Experimental and Numerical Investigations of Fire

Resistance of Novel Timber-Concrete-Composite Decks

R. Meena 1; M. Schollmayer 2; and T. Tannert 3

Abstract: Timber-concrete-composite (TCC) systems, commonly with timber at the bottom and concrete at the top, are efficient solutions
for floors because of their advantages compared to pure timber or pure concrete slabs, one of the advantages being better fire resistance. This
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Waterloo on 09/03/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

paper presents experimental and numerical investigations on the fire resistance of a novel TCC setup with timber beams at the top and a
concrete layer at the bottom. This setup has several advantages in facilitating the connection to the surrounding structure and mechanical
installations. The results from fire tests on a subsection of the system are reported. The concrete side of one test specimen was subjected to a
fire according to the standard temperature-time curve and proofed to achieve a 60-min fire rating. Subsequently the temperature behavior was
numerically modeled by performing a transient thermal analysis with temperature dependent material properties. The temperature profiles for
the TCC system was accurately modeled allowing for the validated model to be used for future optimizations and predicting the fire resistance
ratings of optimized systems. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000539. © 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.

Introduction
Timber Concrete Composites
Hybrid systems that integrate different materials can significantly
increase the applications of timber in structures beyond current
limitations regarding maximum number of stories. As an example,
timber-steel hybrid systems combine the high strength and ductility
of steel with the high stiffness, high compressive load capacity,
low weight, and low environmental footprint of timber. Timber-
concrete-composite (TCC) systems were primarily developed
to refurbish historical buildings in Europe (Yeoh et al. 2011).
Structural and nonstructural benefits over generic timber floors,
such as increased floor capacity and stiffness, shallower floor depth
and reduction in floor weight, and improved acoustic and fire per-
formance have led to increased attention and widened application
of TCC systems. Additional advantages when compared to a con-
crete slab are found in the relatively rapid erection of the system
due to the use of the timber element as formwork, more economical
gravity systems due to TCC’s lighter weight, lower embodied
energy, and reduced carbon dioxide emissions (Clouston and
Schreyer 2008).
In order to take full advantage of the benefits of TCC, the most
efficient TCC deck has its neutral axis at the interface between the
two components such that all of the concrete is in compression and
all of the timber is in tension (Yeoh et al. 2011). The connection
between the two materials must be stiff enough to ensure composite
1
Research Assistant, Timber and Composite Construction, Bern Univ.
of Applied Sciences, Solothurnstrasse 102, Biel 2500, Switzerland. E-mail:
iitbrahul@gmail.com
2
Professor, Timber and Composite Construction, Bern Univ. of Applied
Sciences, Solothurnstrasse 102, Biel 2500, Switzerland. E-mail: martin
.schollmayer@bfh.ch
3
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Wood Science/Dept. of Civil Engineer-
ing, Univ. of British Columbia, 2424 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada
V6T1Z4 (corresponding author). E-mail: thomas.tannert@ubc.ca
Note. This manuscript was submitted on April 30, 2013; approved on
November 11, 2013; published online on November 13, 2013. Discussion
period open until December 18, 2014; separate discussions must be submitted
for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Performance of
Constructed Facilities, © ASCE, ISSN 0887-3828/A4014009(8)/$25.00.
action and the timber must be strong enough to resist tensile
stresses due to bending. The location of the neutral axis depends
purely on the geometry of the system and material properties of the
timber with respect to the concrete. Since the strength of timber in
tension is well-documented, the connector stiffness has been the
focus of recent research. Several means of connecting timber to
concrete are widely documented. The connectors can be catego-
rized as (1) mechanical fasteners such as self-tapping screws, bolts,
or the proprietary HSK system (Clouston et al. 2005); (2) connec-
tions based on mechanical interlocking (notches); and (3) most
recently, adhesive connections (Brunner et al. 2006; Negrão et al.
2010). Glued-in steel connectors, such as the HSK system, have
proven to be the best option in terms of the system’s overall
strength and stiffness (Yeoh et al. 2011).
Research on many aspects and components of TCC systems
[varying connection types, influences of timber and concrete
material properties, short and especially long-term behavior
(e.g., Fragiacomo 2005, 2006), and vibration behavior] while
well-documented is also ongoing. Different design methods have
been proposed for TCC floors; the simplest method [called the
γ method and referred to in EN 1995-1-1:2004 (CEN 2004)] is
based on the effective bending stiffness accounting for composite
action at the interface interlayer (Yeoh et al. 2011).
Fire Resistance of Timber Concrete Composites
Similar to regulations in many other countries, the National
Building Code (NBC) of Canada (NRC 2010) prescribes the re-
quirements for fire rating and fire safety of structures. In NBC,
timber falls under combustible construction, whereas concrete is
noncombustible. In order to ensure that a TCC system satisfies
the requirements of NBC, the clauses for both materials must be
considered to ensure code compliance. For application in Canada,
it must be demonstrated that a TCC system can provide adequate
fire separation as well as maintain its structural integrity for the
required amount of time (60-min fire separation for most occu-
pancy categories).
To build fire resistant structures is one of the imperative tasks in
structural design. The idea of protecting structures against the
effects of fire evolved late in the nineteenth century in order to re-
duce losses of human life and property (Gosselin and Lie 1987).

© ASCE A4014009-1 J. Perform. Constr. Facil.

J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2014, 28(6): A4014009

 With this intention, designers started to make greater use of fire
resistive materials to minimize both the spread of fire and the
amount of damage sustained by structures. The use of timber
and its wood derivatives was limited to low-rise buildings. In recent
years, significant research has been undertaken on the fire resis-
tance of wood (e.g., Babrauskas 2002; Frangi et al. 2009), concrete
(e.g., Kodur et al. 2004; Zadrazil et al. 2004), and TCC structures
(e.g., Frangi et al. 2010; Branthwaite 2010). These experimental
and numerical investigations were carried out on individual
elements as well as full-scale structures and allow for alternate
solutions using TCC systems.
By utilizing the relevant qualities of both materials, TCC floors
have been documented to perform better in fire than either concrete
or timber floors; the fire resistance of TCC floors can be 90 min or
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Waterloo on 09/03/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
more (Natterer 2002). The performance of concrete in fire has been
documented through a state of the art report (Fletcher et al. 2007).
Concrete owes its desirable long-term fire performance to its low
thermal diffusivity. Reinforced concrete, however, quickly loses
strength through spalling (scaling damage along its surface) and
may even be explosive for high-strength concrete.
The performance of timber in fire, in contrast, is very predict-
able and indeed desirable. Unlike steel, which heats up and loses
structural strength throughout its entire cross section, timber chars.
When timber is heated externally, its inherent moisture tends to
evaporate between 100 and 120°C. Above 200°C, timber undergoes
a pyrolysis reaction (thermochemical decomposition of organic
material at elevated temperatures without the participation of oxy-
gen), generating more combustible products. After these products
have burned, a layer of char is left on the surface that protects the
remaining wood from external heat exposure and penetration of
oxygen (Peng 2010). While this charring layer slowly creeps into
the remaining cross section, the charred layer, due to its low thermal
conductivity, also protects the remaining section, allowing it to re-
tain all structural properties. The charred layer has neither strength
nor rigidity, and only the layers underneath continue to carry load
(White 2000), but the char layer in TCC systems provides insula-
tion to protect the concrete and the connectors against high temper-
atures (Frangi et al. 2008).
To establish the capacity of a TCC member during and after a
fire, the charring rate of timber at the connection must be known.
Charring rates from 0.55–0.72 mm=min are reported in the litera-
ture (White 2000; Bailey 2005; Lane 2005; O’Neill 2009; Tsai et al.
2013). Factors that affect the charring rate are the exposure to fire
(direct or indirect), the connection to the concrete, and timber
element geometry (the charring rate is significantly higher for cor-
ners that are exposed to fire from two sides). While long and narrow
timber elements are more efficient in reducing tension forces in
TCC, such a geometry is less desirable for fire resistance because
larger built up sections have a longer fire rating (O’Neill 2009).
Research on the charring rates for double laminated beams indi-
cated that glued connections had the least amount of section loss
although screwed connections achieved a similar performance
(Tsai et al. 2013). When metal connectors are exposed, fire resis-
tance is significantly lower (Peng 2010). The concrete layer is non-
combustible and tends to expand under increased temperature. This
expansion is beneficial, acting as a protective cladding at the TCC
interface, reducing the effect of temperature and delaying the start
of charring (Yeoh et al. 2011; O’Neill 2009).
Previous research successfully combined analytical structural
models and three-dimensional (3D) heat transfer numerical models
to predict the behavior and resistance of timber connections in
fire (Peng 2010). Spreadsheets to estimate fire resistance of TCC
floor systems were provided based on the fact that the capacity of
a TCC in a fire depends on the tensile capacity of the timber
© ASCE A4014009-2
J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2014, 28(6): A4014009
(O’Neill 2009). Current design models, utilizing the γ-method, take
into account the loss in cross section due to charring of wood and
the temperature-dependent reduction of strength and stiffness of the
uncharred section (Frangi et al. 2008). With a reduced cross section
to account for the reduction in strength and stiffness of timber in
heat-affected zones, a designer may use cold strength and stiffness
properties of timber. Although fire resistance time charts, based on
charring rates of double laminated veneer lumber (LVL) panel con-
figurations, are reported in the literature, the need for more tests to
be performed to improve the reliability of the tables is recognized
(O’Neill 2009).
Different fire exposures can be used to test structural elements;
most commonly applied is the ISO 834-1 (ISO 1999) standard-
temperature-time-curve (STtC). The STtC represents a fully devel-
oped fire in a compartment. Although widely used in fire tests to
rate structural elements, the STtC bears little resemblance to a real
fire temperature-time history and the available research for conven-
tional construction assemblies has been a mixed contribution for
the design profession. On one hand, it has led to significant savings
in construction by reducing the need for costly fire-resistance tests;
on the other hand, however, it has also severely restricted design
innovations by enticing engineers to specify already tested designs
instead of designing new systems. Other test standards, e.g., the
temperature curve according to ASTM E119 (ASTM 2003) are
more severe than STtC but longer duration tests seem to deliver
only negligible differences in results (Harmathy et al. 1987).
Additional protection methods to increase the safety of TCC
systems in fire include the use of gypsum boards and sprinklers.
Gypsum boards absorb heat due to their high moisture content
and as a consequence they slow down heat transfer (Peng 2010).
The use of sprinklers on fire resistance does not need explanation;
nonetheless NBC permits the lessening of fire resistance time
requirements if sprinklers are installed in a building.
Objective
Given the state of the art, it may be concluded that research data on
the fire resistance of TCC systems is still in its infancy (Yeoh et al.
2011). Furthermore, all of the research performed on TCC decks
was on systems with wood in tension and concrete in compression,
and with the wooden beams exposed to fire.
This paper presents experimental and numerical investigations
on the fire resistance of a novel TCC deck. The primary objective is
to establish the fire resistance rating of the TCC system based on a
fire test according to the ISO 834-1 (ISO 1999) STtC. The secon-
dary objective, which is contingent on the primary objective, is to
validate a numerical model to provide a basis for parameter opti-
mizations and predicting fire resistance ratings of optimized
systems.
Experimental Investigation
Novel Timber-Concrete-Composite System
A novel TCC system was developed in the framework of the project
Swiss wood-concrete deck at the Bern University of Applied
Sciences, Switzerland. The goal was to design and test a completely
prefabricated floor system that integrates all structural and mechan-
ical functions, e.g., floor heating and cooling, and sprinkler system.
To overcome the commonly encountered problem of connecting a
TCC floor to a timber wall, an unconventional setup with timber
beams on top and a concrete layer on the bottom was developed.
The system (Fig. 1) consists of 6 × 3 m elements, which can be
delivered to site ready for installation.
J. Perform. Constr. Facil.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Waterloo on 09/03/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 1. Schematic of the novel TCC system with notch detail
This novel setup, though at first it seems counterintuitive, pro-
vides most of the advantages of traditional TCC floors; specifically
it is lighter weight compared to a concrete floor and has better
acoustical properties than a lightweight timber floor. Additionally,
the system significantly improves (1) the possibilities to integrate
mechanical installations (using the concrete layer as a thermoactive
element), (2) the connection to timber structural systems, and
(3) the fire resistance of the system.
In a statically determinate single-span application, the timber is
in compression, where it has similar strength as in tension, but
favorably behaves in a ductile manner and not a brittle manner. The
concrete is in tension, which means that a reinforcement mesh is
required to carry the tension force. The concrete is held in place by
means of grooves milled into the timber beams; the shear connec-
tion between timber and concrete is achieved by mechanical inter-
locking through grooves (Fig. 1). The system is completed with a
LVL panel on top which serves as base plate for the floor built up.
The 80-mm concrete layer in the tension zone is relatively thin
and therefore must be reinforced. Self-compacting high-strength
Fig. 2. Transverse cross section of the test specimen (all dimensions in millimeters)
© ASCE A4014009-3
J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2014, 28(6): A4014009
concrete that enables rapid and economic production is used.
The structural design of the presented novel TCC system is ad-
dressed in a companion paper (Hehl et al. 2013). Thermocouple
wires that can activate the system, to regulate the building temper-
ature, are fixed to the individual elements of the TCC system.
One specific advantage of the system is the fire protection on the
lower side of the floor assembly by means of the concrete layer.
There are, however, critical aspects of the system, as follows:
(1) the thin concrete coverage of the reinforcement which when
exposed to high temperature during a fire results in high risk of
spalling, (2) the increased risk of concrete chipping due to the
use of high-strength concrete, (3) the exposure of the thermocouple
wires to high temperature due to the proximity to the lower surface,
(4) the risk of losing the mechanical connection between the timber
and the concrete during the fire, and (5) the risk that the timber
ignites and causes an open fire in the cavity.
Test Specimen Description
The primary objective of the research reported in this paper was to
establish the 60-min fire resistance rating (REI 60) of the TCC
system based on a fire test according to the ISO 834-1 (ISO 1999)
STtC. The specimen fabricated for the fire tests was a full-scale
subsection (940 × 740 mm) of the floor system and consisted of
the reinforced concrete slab connected to two timber beams (Fig. 2).
The depth of the beam penetration into the slab was 30 mm and
each beam was connected to the slab with eight notches. Table 1
lists the test specimen specifications.
To produce the test specimen, the timber beams were cut to di-
mension from Glulam GL24h, then grooves were cut in the wooden
beams. The bending strength f m;k and stiffness E0;mean according to
SIA 265 (SIA 2004) can be assumed to be 24 and 11,600 N=mm2 ,
respectively. The reinforcement bars and the multilayer pipes were
fixed into the mould (Fig. 3) and then the beam elements were
placed into the mould. The multilayer pipe was a composite plastic/
metal pipe for surface heating, radiator connection, and drink-
ing water, and was specified according to the manufacturer’s
J. Perform. Constr. Facil.
 Table 1. Specifications of Fire Test Specimen
Element/material
Specimen
Timber beam
Concrete slab
Numbers of steel bars
Steel bar diameter (mm)
Spacing between steel bars (mm)
Concrete cover for reinforcement (mm)
Multilayer metal pipe diameter,
outer (mm)
Multilayer metal pipe thickness (mm)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Waterloo on 09/03/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
specifications (HakaGerodur 2011) to withstand a maximum oper-
Dimensions/numbers ating temperature of 95°C and a maximum operating pressure of
1 MPa. One of the pipes was filled with water and closed, while
0.94 m L × 0.74 m W × 0.21 m H a
GL24h, BSH 160/80–glulam
the other pipe was kept open. All four sides of the specimen were
Self-consolidating concrete, covered with rock wool for insulation. Thermocouple wires were
C60/65 attached at 27 locations (Table 2) of the specimen to measure the
Nine lateral × seven temperature of the involved materials at different times during the
longitudinal fire test. Precast self-consolidating concrete (C60/65) was poured
5 into the mould and then the specimen was stored for 51 days until
100 testing.
25
16
Test Methods
2

a Experimental investigations were conducted on the TCC system at

H = height; L = length; and W = width.
the fire test facility of the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials
Science and Technology (EMPA) in Dübendorf, Switzerland, in
collaboration with ETH Zürich. The test specimen [Fig. 4(a)] was
fixed into an oven (1,000 × 800 mm) and tested for 60 min under
the ISO 834-1 (ISO 1999) STtC condition.
According to standard procedure, only the bottom side of the
element was exposed to the fire. Temperature profiles were ob-
tained from the thermocouples, which were fixed to the specimen
at different locations and connected to a temperature-measuring

Fig. 3. Reinforcement and pipes fixed into the mould (open pipe on
the left)

Table 2. Location of Thermocouple within Test Specimen

Thermocouple x (cm) y (cm) z (cm) Identification
Concrete layer 1 81 66 0.0 T05
Concrete layer 2 66 54 0.0 T20
Concrete layer 3 52 38 0.0 T08
Concrete layer 4 35 25 0.0 T03
Concrete layer 5 17 13 0.0 T07
Reinforcement bar 1 18 55 3.1 T13
Reinforcement bar 2 29 44 3.1 T12
Reinforcement bar 3 57 34 3.1 T11
Reinforcement bar 4 68 24 3.1 T14
Timber beam 1 10 54 8.0 T09
Timber beam 2 35 54 5.0 T01
Timber beam 3 80 54 5.0 T02
Timber beam 4 35 16 5.0 T16
Timber beam 5 55 16 5.0 T19
Timber beam 6 90 16 8.0 T24
Timber groove 1 47 57 7.0 T04
Timber groove 2 73 50 7.0 T10
Timber groove 3 50 19 7.0 T17
Timber groove 4 50 13 7.0 T18
Open pipe 1 18 33 4.9 T25 Fig. 4. Test observations: (a) untested specimen; (b) cracks occurred
Open pipe 2 15 4 3.3 T23
after 15 min of fire exposure (picture taken at the end of test); (c) water
Open pipe 3 63 33 4.0 T30
Open pipe 4 76 4 5.4 T22 from the cracks in concrete slab after 15 min; (d) steam evaporating
Closed pipe 1 22 69 5.0 T27 though openings; (e) ignition of timber beams after 49 min; (f) no spal-
Closed pipe 2 24 43 3.2 T29 ling at bottom surface of the concrete slab at the end of the test;
Closed pipe 3 72 69 3.5 T21 (g) melted pipe (thermocouple highlighted); and (h) char layer at
Closed pipe 4 70 43 5.0 T28 the bottom surface (thermocouple highlighted)

© ASCE A4014009-4 J. Perform. Constr. Facil.

J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2014, 28(6): A4014009

 device. The novel TCC system was therefore tested with the con-
crete slab exposed to the fire, neglecting the possibility of fire ex-
posure from other sides. To prevent such a fire exposure in practice,
constructive measures have to be used. The practical application of
the system was investigated in a separate work package of the
Swiss wood-concrete deck project.
Test Results
The subsequent observations were made during the experiment.
After 15 min, thermal cracks appeared on the upper side of the
concrete slab [Fig. 4(b)] and water from the pipes leaked trough
these cracks [Fig. 4(c)]. This implies that the multilayer pipes
melted before minute 15 and suggests that the pipes cannot resist
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Waterloo on 09/03/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
beams [Fig. 4(h)] became visible. A char layer of nearly 6 mm
was measured. As the ignition occurred during minute 49; it was
determined that the rate of burning of wood was approximately
0.5 mm=min. The nominal burning rate for the Glulam timber is
0.7 mm=min (SIA 2004) when one of the sides is directly exposed
to fire. In this particular case the timber beam was not exposed to
fire directly, therefore the burning rate was less than the standard
nominal burning rate. The thickness of the char layer can be calcu-
lated by dchar ¼ β 0 t (mm=min), where t is the time after ignition
until the end of the process; and β 0 is the rate of burning of
the wood.
Fig. 5(a) shows the temperature profiles obtained from the oven,
which verifies that the fire conditions within the oven is in accor-

a temperature above 95°C (as specified in the manufacturer’s spec-
ifications). After 16 min, the water in the open pipe was boiling
and steam was evaporating though the openings [Fig. 4(d)]. After
35 min, the leaked water which collected on the upper side of the
slab started boiling and evaporating. After 49 min, smoke was
observed, which implies that the timber beams started charring
[Fig. 4(e)]. After 60 min, the exposed concrete surface showed
no damage. There were neither cracks nor was there any visible
spalling [Fig. 4(f)].
After separating the concrete from the timber beams, the melted
pipes [Fig. 4(g)] and the charred bottom surface of the timber
dance with the STtC pattern. Fig. 5 also shows the temperature pro-
files obtained from the reinforcement bars, the open and closed
pipes, at the contact surface of the timber beam, and at the middle
of the penetration depth. Fig. 5(b), upper curves, shows that the
temperature variation at the concrete surface exposed to the fire
conditions was not in accordance with the exact STtC profile be-
cause there is continuous heat transfer between the surface exposed
to fire and the inner part of the concrete slab. Fig. 5(b), lower
curves, shows the temperature variation in the reinforcement bars
during the experiment. The profiles show a linear variation of
temperature in reinforcement bars and the maximum temperature

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 5. Rate of change of temperature: (a) within the oven; (b) at concrete (upper curves) and reinforcement bars (lower curves); (c) timber bottom
surface (upper curves) and at grooves (lower curves); and (d) pipes (curves for open and closed pipes shown together)

© ASCE A4014009-5 J. Perform. Constr. Facil.

J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2014, 28(6): A4014009

 Table 3. Properties of Different Materials for Thermal Analysis
Material ρ (kg=m3 ) λ (W=m-K) c (J=kg-K)
Concrete 2,300 — —
Wood 450 — —
Steel 7,850 — —
Water 1,000 0.60 4,186
Multilayer pipe 2,700 0.40 2,300
was nearly 450°C after 60 min. Fig. 5(c), upper curves, shows the
temperature profiles for the timber beam at contact surface. The
maximum temperature does not exceed a value of 400°C that
did not show any sever effects on the TCC system during the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Waterloo on 09/03/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
observation. Temperature profiles for both pipes are fairly similar
on both the top and bottom sides of the pipes [Fig. 5(d)]. Conse-
quently, in the subsequent numerical model no distinction was
made between open and closed pipe. The pipes started melting after
12 min at a temperature of nearly 100°C. Right after this occurrence
the water started boiling.
Numerical Simulation
The secondary objective of the research reported in this paper was
to generate and validate a numerical model to provide a basis for
parameter optimization and predicting fire resistance ratings of
optimized systems.
Thermal Material Properties
To model the behavior of the novel TCC system under fire condi-
tion, the thermal conductivity and specific heat are two core proper-
ties, which have to be precisely taken into consideration for thermal
analysis of the structural element. Thermal conductivity λ is an
intrinsic material property (independent of material size, shape or
orientation), which describes the material’s ability to conduct heat.
The specific heat capacity c of a solid or liquid is defined as the heat
required to change the temperature of a unit mass of substance by
1°C. Thermal properties of these materials are also temperature
dependent but due to unavailability of the required data, data at
ambient temperature were used. Table 3 shows the properties used
in the transient thermal analysis to determine the temperature at
different times and locations using the ISO 834-1 (ISO 1999) STtC;
thermal conductivity and specific heat of different materials for the
purpose of modeling were taken from the literature (Bailey 2005).
Transient Thermal Analysis
The commercial software package Workbench (Ansys 2011) was
used; Fig. 6 shows an isometric view of the model, exploiting
symmetry. Only a portion of the test specimen was modeled as the
temperature variation along the bottom surface of the system was
nearly identical during the fire tests (Fig. 5). This modeled section
of the system included all components and materials of the TCC
system. SOLID87 elements (three-dimensional, tetrahedral, 10
node) were deemed most appropriate for all the materials which
for a thermal analysis with free mesh option. Small elements
(10 mm in size) were used to refine the mesh at the contact surface
of the timber beam and the concrete slab. Otherwise, the model
relied on the automatic modeling procedures provided by Work-
bench. Transient thermal analyses determined thermal quantities
that varied over time. A transient thermal analysis can be either
linear or nonlinear. Since thermal properties of most materials such
as thermal conductivity, specific heat, or density vary with temper-
ature, the analysis had to be nonlinear.
© ASCE
J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2014, 28(6): A4014009
Fig. 6. Isometric view of numerical model
Temperature Profiles
The modeled rates of change of temperature for the different
materials (Fig. 7) illustrate that the temperature increases nearly
linearly for all the materials with respect to time. Initially, the
temperature of the reinforcement bars and the pipes increased at
a higher rate initially, while the temperature in the grooves in-
creased at a slightly slower rate. After approximately 20 min, all
further increases in temperature were almost perfectly linear with
time. The maximum temperature in reinforcing steel bars is nearly
480°C after 60 min for 25 mm concrete cover to the reinforcement.
This finding implies that the steel retains approximately 80% of its
strength (Lie 1978). The maximum temperature at the bottom sur-
face of the pipe is nearly 100°C after 10 min. The maximum tem-
perature in the pipe is more than 400°C after 60 min, which implies
that there will be no water at the end of the process and the pipe will
have melted. The temperature in the timber beam on the bottom
surface is approximately 360°C after 60 min. Ignition may occur
after 48 min when the temperature on the bottom of the timber
beam reaches about 300°C. Therefore the thickness of the char
layer can be calculated as dchar ∼ β 0 × t ¼ 0.5 × 12 ¼ 6 mm, with
t being the time from ignition until the required (R60) fire resistant
rating; and β 0 being the rate of burning of wood (0.5 mm=min in
this paper, from the experimental investigations). Roughly 6 mm of
the beam will be converted into char layer. The remaining section of
the beam is able to sustain the weight of the slab and the timber
beam will not lose its connection with the concrete slab.
Discussion
Fig. 7 compares the temperature profiles obtained from the exper-
imental and numerical investigations for the different materials.
All the observations and results are used to define the effective fire
resistance rating of the TCC system. Temperature profiles from
thermocouples are compared with the temperature profile from the
thermal analysis for different materials and locations. The results
obtained from the experimental procedure and the transient thermal
analysis show adequate resemblance.
Thermal cracks occurred due to thermal expansion of the slab
because of excessive temperature difference within the slab and its
surroundings. The temperature of the slab at the surface that was
exposed to fire was more than 700°C after 15 min. No spalling in-
stabilities occurred during the entire process, which is one of the
A4014009-6 J. Perform. Constr. Facil.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Waterloo on 09/03/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 7. Comparison of the experimental and numerical results for temperatures of the different materials when the bottom surface of the concrete slab
exposed to the ISO 834-1 (ISO 1999) STtC

most critical observations in concrete materials when subjected to
high temperatures.
The temperature in the reinforcement bars during the experi-
ments was nearly 450°C after 60 min, which is relatively compa-
rable to the temperature obtained from the thermal simulation. At
this temperature, the reinforcement bars retain 90% of their initial
strength (Lie 1978), which is the most important characteristic re-
quired to keep the concrete slab cohesive even after the cracks.
In the fire test, water from the pipes appeared on the top of the
concrete slab during minute 15 through the cracks in the slab.
Analysis showed that the boiling process of water and the melting
process of pipes occurred between minutes 12 and 15 of the pro-
cess. These results were verified from the numerical transient ther-
mal analysis, which showed that the water within the pipes reached
an average temperature of 100°C after 12 min. In addition, this pro-
cess confirmed the maximum operating temperature for the multi-
layer pipes (95°C) given by the company as the water must have
leaked from the melted pipes.
Furthermore, ignition in the timber beams was observed by
smoke, which occurred after 49 min at a temperature of close to
300°C. In the numerical model, this temperature at the bottom
of the beam was observed after 48 min, which verifies the obser-
vations from experimental investigation. From the 30-mm beam
inside the concrete slab, almost 6 mm were converted into char
at the end of the process, yet the residual height of the beams sus-
tained the weight of the concrete slab. The experimentally observed
thickness of the char layer and the thickness as calculated based on
the numerical results are in excellent agreement. Further modeling
efforts, ideally validated by more tests, on the fire performance of a
complete slab that also consider live loads are recommended.
Conclusions
The research reported in this paper allow the following main con-
clusions to be drawn: (1) the effective fire resistance rating of the
TCC system can be assumed to be 60 min (R60), (2) the minimum
concrete cover of 25 mm for the reinforcement is sufficient for R60
fire resistance rating of TCC system, (3) as the results for open and
closed pipe did not show any difference it can be concluded that
there is no risk of pipes bursting if the water is trapped within the
pipes (after the pipe melts, the water will come out of the thermal
cracks in the concrete slab), (4) concrete cover of 50 mm is suffi-
cient for the timber beam grooves to sustain weight of the concrete
slab for one hour of fire exposure without losing the beam-slab con-
nection, and (5) the validated numerical model can be used to ana-
lyze the temperature profiles for different setups to allow for system
optimization.
Acknowledgments
The research reported in this paper was funded by the Swiss
Commission for Technology and Innovation (CTI) and carried
out in collaboration with Renggli AG, Pirmin Jung Ingenieure
für Holzbau AG, Makiol+Wiederkehr Holzbau-Ingenieure, Jomos
Gruppe, and Rekag AG. The help of the technicians at the Tech

© ASCE A4014009-7 J. Perform. Constr. Facil.

J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2014, 28(6): A4014009

 Park of the Bern University of Applied Sciences in Biel and of
the fire lab at ETH Zurich is kindly acknowledged. The support
by Meng students Robbe Drugmand and Ilana Danzig at the
University of British Columbia is also appreciated.
References
Ansys. (2011). “Documentation for ANSYS. Release 11.” ANSYS, Inc.,
Canonsburg, PA, 〈http://www.ansys.com〉 (May 22, 2014).
ASTM. (2003). “Standard test methods for fire tests of building construc-
tion and materials.” ASTM E119, West Conshohocken, PA.
Babrauskas, V. (2002). “Ignition of wood–A review of the state of the art.”
J. Fire Prot. Eng., 12(3), 163–189.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Waterloo on 09/03/21. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Bailey, C. (2005). “One stop shop in structural fire engineering.” 〈http://
www.structuralfiresafety.org〉 (May 22, 2014).
Branthwaite, K. (2010). “A finite element analysis of the fire resistance of
FRP reinforced member.” Research Rep. Prepared for the School of
Civil Engineering, Univ. of Leeds, Leeds, U.K.
Brunner, M., Romer, M., and Schnüriger, M. (2006). “Timber-concrete-
composite with an adhesive connector (wet on wet process).” Mater.
Struct., 40(1), 119–126.
Clouston, P., Bathon, L., and Schreyer, A. (2005). “Shear and bending per-
formance of a novel wood-concrete composite system.” J. Struct. Eng.,
10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2005)131:9(1404), 1404–1412.
Clouston, P., and Schreyer, A. (2008). “Design and use of wood-concrete
composites.” Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr., 10.1061/(ASCE)
1084-0680(2008)13:4(167), 167–174.
European Committee for Standardization (CEN). (2004). “Eurocode 5:
Design of timber structures–Part 1-1: General–Common rules and rules
for buildings.” EN 1995-1-1:2004, Brussels, Belgium.
Fletcher, I. A., Welch, S., Torero, J. L., Carvel, R. O., and Usmani, A.
(2007). The behaviour of concrete structures in fire, Building Research
Establishment (BRE) Center for Fire Safety Engineering, Edinburgh,
U.K.
Fragiacomo, M. (2005). “A finite element model for long-term analysis of
timber-concrete composite beams.” Struct. Eng. Mech., 20(2), 173–189.
Fragiacomo, M. (2006). “Long-term behaviour of timber-concrete
composite beams. II: Numerical analysis and simplified evaluation.”
J. Struct. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2006)132:1(23), 23–33.
Frangi, A., Erchinger, C., and Fontana, M. (2008). “Charring model for
timber frame floor assemblies with void cavities.” Fire Saf. J., 43(8),
551–564.
Frangi, A., Fontana, M., Hugi, E., and Jöbst, R. (2009). “Experimental
analysis of cross-laminated timber panels in fire.” Fire Saf. J., 44(8),
1078–1087.
Frangi, A., Knobloch, M., and Fontana, M. (2010). “Fire design of timber-
concrete composite slabs with screwed connections.” J. Struct. Eng.,
10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000101, 219–228.
© ASCE A4014009-8
J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2014, 28(6): A4014009
Gosselin, G. C., and Lie, T. T. (1987). “Provision of fire resistance:
Evolution of design approaches.” Proc., Canadian Society for Civil
Engineering (CSCE) Centennial Conf., National Research Council,
Ottawa, 3–19.
HakaGerodur. (2011). “Product specifications.” 〈http://www.hakagerodur
.ch〉 (May 22, 2014).
Harmathy, T. Z., Sultan, M. A., and MacLaurin, J. W. (1987). “Comparison
of severity of exposure in ASTM E119 and ISO 834 fire resistance
tests.” J. Test. Eval., 1, 371–375.
Hehl, S., Meena, R., Tannert, T., and Vallee, T. (2013). “Experimental
and numerical investigations on groove connections for novel timber-
concrete-composite system.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 10.1061/
(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000549, A4014010.
Negrão, J., Leitão de Oliveira, C., Maia de Oliveira, F., and Cachim, P.
(2010). “Glued composite timber-concrete beams. I: Interlayer connec-
tion specimen tests.” J. Struct. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X
.0000228, 1236–1245.
ISO. (1999). “Fire-resistance tests–Elements of building construction–Part
1: General requirements.” ISO 834-1, Geneva.
Kodur, V. K. R., Wang, T. C., and Cheng, F. P. (2004). “Predicting the fire
resistance behaviour of high strength concrete columns.” Cement
Concrete Compos., 26(2), 141–153.
Lane, W. (2005). “Ignition, charring and structural performance of
laminated veneer.” Fire Engineering Research Rep. 05/03, Univ. of
Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Lie, T. T. (1978). “Calculation of the fire resistance of composite concrete
floors and roof slabs.” Fire Technol., 14(1), 28–45.
National Research Council (NRC). (2010). National building code of
Canada. Fire and structural protection of buildings, Ottawa.
Natterer, J. K. (2002). “New technologies for engineered timber structures.”
Prog. Struct. Eng. Mater., 4(3), 245–263.
O’Neill, J. W. (2009). “The fire performance of timber-concrete composite
floors.” MASc. thesis, Univ. of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Peng, L. (2010). “Performance of heavy timber connections in fire.” Ph.D.
thesis, Carleton Univ., Ottawa.
Swiss Society of Engineers and Architects (SIA). (2004). “Timber struc-
tures.” SIA 265, Zurich, Switzerland.
Tsai, K., Carradine, D., Moss, P., and Buchanan, A. (2013). “Charring rates
for double beams made from laminated veneer lumber (LVL).” Fire
Mater., 37(1), 58–74.
White, R. H. (2000). “Charring rate of composite timber products.”
Proc., Int. Conf. Wood and Fire Safety, Tech. Univ. of Zvolen, Slovak
Republic, 353–363.
Yeoh, D., Fragiacomo, M., De Franceschi, M., and Heng Boon, K. (2011).
“State of the art on timber- concrete composite structures: Literature
review.” J. Struct. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000353,
1085–1095.
Zadrazil, T., Vodak, F., and Kapickova, O. (2004). “Effect of temperature
and age of concrete on strength- porosity relation.” Acta Polytech.,
44(1), 53–56.
J. Perform. Constr. Facil.