1

Membrane Action of Composite Floor Slabs in Fire Condition

Guo-Qiang Li * Nasi Zhang **

*
Tongji University, China
**
State University of New York at Buffalo

Abstract
A new method to predict the membrane action for simply supported steel-concrete composite floor slab is presented in
this paper. In the analysis model, the slab is divided into one elliptical paraboloid reinforcement tensile mesh in the
center and four concrete rigid plates at the boundary of the slab which will form a compressive concrete ring to
provided anchorage for the reinforcement. According to force and bending moment equilibrium equation, the load
capacity offered by membrane action is obtained.
4 full-scale composite floor slab test are performed at Tongji University, for the purpose to observe the membrane
action and to verify the validity of the new method. Comparison of the tests’ result and the prediction by the method
proposed is presented and analyzed.
Keywords: Composite floor slab, fire-resistance, membrane action, analysis method, full-scale test

1. Introduction presented. In order to observe the phenomena of

Tests’ results and real fire disasters show that the load
bearing capacity of composite floor slab without
protecting the deck and secondary beams in fire
condition is much higher than that predicted by using
traditional yield line method (bending method) without
considering membrane action.
From 1995 to 1996, six localized fire tests were
performed in a full-scale, eight-storey, steel frame
building at Building Research Establishment Laboratory
at Cardington. The tests showed that the composite floor
slabs can maintained their load bearing capacity,
although the temperature of the unprotected beam was
higher than 1000 ℃because of membrane action
(Huang, 2003).
Since 1990s, many researchers including C.G. Bailey,
A.S. Usmani and Guo-qiang Li conducted studies on
membrane action. Bailey developed a method to predict
the membrane bearing capacity based on yield line
method (Bailey, 2000, 2001, 2004). Usmani analyzed the
membrane action by solving the equilibrium equation
and compatibility equation for isotropic flat slab (Usmani,
2001, 2004). Li presented a simplified model to estimate
the load bearing capacity of composite floor slab in fire
condition with considering membrane action (Li, 2007).
In this paper, a new method to estimate the membrane
action developed by Guo-Qiang Li and Na-Si Zhang is
membrane action and to verify the validity of the new
method, 4 full-scaled slab tests were performed in ISO-
834 standard fire at Tongji University under the
sponsoring from National Natural Science Foundation of
China.
2. Theoretical analysis
2.1. Development of membrane action in floor slab
When the composite slab is exposed to fire, the strength
and stiffness of the steel and concrete will continuously
decrease with the temperature elevation. In consequence,
the load capacity provided by bending mechanism will
not be enough to carry the applied load, and will be
displaced by membrane action.
Fig.1 shows the development of membrane action (Li,
2007): 1) at the beginning of the fire, when the
temperature is not very high, the load on the slab is
almost carried by the bending mechanism; 2) as the
temperature becomes higher, the yield lines will be form
due to the decrease of the strength and stiffness of the
steel and concrete (Fig.1(a)-(b)); 3) with further increase
of the temperature, the yield lines will be completely
developed, the load capacity offered by the bending
mechanism will not be enough, and then the membrane
action will take place to bear the applied load(Fig.1(c)-
 2

(e)); 4) finally, most of the load will be carried by or short edge of the slab, which satisfies 0<K<0.5;
membrane action with the reinforcement acting as a
mesh, and being anchored in a concrete compression ring
formed in the peripheral part of the slab (Fig. 1(f)).

(a) Initialization (b) Forming of (c) Yield lines

of yield line yield lines completed

Fig.2 Division and coordinates of the slab

(d) Appearance (e) Development (f) Membrane at the limit state
of membrane of Membrane action at the
action action limit state 6) At the limit state, the force distribution is assumed
as Fig.3, where C is the compression force between
Fig.1 The development of membrane action rigid plates; S is the shear force in the XY coordinate
in a floor slab plane between rigid plates; Txh and Tyh represent the
in-plane components tension force of the
2.2. Assumption of modeling membrane action reinforcement in X direction and Y direction
The following assumptions are adopted to model respectively; ○ × and □ × represent the vertical
membrane action: components force of the reinforcement in X
1) The slab is rectangular, and the ratio between length direction and Y direction respectively;
and width should not be greater than 2;
2) The support-beams bellow the edges of the slab are
protected and are strong enough to support the load
coming from the slab in fire;
3) The boundaries of the slab are vertically restrained
but no horizontal and rotational restraints are
considered;
4) The reinforcement in the slab is continuous, and
arranged in two orthogonal directions to assure the
formation of reinforcement mesh. The strain
hardening of the reinforcement is ignored;
5) At the limit state, the deformation of the slab is like
Fig.1-(f). The slab can be divided into five parts as
shown in Fig.2, where (x0, y0) is the intersecting
point of the bending yield line and the ellipse; α is
the separation angle between yield line and long
edge of the slab. Plates 1 through 4 are assumed to Fig.3 Force distribution in slab at the limit state
be rigid, therefore they only have rigid rotational
deformation. In the center of the slab, the concrete is 7) At the limit state, the finial deflection of the slab is
cracked and its effect can be ignored. So the central supposed as shown in Fig.4, where θx, θy are the
reinforced concrete slab can be simplified as a rotation of the rigid plates about Y and X axis
reinforcement mesh. According to investigation of respectively. The maximum of the deflection can be
experiment and real fire disasters, the deformation of divided into two parts: dr and w, where dr is the
central part can be assumed as elliptic paraboloid, deflection caused by the rotation of rigid plates and
governed by Eq.(1) w is the deflection of elliptic part.
x2 y2 (1) 8) The failure criterion of the slab is the fracture of
+ = w− z central reinforcement mesh or the crushing of the
1 1
⋅ (KL ) ⋅ (KB )
2 2

w w concrete in the rigid plates.

where L is the length of the slab; B is the width of the
slab; w is the maximum deflection of the elliptic part of
the slab; K is the ratio of half length of the long or short
axis of the ellipse to the corresponding length of the long
 3

by the simulating formula, Eq (5) (Li, 1999).

⎡ w
− 2 ⎤ ⎡
⎛ 2 ⎞
⎜ 0.05+0.135 t −0.005⎛⎜ t ⎞⎟ −d ⎟
⎛ 2⎞
⎜ 0.007+0.0145 t −0.005⎛⎜ t ⎞⎟ ⎟ ⎤
⎢ 0.6 ⋅ e − 0.1
w4
⎥ ⎢ e
⎜
⎝ 20 ⎝ 20 ⎠ ⎟
⎠
⎜
⎝ 20 ⎝ 20 ⎠ ⎟⎠ ⎥
T =⎢ d + 1⎥ ⋅ ⎢T0 + ⎥
H 8 ⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢
⎣ ⎦ ⎢⎣ ⎥⎦
(5)
where t (unit: min) is the heating-up time; T0 (unit: ℃) is
the room temperature; d (unit: m) is the distance between
reinforcement and the bottom of the slab; H (unit: m) is
the thickness of the slab; and w2 and w4 are the
dimension of steel deck for the slab, which are shown in
Fig.5.

Fig.4 Deflection of slab at limited state

2.3. Parameter determination

The main parameters in the new method proposed here
are the angle between yield line and long edge of the slab, Fig.5 Dimension of the slab
α; the intersecting point of the yield line and the ellipse,
(x0, y0); the deflection of elliptic part, w; the deflection 4) To determine θx and θy, it is supposed that the rigid
caused by the rotation of the rigid plates, dr; and the plate 1, 2 and the tangent of the elliptic paraboloid
rotations of the rigid plates, θx and θy. The determinations are continuous on the boundaries. Therefore θx is
of these parameters are presented below. equal to the gradient of the elliptic paraboloid at
1) α can be determined by the traditional yield line point (0, KB). Taking partial derivative of Eq. (1)
theory, since the ultimate deflection of the slab at the about y at point (0, KB), θx can be obtained by Eq.
limit state is developed from yield line mechanism. (6).
2) (x0, y0) can be obtained by geometrical relationship ∂z 2w (6)
given by Eq. (2) and (3) θx = =
∂y y = KB
KB
− ( B ⋅ tgα − L ⋅ tg 2α ) ⋅ L2 + − L4 B 2 ⋅ tg 2α − L2 B 4 + 2 L3 B 3 ⋅ tgα + 4 K 2 B 4 L2 + 4 K 2 L4 B 2 ⋅ tg 2α
x0 =
(
2 B 2 + L2 ⋅ tg 2α ) According to the deformation compatibility of rigid
(2) plates 1, 2 and 3, 4 at the points of (x0, y0), (x0, -y0), (-x0,
⎛ L⎞ B
(3) y0), (-x0, -y0), the rotation of plates 3, 4 can be
y0 = ⎜ x0 − ⎟ ⋅ tgα +
⎝ 2⎠ 2 determined by Eq. (7).
3) In order to determine w, it is assumed that the ⎛ B 2 − y0 ⎞ (7)
reinforcement is going to reach its mechanical strain θ = arctan y ⋅ tan θ
⎜ x ⎟
⎝ L 2 − x0 ⎠
limit at the ultimate state. In this way, the maximum
deflection of the elliptic part can be determined by
the limited elongation ratio of the reinforced bars 2.4. Force and bending moment equilibrium
along short span, because at the same level of equations
deflection in the middle of the slab, the average Reduced strength of reinforcement and concrete
strain in the reinforcement along the short span is (CECS200:2006) were used based on the temperature
larger than that along the long span. Based on the predicted in Eq. (5). For simplification, the effective
assumption 5) and 7) in section 2.2, the total tensile force per unit width of reinforcement at T ℃ in X
deflection of the slab can be obtained by the and Y direction were denoted by fxT and fyT respectively.
summation of deflection caused by the elongation of The force, exerted from reinforcement, on the rigid
the reinforcement and the deflection caused by the plates at the boundary of the elliptic paraboloid is shown
rotation of rigid plates by using Eq. (4) (Li, 2007). in Fig.6.
3 ⎛B ⎞ (4)
w = w + d = 2 KB [ε + α ⋅ (T − T )] + θ ⋅ ⎜ − KB ⎟
total r uk s 0 x
8 ⎝2 ⎠
where εuk is the characteristic limited elongation of
reinforcement, recommended to be 2.5% for the diameter
of the reinforcement less than or equal to 12mm, or 5%
for the diameter of the reinforcement greater than 16mm Fig.6 Force of the reinforcement at the boundary of the
(European Code 2, 1992); αs is the average coefficient of elliptic paraboloid
thermal expansion for the reinforcement, taken as
1.4*10-5; θx is the rotation of the rigid plates 1 and 2 (in In Y direction, tanφy is the gradient at the intersection of
Fig.2); T0 is the room temperature which is 20℃, and T the elliptic part and rigid plate, and can be determined by
is the temperature of the reinforcement after t minutes in Eq. (8).
ISO 834 standard fire exposure, which can be estimated
 4

2 ⎧ ⎡ 1⎛ B ⎞ ⎤
tan ϕ y =
∂z
=
2w ⎛ x ⎞
1− ⎜
(8) ⎪M q12 + M Tvx + M Thx − 2C ⋅ cos α ⋅ ⎢h0 x − ⎜ − y 0 ⎟ ⋅ θ x ⎥ − (15)
⎟ ⎪ ⎣ 3 ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎦
∂y KB ⎝ KL ⎠
z =0 ⎪ ⎡ 1⎛B ⎞ ⎤
So the horizontal and vertical component forces of ⎪2 S ⋅ sin α ⋅ ⎢h0 x − ⎜ − y 0 ⎟ ⋅ θ x ⎥ − M xu = 0
⎪ ⎣ 2⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎦
reinforcement in Y direction are obtained by Eq. (9) and ⎨
⎪ M + M + M − 2C ⋅ sin α ⋅ ⎡h − 1 ⎛⎜ L − x ⎞⎟ ⋅ θ ⎤ +
Eq. (10). ⎪ q 34 Tvy Thy ⎢ 0y 3 2 0 y⎥
⎣ ⎝ ⎠ ⎦
⎪
(9) ⎪
⋅ α ⋅
⎡
−
1⎛L
−
⎞
⋅ θ
⎤
− =
⎪ 2 S cos ⎢ 0y 2 ⎜ 2
h x 0 ⎟ y⎥ M yu 0
KB ⎩ ⎣ ⎝ ⎠ ⎦
Tyh( x ) = Tyu ⋅
⎡ 2
⎤ where M12 and M34 are the bending moments induced by
(KB )2 + 4w2 ⎢1 − ⎛⎜ x ⎞
⎟ ⎥
⎢⎣ ⎝ KL ⎠ ⎥⎦ q12 and q34 respectively; MThx and MTvx are the bending
2
(10) moments induced by horizontal and vertical component
⎛ x ⎞
2w 1 − ⎜ ⎟ forces of reinforcement in plates 1 and 2 respectively;
⎝ KL ⎠
Tyv ( x ) = Tyu ⋅ MThy and MTvy are the bending moments induced by
⎡ x ⎞ ⎤
2

(KB )2 + 4w2 ⎢1 − ⎛⎜ ⎟ ⎥ horizontal and vertical component forces of

⎣⎢ ⎝ KL ⎠ ⎦⎥
reinforcement in plates 3 and 4 respectively; and Mux and
In the same way, for the reinforcement in X direction, the Muy are the bending resistance of the slab about the yield
horizontal and vertical component forces of line respectively.
reinforcement are given by Eq. (11) and Eq. (12) M12, MThx, MTvx, M34, MThy, MTvy, Mux and Muy can be
(11) determined by Eq. (16) and Eq. (17).
KL ⎧ M q12 = q12 ⋅ A12 ⋅ dy
Txh( y ) = Txu ⋅
⎡ 2
⎤ ⎪
(KL )2 + 4w 2 ⎢1 − ⎛⎜ y ⎞⎟ ⎥ ⎪ x0 ⎡ ⎛B ⎞ ⎤
M Thx = 2 ∫ Tyh ⋅ ⎢ h0 x − ⎜ − y0 ⎟ ⋅ θ x ⎥ ⋅ dx
⎢⎣ ⎝ KB ⎠ ⎥⎦ ⎪ 0
⎣ ⎝2 ⎠ ⎦
⎪
⎛ y ⎞
2
(12) ⎪ ⎡ 2⎤
2w 1 − ⎜ ⎟ ⎨ x0 B ⎛ x ⎞ ⎥ KB ⎛B ⎞
⎪ M Tvx = 2 ∫0 Tyv ⋅ ⎢ 2 − KB 1 − ⎜⎝ KL ⎟⎠ ⎥ ⋅ dx + 2∫y0 Txv ⋅ ⎜⎝ 2 − y ⎟⎠ ⋅ dy
⎢
⎝ KB ⎠
Txv ( y ) = Txu ⋅
⎡ ⎪ ⎣ ⎦
y ⎞ ⎤
2

(KL )2 + 4w2 ⎢1 − ⎛⎜ ⎟ ⎥ ⎪
⎛ f ⎞
⎣⎢ ⎝ KB ⎠ ⎦⎥ ⎪ M ux = Asx f yT ⎜ hcx − 0.59 Asx yT ⎟ ⋅ ( L − 2 x0 )
⎪⎩ ⎝ f cT ⎠
At the limit state, the membrane forces in each rigid plate
of the slab are shown in Fig.7. The force equilibrium in (16)
⎧ M q 34 = q34 ⋅ A34 ⋅ dx
X and Y direction can be expressed as ⎪
⎧ 2C ⋅ cos α + 2S ⋅ sin α = 2 x T dx ⎪ y0 ⎡ ⎛L ⎞ ⎤
∫0 yh( x ) (13) M Thy = 2∫ Txh ⋅ ⎢ h0 y − ⎜ − x0 ⎟ ⋅ θ y ⎥ ⋅ dy
0

⎪ ⎪ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎦
⎨
0
⎣
y0
⎪
⎪⎩2C ⋅ sin α = 2S ⋅ cos α + 2∫0 Txh( y )dy ⎪ ⎡L ⎛ y ⎞ ⎥⎤
2
⎨ y0 KL ⎛L ⎞
⎪ M Tvy = 2∫0 Txv ⋅ ⎢ 2 − KL 1 − ⎝⎜ KB ⎠⎟ ⎥ ⋅ dy + 2 ∫x0 Txv ⋅ ⎝⎜ 2 − x ⎠⎟ ⋅ dx
⎢
which leads to
⎪ ⎣ ⎦
⎧ x0 y0
sin α ⋅ 2∫ Tyh ( x )dx − cos α ⋅ 2∫ Txh( y )dy ⎪
⎪S = 0 0 (14) ⎪ ⎛ f ⎞
⎪ 2 M uy = Asy f yT ⎜ hcy − 0.59 Asy yT ⎟ ⋅ ( B − 2 y0 )
⎨ x0
⎪⎩ ⎝ f cT ⎠
⎪ 2∫ Tyh( x )dx − 2S ⋅ sin α
⎪ C= 0 (17)
⎩ 2 cos α where A12 and A34 are the area of the rigid plates 1 or 2
and plate 3 or 4 respectively; dy and dx are the distances
between gravity center of rigid plate 1 or 2 and axis O’
and between plate 3 or 4 and axis O respectively; hcx and
hcy are the distances between reinforcement and the
upper side of the slab in Y and X direction respectively.

Fig.7 Membrane forces in rigid plates 1 and 3 Fig.8 Forces on rigid plate 1 and 3

At the limit state, the force on each rigid plate are shown 2.5. Ultimate load capacity of the slab
in Fig.8, where q12 is the loading capacity of plates 1 and The load capacity of the elliptic part is contributed by the
2, and q34 is the loading capacity of plates 3 and 4.The vertical component force of reinforcement in the elliptic
bending moment equilibriums equations about O’ and O paraboloid, which can be obtained by Eq. (18).
4 ⎡ ∫ Tyv ( x ) ⋅ dx + ∫ Txv ( y ) ⋅ dy ⎤
KL KB
axis can be expressed as
⎢0 ⎥⎦
qe = ⎣ (18)
0

π ⋅ (KL ) ⋅ (KB )
The ultimate load capacity of the slab can be obtained by
 5

averaging the load capacity of the rigid plates and that of reinforcement. Taking the smaller one of Kx, Ky and K
the central elliptical part by using Eq. (19). and substitute into the equations (15), (18) and (19), the
2q12 ⋅ A12 + 2q34 ⋅ A34 + 4⎡ ∫ Tyv ( x ) ⋅ dx + ∫ Txv ( y ) ⋅ dy ⎤
KL KB
revised ultimate load capacity of the slab can be obtained.
⎢⎣ 0 0 ⎥⎦ (19)
q=
LB

2.6. Check the strength of the concrete compression

ring
The concrete compression ring might crush prior to the
fracture of the reinforcement due to large load capacity
of the elliptical reinforcement mesh. Therefore the
compression strength in the rigid plates should be check Fig.9 Force distribution over concrete compression ring
to insure the membrane action works. At the limit state, at limit state
the compressive stress of concrete will be reached at the
cross section A-A and B-B as shown in Fig.9. So, the 2.7. Verification
force equilibrium in the concrete compression ring can The method of modeling membrane action for fire-
be expressed as Eq. (20) and Eq. (21) in X and Y resistance of slab presented in this paper can be verified
direction respectively. by previous tests performed by other researchers (Bailey,
K B ⎛1 ⎞ (20) 2004; Huang, 2003; Jiang, 2004). The details of the slabs
∫ ⋅ dy = ⎜ − K ⎟ ⋅ B ⋅ h ⋅ f
x
T xh ( y )
0
⎝2 ⎠
x c cT
tested in fire are given in Table 1. The maximum
KyL ⎛1 ⎞ (21) deflection of the slabs measured in the tests and that
∫0 Tyh( x ) ⋅ dx = ⎜⎝ 2 − K y ⎟⎠ ⋅ L ⋅ hc ⋅ fcT predicted by various methods are compared in Table 2;
Kx and Ky can be obtained by solving Eq. (20) and Eq. and the test load and the load capacity predicted are
(21). If Kx or Ky is smaller than K, the concrete compared in Table 3.
compression ring will be crushed earlier than the

Table 1 The details of test slabs

Max deflection
Effective Reinft Reinft Steel yield
Test Slab size recorded in the Test load
Reference thickness dia. spacing strength fy
No. (m) test (kN/m2)
(mm) (mm) (mm) (N/mm2)
(mm)
1 1.6*1.1 26 3 30 263 127 45.13
Sawczuk
2 2.0*1.0 26 3 60 263 76 17.14
3 1.829*1.829 43.6 4.8 76.2 376 81 42.9
4 Taylor etal 1.829*1.829 37.3 4.8 63.5 376 98 39.03
5 1.829*1.829 69 4.8 122 376 84 38.13
6 Ghoneim& 2.745*1.829 68.2 6.36 120 450 106 45.5
7 MacGregor 1.829*1.829 67.8 6.35 120 450 100 75
8 Cardington 9.98*7.57 6 200 460 390 5.48
U76-305-
9 Guoqiang Li 3*2 4 150 300 90 10
610

Table 2 Comparison of maximum deflections between measured and predicted

Maximum deflection Predicted by Predicted by Predicted by the wBailey wG.Q Li wnew

Test
measured Bailey et al Guoqiang Li method proposed
No. wtest wtest wtest
wtest (mm) wBailey (mm) wG.Q Li (mm) wnew (mm)
1 127 25 43 58.6 0.356 0.339 0.461
2 76 31 36 55 0.187 0.474 0.724
3 81 33.5 72 95.9 0.435 0.889 1.184
4 98 33.5 72 92.8 0.409 0.735 0.947
5 84 33.5 72 103.8 0.372 0.857 1.236
6 106 95.1 0.897
7 100 93.6 0.936
8 390 450.2 1.154
 6

9 90 127 1.4

Table 3 Comparison of test load and predicted

Test load Predicted by Predicted by Guo- Predicted by the qBailey qG.Q Li qnew
Test
qtest Bailey et al Qiang Li method proposed
No. qtest qtest qtest
(mm) qBailey (kN/m2) qG.Q Li (kN/m2) qnew (kN/m2)
1 45.13 45.24 44.18 34.4 1.002 0.979 0.762
2 17.14 14.21 14.63 17.85 0.829 0.854 1.041
3 42.9 35.27 33.60 41.18 0.822 0.783 0.960
4 39.03 40.03 35.51 48.75 1.026 0.910 1.249
5 38.13 31.22 31.22 31.18 0.819 0.819 0.818
6 45.5 41.89 0.897
7 75 58.3 0.735
8 5.48 5.318 0.970
9 10 7.13 0.713

Tests 1-7 were performed at ambient temperature, and
Test 8, 9 were performed at high temperatures. The limit
elongation is reduced by 30% for test 1-7 because the
limit elongation of the reinforcement at ambient
temperature is less than that at high temperature based on
statistical regression analysis.
The comparisons shown that the method proposed in this
paper can well predict to the maximum deflection and
load-bearing capacity of slabs exposed to fire.
3. Experimental study on full-scaled test
4 full-scaled composite slab tests were performed in ISO
834 standard fire at Tongji University to observe the
membrane action and verify the presented method.
3.1. General information of the tests
The test specimens were 4 pieces of 5.232m*3.72m
composite floor slabs numbered from S-1 to S-4 with the
secondary beam and steel decks unprotected. The slabs
were contributed with the profiled steel sheet YX76-344-
688 which is commonly used in China. The thickness of
the deck was 1mm, and its strength was larger than
270N/mm2 (270 N/mm2 was considered in the
calculation, GB/T 2518-2004). The decks were fixed on
the primary beams and secondary beams (if existed) by
shear connector with a diameter of 16mm and a height of
125mm.Total depth of the slabs was 146mm and the
thickness of the concrete on the top of the decks was
70mm. The reinforcing mesh of the slabs was made by
smooth reinforcement bar with the gird size of
150mm*150mm. The diameter of the reinforcement bar
was 8mm, and the steel grade was Q235. The thickness
of the protective layer of reinforcement was 21mm for S-
1 and 30mm for S-2 to S-4. S-1 and S-2 had an
unprotected secondary beam supporting the slabs in the
middle, while S-3 and S-4 did not have. The cross
section of the secondary beam was I25b, and the grade of
steel was Q235. The slabs, the primary beams and
secondary beams were designed in according with the
Chinese Code GB50017-2003 and YB 9238-92. The
general information of the specimens was shown in Table
4. The arrangement of the specimens and the cross
section of the composite slab are shown in the Fig.10 and
Fig.11 respectively. The grade of the reinforcement was
Q235 and the grade of the concrete was C25. The
material property of reinforcement and concrete are
shown in Table 5 and Table 6 respectively (Where fy, fu
and δ are the yield strength, ultimate strength and the
ultimate elongation of the reinforcement respectively. fcu
is the cubic compressive strength of concrete).
The reinforcement in the test was not anchored at the
boundary of the slab, but exceeded the edge of the slab
for 150mm, because the reinforcement would fracture at
the boundary of the slab according to the phenomena of
Cardington test. The anchorage condition of the
reinforcement is shown in Fig.12.

Table 4 Constructional information of test slabs (mm)

Specim Thickness Arrangement Thickness of the

Total Direction of
No. -ens on the top of the protective layer Secondary beam
depth the rib
size of decks reinforcement of reinforcement
5232* Along the In the middle of the long
S-1 146 70 φ8@150 21
3720 long edge edge, unprotected
5232* Along the In the middle of the long
S-2 146 70 φ8@150 30
3720 long edge edge, unprotected
S-3 5232* 146 70 φ8@150 30 Along the No secondary beam
 7

3720 short edge

5232* Along the
S-4 146 70 φ8@150 30 No secondary beam
3720 short edge

Table 5 Properties of reinforcement bar

at ambient temperature

No. S-1 S-2 S-3、S-4

fy(N/mm2) 579.06 531.84 557.04
fu(N/mm2) 632.05 604.85 661.35
δ(%) 33.3 36 31.33
fy/fu 0.92 0.88 0.84

Table 6 Cubic compressive strength

of concrete

No. S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 Fig.12 Anchorage of the reinforcement

fcu(N/mm2) 26.1 21.0 22.37 22.87 at the boundary of the slabs

The slabs were loaded at 24 points to stimulate uniform

load (as shown in Fig.13 and Fig.14) with the load ratio
of 60%~65% over the design load capacity of the slabs at
the room temperature. ISO834 standard fire is used in the
tests. The deflection of slabs, the temperature at the
surface and bottom of the slabs, the temperature and
strain of the reinforcements in the slabs, as well as the
strain of concrete were measured in the tests. The
arrangements of the measuring points are shown in
Fig.15 to Fig.18.

(a) specimens S-1 and S-2

(b) specimens S-3 and S-4 Fig.13 The planform of loading system
Fig.10 Arrangement of the specimens

Fig.11 Cross section of the slabs

Fig.14 Loading system
 8

3.2. Test phenomena

Statics load was applied on the slab in 10 steps. No crack
and failure were found in this stage. Until the load and
deformation of the slab were stable, the furnace started to
fire. The test load and duration for the 4 tests were
shown in Table 7.

Table 7 Test load and duration for 4 tests

Ultimate bearing Test Load

Duration
No. capacity of design load ratio
(min)
value (kN/m2) (kN/m2) (%)
S-1 30.64 18.38 60 75
Fig.15 Arrangement of thermal couples S-2 29.51 17.71 60 90
S-3 14.57 8.75 60 100
S-4 14.57 9.47 65 100
* Terminated without fail.

In S-1 and S-2, cracks developed beside secondary beam

Fig.16 Arrangement of displacement meters
Y
X Fig.22).
Fig.17 Arrangement of strain gauges for the
reinforcement
due to the negative moment which was caused by the
decrease of the strength and stiffness of the slabs. For S-
3 and S-4, in which no secondary beam was provided,
the crack started at the boundary of the slab.
Significant cracks were found along the long edge of the
slabs because of negative moment induced by the large
deflection in the center of the slabs (shown in Fig.19).
Meanwhile, some cracks occurred along the short edge
of the slabs and extended to the side face of the slabs
(shown in Fig.20). After the test, significant concrete
crush at the yield lines were founded at the corner of the
slabs (shown in Fig.21).
All of the 4 specimens had large deflection after the test.
The deformation of the slabs presented as an elliptic
parabolic which validate assumption 5) and provided
effective support to the load on the slabs (shown in
Fig.23 and Fig.24 show the distribution of the cracks on
S-2 and S-4 after the test, where cracks caused by the
membrane action can be found both at the center and at
corner of the slabs.
The deformation of the unprotected secondary beam is
shown in Fig.25. It can be seen that although the
deflection of the beam is huge, no failure and buckle
were found. Fig.26 shows the condition of steel deck
after test, in which the profiled decks did not melt down
in the high temperature. These indicate that the
secondary beam and steel deck still can help to maintain
the entirety of the slab system after 90 min fire exposure.
No collapse occurred in these 4 tests. The development
of membrane action carried the applied load on the slabs
and kept the stability of the floor system.

Fig.18Arrangement of strain gauges for the concrete

 9

Fig.19 Cracks along the long edge

Fig.23 The cracks on the S-2 after the test

Fig.20 Cracks along the short side face

Fig.24 The cracks on S-4 after the test

Fig.21 The crush of concrete at the yield line

Fig.25 The deformation of the secondary beam

Fig.22 The deformation of the slab after the test

Fig.26 The steel deck after the test
 10

400
3.3. Test result and analysis
350
1. Temperature
300
ISO 834 standard fire was used in the test. According to
the inspection of the temperature in the furnace, the 250

Temperature(℃)
furnace temperature coincided well with the ISO834 fire 200
curve.
150
Fig.27 shows the bottom temperature curve in the middle
S-1
of the slabs. It can be seen that at the beginning of the 100
S-2
test, the temperature of the slab at the bottom was low, 50 S-3
and then it increased along with time. At the time of 75 S-4
0
minutes, the temperature can reach to 700 or 800℃. At 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
the time of 90 minutes to 100 minutes, the bottom of the Time(s)
slab can be heated up to around 800℃ or 900℃.
Fig.28 is surface temperature curve in the middle of the Fig.29 Average temperature of the reinforcement
slabs. It shows that surface temperature of the slab is of S-1 to S-4
about 100℃ at 90 minutes, which is much lower than
that of bottom. 2. The strains of reinforcement and concrete
Fig.29 is the average temperature curves of the Fig.30 and Fig.31 show the strains of the reinforcement
reinforcement. It can be found that the distance between along the short edge and long edge respectively. Since
the reinforcement and the bottom of the slab has a great the effective working temperature of the strain gauges is
impact to the temperature of the reinforcement. less than 60℃, the data when the temperature was higher
than 60 ℃ are taken off in the figures. Since the
1000 reinforcement located at the compression zone in the
900 cross section of the slabs, according to the yield line
800 theory, the reinforcement should be under compression.
700 However, the data show that the reinforcement was
Temperature(℃)

600 under tension during most of the test except for the
500 beginning. This phenomenon proves the occurrence of
400 tensile membrane action in the test.
300
Fig.32 is the strains curve of the concrete at the boundary
S-1
200 S-2
of S-4. It can be found that the concrete in the middle of
100 S-3 the boundary was under compression. It validates the
0
S-4 existence of the concrete compressive ring which can
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 provide the anchorage for the reinforcement.
Time(s)
2500
#1 #2 #3
Fig.27 Bottom temperature in the middle of the slabs #4 #5 #6
2000
#7 #8 #9
1500
120
Strain (με)

1000
100
500
80
0
Temperature(℃)

60 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

-500

40 -1000
S-1
S-2 Time(s)
20
S-3
S-4
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 Fig.30 The strains of the reinforcement
Time(s) along short edge in S-1

Fig.28 Surface temperature in the middle of the slabs

 11

3500
＃10 ＃11
3000 ＃12 ＃13
＃14 ＃15 160
2500 ＃16 ＃17
140
2000
120
Strain (με)

Deflection (mm)
1500
100
1000
80
500
60
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 40
-500
20 S-3
-1000
S-4
Time(s) 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
Time(s)
Fig.31 The strains of the reinforcement
along long edge in S-1 Fig.34 The deflection of S-3 and S-4

4. Verification
300
Table 8 shows comparison of the deflection at the center
200
of the slab predicted by the method proposed in section 2
100 and measured in the tests in section 3.
Strain (με）

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Table 8 Comparison of deflection of tests and prediction
-100

-200
Test Deflection Prediction #1* Prediction #2*
-300
#44 #45 #46 # in tests Defl. % Defl. %
-400 #47 #48 #49 S-1 171 161 -5.85 192 12.28
#50
-500 S-2 141 178 26.24 212 50.35
Time(s) S-3 133 192 44.36 212 59.40
S-4 148 198 33.78 213 43.92
*The average temperature of reinforcement measured in
Fig.32 The strains of the concrete at the boundary of S-4 the test was used in prediction #1, and the reinforcement
temperature obtained by Eq. (5) was used in prediction
3. Deflection in the middle of the slabs #2.
Fig.33 and Fig.34 show the deflections in the middle of
the slabs. It is found that after 90min fire exposure the From Table 8, it can be seen that the deflection predicted
deflection of slabs can arrive at 1/25 of the short edge of by the new method presented in this paper is higher than
the slabs. Therefore, it is reasonable to deduce that the that in tests yielding the following reason.
load-bearing mechanism of the slabs has been changed 1) The thermal elongation of the reinforcement was
from bending mechanism to membrane action under such over predicted by Eq. (4) because the confinement
large deflection in the tests. effect of concrete is ignored. In fact, most of the
concrete in the center of slab did not crack in the test,
180 which can provide good confinement and resist the
160
elongation of the reinforcement.
2) The strength decline of the reinforcement and
140
concrete cannot be exactly obtained in the test.
Deflection (mm)

120
3) Strain hardening of the reinforcement was not
100 considered in the prediction.
80 4) Although the catenary effort of secondary beam and
60 the membrane action of steel deck is small, ignoring
40 these efforts made the prediction conservative.
20 S-1 5) The average of top and bottom temperature of
S-2 concrete was used in prediction. However the real
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
temperature of the concrete should be lower because
Time (s) the temperature gradient in concrete is significant
large.
Fig.33 The deflection of S-1 and S-2
 12

5. Conclusion Huang Z.H., Burgess I.W. and Plank R.J. (2003)

Membrane action will take place to remain the load
capacity in fire condition. A new method to model the
membrane action for simply supported composite floor
slab with continuous reinforcement in two directions was
presented in this paper. For the slabs, with that potential
horizontal restraint on the boundaries, this method is also
applicable with conservation.
Full-scale test were performed on 4 steel-concrete
composite floor slabs. It shows that:
1) Membrane action will occur to carry the applied
load instead of bending mechanism due to large
deflection when the composite floor slabs are
subjected to fire. This membrane action can help to
keep the load capacity of the slabs and maintain the
stability of the floor system under fire condition.
2) The reinforcement in the slabs will be under tensile
and form an elliptical paraboloid tensile mesh which
can bear the load on the slabs. A concrete
compressive ring will be formed at the boundary of
the slabs to provide anchorage for the reinforcement.
3) Due to the membrane action, the existence of
secondary beams to support the slab is not necessary
in fire condition, which can save the fire protection
for secondary beams.
A comparison of the deflection measured in the tests and
that predicted by the new method was presented in this
paper. The reasons for this difference between the
deflection obtained by the new method and that
measured in the test were analyzed. More research
should be conducted on the thermal elongation of the
reinforcement, the bond condition between the
reinforcement and concrete.
Modeling Membrane Action of Concrete Slabs in
composite Building in Fire. II: Validations, Journal of
Structural Engineering, (ASCE), Vol.129, No.8, 2003,
pp. 1103-1112.
Jiang S.C, Li G.Q., Zhou H.Y. and Wang Q. (2004)
Experimental study of behavior of steel-concrete
composite slabs subjected to fire, Journal of Building
Structure, Vol. 25, No.3, June 2004: pp45-50.
Lamont S., Usmani A.S. and Drysdale D.D. (2001) Heat
transfer analysis of the composite slab in the
Cardington frame fire tests, Fire Safety Journal
36(2001), pp. 815-839.
Li G.Q., Yin Y.Z. and Jiang S.C. (1999) Analysis of the
temperature distribution in composite slabs subjected
to fires”. Industrial Construction, No. 12, Vol.29, 1999.
Li G.Q., Guo S.X, and Zhou H.S. (2007) Modeling of
membrane action in floor slabs subjected to fire,
Engineering Structures 29(2007), pp. 880-887.
Specification for design and construction of steel-
concrete composite floor system, YB 9238-92, China
Technical Code for Fire Safety of Steel Structure in
Buildings. CECS 200:2006.
Usmani A.S. and Cameron N.J.K. (2004) Limit capacity
of laterally restrained reinforced concrete floor slabs,
Cement & Concrete Composites 26(2004), pp. 127-
140

6. Acknowledgement
The work reported in this paper was financially
supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China under contract 50621062, 50738005 and
50728805. The support is gratefully acknowledged.

References
Bailey C.G. and Moore D.B. (2000) The structural
behaviour of steel frames with composite floor slabs
subjected to fire: Part 1: Theory, The Structural
Engineer 2000, Vol. 78(11), pp.19-27.
Bailey C.G. (2001) Membrane action of unrestrained
lightly reinforced concrete slabs at large displacements,
Engineering Structure 23(2001), pp. 470-483.
Bailey C.G. (2004) Membrane action of slab/beam
composite floor systems in fire, Engineering Structure
26(2004), pp.1691-1703.
Code for design of steel structures. GB50017-2003,
China.
Continuously Hot-Dip Zinc-Coated Steel Sheet and Strip.
GB/T 2518-2004, China.
Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures. Technical
Report ENV 1992-1-1, Brussels, European Committee
for Standardisation, 1992.