metals

Article
Behaviour of Aluminium EN AW 6082 T6 Columns Exposed to
Transient Heating—Experimental and Numerical Analysis
Marko Goreta *, Neno Torić , Ivica Boko and Vladimir Divić

Faculty of Civil Engineering, Architecture and Geodesy, University of Split, Matice Hrvatske 15,
21000 Split, Croatia
* Correspondence: marko.goreta@gradst.hr; Tel.: +385-21-303-330

Abstract: The paper presents an experimental and numerical analysis of EN AW 6082 T6 aluminium
alloy columns exposed to high-temperature creep in transient conditions. Transient tests with columns
subjected to a constant heating rate for a persistent external load in the form of the horizontal and
transversal forces were carried out. A total of ten columns were examined with varying ratios of
horizontal and transversal loads. The test results were compared to numerical results obtained from
ANSYS 16.2. The coefficients for an ANSYS built-in Modified Time Hardening creep model were
calibrated from the previously conducted tests on coupons and used as a base for the numerical
analysis of the column. The study results reveal that creep reduces column load-bearing capacity,
starting at temperatures above 150 ◦ C. Furthermore, the level of reduction in the aluminium column
capacity, which manifests itself as a runaway failure of the column between the creep and creep-free
model, deviates with a difference exceeding 160% in vertical displacement upon failure, while the
creep model correlates very well with the results obtained from the tested specimens in terms of
failure time and the displacement ratio.

Keywords: aluminium; fire; transient; columns; EN AW 6082 T6; creep

Citation: Goreta, M.; Torić, N.; Boko,
I.; Divić, V. Behaviour of Aluminium
EN AW 6082 T6 Columns Exposed to
Transient Heating—Experimental
and Numerical Analysis. Metals 2022,
1. Introduction
12, 1326. https://doi.org/ 1.1. Research Motivation
10.3390/met12081326 Over the last few decades, aluminium provided great potential for implementation
Academic Editor:
in everyday civil engineering practice. Significant quantities of aluminium worldwide,
Elisabetta Gariboldi together with this metal’s advantageous mechanical properties compared with those of
other metals, support its use as a standalone structural material. The main drawback of
Received: 14 July 2022 aluminium is fire sensitivity since its melting point is approximately 660 ◦ C and reduction
Accepted: 5 August 2022
in its load-bearing capacity starts at temperatures over 100 ◦ C [1]. Moreover, aluminium
Published: 8 August 2022
shows high thermal conductivity which results in faster heat transfer and, therefore, more
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral rapid strength reduction compared with structural steel. Generally, metals exposed to
with regard to jurisdictional claims in fire have noticeable temperature-related strain components, consisting of three types:
published maps and institutional affil- thermal strain, stress-related strain, and creep strain. Creep strain is time-dependent,
iations. and its development depends on the material characteristics and microstructure of the
material altogether, applied physical loads, and temperature. Most metals are susceptible
to significant creep strain starting at temperatures around 25–30% of their melting point,
depending on the applied loads. From an engineering perspective, columns represent
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
critical load-bearing structural elements and if the column fails, there is a high possibility
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
that the structure will collapse [2]. Currently, there is a lack of research on the effect of
This article is an open access article
creep on aluminium columns exposed to high temperatures. This is partly related to the
distributed under the terms and
relative complexity of the experiments and the general use of material test data based on
conditions of the Creative Commons
transient tests.
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
Although the first creep development laws were proposed in the nineteenth century
4.0/).
after Vicat [3], in 1834, discovered this phenomenon in tensile-loaded steel wire, more

Metals 2022, 12, 1326. https://doi.org/10.3390/met12081326 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/metals

Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 17
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 2 of 17

serious research on steel and aluminium alloys dates back to the second half of the 20th
serious research on steel and aluminium alloys dates back to the second half of the 20th
century. Currently, the design codes for aluminium do not cover the effect of transient
century. Currently, the design codes for aluminium do not cover the effect of transient
induced creep in an explicit manner since its background was scarcely investigated. The
induced creep in an explicit manner since its background was scarcely investigated. The
creep effect on columns is included in structural fire design with a reduction factor of 1.2
creep effect on columns is included in structural fire design with a reduction factor of 1.2
according to EC 1999-1-2 Section 4.2.2.4 [4]. Current strict regulations for fire protection
according to EC 1999-1-2 Section 4.2.2.4 [4]. Current strict regulations for fire protection
requirements in everyday use are based on accidents caused by fires that occasionally led
requirements in everyday use are based on accidents caused by fires that occasionally led
to structure collapse,
to structure so there
collapse, is a is
so there need to explore
a need to explorethisthis
possible structural
possible failure
structural mode
failure in in
mode
more detail. In order to start investigating this topic, experimental data obtained
more detail. In order to start investigating this topic, experimental data obtained from from
teststests
conducted
conductedon coupons
on couponsof aluminium
of aluminium alloy 60826082
alloy T6 [5]
T6 were used
[5] were to enable
used the the
to enable use use
of of
creep models offered by software ANSYS [6]. A verified creep model was
creep models offered by software ANSYS [6]. A verified creep model was subsequently subsequently
used in the
used numerical
in the study
numerical of the
study axially
of the loaded
axially aluminium
loaded aluminium columns, followed
columns, up by
followed up by
experimental research, and presented in this study.
experimental research, and presented in this study.

1.2. 1.2.
Comparison between
Comparison Stationary
between and and
Stationary Transient Creep
Transient Tests
Creep Tests
Different loading
Different regimes
loading generally
regimes generallyinfluence successive
influence creep
successive development.
creep development. Tests
Tests
carried out out
carried for creep modelling,
for creep in terms
modelling, of member
in terms of member capacity where
capacity the the
where loadload
is increased
is increased
while the the
while temperature
temperatureis held constant,
is held are defined
constant, as stationary
are defined teststests
as stationary or steady-state tests.tests.
or steady-state
Transient tests
Transient (Figure
tests 1) are
(Figure used
1) are to show
used to showthethe
member
member behaviour
behaviourinin
a more
a morerealistic
realisticman-
manner
ner due to the impact of of fire
fire where
where the
the temperature
temperatureload,load,according
accordingtotothe
theshape
shapeofofnomi-
nominal
nal fire curve ISO 834, increases
increases over
over time
time whilst
whilst the
the load
load remains
remains constant.
constant.

(a) (b)
Figure 1. Representation
Figure of the
1. Representation oftest
the variables in transient
test variables test regime;
in transient (a) Mechanical
test regime; load load
(a) Mechanical vs. Time
vs. Time
development; (b) Heating rate vs. Time development.
development; (b) Heating rate vs. Time development.

1.3. 1.3. Previous

Previous Research
Research
TheThe creep
creep behaviour
behaviour of aluminium
of aluminium is, currently,
is, currently, a scarcely
a scarcely investigated
investigated topic
topic within
within
the structural-fire research community. Significant research breakthroughs
the structural-fire research community. Significant research breakthroughs on this topic on this topic
date back to the middle of the twentieth century. Harmathy [7] proposed
date back to the middle of the twentieth century. Harmathy [7] proposed a new approach a new approach
to determining
to determining thethe creep
creep development
development ofof metalsunder
metals undertransient
transientconditions.
conditions. He
He applied
applied the
the Dorn
Dorn [8]
[8] creep
creepmodel
modeland andadapted
adapteditittotomeet
meetthethepractical
practicalrequirements
requirements and to calculate
and to calcu- dis-
lateplacements
displacementsof protected steel steel
of protected elements exposed
elements to transient
exposed high temperatures.
to transient Generally,
high temperatures.
Harmathy expressed time-dependent strain
Generally, Harmathy expressed time-dependent strain as (1): as (1):
11 𝑑 d 𝜀 
== 𝑐𝑜𝑡ℎ 2 εc (1) (1)
𝑍Z𝑑𝜃 coth 𝜀 ε
dθ I
where εc is time-dependent creep strain and θ is the temperature defined by Dorn (2)
where εc is time-dependent creep strain and θ is the temperature defined by Dorn (2)
∆ /
𝜃 = Z𝑒t 𝑑𝑡 (2)
θ= e−∆H/RT dt (2)
0
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 3 of 17

where ∆H represents the creep activation energy (J/mol), R is the gas constant (J/mol◦ K),
and T is the temperature (◦ K). Z and εI are the dimensionless creep parameters dependent
only on the applied stress.
Previously published research on the influence of creep on aluminium alloys included
studies conducted by Langhelle et al. [9] and Maljaars [10–15]. Langhelle et al. conducted
research on the behaviour of aluminium AW 6082 columns of an alloy of T4 and T6 temper
exposed to fire. Buckling tests of 31 RHS columns with a slenderness ratio of 41 were
carried out in stationary (temperature up to 300 ◦ C) and transient (heating rate range
5–12◦ C/min and the stress level range 75–110 MPa) heating conditions. The main research
topic of this study was the influence of high-temperature creep effects on column load
capacity and its comparison to design codes. Langhelle et al. reported that the creep strain
for temperatures over 170 ◦ C was significant, but insufficiently researched and covered
by the current standards for aluminium. Maljaars in his extensive studies covered the
numerical and experimental behaviour of 5xxx and 6xxx series aluminium alloys exposed
to stationary and transient heating, with particular emphasis on creep strain. He applied
the aforementioned Dorn and Harmathy creep models and carried out transient tests with
a varying heating rate within the range of 1.6–11 ◦ C/min and a constant load (stress range
20–150 MPa), where the critical temperature interval was within the range 170–380 ◦ C
and sufficiently valid to simulate insulated aluminium members exposed to a real fire.
The main conclusion of his studies is that the Eurocode 9 approach for creep effects in
structural fire design has certain limitations since it is based on conservative steady-state
tensile tests instead of transient tests. He also pointed out that the creep model developed
by Dorn and Harmathy is not suited for aluminium alloys in series 6xxx for creep strain
representation. Kandare et al. [16,17] applied an analytical creep model developed by
Maljaars for the plates simulated as columns of aluminium alloys 5083 H116 and 6082 T6
exposed to compression load and transient heating. The main conclusion of this study
was a fairly good prediction of the failure of aluminium plates due to buckling at high
temperatures with the visible representation of primary and secondary creep phases, but
with a noticeable deficiency for complex structures and elements such as I profiles.
Further research on the topic of axially loaded aluminium columns exposed to high
temperatures was put forward by Jiang et al. [18] in an extensive study where the authors
examined 108 specimens (48 circular tubes and 60 rectangular tube cross-sections). Columns
of different slenderness failed due to buckling for different levels of temperature load and
the main conclusion was that the EC9 calculation methodology has certain limitations for
temperatures above 300 ◦ C so he proposed some additional formulas to estimate the flexural
buckling behaviour of aluminium alloy columns for a temperature span of 100–400 ◦ C.
Wang et al. [19] carried out a study with a series of 6060 columns with different lengths
and irregular-shaped cross-section thickness and stated that the current design codes for
columns exposed to fire predict load capacity too conservatively. Based on his conclusions,
he proposed the modification of the reduction in the Young’s modulus of aluminium alloys
for temperatures above 250 ◦ C. With the increase in interest for use of aluminium alloys
as a load-bearing material in everyday structures, Zheng and Zhang [20] simulated the
response of fire-protected and unprotected I cross-section aluminium alloy beams and
compared the results to the Eurocode 9 standard and proposed additional formulas for
calculating the critical temperature of 5xxx and 6xxx series aluminium alloys.
Due to very scarce research data on the behaviour of the I section columns exposed
to high-temperature creep, Torić et al. [5,21–24] carried out a research study. Within the
mentioned research, a material study on coupons of EN AW 6082 T6 was conducted as the
main prerequisite to determine the creep behaviour of specified aluminium alloy columns
exposed to transient heating presented in this paper.
 Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 4 of 17

2. Creep Model Calibration of Aluminium Alloy EN AW 6082 T6

2. Creep Model Calibration of Aluminium
2.1. ANSYS Alloy EN AW 6082
Creep Model—Theoretical T6
Background
2.1. ANSYS Creep Model—Theoretical Background
ANSYS software considers creep as a rate-dependent material nonlinea
ANSYS software considers
material creep as a rate-dependent
continues to deform under material
constantnonlinearity
load over where the softwar
time. The
material continues to deform under constant load over time. The software is capable
modelling creep following two different approaches, strain hardening of and
modelling creep following two different approaches, strain hardening and time hardening.
ing. Strain hardening is based on the stress relaxation law presented in the
Strain hardening is based on the stress relaxation law presented in the ANSYS Structural
tural Analysis Guide [25] where the reaction force diminishes over time du
Analysis Guide [25] where the reaction force diminishes over time due to occurring creep-
creep-related displacements; this is more applicable to stationary tests s
related displacements; this is more applicable to stationary tests since the creep strain rate
strain rate is calculated as a function of the previous accumulated creep an
is calculated as a function of the previous accumulated creep and stress. Time hardening
hardening represents creep strain due to constant applied stress and is m
represents creep strain due to constant applied stress and is more suited to high-temperature
high-temperature creep representation in transient conditions (Figure 2).
creep representation in transient conditions (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Applied numerical creep

Figure 2. model fornumerical
Applied creep strain duemodel
creep to constant applied
for creep stress.
strain due to constant applied s

The software can model the first two stages of creep (primary and secondary), while
The software can model the first two stages of creep (primary and sec
the tertiary phase is omitted from the calculation since it implies impending rupture, which
the tertiary phase is omitted from the calculation since it implies impen
is not considered relevant in the case of large I-sections. ANSYS determines creep strain by
which is not considered relevant in the case of large I-sections. ANSYS de
means of numerical methods recommended for general use for problems involving large
strain by means of numerical methods recommended for general use for pr
creep strains and large deformations caused by high temperature. It uses a Euler forward
ing large creep strains and large deformations caused by high temperature.
algorithm where the modified total strain in every substep (time step) n is computed as (3):
forward algorithm where the modified total strain in every substep (time
puted
 0 as (3): n o n o 
pl
ε n = {ε n } − ε n − εth − εcr

n n −1 (3)
ε = ε − 𝜀 − 𝜀 − 𝜀
where ε stands for total where
strain vector, ε pl for
𝜀 stands plastic
totalstrain
strainvector,
vector,εth𝜀thermal strain
plastic vector
strain in the
vector, 𝜀 therma
cr
ongoing time step, and ε the creep strain vector from the previous time step, calculated as
in the ongoing time step, and 𝜀 the creep strain vector from the previous
a scalar quantity through the equivalent creep strain increment ∆εcr in each master node m,
culated as a scalar quantity through the equivalent creep strain incremen
which is calculated as (4):
master node m, whichis calculated  as (4):
cr 1
∆ε m = ε et 1 − A 1 (4)
e ∆𝜀 = 𝜀 1 −
𝑒
where the equivalent modified total strain ε et is computed as a function of all three normal
where(γthe
strains (ε0x , ε0y , ε0z ) and shear 0 equivalent
0 0 modified total strain 𝜀 is computed as a function o
xy , γyz , γzx ) components (5):
mal strains (𝜀 , 𝜀 , 𝜀 ) and shear (𝛾 , 𝛾 , 𝛾 ) components (5):
 2  2 1
1  0
2 3  0 2 3  0 2 3 0
2 2
ε et = √ 0 0 0 10 0
ε x − ε y + ε y − ε z 𝜀 += ε z −𝜀ε x− 𝜀+ + γ𝜀xy− 𝜀+ + (𝜀 + γ 3 3 3
2 2
γ
2 yz− 𝜀 ) 2+ 2 zx𝛾 + (5)𝛾 + (
√2 2 2

and e = 2.7182 (base naturaland elogarithm).

= 2.7182 (base natural logarithm).
A = ∆ε
cr
(the creep strain ∆
ε et Aratio
= in the
(therange
creepfrom 1 toratio
strain 10 for
inthe
thecurrent
range integration point).
from 1 to 10 for the curre
Since creep is a path-dependent phenomenon, it is of great importance to adequately
point).
capture the response of the model; in ANSYS, this is represented by the creep strain
Since creep is a path-dependent phenomenon, it is of great importance
ratio, which is dependent on the equivalent creep strain increment ∆εcr and the modified
capture the response of the model; in ANSYS, this is represented by the cre
equivalent strain ε et . In accordance with the law described above, the creep strain increment
which is dependent on the equivalent creep strain increment ∆𝜀 and
equivalent strain 𝜀 . In accordance with the law described above, th
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 5 of 17

converts to a full strain tensor with six (three normal strain and three shear) components
(6)–(11):  
∆ε cr 2ε0x − ε0y − ε0z
∆εcr
x = (6)
ε et 2(1 + ν )
 
2ε 0 − ε0 − ε0
∆ε cr y y x
∆εcr
y = (7)
ε et 2(1 + ν )
∆εcr cr cr
z = − ∆ε x − ∆ε y (8)
0
∆εcr 3γxy
∆εcr
xy = (9)
ε et 2(1 + ν)
0
∆εcr 3γyz
∆εcr
yz = (10)
ε et 2(1 + ν)
∆εcr 3γxz 0
∆εcr
xz = (11)
ε et 2(1 + ν)
where the total creep strain is calculated separately for each component as the combination
of the total creep strain from the previous time step and creep strain from the current
increment, with an example for z component as follows (12):

(εcr cr cr
z )n = ( ε z )n−1 + ∆ε z (12)

The time-step size in the integration procedure shown is presented for stress and
strain in referred time interval tn−1 , while the creep strain rate is calculated in time tn for
temperature in the same tn step. A detailed numerical procedure can be found within the
ANSYS material [26] and theory [27] reference.

2.2. Available Predefined ANSYS Creep Models

ANSYS includes a total of 13 different creep models with temperature-dependent
constants which can be entered directly by means of the creep model itself or by the material
model. Most of the available creep models use a derivative of creep strain, which makes
it difficult to obtain quality results due to the large number of noisy experimental data.
Based on numerical simulations, the Modified Time Hardening model was chosen as it was
the most applicable in terms of time consumption and the complexity of the calculations.
Also, it is more applicable for transient tests since the creep strain rate is calculated as a
function of stress and time when the stress level remains approximately constant during
fire exposure. The creep equation for the corresponding model can be defined as (13):

ε cr = C1 σC2 tC3 +1 e−C4 /T /(C3 + 1) (13)

where ε cr represents the creep strain, σ is current stress (MPa), T current temperature (◦ K),
and t is the time (min), while C1 , . . . , C4 are the dimensionless coefficients for the adopted
creep model. Presented coefficients for the Modified Time Hardening model have property
values based on the initial value of strain resistances dependent on applied stress, Q is the
activation energy (kJ/mol), R is the universal gas constant (kJ/mol◦ K), and an exponential
factor based on time. The temperature component C4 is included through the material
model and the coefficient C2 is fixed to a value of one in order to simplify the conducted
robust calculations since it presents the stress exponent.

2.3. Transient Creep Model Calibration Using Material Data

In order to obtain the required coefficients of the presented MTH creep model, the
test results for aluminium coupons of EN AW 6082 T6 alloy put forward by Torić et al. [5]
were used as representative. The tests were performed by following the ASTM standard for
high-temperature tests [28] and the ASTM standard for normal temperature tests [29]. The
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 6 of 17

ANSYS mechanical built-in nonlinear model for rate-dependent creep-curve fitting was
used for every temperature level in various stress ratios to acquire needed coefficients for
the creep model. The results of the curve-fitting method for the referent four-hour interval
are shown in Table 1 and Figure 3.

Table 1. Modified Time Hardening model coefficients.

Temperature Applied Stress MTH Creep Model Coefficients

f0.2,θ (%)
(◦ C) (MPa) C1 C2 C3 C4
6.06 ×
150 170.30 0.7 1.00 −0.2490 0
10−13
5.62 ×
38.10 0.2 1.00 −0.8910 0
Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10−11 6 of 17
200
8.20 ×
57.19 0.3 1.00 −0.9250 0
10−11
was used for every temperature level in 9.60
various
× stress ratios to acquire needed coefficients
for95.20 0.5 of the curve-fitting
the creep model. The results method −0.8800
1.00for the referent 0
four-hour in-
10−11
terval are shown in Table 1 and Figure 3.
1.60 ×
16.30
Table 0.15 model coefficients.
1. Modified Time Hardening −14 1.00 0.1380 0
10
250 Temperature 9.18 × MTH Creep Model Coefficients
f0.2,θ
32.25 0.3 (MPa)
Applied Stress 1.00 C2 −0.7900 0
(°C) (%)10−11 C1 C3 C4
150 170.30 0.7
5.00 ×6.06 × 10 −13 1.00 −0.2490 0
53.76 0.5
38.10 0.2 −115.62 × 10−11 1.00 1.00 −−0.8910
0.6160 0 0
10
200 57.19 0.3 8.20 × 10
−11 1.00 −0.9250 0
95.20 3.75 ×
0.5 9.60 × 10−11 1.00 −0.8800 0
8.73 0.15 1.00 0.0361 0
16.30 10−131.60 × 10−14
0.15 1.00 0.1380 0
300 250 32.25 2.95 ×
0.3 9.18 × 10−11 1.00 −0.7900 0
17.46 0.3 1.00 1.00 −−0.6160
0.4670 0
53.76 10−105.00 × 10−11
0.5 0
8.73 0.15
8.26 ×3.75 × 10−13 1.00 0.0361 0
29.10
300 0.5
17.46 0.3 −102.95 × 10−10 1.00 1.00 −−0.4670
0.3210 0 0
10
29.10 0.5 8.26 × 10−10 1.00 −0.3210 0

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 3. Comparison of creep strain between the experimental and numerical results for various
Figure 3. Comparison of creepand
temperature strain between
stress levels; the tests
(a) Creep experimental
for 150 °C andand numerical
200 °C; results
(b) Creep tests for 250for
°C; various
(c)
temperature and stress
Creeplevels; (a)°CCreep
tests for 300 tests for
on 240-minute 150 ◦(d)CCreep
timescale; 200for◦ C;
and tests 300 (b)
°C onCreep tests
12-minute for 250 ◦ C;
timescale.

(c) Creep tests for 3003. ◦Test

C on 240-minute timescale; (d) Creep tests for 300 ◦ C on 12-minute timescale.
Study
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 7 of 17
Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 17

3. Test Study
3.1.
3.1.Test
TestSetup
Setup
Experimentalanalysis
Experimental analysisfor
forthis
this study
study waswas carried
carried outout at specialised
at the the specialised laboratory
laboratory unit—
unit—Structures
Structures lab—atlab—at the Faculty
the Faculty of Engineering,
of Civil Civil Engineering, Architecture
Architecture and Geodesy,
and Geodesy, Uni-
University
ofversity
Split. of
TheSplit.
setupThe setup consisted
consisted of the testofframe,
the testtwo
frame, two separate
separate hydraulic hydraulic
systems,systems, an
an induction
induction
heating heatingan
machine, machine,
insulatedan steel
insulated
tube steel tubeasserving
serving as aafurnace,
a furnace, detacheda detached cool-
cooling system,
ing the
and system, and theequipment
measuring measuring(Figure
equipment4). (Figure 4).

(a)

(b)
Figure4.4.The
Figure Thetest
test frame;
frame; (a)
(a) Test setup with equipment
equipment used;
used;(b)
(b)3D
3Dmodel.
model.

The test
The test frame
frame was
was made of multiple
multiple welded
weldedandandbolted
boltedUPNUPN280280steel
steelsections
sectionstoto
ensuresufficient
ensure sufficient support
support rigidity. The testtest setup
setup was
wasdesigned
designedtototest
testcolumn
columnspecimens
specimens
withan
with anapproximate
approximate lengthlength of 2590
2590 mm
mm in in order
ordertotomatch
matchthethestandard
standardfloor
floorheight
heightforfor
typicalbuildings.
typical buildings. Boundary
Boundary conditions
conditionsforforthe
thecolumns
columnswerewereprovided
providedby byhigh-quality
high-quality
steelpins
steel pinslubricated
lubricated with
with mechanical
mechanical grease
grease and
andused
usedwith
withthin
thinlathed
lathedsteel
steelplates.
plates.This
This
connection setup
connection setup with a with a total diameter of 60 mm was used as a link between
diameter of 60 mm was used as a link between two welded two welded
steelbearings
steel bearings to to ensure
ensure uninterrupted
uninterrupted rotation
rotationandandtotominimise
minimiseboltboltfriction
frictionduring
duringthe the
experiments. The
experiments. The total axial distance
distance between
betweenthe thetwo
twopins
pinswas
wasapproximately
approximately 2910 mm.
2910 mm.
Theright
The rightbearing
bearingononthe the frame
frame was
was fixed,
fixed, while
while thethe
leftleft
oneone
waswas movable
movable and and
usedused to
to apply
apply
the the horizontal
horizontal load onload
the on the column
column with awith a hydraulic
hydraulic ram awith
ram with a capacity
capacity of approx-
of approximately
imately
1000 kN. 1000 kN. A
A smaller smaller hydraulic
hydraulic jack with ajack with aofcapacity
capacity up to 60 of
kNup to 60
with thekNloadwith
cellthe
wasload
used
 Metals2022,
Metals 2022,12,
12,1326
x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of
8 of1717

cell
to was usedgeometrical
counteract to counteractimperfections
geometrical imperfections
around the weaker aroundaxis theof weaker axis of Pressure
the column. the col-
umn. Pressure gauges were used for constant monitoring
gauges were used for constant monitoring of the pressure in the system and the load of the pressure in the systemcell
and the load cell
was used as validation. was used as validation.
An efficient
An efficient heating
heating regime
regime waswas achieved
achieved with withaahigh-frequency
high-frequencyinduction inductionmachine.
machine.
Sincealuminium
Since aluminium is is not
not ferromagnetic,
ferromagnetic, heating heating was was achieved
achievedby bymeans
meansof ofaaradiative
radiativeheat heat
fluxemanating
flux emanating from from thethe surrounding
surrounding steel steel tube
tube ofof 406
406 mm
mm serving
servingas asaafurnace.
furnace.AAthick thick
layerof
layer ofinsulation
insulationofof50 50mmmmceramic
ceramicwool woolwas wasplaced
placed onon thethetubetube andand secured
secured byby wrap-
wrapping
ping with high-quality belts resistant to high temperatures
with high-quality belts resistant to high temperatures which provided thermal resistance which provided thermal re-
sistance up◦ to 800 °C. The same ceramic wool was used at both
up to 800 C. The same ceramic wool was used at both ends of the tube to prevent possible ends of the tube to prevent
possibleand
cooling cooling and temperature
temperature leakagethe
leakage during during the experiments
experiments in orderintoorder achieveto achieve the
the desired
desired rate
heating heatingwhichratewaswhich was controlled
controlled by an induction
by an induction machine machine
with a withpower a power
of up to of 35
up kW.
to
35 kW.
This Thisarrangement
heating heating arrangement
was chosen was as chosen
being aas morebeing a more favourable
favourable test setup for test setup for
temperature
temperature
induction induction
compared compared
with with electric
electric heaters sinceheaters sinceshape
the circular the circular
of the shape
furnace of provides
the fur-
nace provides more uniform heating of the cross-section of
more uniform heating of the cross-section of the column. The arrangement is also safer the column. The arrangement
is also safer
because because the
the machine doesmachine
not heat doesthenot heat thedirectly,
specimen specimen directly,
which which
reduces thereduces the
possibility
possibility of damage to the equipment, and it is aimed directly
of damage to the equipment, and it is aimed directly at the insulated steel furnace. This at the insulated steel fur-
nace. This
heating heating methodology
methodology is also energy is also energyand
efficient, efficient, and the
the heating rateheating
can berate can beeasily
corrected cor-
rected easily by increasing or decreasing
by increasing or decreasing the machine power. the machine power.
Thesteel
The steeltube
tubehad hadan anopening
openingfor foraasmaller
smallerhydraulic
hydraulicjack, jack,usedusedtotoapply
applythe thetransver-
trans-
versal
sal forceforce
during during the tests,
the tests, sincesince
the the
oil inoilthe
in the hydraulic
hydraulic system
system must must be maintained
be maintained at aatlow
a
low temperature.
temperature. It was It was necessary
necessary to include
to include a steel
a steel extension
extension for afor a transverse
transverse hydraulic
hydraulic jack
jack awith
with a cooling
cooling system system
because because
of the of highthemetal
high temperature
metal temperature conductivity
conductivity and theand the
heating
heating of the steel tube, which ◦
reaches 600
of the steel tube, which reaches 600 C in these types of tests. °C in these types of tests.
Measuring equipment
Measuring equipment consisted
consisted of of displacement
displacement metersmetersand andhigh-accuracy
high-accuracy(up (uptoto
0.001 mm) linear variable differential transformers (LVDT) which were connected tothe
0.001 mm) linear variable differential transformers (LVDT) which were connected to the
data-acquisition card
data-acquisition card from
fromNational
NationalInstruments,
Instruments, and
andwhere
where thetheresults were
results recorded
were recordedby
MatLab
by MatLab software
software [30] [30]
and andlater later
stored on a PC
stored on for
a PCfurther processing.
for further The sensor
processing. Theforsensor
hor-
izontal
for displacement
horizontal was mounted
displacement was mountedon top of on the
tophorizontal
of the horizontalhydraulic cylinder cylinder
hydraulic on the
movable
on side of side
the movable the frame
of the(left),
framewhile(left),the vertical
while LVDT was
the vertical LVDT attached with 3D-printed
was attached with 3D-
accessories on a small hydraulic jack, used to inflict
printed accessories on a small hydraulic jack, used to inflict the transversalthe transversal load (on load
the weaker
(on the
axis). axis).
weaker

3.2. Column
3.2. Column Specification
Specification
The aluminium
The aluminium columns tested within within this
thisstudy
studywereweremade
madeofofENENAWAW6082
6082T6T6alloy,
alloy,
whichisisnormally
which normallyused usedininconstruction
constructiondue duetotoitsits favourable
favourable mechanical
mechanical properties.
properties. Al-
Alloys
loys
in thein6xxx
the series
6xxx series
consistconsist of a percentage
of a high high percentage of silicon
of silicon and magnesium,
and magnesium, whichwhich in-
increases
creases weldability
weldability and plastic
and plastic deformation,
deformation, and theyandhave
they have
goodgood anti-corrosion
anti-corrosion properties
properties and
and strength.
high high strength. The proof
The proof strength
strength for thefor the presented
presented aluminium
aluminium alloy
alloy is is generally
generally higher
higher
than 260than
MPa260 [4],MPa
which[4],corresponds
which corresponds to the
to the yield yield strength
strength of standard
of standard S275 struc-
S275 structural steel.
tural the
Since steel.
testSince
framethewas
testdesigned
frame was fordesigned
a specimen forlength
a specimen length approximately
approximately equal
equal to the average
to the height,
storey averagethe storey
testedheight, thealuminium
I section tested I section
columns aluminium
were 2590 columns
mm in were 2590
length, withmm in
a total
length,height
profile with aof total
220profile height5).
mm (Figure of 220 mm (Figure 5).

Figure5.
Figure 5. Column
Column geometry
geometry and display of applied
applied thermocouples.
thermocouples.

A
Aflange
flangewidth
widthofof170
170mm
mmandanda athickness
thicknessofof1414mm
mmwith
witha web
a webthickness ofof
thickness 8 mm for
8 mm
specified length
for specified defined
length a column
defined slenderness
a column ratio
slenderness of about
ratio 70. 70.
of about
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 9 of 17

The column temperature development was measured by 13 independent thermo-

couples in 5 different cross-sections on the flanges and on the web in order to obtain an
accurate display of the generated temperature field over the column (Figure 5). The num-
ber of thermocouples was governed by the space limitation of the National Instruments
data-acquisition card used to record the temperatures on the column in 0.5-s intervals.
Temperature increase was defined by the power output of the induction machine. The
optimal heating rate of the machine was within the range of 1.5–4.0 ◦ C/min and the power
output used for the experiments was approximately 17 kW.

3.3. Test Results

Ten aluminium columns of alloy EN AW 6082 T6 were tested by exposure to various
load and heating arrangements. Stress levels based on column failure and obtained from
the stationary tests [31] were compared to preliminary transient tests [32] and used to
determine the input forces and temperature ratios applied within this study. Various
horizontal forces in the range of 200–400 kN were applied to the column by two different
transversal loads, equal to 10–15 kN, at the midspan of the column. A horizontal load
with an increment of 50 kN was defined to induce stress levels below the 0.2 f0.2,θ stress at
ambient temperature; the tests conducted on columns could, therefore, fit the 0.2–0.5 f0.2,θ
interval conducted on coupons at elevated temperatures and subsequently used to obtain
the MTH-creep coefficients presented in Section 2.2. The f0.2,θ interval represents the proof
strength which, for aluminium alloys, is the value of stress at 0.2% strain, obtained from
the capacity tests for a given temperature θ. Detailed experimental data for each test are
presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Columns test parameters.

Average Load (kN) Average Load (bar) Average Heating Specimen

No.
Horizontal Transversal Horizontal Transversal Rate (◦ C/min) Name
1 200 10 33 33 2.6 T1—H200 V10
2 250 10 41 33 3.2 T2—H250 V10
3 300 10 49 33 2.5 T3—H300 V10
4 350 10 56 33 2.9 T4—H350 V10
5 400 10 64 33 2.9 T5—H400 V10
6 200 15 33 50 2.9 T6—H200 V15
7 250 15 41 50 3.0 T7—H250 V15
8 300 15 49 50 2.8 T1—H300 V15
9 300 10 49 33 2.8 T1—H300 V10
10 350 15 56 50 2.8 T1—H350 V15

The application of the horizontal force was controlled by a built-in potentiometer, and
it was applied on the column with approximately 120 kN/min ratio up to 350 kN; the
interval from 350 to 400 kN had a rate of 20 kN/min due to the limitations of the expansive
hydraulic vessels and hydraulic system (Figure 6a). The transverse force was inflicted
at a rate of about 26 kN/min (Figure 6b). The accuracy of the applied forces during the
tests was ±5 kN for the horizontal load and about ±0.5 kN for the transverse load. The
average heating rate for the presented tests was up to 3.2 ◦ C/min at midspan, as presented
in Table 2 and in Figure 6e, and it was achieved at approximately 60 min from the start
of the test. Although the temperature peak was at the centre of the column, it decreased
towards the bearings, as shown in Figure 6c,d, but not excessively due to the high thermal
conductivity of aluminium. This initial one-hour interval represents the stage needed
for the temperature increase in the material crystal structure when significant strain due
to thermal expansion and creep do not occur. The boundary conditions of the furnace
with constrained vertical and horizontal displacement and the limitations of the hydraulic
system were sufficient to conduct valid transient creep tests with the presented loads.
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 10 of 17
Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 17

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e)

Figure 6. Applied loadsFigure

and6.average
Applied heating
loads andrates
averageonheating rates on the
the columns; (a)columns; (a) Horizontal
Horizontal force variation
force variation (kN);
(kN); (b) Transversal force variation (kN); (c) Heating rates for thermocouples 1–4 (°C/min); (d)
(b) Transversal force variation (kN); (c) Heating rates for thermocouples 1–4 ( ◦ C/min); (d) Heating
Heating rates for thermocouples 5–10 (°C/min); (e) Heating rates for thermocouples 11–13
rates for thermocouples 5–10 (◦ C/min); (e) Heating rates for thermocouples 11–13 (◦ C/min).
(°C/min).

4. Creep Model Verification

4.1. ANSYS Column Model
The numerical model developed in ANSYS consists of seven solid bodies (aluminium
column and six steel accessories (pins, bearings) visible in Figure 7a) to simulate the column
behaviour and the behaviour of two surface bodies under the application of external
mechanical load. The column was divided into five different sections according to the
mentioned positioning of thermocouples in order to accurately simulate the temperature
field (Figure 7b). SOLID187 was the element type used for calculations, with a coarse
25 mm mesh for the column and 50 mm mesh for the steel joints and bearings (Figure 7c).
Predefined joints with a 0.2 coefficient for friction between the steel sections were used as
contact elements.
 umn behaviour and the behaviour of two surface bodies under the application of external
mechanical load. The column was divided into five different sections according to the
mentioned positioning of thermocouples in order to accurately simulate the temperature
field (Figure 7b). SOLID187 was the element type used for calculations, with a coarse 25
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 mm mesh for the column and 50 mm mesh for the steel joints and bearings (Figure 7c). 11 of 17
Predefined joints with a 0.2 coefficient for friction between the steel sections were used as
contact elements.

(a)

(b)

(c)
Figure7.
Figure 7. ANSYS
ANSYS numerical
numerical model;
model;(a)
(a)3D
3Dmodel
modelofofthe
thecolumn;
column;(b)
(b)Temperature
Temperaturezones
zonesofof
the col-
the column;
umn; (c) 3D
(c) 3D mesh. mesh.

4.2.Comparison
4.2. Comparison between
betweenthe
theModel
Modeland
andTest
TestData
Data
Since aluminium alloys are susceptible to large plastic strains, it is necessary to define
Since aluminium alloys are susceptible to large plastic strains, it is necessary to define
the failure criteria for the column. When plastic strain increases, the load-bearing capacity
the failure criteria for the column. When plastic strain increases, the load-bearing capacity
of a column diminishes but not necessarily to the point of rupture, as is the case in coupon
of a column diminishes but not necessarily to the point of rupture, as is the case in coupon
tests. In a column, failure is evident from the appearance of the vertical asymptote which
tests. In a column, failure is evident from the appearance of the vertical asymptote which
manifests in vertical displacements, and it utilises the plastic capacity of the column.
manifests in vertical displacements, and it utilises the plastic capacity of the column. Ac-
According
cording to to this,
this, thethe failure
failure criteria
criteria forfor
thethe columns
columns in experimental
in experimental teststests
werewere determined
determined
based
based on the rate of deflection [33] when, during fire exposure, the column exceeds the the
on the rate of deflection [33] when, during fire exposure, the column exceeds
limit
limitof
of (14)
(14)
L2
𝐿 mm/min (14)
9000d mm/min (14)
9000𝑑
where L is the total length of the column (mm), and d is the effective depth (mm) of the
where L is the total length of the column (mm), and d is the effective depth (mm) of the
loaded, weaker axis of the column. The exact point of failure based on the aforementioned
loaded, weaker axis of the column. The exact point of failure based on the aforementioned
condition, which is 4.4 mm/min (14) for the given geometry, was obtained from the
condition, which is 4.4 mm/min (14) for the given geometry, was obtained from the deri-
derivation of vertical displacements, and is marked on the experimental charts presented in
vation of vertical displacements, and is marked on the experimental charts presented in
Figure 8. Vertical displacements for the numerical model represent the exceeded capacity
due to failure or due to the time limit of the experiments.
 Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 17

Metals 2022, 12, 1326 12 of 17

Figure 8. Vertical displacements for the numerical model represent the exceeded capacity
due to failure or due to the time limit of the experiments.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e)

Figure 8. Comparison Figure 8. Comparison

between midspanbetween
verticalmidspan vertical displacements
displacements of numericalof models
numericaland
models
test and test data;
data;
(a) Horizontal force 200 kN; (b) Horizontal force 250 kN; (c) Horizontal force 300 kN; (d) Horizon-
(a) Horizontal force 200 kN; (b) Horizontal force 250 kN; (c) Horizontal force 300 kN; (d) Horizontal
tal force 350 kN; (e) Horizontal force 400 kN.
force 350 kN; (e) Horizontal force 400 kN.
5. Discussion
5. Discussion
5.1. Creep Effect and Its Development Time Span
5.1. Creep Effect and Its Development Time Span
The need to elaborate on the topic presented in this study arose from the assumption
that creep strain in aluminium exposed to high temperature can have a crucial impact on
the load-bearing capacity of the columns, and thus the entire structure. Various external
loads with an approximate constant heating rate defined by machine power are presented
in this study with the aim of defining when and in what way the failure of the aluminium
columns occurs due to creep.
The hypothesis that significant creep development for aluminium alloy EN AW 6082
T6 occurs at a temperature above 150 ◦ C proved to be correct since no noticeable vertical
deflections due to creep were observed for the first 60 min of the test—the timespan
required to achieve a constant heating rate. The creep in aluminium is dependent on the
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 13 of 17

external mechanical and temperature load defined by the applied heating rate. It is possible
that lower heating rates (below 1 ◦ C/min) could more accurately capture the creep strain,
although that approach is questionable due to difficulties in execution and the probability
of the occurrence of that scenario in a real fire.

5.2. The Influence of the External Load on the Column Failure

The external load for the presented tests was defined based on the stress levels of
previously tested coupons in order to better cover the dependence on monotonically
increasing stress levels caused by the transient heating conducted on the aluminium
columns. From the graphs presented in Figure 8. It can be observed that the increase in
horizontal load for the same amount of transversal load leads to the accelerated failure of
the specimen.
It is evident from the test results presented in Table 3 and Figure 8 that the difference
in vertical displacements upon failure is reduced with the increase in load. At lower
stress ratios, it takes more time to satisfy the 4.4 mm/min failure criterion, due to the
slower establishment of creep. An increase in creep strain, which leads to faster column
failure, manifests for higher loads and is perceptible in a descending time ratio difference
upon failure.

Table 3. Comparison of vertical displacements and time of failure based on transversal load.

Displacements Displacement
Specimen Name Time (min) Time Ratio (%)
(mm) Ratio (%)
T1—H200 V10 59.2 126
139.4 99.2
T6—H200 V15 42.4 125
T2—H250 V10 41.8 120
104.3 96.7
T7—H250 V15 40.1 116
T9—H300 V10 39.3 122
97.4 89.3
T8—H300 V15 40.4 109
T4—H350 V10 38.1 121
93.7 86.0
T10—H350 V15 40.7 104

5.3. Comparison between the Creep-Free and MTH-Creep Models

Figure 8 shows the difference in midspan displacements of the column between
numerical models without taking creep into account from the modified time hardening
models. In a creep-free simulation, the failure occurs only due to material properties which
cannot be applied to metals, such as aluminium, because of its nonlinear, inelastic, and
rate-dependent behaviour. According to the presented graphs, the Eurocode 9 factor of 1.2
for the creep effect on fire-exposed aluminium columns needs further consideration since
the creep-free numerical model deviates somewhat from the experimental data obtained
from transient tests, and because it is based on capacity tests which do not fully represent a
realistic fire scenario.
It can be seen from Table 4 and Figure 8 that the test time span was not sufficient for
the column to fail when using the creep-free model for nearly all tests. It is noticeable that
the difference in vertical displacements ratio decreases with the increase in load. Although
in Tests 4 and 5 the column fails in both models, the difference in vertical displacements
upon failure is more than 160%.

Metals 2022, 12, 1326
It can be seen from Table 4 and Figure 8 that the test time span was not sufficient for
the column to fail when using the creep-free model for nearly all tests. It is noticeable that
the difference in vertical displacements ratio decreases with the increase in load. Although
in Tests 4 and 5 the column fails in both models, the difference in vertical displacements
upon failure is more than 160%. 14 of 17

Table 4. Vertical displacements—comparison of creep and creep-free model.

Creep-Free
Table 4. Vertical displacements—comparison of creep and creep-free model.
Creep Displacements Displacement Temperature at Failure Time
Specimen Name Displacements
(mm) Creep ratio (%)
Creep-Free Midspan (°C) Temperature(min)
(mm) Displacement Failure Time
Specimen Name Displacements Displacements at Midspan
T1—H200 V10 58.4 11.6 * 504.9 Ratio 293
(%) (min)
(mm) (mm) (◦ C) 126
T6—H200 V15 42.6
T1—H200 V10 21.1 *
58.4 202.4
11.6 * 287
504.9 293 126 126
T2—H250 V10 41.2
T6—H200 V15 13.3 *
42.6 308.9
21.1 * 286
202.4 287 119 126
T7—H250 V15 T2—H250 V10
42.2 16.541.2
* 13.3 *
255.7 308.9
280 286 116 119
T7—H250 V15 42.2 16.5 * 255.7 280 116
T9—H300 V10 38.1
T9—H300 V10
12.4 *
38.1
308.2
12.4 *
268
308.2 268
119 119
T8—H300 V15 37.4
T8—H300 V15 18.0 *
37.4 208.2
18.0 * 245
208.2 245 110 110
T4—H350 V10 T4—H350 V10
38.1 38.1
23.2 23.2
164.3 164.3
268 268 117 117
T10—H350 V15 36.7 20.0 * 183.5 232 105
T10—H350 V15 36.7
T5—H400 V10
20.0 *
34.7
183.5
20.1
232
171.7 263
105 117
T5—H400 V10 34.7 20.1 171.7
*—failure did not occur for the creep-free model 263 117
*—failure did not occur for the creep-free model

5.4. Comparison of the MTH Creep Model with Test Results

5.4. Comparison of the MTH Creep Model with Test Results
The comparison of the numerical model and experimental data is shown in Figure 8
The comparison of the numerical model and experimental data is shown in Figure 8
with
with aa noticeable resemblancetoto
noticeable resemblance thethe average
average failure
failure time.
time. CreepCreep indicates
indicates evident
evident plasticplastic
strains
strains on aluminium columns at midspan with the vertical deflection of 34 mm visiblevisible
on aluminium columns at midspan with the vertical deflection of 34 mm in in
Figure 9a. This is substantiated by the numerical results obtained from
Figure 9a. This is substantiated by the numerical results obtained from the ANSYS MTH the ANSYS MTH
creep modeldisplayed
creep model displayedininFigure
Figure
9b9bforfor
thethe column
column in Test
in Test 5 since
5 since it sustained
it sustained the largest
the largest
deflection at midspan. The average vertical deflection which manifests through
deflection at midspan. The average vertical deflection which manifests through the plastic the plastic
strain for all
strain for all columns
columnswas was1717mm.
mm.

(a)

(b)
Figure 9.
Figure 9. Tested
Testedcolumn
column specimens; (a) (a)
specimens; Visible plastic
Visible strainstrain
plastic on tested columns;
on tested (b) Failure
columns; (b) of the of the
Failure
column in ANSYS for Test
column in ANSYS for Test 5. 5.

The presented
The presentedcreep
creepmodel
model matches
matchesvery well
very with
well the test
with the results in terms
test results of vertical
in terms of vertical
displacements since the failure times are within ±10% perimeter which validates
displacements since the failure times are within ±10% perimeter which validates the MTH
the MTH
creep model for further consideration in terms of high-temperature creep on aluminium
alloys (Figure 10).
 Metals 2022, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 17

The presented creep model matches very well with the test results in terms of vertical
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 displacements since the failure times are within ±10% perimeter which validates the
15 of 17MTH
creep model for further consideration in terms of high-temperature creep on aluminium
alloys (Figure 10).

(a) (b)

Figure 10. ComparisonFigure 10. Comparison

between between the
the experimental andexperimental
numericaland numerical
midspan midspan displacements
displacements and fail-
and failure
ure times of the column upon failure; (a) Vertical displacement comparison; (b) Failure time com-
times of the column upon failure; (a) Vertical displacement comparison; (b) Failure time comparison.
parison.

6. Conclusions 6. Conclusions
The influence of theThe
transient
influenceheating regime
of the transient on the
heating failure
regime of failure
on the EN AW 6082
of EN AWT6 6082alu-
T6 alu-
minium alloy columnsminium
duealloy columns
to creep hasdue
beento creep has been
presented inpresented in this
this paper. Thepaper. The heating
heating rate atrate at
midspan of up to 3.2midspan
◦ C/min ofresulted
up to 3.2 °C/min resulted in a temperature
in a temperature range upon range uponfrom
failure failure230
from
◦ C230
to°C to
◦ 300 °C, based on the applied load. Some conclusions and guidelines for further research
300 C, based on thecan
applied load. Some conclusions and guidelines for further research
be obtained from this study:
can be obtained from• this study:
The applied creep model can be used to predict the failure of I section aluminium
• The applied creep model
columnscan
madebe of used to predict
alloy 6082 T6 exposedthetofailure of I section
high temperature aluminium
with sufficient accuracy;
columns made of • alloy
The noticeable strain duetotohigh
6082 T6 exposed creeptemperature
starts to occurwith
in temperatures
sufficient over 150 °C in a
accuracy;
transient heating regime;
• The noticeable strain due to creep starts to occur in temperatures over 150 ◦ C in a
• The significant difference in failure between creep and creep-free model confirms the
transient heating regime;
assumption of a substantial impact of creep; this must be taken into account in the
• The significant difference inaluminium
design of failure between
columns.creep and creep-free model confirms the
assumption of a substantial impact of
The presented experimentalcreep;
andthis must analysis
numerical be taken into aaccount
favours in more
further and the de-
design of aluminium columns.of this topic since the creep strain impact in transient heating is signifi-
tailed elaboration
cant in the overall capacity of the aluminium columns; this is especially so for alloy EN
The presented experimental and numerical analysis favours a further and more de-
AW 6082 T6, which is the most suited to application in structural engineering practice. A
tailed elaboration of this topic since the creep
more detailed analysis strain
on similar impact
6xxx in transient
aluminium alloys forheating is significant
variable heating rates should
in the overall capacity of the aluminium columns; this is especially so for alloy
be considered for further research, based on the acquired data and observations EN AW from this
6082 T6, which is the most suited to application in structural engineering practice. A
study.
more detailed analysis on similar 6xxx aluminium alloys for variable heating rates should
Author Contributions: M.G., N.T. and I.B. designed the research and prepared the draft manu-
be considered for further research, based on the acquired data and observations from
script. M.G. and V.D. conducted the experiments. All authors have read and agreed to the published
this study. version of the manuscript.

Author Contributions:Funding: Thisand

M.G., N.T. workI.B.
was partially the
designed supported through
research project KK.01.1.1.02.0027,
and prepared a project co-fi-
the draft manuscript.
nanced by the Croatian Government and the European Union through the European Regional De-
M.G. and V.D. conducted the experiments.
velopment All authors have
Fund—the Competitiveness read andOperational
and Cohesion agreed to Programme.
the published version
of the manuscript.
This work was also partially supported by the Croatian Science Foundation under the project Influ-
Funding: This work was ence of creep strain
partially on the load
supported capacity
through of steelKK.01.1.1.02.0027,
project and aluminium columns exposed
a project to fire (UIP-2014-
co-financed
by the Croatian Government and the European Union through the European Regional Development
Fund—the Competitiveness and Cohesion Operational Programme. This work was also partially
supported by the Croatian Science Foundation under the project Influence of creep strain on the
load capacity of steel and aluminium columns exposed to fire (UIP-2014-09-5711). Any opinions,
findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do
not necessarily reflect the views of the Croatian Science Foundation.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Data can be available on request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 16 of 17

Nomenclature

εc time-dependent creep strain by Dorn

εI, Z creep parameters dependent on applied stress
θ temperature accumulated in time
∆H activation energy of the creep
R universal gas constant
T temperature
ε0 n modified total strain
εn total strain vector
pl
εn plastic strain vector
εth
n thermal strain vector
εcr
n −1 creep strain vector
∆εcr m equivalent creep strain
ε et equivalent modified total strain
A creep strain ratio
∆εcr x , ∆ε y , ∆ε z
cr cr normal creep strain components
∆εcr xy , ∆ε yz , ∆ε xz
cr cr shear creep strain components
ε cr creep strain for MTH creep model
C1 , C2 , C3 , C4 coefficients for the MTH creep model
f 0.2,θ stress at 0,2% strain for temperature θ
L total length of the column
d effective depth of the column

References
1. Goreta, M.; Torić, N.; Boko, I. Calibration of an existing creep model for analysis of aluminium members exposed to constant
temperature. Int. J. Eng. Model. 2021, 34, 1–15. [CrossRef]
2. Usmani, A.S.; Chung, Y.C.; Torero, J.L. How did the WTC towers collapse: A new theory. Fire Saf. J. 2003, 38, 501–533. [CrossRef]
3. Vicat, M. On the gradual elongation of iron wire under tension. In Measurement of High Temperature Mechanical Properties of
Materials; National Physical Laboratory: Teddington, UK, 1834; pp. 9–12.
4. EN 1999-1-2; Eurocode 9-Design of Aluminium Structures-Part 1–2: Structural Fire Design. European Comittee for Standardiza-
tion: Brussels, Belgium, 2007.
5. Torić, N.; Brnić, J.; Boko, I.; Brčić, M.; Burgess, I.W.; Uzelac, I. Experimental analysis of the behaviour of aluminium alloy EN
6082AW T6 at high temperature. Metals 2017, 7, 126. [CrossRef]
6. Canonsburg, 2600 A. D. ANSYS Inc., Southpointe, PA 15317, Release 16.2. 2015. Available online: https://docplayer.net/225783
04-Release-notes-2600-ansys-drive-ansys-inc-is-canonsburg-pa-15317-t-724-746-3304-f-724-514-9494.html (accessed on 12 July
2022).
7. Harmathy, T.Z. Creep deflection of metal beams in transient heating processes, with particular reference to fire. Can. J. Civ. Eng.
1976, 3, 219–228. [CrossRef]
8. Dorn, J. Some fundamental experiments on high temperature creep. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 1955, 3, 85–116. [CrossRef]
9. Langhelle, N.K.; Amdahl, J. Experimental and numerical analysis of aluminium columns subjected to fire. In Proceedings of the
Eleventh International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Stavanger, Norway, 17–22 June 2001; Volume 4, pp. 406–413.
10. Maljaars, J. Literature study on aluminium structures exposed to fire. Neth. Inst. Met. Res. 2005, 128. Available online:
https://pure.tue.nl/ws/files/2310557/633114.pdf (accessed on 12 July 2022).
11. Maljaars, J.; Fellinger, J.; Soetens, F. Fire exposed aluminium structures. Heron 2005, 50, 261–278.
12. Maljaars, J.; Soetens, F.; Katgerman, L. Constitutive model for aluminum alloys exposed to fire conditions. Metall. Mater. Trans. A
2008, 39, 778–789. [CrossRef]
13. Maljaars, J.; Soetens, F.; Snijder, H. Local buckling of aluminium structures exposed to fire. Part 2: Finite element models.
Thin-Walled Struct. 2009, 47, 1418–1428. [CrossRef]
14. Maljaars, J.; Soetens, F.; Snijder, H. Local buckling of aluminium structures exposed to fire. Part 1: Tests. Thin-Walled Struct. 2009,
47, 1404–1417. [CrossRef]
15. Maljaars, J.; Twilt, L.; Fellinger, J.H.H.; Snijder, H.H.; Soetens, F. Aluminium structures exposed to fire conditions—An overview.
Heron 2010, 55, 85–122.
16. Kandare, E.; Feih, S.; Kootsookos, A.; Mathys, Z.; Lattimer, B.; Mouritz, A. Mouritz, creep-based life prediction modelling of
aluminium in fire. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2010, 527, 1185–1193. [CrossRef]
17. Fogle, E.J.; Lattimer, B.Y.; Feih, S.; Kandare, E.; Mouritz, A.P.; Case, S. Case, compression load failure of aluminum plates due to
fire. Eng. Struct. 2012, 34, 155–162. [CrossRef]
Metals 2022, 12, 1326 17 of 17

18. Jiang, S.; Xiong, Z.; Guo, X.; He, Z. Buckling behaviour of aluminium alloy columns under fire conditions. Thin-Walled Struct.
2018, 124, 523–537. [CrossRef]
19. Liu, M.; Chang, Y.; Wang, P.; Zhnag, L. Buckling behaviors of thin-walled aluminum alloy column with irregular-shaped cross
section under axial compression in a fire. Thin-Walled Struct. 2016, 98, 230–243. [CrossRef]
20. Zheng, Y.Q.; Zhang, Z. The fire performance and fire-resistance design of aluminium alloy I-beams. Fire Mater. 2014, 40, 141–157.
[CrossRef]
21. Torić, N.; Boko, I.; Burgess, I.W.; Goreta, M. Experimental analysis of the influence of creep on fire-exposed steel and aluminium
columns. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Structures in Fire, Belfast, UK, 6–8 June 2018; p. 6.
22. Toric, N.; Glavinić, I.U.; Burgess, I.W. Burgess, development of a rheological model for creep strain evolution in steel and
aluminium at high temperature. Fire Mater 2018, 42, 879–888. [CrossRef]
23. Torić, N.; Boko, I.; Uzelac, I.; Harapin, A.; Divić, V.; Galić, M.; Brnić, J.; Čanad̄ija, M.; Turkalj, G.; Lanc, D.; et al. High-temperature
properties of aluminum alloy EN6082AW T6. In Proceedings of the International Conference of Applications of Structural Fire
Engineering (ASFE), Manchester, UK, 7–8 September 2017; p. 5.
24. Torić, N.; Glavinić, I.U.; Boko, I. Sustainability of aluminium in construction practice-recent fire related research. In Proceedings
of the 1st International Conference on Costruction Materials for Sustainable Future, Zadar, Croatia, 19–21 April 2017; p. 6.
25. Canonsburg, A.D. Structural Analysis Guide, no. January. 2020. Available online: https://d.shikey.com/down/Ansys.Products.
2020.R1.x64/install_docs/Ansys.Products.PDF.Docs.2020R1/readme.html (accessed on 12 July 2022).
26. Canonsburg, A.D. Material Reference, no. January. 2020. Available online: https://d.shikey.com/down/Ansys.Products.2020.R1
.x64/install_docs/Ansys.Products.PDF.Docs.2020R1/readme.html (accessed on 12 July 2022).
27. Canonsburg, A.D. Theory Reference, no. January. 2020. Available online: https://d.shikey.com/down/Ansys.Products.2020.R1
.x64/install_docs/Ansys.Products.PDF.Docs.2020R1/readme.html (accessed on 12 July 2022).
28. ASTM E21-09; Standard Test Methods for Elevated Temperatiure Tension Tests of Metallic Materials. ASTM International: West
Conshocken, PA, USA, 2009.
29. ASTM E8/E8M-11; Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials. ASTM International: West Conshocken, PA,
USA, 2011.
30. M.T.M. Inc. MatLab. 2018. Available online: https://www.mtm-inc.net/ (accessed on 12 July 2022).
31. Torić, N.; Boko, I.; Burgess, I.W.; Divić, V. The effect of high-temperature creep on buckling behaviour of aluminium grade
EN6082AW T6 columns. Fire Saf. J. 2020, 112, 102971. [CrossRef]
32. Goreta, M.; Torić, N.; Divić, V.; Boko, I. Testing the influence of creep on fire-exposed aluminium columns. In Proceedings of the
9th International Congress of Croatian Society of Mechanics, Split, Croatia, 18–22 September 2018; p. 10.
33. EN 1363-1; Fire Resistance Test-Part 1: General Requirements. European Comittee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2020.