You are on page 1of 5

18-10-16

Chap. III Evaluating fire resistance

1
2016/2017

University of Liege

J-M Franssen & T. Gernay

3. Evaluating fire resistance

Load combinations in the fire situation


S

Actions for temperature analysis


G

A
C
T
I
O
N
S

Thermal Action

FIRE
Actions for structural analysis
Mechanical Action
Dead Load
G
Imposed Load Q
Snow
S
Wind
W

Fire
2
2016/2017

University of Liege

J-M Franssen & T. Gernay

18-10-16

3. Evaluating fire resistance

Load combinations in the fire situation


Rules for load combinations are defined in EN 1990
Normal conditions (20C):

Ed = G Gk + Q,1 Q1,k + i 0,i Q,i,k Qi,k

Ex. office withlife load Qk considered as the leading variable action, Wind load Wk and
snow load Sk being accompanying actions :
Ed = 1.35 Gk + 1.5 Qk + 0.6 * 1.5 W k + 0.5 * 1.5 Sk

3
2016/2017

University of Liege

J-M Franssen & T. Gernay

3. Evaluating fire resistance

Load combinations in the fire situation


Fire is an accidental action.
=> it is not necesary to consider the simultaneous occurence with other
independent accidental actions (e.g. seismic action).
=> General rule: one of both equations has to be used (which one is a N.D.P.).

where:
Gk, Qk, Pk

1
2

are the characteristic values of the permanent, variable and prestressing action,
is the coefficient for frequent value of a variable action, generally
representing the value that is exceeded with a frequency of 0.05, or 300 times
per year,
is the coefficient for quasi-permanent value of a variable action,
generally representing the value that is exceeded with a frequency of 0.50, or
the average value over a period of time.

4
2016/2017

University of Liege

J-M Franssen & T. Gernay

18-10-16

3. Evaluating fire resistance

Load combinations in the fire situation


1

0,7
0,7
0,7
0,7
1,0

0,5
0,5
0,7
0,7
0,9

0,3
0,3
0,6
0,6
0,8

0,7

0,7

0,6

0,7
0

0,5
0

0,3
0

0,70
0,70

0,50
0,50

0,20
0,20

0,50

0,20

Wind loads on buildings (see EN1991-1.4)

0,6

0,2

Temperature (non-fire) in buildings (see EN1991-1.5)

0,6

0,5

Action
Imposed loads in buildings, category (see EN 1991-1.1)
Category A : domestic, residential areas
Category B : office areas
Category C : congregation areas
Category D : shopping areas
Category E : storage areas
Category F : traffic area
vehicle weight 30kN
Category G : traffic area,
30 kN < vehicle weight
160kN
Category H : roofs
Snow loads on buildings (see EN1991-1.3)
Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden
Remainder of CEN Member States, for sites located at altitude
H > 1000 m a.s.l.
Remainder of CEN Member States, for sites located at altitude
H 1000 m a.s.l.

( Reference : prEN1990 - July 2001)

5
2016/2017

University of Liege

J-M Franssen & T. Gernay

3. Evaluating fire resistance

Load combinations in the fire situation

One of both equations has to be used (which one is a N.D.P.)

In France, Eq. (1) has to be used.


In Belgium, Eq. (2) has to be used, except when Qk1 is the wind action (in which
case, Eq. (1) has to be used).
( Reference : prEN1990 - July 2001)

6
2016/2017

University of Liege

J-M Franssen & T. Gernay

18-10-16

3. Evaluating fire resistance

Load combinations in the fire situation


Examples
Category B building

Permanent loads
Life load
Snow load
Wind load

DW
LL
SN
WL

Combinations when WL is the leading action


Equation 1
Equation 2

=> DW + 0.2 WL + 0.3 LL + 0.0 SL


=> DW + 0.0 WL + 0.3 LL + 0.0 SL

7
2016/2017

University of Liege

J-M Franssen & T. Gernay

3. Evaluating fire resistance

Load combinations in the fire situation


Simplification 1
When indirect effects of actions need not be explicitly considered,
effects of actions may be determined at t = 0, and remain constant throughout
fire exposure.

Simplification 2
As a further simplification to 1, effects of actions may be determined
from those determined in normal temperature design.
Ed,fi = fi Ed

8
2016/2017

University of Liege

J-M Franssen & T. Gernay

18-10-16

3. Evaluating fire resistance

Load combinations in the fire situation


Illustration, valid if G = 1.35 and Q = 1.5

9
2016/2017

University of Liege

J-M Franssen & T. Gernay

3. Evaluating fire resistance

Load combinations in the fire situation

Simplification 3
Take fi = 0.65 (except for storage, where fi = 0.70)

10
2016/2017

University of Liege

J-M Franssen & T. Gernay