Abstract
AbstractEngineered timber is an innovative and sustainable construction material, but its uptake has been hindered by concerns about its performance in fire. Current building regulations measure the fire performance of timber using fire resistance tests. In these tests, the charring rate is measured under a series of heat exposures (design fires) and from this the structural performance is deduced. Charring rates are currently only properly understood for the heat exposure of a standard fire, not for other exposures, which restricts the use of performance-based design. This paper studies the charring rates under a range of design fires. We used a multiscale charring model at the microscale (mg-samples), mesoscale (g-samples), and macroscale (kg-samples) for several wood species exposed to different heating regimes and boundary conditions. At the macroscale, the model blindly predicts in-depth temperatures and char depths during standard and parametric fires with an error between 5% and 22%. Comparing simulations of charring under travelling fires, parametric fires, and the standard fire revealed two findings. Firstly, their charring rates significantly differ, with maximum char depths of 42 mm (travelling), 46 mm (parametric), and 59 mm (standard fire), and one (standard fire) to four (travelling fire) charring stages (no charring, slow growth, fast growth, steady-state). Secondly, we observed zero-strength layers (depth between the 200 °C and 300 °C isotherm) of 7 to 12 mm from the exposed surface in travelling fires compared to 5 to 11 mm in parametric fires, and 7 mm in the standard fire. Both traditional design fires and travelling fires, therefore, need to be considered in structural calculations. These results help engineers to move towards performance-based design by allowing the calculation of charring rates for a wide range of design fires. In turn, this will help engineers to build more sustainable and safe structures with timber.
Funder
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality,General Materials Science
Reference50 articles.
1. Oliver CD, Nassar NT, Lippke BR, McCarter JB (2014) Carbon, fossil fuel, and biodiversity mitigation with wood and forests. J Sustain For 33:248–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2013.839386
2. Tollefson J (2017) The wooden skyscrapers that could help to cool the planet. Nature 545:280–282. https://doi.org/10.1038/545280a
3. Deeny S, Hadden RM, Lawrence A, Lane B (2018) Fire safety design in modern timber buildings. Struct Eng 96:48–53
4. Law A, Hadden RM (2017) Burnout means Burnout. SFPE Eur Mag
5. Gronli MG, Melaaen MCMC, Grønli MGM, Melaaen MCMC (2000) Mathematical model for wood pyrolysis comparison of experimental measurements with model predictions. Energy Fuels 14:791–800. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef990176q
Cited by
21 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献