429
Effect of fire on concrete and
concrete structures
Gabriel Alexander Khoury
Imperial College, London, UK
Summary
The behaviour of concrete in fire depends on its mix
proportions and constituents and is determined by
complex physicochemical transformations during
heating. Normal-strength concretes and high-
performance concretes microstructurally follow
similar trends when heated, but ultra-high-
performance concrete behaves differently. A key
property unique to concrete amongst structural
materials is transient creep. Any structural analysis
of heated concrete that ignores transient creep will
yield erroneous results, particularly for columns
exposed to fire. Failure of structural concrete in fire
varies according to the nature of the fire; the
loading system and the type of structure. Failure
could occur from loss of bending or tensile strength;
loss of bond strength; loss of shear or torsional
strength; loss of compressive strength; and spalling
of the concrete. The structural element should,
therefore, be designed to fulfil its separating and/or
load-bearing function without failure for the
required period of time in a given fire scenario.
Design for fire resistance aims to ensure overall
dimensions of the section of an element sufficient to
keep the heat transfer through this element within
acceptable limits, and an average concrete cover to
the reinforcement sufficient to keep the
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2: 429d447
Introduction
This paper presents a general brief outline of the
effect of fire on both concrete material and
concrete structures with emphasis being placed
upon the subject areas receiving most attention in the
past few years, namely: (a) deterioration in
mechanical properties of concrete and especially
of high-performance and ultra-high-performance
concretes in fire; (b) explosive spalling and the
use of polypropylene fibres; (c) the development
of finite element structural analysis models
capable of predicting pore pressures and spalling;
and (d) fires in tunnels. The basic principles
of fire engineering are also presented on the
Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
temperature of the reinforcement below critical
values long enough for the required fire resistance
period to be attained. The prediction of spalling
` hitherto an imprecise empirical exercise ` is now
becoming possible with the development of
thermohydromechanical nonlinear finite element
models capable of predicting pore pressures. The
risk of explosive spalling in fire increases with
decrease in concrete permeability and could be
eliminated by the appropriate inclusion of
polypropylene fibres in the mix and/or by protecting
the exposed concrete surface with a thermal
barrier. There are three methods of assessment of
fire resistance: (a) fire testing; (b) prescriptive
methods, which are rigid; and (c) performance-
based methods, which are flexible. Performance-
based methods can be classified into three
categories of increasing sophistication and
complexity: (a) simplified calculations based on
limit state analysis; (b) thermomechanical finite
element analysis; and (c) comprehensive
thermohydromechanical finite element analysis. It
is only now that performance-based methods are
being accepted in an increasing number of
countries.
assumption that the reader is not a specialist in this
field.
Background
Research into the effect of fire on concrete and concrete
structures has been conducted since at least 1922[1],
primarily in relation to buildings. The main areas of
interest were: (a) the understanding of the complex
behaviour of the material itself; and (b) the structural
safety and integrity of the building during, and after,
fire. The introduction of the advanced gas-cooled
(AGR) nuclear reactor system in the UK in the 1960s
and 1970s provided added impetus and funding for
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
430
research into the effect of high temperatures on
concrete, albeit in relation to service and accident
nuclear reactor conditions[2], but nevertheless with
useful technology transfer to fire applications. Much
of the output from this research has been published in
a series of biannual ‘SMiRT’ conferences since 1971,
and in the journal Nuclear Engineering and Design. Up
to about a decade ago, fire research was focused upon
the behaviour of ‘normal-strength’ concrete at high
temperatures, and engineers mainly employed
prescriptive methods of design to ensure structural
stability in fire. Since then, there have been two major
developments in this field, namely: (a) the increasing
use of high-performance concrete (HPC) in buildings,
tunnels and bridges; and (b) the growing acceptance of
the use of performance-based structural analysis and
design against fire. The employment of HPC in tunnel
linings, with its greater tendency to explosively spall
in fire, has resulted in a series of high-profile and
costly incidents of explosive spalling of concrete in
tunnel fires, which further fuelled urgent research
aimed at a better understanding and solution of this
serious problem. The impetus for the development of
performance-based structural analysis came from the
limitations inherent in the traditional prescriptive
methods of design. Several countries have already
developed performance-based codes (e.g. UK,
Sweden, Norway, New Zealand and Australia) and
many more countries are in the process of doing so.
While the UK has led in this field with the publication
in 1992 of the Building Regulations Approved Document
B3[3], performance-based structural design and
analysis methods are still not as widely used by
engineers in the UK, as they are in Scandinavia. This
topic is currently the focus of much discussion,
research and development worldwide. This has led to
new ideas for improving fire safety, thus encouraging
the engineer to develop new creative solutions[4].
Fire scenarios
The temperature}time curves in ‘Standard’ fires
(Fig. 1) used in testing, analysis and design were
established from experience in real fires and fall into
three main categories, depending upon the application
(i.e. buildings, offshore/petrochemical, tunnels).
BUILDINGS: BS 476 [5] OR ISO 834 [6]
The standard furnace curve represents a typical
building fire based upon a cellulosic fire in which the
fuel source is wood, paper, fabric, etc. In BS 476, the
temperature increases from 20 to 842 3C after the first
30 min (i.e. equivalent to an average heating rate of
27.4 3C min!1). This fire profile has a slow
temperature rise up to 1000 3C over a period of
120 min. This curve represents only one possible
exposure condition at the growth and the fully
developed fire stages, and does not include a final
Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION
Fig. 1. Standard fire scenarios for buildings (ISO 834 or BS 476),
offshore and petrochemical industries (hydrocarbon), and tunnels
(RWS, RABT); idealized fire curves established from experience in
real fires which vary considerably from fire to fire
decay stage. By comparison, real fires can have
a slower or longer growth phase, and once they are
established, temperatures can be higher than the
furnace temperatures, though they are rarely
sustained because they are subject to pronounced
fluctuations. The standard temperature–time curve,
therefore, corresponds to a severe fire, but not the
severest possible fire.
OFFSHORE AND PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES [7`9]
In the 1970s, the oil company Mobil investigated
hydrocarbon fuel fires and developed
a temperature–time profile with a rapid temperature
rise in the first 5 min of the fire up to 900 3C (i.e.
176 3C min!1) and a peak of 1100 3C. This research laid
the foundation for test procedures to assess
fire- protecting materials for the offshore and
petrochemical industries.
TUNNELS: RWS AND RABT
More recently, a spate of major tunnel fires have
indicated that an even more severe fire scenario needs
to be considered. In the Netherlands, the Ministry of
Public Works, the Rijswaterstaat (RWS), and the TNO
Centre for Fire Research have established a fire curve
for the evaluation of passive protecting materials in
tunnels[10]. This RWS Dutch fire curve models a most
severe hydrocarbon fire, rapidly exceeding 1200 3C
and peaking at 1350 3C (melting temperature of
concrete) after 60 min and then falling gradually to
1200 3C at 120 min, the end of the curve. RWS is
intended to simulate tankers carrying petrol in tunnels
with a fire load of 300 MW causing a fire for 2 h, and
was established on the basis of Dutch experience in
tunnel fires. However, the maximum temperatures
attained in recent major fires did not reach RWS levels,
e.g. Channel (1100 3C), Great Belt (800 3C), Mont Blanc
(1000 3C), Tauern (1000 3C). The RWS fire curve,
therefore, represents the severest form of tunnel fire in
terms of initial heating rates and maximum
temperatures. The RABT German fire curve, with
a descending branch, represents a less severe fire
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
 FIRE AND CONCRETE 431

scenario in tunnels than the RWS curve, reaching

a maximum temperature of 1200 3C (melting point of
some aggregates) sustained up to 1 h before decaying
to ambient.
Many standard (building) insulation materials
decompose and lose their function above 1200 3C. It
may be that insulation materials behave well in BS 476,
ISO 834, Eurocode hydrocarbon fires and even the
RABT fire, but may not withstand a fire under RWS
conditions. For this reason, the manufacturer of
thermal insulation coatings for tunnel concrete linings,
Lightcem, have recently developed two different
thermal types of insulation materials: one for
temperatures up to 1200 3C based on Portland
cements, and another for temperatures up to 1350 3C
based on aluminous cements. It should, however, be
noted that structural aluminous cement concretes
have been banned because of the risk of conversion
and weakening that can take place under certain
temperature/humidity conditions.

Fire and concrete material

Fire resistance is a concept applicable to elements of
the building structure and not a material, but the
properties of a material affect the performance of the
element of which it forms a part. Therefore, the effect
of fire on concrete material will be discussed first in
this section and measures for improving material
performance will be proposed. The influence of fire on
concrete structures will then be discussed in the
following section.
The advantages of concrete in a fire are two-fold. It
is: incombustible (e.g. when compared with wood);
and a good insulating material possessing a low
thermal diffusivity (e.g. when compared with steel).
However, there are two problems of concrete in fire.
These are: deterioration in mechanical properties as
temperature rises, caused by physicochemical changes
in the material during heating (Fig. 2); and explosive
spalling, which results in loss of material, reduction in
section size and exposure of the reinforcing steel to
excessive temperatures. Consequently, both the
separating/insulating and load-bearing functions of
the concrete member could be compromised.
DETERIORATION IN MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
Deterioration in mechanical properties of concrete
upon heating may be attributed to three ‘material’
factors:
E physicochemical changes in the cement paste;
E physicochemical changes in the aggregate;
E thermal incompatibility between the aggregate and
the cement paste;
and are influenced by ‘environmental’ factors, such as:
E temperature level;
E heating rate;
Fig. 2. Physicochemical processes in Portland cement concrete
during heating: (a) temperatures are for the concrete material and
not the fire, except for explosive spalling where the temperature
range is that of the concrete surface and depends upon the heating
rate and type of concrete; (b) unsealed cement paste (i.e. allowed
to dry) behaves very differently from moist sealed cement paste
d above 100 3C, the former is dominated by dehydration
processes, while the latter is dominated by hydrothermal chemical
transformations and reactions
E applied loading;
E external sealing influencing moisture loss from the
surface.
These factors are described below in relation to
compressive and tensile strength.
Compressive and tensile strength
Before explaining the changes in strength of concrete
as a function of increasing temperature, two positive
aspects of heated concrete need pointing out.
Influence of transient creep
Up to the 1970s, scientists were puzzled as to why
concrete does not break up when heated above 100 3C,
because the differential strain resulting from the
expansion of the aggregate and shrinkage of the
cement paste is far too large to be accommodated by
elastic strains. The discovery of the phenomenon of
‘transient creep’ provided the answer. Transient creep
(strictly, it should be called load-induced thermal
strain, LITS[11]) develops during first heating (and not
during cooling) under load. LITS is unique to concrete
amongst structural materials. Above 100 3C it is
essentially a function of temperature and not of time
and is, therefore, relatively easy to model

Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
432 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION

mathematically in a short-term heating scenario such
as fire. A further simplification, discovered by the
author[11], is the existence of a ‘master LITS’ for
Portland-cement-based concrete in general for
temperatures up to 450 3C, irrespective of the type of
aggregate or cement blend used (Fig. 3). LITS is much
larger than the elastic strain (compare Figs 3 and 4 for
20% stress level), and contributes to a significant
relaxation and redistribution of thermal stresses in
heated concrete structures. Any structural analysis of
heated concrete that ignores LITS will, therefore, be
wholly inappropriate and will yield erroneous results,
particularly for columns exposed to fire. This
phenomenon is still not fully appreciated by structural
engineers and should be incorporated more fully into
standards and design codes.
cooling, and is attributed to the weakening of the
physical van der Waals’ forces as the expanding water
molecules push the CSH layers further apart. This
minimum, therefore, does not appear when the
‘residual’ strength is measured after cooling and
plotted against previous temperature. Frequently, the
‘hot’ strength is shown to increase to a maximum at
about 200–300 3C greater than the initial strength prior
to heating. Most concretes experience a strength
reduction above 300 3C, but this depends upon the
type of aggregate and cement blend used in the mix.
Between 300 and 600 3C there is room for improving
the performance of concrete by judicious mix design.

Influence of loading during heating

Another positive aspect of concrete at high
temperature is the ‘beneficial’ influence of loading
which places the material into compression,
‘compacts’ the concrete during heating and inhibits
the development of cracks. Again, this influence is not
fully appreciated by the practising engineer and is not
adequately covered in the codes and standards. An
example of this phenomenon is given in Fig. 4,
comparing the stress–strain relation at levels of high
temperature 20–700 3C for concrete heated without
load and under 20% load. The influence of
temperature can be markedly diminished. Both the
compressive strength and elastic modulus reduce far
less with increase in temperature for the concrete
heated under load. However, for concrete heated
without load, tests consistently show the modulus of
elasticity to reduce with increase in temperature by
a larger proportion of the initial value than the
compressive strength[12].

Influence of temperature Fig. 3. Load-induced thermal strains (or transient creep) of

Compressive strength, reduces from ambient to reach concrete during heating at 1 3C min!1 to 600 3C under
a minimum at 80 3C for unsealed concrete. This is an compressive loads up to 30% of the unheated strength; heating was
‘apparent’ strength loss, largely reversible upon slow to reduce ‘structural’ effects; LITS was found to be more
a function of temperature than of time

Fig. 4. Effect of temperature and load level during heating-up upon the residual stressdstrain relation in uniaxial compression of unsealed
C70 HITECO concrete cylindrical specimens; tests conducted at constant stress rate, descending branch not shown

Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
 FIRE AND CONCRETE 433

However, the author discovered a marked increase in

the ‘basic’ creep of Portland cement paste and
concrete[13] at about 550–600 3C, indicating this
temperature to be critical, above which concrete is not
structurally useful. Fortunately, in fire, only the first
few centimetres from the concrete surface experience
temperatures greater than 300 3C owing to the low
thermal diffusivity of concrete in general. The normal
practice after fire is to remove and replace this
‘overheated’ layer. As long as the concrete does not
spall during fire, this layer continues to provide
thermal protection to the steel and inner concrete, and
would effectively act as a thermal barrier, although its
structural role becomes greatly diminished.
Another important phenomenon, also not fully
appreciated, is the major difference in behaviour
between ‘unsealed’ and moist ‘sealed’ concrete at
temperatures above about 100 3C. The dominant
process for unsealed concrete relates to the loss of the
various forms of water (free, adsorbed and chemically
bound), while the dominant process in sealed concrete
relates to hydrothermal chemical reactions which
could result in much weaker or stronger gel,
depending upon the CaO/SiO2 ratio (C/S ratio). The
C/S ratio is influenced by the use of cement
replacements such as slag, pulverized fly ash (PFA), or
silica fume in the mix.
Given the large number of material and Fig. 5. Effect of temperature upon the residual compressive
strength of two high-performance concretes (C60-SF, C70) and
environmental factors that influence the compressive two ultra-high-performance concretes (CRC, RPC-AF) after heat
strength of heated concrete, it is no surprise that cycling without load at 2 3C min!1: (a) actual values; (b) percentage
measurements of compressive strength at 150 3C can of initial strength at 20 3C
yield results ranging from as low as 30% to as high as
120% of the original cold strength[14]. It is no wonder
that data for concrete strengths at elevated
temperatures taken from different sources differ transformations can take place under hydrothermal
substantially, and in several cases even seem conditions. This suggests that the UHPC hot strength
contradictory. Therefore, representing ‘typical’ loss could have been more pronounced had the
strength behaviour of all ‘normal-weight concrete’ at specimens been kept for a longer time at appropriate
high temperatures with a single ‘average curve’, as temperatures. Normal-strength concretes and high-
given in BS 8110[15], can be misleading unless the performance concretes microstructurally follow
specific mix and environmental conditions (e.g. similar trends when heated, but ultra-high-
heating rate, load during heating, moisture condition, performance concrete behaves differently, as
cooling rate, etc.) are specified. evidenced by rate of moisture loss readings taken at
Recent research[12,16] has extended the testing of constant high temperatures.
compressive strength from normal-strength concrete Until very recently, all measurements of tensile
to high-performance concrete (HPC; strengths strength at high temperatures were performed by
60–100 MPa) and even ultra-high-performance indirect means. However, there is sufficient evidence
concrete (UHPC containing steel fibres; strengths to show that the tensile constitutive behaviour of
100–300 MPa). The results shown in Fig. 5 show that concrete at high temperature cannot be adequately
the ‘hot’ strengths of the HPC concretes decline less determined from indirect ‘tension’ tests (i.e. splitting
with increase in temperature than those of the UHPC and bending). For this reason, stress–strain tests in
concrete, but that the reverse is true for the residual direct tension were performed at high temperatures for
strength measured after cooling (possibly because of the first time last year at Imperial College in
the steel fibres). The relatively poorer ‘hot’ collaboration with Milan Polytechnic. The direct
performance of the UHPC could be due to its very tensile hot strength declines with increase in
dense structure, from which moisture escapes less temperature. Also as expected, the results obtained
readily. This has two effects: a physical effect due to from the hot tests were closer to those obtained for the
reduced van der Waals’ forces as water expands upon residual tests for the HPC than for the UHPC
heating, and a chemical effect whereby detrimental concretes, owing to the presence of steel.

Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
434
Mix design against strength loss
Deterioration of mechanical properties can be reduced
for the temperature range from ambient up to 600 3C
by judicious design of the concrete mix (Fig. 6). This
would take into consideration the behaviours of; (a)
the aggregate; (b) the cement paste; and (c) the
interaction between them.
Aggregate
The choice of aggregate is probably the more
important since some aggregates, such as flint or
Thames gravel, break up at relatively low
temperatures (below 350 3C) while other aggregates,
such as granite, exhibit thermal stability, up to 600 3C.
The thermal stability of different aggregates increases
in the following order: flint, Thames gravel, limestone,
basalt, granite, gabbro. Other desirable features in
aggregates are: (a) low thermal expansion, which
improves thermal compatibility with the cement paste;
(b) rough angular surface, which improves the
physical bond with the paste; and (c) the presence of
reactive silica, which improves the chemical bond with
the paste.
Cement blend
As for the cement blend, an important feature is the
C/S ratio. A low C/S ratio results in a low calcium
hydroxide (Ca(OH)2) content in the original mix and
ensures a more beneficial hydrothermal reaction.
Calcium hydroxide is not desirable because it
dissociates at about 400 3C into CaO and CO . The

CaO rehydrates expansively and detrimentally upon
cooling and exposure to moisture. The C/S ratio is
reduced in practice by the use of slag, PFA or silica
fume. Tests by the author show that the use of slag
produces the best results at high temperatures,
followed by PFA and then silica fume. The relatively
low performance of the silica fume cement paste
(contrary to its high durability performance at room
temperature) may be attributed to the dense, low
permeability structure of the paste which does not
readily allow moisture to escape from the heated
concrete, thus resulting in high pore pressures and the
development of microcracks.
EXPLOSIVE SPALLING
Spalling is the violent or non-violent breaking off of
layers or pieces of concrete from the surface of
a structural element when it is exposed to high and
rapidly rising temperatures, as experienced in fires
with heating rates typically 20–30 3C/min\.
Spalling can be grouped into four categories:
(a) aggregate spalling; (b) explosive spalling;
(c) surface spalling; (d) corner/sloughing-off spalling.
The first three occur during the first 20–30 min into
a fire and are influenced by the heating rate, while the
fourth occurs after 30–60 min of fire and is influenced
by the maximum temperature. Surface and explosive
Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION
Fig. 6. Concrete mix design for improved performance at high
temperature; some factors that improve performance at room
temperature, e.g. low permeability from the use of SF or low
water/cement ratio (w/c) increase risk of explosive spalling
spalling are violent while corner/sloughing-off
spalling is non-violent. It could also be argued that
surface spalling is really a subset of explosive spalling
which is the most serious, and hence most researched,
form of spalling.
The damage caused to a concrete structure by
spalling can render fire safety design calculations
inaccurate and lead to significantly reduced levels of
safety in fire. It is, therefore, important to: (a) better
understand the fundamental mechanisms responsible
for explosive spalling of concrete; (b) develop
a realistic predictive model; and (c) optimise (in terms
of cost and effectiveness) the methods for eliminating
explosive spalling in practice.
Factors influencing explosive spalling
Many material (e.g. permeability, saturation level,
aggregate size and type, presence of cracking and
reinforcement), geometric (e.g. section shape and size)
and environmental (e.g. heating rate, heating profile,
load level) factors have been identified from
experiments as influencing spalling of concrete in fire
(Table 1). The test results were used to produce
nomograms identifying spalling and non-spalling
zones (e.g. Fig. 7). A detailed account of the factors
influencing spalling is beyond the scope of this paper,
but the main factors are the heating rate (especially
above 3 3C min!1), permeability of the material, pore
saturation level (especially above 2–3% moisture
content by weight of concrete), the presence of
reinforcement and the level of external applied load.
Low-permeability, high-performance concrete (HPC)
is more likely to explosively spall, and to experience
multiple spalling, than normal-strength concrete,
despite its higher tensile strength. This is because
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
 FIRE AND CONCRETE 435

Table 1 Characteristics of the different forms of spalling

Spalling Time of Nature Sound Influence Main
occurrence (min) influences
.....................................................................................................................
Aggregate 7d30 Splitting Popping SuperficialH, A, S, D, W
Corner 30d90 Non-violent None T, A, Ft, R
Can be serious
Surface 7d30 Violent Cracking Can be serious
H, W, P, Ft
Explosive 7d30 Violent Loud bang Serious H, A, S, Fs, G,
L, O, P, Q, R,
S, W, Z
.....................................................................................................................
A"aggregate thermal expansion, D"aggregate thermal diffusivity, Fs"shear strength of concrete, Ft"tensile strength of concrete, G"age
of concrete, H"heating rate, L"loading/restraint, O"heating profile, P"permeability, Q"section shape, R"reinforcement,
S"aggregate size, T"maximum temperature, W"moisture content, Z"section size

Fig. 7. Explosive spalling empirical envelope for normal-strength Fig. 8. Gradients of temperature, pore pressure and moisture in
concrete, showing influences of moisture content and applied normal and high-performance concrete sections during heating
stress[24] from one unsealed surface (Anderberg & Khoury)

greater pore pressures build up during heating
(Fig. 8), owing to the material’s low permeability.
Also, the peak in pore pressure occurs nearer to the
surface for HPC which explains why thinner concrete
sections spall repeatedly from HPC concrete in fire.
Mechanisms of explosive spalling
The mechanisms proposed to explain the explosive
spalling of concrete fall under three categories:
E pore pressure spalling: as favoured by Shorter
& Harmathy[17], Meyer-Ottens[18], Aktarruzzaman
& Sullivan[19], Khoylou[20], Ichikawa[21];
E thermal stress spalling: as favoured by Saito[22],
Dougill[23];
E combined pore pressure and thermal stress spalling:
as favoured by Zhukov[24], Sertmehmetoglu[25],
Connolly[26].
Pore pressure spalling
This has been predicted using a ‘moisture clog
model’[17], ‘vapour drag forces model’[18] or an
‘idealized spherical pore model’[19]. The main factors
which influence pore pressure spalling are the
permeability of the concrete, the initial water
saturation level, and the rate of heating. The
generation of pore pressure in the heated concrete
(Fig. 8) is difficult to predict reliably. The models range
in complexity from the simple use of steam tables to
full solution of the equations of state using finite
element analysis[27,28]. The majority of such models
predict pore pressure levels which are substantially
less than the tensile strength of concrete. Furthermore,
test measurements of pore pressures in unsealed
concrete specimens also usually produced levels less
than the tensile strength of concrete[25,29,30]. However,
Khoylou[20], suggested that large hydraulic pressures
could be generated in heated saturated sealed spherical
pores to cause hydraulic pore pressure explosive
spalling. This model, based on elastic theory, does not
consider the influence of moisture migration between
pores, nor the role of creep, and may therefore greatly
overestimate pore pressures. An analytical model by
Connolly[26], based on the velocities of the moisture
clog and the 100 3C isotherm also consistently
predicted pore pressures greater than those measured.
All this serves to illustrate how difficult it has been to
accurately predict pore pressures and pore pressure
explosive spalling by means of analytical methods.
Thermal stress spalling
At a sufficiently high heating rates, ceramics can
experience explosive spalling. This is attributed to
excessive thermal stresses generated by rapid heating,

Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
436 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION

and demonstrates that factors other than pore

pressures may contribute to explosive spalling.
Heating concrete generates temperature gradients
(Fig. 8) that induce compressive stresses close to the
heated surface (due to restrained thermal expansion)
and tensile stresses in the cooler interior regions
(Fig. 9). Surface compression may be augmented by
load or prestress, which are superimposed upon the
thermal stresses. However, very few concrete
structures are loaded to levels where the necessary
failure stress state is reached. This makes thermal
stress spalling, by itself, a relatively rare (but not
impossible) occurrence. Predicting spalling based on
thermal stresses would have the merit of simplicity, as
reasonable estimates may be made of their magnitude
using nonlinear constitutive models. However,
although Dougill’s theory[23] is more realistic than
Saito’s[22], it still does not explain the obvious role of Fig. 9. Calculated elastic thermal stress profiles in the central
moisture in spalling. cross-section of a 60 mm diameter gravel concrete cylinder heated
uniformly on the curved surface at a constant rate of 13C min!1,
without relaxation by creep
Combined thermal stress and pore pressures
Explosive spalling generally occurs under the
combined action of pore pressure, compression in the
exposed surface region (induced by thermal stresses
and external loading) and internal cracking (Fig. 10).
Pore pressure spalling may act by itself for small
unloaded specimens. For larger specimens, the pore
pressure will need to be considered, together with
both the thermal and load-induced stresses, before the
likelihood of explosive spalling, can be assessed.
Cracks develop parallel to the surface when the sum of
the stresses exceeds the tensile strength of the material.
This is accompanied by a sudden release of energy and
a violent failure of the heated surface region.
Sertmehmetoglu[25] suggested that the effect of load
was simply to create planes of weakness parallel to the
heated face of the concrete. He demonstrated that the
action of relatively small pore pressures from within
such planes could initiate spalling. Pore pressure Fig. 10. Forces acting in heated concrete[24]
spalling and thermal stress spalling, both influenced
by external loading, act singly or on combination,
depending upon the section size, the type of concrete have failed[26] owing to the complex microstructure
and the moisture content. In both normal and high- and multiphase nature of heated concrete, which does
performance concretes, the evidence suggests that not readily lend itself to simplified analytical models.
pore pressure spalling is the more dominant of the two The inability to predict the occurrence of spalling has
– hence the effectiveness of the polypropylene fibres. been a limiting factor in the development of robust
However, unpublished test results suggest that in models capable of predicting the response of concrete
some ultra-high-performance concretes, containing structures to fire. It is only now that a fully
large proportions of expansive silica, thermal stress comprehensive and coupled nonlinear finite element
spalling may assume a greater importance – and the model is being developed to predict the pore pressures
use of large quantities of polypropylene fibres does and spalling in heated concrete structures (see below).
not seem to prevent spalling. Further research is
required to settle this issue.
Design against spalling
While a whole raft of measures (Table 2) have in the
Prediction of spalling past been proposed to combat explosive spalling, the
Until now, the prediction of spalling during heating only really effective method has so far been the use of
has been largely an imprecise empirical exercise. a thermal barrier, protecting the surface of the concrete
Attempts to predict spalling by analytical methods from the fire. It is only now that polypropylene (pp)

Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447

Table 2 Evaluation of preventive measures for the spalling of concrete
Method Effectiveness
...............................................................................................................................................
Polypropylene fibres Very effective, even in high-strength concrete
Air-entraining agent Very effective
Thermal barrier Very effective
Moisture content control Reduces vapour pressure
Compressive stress control Reduces explosive pressure
Choice of aggregate It is best to use low expansion and
small-size aggregate
Reinforcement Reduces spalling damage
Supplementary reinforcement Reduces spalling damage
Choice of section shape Thicker sections reduce spalling damage
...............................................................................................................................................
fibres are being considered for use in the concrete mix
for the purpose of increasing permeability during
heating above 160 3C, thus reducing pore pressures
and the risk of spalling. Polypropylene fibres melt at
about 160 3C and provide channels in the concrete for
moisture to escape. A further, recent advance has been
the development by the company Fibrin of low-melt
pp fibres (130 3C) which promise to be even more
effective, particularly for low-permeability dense and
saturated concrete. Nevertheless, there remain two
key areas for further research and development,
namely: (a) the exact mechanism by which pp fibres
operate is not properly understood (e.g. the influence
of the melting/evaporation process of the fibres upon
the microstructure of the concrete and the additional
role of microcracking); and (b) the use of pp fibres in
practice is yet to be optimized (e.g. type and amount of
fibres in relation to applied load and concrete
strength). There is unpublished evidence that even
large quantities of pp fibres may not prevent explosive
spalling of some ultra-high-performance concretes in
fire. When such a material contains high levels of
expansive silica, thermal stress spalling may become
more dominant than in normal concrete.
CRITICAL TEMPERATURES
Three critical temperatures for structural concrete can
be identified (Fig. 2):
E spalling critical surface temperature: experimental
evidence indicates that the concrete surface
temperatures when spalling occurs fall in the
range of about 250–420 3C[19,26,31], depending
upon the heating rate and characteristics of the
concrete.
Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
FIRE AND CONCRETE 437
Comments
May not prevent spalling in expansive ultra- high-
strength concrete. Does not reduce
temperatures d only pore pressures
But can reduce strength
Also reduces concrete temperatures and
increases fire resistance
Normal moisture content is usually above the ‘no
spalling’ limit for most buildings
Not economical as section sizes increase
If low moisture lightweight concrete is used,
additional fire resistance is possible, but in high-
moisture conditions violent spalling is promoted.
Presence of reinforcement limited spread of
spalling in the Channel Tunnel fire
Difficult to use in small and narrow sections
Important for I-beams and ribbed sections
E initiation of strength loss critical temperature: this
depends upon the type of concrete and for siliceous
concrete it is about 300 3C, but can be lower for flint
aggregate concrete and higher for granite aggregate
concrete.
E generic loss of load-bearing capacity critical
temperature: Portland-cement-based concretes
experience considerable creep at about 550–600 3C,
at which temperature the material would not be
structurally useful in the ‘hot’ state.
Fire and concrete structures
Fire impacts upon concrete structures insofar as it
generates a heat flow into the concrete’s exposed
surface, producing temperature, moisture and pore
pressure gradients within the concrete mass. Thermal
strains, stresses and cracking develop within the
heated structure. Explosive spalling of the concrete
can take place. Also, both the concrete and steel, as
well as the bond between them, experience strength
losses upon heating. The designer should, therefore,
ensure that all these factors combined do not prejudice
the structure’s primary separating and/or load-
bearing functions for the duration of, and following,
the fire.
TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION
Knowledge of the development of temperature
distribution in concrete structures is the first key step
in the understanding of the structure’s behaviour in
fire. Air temperatures in fires frequently exceed
900 3C. However, the good insulating properties of
concrete mean that the temperature gradient is large
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
438 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION

and only the temperature of the outside layer is

markedly increased, while the temperature of the
internal concrete remains comparatively low. This fact
is illustrated by the example of a 160-mm, wide beam
exposed on three sides to a standard ISO 834 (BS 476)
fire[9]. The temperature after 1 h of fire exposure in the
region away from the influence of the corner will be as
follows: 600 3C at 16 mm depth and 300 3C at 42 mm
depth (Fig. 11). The 500 3C isotherm reaches 10 mm at
30 min, 20 mm at 60 min, and 32 mm at 90 min. The
temperature at a given distance from the exposed
surface will be higher at corners of an element due to
the transmission of heat from the two surfaces. Thus,
the profile of equitemperatures of a cross-section is
rounded at corners (Fig. 11).

FIRE RESISTANCE
The concept of ‘fire resistance’ has been for decades at
the heart of research, design and assessment of
concrete structures exposed to fire. Fire resistance can
be defined as the ability of an element (not a material)
of building construction to fulfil its designed function
for a period of time in the event of a fire. Fire resistance
time of a structural element exposed to a standard
furnace test is defined as the time elapsed before a fire
limit state is violated. These fire limit states are given
in BS 476: Part 20 as follows for separating (E and I)
and load-bearing (R) functions[5]:
E limit state for insulation (I): A fire on one side of
a wall, or underside of a floor, acting as
a compartment boundary, should not cause
combustion of objects on the unexposed side. Limits
of temperature rise of 140 3C (average) or 180 3C
(peak) above ambient temperature are specified in
the standard fire resistance test.
E limit state for integrity (E): A wall or floor acting as
a compartment boundary should not allow passage
of smoke or flame from one compartment to another
as a result of breaks or cracks in the wall or floor.
Both insulation and integrity criteria also apply to
members embedded in walls or floors.
E limit state for load-carrying capacity (R): The
members in a structural assembly should resist the
applied loads in a fire.
Hence, normally, each part of the structure will have
a different function in fire, according to its type and
position. This function could be to contain a fire (as
with non-load-bearing walls), to support the design
loads (as with beams and columns), or both (as with
a floor). The fire design process for separating
structures comprise only thermal analysis, whilst for
load-bearing structures both thermal and structural
analyses are required.
Design for fire resistance also aims to ensure:
E overall dimensions of the section of an element
sufficient to keep the heat transfer through this
element within acceptable limits;
Fig. 11. Temperature contours in a quarter section of a concrete
beam heated on three sides in ISO 834 (or BS 476) fire:
(a) contours after 60 min; (b) 5003C isotherms after 30, 60 and 90
min[9]
E average concrete cover to the reinforcement
sufficient to keep the temperature of the
reinforcement below critical values (500 3C for
reinforcing steel and 350 3C for prestressing steel)
before the required fire resistance period is attained.
Concrete cover in fire applications is defined as the
distance between the nearest heated face of the
concrete and the surface of the main reinforcement,
or an average value determined in BS 8110: Part 2[15].
This cover is defined differently from the ‘nominal
cover’ of BS 8110: Part 1[15].
The cover thickness for a specified steel temperature
limit depends upon the thermal diffusivity (k/
C
where k"thermal conductivity, C"specific heat,
and
"density) of aggregate used. The cover has to
provide lasting protection to the reinforcement from
both fire and environmental attack. Choice of cover
thickness should be on the basis of the more onerous
requirement[15]. Reinforced or prestressed members
generally fail in fire as a result of excessive
temperature rise in the steel. This failure applies
mainly to simply supported flexural members. Loss of
concrete cover by spalling of the concrete, especially
explosive spalling in the region of the tensile steel,
endangers the carrying capacity because of the
increased rate of heat transfer to the steel and
reduction in overall thickness of concrete. Hence,
a maximum cover to reinforcement is recommended
to reduce the potential for spalling, but a minimum

Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447

thickness is required for thermal insulation. Therefore,
the actual thickness should be between these two
limits.
The fire resistance of a whole concrete structure
would not necessarily be that ascribed to its individual
elements. Better fire behaviour could arise from such
factors as robustness, adequate continuity of
reinforcement, reduced level of loading, composite
construction, and the availability of alternative paths
for load support. The provision of continuity of
reinforcement in the design allows the redistribution
of forces and moments to gradually take place
towards the parts of the structure not exposed to
the fire as the exposed parts are weakened, thus
ensuring an improved fire resistance relative to the
situation of the simply supported single element. It is,
therefore, necessary to pay particular attention to
detailing.
Factors affecting fire resistance of concrete elements
according to BS 8110[15] are:
E size and shape of elements;
E disposition and properties of reinforcement or
tendon;
E the load supported;
E the type of concrete and aggregate;
E protective concrete cover provided to reinforcement
or tendons;
E conditions of end support.
E the overall thickness of the section in order to keep
heat transfer through the floor or wall within
acceptable limits;
E provision of surface insulation.
Fire engineering calculations, or a full-scale test, allow
interaction between these factors to be taken into
account (see next section).
TYPES OF FAILURE IN FIRE
The failure of structural concrete in fire varies
according to the nature of the fire (e.g. rate of
temperature increase and maximum temperature); the
loading system; and the type of structure exposed to
the fire. Failure could occur due to:
E loss of bending or tensile strength;
E loss of bond strength;
E loss of shear or torsional strength;
E loss of compressive strength;
E spalling of concrete (discussed above).
Bending`tensile failure
Bending failure of load-bearing bending elements
generally occurs when the reinforcement fails
as the tensile strength of the steel is reduced on
heating. Failure due to bending in the centre of the
span of length L of simply supported load-bearing
members is indicated by deflections of the order of
L/30.
Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
FIRE AND CONCRETE 439
Bond failure
Failure of reinforced concrete members may occur in
fire when heating reduces the bond strength between
the steel and concrete. Bond failure is usually
combined with concrete tensile failure as the tensile
strength decreases rapidly with heating.
Shear`torsion failure
Shear or torsion failure in fire is influenced by the
concrete tensile strength and is much more
complicated to determine than bending failure,
because of limited experimental experience. As torsion
members with a defined fire resistance are rare, the
solution of the problem may be shifted to individual
cases, if any. There is, however, practical interest in
shear beams which are usually designed with a special
shear reinforcement.
Compressive failure
Reinforced concrete members under compression (e.g.
columns) usually fail in fire due to concrete failure in
the compression zone as its strength diminishes with
heating. The loss in strength of the reinforcement with
heating is of minor importance in cases where the steel
content is small, but not at high steel contents, where
both the concrete and steel influence the load-bearing
behaviour.
METHODS OF ASSESSMENT OF FIRE RESISTANCE
The engineer has at his/her disposal three methods of
assessment of fire resistance (Fig. 12), namely:
E fire testing;
E prescriptive methods;
E performance-based methods.
The first two have been established for several
decades. It is only now that performance-based
methods based on fire engineering calculation are
being accepted in an increasing number of countries.
For any of the three methods of design, the detailing of
the structure should be such as to implement the
design assumptions for the changes during a fire in the
distribution of load and the characteristic strengths of
the materials. In particular, the reinforcement
detailing should ensure that both elements and the
structure as a whole contain adequate supports, ties,
bonds and anchorages for the required fire
resistance[16].
Fire testing
Fire testing of an element or subassembly when
exposed to a ‘standard’ temperature–time regime (e.g.
according to BS 476[5]), is the most expensive of the
three options, particularly for larger, more complex
structures. Any form of concrete element covered by
a valid fire test report may be deemed to have the fire
resistance ascribed to it by such a test, provided that
the element has similar details of construction, stress
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
440
Fig. 12. Three main options of concrete fire assessment and
design process; performance-based methods are gaining
acceptance in an increasing number of countries
level, and support as the test specimen. Standard tests
for fire resistance are usually conducted on single
building elements where it is not feasible to reproduce
in the test furnace the nature and magnitude of
restraint and continuity of the adjoining construction.
In some cases, therefore, the fire performance of
structural elements in the building could be expected
to be much greater than that of the simple element
when tested in the furnace. In other cases, thermal
movement can reduce the fire resistance. Another
advantage of fire testing over prescriptive methods is
that it provides an indication of temperature
distributions within, and deflections of, the element
during heating as well as detailing weaknesses not
discovered without tests. However, its accuracy is
sensitive to the testing apparatus and method
employed, hence the considerable discussions at
international committee level on harmonization of
laboratory testing between different countries. The
preparation for testing and performing the test is
lengthy, and the cost of setting it up and execution is
high. Furthermore, testing of a complete construction
in fire is a formidable task, as evidenced by the
full-scale fire tests undertaken on a building by the
Building Research Establishment in the great airship
hangar in Cardington, England.
Prescriptive methods
Current building fire engineering practice is largely
based on the application of prescriptive codes
whereby the engineer designs in accordance with
Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION
predetermined requirements, based on generic
occupancies or classes of fire risk. Prescriptive codes
are rigid and restrictive, and do not allow for
engineering thinking. Although the cheapest to
implement, they are the least accurate of the three
methods. The safety level achieved by this method can
vary significantly. In many cases it is very
conservative and not cost efficient, but sometimes it
can also be unsafe[4]. The fire resistance requirement in
the prescriptive method is expressed by target fire
resistance ratings for members exposed to BS 476 or
ISO 834 fire. This means that a structural member
should be designed in such a way that it does not
collapse within 30, 60, 90 or may be 120 min. No
classes in between are available. Hence, if a test
specimen collapses after 59 min, it will be categorized
in the R30 fire class, irrespective of the loading level.
Such deficiencies have provided the driving force for
the development and wider acceptance of
performance-based methods (see below).
Engineers apply prescriptive methods for the fire
resistance of building elements or subassemblies from
tabulated data presented in the codes and standards.
BS 8110: Part 2: 1985[15] gives tables specifying
minimum dimensions, including cover (in mm) for
fire resistances ranging from 30 min to 4 h for concrete
beams, columns and floors. The standard refers,
erroneously, only to density of the concrete, hence the
distinction made in the tables just between ‘dense’ and
‘lightweight’ (i.e. (2000 kg m!3) concretes and their
strength change with temperature. The foregoing
discussion on materials properties shows that the
behaviour of heated ‘dense’ concrete is very
dependent upon the type of aggregate used. Some
aggregates (e.g. Thames gravel) break up at 350 3C
while others (e.g. granite and gabbro) can be thermally
stable even at 600 3C. Also, the behaviour of the
lightweight aggregates depends upon their density.
The data also distinguishes between simply supported
and continuous constructions for flexural members for
both reinforced and prestressed concrete. The tables
are based on the assumption that the elements are
supporting the full design load. The tabulated data for
simply supported elements are based on the steel
reinforcement retaining a proportion of its strength at
high temperatures; reinforcing bars and prestressing
tendons are considered to retain about 50% of their
ambient strength at 550 and 450 3C respectively. If any
dimension of a particular construction is less than the
minimum specified in the tables and it is not possible
or desirable to increase it to meet the requirements, the
fire resistance may be enhanced by the application of
a protective coating, system or membrane[32]. It is
necessary to appreciate that these periods do not
signify the duration of an actual fire. For example
a 60-min fire does not imply that a construction is
expected to withstand a fire of 60 min duration, but
that it will withstand a fire of a longer or a shorter
duration whose severity corresponds to the 60-min
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447

furnace test. Specific provisions of test for fire
resistance of elements of structure in terms of the three
performance criteria mentioned above are given in the
Building Regulations[3]. The regulations also set out
the minimum periods of fire resistance in minutes for
elements of structure at basement, ground and upper
levels of various types of building. The regulations
state that where one element of structure supports or
carries or gives stability to another, the fire resistance
of the supporting element should be no less than the
minimum period of fire resistance for the other
element (whether that other element is load-bearing or
not). Circumstances for varying this principle are also
given[3].
Performance-based methods
Performance-based methods are based on fire
engineering calculations, and provide a cost-effective
and flexible method of assessment superior to
prescriptive methods. A given problem can be studied
for different fire scenarios, geometries, material
properties, loading or support conditions. This can be
performed in a relatively short period of time, thus
allowing a better understanding of the behaviour of
the structure subjected to fire until collapse. Moreover,
computer programs can even simulate structural
conditions that are very difficult to study in a fire test.
In the performance-based design, the structure is not
allowed to collapse during the complete fire process,
including the cooling phase[4].
Performance-based methods can be classified into
three categories of increasing sophistication and
complexity. These are (Fig. 12):
E simplified calculations based on limit state analysis;
E thermomechanical finite element analysis;
E comprehensive thermohydromechanical finite
element analysis.
Thermal analysis
For separating functions, only thermal analysis is
required. For the load-bearing function, thermal
analysis will need to be conducted in all three
performance-based categories as part of the structural
analysis. For the simplified limit state method, it
would be a stand-alone finite element calculation to
determine, for example, the location of the 500 3C (or
other) contour. Without taking into consideration
moisture migration, thermal analysis would provide
approximate results, particularly in the temperature
range 100–200 3C when moisture migration and
evaporation play a significant role. Normally this can
be partly accounted for by introducing a latent heat of
evaporation component to the specific heat capacity,
but this still does not entirely solve the problem.
This component may not be significant in terms of
load-bearing capacity assessment, but in other
examples (e.g. spalling or in nuclear reactor concrete)
it is important.
Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
FIRE AND CONCRETE 441
Software for thermal analysis fall under two
categories:
E general programs developed by professional
software houses. The most well-known are:
ABAQUS, ADINA, and ANSYS in the USA, and
PAFEC and LUSAS in the UK.
E fire-dedicated programs designed by research
workers in the field of fire. The most reputed are:
FIRES-T3 which was developed in 1977 at the
University of California, Berkeley, in the USA by
Bresler, Iding & Nizamuddin[33]; TASEF-2,
developed in 1979 by Wickstrom[34] in Sweden; and
TEMPCALC, developed in 1986 by Anderberg[35] in
Sweden. TEMPCALC continues to be improved and
used in practice on a range of fire applications,
including the simulation of the loss of surface-
spalled material and the thermal behaviour of
intumescent thermal coatings.
Simplified limit state analysis
Having determined the temperature distribution for
the structural element, either from the published
literature on a similar element or from thermal
analysis, a simplified limit state analysis is carried out,
using a technique first proposed by Anderberg[36]. He
suggests a very simple method of analysis, based on
the hypothesis that the thickness of the damaged
siliceous concrete is assumed to equal the average
depth of the 500 3C isotherm in the compression zone
of the cross-section. Damaged concrete (i.e. concrete
with temperatures in excess of 500 3C) is not expected
to contribute to the load-carrying capacity of the
member, whilst the residual concrete cross-section is
assumed to retain its full initial values of strength and
modulus of elasticity. Anderberg suggests that this
method, the ‘500 3C isotherm’, or ‘Effective cross-
section’ method, is applicable to a reinforced concrete
section with respect to axial load, bending moment
and their combinations. For this method to apply,
there should be minimum dimensions of the member,
depending upon fire resistance time or fire load
density[37]. One note of caution is that the choice of the
temperature isotherm will depend upon the type of
concrete used and its characteristic strength loss
against temperature. For certain concretes, the
isotherm temperature may well be below 500 3C, or
even below 400 3C.
Thermomechanical finite element analysis
The bulk of performance-based, fire-dedicated
software dating back to the 1970s falls into this
category. The thermal and mechanical analysis are
normally interfaced and not integrated. In other
words, the thermal calculation is carried out first for
the entire duration of the fire and then fed into the
mechanical analysis program to produce the stresses
and strains for the member/structure – there being no
interaction between the two analyses – and moisture
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
442 CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION

effects are also absent. Nevertheless, validation of the

results from such programs has consistently shown
that the deformations of simple elements can be
reasonably accurately predicted by such methods,
providing transient creep (or LITS) is incorporated
into the model, particularly for columns. The
modelling of LITS is relatively simple in fire-dedicated
programs where the duration of the analysis is in
minutes or a few hours. This is because LITS is largely
a function of temperature rather than time. Therefore,
time-dependent creep functions can be dispensed
with, without prejudicing the outcome. The absence of
a moisture migration analysis means that the
evaporation plateau and explosive spalling cannot be
predicted.
The first such fire-dedicated concrete program was
initially developed in 1974 at the University of
California and was called FIRES-RC by Becker
& Bresler[38]. That program was improved later by
Anderberg[39] who introduced a more realistic
concrete behavioural model. This program was
followed by CONFIRE, developed in 1982 by
Forsen[40] in Norway (valid so far only for siliceous
concrete); STABA-F, developed at the Technical Fig. 13. Simplified flow chart of thermohydromechanical finite
element analysis of heated concrete structures including spalling;
University of Braunschweig[41] in 1985; CEFICOSS most fire-dedicated finite element software are thermomechanical
developed in 1987 by Franssen[42] of the University of and exclude the hydral component. The thermal and mechanical
Liege; STRUCT, developed by the author and his PhD analyses are usually interfaced and not integrated, hence the inputs
student at Imperial College in 1991[43]; and the most and outputs are shown separately. With a fully integrated and
interactive model, the input data are not separated because they all
recent FIREXPO, developed in 1999 by the contractor contribute to the overall analysis
Bouygues, with input from the author, as part of the
HITECO research programme funded by the
European Commission[28].
are included and chemical–physical phase changes are
Comprehensive thermohydromechanical finite element incorporated, such as hydration–dehydration,
analysis evaporation–condensation and
A comprehensive analysis would incorporate thermal, adsorption–desorption. Phase changes in concrete are,
hydral and mechanical analyses in a fully integrated for the first time, incorporated directly in the transport
and interactive model (Fig. 13), capable of predicting mechanism of any concrete model. Melting and
explosive spalling (e.g. in tunnels) or the moisture evaporation of pp fibres are modelled as phase
state of the concrete containment of nuclear reactors changes. The complete behaviour of concrete in the
(an important function as a biological radiation elastic, inelastic and plastic ranges up to fracture is
shield). The first such model was developed in the described. Previous models were based on elastic
1970s by Bazant & Thonguthai[27], albeit with fracture only. The physical model is described with
limitations in the modelling. For example, the hydral emphasis being placed upon the real processes
component is considered to be a single-phase smeared occurring in concrete during heating, based on tests
fluid and spalling is not incorporated. carried out in several major laboratories around
A more advanced model was developed in 1999 at Europe as part of the wider HITECO research
Padua University in co-operation with the author and programme. A number of experimental and modelling
ENEA in Rome as part of a multinational programme advances are presented in this work. The stress–strain
of research funded by the European Commission[28]. behaviour of concrete in direct tension (determined
Called HITECOSP (high-temperature concrete experimentally for the first time) is input into the
spalling), it is a fully coupled nonlinear model, model. The hitherto unknown microstructural, hygral
designed to predict the behaviour, and potential for and mechanical behaviour of HPC/UHPC were
spalling, of heated concrete structures for fire and determined experimentally and the information is also
nuclear reactor applications. Concrete is considered as built into the model. It is also the first time that such
a multiphase material consisting of a solid phase, two a complex model has been developed with the aim of
gas phases and three water phases. predicting the behaviour of concrete at high
Refinements (such as the effect of damage on temperatures in general and explosive spalling in
permeability and nonlinearities due to temperature) particular. The fluid phase is considered to consist of

Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
 FIRE AND CONCRETE 443

water, dry air and vapour. The water phase consists of BRE. The review presented above is derived mainly
free capillary and physically bound water. Chemically from fire concrete research related to buildings and
bound water is considered part of the solid skeleton has, therefore, been adequately covered within the
until it is released on heating. The solid is fully scope of this paper.
deformable and able to experience elastic, damage,
thermal, creep, shrinkage, plastic, cracking strain TUNNEL FIRES
processes. Both ‘basic’ and, importantly, ‘transient’ There have been at least nine major fires in European
creep phenomena are included. Outputs are tunnels since 1990[46–52]. Two road-tunnel fires in 1999
presented in the form of three-dimensional colour (Mont Blanc, France/Italy and Tauern, Austria)
diagrams of temperature, vapour pressure, water claimed 51 lives, and in November 2000 a funicular-
saturation and damage distributions. An example railway-tunnel fire in Kaprun, near Salzburg, Austria
output for a tunnel lining segment subjected to fire is claimed 159 lives. Two earlier fires in the Great Belt
shown in Fig. 14. Tunnel (Denmark, 1994) and the Channel Tunnel
(UK/France, 1996) did not claim any lives, but
resulted in significant damage and spalling to the
Applications
tunnel segments, made of high-performance concrete
BUILDING FIRES (Table 3). The maximum temperatures reached in
Engineers and scientists have devoted attention to fire these fires ranged from 800 3C (Great Belt) to 1100 3C
in buildings for decades, and there is an abundance of (Channel), although the Dutch report even higher
books[44,45] and other literature on the subject. The temperatures of 1350 3C in their tunnel fires[10]. The
website of the Building Research Establishment duration of the fires (9 h for the Channel Tunnel) were
(brebookshop.com) currently has 198 publications significantly longer than those encountered in
related primarily to fire in buildings, most of them buildings (normally up to 2 h). This is at least partly
available from The Stationery Office or directly from due to the difficulties the fire services encounter in

Fig. 14. Profiles of temperature (shown by depth of shading) and gas pressure (shown by undulations) in an HPC concrete beam 20 min
into a fire[28]

Table 3 Concrete damage in recent tunnel fires

Tunnel Concrete strength
Maximum Fire Length affected Segment depth
temp. duration (h) affected
(3C)
...............................................................................................................................................
Great Belt 76 MPa, 28 day 800 7 16 segment rings Up to 68% spalled in
(1994) [50] (1.65 m long) layers along 10 segments
damaged in crown
Channel (1996) 110 MPa, mature 1100 9 500 m with 50 m Up to 100% of segment
[47,48] severely affected thickness spalled showing
by spalling grout
Mont Blanc Not reported 1000 50 900 m; tunnel crown Not reported
(1999) [49] most affected
............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
444
reaching and extinguishing tunnel fires. Also, the
closeness of the tunnel roof above the fire means that
the thermal plume has less height in which it can
entrain cooler air, thus resulting in higher
temperatures than in buildings.
The form of the tunnel also affects its ability to resist
fire. Rectangular tunnels of the cut-and-cover type,
formed of reinforced concrete, can be categorized as
structures whose principal loading condition is
controlled by bending considerations. Thus, a fire in
such a structure only has to cause spalling in the soffit
and loss of intrados rebar to seriously undermine the
stability of the structure. Circular tunnels behave
differently from rectangular ones as their principal
loading condition is hoop compression. In fire, the
hoop loads increase, owing to restrained expansion
near the heated surface. This loading could contribute
to increased risk of concrete spalling.
The damage to the concrete extended for
considerable lengths (500 m in the Channel Tunnel
and 900 m in the Mont Blanc tunnel) owing to the fact
that the fire spread from one goods vehicle to another.
The maximum depth of concrete damage to the
segment linings reached 68% of the thickness (i.e.
270 mm out of 400 mm) in the Great Belt tunnel to
100% of the thickness in the Channel Tunnel, caused
by multiple spalling of the high-performance concrete,
particularly in the lightly reinforced regions[46]. Two
factors limited the spread of multiple spalling: the
presence of reinforcement, and evaporation of
moisture from the heated concrete. Had the Channel
Tunnel not been bored (deliberately) in the
impermeable chalk layer, the loss of the concrete lining
would have resulted in flooding of the tunnel, with
a much more serious outcome. Firemen reported that,
on entering the fire zone in the Channel Tunnel, they
were showered with small, hot pieces of concrete in an
environment that resembled ‘hell’. The cost of repair
after the Channel Tunnel fire was @45 million[47].
Damage to the concrete segments would have been
largely avoided had it been protected by a layer of
thermal insulation. Nowadays, designers have
a second weapon in their armoury to protect concrete
from spalling, and that it the use of pp fibres in the
mix.
Despite the problems outlined above, even the latest
versions of design guides for tunnels do not
adequately cover this issue. For example, there is no
mention of the need for adequate fire protection
against explosive spalling in the 1999 version of the
Design Manual[53]. The manual emphasizes when
protection is not to be used, rather than recommends
when protection should be used. The two prime
recommendations of concrete cover and the use of
additional mesh reinforcement are not fully adequate
measures to protect concrete in the event of a medium
large fire. The statement in the manual that concrete is
‘inherently fire resisting’ is negated by the
phenomenon of explosive spalling.
Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION
The optimum passive fire protection design for
tunnels could involve the use of both pp fibres and
a thermal barrier. Without the thermal barrier, only
the problem of explosive spalling would be addressed
by the fibres, and temperature levels within the
concrete would not be reduced. Thermal barriers are
effective in reducing: (a) the risk of explosive spalling;
(b) deterioration of concrete mechanical properties;
and (c) steel temperatures. In Switzerland, a concrete
surface temperature limit is set at 250 3C by the use of
protective panels[46]. However, thermal barriers are
dearer than pp fibres, and a cost-effective design for
a new tunnel could, therefore, optimize on the use of
the thermal barrier to the areas that need most
protection (identified from knowledge of the fire
scenario, and from thermal calculations) while the
concrete would incorporate the fibres. The use of
fibres is, however, not possible in existing tunnels, and
thermal barriers are the only effective option for the
provision of passive fire protection, if deemed
necessary. A cost, benefit and risk analysis would
identify the optimum passive fire protection design.
Some tunnels are so lightly loaded, and employ such
relatively low-strength concrete, that designers may
feel that an increased concrete cover combined with
the use of the fibres would be an adequate protection
against fire.
Assessment after fire
An immediate and thorough appraisal is normally
required after a fire. Such an appraisal should begin as
soon as the building can be entered, and generally
before the removal of debris.
After a fire, an estimate is made of the severity of
temperature exposure in terms of an equivalent
standard test. A visual examination and classification
of damage for each structural member is carried out.
The maximum concrete temperature profile during
a fire can be estimated from results of previous tests,
from computer simulations, and from post-fire
assessment of the concrete (e.g. through its colour
change or by a thermoluminescent technique)[54]. Key
diagrams and schedules are then prepared. Following
this, a general assessment of the likely repairs required
may be drawn up. Normally, concrete exposed to
temperatures above 300 3C is replaced if possible.
Otherwise the dimensions are increased (e.g.
reinforced columns), depending upon the design load.
The fire resistance of a concrete structure is
frequently well above minimum requirements.
Because of the structural continuity present in most
buildings, there are reserves of strength which
may enable the structure to survive fires and be
reinstated. Reinstatement by repair will usually be
economically preferable to demolition and rebuilding
in terms of capital expenditure and earlier
reoccupation.
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447

Conclusions
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
The behaviour of concrete material in fire depends
very much on the specific concrete mix proportions
and constituents used, and is determined by complex
physicochemical transformations during heating.
However, all Portland-cement-based concretes lose
their load-bearing capacity at temperatures above
550–600 3C. At lower temperatures (i.e. that of the bulk
of the concrete member during fire) the deterioration
in mechanical properties during heating can be
reduced by judicious concrete mix design whereby
thermally stable aggregates of low thermal expansion
are employed, and cement blends are selected that
produce a low CaO/SiO2 ratio, but not too low
a permeability (also important to reduce the risk of
spalling). A key property unique to concrete amongst
structural materials is the load-induced thermal strain
(LITS), also called transient creep. Any structural
analysis of heated concrete that ignores LITS will be
wholly inappropriate and will yield erroneous results,
particularly for columns exposed to fire. Normal-
strength concretes and high-performance concretes
microstructurally follow similar trends when heated,
but ultra-high-performance concrete behaves
differently.
EXPLOSIVE SPALLING
The risk of explosive spalling in fire is significantly
reduced in high-permeability concrete. In low-
permeability concrete, spalling could be eliminated by
the appropriate inclusion of polypropylene fibres in
the mix (this requiring further research) and/or by
protecting the exposed concrete surface with a thermal
barrier. Until now, the prediction of spalling during
heating has been largely an imprecise empirical
exercise. Attempts to predict spalling by analytical
methods have failed, owing to the complex
microstructure and multiphase nature of heated
concrete. The inability to predict the occurrence of
spalling has been a limiting factor in the development
of robust models capable of predicting the response of
concrete structures to fire. This prediction is now
becoming possible with the development of
thermohydromechanical, nonlinear finite element
models capable of predicting pore pressures and
hence spalling in heated concrete structures. Experts
differ as to the mechanisms responsible for explosive
spalling. The balance of evidence suggests that it is the
combination of pore pressure spalling and thermal
stress spalling, with pore pressure spalling being the
dominant mechanism in both normal-strength and
high-performance-concretes. However, thermal stress
spalling may assume greater importance in ultra-high-
performance concretes containing a high proportion of
expansive silica. Further research is required to settle
this issue.
Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
FIRE AND CONCRETE 445
FIRE AND CONCRETE STRUCTURES
Failure of structural concrete in fire varies according to
the nature of the fire, the loading system and the type
of structure exposed to the fire. Failure could occur
due to loss of bending or tensile strength; loss of bond
strength; loss of shear or torsional strength; loss of
compressive strength; and spalling of the concrete.
The structural element should, therefore, be designed
to fulfil its separating and/or load-bearing function
without failure for the required period of time in
a given fire scenario. Design for fire resistance aims to
ensure overall dimensions of the section of an element
sufficient to keep the heat transfer through this
element within acceptable limits, and an average
concrete cover to the reinforcement sufficient to keep
the temperature of the reinforcement below critical
values long enough for the required fire resistance
period to be attained.
METHODS OF ASSESSMENT OF FIRE RESITANCE
The engineer has at his/her disposal three methods of
assessment of fire resistance: (a) fire testing;
(b) prescriptive methods; and (c) performance-based
methods. The first two have been established for
several decades. Prescriptive methods are rigid and
restrictive, and do not allow for engineering thinking,
nor can they be applied to whole structures. Although
the cheapest to implement of the three methods, they
are the least accurate. The safety level achieved can
vary significantly. Such deficiencies have provided the
driving force for the development and wider
acceptance of performance-based methods.
Performance-based methods employ fire engineering
calculations and provide a cost-effective and flexible
method of assessment of fire resistance that is superior
to prescriptive methods. Performance-based methods
can be classified into three categories of increasing
sophistication and complexity: (a) simplified
calculations based on limit state analysis;
(b) thermomechanical finite element analysis; and
(c) comprehensive thermohydromechanical finite
element analysis, also capable of predicting moisture
migration, pore pressures and explosive spalling. It is
only now that performance-based methods, first
introduced in the UK, are being accepted in an
increasing number of countries.
TUNNEL FIRES
A spate of major tunnel fires in the past few years has
resulted in significant spalling of the concrete lining,
up to 100% of its thickness. Based on experience in the
Netherlands, the Dutch authorities proposed a fire
scenario, RWS (more severe than the normal
hydrocarbon fire) with temperatures rapidly rising
and peaking at 1350 3C (melting temperature of
concrete) to simulate fire in tankers carrying petrol.
However, the maximum temperatures attained in
recent major fires in the UK, France, Denmark and
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
446
Austrian tunnels did not reach RWS levels, but the
durations of those fires far exceeded anything in the
standards. Guidelines for tunnel design urgently
require updating to incorporate the latest
developments in fire protection engineering,
particularly against spalling.
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to express his appreciation to
Dr Yngve Anderberg, of Fire Safety Design, for
kindly reading the manuscript, and for his useful
comments.
References and recommended reading
[1] Lea F & Stradling R. The resistance to fire of concrete and reinforced
concrete. Engineering. 1922: 114(2959).
[2] ACI Seminar. Concrete for nuclear reactors, Berlin 1970. Special
Publication SP34, Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute.
[3] Building Regulations. Approved Document B 3: Internal fire spread
(structure). The Building Regulations Approved Document B, Fire Safety, 1992.
[4] Anderberg Y. Fire engineering design of structures based on design
guides. 2nd International Conference on Performance-Based Codes and Fire Safety
Design Methods, Maui, USA, 7d9 May, 1998.
[5] British Standards Institution. BS 476, Fire tests on building materials
and structures. London: BSI. 1987.
[6] ISO 834. Fire resistance test d elements of building construction.
International Standard 834, 1975-11-01.
[7] Eurocode 1: Basis of design and actions on structures, Part 2.2: Actions on
structures exposed to fire. EN 1991. Brussels, Belgium: European Committee for
standardization.
[8] Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures, Part 1: General rules
d Structural fire design. EN 1992. This is currently being revised, see [9].
[9] Anderberg Y. Temperature Profiles. Annex A CEN/TC92/SC2/PT1-2
Doc 58, Lund Sweden: Institute of Technology. 2000.
[10] Varley N & Both C. Fire protection of concrete linings in tunnels.
Concrete May 1999: 27d30.
[11] Khoury GA, Sullivan PJE & Grainger BN. Strain of concrete during
first heating to 600 3C under load. Magazine of Concrete Research 1985: 37(133):
195d215.
[12] Khoury GA & Algar S. Advanced mechanical characterisation of HPC
and UHPC concretes at high temperatures. Proceedings of the International
Workshop on Durable Concrete Structures, Weimar, October 1998.
[13] Khoury GA, Sullivan PJE & Dias WPS. Deformation of concrete and
cement paste loaded at constant temperatures from 140 3C to 720 3C. Materials and
Structures 1986: 19(110): 97d104.
[14] Khoury GA. Compressive strength of concrete at high temperatures:
a reassessment. Magazine of Concrete Research 1992: 44(161): 291d309.
[15] British Standards Institution. BS 8110: Part 1:1985, Structural use of
concrete. Code of practice for design and construction. Part 2:1985, Structural use of
concrete. Code of practice for special circumstances. Section four, Fire resistance.
London: BSI. 1985.
[16] Khoury GA, Algar S, Felicetti R & Gambarova P. Mechanical
behaviour of HPC and UHPC concretes at high temperatures in compression and
tension. ACI International Conference on State-of-the-art in High Performance
Concrete, Chicago, March 1999.
[17] Shorter GW & Harmathy TZ. Moisture clog spalling. Proceedings of
lnstitution of Civil Engineers 1965: 20: 75d90.
[18] Meyer-Ottens C. The question of spalling of concrete structural elements
of standard concrete under fire loading. PhD Thesis. Technical University of
Braunschweig, Germany. 1972.
[19] Akhtarruzaman AA & Sullivan PJ. Explosive spalling of concrete
exposed to high temperature. Concrete Structures and Technology Research Report.
London: Imperial College. 1970.
[20] Khoylou N. Modelling of moisture migration and spalling behaviour in non-
uniformly heated concrete. PhD Thesis. University of London. 1997.
Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION
[21] Ichikawa Y. Prediction of pore pressures, heat and moisture transfer
leading to spalling of concrete during fire. PhD Thesis. University of London. 2000.
[22] Saito H. Explosive spalling of prestressed concrete in fire. Occasional
Report No. 22. Japan: Building Research Institute. 1965.
[23] Dougill JW. Modes of failure of concrete panels exposed to high
temperatures. Magazine of Concrete Research 1972; 24(79): 71d76.
[24] Zhukov VV. Explosive failure of concrete during a fire. Translation No. DT
2124. Borehamwood, England: 1975. Joint Fire Research Organisation.
[25] Sertmehmetoglu Y. On a mechanism of spalling of concrete under fire
conditions. PhD Thesis. King’s College, London. 1977.
[26] Connolly RJ. The spalling of concrete in fires. PhD Thesis. Aston
University. 1995.
[27] Bazant Z & Thonguthai W. Pore pressure in heated concrete walls
d theoretical prediction. Magazine of Concrete Research 1979: 31(107): 67d75.
[28] Khoury GA, Majorana C, Kalifa P, Aarup B, Giannuzzi M & Corsi
F. The HITECO BRITE project on the effect of heat on high performance concrete.
Proceedings of the International Workshop on Durable Concrete Structures,
Weimar, Germany, October 1998.
[29] Bremer F. Multi-layer (double-wall) prestressed concrete pressure vessel.
Nuclear Engineering and Design 1967: 5: 183d190.
[30] Thelanderson S. Mechanical behaviour of heated concrete under
torsional loading at transient high temperature conditions. Bulletin No. 46, Institute of
Technology. Lund, Sweden: 1974.
[31] Jumpannen U-M. Effect of strength on fire behaviour of concrete. Nordic
Concrete Research Publication No. 8. 1989.
[32] Morris WA, Read REH & Cooke GME. Guidelines for the construction
of fire-resisting structural elements. Building Research Establishment Report BR 128.
1988.
[33] Iding R, Bresler B & Nizamuddin Z. FIRES-T3, A computer program
for the fire response of structures-thermal. Report No. UCB FRG 77-15 Berkeley:
University of California. 1977.
[34] Wickstrom U. TASEF-2, A computer program for temperature analysis of
structures exposed to Fire. Lund, Sweden: Institute of Technology. 1979.
[35] Anderberg Y. TEMPCALC User Manual. Lund, Sweden: Institute of Fire
Safety Design (IFSD). 1986.
[36] Anderberg Y. Analytical fire engineering design of reinforced concrete
structures based on real fire characteristics. Proceedings of the FIP Congress, London
1978. Part 1: 112d121.
[37] Anderberg Y. Simplified cross-section calculation methods to be used for
bending moments and axial forces. Annex B CEN/TC92/SC2/PT1-2 Doc 58 Lund,
Sweden: Institute of Technology. 2000.
[38] Becker J & Bresler B. FIRES-RC, A computer program for the fire
response of structures-reinforced concrete frames. Report No. UCB FRG 74-3
Berkeley: University of California. 1974.
[39] Anderberg Y. Fire-exposed hyperstatic concrete structures. An
experimental and theoretical study. Bulletin 55 Lund, Sweden: Institute of Technology.
1976.
[40] Forsen NE. A theoretical study on the fire resistance of concrete
structures. SINTEF Report No: STF65 A82062, Cement and Concrete Research
Institute, Norwegian Institute of Technology. 1982.
[41] Rudolph K, Richter E, Hass R & Quast U. Principles for calculation
of load-bearing and deformation behaviour of composite structural elements
under fire action. Proceedings of 1st International Symposium on Fire Safety Science,
1985.
[42] Franssen JM. A study of the behaviour of composite steel-concrete
structures in fire. PhD. Thesis, Liege University, Belgium. 1987. (in French).
[43] Terro M. Computer modelling of the effect of fire on structures. PhD
Thesis, University London. 1991.
[44] Anchor RD, Malhotra HL & Purkiss JA (eds). Design of structures
against fire. UK: Elsevier. 1986, p. 251.
[45] Shields TJ & Silcock GW. Buildings and Fire. London: Longman. 1987.
[46] Lance GA. Effect of fire on tunnel lining stability. Tunnels and Tunnelling
International 1998: October, pp. 39}41.
[47] Coates J. Chunnel: They have been told. Construction News No. 6494,
5 December 1996: 1.
[48] Arches brace Chunnel for six month repair schedule. New Civil Engineer,
28 Nov 1996: 3d4.
[49] French Minister of the Interior, Equipment, Transportation and
Housing. Task force for technical investigation of the 24 March 1999 fire in the Mont
Blanc vehicular tunnel, Report of 30 June 1999.
[50] Tait JC & Hoj NP. Storebaelt eastern railway tunnel: Dania tunnel boring
machine fire d analysis and recovery. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers
1996: Supplement, 114 Special Issue 1: pp. 40d48.
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447
 FIRE AND CONCRETE 447

[51] PIARC Committee on Road Tunnels (C5). Fire and smoke control in
road tunnels. PIARC World Road Association, France, 1999. (ISBN 2-84060-064-1).
[52] Proceedings of the International conference on fires in tunnels,
Boras, Sweden, October 1994, Swedish National Testing and Research Institute Fire
Technology, SP Report 1994: 54.
[53] The Highways Agency (and other UK organizations). Design Manual
for Roads and Bridges: Design of Road Tunnels. Document BD 78/99, London: The
Stationery Office. 1999.
[54] Placido F. Thermoluminescence test for fire-damaged concrete. Magazine
of Concrete Research 1980: 32(11): 112d116.

Gabriel Alexander Khoury Bsc MSc PhD DIC Eurlng CEng

MIStructE MINucE MIFE MRAeS
Civil Engineering Department,
Imperial College, London SW7 2BU, UK
E-mail: Gabriel@clara.net

Copyright ^ 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2000; 2:429}447