结构防火:等级体系表现出粗糙、不一致的设计

Eoin O’Loughlin , Simon Lay
{"title":"结构防火:等级体系表现出粗糙、不一致的设计","authors":"Eoin O’Loughlin ,&nbsp;Simon Lay","doi":"10.1016/j.csfs.2015.03.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper highlights a shortcoming in the current system of structural fire resistance design, proposes how it can be addressed and shows how the perceived barriers to change can be overcome. It is an opinion piece intended to stimulate discussion.</p><p>Whilst structural fire engineering knowledge may be relatively underdeveloped compared to other engineering disciplines, the industry has made great progress in recent decades in understanding and analysing fire behaviour and the response of structures, as well as developing fire protection products that can be accurately specified to meet performance criteria. In addition, through modern fire and risk engineering there are also methods to establish the appropriate fire resistance rating for a building (or element) based on risk profile, fire loading, building fabric and potential ventilation amongst other things. It is the objective of many within the industry for structural fire engineering to become an integrated part of the design process, ultimately leading to safer and more efficient structures. However, this paper questions whether current structural fire resistance design methods achieve the consistent level of crudeness required for this, or whether the means by which structural performance in fire is quantified, standard fire resistance, represents a weak link that undermines the entire process.</p><p>Although the concept of standard fire resistance, benchmarked against performance under normalised furnace test heating regimes, is useful in that it allows for the comparison necessary to safeguard consistency across products, design methods and geographies, the historic 15-min fire resistance increments (for example 60, 75, 90<!--> <!-->min) result in inconsistent levels of safety. Refined grades, as in fact already allowed under fire resistance testing standards, would yield significant benefits for reliability and design efficiency. The paper uses hypothetical case studies to exhibit the merits of refined fire resistance grades and explains how implementing the enhanced classification system may be readily achievable.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100219,"journal":{"name":"Case Studies in Fire Safety","volume":"3 ","pages":"Pages 36-43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.csfs.2015.03.001","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Structural fire resistance: Rating system manifests crude, inconsistent design\",\"authors\":\"Eoin O’Loughlin ,&nbsp;Simon Lay\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.csfs.2015.03.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper highlights a shortcoming in the current system of structural fire resistance design, proposes how it can be addressed and shows how the perceived barriers to change can be overcome. It is an opinion piece intended to stimulate discussion.</p><p>Whilst structural fire engineering knowledge may be relatively underdeveloped compared to other engineering disciplines, the industry has made great progress in recent decades in understanding and analysing fire behaviour and the response of structures, as well as developing fire protection products that can be accurately specified to meet performance criteria. In addition, through modern fire and risk engineering there are also methods to establish the appropriate fire resistance rating for a building (or element) based on risk profile, fire loading, building fabric and potential ventilation amongst other things. It is the objective of many within the industry for structural fire engineering to become an integrated part of the design process, ultimately leading to safer and more efficient structures. However, this paper questions whether current structural fire resistance design methods achieve the consistent level of crudeness required for this, or whether the means by which structural performance in fire is quantified, standard fire resistance, represents a weak link that undermines the entire process.</p><p>Although the concept of standard fire resistance, benchmarked against performance under normalised furnace test heating regimes, is useful in that it allows for the comparison necessary to safeguard consistency across products, design methods and geographies, the historic 15-min fire resistance increments (for example 60, 75, 90<!--> <!-->min) result in inconsistent levels of safety. Refined grades, as in fact already allowed under fire resistance testing standards, would yield significant benefits for reliability and design efficiency. The paper uses hypothetical case studies to exhibit the merits of refined fire resistance grades and explains how implementing the enhanced classification system may be readily achievable.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100219,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Case Studies in Fire Safety\",\"volume\":\"3 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 36-43\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.csfs.2015.03.001\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Case Studies in Fire Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214398X15000035\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Case Studies in Fire Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214398X15000035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文强调了当前结构防火设计系统中的一个缺点,提出了如何解决这个问题,并展示了如何克服改变的障碍。这是一篇旨在激发讨论的评论文章。虽然与其他工程学科相比,结构消防工程知识可能相对不发达,但近几十年来,该行业在理解和分析结构的火灾行为和反应,以及开发可以准确指定以满足性能标准的消防产品方面取得了很大进展。此外,通过现代火灾和风险工程,也有方法根据风险概况、火灾负荷、建筑结构和潜在通风等因素,为建筑物(或构件)建立适当的耐火等级。许多业内人士的目标是使结构防火工程成为设计过程的一个组成部分,最终实现更安全、更高效的结构。然而,本文质疑当前的结构防火设计方法是否达到了这一要求所要求的一致的粗糙水平,或者是否通过量化结构防火性能的手段,即标准防火性能,代表了破坏整个过程的薄弱环节。虽然标准耐火的概念,在标准炉测试加热制度下的性能为基准,是有用的,因为它允许必要的比较,以确保产品,设计方法和地域的一致性,历史上的15分钟耐火增量(例如60,75,90分钟)导致不一致的安全水平。事实上,在耐火测试标准下已经允许的精炼等级,将在可靠性和设计效率方面带来显著的好处。本文以假设的个案研究,展示精炼耐火等级的优点,并解释如何实施改进的分类制度是容易实现的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Structural fire resistance: Rating system manifests crude, inconsistent design

This paper highlights a shortcoming in the current system of structural fire resistance design, proposes how it can be addressed and shows how the perceived barriers to change can be overcome. It is an opinion piece intended to stimulate discussion.

Whilst structural fire engineering knowledge may be relatively underdeveloped compared to other engineering disciplines, the industry has made great progress in recent decades in understanding and analysing fire behaviour and the response of structures, as well as developing fire protection products that can be accurately specified to meet performance criteria. In addition, through modern fire and risk engineering there are also methods to establish the appropriate fire resistance rating for a building (or element) based on risk profile, fire loading, building fabric and potential ventilation amongst other things. It is the objective of many within the industry for structural fire engineering to become an integrated part of the design process, ultimately leading to safer and more efficient structures. However, this paper questions whether current structural fire resistance design methods achieve the consistent level of crudeness required for this, or whether the means by which structural performance in fire is quantified, standard fire resistance, represents a weak link that undermines the entire process.

Although the concept of standard fire resistance, benchmarked against performance under normalised furnace test heating regimes, is useful in that it allows for the comparison necessary to safeguard consistency across products, design methods and geographies, the historic 15-min fire resistance increments (for example 60, 75, 90 min) result in inconsistent levels of safety. Refined grades, as in fact already allowed under fire resistance testing standards, would yield significant benefits for reliability and design efficiency. The paper uses hypothetical case studies to exhibit the merits of refined fire resistance grades and explains how implementing the enhanced classification system may be readily achievable.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信