STAINLESS STEEL IN FIRE (SSIF) - Steel-stainless.org

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 6.2Transient state tests specimenStandard tensile tests were performed to evaluate the stress level to be applied during the transient statetests. The experimental results are summarised in Table 6.2.Table 6.2Tensile tests results at room temperatureMaterialTestno R 0.2p[MPa]LongitudinalR m [MPa] A(%) Z(%)R 0.2p[MPa]TransverseR m [MPa] A(%) Z(%)1 392 759 71 55 385 744 67 51STR 182 382 752 73 56 384 743 66 513 382 748 73 56 386 739 66 51Mean 385 753 72 56 385 742 66 511 236 658 79 57 265 663 80 59EN1.45412 248 668 79 55 258 657 81 563 244 656 78 55 261 657 83 61Mean 243 661 79 56 261 659 81 5950
Table 6.3Test programme for transient state testsMaterialDirection of thespecimen with respectto the rolling directionTemperaturecurveLoad typeLoadlevel(% ofR 0.2p )Numberof testsOutputLongitudinal Room temperature Tensile - 3Transverse Room temperature Tensile - 3Stress-straincurves1% 110% 220% 1STR 18LongitudinalLinear (10°C/min)up to failure or1000°CAxial andConstant30% 140% 250% 1Strain-Temperaturecurves60% 170% 280% 190% 1Longitudinal Room temperature Tensile - 3Transverse Room temperature Tensile - 3Stress-straincurves1% 1EN1.4541LongitudinalLinear (10°C/min)up to failure or1000°CAxial andConstant20% 130% 250% 160% 1Strain-Temperaturecurves70% 180% 1Stress-strain curves of transient state test results at different temperatures show that there is a shift in thecurves for different temperatures along the x-axis, which reveals the presence of parasite strains inducedby the testing machine adjustments (see Figure 6.3). These strains can be estimated by performing atransient state test at a very low stress level (1% of R 0.2p ).Figure 6.4 shows the strain-temperature plot of the results after subtracting the parasite strains for<strong>stainless</strong> steel EN 1.4541. It is observed that the stress-strain curve still does not match the axes origin.A further estimate of parasite strains was necessary in order to obtain a better match of the stress-straincurve with the axes’ origin. This was due to difficulties in determining Young’s modulus at hightemperatures. It was observed that the values obtained initially were lower than those given in EN 1993-1-2. This was due to the time necessary to set up the test, which allowed material relaxation andconsequently introduced creep phenomena. It is generally understood that it is very difficult to achievea good prediction of Young’s modulus at elevated temperatures in transient state tests; isothermal testsare the preferred way of measuring Young’s modulus.The difficulties encountered in the determination of the parasite strains and evaluation of elasticmodulus suggest that there is a need for developing a well defined procedure for the execution oftransient state tests and for the subsequent analysis of experimental data for the evaluation of retentionparameters.51
Page 1 and 2: Research Programme of the Research
Page 3 and 4: CONTENTSPage No.ABSTRACT 5FINAL SUM
Page 5: ABSTRACTThe relatively sparse body
Page 9: 8. WP7: Design aids and softwareRat
Page 12 and 13: 1.2Stiffness E( ) retention / E(20
Page 15 and 16: 3 WP1: FIRE RESISTANT STRUCTURES AN
Page 17 and 18: ExposedMid-depth ofinsulationInnerp
Page 20 and 21: system thus achieved a 60 minute fi
Page 22 and 23: than the carbon steel columns; the
Page 24 and 25: For case 1 (pinned ends), the stain
Page 26 and 27: 10 68.5 10 61.5θg2= 20°C; α = 9
Page 28 and 29: of part of the cross-section being
Page 30 and 31: Load testing:1000 kN PressEnd plate
Page 32 and 33: Table 4.3 shows failure times, fire
Page 34 and 35: 4.3.3 Design method for composite c
Page 36 and 37: 4.3.5 Design method for composite b
Page 38 and 39: 4.3.6 Comparison between stainless
Page 41 and 42: 5 WP3: CLASS 4 CROSS SECTIONS IN FI
Page 43 and 44: FWater cooled steelload equipmentSu
Page 45 and 46: Table 5.4 Comparison of strength re
Page 47 and 48: 5.3.3 Development of design guidanc
Page 49: 6 WP4: PROPERTIES AT ELEVATEDTEMPER
Page 53 and 54: The following procedure used to eva
Page 55: Table 6.4Material reduction factors
Page 58 and 59: T= 100 °C T=200°CT= 300 °C T=400
Page 60 and 61: Grade 1.4318: Welded (W) v.s. Base
Page 62 and 63: Figure 7.5Connection design for bol
Page 64 and 65: Table 7.2Detailed results of shear
Page 66 and 67: dilatation caused by heating may ca
Page 69 and 70: 8 WP6: PARAMETRIC FIRE DESIGNDetail
Page 71 and 72: Table 8.1Cross-sectionTemperature f
Page 73 and 74: analyses (Figure 8.2). The differen
Page 75 and 76: calculated according to EN 1993-1-4
Page 77 and 78: The following observations were not
Page 79 and 80: 9 WP7: DESIGN AIDS AND SOFTWARE9.1
Page 81 and 82: 9.3 Design of stainless steel beams
Page 83 and 84: Figure 9.4Column buckling tests at
Page 85 and 86: The main assumptions made by the so
Page 87: Figure 9.7Fire design software: fir
Page 91: 11 FINAL WORK PACKAGE REPORTSAll de
Page 94 and 95: 12.2 Dissemination of project resul
Page 97: 13 CONCLUSIONSThis report summarise
Page 100 and 101:
Figure 6.3 EN 1.4541 steel stress-s
Page 102 and 103:
Table 8.5 Buckling resistance at ro
Page 104 and 105:
[22] ECSC Final Report, Development
Page 106 and 107:
Table A.4Values of parameters L θ
Page 108 and 109:
Table B.1Experimental data on stain
Page 110 and 111:
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONRESEARCH DIRECTO
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
show all

STAINLESS STEEL IN FIRE (SSIF) - Steel-stainless.org

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?