Advanced search
1 file | 1.90 MB Add to list

Review of current practice in probabilistic structural fire engineering : permanent and live load modelling

Author
Organization
Abstract
Probabilistic analysis is receiving increased attention from fire engineers, assessment bodies and researchers. It is however often unclear which probabilistic models are appropriate for the analysis. For example, in probabilistic structural fire engineering, the models used to describe the permanent and live loads differ widely between studies. Through a literature review, it is observed that these diverging load models are based on surveys conducted between 1893 and 1976 and that widely adopted assumptions, such as the rule for combining permanent and live loads into the total load effect, are commonly adopted based on precedent. The diverging current models however relate to mostly the same underlying datasets and basic methodologies. Differences can be attributed (largely) to specific assumptions in different background papers, which have become consolidated through repeated use in research papers and adoption in background documents to codes. By reviewing the studies underlying currently applied probabilistic load models in structural fire engineering, a consolidated probabilistic load model is proposed in this paper. It is concluded that the total load effect is ideally described by KE·(G + Q), with KE the model uncertainty for the load effect, G the permanent load, and Q the imposed load. The model uncertainty KE can be described by a lognormal distribution with mean equal to unity and coefficient of variation (COV) of 0.10. The permanent load is preferably modelled by a normal distribution with mean equal to the nominal permanent load, and a COV which can either be assessed on a project specific basis, or can be set to 0.10 for a first assessment. For common occupancies (office, residential), the live load is preferably modelled by a Gamma distribution. The mean live load can be taken as 0.2 times the nominal, and the live load COV can be taken as 0.60 for large load areas (> 200 m2) and 0.95 for smaller load areas (< 100 m2). Comparison between the failure probabilities of steel and concrete columns subject to fire, considering the proposed consolidated model and two currently commonly used models, indicates that relative differences of the probability of failure can be in the order of 10%. Live load models for evacuation routes and warehouses require specific study and are outside the scope of the review.
Keywords
permanent load, live load, probabilistic analysis, structural fire engineering, DESIGN, RESISTANCE

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text (Published version)
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.90 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Jovanović, Balša, et al. “Review of Current Practice in Probabilistic Structural Fire Engineering : Permanent and Live Load Modelling.” FIRE TECHNOLOGY, 2020, doi:10.1007/s10694-020-01005-w.
APA
Jovanović, B., Van Coile, R., Hopkin, D., Elhami Khorasani, N., Lange, D., & Gernay, T. (2020). Review of current practice in probabilistic structural fire engineering : permanent and live load modelling. FIRE TECHNOLOGY. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-020-01005-w
Chicago author-date
Jovanović, Balša, Ruben Van Coile, Danny Hopkin, Negar Elhami Khorasani, David Lange, and Thomas Gernay. 2020. “Review of Current Practice in Probabilistic Structural Fire Engineering : Permanent and Live Load Modelling.” FIRE TECHNOLOGY. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-020-01005-w.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Jovanović, Balša, Ruben Van Coile, Danny Hopkin, Negar Elhami Khorasani, David Lange, and Thomas Gernay. 2020. “Review of Current Practice in Probabilistic Structural Fire Engineering : Permanent and Live Load Modelling.” FIRE TECHNOLOGY. doi:10.1007/s10694-020-01005-w.
Vancouver
1.
Jovanović B, Van Coile R, Hopkin D, Elhami Khorasani N, Lange D, Gernay T. Review of current practice in probabilistic structural fire engineering : permanent and live load modelling. FIRE TECHNOLOGY. 2020;
IEEE
[1]
B. Jovanović, R. Van Coile, D. Hopkin, N. Elhami Khorasani, D. Lange, and T. Gernay, “Review of current practice in probabilistic structural fire engineering : permanent and live load modelling,” FIRE TECHNOLOGY, 2020.
@article{8669896,
  abstract     = {Probabilistic analysis is receiving increased attention from fire engineers, assessment bodies and researchers. It is however often unclear which probabilistic models are appropriate for the analysis. For example, in probabilistic structural fire engineering, the models used to describe the permanent and live loads differ widely between studies. Through a literature review, it is observed that these diverging load models are based on surveys conducted between 1893 and 1976 and that widely adopted assumptions, such as the rule for combining permanent and live loads into the total load effect, are commonly adopted based on precedent. The diverging current models however relate to mostly the same underlying datasets and basic methodologies. Differences can be attributed (largely) to specific assumptions in different background papers, which have become consolidated through repeated use in research papers and adoption in background documents to codes. By reviewing the studies underlying currently applied probabilistic load models in structural fire engineering, a consolidated probabilistic load model is proposed in this paper. It is concluded that the total load effect is ideally described by KE·(G + Q), with KE the model uncertainty for the load effect, G the permanent load, and Q the imposed load. The model uncertainty KE can be described by a lognormal distribution with mean equal to unity and coefficient of variation (COV) of 0.10. The permanent load is preferably modelled by a normal distribution with mean equal to the nominal permanent load, and a COV which can either be assessed on a project specific basis, or can be set to 0.10 for a first assessment. For common occupancies (office, residential), the live load is preferably modelled by a Gamma distribution. The mean live load can be taken as 0.2 times the nominal, and the live load COV can be taken as 0.60 for large load areas (> 200 m2) and 0.95 for smaller load areas (< 100 m2). Comparison between the failure probabilities of steel and concrete columns subject to fire, considering the proposed consolidated model and two currently commonly used models, indicates that relative differences of the probability of failure can be in the order of 10%. Live load models for evacuation routes and warehouses require specific study and are outside the scope of the review.},
  author       = {Jovanović, Balša and Van Coile, Ruben and Hopkin, Danny and Elhami Khorasani, Negar and Lange, David and Gernay, Thomas},
  issn         = {0015-2684},
  journal      = {FIRE TECHNOLOGY},
  keywords     = {permanent load,live load,probabilistic analysis,structural fire engineering,DESIGN,RESISTANCE},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {30},
  title        = {Review of current practice in probabilistic structural fire engineering : permanent and live load modelling},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10694-020-01005-w},
  year         = {2020},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: