Fire Resistance of Four-Face Heated Reinforced

Concrete Columns
K. H. Tan1 and Y. Yao2

Abstract: Until now, the determination of fire resistance of reinforced concrete 共RC兲 columns has essentially been based on tabulated
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Birla Institute of Technology - Pilani on 08/23/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

data. Clearly, a more scientific approach based on an understanding of the fundamental behavior of columns in fire is timely and will be
useful to structural engineers. This paper develops a simple and rational method to predict the fire resistance of RC columns subjected to
four-face heating. The effects of elevated temperature on material deterioration with regard to the strength and stability of the columns are
quantified. Both uniaxial and biaxial bending of columns is considered. The computer code SAFIR, developed at the University of Liege,
was used to analyze reported experimental results and to simulate the deformation response. The approach comprises three steps. The first
step is to determine the respective strength reduction factors of concrete and steel and the modulus of elasticity at elevated temperature
on the basis of numerical simulations using SAFIR. The second step is to calculate the balanced failure point of the column, so as to
determine whether the applied load eccentricity is small or large. The third step is to determine the failure load by a trial and error process.
This method can be regarded as an extension of the existing American Concrete Institute method for ultimate strength predictions of RC
columns at ambient temperature.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0733-9445共2003兲129:9共1220兲
CE Database subject headings: Columns; Fire resistance; Concrete, reinforced.

Introduction main reason is due to the complex temperature distribution in the

The design of concrete columns exposed to fire is generally based
on national and international code recommendations. In ENV
1992-1-2 共European Committee for Standardization 1995兲, the
design of concrete structures is essentially based on tabulated data
with appropriate concrete cover for different fire durations. Al-
though this procedure is useful, it should be supplemented by
simple calculation methods based on engineering theory. To date,
some research work on concrete material properties under fire
conditions has been conducted by Phan and Carino 共1998兲, and
some simplified methods have been developed by Hertz 共1993兲
and Dotreppe et al. 共1999兲 for reinforced concrete 共RC兲 columns
under fire conditions. There has been some published work on the
effect of transient creep straining on RC structures by Harmathy
共1967兲 and by Anderberg 共1983兲. This effect tends to hasten the
critical temperature. However, until now, the use of simplified and
rational methods for fire resistance predictions in reinforced con-
crete columns is still limited. On the other hand, such a method
has already been established by Burgess and Najjar 共1994兲 and by
Wang 共1997兲 for fire resistance predictions of steel columns. One
1
Associate Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Nanyang Technological Univ., BLK. N1, No. 01a-37, Nanyang Ave.,
Singapore 639798.
2
Research Student 共Masters in Engineering兲, School of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, Nanyang Technological Univ., BLK. N1,
No. 01a-37, Nanyang Ave., Singapore 639798.
Note. Associate Editor: Peter W. Hoadley. Discussion open until Feb-
ruary 1, 2004. Separate discussions must be submitted for individual
papers. To extend the closing date by one month, a written request must
be filed with the ASCE Managing Editor. The manuscript for this paper
was submitted for review and possible publication on January 31, 2002;
approved on October 2, 2002. This paper is part of the Journal of Struc-
tural Engineering, Vol. 129, No. 9, September 1, 2003. ©ASCE, ISSN
0733-9445/2003/9-1220–1229/$18.00.
cross section of RC columns, which is not amenable to a simpli-
fied method. Furthermore, in the column test results, there is a
wide scatter of experimental data due to spalling of the concrete.
This has a significant detrimental effect on the temperature of
reinforcement, which in turn affects the fire resistance of the col-
umns.
When the temperature is increased, the load bearing capacity
of a RC column will be reduced due to deterioration of the
strength and stiffness of the concrete and steel materials. This
paper presents a simplified method to calculate the load bearing
capacity of RC columns, at any time of fire exposure, as shown in
Fig. 1. When the temperature is increased, the axial force–
moment 共P-M兲 interaction diagram contracts. The relationship be-
tween temperature T and fire exposure time t can be taken from
any heating curve, such as ISO 834 共ISO 1975兲. Thus, one can
judge whether the column fails or not by comparing the failure
load at an assigned fire exposure time with the initial applied
load. The horizontal shaded plane represents all admissible com-
binations of moment and temperature for a given load P apply . Fig.
2 shows a family of P-M interaction curves for different tempera-
tures; they are the two-dimensional representations of the P-M-T
curves in Fig. 1. Clearly, the horizontal plane is represented by
the line P apply in Fig. 2, and P apply is in between the failure load at
T 1 and T 2 . Thus, after the temperature reaches T 2 , the column
will collapse. Before the temperature reaches T 1 , the column is
still safe. The proposed method for fire resistance prediction is
developed from the American Concrete Institute 共ACI兲 code
318-99 共ACI 2000兲 for column design at ambient temperature.
Both uniaxial and biaxial bending of columns is considered. Due
to the scarcity of test data, only the uniaxial model is compared
with test results. Biaxial model predictions are compared with the
results from SAFIR. As a finite element program, SAFIR accom-
modates various elements for different idealization, calculation
procedures, and various material models for incorporating stress-

1220 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / SEPTEMBER 2003

J. Struct. Eng. 2003.129:1220-1229.

 共1997兲 performed a thermal analysis for RC columns under an
ISO 834 fire using SAFIR, and they proposed the following ex-
pression for ␤ c4 (t) and ␤ yc (t), which are the respective strength
reduction factors for concrete and corner steel bars under four-
face heating:

兺 i⫽1
n
⬘ 共 t ISO兲
A ci f ci ␥ 共 t ISO兲
␤ c共 t 兲 ⫽ ⫽ (1)
A c f ⬘c 冑1⫹ 共 0.3A ⫺0.5
c t ISO兲 A
⫺0.25
c

␤ yc 共 t 兲 ⫽␥ 共 t ISO兲 ⫻ 1⫺ 冉 0.9t ISO

0.046d ⬘ ⫹0.11
⭓0 冊 (2a)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Birla Institute of Technology - Pilani on 08/23/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

where t ISO⫽ISO 834 fire exposure time in hours; A c ⫽cross sec-

Fig. 1. Failure path of column under different fire conditions
strain behavior. The stress-strain material laws are generally
linear-elliptic for steel and nonlinear for concrete. SAFIR can be
used for performing three different types of calculation, namely,
thermal, torsional, and structural analysis.
tional area in m2; d ⬘ ⫽concrete cover 共from the edge to the center
of the bar兲 in mm; f ⬘c ⫽concrete cylinder strength 共MPa兲 at ambi-
ent temperature; and 兺 A ci f ⬘ci (t ISO) is the summation of A c f ⬘c (t ISO)
when the cross section is divided into n finite meshes.
Eq. 共2兲 can be applied only to steel bars at corners, which are
subjected to direct heating from two adjoining faces. Thus, the
authors propose a separate factor ␤ ym (t) as the strength reduction
factor for other bars including the midside bars, which are sub-
jected to direct heating from one face only
␤ ym ⫽␥ 共 t ISO兲 ⫻ 1⫺ 冉 0.78t ISO
0.05c⫹0.1
⭓0 冊 (2b)

Derivation of Extended American Concrete Institute

Method ␥ 共 t ISO兲 ⫽ 再 1⫺0.3t ISO
0.85
for t⭓0.5 h
for t⬎0.5 h
(3)

The basic idea is to find the balanced and ultimate failure points
on P-M interaction curves corresponding to different constant
temperatures, as shown in Fig. 2.
Assumptions for the method include the following:
• The cross section remains plane after bending and normal to
the centroidal axis;
• Lateral-torsional buckling is neglected;
• Shear deformations are very small and negligible;
• Only a rectangular section is considered;
• The concrete has no tensile strength;
• The column is four-face heated under an ISO 834 fire;
• The column slenderness ratio ␭⭐100;
• The load eccentricity e⭐h/2;
• The cross section area is 0.04⭐A c ⭐0.36 m2 ; and
• The concrete cover is 20⭐c⭐60 nm.
Before extending the ACI method to elevated temperature calcu-
It should be noted that Eqs. 共1兲–共3兲 are applicable only to RC
columns that satisfy the following conditions:
• With siliceous aggregate;
• Subjected to an ISO 834 fire; and
• For a rectangular cross section with b/h⬍2.0, where b and h
are the width and depth of the column cross section, respec-
tively.
A modification factor ␣ ISO is applied to the fire exposure time
t to account for fire curves other than ISO 834, such as an ASTM
E 119 fire 共ASTM 1995兲. For an ASTM E 119 fire curve, the
equivalent ISO exposure time factor ␣ ISO can be estimated as
t ISO共 T f 兲
␣ ISO⬵ (4)
t ASTM共 T f 兲
where t(T f ) refers to the time taken to reach the failure tempera-
ture T f according to ISO 834 or ASTM E 119 fire curves

再
lations, the relationship between temperature and material
1.0 for an ISO 834 fire
strength has to be ascertained in the first step. Dotreppe et al. ␣ ISO⫽
0.90 for an ASTM E 119 fire 共 Yao 2002兲

Uniaxial Bending
To derive the calculation method for uniaxial bending, the first
step is to decide on the fire exposure time 共i.e., one or two hours兲.
Then the balanced failure point of the column at that time is
calculated. As shown in Fig. 3, the extent of the neutral axis c b
from the extreme compression fiber at balanced failure can be
expressed as
␧ u共 T 兲
c b 共 T 兲 ⫽ 共 h⫺d ⬘ 兲 (5)
␧ u 共 T 兲 ⫹␧ s 共 T 兲
where ␧ s (T)⫽␧ y (T) for the balanced failure point; E y (T)
⫽yield strain of steel at temperature T, which is equal to the ratio
of f y (T) to E s (T), assuming bilinear stress-strain curves for steel;
Fig. 2. Failure curves of column at different temperatures
␧ u (T)⫽ultimate concrete strain at temperature T 共the ACI code

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / SEPTEMBER 2003 / 1221

J. Struct. Eng. 2003.129:1220-1229.


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Birla Institute of Technology - Pilani on 08/23/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 3. Column subjected to eccentric compression force
recommends 0.003 at ambient temperature兲; f y (T)⫽yield
strength of steel 共MPa兲 at temperature T, which is equal to the
product of ␤ y (t) and f y (20°C); ␤ y (T)⫽yield strength reduction
factor of steel bars; E s (T)⫽modulus of elasticity of steel at tem-
perature T; h⫽depth of RC column in mm; and d ⬘ ⫽concrete
cover 共distance from extreme fiber to the center of the bar兲 in mm.
Since ␧ y (T) is related to the temperature field and the tem-
perature of steel is a function of time and concrete cover, the
writers propose the following equations, which can be used for
either corner bars or midside bars by simply substituting ␤ y (t)
with ␤ yc (t) 共corner bars兲 or ␤ ym (t) 共midside bars兲, respectively:
f y 共 T 兲 ⫽␤ y 共 t 兲 ⫻ f y 共 20°C兲
E s 共 T 兲 ⫽␤ ES 共 t 兲 ⫻E s 共 20°C兲
␤ ES 共 t 兲 ⫽0.8⫻␤ 2y 共 t 兲 ⫹0.2⫻␤ y 共 t 兲
where ␤ ES (t) is the reduction factor for the steel elastic modulus
and is dependent on the concrete cover, temperature distribution
field in the cross section, and fire curve. The relationship between
␤ ES (t) and the fire exposure time t for four different concrete
covers is shown in Fig. 4. Clearly, into the fire exposure time,
␤ ES (t) is reduced most rapidly with the smallest concrete cover.
Eq. 共8兲, which describes the reduction factor of E s correspond-
ing to different temperatures, is developed using the SAFIR pro-
gram. Nine cross sectional areas of columns ranging from
200 mm⫻200 mm to 600 mm⫻600 mm in increments of
50 mm⫻50 mm are analyzed in the case study. It is required to
Fig. 4. Relationship between reduction factor ␤ ES and time
corresponding to different concrete covers
1222 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / SEPTEMBER 2003
J. Struct. Eng. 2003.129:1220-1229.
find the temperature of each element of the cross section for a
given time from the output file of SAFIR. The data are taken at
intervals of 10 min in a 4-h fire exposure time. The deterioration
factor ␤ ES (t) for the modulus of elasticity of steel can then be
developed. From the temperature field of the steel bars with dif-
ferent concrete covers, cross sections, and fire exposure times, the
respective reduction factors of the modulus of elasticity (␤ ES )
and the yield strength of steel bars (␤ y ) can be calculated by the
formulas in the Eurocode for E s and f y at elevated temperature
共European Committee for Standardization 1995兲. After studying
different cases and performing least-squares regression, Eq. 共8兲 is
recommended to describe the reduction factor of the modulus of
elasticity for steel.
As for the concrete material, the term E c (T) is the modulus of
elasticity for the entire cross section at elevated temperature. To
derive the reduction factor for the modulus of elasticity of con-
crete, a similar method can be applied by SAFIR. However, unlike
steel, the deterioration factor of concrete is related to all elements
of the cross section due to the nonlinear temperature distribution
in concrete. In this approach, it is required to combine the modu-
lus of elasticity E with the moment of inertia I of the correspond-
ing element to give the E c I value. The reason is that when a
column is under fire attack, the strength and modulus of elasticity
of the outer fiber will deteriorate rapidly. However, since the mo-
ment of inertia of the outer fiber about the centroid is greater, it is
incorrect to use the average value of the whole cross section to
describe the deterioration factor of E. This will lead to unsafe
prediction as the actual product of E c and the stiffness of the outer
(6) fibers is much lower.
The derivation of E c I is as follows:
(7)
f ⬘c 共 T 兲 ⫽␤ c 共 t 兲 ⫻ f ⬘c 共 20°C兲 (9)
(8)
兺 i⫽1
n
共 E cI 兲 i共 T 兲 兺 i⫽1
n
共 E i A i y i2 兲共 T 兲
␤ EC1 ⫽ ⫽ (10)
共 E cI 兲 w共 T 兲 共 E cI 兲 w共 T 兲
where 兺 i⫽1n
(E c I) i (T) is the summation of (E c I) at temperature T
when the cross section is divided into n finite meshes; and
(E c I) w (T) is the E c I value of the whole cross section; E i
⫽elastic modulus of mesh i as affected by heat; y i ⫽distance
from the center of the mesh to the centroidal axis; and A i ⫽area of
mesh i. It should be noted that the factor ␤ EC1 accounts for the
nonuniform temperature distribution across the whole cross sec-
tion, with the outer fibers in the hottest zone. Thus, ␤ EC1 trans-
forms the section into one with uniform temperature:
共 E c I 兲 w 共 T 兲 ⫽␤ EC2 ⫻E c 共 20°C兲 I (11)
whereas ␤ EC2 relates the section properties at elevated tempera-
ture with ambient temperature:
n
共 E c I 兲共 T 兲 ⫽ 兺 共 E c I 兲 i共 T 兲 ⫽␤ EC1共 t 兲 ⫻␤ EC2共 t 兲 ⫻E c共 20°C兲 I
i⫽1
⫽␤ EcI 共 t 兲 ⫻E c 共 20°C兲 I (12)
␤ EcI 共 t 兲 ⫽ 共 1.1⫻A 0.15
c 兲
t ISO
⫻␤ c 共 t 兲 (13)
where t ISO is in hours and A c in m2; and ␤ Ec1 (t) is equal to the
product of ␤ EC1 and ␤ EC2 .
Again, Eq. 共13兲, which describes the reduction factors of E c I
corresponding to different temperatures, is developed using the
SAFIR program. The relationship between the reduction factor
␤ EcI (t) and the fire exposure time corresponding to four different
square cross sections is shown in Fig. 5.
On the other hand, since the temperature at the column surface
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Birla Institute of Technology - Pilani on 08/23/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 5. Relationship between reduction factor ␤ EcI and time

corresponding to different cross sections

Fig. 6. Difference of stress block transformation at ambient and

is very close to the heating curve, the strain failure criterion elevated temperature
␧ u (T) is not related to the temperature field of the entire cross
section. Neither ␧ 1 (T) nor ␧ ult(T) of the Eurocode can be used as
the strain failure criterion; the former marks the beginning of 关 1,000⫻ f ⬘c 共 T 兲兴 /6.9⫺4,000
␤ 1 ⫽0.85⫺0.05⫻
strain softening, while the latter marks the end. Thus, the writers 1,000
propose a set of values for ␧ u (T) corresponding to different tem-
peratures, as shown in Table 1, where ␧ 1 (T)⬍␧ u (T)⬍␧ ult(T).
Linear interpolation can be applied for strain between any two ⫽0.85⫺0.05⫻ 冉 f c⬘ 共 T 兲
6.9
⫺4 冊 (15)
temperatures. These values are obtained from the addition of 0.5
and 0.65⭐␤ 1 ⭐0.85. It should be noted that the writers propose
⫻10⫺3 strain to the corresponding yield strain ␧ 1 (T) in EC2-
1992-1-2 共European Committee for Standardization 1995兲. If ex- f ⬘c (t) instead of f ⬘c in Eq. 共15兲 to consider the effect of elevated
perimental data for ␧ u (T) are available, Table 1 can be updated temperature.
accordingly. For compression steel
Step 2 requires the determination of the balanced failure point c b ⫺d ⬘
and the buckling effect. Fig. 6 shows the transformation of a ␧ ⬘s 共 T 兲 ⫽␧ u 共 T 兲 (16)
cb
nonlinear stress block into an equivalent rectangular stress block
for 共a兲 the ambient and 共b兲 the elevated temperature case. The If ␧ s⬘ (T)⬍␧ y (T) the compression steel has not yet yielded, and
neutral axis depth c b is determined from Eq. 共5兲. At ambient from Fig. 6共b兲 the balanced failure load P b (T) and moment
temperature, a b is equal to ␤ 1 c b , that is, the stress-strain curve M b (T) can be calculated as follows:
can be approximated by a rectangular stress block of depth a b P b 共 T 兲 ⫽0.85f ⬘c 共 T 兲 a b b⫹A ⬘s f s⬘ 共 T 兲 ⫺A s f y 共 T 兲 (17)
关Fig. 6共a兲兴. At elevated temperature, the transformation factor ␤ 1
and the shapes of nonlinear stress blocks are different from those
at ambient temperature because the strength of the outer concrete
fiber deteriorates rapidly under fire attack. Thus, compressive
M b 共 T 兲 ⫽0.85f ⬘c 共 T 兲 a b b 冉 h ab
2 冊 h
⫹ ⫺c b ⫹A ⬘s f s⬘ 共 T 兲 ⫺d ⬘
2 2 冉 冊
concrete stress in the outer fiber is assumed to be zero 关Fig. 6共b兲兴.
In addition, Eq. 共1兲 proposed by Dotreppe et al. 共1997兲 leads to an 冉 冊
⫹A s f y 共 T 兲 d⫺
h
2
(18)
average remaining concrete strength, which is a reasonable repre-
sentation of the stress block for a heat-affected section subjected where b⫽column width in mm; h⫽column depth in mm; and d
to pure compression. However, Eq. 共1兲 is not an adequate strength ⫽distance from the extreme compression fiber to the centroid of
representation of a heat-affected concrete section subjected to the tension bar in mm.
both compression and significant moment. Thus, it is proposed to It should be noted that in the Eurocode the column width b is
transform the stress block as shown in Fig. 6共b兲, to eliminate reduced with time into the fire exposure. However, it is not nec-
nonconservatism. essary to reduce b in the proposed method because the modifica-
From the ACI code for ambient temperature design, the depth tion of the stress block as shown in Fig. 6共b兲 is already adequate.
of the rectangular stress block a b can be expressed as After determining the column strength at balanced failure, the
next step is to assess the buckling effect. Reinforced concrete
a b ⫽␤ 1 c b (14) columns are nonhomogeneous and when they are subjected to

Table 1. Values of ␧ u (T)

Concrete temperature 共°C兲 20 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000
t ISO 共min兲 0 0.16 0.29 0.69 1.45 2.95 5.87 11.6 22.7 44.3 86.5
␧ u (T)⫻10⫺3 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.5 8.0 10.0 13.0 14.5 15.0 15.5 15.5

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / SEPTEMBER 2003 / 1223

J. Struct. Eng. 2003.129:1220-1229.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Birla Institute of Technology - Pilani on 08/23/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 8. Comparison of biaxial bending column failure load between

extended American Concrete Institute method and SAFIR simulation

Fig. 7. Different load eccentricities of failure loads for columns at

temperature T
Cm
␦⫽ (24)
1⫺ P b / P c 共 T 兲

creep and cracking at elevated temperature, the effective rigidity M 1b

C m ⫽0.6⫹0.4 ⭓0.4 (25)
EI will deteriorate. For column design at ambient temperature, the M 2b
ACI method has proposed the following equation:
where M 2b is the greater of the two end moments. The ratio
E c 共 20°C兲 I⫽E c 共 20°C兲 I g /2.5 (19) M 1b /M 2b is positive when the end moments produce a single
curvature and negative when they produce a double curvature. It
where E c ⫽modulus of elasticity of concrete; and I g ⫽moment of
should be noted that Eqs. 共22兲 and 共24兲 apply only to members
inertia of gross cross section of column. From the ACI Committee
braced against side sway.
Report 363R-92 共ACI 1992兲, for concrete strength ranging from
From Eqs. 共17兲 and 共18兲, the value of e b can be calculated; it
20 to 80 MPa, the value of E c can be calculated as
is equal to M b / P b at balanced failure. Comparing this term with
E c 共 20°C兲 ⫽3,320冑 f ⬘c 共 20°C兲 ⫹6,900 (20) e mag from Eq. 共23兲, it can be determined whether the applied load
eccentricity e is smaller or greater than e b , as shown in Fig. 6.
Based on Eqs. 共9兲–共13兲, the Euler load can be calculated as Different neutral axis depths c n are tried out in step 3 to deter-
␲ 兺 i⫽1
n
共 E cI 兲 i共 T 兲 ␲ 2 ⫻␤ EC1 共 T 兲 ⫻␤ EC2 共 t 兲 ⫻E c 共 20°C兲 I mine the failure point at temperature T by comparing M n and
P c⫽ ⫽ M mag . The value of M mag is equal to P n ␦e, where e is the applied
共 kl 兲 2 共 kl 兲 2 load eccentricity. Using this method, the nominal failure load P n
and moment M n are known, where P n and M n can be calculated
␲ 2 ⫻␤ ECI 共 t 兲 ⫻E c 共 20°C兲 I ␲ 2 ⫻ 共 E c I 兲共 T 兲
⫽ ⫽ (21) from Eq. 共17兲 and Eq. 共18兲, respectively, by replacing a b with a n
共 kl 兲 2
共 kl 兲 2 and f y with f s . Substituting P b with P n in Eq. 共24兲 the moment
where magnification factor ␦ can be determined. So far, we can find

再
different points ( P n ,M n ) on the failure curve corresponding to
1 for pinned-pinned end one constant temperature T, as shown in Fig. 7.
k⫽ 0.7 for pinned-fixed end If e mag is greater than e b , then the neutral axis depth at failure
is smaller than that at balanced failure, and e is termed a large
0.5 for fixed-fixed end
eccentricity, that is, the column experiences greater P-⌬ effects.
To include the P-⌬ effect, it is required to calculate the moment The failure mode is characterized by yielding of the tension steel
magnification factor ␦. For equal end eccentricities in the same bars. On the other hand, if e mag is smaller than e b , the neutral axis
direction, ␦ can be calculated as depth at failure is greater than that at balanced failure, and e is
1 defined as a small eccentricity; the column tends to fail in con-
␦⫽ (22) crete crushing mode.
1⫺ P b / P c 共 T 兲 When the column is concentrically loaded, a minimum load
e mag⫽␦•e (23) eccentricity should be assigned, say 25 mm, or a corresponding
value recommended in the ACI code for ambient temperature.
where e⫽load eccentricity and the balanced load P b is calculated It should be noted that for design purposes a safety factor of
from Eq. 共17兲; and e mag⫽magnified eccentricity. 0.75 should be applied to Eq. 共24兲
If the load eccentricities at the two column ends are not equal
or are in opposite directions, the moment magnification factor ␦ Cm
␦⫽ (26)
can be calculated as 1⫺ P b /0.75P c 共 T 兲

1224 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / SEPTEMBER 2003

J. Struct. Eng. 2003.129:1220-1229.

 Biaxial Bending
The method discussed in the section ‘‘Uniaxial Bending’’ predicts
the fire resistance of rectangular or square columns bent about
only one of the principal axes. This section describes a method for
columns bent about both principal axes of the cross section. For a
RC column with slenderness ratio smaller than 60, a simple and
approximate method developed by Bresler 共1960兲 for failure load
prediction can be extended to elevated temperature conditions. It
can be described as follows:
1 1 1 1
⫽ ⫹ ⫺ (27)
P n 共 T 兲 P nx0 共 T 兲 P ny0 共 T 兲 P 0 共 T 兲
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Birla Institute of Technology - Pilani on 08/23/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

where P n (T)⫽approximate value of ultimate load at temperature

T in biaxial bending with eccentricities e x and e y ; P ny0
⫽ultimate load at temperature T when only eccentricity e x is
Fig. 9. American Concrete Institute predictions for case study

Table 2. Details of Case Study 1

Number Reference b 共mm兲 h 共mm兲 Rebar 共mm兲 L 共m兲 f c⬘ 共N/mm2兲 f yr 共N/mm2兲 Enda c 共mm兲 e 共mm兲 P app 共kN兲 t test 共min兲
1 1 300 300 6⭋20 3.76 24.1 487 p-p 38 30 710 86
2 2 300 300 6⭋20 3.76 24.1 487 p-p 38 0 930 84
3 3 300 300 6⭋20 3.76 24.1 487 p-p 38 0 930 138
4 4 300 300 6⭋20 4.76 24.1 487 p-p 38 30 650 63
5 5 300 300 6⭋20 4.76 34.1 487 p-p 38 0 880 108
6 6 300 300 6⭋20 5.76 24.1 487 p-p 38 30 600 61
7 7 300 300 6⭋20 5.76 24.1 487 p-p 38 0 800 58
8 8 200 200 4⭋20 3.76 24.1 487 p-p 38 0 420 58
9 9 200 200 4⭋20 3.76 24.1 487 p-p 38 0 420 66
10 10 200 200 4⭋20 4.76 24.1 487 p-p 38 0 340 48
11 11 300 300 6⭋20 4.76 30.7 462 p-p 38 30 650 80
12 12 300 300 6⭋20 4.76 30.7 462 p-p 38 30 650 69
13 13 300 300 6⭋20 4.76 30.7 462 p-p 38 15 740 85
14 14 200 200 4⭋20 4.76 30.7 462 p-p 38 10 280 49
15 15 200 200 4⭋20 4.76 30.7 462 p-p 38 20 240 36
16 16 300 300 6⭋20 4.76 30.7 462 p-p 38 90 460 75
17 17 300 300 6⭋20 4.76 30.7 462 p-p 38 150 362 65
18 18 200 200 4⭋20 4.76 30.7 462 p-p 38 60 170 49
19 19 200 200 4⭋20 4.76 30.7 462 p-p 38 100 130 53
20 20 300 300 6⭋20 3.8 33.2 458 p-f 38 30 845 111
21 21 300 300 6⭋20 3.8 33.2 418 p-f 38 50 780 125
22 25 200 200 4⭋20 5.76 32.4 443 p-p 38 10 208 40
23 26 300 300 6⭋20 4.76 30.7 433 p-f 38 15 735 160
24 27 300 300 6⭋20 4.76 43.2 544 p-f 38 150 355 89
25 28 300 300 6⭋20 4.76 31.5 499 p-p 38 ⫾15b 735 93
26 29 300 300 6⭋20 4.76 38.2 449 p-p 38 ⫾30b 645 135
27 30 300 300 6⭋20 4.76 38.2 404 p-p 38 5 1224 48
28 31 300 300 6⭋20 3.76 42.3 452 p-p 38 5 1695 57
29 37 300 300 6⭋20 4.7 34.9 505 p-p 38 5 1548 38
30 38 300 300 6⭋20 4.7 31.5 503 p-p 38 10 970 55
31 39 300 300 6⭋20 4.7 31.5 526 p-p 38 10 1308 57
32 40 300 300 6⭋20 4.7 31.5 503 p-p 38 150 280 49
33 41 300 300 6⭋20 4.7 31.5 526 p-p 36 150 465 50
34 42 200 200 6⭋14 5.71 41.5 480 p-p 30 100 140 31
35 43 200 200 6⭋14 5.71 41.5 477 p-p 33 10 245 40
36 44 200 200 6⭋14 5.71 41.5 480 p-p 33 50 172 35
37 45 200 200 6⭋14 5.71 41.5 482 p-p 33 10 175 49
38 46 200 200 6⭋14 5.71 41.5 485 p-p 33 50 122 52
39 47 200 200 6⭋14 5.71 41.5 478 p-p 30 10 128 72
a
The symbol ‘‘p’’ stands for pinned end condition, while ‘‘f’’ stands for fixed end condition.
b
The ⫾ sign means opposite eccentricities were applied at the two column ends.

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / SEPTEMBER 2003 / 1225

J. Struct. Eng. 2003.129:1220-1229.

 Table 3. Details of Case Study 2 共Lie and Woollerton 1988兲
Number Reference b 共mm兲 h 共mm兲 Rebar 共mm兲 L 共m兲 f c⬘ 共N/mm2兲 f yr 共N/mm2兲 Enda c 共mm兲 e 共mm兲 P app 共kN兲 t test 共min兲
1 I2 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 36.9 444 f-f 48 0 1,333 170
2 I3 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 34.2 444 f-f 48 0 800 218
3 I4 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 35.1 444 f-f 48 0 711 220
4 I6 203 203 4⭋20 3.81 42.3 442 f-f 48 0 169 180
5 I7 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 36.1 444 f-f 48 0 1,067 208
6 I8 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 34.8 444 f-f 48 0 1,778 146
7 I9 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 38.3 444 f-f 48 0 1,333 187
8 II2 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 43.6 444 f-f 48 0 1,044 201
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Birla Institute of Technology - Pilani on 08/23/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

9 II3 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 35.4 444 f-f 48 0 916 210
10 II4 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 52.9 444 f-f 48 0 1,178 227
11 II5 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 49.5 444 f-f 48 0 1,067 234
12 II8 305 305 8⭋25.5 3.81 42.6 444 f-f 48 0 978 252
13 II9 305 305 8⭋25.5 3.81 37.1 444 f-f 48 0 1,333 225
14 II10 406 406 8⭋25.5 3.81 38.8 444 f-f 48 0 2,418 262
15 II11 406 406 8⭋32.3 3.81 38.4 414 f-f 48 0 2,795 285
16 II12 406 406 8⭋32.3 3.81 46.2 414 f-f 64 0 2,978 213
17 III1 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 39.6 444 p-f 48 0 800 242
18 III2 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 39.2 444 p-f 48 0 1,000 220
19 III3 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 39.9 444 p-p 48 25 1,000 181
20 III5 305 457 8⭋22.2 3.81 42.5 414 f-f 48 0 1,413 356
21 III14 305 305 4⭋25.5 3.81 37.9 444 p-f 48 25 1,178 183
a
The symbol ‘‘p’’ stands for pinned end condition, while ‘‘f’’ stands for fixed end condition.

present (e y ⫽0); P nx0 ⫽ultimate load at temperature T when only
eccentricity e y is present (e x ⫽0); and P 0 ⫽ultimate load at tem-
perature T for a concentrically loaded column. P ny0 , P nx0 , and
P 0 can be calculated by the method in the previous section.
Due to the scarcity of test data for columns subjected to biaxial
bending, the fire resistance predictions for 68 columns with dif-
ferent slenderness ratios 共from 20 to 73兲, load levels 共from 250 to
1950 kN兲, eccentricities 共from 0 to 80 mm兲, cross sectional areas
共from 200 mm⫻200 mm to 600 mm⫻600 mm), concrete
strengths 共from 20 to 80 MPa兲, concrete covers 共from 20 to 60
mm兲, and failure time from 30 to 320 min under an ISO 834 fire
were analyzed using the proposed method and the SAFIR pro-
gram. As shown in Fig. 8, in comparison with SAFIR, Eq. 共27兲
gives acceptably safe and accurate predictions for design pur-
poses provided 0.1P 0 ⬍ P n ⬍0.9P 0 . It should be noted that with
increasing load level the conservatism of the proposed method
also increases.
laboratories 共Lie and Woollerton 1988; Dotreppe et al. 1997兲
were collected from the literature, and these tests are used in the
comparison study as shown in Fig. 9. Details of the specimens are
included in Tables 2– 4. It shows that the extended ACI approach
is able to provide accurate and safe predictions. Fig. 10 shows the
distribution of the ratio P ACI/ P test. Although the tests were con-
ducted under different laboratory conditions, the proposed ap-
proach yields relatively accurate and conservative predictions.
These figures show that the method can predict the fire resistance
of RC columns accurately.
Worked Example
Column 1 in Table 2 was tested at the Technical University of
Braunschweig, and the column failed after being exposed to the
ISO 834 fire for 86 min. The properties of the column are given as
follows: A c ⫽0.3 m⫻0.3 m⫽0.09 m2 , 6␾20, L⫽3.76 m, d ⬘
⫽38 mm, e⫽30 mm, pinned at both ends, f ⬘c ⫽24.1 MPa, f y
⫽487 MPa, and E s (20)⫽2⫻105 MPa.

Case Studies Step 1: Determination of the Reduction Factors

From Eqs. 共1兲–共3兲, 共8兲, and 共13兲, the reduction factors are
The calculation method is used to predict the fire resistance of
rectangular RC columns. Sixty-four RC column tests from three ␤ c ⫽0.5, ␤ y ⫽0.26, ␤ ym ⫽0.375, ␤ ES ⫽0.106

Table 4. Details of Case Study 3 共Dotreppe et al. 1997兲

Number Reference B 共mm兲 h 共mm兲 Rebar 共mm兲 L 共m兲 f cu 共N/mm2兲 f c⬘ a 共N/mm2兲 f yr 共N/mm2兲 Endb c 共mm兲 e 共mm兲 P app 共kN兲 t test 共min兲
1 31BC 300 300 4⭋16 2.1 38.5 29.3 576 p-p 25 0 1270 63
2 31CC 300 300 4⭋16 2.1 38.1 28.6 576 p-p 25 0 803 123
3c 33AC 300 300 4⭋25 2.1 32.7 26.2 591 p-p 25 0 878 69
4 21BC 200 300 6⭋12 2.1 40.0 30.6 493 p-p 25 0 611 107
5 22BC 200 300 6⭋12 2.1 37.6 27.3 493 p-p 35 0 620 97
a
The cylinder strength f c⬘ was provided by J. M. Franssen from the University of Liège, Belgium.
b
The symbol ‘‘p’’ stands for pinned end condition, while ‘‘f’’ stands for fixed end condition.
c
This row is excluded from the comparison study.

1226 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / SEPTEMBER 2003

J. Struct. Eng. 2003.129:1220-1229.

 E c 共 20兲 ⫽3320⫻ 冑24.1⫹6900⫽2.32⫻104 MPa
0.34⫻2.32⫻104 ⫻3004 /12
E c 共 T 兲 I⫽ ⫽2.13⫻1012 N mm2
2.5
The column Euler load is
␲ 2 ⫻2.13⫻1012 1
P c⫽ ⫽1,487 kN, ␦⫽ ⫽1.62
3,7602 1⫺570/1,487
From Eq. 共23兲, e mag⫽1.62⫻30⫽49 mm⬍M b / P b ⫽38.4
⫻103 /570⫽67 mm, so the column eccentricity is small.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Birla Institute of Technology - Pilani on 08/23/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Step 3: Determination of Failure Point

Fig. 10. Distribution of load ratio P ACI/ P test
We try different neutral axis depths to determine the failure point
P n and M n . Since the eccentricity is small, the c n value at failure
␤ Esm ⫽0.187, ␤ Ecl ⫽0.34 should be greater than that at balanced failure. We try the value
c n ⫽220 mm first.
c n ⫽220 mm, a n ⫽0.85⫻220⫽187 mm
Step 2: Determination of Eccentricity
⫺3
The balanced failure point P b and M b are calculated to determine ␧ s ⫽15.5⫻10 ⫻42/220⫽2.96⫻10⫺3
small or large eccentricity. Since t ISO⫽86 min, from Table 1, f s ⫽127⫻2.96⫻10⫺3 /6.0⫻10⫺3 ⫽63 MPa
␧ u (T)⫽15.5⫻10⫺3 . From Eq. 共5兲 and Fig. 11
␧ s⬘ ⫽15.5⫻10⫺3 ⫻ 共 220⫺38兲 /220⫽12.8⫻10⫺3 ⬎6.0⫻10⫺3
15.5⫻10⫺3
c b ⫽ 共 300⫺38兲 ⫻ ⫺3 f s⬘ ⫽127 MPa
15.5⫻10 ⫹ 共 487⫻0.26/2⫻105 ⫻0.106兲

⫽189 mm ⬘ ⫽15.5⫻10⫺3 ⫻ 共 220⫺150兲 /220⫽4.93⫻10⫺3 ⬎4.88⫻10⫺3

␧ s1
where ␧ y (T)⫽(487⫻0.26)/(2⫻105 ⫻0.106)⫽6.0⫻10⫺3 for ⬘ ⫽0.375⫻487⫽183 MPa
f s1
corner bars; for midside bars ␧ y (T)⫽(487⫻0.375)/(2⫻105
⫻0.187)⫽4.88⫻10⫺3 . P n ⫽0.85⫻0.5⫻24.1⫻187⫻300⫹628⫻127⫹628⫻183⫺628
From Eqs. 共14兲 and 共15兲, a b ⫽␤ 1 ⫻c b ⫽0.85⫻189⫽161 mm.
⫻63⫽575⫹80⫹115⫺40⫽730 kN
From Eq. 共16兲, ␧ s⬘ ⫽15.5⫻10⫺3 ⫻(189⫺38)/189⫽12.4⫻10⫺3
⬎6.0⫻10⫺3 . Therefore f s⬘ (T)⫽ f s (T)⫽0.26⫻487⫽127 MPa. M n ⫽575⫻ 共 300⫹187⫺2⫻220兲 /2⫹80⫻ 共 150⫺38兲 ⫹40
Since c b is 189 mm, the stress on reinforced bars in the middle
of the cross section ␧ s1 can be calculated as ⫻ 共 150⫺38兲 ⫽2 kN m
189⫺150 730⫻30
␧ s1 ⫽15.5⫻10⫺3 ⫻ ⫽3.2⫻10⫺3 M mag⫽ ⫽43⬎27 kN m
189 1⫺730/1,487
3.2⫻10⫺3 Thus, a smaller value of c n is required. Trying c n ⫽210 mm, with
f s1 ⫽0.375⫻487⫻ ⫽120 MPa a similar procedure, P n ⫽682 kN, M mag⫽37.6 kN m⬎M n
4.88⫻10⫺3
⫽30.7 kN m. Trying c n ⫽200 mm, P n ⫽629 kN, M mag
From Eqs. 共17兲 and 共18兲 ⫽32.6 kN m⬍M n ⫽34.4 kN m. Therefore, the failure load is be-
P b ⫽0.85⫻0.5⫻24.1⫻161⫻300⫹628⫻127⫹628⫻120⫺682 tween 682 and 629 kN. After further iterations, the column failure
load converges to 640 kN, which is lower than the test result of
⫻127⫽570 kN 710 kN 共Reference 1 in Table 2兲.

M b ⫽0.85⫻0.5⫻24.1⫻161⫻300⫻ 共 300⫹161⫺2⫻189兲 /2⫹628 Conclusions

⫻127⫻ 共 150⫺38兲 ⫻2⫽38.4 kNm A proposed approach for RC columns in fire conditions is pre-
sented. It is based on the ACI method for column design at am-
where 628 mm2 ⫽total area of 2␾20 bars. bient temperature. A theoretical model is derived for both axially
From Eqs. 共13兲 and 共19兲–共21兲 and eccentrically loaded columns. With this method, the ultimate
load and deflection of RC columns at elevated temperature can be
determined directly. Thus, there is no need to rely on tables or
graphs for the temperature distribution over the cross section for
four-face heating. Three case studies comprising a total of 64 RC
columns were analyzed to verify the approach. The experimental
results show that the extended ACI approach is not only accurate
and consistent, but also conservative.

Acknowledgments
The writers express their gratitude to Dr. J. M. Franssen of the
Fig. 11. Calculation example
University of Liege for his kind assistance with the application of

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / SEPTEMBER 2003 / 1227

J. Struct. Eng. 2003.129:1220-1229.

 the finite element program SAFIR. The writers would like to ex-
tend their gratitude to Mr. Tang C. Y. for discussions.
Notation
The following symbols are used in this paper:
A ⫽ cross sectional area 共mm2兲;
A c ⫽ area of concrete section 共mm2兲;
A i ⫽ area of segment i 共mm2兲;
A s ⫽ area of tensile steel reinforcement 共mm2兲;
A s⬘ ⫽ area of compressive steel reinforcement 共mm2兲;
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Birla Institute of Technology - Pilani on 08/23/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
a b ⫽ width of rectangular stress block of concrete
共mm兲;
b ⫽ width of cross section 共mm兲;
C m ⫽ factor to account for moment at upper and
lower column ends;
c b ⫽ depth of neutral axis at balance failure point
共mm兲;
c n ⫽ depth of neutral axis at failure point on failure
curve 共mm兲;
d ⫽ distance from extreme compression fiber to
centroid of tension bar 共mm兲;
d ⬘ ⫽ concrete cover 共mm兲;
E ⫽ elastic modulus 共MPa兲;
E c ⫽ elastic modulus of concrete 共MPa兲;
E i ⫽ elastic modulus of segment i as affected by
heat 共MPa兲;
E s ⫽ elastic modulus of steel reinforcement
共N/mm2兲;
e ⫽ bending eccentricity 共mm兲;
e b ⫽ balanced load eccentricity⫽M b / P b 共mm兲;
e mag ⫽ magnified eccentricity 共mm兲;
f ⬘c ⫽ cylindrical compressive strength of concrete
共MPa兲;
f y ⫽ yield stress of steel reinforcement 共MPa兲;
h ⫽ height of cross section 共mm兲;
I ⫽ moment of inertia of cross section 共mm4兲;
I g ⫽ moment of inertia of gross section of column
共mm4兲;
k ⫽ effective length factor;
L ⫽ column length 共m兲;
M ⫽ bending moment 共N•m兲;
M b ⫽ balanced moment capacity 共N m兲;
M 1b ,M 2b ⫽ moments of two ends of column 共N m兲;
P ⫽ applied axial load 共N兲;
P b ⫽ balanced failure load 共N兲;
P n ⫽ ultimate load 共N兲;
P nx0 ⫽ ultimate load when only eccentricity e y is
present 共N兲;
P ny0 ⫽ Ultimate load when only eccentricity e x is
present 共N兲;
P 0 ⫽ ultimate load for concentrically loaded column
共N兲;
T ⫽ temperature 共°C兲;
T b ⫽ temperature at balanced failure point 共°C兲;
T f ⫽ failure temperature of column 共°C兲;
t ⫽ fire exposure time 共h兲; t⫽0 for ambient
temperature;
t b ⫽ fire exposure time at balanced failure point 共h兲;
t f ⫽ failure time of column 共h兲;
y i ⫽ distance from center of segment i to section
central axis 共mm兲;
1228 / JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / SEPTEMBER 2003
J. Struct. Eng. 2003.129:1220-1229.
y 0 ⫽ initial deflection at ambient temperature 共mm兲;
␣ ISO ⫽ equivalent ISO exposure time factor;
␤ c ⫽ reduction factor for concrete strength at
elevated temperature;
␤ EcI ⫽ product of ␤ EC1 and ␤ EC2 ;
␤ EC1 ⫽ factor to account for variation of EI term in
cross section;
␤ EC2 ⫽ reduction factor for EI at elevated temperature;
␤ ES ⫽ Reduction factor for modulus of elasticity of
steel at corner of cross section;
␤ ESm ⫽ reduction factor for modulus of elasticity of
steel at middle of cross section;
␤ y ⫽ reduction factor for steel strength at elevated
temperatures;
␤ yc ⫽ reduction factor for corner steel strength at
elevated temperatures;
␤ ym ⫽ reduction factor for midside steel strength at
elevated temperatures;
␥ ⫽ factor to account for spalling of concrete;
⌬ ⫽ displacement 共mm兲;
␦ ⫽ moment magnification factor;
␧ ⫽ mechanical strain;
␧ s ,␧ s⬘ ⫽ strain of tensile and compressive steel
reinforcement;
␧ u ⫽ strain failure criterion of concrete;
␧ ult ⫽ ultimate strain of concrete;
␧ y ⫽ yield strain of steel reinforcement; and
␧ 1 ⫽ yield strain of concrete.
References
American Concrete Institute 共ACI兲. Committee Report 363R-92. 共1992兲.
‘‘State-of-the art report on high-strength concrete.’’ Committe Rep.
No. 363R-92, Farmington Hills, Mich.
American Concrete Institute 共ACI兲. Committee Report 216R-89. 共1994兲.
‘‘Guide for determining the fire endurance of concrete elements.’’
Committee Rep. No. 216R-89, Framington Hills, Mich.
American Concrete Institute 共ACI兲. Committee Report 318-99 共2000兲.
‘‘Building code requirement for reinforced concrete, part 3: Use of
concrete in buildings—Design, specification, and related topics.’’ ACI
manual of concrete practice, Committee Rep. No. 318-99, Farmington
Hills, Mich.
Anderberg, Y. 共1983兲. ‘‘Predicted fire behaviour of steels and concrete
structures.’’ Rep. No. LUTVDG/(TVBB-3011), Division of Building
Fire Safety and Technology, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund,
Sweden.
ASTM. 共1995兲. ‘‘Standard methods of fire tests of building construction
and materials.’’ E 119, Philadelphia.
Bresler, B. 共1960兲. ‘‘Design, criteria for reinforced columns under axial
load bi-axial bending.’’ J. Am. Concr. Inst., Nov., 481– 491.
Burgess, I. W., and Najjar, S. R. 共1994兲. ‘‘A simple approach to the
behavior of steel columns in fire.’’ J. Constr. Steel Res., 31, 134 –155.
Dotreppe, J. C., Franssen, J. M., Bruls, A., Vandevelde, P., Minne, R., Van
Nieuwenburg, D., and Lambotte, H. 共1997兲. ‘‘Experimental research
on the determination of the main parameters affecting the behavior of
reinforced concrete columns under fire conditions.’’ Mag. Concrete
Res., 49共179兲, 117–127.
Dotreppe, J. C., Franssen, J. M., and Vanderzeypen, Y. 共1999兲. ‘‘Calcula-
tion method for design of reinforced concrete columns under fire con-
ditions.’’ ACI Struct. J., 96共1兲, 9–18.
European Committee for Standardization. 共1995兲. ‘‘Design of concrete
structure. Part 1.2: General rules—Structural fire design.’’ Eurocode
2: ENV 1992-1-2, U.K.
Franssen, J. M., Schleich, J. B., and Cajot, L. G. 共1995兲. ‘‘A simple model
for the fire resistance of axially loaded members according to Euro-
 code 3.’’ J. Constr. Steel Res., 35, 49– 69.
Franssen, J. M., Schleich, J. C., Cajot, L. G., and Azpiazu, W. 共1996兲. ‘‘A
simple model for the fire resistance of axially loaded members—
Comparison with experimental results.’’ J. Constr. Steel Res., 37,
175—204.
Harmarthy, T. Z. 共1967兲. ‘‘A comprehensive creep model.’’ J. Basic Eng.,
396 –502.
Hertz, K. 共1993兲. ‘‘Simplified calculation method for fire exposed con-
crete structures.’’ Supporting document for CEN pr-ENV 1992-1-2,
Technical Univ. of Denmark, Denmark.
ISO. 共1975兲. ‘‘Fire resistance tests—Elements of building construction.’’
ISO 834, International Standards Organization, U.K.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Birla Institute of Technology - Pilani on 08/23/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Lie, T. T., and Woollerton, J. L. 共1988兲. ‘‘Fire resistance of reinforced-
concrete columns: Test results.’’ Internal Rep. No. 569, National Re-
search Council of Canada, Québec.
Nilson, A. H., and Winter, G. 共1991兲. Design of concrete structres, 11th
Ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
Phan, L. T., and Carino, N. J. 共1998兲. ‘‘Review of mechanical properties
of HSC at elevated temperature.’’ J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 10共1兲, 58 – 64.
Wang, Y. C. 共1997兲. ‘‘The effects of frame continuity on the behavior of
steel columns under fire conditions and fire resistance design propos-
als.’’ J. Constr. Steel Res., 41共1兲, 93–111.
Yao Yao. 共2002兲. ‘‘Fire resistance of reinforced concrete columns.’’
M.Eng. thesis, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Nan-
yang Technological Univ., Singapore.

JOURNAL OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / SEPTEMBER 2003 / 1229

J. Struct. Eng. 2003.129:1220-1229.