1991-1-1 into account. Currently, the application of natural fire models is only allowed in exceptional cases after coordination with the construction supervision authorities. We will see whether demand will arise in this respect.
Reference literature /1/ DIN EN 1992-1-2:2010-12 /2/ D. Hosser, Grundlagen und Hintergründe der Heißbemessung, in: Tagungsband der Gemeinschaftstagung „Eurocode 2 für Deutschland“ /3/ DIN EN 02/01/1991:2010-12
