Robust and pre-fabrication construction techniques are the cutting edge practice in the building industry. Cold-frame, warm-frame and hybrid-frame are three common Light-gauge Steel Frame (LSF) wall constructions applied for better energy performance. Still, the applications of the aforementioned wall configurations are restricted due to limited fire safety studies. This paper presents the fire performance investigations and results of cold-frame, warm-frame, and hybrid frame LSF walls together with three novel configurations maintaining the same material quantities. Successfully validated 3D heat transfer finite element models were extended to six wall configurations. Time variant temperature profiles from Finite Element Analyses were evaluated against the established Load Ratio (LR)-Hot-Flange (HF) temperature curve to determine the structural fire resistance. Modified warm-frame construction showed the best performance where the Fire Resistance Level (FRL) is approximately twice that of conventional LSF wall configurations. Hence, the novel LSF wall configurations obtained by shifting the insulation material toward the fireside of the wall make efficient fire-resistant wall solutions and the new designs are proposed to be incorporated in modular constructions for enhanced fire performance.

Structural fire damage can be identified as a common accidental disaster throughout the world which cause thousands of deaths, injuries and millions of property damage each year. Fire represents one of the most severe conditions which structures may be subjected. Generally structural element will be exposed to very high temperature (1200 0 C) during a fire propagation. Fire safety of a structure is measured in terms of fire resistance which is the duration that a structural member can exhibits resistance with respect to structural integrity, stability and heat transmission. Concrete generally provides better fire resisting characteristics compared to the other construction materials due to its low thermal conductivity, high heat capacity and slower strength degradation with temperature. Cellular lightweight concrete (CLC) is one of the novel type of concrete which can be identified as a better construction material than conventional concrete due to its numerous advantages. However, limited research work has been carried out to determine the fire performance of CLC. Fire response of structural member depends on the thermal, mechanical and deformation properties of the structural material at elevated temperature. Even though properties at elevated temperatures for normal weight concrete is available in literature, properties of CLC at elevated temperatures (ambient to 1200 0 C) is not thoroughly investigated. Further CLC fire rating under natural/parametric fire situations and under hydrocarbon fire situations need to be studied. EN 1992.1.2 provides minimum thickness requirements under standard fire situation for non-loadbearing and load bearing normal weight concrete walls, but for CLC, these values are not available, hence required to be included. Also, parameters and material property limitations related to spalling effect of CLC during fire exposure has not being investigated. Moreover, residual characteristics of CLC walls after fire situation and ability to withstand a second fire situation needs to be assessed.

No abstract

Purpose In this study, the insulation fire ratings of lightweight foamed concrete, autoclaved aerated concrete and lightweight aggregate concrete were investigated using finite element modelling. Design/methodology/approach Lightweight aggregate concrete containing various aggregate types, i.e. expanded slag, pumice, expanded clay and expanded shale were studied under standard fire and hydro–carbon fire situations using validated finite element models. Results were used to derive empirical equations for determining the insulation fire ratings of lightweight concrete wall panels. Findings It was observed that autoclaved aerated concrete and foamed lightweight concrete have better insulation fire ratings compared with lightweight aggregate concrete. Depending on the insulation fire rating requirement of 15%–30% of material saving could be achieved when lightweight aggregate concrete wall panels are replaced with the autoclaved aerated or foamed concrete wall panels. Lightweight aggregate concrete fire performance depends on the type of lightweight aggregate. Lightweight concrete with pumice aggregate showed better fire performance among the normal lightweight aggregate concretes. Material saving of 9%–14% could be obtained when pumice aggregate is used as the lightweight aggregate material. Hydrocarbon fire has shown aggressive effect during the first two hours of fire exposure; hence, wall panels with lesser thickness were adversely affected. Originality/value Finding of this study could be used to determine the optimum lightweight concrete wall type and the optimum thickness requirement of the wall panels for a required application.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract