Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Fire Technology
Published in: Fire Technology 4/2019

05-12-2018

Severity Measures and Stripe Analysis for Probabilistic Structural Fire Engineering

Authors: Mayank Shrivastava, Anthony K. Abu, Rajesh P. Dhakal, Peter J. Moss

Published in: Fire Technology | Issue 4/2019

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This paper presents modifications to the adoption of a Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering (PBEE) framework in Probabilistic Structural Fire Engineering. Potential Fire Severity Measures, which capture significant characteristics of fire scenarios, are investigated. A suitable Fire Severity Measure (FSM), which best relates fire hazard intensity with structural response, is identified by satisfying efficiency and sufficiency criteria as described by the PBEE framework. The study also implements a new analysis method called Fire Stripe Analysis (FSA) to obtain the relationship between FSM and the structural response. In order to obtain the annual rate of exceedance of damage and repair cost/time for an office building, an occurrence model and an attenuation model for office structure fires are generated for both Christchurch city and New Zealand. The process is demonstrated with the help of a case study performed for a steel–concrete composite beam. Structural response is recorded for the beam exposed to several fire profiles which are generated by varying fuel loads from 200 MJ/m2 to 1000 MJ/m2 and ventilation factors from 0.02 m1/2 to 0.08 m1/2. FSA and dispersion curves of structural response are plotted for every fire severity measure. Cumulative incident radiation is found to be the most efficient and sufficient FSM. The mean annual rate of exceedance of given levels of fire severity and structural response are evaluated for both New Zealand and Christchurch city. It is found that Christchurch city has a 15% less probability of exceedance of the given fire severity level in comparison to the whole of New Zealand. The extension of this work would facilitate designers/insurers to evaluate the probability of damage or failure of a structure due to a probable fire hazard.
previous article The Need for Hierarchies of Acceptance Criteria for Probabilistic Risk Assessments in Fire Engineering
next article Fire Fragility Functions for Steel Frame Buildings: Sensitivity Analysis and Reliability Framework

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Literature
1.
2.
Gibson E (1982) Working with the performance approach in building. CIB Report Publication, Rotterdam
3.
Cornell CA, Krawinkler H (2000) Progress and challenges in seismic performance assessment. PEER Center News 3(2):1–3
4.
Deierlein G, Krawinkler H, Cornell C (2003) A framework for performance-based earthquake engineering. In: Pacific conference on earthquake engineering, 2003. Citeseer, pp 1–8
5.
Hopkin D (2017) A review of fire resistance expectations for high-rise UK apartment buildings. Fire Technol 53(1):87–106CrossRef
6.
De Sanctis G, Fischer K, Kohler J, Fontana M, Faber M (2011) A probabilistic framework for generic fire risk assessment and risk-based decision making in buildings. In: 11th International conference on application of statistics and probability in civil engineering, ETH Zurich, Switzerland. CRC Press
7.
Guo Q, Jeffers AE (2014) Finite-element reliability analysis of structures subjected to fire. J Struct Eng 141(4):04014129CrossRef
8.
Guo Q, Jeffers AE (2013) Stochastic finite element methods for the reliability-based fire-resistant design of structures. In: 3rd international conference on applications of structural fire engineering, pp 96–101
9.
Guo Q, Shi K, Jia Z, Jeffers AE (2013) Probabilistic evaluation of structural fire resistance. Fire Technol 49(3):793–811CrossRef
10.
Shi K, Guo Q, Jeffers A (2013) Stochastic analysis of structures in fire by monte carlo simulation. J Struct Fire Eng 4(1):37–46CrossRef
11.
Balogh T, Vigh LG (2016) Complex and comprehensive method for reliability calculation of structures under fire exposure. Fire Saf J 86:41–52CrossRef
12.
Kirby B, Newman G, Butterworth N, Pagan J, English C (2004) A new approach to specifying fire resistance periods. Struct Eng 82(19):34–37
13.
Law A, Stern-Gottfried J, Butterworth N (2015) A risk based framework for time equivalence and fire resistance. Fire Technol 51(4):771–784CrossRef
14.
Deierlein G, Krawinkler H, Cornell C (2003) A framework for performance-based earthquake engineering. Paper presented at the Pacific conference on earthquake engineering
15.
Moehle J, Deierlein GG (2004) A framework methodology for performance-based earthquake engineering. In: 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, pp 3812–3814
16.
Porter KA (2003) An overview of PEER’s performance-based earthquake engineering methodology. In: Ninth International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering, San Francisco, California, USA
17.
Devaney S (2014) Development of software for reliability based design of steel framed structures in fire. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Edinburgh
18.
Hamilton SR (2011) Performance-based fire engineering for steel framed structures: a probabilistic methodology. Ph.D. Dissertation, Stranford University
19.
20.
Moss PJ, Abu AK, Dhakal RP (2014) Incremental fire analysis (IFA) for probabilistic fire risk assessment. In: 23rd Australasian conference on the mechanics of structures and materials (ACMSM23), Byron Bay, NSW, Australia, pp 707–712
21.
Rini D, Lamont S (2008) Performance based structural fire engineering for modern building design. In: Structures congress 2008: crossing borders, pp 1–12
22.
Shrivastava M, Abu A, Dhakal R, Moss P (2016) Efficiency of different intensity measures for probabilistic fire engineering. In: 24th Australasian conference on mechanics of structures and materials, Perth, Australia, 2016. CRC Press, pp 957–962
23.
Dhakal RP, Mander JB (2006) Financial risk assessment methodology for natural hazards. Bull New Zealand Soc Earthquake Eng 39(2):91–105
24.
Shome N, Cornell C (1999) Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures, Reliability of Marine Structures Program. Report No RMS
25.
Luco N, Cornell CA (2007) Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions. Earthquake Spectra 23(2):357–392CrossRef
26.
Tothong P, Luco N (2007) Probabilistic seismic demand analysis using advanced ground motion intensity measures. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 36(13):1837–1860CrossRef
27.
Giovenale P, Cornell CA, Esteva L (2004) Comparing the adequacy of alternative ground motion intensity measures for the estimation of structural responses. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 33(8):951–979CrossRef
28.
Tothong P, Cornell C (2007) Probabilistic seismic demand analysis using advanced ground motion intensity measures, attenuation relationships, and near-fault effects. PEER Report 2006/11, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. University of California, Berkeley, California, USA
29.
Kramer SL, Mitchell RA (2006) Ground motion intensity measures for liquefaction hazard evaluation. Earthquake Spectra 22(2):413–438CrossRef
30.
Vamvatsikos D, Cornell CA (2002) Incremental dynamic analysis. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 31(3):491–514CrossRef
31.
Baker JW (2007) Probabilistic structural response assessment using vector‐valued intensity measures. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 36(13):1861–1883CrossRef
32.
Bazzurro P, Cornell CA, Shome N, Carballo JE (1998) Three proposals for characterizing MDOF nonlinear seismic response. J Struct Eng 124(11):1281–1289CrossRef
33.
Jalayer F, Cornell C (2009) Alternative non‐linear demand estimation methods for probability‐based seismic assessments. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 38(8):951–972CrossRef
34.
CEN (2002) Eurocode 1: actions on structures part 1-2: general actions–actions on structures exposed to fire. Brussels
35.
Nyman JF (2002) Equivalent fire resistance ratings of construction elements exposed to realistic fires
36.
Nyman JF, Gerlich HJ, Wade C, Buchanan AH (2008) Predicting fire resistance performance of drywall construction exposed to parametric design fires—a review. J Fire Prot Eng 18 (2):117–139CrossRef
37.
CEN (2012) Fire resistance tests—part 1: general requirements, EN 1363-1 European Committee for Standardization. Brussels
38.
BSI (1987) Fire tests on building materials and structures, BS 476 (Parts 20 to 23). British Standards Institution, UK
39.
Standard A (1997) Methods for fire tests on building materials. Components and structures (AS 15304) Australia
40.
ISO I (1999) 834-1: 1999-Fire-resistance tests—elements of building construction–part 1: general requirements. Int Organ Stand
41.
Buchanan AH, Abu AK (2017) Structural design for fire safety. Wiley, New York
42.
Gernay T, Elhami Khorasani N, Garlock M Fragility analysis of a steel building in fire. In: Proceedings of the first international conference on structural safety under fire & blast-CONFAB 2015, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, 2015. ASRANet Ltd, pp 252–261
43.
Thomas P (1986) Design guide: structure fire safety CIB W14 workshop report. Fire Saf J 10 (2):77–137CrossRef
44.
Vrouwenvelder T (1997) The JCSS probabilistic model code. Struct Saf 19 (3):245–251CrossRef
45.
Stevenson P (1993) Computer modelling of structural steel frames in fire. Fire Engineering Research Report University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
46.
Welsh R (2001) 2-D analysis of composite steel-concrete beams in fire. Fire Engineering Research Report. School of Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
47.
Wastney C (2002) Performance of unprotected steel and composite steel frames exposed to fire. M.E.F.E. report, University of Canterbury
48.
Huang Z, Burgess IW, Plank RJ (2003) Modeling membrane action of concrete slabs in composite buildings in fire. I: theoretical development. J Struct Eng 129 (8):1093–1102CrossRef
49.
Huang Z, Burgess IW, Plank RJ (2003) Modeling membrane action of concrete slabs in composite buildings in fire II: validations. J Struct Eng 129 (8):1103–1112CrossRef
50.
NZFS (2013) Emergency Incident Statistics 2012–2013. New Zealand Fire Service, Wellington, New Zealand
51.
Kam W, Pampanin S (2011) General performance of buildings in Christchurch CDB after the 22 Feb 2011 earthquake: a contextual report (prepared for the Department of Building and Housing). Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering, University of Canterbury
52.
Miles S, Brechwald D, Davidson R, Demeter K, Johnston D, Pampanin S, Wilkinson S (2014) Building back better-case study of the 2010–2011 canterbury. New Zealand Earthquake Sequence (A Learning from Earthquakes Report)
Metadata
Title
Severity Measures and Stripe Analysis for Probabilistic Structural Fire Engineering
Authors
Mayank Shrivastava
Anthony K. Abu
Rajesh P. Dhakal
Peter J. Moss
Publication date
05-12-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Fire Technology / Issue 4/2019
Print ISSN: 0015-2684
Electronic ISSN: 1572-8099
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-018-0799-7

Other articles of this Issue 4/2019

Fire Technology 4/2019 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

A Monte Carlo-Based Probabilistic Barrier Failure Model for Arbitrary Fire Environment

Editorial

Guest Editorial: Probabilistic Methods in Fire Safety Engineering

OriginalPaper

Probabilistic Study of the Resistance of a Simply-Supported Reinforced Concrete Slab According to Eurocode Parametric Fire

OriginalPaper

Probabilistic Analysis of Building Fire Severity Based on Fire Load Density Models

OriginalPaper

Development of an Integrated Risk Assessment Method to Quantify the Life Safety Risk in Buildings in Case of Fire

OriginalPaper

The Need for Hierarchies of Acceptance Criteria for Probabilistic Risk Assessments in Fire Engineering