4.7 Article

Experimental study on S700 T-stub in heating and cooling during fire

期刊

THIN-WALLED STRUCTURES
卷 195, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2023.111342

关键词

High strength steel; Natural fire; Heating and cooling fire; S700 steel; Material properties

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the strength of S700 steel material and T-stub made from S700 steel during fire was experimentally investigated. The results showed that about 90% of strength was regained at the cooling stage after the fire. The failure mode of the T-stub during the fire depended on its relative strength and the strength of the bolts.
In this paper, experimental investigations were carried out to assess the strength of S700 steel material and T-stub made from S700 steel in heating and cooling during fire with an emphasis on cooling stage fire (decreasing temperature). T-stub is a simple idealization of tension zone in bolted connection as T-shaped joint. In total, 17 coupons were tested in room temperature, growth (growing/ increasing temperature), cooling and postfire phases. It was observed from the tensile test data, that the growth phase properties were not similar as the cooling phase properties, however, about 90% of strength regained at the end of cooling phase, (i.e., in postfire specimens). 22 T-stubs of two geometric configurations were tested for axial capacity in heating and cooling during fire. In both the geometric configuration, the mode of failure at room temperature changed to other modes at elevated temperatures. The mode of failure at elevated temperature depended on the relative strength of T-stub and the bolts. The experimental results were compared with existing codal provisions - Eurocode 3 and AISC 360. It was found that the Eurocode prediction was close to the experimental results, while AISC prediction was highly conservative, which might be attributed to the non-consideration of bolt strength (proportionate reduction in strength due to fire) directly during the strength prediction.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据