AlllDO TT2fit.7

NATL INST OF STANDARDS & TECH R.I.C.

A1 11 00992867

/NBS building science series TA435 .U58 V76;1976 C.I NBS-PUB-C 1974

NBS BUILDING SCIENCE SERIES 76

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE / National Bureau of Standards

Analysis of

einforced Concrete Beams

Subjected to Fire

.U58

NO. 76

1976

C.2
The Building Science Series

The Building Science Series disseminates technical information developed at the National Bureau of Standards on

building materials, components, systems, and whole structures. The Series presents research results, test methods, and performance criteria related to the structural and environmental functions and the durability and safety characteristics of building elements and systems. These publications, similar in style and content to the NBS Building Materials and Structures Reports (1938-59),

are directed toward the manufacturing, design, construction, and research segments of the building industry, standards organizations, and officials responsible for building codes. The material for this Series originates principally in the Center for Building Technology of the NBS Institute

for Applied Technology. The publications are divided into three general groups: Building Systems and Processes;

Health, Safety and Comfort ; and Structure^ -and Materials. For further information regarding these publications

please contact the Program Planning and Liaison Unit, Center for Building Technology, Institute for Applied

Technology, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. 20234.^

r

[See mailing list announcement on last page]
"

jAN 0 1977

Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Beams

Subjected to Fire

^ ' Bruce EUingwood

and

James R. Shaver

Center for Building Technology

Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Elliot L. Richardson, Secretary

Dr. Betsy Ancker-Johnson, ksii%\an\ Secretary for Science and Technology

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Ernest Ambler, Aciing Director

Issued July 1976
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Ellingwood, Bruce. Analysis of reinforced concrete beams subject to fire. (National Bureau of Standards building science series ; 76) Bibliography: p. Supt.ofDocs.no.: €13.29/2:76

1. Concrete beams-Thermal properties. 2. Firetesting. I. Shaver, James R., joint author. II. Title. III. Series: United States. National Bureau of Standards. Building science sereis ; 76. TA435.U58 no. 76 [TH1092] 690'.02 [624M834] 76-608159

National Bureau of Standards Building Science Series 76

Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.), Bldg. Sci. Ser. 76. 83 pages (July 1976) CODEN: BSSNBV

Supersedes NBSIR 76-1032

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON: 1976

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 (Order by SD Catalog No. C13.29/2:76). Price $1.45. (Add 25 percent additional for other than U.S. mailing).
ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAMS SUBJECTED TO FIRE

Bruce Ellingwood

James R. Shaver

Methods for analytically predicting the behavior of simply supported reinforced

concrete beams subjected to fire are presented. This is generally a two-step process

involving a thermal analysis followed by a stress analysis. This study emphasizes the

latter, wherein the determination of moment-curvature-time relationships for the beam

cross section incorporates the temperature-dependent strength degradation in the steel and

concrete as well as thermal and creep strains. The sensitivity of the predictions to

various phases of analytical modeling is investigated to establish the parameters most

important for the prediction of beam behavior and to indicate where additional data should

be gathered. A comparison of predicted behavior with that observed in fire tests shows

excellent agreement when realistic reinforcement temperature histories are used.

Key Words: Creep; fire endurance; fire tests; reinforced concrete; sensitivity analysis;

steel; structural mechanics; uncertainty.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The writers would like to thank Drs . E.V. Leyendecker and C. Culver of the Center

for Building Technology and Messrs. L. Issen and D. Gross of the Center for Fire Research

for their critical review of the manuscript.

ill

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Abstract iii

Acknowledgments iii

Notation vi

1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Methods of Analysis 2 3.0 Modeling Uncertainties 12 3.1 Creep Model 13 3.2 Analysis of Thermal Strains 16 3.3 Constitutive Relations 17 4.0 Case Studies 17 4.1 T - Beam with Grade 40 Reinforcement 19 4.2 T - Beam with Grade 60 Reinforcement 34 4.3 Prestressed T - Beam 34 5.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 38 References 41

Appendix A: Instructions for Program Usage and Input Data Preparation ... 42 Appendix B: Computer Program Documentation 50

V
NOTATION

Young's modulus for steel and concrete, respectively,

strain hardening exponent, strength coefficient,

moment; working load and ultimate load moments, respectively,

axial thrust

.

temperature; temperature in discrete element ij ; initial temperature;

temperature in bar k.

Zener-Holloman creep constant.

depth to reinforcement from top of beam; depth to bar k.

total strain; total strain at top of beam; imposed strain,

concrete stress, ultimate concrete strength,

steel stress; steel yield stress,

balanced reinforcement ratio.

reinforcement ratios for T-beams defined by ACI 318-71 [2].

time

.

beam cross section coordinates measured from top of beam.

coefficients of thermal expansion for concrete and steel, respectively.

activation energy of creep divided by gas constant.

constants for determining temperature dependency of a and a . C 8 constant used to determine 9(T); 3 = AH/R.

strain; stress.

thermal strain in concrete, thermal strain in steel, creep strain in

steel, prestressing strain in steel, respectively.

mechanical concrete strain at top of beam at x , R constant related to primary creep strain.

constants used in the constitutive relations for concrete

and steel, respectively.

temperature-compensated time.

unit rotation (curvature)

.

vi
1.0 INTRODUCTION

The provision for sufficient fire resistance and reserve load-carrying capacity for

reinforced concrete structural elements is an important problem in engineering design and

is required by most building codes. Currently, this resistance to fire is determined

primarily on the basis of the performance of an element subjected to the American Society

for Testing and Materials (ASTM E-119) [3] fire test. Although the standard fire test

may not be representative of an actual fire, it is generally recognized as being necessary

to provide a basis for comparison between various designs and to satisfy the need for

reproducibility in test data. The suitability of prospective designs is thus likely to

be judged by their performance in this standard test in the foreseeable future.

Criteria for the fire-resistant design of reinforced or prestressed members are

difficult to develop. Because of the considerable cost in conducting a standard fire test

of even a simple beam, it would generally not be economical to test a sufficiently large

number of specimens to determine experimentally fire endurance for a spectrum of possible

designs. Although it is possible to determine fire resistance with a limited experimental

data base by interpolation, this procedure relies to a great extent on judgment and experience

and, moreover, provides little indication of the sensitivity of member endurance to various

designer-controlled parameters. An alternative is to use thermomechanical models to

predict analytically the behavior of reinforced concrete members subjected to fire. In

this context, the limited data extant would be used to define experimental constants

employed in the models and to update and improve the analysis procedure itself. This

procedure furnishes a logical basis not only for interpreting such test data as is available

but also for extrapolating, within reasonable limits, to situations not covered by the

data base.

This methodology is described in the following sections. The analysis of a reinforced

concrete beam section subjected to a non-linear strain distribution produced by a timedependent temperature history is discussed. A sensitivity analysis of the analytical

•k Numbers in brackets indicate literature references on page 41.

1
models is presented in order to show the effect of inaccuracies in data reduction and to provide some guidance as to where acquisition of additional data would most readily pay

off. A computer program used to perform these analyses is documented in detail, including

the preparation of input data, flow charts of the computational algorithm, and a source listing of the computer code. The methodology described herein is believed to provide a framework for systematically developing fire-resistant design procedures in the long term.

2.0 METHODS OF ANALYSIS

At room temperature, the ultimate capacity of a properly designed reinforced concrete

beam will exceed the sustained or service load moment by a prescribed margin of safety.

During the fire, however, the ultimate capacity will degrade to the point where it is less

than the service load, at which point the beam will fail. Accordingly, the reserve moment

r^iparitv as a function of temperature or time and the period that the beam can sustain

its working load are of particular interest. In this analysis, the moment-curvature-time

relationship for a reinforced and/or prestressed concrete beam section subjected to fire

is developed. The effects of the resulting thermal expansion of the concrete and steel,

creep in steel, and progressive deterioration of the materials at elevated temperatures

are incorporated into the strength calculations. An accompanying finite element thermal

analysis program [15] is used to determine the temperature distribution on the beam cross

section. This thermal analysis is made prior to the strength analysis.

Because of the non-linear nature of the stress-strain equations for concrete and for

steel reinforcement when stressed above the proportional limit, closed-form expressions

for the moment-curvature relations for a reinforced concrete beam section are difficult to obtain. Therefore, an iterative procedure is employed wherein a strain distribution is

assumed on the cross section, the stresses are determined from the appropriate constitutive

relations, and a resultant thrust and moment are computed from these stresses; i.e.

/CT(x,y) dA = P

fa (x,y) y dA = M (1)

^ /a(x,y) X dA = 0

If the thrust and moment computed from Eq . 1 equal the applied loads on the beam, the

resulting moment and curvature are recorded; otherwise, the assumed strain distribution is

modified, and the process is repeated until the calculated and applied loads converge.

Although the above computation procedure is easily visualized in a reinforced concrete beam at room temperature, prolonged exposure to fire induces a nonlinear thermal strain

distribution on the cross section and causes the material strengths to degrade and the

steel (and, to a lesser extent, the concrete) to creep under sustained load conditions.

2
These factors affect the load-deformation characteristics of the beam, as described in the

following.

Fig. 1 shows the distribution of strains on reference coordinate x of a beam cross

R section which has been exposed to fire. It mig'ht be noted that the reference coordinate

is not necessary in a room temperature analysis because the strain distribution across

the beam width is, or is assumed to be, constant. Under elevated temperatures, however,

the strain distribution becomes nonlinear in both the depth and width direction. Under

the assumption that plane sections remain plane after deformation, the t otal strain e^(y)

is defined by [10],

in which e is the total strain at the top of the beam and 4 is the unit rotation at the

o section (y is measured from the top of the beam). In what follows, extensional strain

will have positive sign.

The total strain is the sum of two components, i.e..

Note that although e^ is a function of y only, e^ and £ are functions of x and y because

of the nonlinearity in the temperature distribution across the width and deptn of the

section. The Imposed strain component e^(x,y) consists of thermal strains in the concrete,

e , , and steel, e , , and the creep strain in the steel, £ (to be discussed in Eqs. 7 and

cth sth cr

8). The mechanical strain e(x,y) is required to establish equilibrium, subject to the

compatibility requirement expressed by Eq. 2. The stresses on the cross section are

computed from the mechanical strains using the appropriate constitutive relationship.

Eqs. 2 and 3 show this mechanical strain is given by

e^(y) = + i>y (2)

e^(y) = e^(x,y) + E(x,y). (3)

(Aa)

It may be observed from Eq . 4a that two parameters, e^ and (f) , are sufficient to

describe uniquely the strain distribution on the cross section once the imposed strains

3
4
are determined. These two parameters may be adjusted using a self-accelerating method

[19] for the iterative solution of equations in order to satisfy equilibrium, Eq . 1.

Rather than to iterate with e^ directly, it is convenient to employ the more conventional

parameter which denotes the mechanical limiting concrete compressive strain at the top

of the beam and at the reference width coordinate x (see Fig. 1). R

To express e^ in terms of e^, note that at (x,y) = (x^^.o) , e(x^,0) = and thus

% = + ej(x^,0) (4b)

where ej(Xj^,0) is the imposed (thermal) strain at the top of the beam. In general, then,

the mechanical strain is given by

e (x,y) = + <J)y - [e^(x,y) - ej(x^,0)], (5)

It is convenient in performing the strength computations (and, indeed, necessary for

all but the simplest cases) to discretize the beam cross section with a series of small

elements rather than to treat it as a continuum. The forces can then be obtained by

summation. Using this approach, the strain at the centroid of a concrete element furnishes

a stress which is assumed to be constant over that particular element. In particular, the

strain in the concrete element with centroidal coordinates (x^,yj) is

^c^^'^j) = +

- [^cth ^^'^j) - "cth (^R'O)]. (6a)

The strain in the steel reinforcing bar with depth d^ would be

S^V =^c *\ - f^sth^V ^ ^cr^V - ^cth^'^R'^)] • (^^)

If the beam is prestressed in addition to or instead of being reinforced,

S^V = ^c ^ ^'^k - [^th^V ^r^V - ^cth(-R'0>] Ss^V ^"""^

in which e is prestressing strain in steel element k. ps
The thermal strains in the concrete and steel, indicated in Eq. 6, are computed from

the temperature distribution on the cross section. The temperature within each concrete

element is assumed to be constant, and is determined by averaging the nodal temperatures

calculated during the thermal analysis. The steel temperatures may either be computed

from the adjacent nodal temperatures in the surrounding concrete mass or may be read from

cards or tape at each calculation time step.

The thermal strains for concrete and steel, respectively, are

T

e ^i.(x.,y.) = / ii a (T) dT for concrete cth i-^j o c

(7)

e .u(d, ) = a (T,d, ) dT for steel

stn k o s k.

where and are coefficients of thermal expansion of concrete and steel, dependent on

temperature T.

The creep strain in the steel is determined using the Harmathy-Dorn theory [9, 12]

along with a time-hardening rule for determining the creep under a variable stress history.

The procedure for computing the creep increment corresponding to a small time interval is

illustrated in Fig. 2. The primary and secondary stages of creep are described by Harmathy's

creep equation

de /de = Z coth^ (e /e ) (8a) cr cr to or, in integrated form.

e /e - tanh e /e = ze/e

cr to cr to to

^g^^

in which Z and e^^ are material-dependent functions of stress, and 9(t) is the temperaturecompensated time [9],

l(t) = exp [ - AH/RT(t)] dr. (9)

Term AH is the activation energy for creep, R is the gas constant, and T(t) is the temperature

as a function of time. The time-hardening rule appears appropriate for studying creep at

elevated temperatures [6, 16], and assumes that the creep strain increment during a given

6
TEMPERATURE-COMPENSATED TIME

FIG. 2 - COMPUTATION OF CREEP STRAIN INCREMENT WITH TIME-HARDENING RULE

FIG. 3 - STRESS-STRAIN CURVE FOR CONCRETE

7
time increment at a constant stress is dependent only on -the accumulated temperaturecompensated time up to the start of that increment.

Finally, the stresses on the cross section are computed from the strains defined by

Eq. 6, using the appropriate temperature-dependent constitutive relations for the materials.

In the present study, the stress-strain curve for the concrete is given by [8]

2f •c

1 + (e/e )

o

(10)

which is illustrated in Fig. 3, and in which f^ is the compressive strength and is a

constant. ByJOtaking the derivative,> it mayy be seen that 2f'/e = E , where E is the

c o c c initial tangent modulus of elasticity, and thus f^ = f(f^> "^^^ idealized dependence

of f^ and E^ on temperature is illustrated in Fig. 4, where it may be seen that these

properties degrade at elevated temperatures [1, 4, 5].

In similar fashion, either the common elastic-per f ectly plastic curve or a strainhardening model similar to the Ramberg-Osgood relation may be used to determine the

stress-strain curve for the steel. The latter relation is given by

f = E e, e < E s s ~ P

(11)

f =Ee-K (e-e)'^, e>e s s p p

and is shown in Fig. 5; K, n, and are experimental constants. Eq . 11 has the

capability for modeling the "rounded" stress-strain characteristics observed in steel at

elevated temperatures. The modulus E^, and the yield strength f^, are temperature-dependent

[13, 14, 20] as shown in Fig. 6 for grade 40 reinforcement. K, n, and can be computed

knowing f and E . y s In this study, the ultimate moment capacity of the beam was given by the maximum

point on the moment-curvature relationship. The corresponding compressive strain in the

concrete, e^, was typically in the range 0,003 - 0.005 for the under-reinforced beams

considered

.

8
FIG. 4 - NORMAL WEIGHT CONCRETE PROPERTIES AT ELEVATED TEMPERATURES

9
s

FIG. 5 - STRESS-STRAIN CURVE IDEALIZATIONS FOR REINFORCEMENT

(6c) Coefficient of Thermal Expansion

FIG. 6 - REINFORCING STEEL PROPERTIES AT ELEVATED TEMPERATURES

10
The accuracy with which the temperature history in the reinforcement can be established

is especially important, since the strength of a lightly reinforced beam depends primarily

on the strength of its reinforcing steel, and both the constitutive relations and predictions

of creep in the steel are affected by the temperatures. In the present algorithm, the

steel temperatures may be either computed or may be read independently at each calculation

time stage. The latter method provides a capability for directly utilizing experimental

data obtained from thermocouples attached to the steel during a fire test in making strength

predictions. Indeed, when the measured temperatures are used in the strength analysis

described above, the resulting predictions of behavior agree quite closely with test

observations

.

The temperature distribution on the beam cross section may be determined from a

finite element thermal analysis in which the appropriate heat boundary conditions are

specified. Since an examination of thermal analyses was considered to be outside the

scope of the present study, the temperature distributions were estimated from an available

two-dimensional thermal analysis program [15] which, for simplicity, treats the beam

section as homogenous, and in which the steel and the heat flow along the member are not

explicitly considered. Temperatures are thus determined at discrete nodal points. The

temperature in a reinforcing bar is then calculated from those at the three nodes adjacent

to it, weighting each nodal temperature by the area coordinate of the bar with respect to

that particular node. Although area coordinates provide a natural way to weight the nodal

temperatures, steel temperatures which are estimated from those in the surrounding concrete

can be as much as 40 percent too high. The reasons for this discrepancy are that the

reinforcement in the actual beam acts as a heat sink and longitudinal heat conductor [5],

and that the moisture in the surrounding concrete condenses around the steel, providing a

layer of insulation around the bar. In large reinforced sections, moreover, the heat sink

caused by the steel would significantly perturb the thermal distribution in the surrounding

concrete mass. Therefore, the available capacity of the beam would be severely underestimated using the above thermal analysis without correction. This will be shown quantitatively

in a subsequent example where it will also be shown that the computed and measured temperatures

will agree if the calculated temperature increments are scaled by an appropriate constant.

However, this scaling factor depends on beam geometry, reinforcing arrangement, and temperature

history, and its empirical nature introduces additional uncertainty.

11
A thermal analysis has recently become available [4,5] that allows sections with

several different materials and thermal properties to be modeled, and which promises to

remove a substantial amount of the uncertainty in steel temperature calculation. However,

the assumption therein that perfect thermal contact is maintained between two adjacent

materials may not hold in the case of prestressed beams where shielded cables are used.

Moreover, although the section is assumed to remain uncracked, the random flexural cracking

which occurs in beams would tend to raise the temperature in the reinforcement. The

importance of accurate steel temperatures in predicting beam behavior and ultimate strength

therefore mandates additional study in this area.

Since the beam section is discretized during the finite element thermal analysis, the

same grid system is employed in the strength analysis in the current study. In general,

however, this would not be necessary. The coarseness of the mesh will decrease the accuracy

of the temperature estimates as well as the calculated stress distribution and moment

capacity. Discretization problems were outside the scope of the present study, and have

not been explored in detail. The selection of an appropriate mesh relies to a great

extent on engineering judgment. A finer mesh should be selected if the thermal or mechanical

strain gradients are expected to be sharp. For example, if the neutral axis falls within

the top two element rows of a discretized beam section, the estimate of the concrete

compressive stress block will be very crude since the stress is assumed to be constant

over any element.

Similarly, the temperature-time history must be discretized for both thermal and

strength calculations. The choice of too large a time step will cause an error in the

estimates of thermal and creep strains, particularly at higher temperatures later in the

test. For the case studies discussed in the sequel, a 10 minute interval has been used

with success.

3.0 MODELING UNCERTAINTIES

Since the behavior of reinforced concrete beams subjected to fire load is a complex

phenomenon, it is essential to identify potential sources of solution error that may arise

as a result of the mathematical modeling. These sources would include the creep model,

thermal strain analysis, and the stress-strain curve idealization, including the rate of

12
degradation of material properties with increasing temperature. While the models employed

herein are felt to be suitable for this study, the sensitivity analysis must be sufficiently

detailed that the results obtained can be realistically interpreted. Although the ultimate

moment capacity of an under-reinforced simply supported concrete beam may not be particularly

sensitive to errors in creep or thermal strains, this is not true for its curvature

(deflection) at failure. Furthermore, if the beam is partially restrained, these factors

may be important. Therefore, these limitations and sources of uncertainty in the models

and their parameters are discussed in the following paragraphs.

3.1 Creep Model

The creep model, Eq. 8, perhaps constitutes the largest single source of uncertainty

[6,7,12,17] and warrants extended attention. All creep analyses [17] attempt to relate

the creep strain e , its time rate de I At, applied stress a, temperature T and time t in cr cr some parametric equation, i.e.j

F, (e ,de /de,a) = 0 (12a)

1 cr' cr

and when time and temperature are combined Into one normalizing parameter 6, the temperaturecompensated time of Equation 9, this becomes

F^ (e , de /d9,a) = 0 . (12b)

2 cr cr

In addition to the state variables, these functions contain certain empirical constants,

which must be determined experimentally.

The determination of these experimental constants constitutes a significant part of

the uncertainty in the creep analysis. For example, the experimental parameter ej.Qin

Eq. 8 determines the amount of primary creep that occurs. However, since the test specimens

are loaded and heated to test stress and temperature over a finite time, it may be difficult

to differentiate between instantaneous recoverable inelastic deformation in the specimen,

and primary creep deformation, which is irrecoverable [7,17]. Moreover, it should be

13
expected that e^^ would depend not only on a but on da/dt as well, since the anelastic

strain is dependent on the loading rate. Thus, it should not be too surprising that e^^

has been observed to be a poorly reproducible quantity which exhibits considerable scatter

[12,13]. The parameter Z in Eq . 8 describes the steady-state secondary stage creep rate.

Inasmuch as the most reliable and reproducible test results have been generated for the

steady state portion of the creep curves more confidence may be placed in values of Z

reported in the literature than in values of e . Under certain service conditions,

to however, the material may become structurally unstable, in which case Z would be a function

of temperature as well as stress. Moreover, the hypothesis of functional similarity

underlying Eq. 8 may not be valid for a broad range of stress in all materials [17].

The temperature-compensated time parameter 9(t) described in Eq . 9 has some theoretical

basis in statistical mechanics. The key parameter in evaluating 6(t) is 3 = AH/R which

is experimentally determined and is commonly assumed to be constant at all temperatures.

Although AH has been shown to be insensitive to material structure for pure metals at

temperatures exceeding one-half the melting point [9], the situation for alloys is more

complicated [17]. In general, AH is dependent on the structural state of the material and

its prior deformation history; if a phase change in the metal occurs due to elevated

temperature, AH would be expected to change accordingly. It seems apparent that 6 should

actually vary over the range of temperatures encountered during the fire test, and indeed

there is some evidence [17] that d3/dT > 0. Unfortunately, there is insufficient data at

present to estimate this functional relationship.

An appreciation of the numerical effect of variations in the creep parameters on the

predicted creep strain may be gained by examining the total differential of Eq . 8b, i.e..

2 de = (coth e /e - csch e /e ) de cr cr to cr to to

+ coth^e /c (edZ + Zd6) (13a) cr to

de = C, de + C„ dZ + C_de (13b) cr 1 to 2 3

•

We might observe that the coefficient is bounded by 0 < C-j^ < 1, and thus a variation in

e will cause a change of the same magnitude in e . The effect of variations in Z to ° cr

14
and e is not as clear, as Z ranges from 10 to 10 /hr [13] in Grade AO reinforcement

— 18 while e varies from 0 to 10 hr during a four hour duration of a standard ASTM fire test.

If Z errs by an order of magnitude, then de will err by a similar amount, as shown by

cr ' the second term in Eq . 13b. In spite of the general predictability of the secondary creep

stage, existing data indicates that this error is a distinct possibility at certain stress

levels [13,18].

Decomposing the third term in Eq. 13b, we observe that if T is essentially constant,

de 3. (d6) (14a)

e ~ T e

For the steels and temperatures of interest in the current study, 6 ss 70000 [13] and

T = 1000°F (538°C); thus g/T « 70, and

(14b)

It may be concluded that an error of 10 percent in the estimate of g will result in a 700

percent error in the temperature-compensated time increment which, in turn, may cause an

error of an order of magnitude in the estimate of the creep strain increment according to

Eq. 13. In connection with this sensitivity and the temperature dependency noted earlier,

it is important to note that the experimental values of 3 ai^s usually obtained over a

fairly narrow temperature range, say 800°F - 1100°F (427°C - 593°C) , while the temperature

in the steel reinforcement may range over 1000°F (538°C) during a fire test. In some

instances, the uncertainty in 3 may tend to limit the usefulness of e(t) as a temperaturetime normalizing parameter.

There are additional limitations and restrictions in the use of Eq. 12 itself in

predicting creep behavior under non-steady stress and temperature conditions. For example,

although it is tacitly assumed in developing Eq . 12 that the stress remains constant

during the entire creep test it is actually the load that remains constant. The continual

reduction in area during testing due to accumulations of plastic deformation causes the

stress to increase. This seemingly fine point requires that the usefuluess of Eqs. 12

in predicting creep under service loads be restricted to small deformations where creep

strains do not exceed a few percent.

15
When the stress is strongly time-dependent during service, one must assume that

the creep strain increment is controlled by a time-hardening or strain-hardening mechanism

or a combination of the two to predict creep deform.ation under these conditions [16]

.

This requires rather broad assumptions regarding the temperature-dependent viscoelastic

properties of the material. The strain-hardening mechanism implies that the material is

structurally stable and the creep increment depends on the amount of prior deformation;

satisfactory agreement with experiment has been found under conditions of variable stress

but essentially constant temperature. The time-hardening mechanism is analogous to the

flow of a a nonlinear viscous fluid with time-dependent viscosity, and seems appropriate

at elevated temperatures when the stress levels change only slightly. It should be realized

that in a reinforced concrete beam subjected to fire, the actual state is somewhere in

between these two extremes. In any event, the assumption that the stress and temperature

are constant for a particular creep curve, upon which basis creep increments are calculated

for a variable stress and temperatures, ignores the finite loading and heating times

necessary to conduct the tests from which such curves are derived.

In sum it is apparent that additional experimental creep data is required, especially

with regard to e^^ and 3, before the same degree of confidence can be placed in the creep

analysis as in the remaining portions of the methodology.

3.2 Analysis of Thermal Strains

Thermal strains are analyzed according to Eq. 7 for both concrete and steel. The

principal source of uncertainty arises from the expression for the temperature-dependent

thermal expansion a(T). The scatter in a(T) is considerable for concrete [5], and somewhat

less for steel [20] . Typically, a(T) increases approximately linearly up to some T^

beyond which it is assumed to remain constant;

a (T) = [a + da (T - T ) ] , T < T (15)

o — o

= a , T > T m m

where is typically about 6 x 10~^/°F (3.3 x 10~^/C°). For concrete, T^ = 800°F (427°C)

and at this temperature, 8 x 10~^/°F < a < 22 x 10~^/°F (4.4 x 10~^/°C < a < 12.2 x 10~^/°C). m m

16
Using Eqs. 7 and 15, this variation in thermal expansion would result in a difference in

computed thermal strains of 0.005 and 0.0106 in those elements having temperatures of

800°F (427°C) and 1200°F (629°C) respectively. For steels, at T = 1500°F (815°C)

,

m

9 X 10~^/°F < < 12 X 10"^°F (or 5 x 10~^/°C < < 6.7 x 10"^/°^), implying a difference

0.0013 in computed thermal strain when the reinforcement is at 1200°F (649°C) . However,

the effect of these variations on the ultimate (reserve) moment capacity of the beams

under the fire load considered in this study was found to be slight, since the steel was

observed to have yielded well before the beam capacity was reached.

3.3 Constitutive Relations

The reinforcement stress-strain curve idealization and the modeling of the temperature

dependent reinforcement strength degradation have a significant effect on the predicted

moment capacity of the reinforced concrete beam, as will be shown subsequently.

In particular, an examination of available data on the degradation of yield stress

with temperature [5,13,14,20] revealed that the scatter in reinforcement yield stress

increased with temperature. At 800°F (427°C), for example, yield stresses reported for

intermediate grade steels ranged from 45 percent to 85 percent of their room temperature

values. In turn, this implies that the unpredictability in moment capacity will also

increase with temperature. On the other hand, the form of the concrete stress-strain curve

and the temperature-dependent material properties of the concrete were not found to be

especially influential for the lightly reinforced beams considered in this study, although

they would be expected to be important in reinforced concrete members subjected to large

axial thrusts. Moreover, although the small tension load-carrying capacity of concrete is

included in the numerical analysis, its effect on the load-deformation behavior of the

beams is negligible, except at extremely small loads.

4.0 CASE STUDIES

A lightly reinforced T-beam section fabricated with normal weight concrete, shown in

Fig. 7, was chosen for the case studies herein. A series of simply supported beams spanning 40 ft (12.2 m) with similar cross sections were tested by Portland Cement Association

17
26"

25" mi

3in 3i

—14"-^

(7a) -REINFORCING CONFIGURATION

26"

25"

1

... . T ^1

I 2

14'

4(p) 4"

3"

(7b) - PRESTRESSING CONFIGURATION

FIG. 7 - BEAN CROSS SECTIONS ANALYZED

18
(PCA) using the standard ASTM E-119 [3] fire. In this test series, the grade of reinforcement, concrete strength, and the effect of prestressing compared to reinforcing were

considered. The usefulness of the present analysis will be demonstrated by its ability to

predict the behavior of the above beams under fire test. It might be emphasized that the

effect of end restraint on beam strength was not considered in this study. Restricting

the scope to determining the load-carrying capacity of a cross-section of course limits

the applicability of the analysis to simply supported members, where the section investigated

is that having the maximum applied moment.

4.1 T-Beam with Grade 40 Reinforcement

In the first illustration using the section shown in Fig. 7a, the reinforcement

consists of 8 No. 10 Grade 40 deformed bars with a nominal yield strength of 40 ksi (276

2 MN/m ). The reinforcement ratio of p - p = 0.0086 is considerably less than the maximum w 1 allowable [2] value of 0.75p' = 0.055. The corresponding beam tested by PCA [11] sustained

b a test moment of 4770 in-kips (0.539 MN-m) for 310 minutes, at which time the test furnace

control failed; the projected beam endurance was about 6 hours. The test moment was 54

percent of the ultimate beam capacity at room temperature. At the time of test, the

' 2 concrete compressive strength was f^ = 7230 psi (49.9 MN/m ), while the actual steel yield

strength was f^ = 46 ksi (317 MN/m^)

.

The temperature distribution on the cross section was determined as a function of

time from a thermal analysis provided by Issen [15]. The cross section was discretized in

1-inch (2.54 cm) squares, and the strains and stresses on the cross section, as well as

its load carrying capacity, were calculated at 10 minute time increments, beginning with a

temperature of 70°F (21°C) at time zero, until the ultimate capacity fell below the sustained

load moment. (This discretization was used for all case studies considered herein.)

About 1 1/2 minutes was needed to perform the thermal analysis on an UNIVAC 1108 (Exec 8)

System, followed by 1 1/2 minutes to perform the strength calculations for the entire fire

test of this beam. Beam symmetry allowed consideration of only one-half the cross section;

this is reflected in the value of moment in the strength-time curves which follow.
Fig. 8 describes the temperature history in the reinforcement which is computed

directly from the temperatures of the surrounding concrete mass. As might be expected,

the calculated bar temperatures are dependent upon the amount of concrete cover provided,

reaching about 1400°F (760°C) in bar 1 after 300 minutes and about 750°F (399°C) in bar 4

which is better protected. The actual temperatures in the reinforcement at midspan which

were monitored with thermocouples for the duration of this test are shown in Fig. 9

(reproduced from Ref . 11) for comparison. The computed steel temperatures are considerably

higher than the actual values for reasons discussed earlier. After 5 hours of test, for

example, the measured temperatures range from 70 percent to 85 percent of those calculated,

with the lower percentages for the hotter bars. Moreover, the measured temperatures tend

to increase more rapidly than predicted during the early stages of the fire.

To compensate for this discrepency in a reasonably simple manner, an empirical scaling

factor is introduced by which the increments in calculated steel temperatures are multiplied

so that, on the average, the computed and measured values agree. In the present analysis,

this factor is taken as a constant for simplicity. However, it is clear from inspecting

Fig. 8 and 9 that the scaling factor is dependent on the amount of bar cover and elapsed

time and, moreover, would be expected to be influenced by the type of reinforcement and

concrete moisture content as well.

The effect of the method selected to determine the steel temperature history on the

estimated beam strength is shown in Fig. 10, where the degradation in ultimate moment

capacity resulting from progressive material deterioration is illustrated. In these and

all subsequent calculations, the coefficient of thermal expansion in Fig. 6c was used to

calculate the thermal strains, while in computing the creep, the following experimental [13]

parameters were substituted in Eqs . 8 and 9:

AH/R = 75000

= 1,7 x 10

-10 1.75

to

0.026 f 4.7f < 15000

s s Z = 1.23 X 10

-16

exp [.0003 f ], f > 15000

20
0 I 2 3 4 5

TIMEiHr.)

FIG. 8 - COMPUTED TEMPERATURES IN REINFORCEfCNT

(Cross section shown in Fig. 7a)

FIG. 9 - MEASURED TEMPERATURES IN REINFORCEMENT

(Cross section shown in Fig. 7a)

21
0)u

;)u

U H

4-) C I 01 cn S CO

<u (U o n

u u

O CO C .H

•H 0)

0) (U o<!• O

•H

0) W

X) cn iHo

0)<u z

(U o

U II 0)

U.J ^ _

ZD

LU

•=3: UJ

2:o

o

•a:

CD

«=C

cc: UJ

CO

U-o

I—

I CD

CD

ro CM —

(qi - ui ) g_OI X 1N3W0I/\I

22
Using the measured temperatures (Fig. 9) and an elastoplastic stress-strain curve

with the reported [11] yield stress of = 46 ksi (317 MN/ra^) the extrapolated duration

predicted for the beam is about 375 minutes (curve I) which agrees quite closely with the

6 hour duration projected in Ref . 11. When the uncorrected calculated steel temperature

history of Fig. 8 is used instead, but all other parameters remain fixed, the predicted

beam endurance (curve II) becomes about 270 minutes. An error of roughly 40 percent in

estimating temperature thus causes an error of 30 percent in the predicted test duration

for this beam. Clearly, a failure to determine the temperature history in the reinforcement

accurately may limit the usefulness of the analysis in interpreting experimental data.

A notable improvement in predicting beam behavior is obtained when an empirical

scaling factor of 0.75 is applied to the calculated steel temperature, as shown by curve

III in Fig. 10. In spite of some local irregularities, the general agreement between

curves I and III is quite close, indicating that judicious use of the scaling factor can

yield reasonable predictions when the actual temperature data is unavailable or would be

difficult to obtain. Although the factor is 0.75 for this particular beam, additional

studies would be required before this result can be generalized to other beam geometries

and reinforcement arrangements. It might be emphasized, however, that since the error

induced by using the uncorrected (scaling factor of unity) calculated steel temperature

is in the conservative direction, the resulting predictions would still be useful for

purposes of design and for parametric sensitivity studies. In the absence of any experimental

data from which the scaling factor could be deduced, a value of unity should be assigned.

The steel stress-strain curve idealization also has an important effect in the predicted

reserve capacity above working load, ~^wl ' '^^^ effect of the elastoplastic and strain

hardening stress-strain models on predicted strength is compared in Fig. 11 by curves I and

II, where the steel yield stress has been chosen at its nominal value of 40 ksi (276

2 MN/m ) and the uncorrected calculated temperatures in Fig. 8 have been employed. Observe

from curves I and II that while the reserve capacities of the beam prior to failure may

differ considerably, the durations range from 240 to 295 minutes. Considering the uncertainties

involved, this range should not be too surprising. It might also be noted that the elastoplastic

model gives reasonable but conservative estimates, and is much easier to apply in design

and parametric sensitivity studies, since the family of stress-strain-temperature curves

can be completely specified by two rather than four temperature-dependent material constants.

23
CO

(Uu3 ^

tfl

B

U

0) 2

0) On H 00

.H

O

(U

(U II 4-1 W

•a iH

4J ... o e

0)uoO 1-4 G r-i tD • ' O

OO

to o

CMd

LU>3OQOO

COOO

UJm< o

10

CO

'IUJ UJ > > O

cr3O o ^

CM ~

us o o H I- cn cn < <

OlO

OLO

IK cn CO < <

-i _J

UJ LJ

OO - W H

<!

O

ro CM

(qi - U!) g_OI

X

24
The slight irregularity in the ultimate moment capacity computed with the strain

hardening stress-strain curve occurring at 150-160 minutes is caused by slight error in

the definition of experimental constants K(T) and n(T) in the vicinity of its slope

transition at 800°F (427°C) . Although this can easily be removed by recalculating the

constant and/or using more points to define n and K vs . T, it provides another illustration

of the sensitivity of the ultimate moment calculations to stress-strain curve modeling.

The coincidence of curves I and III in Fig. 11 at room temperature (t = 0) is fortuitous,

and results from the strain hardening modeled by the reinforcement constitutive relation

2 which was used to obtain curve I. Thus, while the nominal yield stress is 40 ksi (276 MN/m ),

the actual reinforcement stresses at ultimate depend on the reinforcement strains. Here,

the reinforcement ratio was such that these strains were 0.0206 in/ in and 0.025 in/in,

2 with corresponding stresses of 45.5 and 46.1 ksi (314 and 318 MN/m ) in the two layers of

reinforcement (see Fig. 7); hence, the equality of curves I and III at t = 0.

The strength of a lightly-reinforced beam is governed primarily by the yield stress of the

reinforcement. The consequence of using a nominal design value for f^ instead of the actual

value is illustrated by comparing curves II and III in Fig. 11 in which f^ = 40 ksi (276 MN/m^)

,

and f = 46 ksi (317 MN/m^) , respectively. It is well knowrTthat f exhibits some scatter

y y and that nominal design values are chosen accordingly so that the likelihood of actually

encountering a strength less than nominal is quite small. In statistical terms, if the

mean of f is 46 ksi (317 MN/m )

, the nominal value might correspond approximately to the

y

5 percentile value of its probability distribution. This inherent variability would be

expected to limit the degree of test reproducibility observed from a series of nominally

identical beams tested under controlled conditions.

Uncertainty in the yield stress is not the only determinant of observed scatter in

experimental or field data, however. The depth to the centroid of the steel reinforcement,

d, not only influences the moment capacity but also indirectly controls the temperature

elevation in the bars for a beam with fixed geometry, since larger depths would mean less

concrete bar cover. This may be seen in Fig. 12, where the predictions for the PCA [11]

beam (curve III of Fig. 10), which had a minimum concrete cover of 2 1/2 in (6.35 cm), are

compared to those for beams with 5 3/8 in (13.7 cm) and with 1 in (2.54 cm) cover. As

would be expected, the beam with the maximum d (minimum cover) yields the largest margin

of reserve capacity at room temperature. Because of the limited fire protection provided,

25
26 \
however, the bars also heat more rapidly and to higher temperatures with the consequence

that after 2 1/2 hours its reserve strength is reduced to that of the beam with 2 1/2 in

(6.35 cm) cover. Conversely, the predicted response of the beam with 5 3/8 in (13.7 cm)

cover was most favorable in the long run because of its relatively lower steel temperatures.

While the uncertainty in steel yield stress is in large part unavoidable due to the

inherent variability of the material, the uncertainty in bar placement arises from workmanship

and, to a certain extent, can be controlled by good construction practice. The potential

lack of cover that would result from the tendency for d to exceed its design value due to

construction loads might adversely affect the response of the beam to fire in 'the long

term.

Families of curves such as those in Figs. 10, 11, and 12 may be used not only for

planning and interpreting experiments but also to construct design aids to be used in

dimensioning fire-resisting structural members. For example, one such requirement might

be that the beam still carry 25 percent in excess of its service live load after 3 hours

of fire; satisfying this criteria would entail the selection of a certain amount of concrete

cover in conjunction with a given reinforcement ratio and yield strength. However, a nondimensional analysis does not appear possible since the thermal analysis is geometrydependent, and on each of a family of cross sections deemed to be representative of most

design cases it will be necessary to first perform a thermal and then a stress analysis

prior to establishing the design aids.

The predictions of moment capacity are also sensitive to the rate of steel strength

degradation. In Fig. 13a, the scatterband for the temperature-dependent degradation in

yield strength is shown with two piecewise-linear curves that might reasonably be chosen

to model this behavior. For illustrative purposes, the uncorrected calculated steel

temperatures were used. The differences in predicted ultimate moment capacity using these

two models along with the elastoplastic stress-strain curve for the steel is apparent from

Fig. 13b, where it is observed that yield strength degradation to 85 percent at 1000°F

(538°C) instead of 75 percent at 800°F (427°C) results in approximately one extra hour of

beam endurance. Figs. 10 through 13 emphasize the need for reasonably precise knowledge

of the relations for the reinforcement if credible analytical predictions of beam behavior

are to be made.

27
0 500 1000 1500 2000

T- TEMPERATURE ("F)

(13a) Temperature-Dependent Degradation in Steel Yield Strength

Ic

'Z 2

(0

IO

3

Grade 40 Reinforcement

Elastoplastic Steel Stress-Strain Curve

Calculated (Uncorrected) Steel Temperatures

(1 in-lb = 0.113 N-m)

100 200

TIME (Min.)

(13b) Degradation in Moment Capacity of Beam

300

FIG. 13 - EFFECT OF STEEL STRENGTH DEGRADATION ON BEAM ENDURANCE

28
The behavior of the thermal and creep strains in the steel Is described in Fig.

14, using the strain hardening idealization along with the (uncorrected) calculated bar

temperatures. These strains were employed in the analysis used to obtain curve I in

Fig. 11. The selection of a scaling factor of unity serves to accentuate certain effects

of thermal and creep strains in the reinforcement on structural response that will be

discussed. The thermal strains increase quite regularly, in accordance with the temperature

increase in the bars. During the first portion of the test, the creep strains are essentially

zero, but after the bar temperatures exceed approximately 800°F (538°C) the creep strains

exceed 0.02. However, the creep analysis is only valid for small strains and, moreover,

the temperature in bar 1 exceeds 1300°F (705°C) after about 260 minutes of test, implying

that AH/R = 75000 may no longer be appropriate. Therefore, the validity ef the creep

calculations beyond this stage is somewhat uncertain. While these factors will not significantly affect the calculation of ultimate strength since the beam is under-reinforced,

they will cause the deflection of the beam at working load to be overestimated. It might be

noted that the creep behavior shown in Fig. 14, where a rapid strain increase follows a

long period of very slow accumulation, has been observed in other experiments (viz. Fig. 2,

Ref . 12) .

Anomalies in creep strains are clearly reflected in the calculated values of working

load stress in the reinforcement; these in turn, determine the creep increments in the

subsequent time interval. Therefore, any error in estimating creep strain or working

load stress will tend to compound with time. The working load stresses in the steel are

clearly nonconstant with time, as shown in Fig. 15. Inasmuch as bar 1 is hottest, its

strength properties degrade most rapidly, its stress at working load decreases and the

additional load is picked up by bars 2, 3, and 4. Later, at about 220 minutes, bar 2 and

3 also become quite hot and began shedding their load, with the net result that bar 4, which

remains relatively cool, is loaded into the strain-hardening range. A slight instability

in the stress-time curves has been observed to occur in a number of instances when the creep

strain in one of the bars exceeds about 0.025, and shows up here beginning at about 240 minutes.

This is typically accompanied by a sudden drop in the mechanical stress in the corresponding

bar. The exact cause for this behavior must be determined from additional studies.

29
TIME

FIG. 14 - CREEP STRAINS AND THERMAL STRAINS IN REINFORCEMENT
TIME (Min.)

FIG. 15 - STRESSES IN REINFORCEMENT AT WORKING LOAD

31
It should be remarked here that when the corrected calculated steel temperatures (or

measured temperatures) are used, the predicted creep behavior is much less dramatic, the

creep strains at failure being on the order of 0.01 - 0.02. Nevertheless, it is necessary

to have some feeling for the consequences of high steel temperatures and creep in terms

of the analysis, since these factors cannot be precluded in all beam configurations that

might be of interest.

The thermal expansion of the concrete was ignored in some previous [11] strength

calculations, where it was argued that since the temperatures in the concrete compressive

zone were much lower than the tension reinforcement, the concrete thermal strains would be

unimportant. The effect of ignoring ^^^-^ computing the beam capacity, in this case study

is shown in Fig. 16. It is apparent that when the elastoplastic stress-strain idealization

is used,

^^^Yi very little influence on the calculated moment capacity, while the effect

is somewhat more pronounced with the strain hardening model. However, the predicted beam

endurance is the same regardless of whether e , is included or not. Therefore, the * cth '

decision on whether to include this parameter should depend on the intent and desired accuracy

of the analysis. In view of the sensitivity of the solution to other sources of uncertainity

,

the benefits derived from including concrete thermal expansion are judged to be marginal,

at least in simply supported beams, provided that reserve capacity and endurance, rather than

beam distortion are the primary factors of interest.

Finally, an example of the variability in creep strain predictions resulting from

uncertainty in the value of 3 = AH/R is shown in Fig. 17 far bar 1, which has the highest

temperature. The concrete thermal expansion was suppressed in these calculations, and

the uncorrected steel temperatures were used for illustrative purposes. It is seen that

decreasing AH/R from 75000 to 70000 causes the creep strain increment between 230 and 240

minutes to increase from 0.0097 to 0.0487. The very large imposed strain which may result

forces the mechanical stress in the corresponding bar to go into compression in order to

maintain strain compatibility. Not only does this affect the load-deformation-time relationship

for the beam, it also implies that a reversal of inelastic deformation should occur for

the compressively stressed bar during the subsequent time increment. Unfortunately, the

computation of creep strain reversals is still clouded with uncertainty [17], and numerical

results obtained under such circumstances should therefore be viewed with some suspicion.

32
Strain-Hardening Steel Stress-Strain Curve

O THERMAL STRAINS INCLUDED

3 THERMAL STRAINS SUPPRESSED

Elastoplastic Steel Stress-Strain Curve

A THERMAL STRAINS INCLUDED

A THERMAL STRAINS SUPPRESSED

(1 in- lb = 0.113 N-m)

\ \ \ L

100 200 300

TIME (MIn.)

FIG. 16 - EFFECT OF CONCRETE THERNAL EXPANSION ON MOMENT CAPACITY

TIME (Min.)

FIG. 17 - SENSITIVITY OF CREP STRAIN IN BAR 1 TO AFI/R

33
4.2 T-Beam with Grade 60 Reinforcement

The second case study considers the section shown in Fig. 7a which contains 8 No. 9

2 Grade 60 bars with a nominal yield strength of 60 ksi (413 MN/ra ) . The bar locations are

the same as in the previous case study. The corresponding beam tested by PCA [11] sustained

a test moment of 5250 in-kips (0.594 MN-m) for 373 minutes, at which time the beam failed.

' 2 At the time of test, the compressive strength of the concrete was f^ = 5910 psi (41 MN/m ),

2 while the actual yield strength of the reinforcement was f^ = 66 ksi (454 MN/m )

.

The time-dependent degradation in ultimate moment capacity predicted from the thermomechanical

analysis is shown in Fig. 18. An elastoplastic stress-strain curve for the reinforcement

was used, along with the following experimental creep constants [13] in Eqs. 8 and 9:

AH/R = 65000

e = 1.25 X 10 ^ f to s

Z = 267.7 f ^'^^

, f < 15000

s s —

3.69 X lO"-'-^ exp (0.00022f ) , f > 15000

s s

The use of the uncorrected calculated reinforcement temperatures has approximately the

same effect on the calculated capacity and duration that was observed with the Grade 40

reinforced beam (cf. Figs. 10 and 18). A divergence between the two solutions occurs at

about 150 minutes, and the predicted endurance is about 100 minutes less for the beam in

which the uncorrected calculated steel temperatures were employed, being 245 minutes

instead of the 355 minutes obtained when measured temperatures were used. This again

demonstrates the ability of the analysis to accurately predict beam response, provided

that an accurate reinforcement temperature history is available, and the need for such

data if credible results are to be obtained.

4.3 Prestressed T-Beam

A prestressed beam was chosen for the final case study. The section geometry and

pre-stressing arrangement are shown in Fig. 7b. The corresponding beam tested by PCA [11]

34
- 4

I 3 O

UJS

o

z

Elastoplastic Steel Stress-Strain Curve

(1 in- lb = 0.113 N-m)

EXPERIMENTAL TIME

TO FAILURE

A MEASURED STEEL TEMPERATURES

O CALCULATED STEEL TEMPERATURES (UNCORRECTED)

100 200 300

TIME (Min.)

400

FIG. 18 - PREDICTED BEAM CAPACITY WITH GRADE 60 REINFORCEMENT

35
contained 16 tendons of cold-drawn 1/2 in (1.27 cm) diameter 7-wire strand, with a nominal

2 2 0.2% yield stress of 225 ksi (1550 MN/m ), which were pretensioned to 175 ksi (1206 MN/m )

prior to placing the concrete. The corresponding prestrain (Eq. 6c) is e = 0.0064. The

ps

' 2 concrete compressive strength at test was f = 5940 psi (41 MN/m ) while the strand yield

2 stress was 236 ksi (1625 MN/m ) . The observed time to failure was 237 minutes with a

service load moment of 5030 in-kips (0.569 MN-m)

.

The strain hardening model was chosen for the stress-strain relationship for the

strand because of its observed rounded nature. The values of K and n at room temperature

2 were K = 39743000 psi (274027 MN/m ) and n = 1.113. The yield stress degrades at a somewhat

more rapid rate at elevated temperatures for the ultra high strength steels used in strand

[13] than for ordinary steels. Rather than to use the degradation model shown i'n Fig.

6a, therefore, the yield stress ratio was set at 0.75 at 600°F (316''C) and 0.25 at 1000°F

(538°C) . The following experimental creep constants were used [13]

AH/R = 55000

_ . , ^-6 ^ 0.67

£ = 3.3 X 10 f to s

64 f-^ , f < 25000

s s ^ = 13 8.21 X 10 exp [0.0001 f ], f ^ 25000

The predicted time-dependent degradation in ultimate moment capacity for this prestressed beam is shown in Fig. 19. The temperature history in the .steel measured during

the corresponding test [11] was used in performing the calculations. The agreement between

predicted and observed endurance again appears to be reasonable with the difference being

easily attributed to the uncertainties in material response and modeling discussed in

detail in connection with the first case study. The rather precipitous drop in capacity

that occurs at 200 minutes is caused by an acceleration in the accumulated creep strains

in tendons 1, 4, and 7 (see Fig. 7b), which have the least amount of cover and whose

temperatures approach 900°F (483°C) after 3 hours of test. Similar behavior has been

noted earlier, cf. Fig. 14 and curve I in Fig. 11. In the present case study, the predicted

creep strains in the hotter bars exceeded 0.03 at 190 minutes; the limit of applicability

of the small deformation theory, therefore, is clearly being approached.

36
\

TIME

TIME (MIn.)

FIG. 19 - PREDICTED MOMENT CAPACITY OF PRESTRESSED BEAH
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In this study, methods for analytically predicting the behavior of simply supported

reinforced concrete beams subjected to fire have been discussed. The stress analysis of a

beam cross section was considered, incorporating the temperature-dependent strength

degradation of the steel and concrete, as well as the thermal and creep strains. The main

objectives of the analysis were to determine (1) the reserve strength of the beam above

working load as a function of elapsed time, and (2) the time it could sustain that load

under fire. These predictions gave reasonable agreement with experimental data [11],

provided that the material properties and temperature history in the reinforcement were

accurately defined.

It should be apparent that the ability of any analytical model to predict structural

behavior is dependent not only on the model itself but also on the accuracy with which its

parameters can be defined. The sensitivity analysis performed herein revealed that the

primary factors affecting the predicted behavior are the uncertainties in the various

temperature-dependent material parameters and in the calculation of bar temperatures.

Therefore, if accuracy in analytically reproducing the results of a fire test is of particular

interest, it is essential that the structural parameters in the analysis be the same as

those in the experiment. Such reproducibility may not always be possible because of the

inability to estimate some quantities accurately and the inherent randomness in others.

In many cases, particularly in developing design standards, it would be prudent from

a safety viewpoint to select conservative values for the parameters (thus, for example,

although the average yield strengths of intermediate grade reinforcement may be 46 ksi

2 2 (317 MN/m ) a value of 40 ksi (276 MN/Mm ) is used in design) , Naturally, such assumptions

lead to a conservative estimate of the fire endurance for the beam. The question of how

conservative to choose such design parameters may best be answered using a statistical

methodology in which the various factors contributing to possible beam unreliability can

be analyzed systematically.

38
Although the findings in this study are based on limited data and thus must be

considered as preliminary in nature, the following specific conclusions and recommendations

can be presented:

1. The single most Important factor affecting the predicted beam behavior is the

estimated (or calculated) temperature history in the steel reinforcement or

prestressing. The computation of these temperatures directly from those in the

surrounding concrete yields a very conservative result in terms of predicted

beam endurance.

2. The temperature-dependent material properties of the reinforcement are

significant in establishing the reserve capacity of the beam as a function

of time and in predicting beam endurance. Concrete properties do not appear to

be especially important, however, provided that the section does not carry axial

load. In fact, the exclusion of concrete thermal expansion seemed to have

little effect insofar as fire endurance calculations were concerned.

3. The inherent (random) variability of the reinforcement strength and

uncertainty in placing the reinforcement arising from careless workmanship would

tend to limit the reproducibility of beam fire tests and the predictability of

member behavior in service.

4. The creep model is the weak link in the analysis. This is not because of its

concept, which is as easily justified and defended as any available alternative,

but because of the uncertainty in the definition of the model parameters and the

sensitivity of the creep predictions to them. One must bear in mind the limitations

of the creep model and the conditions under which its parameters were derived.

39
5. The elastoplastic curve appears to be appropriate and sufficient for modeling

the stress-strain relation for reinforcing steel. The reinforcement strength

properties at all temperatures can thus be completely specified with two temperaturedependent material constants. There appears to be little advantage in using the

strain hardening model with its two additional required constants, unless strain

hardening commences immediately upon yielding.

6. It appears feasible to use this analysis for developing criteria for the design

of fire-resistant beams, provided that reasonable temperature and material

property estimates can be obtained. Families of curves derived from analyses

similar to those illustrated in Figures 10, 11, 12, 18 and 19, could be employed

to determine the effect of such factors as bar cover and reinforcement ratio on

fire resistance. Since the present analysis tacitly assumes that the parameters

are single-valued, a thorough analysis of modeling and statistical uncertainties

should be performed before specific design aids can be advanced.

40
REFERENCES

Abraras, M.S., "Compression Strength of Concrete at Temperatures to 1600°F," in Temperature and Concrete , American Concrete Institute SP 25, 1971.

2. ACI Committee 318-71, Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete, American

Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan, 1971.

3. ASTM D esignation: E 119—67, Standards Methods of Fire Tests of Building Construction

and Materials, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

1967.

4. Becker, J., et . al., "Reinforced Concrete Frames in Fire Environments," preprint

2250, ASCE National Structural Engineering Meeting, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1974.

5. Bizri, H., "Structural Capacity of Reinforced Concrete Columns Subjected to Fire

Induced Thermal Gradients," Report No. UC-SESM-73-1, University of California,

Berkeley, 1973.

6. Boresi, A. P., Sidebottom, O.M., "Creep of Metals Under Multiaxial States of

Stress," Nuclear Engineering and Design , Vol. 18, September 1972.

7. Coffin, L.F., Goldhoff, R.M., "Prediction Testing in Elevated Temperature

Fatigue and Creep: Status and Problesm," in Testing for Prediction of Material

Performance in Structures and Components , ASTM STP 515, 1972.

8. Desayi, P., Krishnan, S., "Equation for the Stress-Strain Curve of Concrete,"

ACI Journal , Proc. Vol. 61, No. 3, March 1964.

9. Dorn, J.E., "Some Fundamental Experiments on High Temperatures Creep," Journal

Mech. and Physics of Solids , Vol. 3, 1954.

10. Gatewood, B., Thermal Stresses , McGraw-Hill , NY, 1957.

11. Gustaferro, A.H., et . al., "Fire Resistance of Prestressed Concrete Beams, Study C: Structural Behavior During Fire Tests" RD009.01B, Portland Cement Association, 1971.

12. Harmathy , T.Z., "A Comprehensive Creep Model," Journal of Basic Engineering ,ASME

,

September 1967.

13. Harmathy, T.Z., Stanzak, W. , "Elevated-Temperature Tensile and Creep Properties of

Some Structural and Prestressing Steels" in Fire Test Performance , ASTM STP 464, 1970.

14. Holt, J.M., "Short-Time Elevated Temperature Properties of USS Cor-Ten, USS Man-Ten,

USS Tri-Ten and ASTM A36 Steel," USS. Steel Applied Research Laboratory Project

57.19-AOl (1) Report, 1963.

15. Issen, L.A., "Analytic Model for Calculating Fire Resistance of Simply Supported

Prestressed and Reinforced Concrete Beams," NBS Special Publication 411, Fire Safety

Research, Nov. 1974.

16. Nickell, R.E., "Thermal Stress and Creep," in Structural Mechanics Computer Programs , ed. by Pilkey, ed. al.. University Press of Virginia, 1974.

17. Rabotnov, Yu. N., Creep Problems in Structural Members , John Wiley, NY, 1969.

18. Thor, J., "Deformations and Critical Loads of Steel Beams Under Fire Exposure Conditions,"

National Swedish Building Research Document D 16:1973.

19. Traub, J.F., Iterative Methods for the Solution of Equations , Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1964.

20. Uddin, T., Culver, C, "Effects of Elevated Temperature on Structural Members," Journal

of Structural Division , ASCE, Vol. 101, No. ST7 , July, 1975.

41
APPENDIX A

INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROGRAM USAGE AND INPUT DATA PREPARATION

This appendix contains the specific instructions for preparation of the card input needed

to use this program. The required data is broken into (4) major blocks:

I. Beam description and analysis control parameters;

II. Cross-section geometry;

III. Material property parameters;

IV. Time and/or temperature increments and output requests.

These input blocks are read by the program in the sequence given. It should be noted at the

outset that the program was written in FORTRAN V and executed on a UNIVAC 1108 (Exec 8) system.

A.l Beam Description and Analysis Control Parameters

The input block containing beam description and analysis control parameters requires

input for the following four (4) subgroups.

A) Beam description: (2 cards required)

Each card may contain up to 78 alphanumeric characters used to describe the

beam being analyzed in Cols. 1-78 on each card.

B) Control Words: (1 card required)

Two alphanumeric words containing six characters each are located in columns

1-13 with a space between each word in column 7.

1) Control Word 1: (Cols. 1-6)

REINFO - means that the beam contains reinforcing steel;

PRESTR - means that the beam contains prestressed steel;

REPRST - means that the beam contains both reinforcing and prestressed steel.

2) Control Word 2: (Cols. 8-13)

RAMOSG - means that the steel stresses are to be computed using the RambergOsgood idealization

FLATT - means that the steel stresses are to be computed using the elastoplastic idealization

C) Working Load Moment: (1 card required)

The working load moment in (in-lb) is given as a floating point number in columns

1 to 10.
D) Convergence Criteria: (1 card required)

Two numeric words are required and are located in columns 1-20.

1) Criteria Word 1: (Cols. 1-10)

An integer which specifies the maximum number of iterations allowed for

convergence. The minimum value is recommended as '20 since the initial

iteration cycle is generally long.

2) Criteria Word 2: (Cols. 11-20)

A floating point number which specifies the tolerance within which the

resultant axial thrust must fall for convergence. One (1.0) pound has been

used with usually less than four cycles required for convergence within

this tolerence.

A. 2 Cross-Section Geometry

The input block for cross-section geometry contains two subgroups. The cross-section

discretization used by this program is the one generated and used by the finite element

thermal analysis in determining the temperature distribution on the cross-section. This

discretization is made available to the program via an output tape from the thermal analysis

which also contains the temperature distribution on the cross-section at given time increments.

In order to properly read the grid from the output tape two (2) parameters are required.

A) Cross-Section Geometry: (1 card required)

This card contains four (4) integers located in columns 1-40 which specify the

cross-section geometry parameters.

1) Control Word 1: (Cols. 1-10)

This integer specifies the number of reinforcing and/or prestressed steel

elements in the cross-section.

2) Control Word 2: (Cols. 11-20)

An integer which is the minimum row number for the grid input to the thermal

analysis

.

3) Control Word 3: (Cols. 21-30)

An integer which is the maximum row number for the grid input to the thermal

analysis

.

43
4) Control Word 4: (Cols. 31-40)

An integer which specifies the reference line Xn computation of the R imposed (thermal) strain. As an example, in the case of a symmetric crosssection this reference line could be the axis of symmetry and the reference

integer would then be the column number used by the thermal analysis to specify

the grid line which lies along the axis of symmetry.

B) Steel Geometry: (1 card required for each reinforcing bar and/or prestressed

strand)

Each bar or strand card contains three (3) floating point numbers in columns 1 to

30 with an integer in columns 31-40. The first number in Cols. 1-10 is the

x-coordinate in inches for the bar with reference to the coordinate axis used to

input the grid to the thermal analysis. The second number located in columns 11

to 20 specifies the y-coordinate in inches and the third floating point number in

Cols. 21-30 gives the area of the bar in square inches. The integer located in

Cols. 31-40 specifies whether the steel is a reinforcing bar or a prestressing

strand. A zero (0) is input for a reinforcing bar and a one (1) for prestressed

steel.

A. 3 Material Property Parameters

The input block for the material property parameters is broken into two (2) subgroups

with one for the concrete material properties and the other for the properties of the

reinforcing and/or prestressed steel. Each subgroup in turn has two (2) parts: (1)

Input for the material properties at the base (room) temperature and (2) Input for the

degradation or change in material properties as a function of temperature. A third data

group for the creep properties of the steel and prestressing strains is also required.

The degradation or change in all material properties as a function of temperature for

both steel and concrete is modeled by a piece-wise linear curve in the program. Input

data required by the program for handling the material properties in this manner are the

total number of end points for linear segments plus the ordinate and abcissa values for each

end point. Fig. 4a exhibits a typical piece-wise linear curve which in this case shows the

degradation of concrete strength with temperature. This curve is comprised of three(3)

segments and requires information at four (4) end points for its complete description.

44
In the event that a material property is required at a temperature which is greater

than the maximum temperature value input, an error message is written and the value at the

maximum temperature is used.

In addition, seven constants are required to compute the stress-dependent primary

creep parameter, e^^, and the secondary creep rate, Z, which appear in Eq. 8. Specifically,

^to = ^1 (fs>

Z = C3 expCc^y, > ,

The expression for Z depends on whether the steel stress exceeds a transition stress C^.

Finally, the computation of temperature-compensated time Eq . 9 requires definition of

C„ = AH/R

o

A) Concrete Material Properties:

1) Base Temperature Properties: (1 card required)

This card contains three (3) floating point numbers in Cols. 1-10, 11-20 and

21-30 which are, respectively, the maximum compressive strength for the

concrete at the base temperature, its modulus of elasticity, and the constant

0.85, which is defined in ACI 318-71, Sect. 10.2.7 [2].

2) Degradation or change in material properties with temperature. The following

required sequence of input is used for concrete:

a) Compressive Strength

b) Tensile Strength

c) Modulus of Elasticity

d) Thermal Expansion of Concrete

45
Each input consists of one or more cards with the following format:

Card No. 1 (required): Contains an integer in columns 1 to 10 which gives

the number of end points required to specify the piece-wise linear curve.

The x-y coordinates for the first three end points are placed on the card

' beginning in column 21. Floating point numbers are used to specify the x and

y coordinates of the end points in that order. Each coordinate is contained

in a field of ten (10) columns.

Card Nos. 2, 3, etc. (if necessary): These cards contain the x-y coordinates

for the remaining end points. Again, floating point numbers in fields of

ten (10) columns beginning in column 1 are used to specify the x and y

coordinates, respectively. If the y coordinate for the final point on the

curve is in the field given by columns 71-80 on any card, then a blank card

must follow before the next input group.

B) Reinforcing and/or Prestressed Steel Properties

1) Base Temperature Properties: (1 card required)

This card contains two (2) floating point numbers in Cols. 1-10 and 11-20

which are respectively, the yield strength of the steel and the modulus of

elasticity for the steel at the base temperature.

2) Degradation or change of material properties with temperature. The following

required sequence of input is used for steel:

a) Yield strength

b) Strain hardening exponent for strain hardening constitutive model

c) Strength coefficient for strain-hardening constitutive model

d) Modulus of Elasticity

e) Coefficient of Thermal Expansion for Steel

The input format for each material property change is the same as that given in the

concrete segment. The information for the strain-hardening constitutive model is not

required if the elasto-plastic idealization is used to model the steel stress-strain

relationship

46
3) Creep Properties and Prestressing Strains

a) Creep Properties (2 cards required)

:

The eight (8) coefficients are placed, four (4) to a card, in fields on

10 columns each using the Fortran E format. The input order of these

coefficients is the same as that given by the subscripts attached to the

coefficients presented in the introduction to this section.

b) Prestressing Strains

Prestressing strains, when required, are input in the same order as used

for the steel coordinates. They are input as floating point numbers in

fields of 10 columns with eight (8) strains to a card. In the case

where both reinforced and prestressed steel are present in the beam, zero

(0) strain must be input for the reinforcement bars. This information is

not required for a beam containing only reinforcing steel.

A. 4 Time and/or Temperature Increments and Output Requests

The input block for the time and/or temperature increments and output requires data

for three (3) subgroups.

Four types of output are available during each computation at a specified time. As a

minimum, the elapsed time from the beginning computation and the ultimate moment capacity

for the cross-section at that time increment are always printed. The other three types

of output are optional and returned only during the computation at a given time if an

integer one (1) is specified in the appropriate input field. If the optional output is \

not wanted then an integer (0) is input on the card. The following is a description of

the optional output.

Output A) The steel temperatures and steel material properties at that temperature

including the accumulated creep of the steel from time zero.

Output B) The assumed top concrete strain at the reference line, the curvature which

satisfies equilibrium and compatibility for the assumed strain, the moment

capacity for that strain and the number of iterations needed to satisfy the

convergence criterion are given for each strain. In addition, the stress and

strains in the steel are given at working load and ultimate moment

.

47
Output C) This includes all of the information from Output B plus the total stress

and strain in the concrete and steel and the mechanical stress and strain

in the concrete and steel for each assumed top concrete strain. It should

be noted that a request for Output C gives Output B and thus Output B

should not be requested on the input card.

A) Temperature and time parameters: (one card required)

This card contains: (1) a floating point number in columns 1-10 which gives

the base (room) temperature for the initial calculation, (2) a six character

alphanumeric word in columns 15-20 which specifies whether the steel

temperatures are calculated from the temperature of the surrounding concrete

(word must be CALCST) or read from cards (word must be READST) , (3) a floating

point number in columns 21-30 which allows for adjustment of the steel

temperatures when they are determined from the temperature of the surrounding

concrete and (4) an integer in columns 31-40 which specifies the number of

time increments starting with the base temperature for which the moment-curvature

of the beam cross-section is to be determined.

B) Time and Output Requests: (one card required for each time a computation is wanted)

Each card contains a floating point number in columns 1-10 which specifies the

time of the calculation and three (3) integers in columns 11-20, 21-30 and 31-

40, which specify the optional output (A, B, or C, respectively) wanted with

each time calculation.

C) Steel Temperature: (one or more cards is required for each time a computation

is wanted if READST is input)

Each card contains a maximum of eight (8) bar or strand temperatures as floating

point numbers in fields of ten (10) columns beginning with column 1. If there

are less than 8 bars or strands than only one (1) card is needed to input the

steel temperatures at each time increment

.

The following is a sample of the input data that was used to obtain curve I in Fig. 10 of

the main body of the report.

48
BEZRM 84 - 40V REI IMFDRCEtlENT - UMIT-::= <LBr niM- DEGREES -F> BLRMK CARD

RE I MFD FLhTT

. 2335 000.

20 1. 4 1 26 14

•3. 125 3.125 1.270

11.G87 3.125 1.270

j". 125 6.375- 1.27 0

1 1 . G37 6.375 1.270

723 0. 497 0000. .35

4 70. 1.0 300. 1. 0 1600.

2100. 0.2

3 7 0. 1.0 1200. .25 2100.

BLRMK CRRD

3 7 0. 1 . 0 1200. 0.4 21 00.

ELl'irHK CRRD

3 7 0. . 0 00006 300. . 000020 2100.

BLRMK CRRD

4=3000. 29000000.

4 70. 1.0 300. .75 1400.

2100. 0. 0 4 7 0. 1 . 0207 300. 1. 013 1200.

2100. 1 . 0 4 7 0. 3 0603000. 300. 25591000. 1200.

0.0

1. 7E-10 1.75E0 2.6E -02 4 . 7E 0 1. 23E16 3.0E-04 1.5E04 7.5E04

3 7 0. 1.0 900. .85 2100.

BLllMF CRRD

3 70. . 0000 06 1500. .. 000009 21 00.

BLRMK CRRD

92.95 RERDST 1.0

< i 39

0. 10.X X

1 4 t J. 20. 1 1 30. X X 40. 4 4 1 X 50. 4 4 X X iO. 4 4 X - X

25

0. 3

0.3

. 0 0 002 0

.20

1. 00523

0. 0 000012

Additional time and output request data,

as indicated by the above.

150.2 121.6 107.2 92.95

228.8 135.9 171.6 107.2

278.8 257.4 228.8 123.7

286.0 264.6 257.4 150.2

271.7 257.4 257.4 178.8

264.6 257.4 250.2 214.5

Additional bar temperature data corresponding

to each time step, as indicated by the above.

EMD DF

49
APPENDIX B

COMPUTER PROGRAM DOCUMENTATION

This appendix contains the source listing for the computer program used to perform the

analysis of a reinforced concrete beam section subjected to a non-linear temperature distribution described in Section 2 of this report. In addition to the source listings for the

main program and subroutines, flow diagrams are given for the main program, which controls

the main input and sequencing of calculations, and subroutine MOMCUR, which controls the

computation of the moment-curvature relationship for a given temperature distribution. The

program which is written in FORTRAN V is restricted in use since it requires input from a

thermal analysis of the cross-section under investigation. Those source statements in the

main program which require information from the thermal analysis are located at line 44

through line 50 and line 138. These statements would have to be modified in order to accept

information (cross-section discretization and nodal point temperatures) from a thermal

analysis different from the one used in this study [15].

50
MAIN PROGRAM

Controls Input and General Sequence of Calculations

\^ Title &. Options ^

\^Working Load Moment M^ ^ \

Iteration Control Parameters

Geometry of Cross-section

1. Input Control Parameters

2. Steel Coordinates

3. Concrete Element Coordinates

from thermal analysis AMGJ65

Compute Element Location

area, depth to centroid,

etc

.

(SECTN)

Concrete Material Properties

Steel Material Properties,

prestressing included,

if required

Temperature Control Parameters

and Output Requests /

Initialize Calculation

51
Set Output Requests

Initialize Temperature-dependent Material

Properties. Determine Increments of

Thermal Expansion and Creep.

(INITAL)

Moment-Curvature Relationship

Steel Stress at Working Load

Ultimate Moment Capacity of Beam

(MOMCUR)

Number

Calculations^

yes

Terminate

or Start New Problem

Increment Calculation

Time and Nodal

Temperatures

Reset Output Request

52
C MHlh PPOGPRM CDMTPQLS IMPIIT. CHLCULhTIDN SEQEHCE HhD OUTPUT

c PIMEM: lOri title < i6-> . TCOIiE ^3 0. so , TinEP < 1 0 0) . IhOUT ( 1 00>4)

COMMDH GcDh' JRHhbE. IMIN'50> « Ihl^X'.!50> > JM I M. JMRX ^ hEQ <5 0> >

1 • :-; u « 5 o > . yy : s o < s o ^ • y. i < o > . ys <?xo ? epyc ' .20 » 3> • hi.x < £ 0 . 4> » ytep

CDMriah STL • HSSj SDEPT c20^ .STEMP(c:0^ . STEMl '20'> .MSMRT<20> FYCaO) »

1 HK <:aO' . HM (dfyy . HMOrs • ^O) > hLPHhS (aCO . EPST (SC^ , EPSPST (£0> » c S:TPH':£0::' .TSTS'^n. , ShPEM':£0> .STRESS 'scO -EPSUl-c-O;) fFSW<aO> » 3 EPSULT'cOl .FSULTcao

CDMMDM •CDhC- CHEPT <c!9. 49> • ChPER < 29 . 49:^ . CTEMP ' 29 . 49:> ^CTEMl <29»49)»

1 FPC ':29. 49> ? FPT :£9. 49 > « HMnnC •..29? 49> • HLPHPC <29. 49> •> CEPT ;29> 49> , 2 RLDTCT.JSSTRN ' 29.49) . TSTC ( 29. 49''' . CSTPES (29. 49)

CDMMOh' CPP' LPEEP (2 0> . TCMPT •;£0> , Z <20> . EPTD • £0> . EPSCl <20> »

1 E P S L 2 1 2 0 > !> C Z ( y . 2 > CDMnDh-MRTIh - FC. EC.NFC PFCT ( 1 0. 2> .tSFT. PFT <! 0, 2> . HEC»PECT (1 0> 2> >

1 hRLCi. RLPHC a 0. 2> - FYS . ES • hYS . PYS a C 2;' - hRM. RHT (1 0. 2> > 2 NK. RKT a 0, 2;:' » FYSPS . MYSP - PYSPS a 0» 2:> . HRhPS. RMPST a 0.2> » 3 hKPS. RKPST a Of 2> . HES- PES a 0- 2> . MRLS - RLPHS ( 1 0 » 2>

COMMDh- TTEMP-TIME. TIMP.TEf^P OSO, SO.) . TEMPIh. TFCTR

CDnMDM - IhliEX.'MT IhC . I PEF » TDL . h I TER . S I LERL . STCRL . lEPSCi. ISTPSR» ICONV

IiQUBLE PPECISIDH TCMPT

REWIMD 10

C

C INPUT PRObPRM COhTPDL PRPRMETERS

C

RERD •:;5.12'dO:) T I TLE (!> . I = 1 » 26>

10 I.IRITE ' A. 1250) ' TITLE (I ) . 1 = 1 .2t.> C REnli In P RCGF-inr CPTIDf^S ^^S MLPHRriUMEPIC DRTR

RERD 'S ,1251 > BUT YPE , S I HERL

RERD ' S, 1 194> EriWL

!.iR ITE tb. 130 0) BMWL

13 0 0 FDRMRTaX, WDRKINb LORH MOMENT ='>E10.5>' IH-LB':> RERD ';:s, 1221 hITER. TDL

C

C IMPUT EERM GEOMETRY HESCRIPTIDM

C

PERIM.S. 125£> NSSf JMIH, JMRX. IREF> IGEDM

JRRMGE = JMRX - JMIN

RERD '.5. 1 190:) '::XS (.I) > Y3 ':.i:) . SRRER a> j 1 = 1 » NSS>

i.jRITE ':6. 1301>

1 3 0 1 FDRMflT >;. 1 OX .

' STEEL COORD I MRTES / 1 3X ,

'• XS " - 1 3X , YS ' » 1 OX »

' flREfl ' > WRITE'; 6 . 13 02.) '^XSCD fYSvi:) , SRRER (I!) . I = ljhSS>

13 02 FDPMRT ':3E15.4:) C RERD IM THE MDDRL PT.DRTR FROM RMGT65

JRRM^JMRX- JMIM+1

RERD ': 1 0 ) ': I MRX J;' . I M I li Cj:> , MEQ '^ J:) » .J= 1 > JRRh ) > BW

DO 69 0 J=l..JRRti

IRRH=hEQ >' jy

RERD •: 1 0> '•.;XX '• I » J.) » YY ':: I « J:) » TCDDE -:: I » J ) . I CODE > I = 1 > I PRM)

69 0 CnNTIMUE

CRLL SECTM

IF';. IGEDM .EQ. l) CRLL GEDMDT

53
c

C INPUT CONCRETE MRtEPIfH. PPOPERTIES

C

PERD (5. 1 190:^ FC» EC. XF

i.iPITE (6. l:?0:-!> PC. EC

I'POS FDPriRT-:'5X. ' PC = • • E 15. 5» ^X- ' EC =- .El5.5>

FC = XF PC

RERD (5. 1 1"?1> MFC* < cRFCTvIj J> » J=l!.£> , I = 1,NFC>

PERU - 1 191> NFT. V <PFT a . J:> . .1=1 >2> J 1 = 1 >HFT>

PERDcT.. 1191> MEC» <. <PECT < I , J;- ,J=l,ay , 1 = 1, NEC)

PERD(=i> ir?l> MRLC C (RLPHC < I » J.^ » J=l,£:> , I = 1,MRLC)

C INPUT STEEL MRTERIRL PRPRMETERS

C

IF'BMTYPE .EQ. PPESTP'> GO JO 12

C REINf^DPCIMb STEEL PPOPERTIES

PERU C?. 1 r?4> FYS» ES

PERU :;5 .1191:) NY S , < <;PYS < I , J.) » J= 1 , . I = 1 , NYS>

PERU'S. ii9i:> NRN. ''RNTa.j:) .j=i.£> I. i = i,nmm:>

PERD^S. 119i:> NK . . RKTa.J) . J=1.,E:> j I = 1,NK>

RERr (5 , 1 1 wr.> 'XZ C I . 1 > . I = 1 , 3>

l.lRITE':;6. 13 04) FYS. ES

1 3 04 FDPMRT <5X ,

- FYS = • . E 1 5 . 5 • 5X .- ES = '" , E 1 5 . 5>

IF'BMTYPE .EQ. RE INFO' > hD TO 11 C NSMRT TELLS WHICH STEEL ELEMENTS RRE PPESTRESSED

RERri':.5. 1139;) (NSMRTU!) . I = 1,NSS:)

GO TO 13

12 DO lis:? 1^1, NSS

1133 HSMRTCI) = 1 C PRESTPESSING CRELE ONLY

13 RERD 'iS. 1 194:- FYSPS. ES

RERD 1 19i:) NYSP, ( CPYSPS <I , .J> » .J=l . £> » 1 = 1 . NYSP>

RERB ''5 .1191) NRNPS . < • RNPST < I . J) . .J= 1 . a!) • I = 1 j NRNPS>

RERDC5. 11 91) NKPS, aRKPST < I . J) ».J=1j£> , I = 1,NKPS)

RERB •.':< . 1 1 S6> CCZ < l^d> . I = 1 » 3>

i.JR I TE <.6 , 1 305> FYSPS , ES

13 05 FDPMRT <5X. 'FYS <PS> =' , E15. 5, 5X» 'ES CPS) E15.5)

bO TO 14

11 BO 1137 I = 1» NSS

1137 HSMRTa.) = 0 C ES ' T> .' ES CTO ) RNB RLPHR<S> RPE THE SRME FDR

C BOTH PEINFOPCING RNB PPESTPESSING

14 RERB'^5. 1191) NES. -PESa. J) . J=1.3> . I = 1.NES>

RERB •: 5 .1191) NRL S . •: < RLPHS C I . J > , .1= 1 . £.) , I = 1 . NhLS>

C STPRINS IN PPESTPESSING CRPLE

IFCBMTYPE .EQ. 'PEINFO':) GO TO 15

RERB':5. 1211) (.EPSPSTa:) , I = 1.NSS>

BO 16 1=1, NSS

IF 'NSMRT':!) .EQ. 0) GD TD 16

l.lPlTE't.. 1306) I.EPSPSTcn

1306 FDPMRT <5X, 'BRR', Id, £X, 'PPESTRESSED TD STRRIM',E15.

16 CONTINUE

54
c

C INPUT TIME flMD/'OP TEMPERflTUPE PftPftMETEPS RMIi OUTPUT PEOUESTS

C

15 RERD<5»119£> TEMPIM. STCFlLi TFCTP,HCRLC

WRITEC^^f 1307> TEriPIN»MC«LC

1307 FDRMl=tT(lX» START IMI5 TEMP =' » F8. 2» 5X. ' MCALC ='»I5>

IF<STCflL .EQ. ' CRLCST^:^ MPITE <6» 1308> TFCTR

IF(STCflL .EO. ' REFiDST'> MR ITE <:6. 1 309>

130S FDRMRT ax* ' STEEL TEMPERRTUPE IS CRLCULRTEP FROM SURRDUMDIMG'/'

r CDNCRETE TEMPERRTURE WITH RDJUSTMEHT FRCTGP DF'jFS.^)

1309 FDRMRTCIX* 'STEEL TEMPERRTURE IS IMPUT RT ERCH TIME IMCREMENTO

DD £000 I=1»NCRLC

£000 RERDCSj 1170> TIMER . <IMOUT <I > J> » J=l »4>

C

C CRLCULRTIQM SEQUEMCE ( MQMEMT- CURVRTURE-T IME RELRT lOMSHIPS > C

NTIMC = 1 TIME = 0.

0

ISTEMP =0

lEPSC = 0 ISTRSfl = 0 C SET OUTPUT REQUESTS

Ui91 IF^IIMOUTCMTINC* l!) .EQ. 1> ISTEMP = 1 IF<IMDUT (:MTIMC»£> .EQ. 1> lEPSC = 1 IF<IMDUT (:MTINC»3:> .EQ. 1> ISTRSR = 1 CRLL INITRL

IF < ISTEMP .EQ. 1> CRLL TEMPOT

CRLL MOMCUR<:BMWL.«1090>

IF<MT1MC .EQ. NCRLO GO TO 1090

MTI»C = HTIMC + I TIMP = TIME

C TIMER IS TIME RT WHICH CRLCULRTION IS PEPFDRMEIt» CDPRESC PDHIUMG TO SOME* BUT MOT MECESSRRILY RLL> OF THE TIMES

C OUTPUT FROM THE THEPMRL RNRLYZER

1092 RERIKIO:) TIME» TEMP

IF(;RBS<:TIMER<MTIHC>-TIME> .GE. .05> go to 1092

ISTEMP = 0 IEPSC = 0 ISTRSR = 0 GO TO 1091

1090 RERIKSj 1£50> <T I TLE < I > » 1 = 1 » 26>

IF<TITLE .EQ. 'EMD DF'.> GO TO 1150

GO TO 10

C

C EMU OF CRLCULRTIOM SEQUENCE

C

1150 STOP

lc:50 FORMRT <13Rie./13R6>

1£51 FDRMRT <Z<.^^.-'> IX) i. 16. 1X»R6>

1170 FDRMRT (F 10. 0. 41 1 0> 1221 FOPMRT n 10»F1 0. 0> 1252 FDRMRT <5I10:)

1160 FDRMRT a6I5>

1211 FDRMRT (SFl 0. 0> 1190 FDRMRT <3F1 0. 0> 1191 FDRMRT a 1 0 » 1 OX > t.F 10.0/ ''SF 1 0 . 0) > 1194 FDRMRT <2F 10. 0)

11S6 FDRMRT (4E 16. 4>

11 89 FDRMRT <2 01 2)

1192 FDRMRT CFIO. 0.4X»R6.F10. 0> I10>

END

55
SUFPOUTIME SECTN

CDMhDIH bEOM JPHhbE» IMIN<50) » IMFtXCSO . JMIN. JhHX.HEQ (50> »

1 :<:X':; ?Ci.50:> .YY ^ 30.SCi> .Vs c^O) »YS<,20> >BPYC<£:0»:3> >NLS<£0»4> jYDEP

COMMDN 'iTL MSS* SDEPT <20'> iIDMMDM' COhC ' CDEPT •: 49;) . CtiPER <29» 49>

C FIND DEPTH OF EFiCH BRP FPDM TOP

780 YMHX=0.

YMIM=1 0000.

JPRM=JMRX-.JMIN+1

DO 79 0 J=1.JPRN

IPRW=MEQ<J>

DO 79u 1=1 . IPRM

YMRy =RMRX 1 ( YMRX « YY <: I > J> >

I M=HM I M 1 ' YMI N . YY a » j;) > 790 COhTIHUE

VDEP=YMRX-YMIN

I.IP I TE (.6 . 1 26 0:> YMRX . YM I N YDEP

ld60 FDPMRT(.' YMRX = .E10.5'' YMIH = SEIO.5^' YDEP = •.EIO.S)-

DO 8 00 H=1.HSS

SDEPT " MJ =YMRX-YS <N> 800 COHTINUE

C CRLCULRTE THE RPER OF ERCH QURD RCPOSS ERCH HDRIZONTRL STRIP RMD

C FihD DEPTH OF ERCH CDNlPETE ELEMENT

DO 8:?.0 .1=1, JRRNGE

IP = IMRXCJ:;' - IMIM<J>

DO 33 0 I = 1j IR

I U= I + 1 M I h •:; J :- - 1 M I M C J+ 1 > YH= CYY : I . J> +YY C I + 1 - J> +Y Y < I U < J+ 1 > +YY (I U + 1 » .J+ 1 >> /4 . 0 CDEPT . X- =YMRX-YM

CRLL TRPER ( XX '::i j J::- j YY <I j J> > XX (I + l > J> > YY a + 1 » J> • XX CIU+l

£1.> ,YY':IU+1 j .J+l> .Rl)

CRLL TRPER - XX •: I > J> > YY < I . J;- . XX a U+ 1 » J+ 1 ) » YY < I U+ 1 . J+ 1 > , XX

« .1+ 1 :> • YY " I U > J+ 1 J Rc:> CRPER a !> J :' =R1+R£

830 COMTINUE

RPER=0

DO 360 .1=1 . JPRNGE

I RR= I MRX •: .J> -IM IN <.J:) DO x'SO 1=1 - IRR

RPER=RPER-»-CRPER I , J> 850 COhTIHUE

86 0 CDNTIhUE

MRITE •::6.37 0> RPER

37 0 FDPMRT EERM RPER= ' - E10.5>

IFiSTCRL .EQ. 'PERD'> GO TO 380

C LDChTE THE 4 NERPEST MODES TO ERCH PRP

CRLL CQURD

83 0 CDhTINUE

PETUPM

EHD

SUBPOUT I NE TRPER X 1 » Y 1 ^ X£ > Yi , X3 , Y3 . RPER ) C THIS CRLCULRTES THE RPER OF R TPIhhbLE .IF PTS l,c',RMD 3 RPE

C SUPPLIED IH R COUHTEP CLOCKI.ilSE SEC'UEMCE THE RPER MILL BE POSITIVE

R P E R = 0 . 5 •: X 1 Y c' - Y 3 > - X £ ' Y 1 - Y 3 ) + X 3 •: Y 1 - "r 2 > > PETUPH

EHD

56
SUEPOUTINE CQURD

THIS :SUB;POIJTIhE IDEhTIFIES WHERE ERCH BRR IS LDCflTED WPT MDLE DR

iT'ljHDPILHTEPtiL ELEMENT

CDMriDM 'I5EDM. JPRNGEj Ihlh'.!50;> • IMRX <;50> . JMIh« JMhX»NEQ <:50>

1 X>: <3 0 . 5 0 > > YY <:3 0 » 5 0> » XS < £ 0 ) » YS 0> » BRYC «: c: 0 » 3> > NLS <2 0 » 4> . YDEP

COMMDtS'STL.'MSS

DIMENSION X';5"> »Y<5> -XI (;4> »YI <4> Cc

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

C TEST

nls<;n>k> lrbles steel N =BRP NUMBER

K = 1 BRP NUMBER

=£ I DF PEFEPENCE

=5 J DF PEFEPENCE

=4 BRP LOCRTIDM

IF NLSCM* 4:^=1 BRP IS =a BRP IS

=3 BRP IS

IN CONCRETE ELEMENT

NODE

NOUE

RT NDUE I»J

IN LH SI HE OF

IN PH SI BE OF

QURD

QURD

TEST FOP BRP LDCRTION

IiQ ££0 NN=1»NSS

SX=XS <NN> SY=YS CNN!) ERCH QURDPILRTEPRL IN SEQUENCE

DO 13 J=l..JPRNi5E

IP = IMRX(.J> - IMINCJ) no lyn 1=1 »IR

IT=I->-ININ t J> -ININ i'J*+l> X'::i>=xx<:i> j:> X ::£> =XX CI + l » J> X'::3>=XXaT + l, J+l>

x<4>=xxaT..j+i>

X.::5;)=:X(:i>

Y':;i>=YY<:i> J> Y<c:>=YY<:i + i>.J> Y "i;3> =YY CIT+l » J+l)

Y <4> = YY O T » J + 1 !> Y(5>=Y<i;)

DO £0 M=l»4

CRLL TRPER <X CM) » Y <M:>

£0

C

30

2>

BRP IS 1.1 1 THIN THIS

IF<RBS

IF -:RBS

< SX-X <L> > csY-Y '::l:> )

C IDENTIFY

CNOTE THRT

NODE

NODE

WHERE

LRBEL-i

IF 'iRPER. LT. O)

CONTINUE

QURDPILRTEPRL. CHECK

DO 50 L=l'.4

.GE. l.E-OG) GO TD 30

.GE. i.E-Ot.) GO TD 30

GO TO ':40> ^'0. 60, 7 0> CONTINUE

GO TD 90

BRP IS LDCRTED

RPE TRUE LRBELS

: M+ 1 > , Y <:M+ 1 > , SX > SY » RREfl

GO TO 13 0

IF RT R NODE POINT

RND NOT NOPNRLIZED LABELS

4 0 NL S NN . £> = I + I M I N <..0 -

1

NLS rm? 3> =.J+.JMIN-1

GO TO 80

50 NLS':NN.£:)=I + IMIN<:J>

r^LS (NN. 3> = J + JNIN-1

GO TD 8 0 60 ML : - NN . £ > = I T+ 1 M I N <.J-»- 1 > NL : ' NN. 3.' = J + JNIN

GO TO 80

70 nl: •rm.£) = iT-t-iMiN'::.j+i)-i

NL: - Nh. =J+.IMIN

80 NL : ' r<N. D =NN

NL : • rni. 4 ' = 1 GO TD 1£0

57
C IDENTIFY

C ERR IS IIS PH SIDE

1 00

110

ISO

130

140

MHICH SIDE OF OijnV lf\P IS IM

C HLL T h(. Fh ( X <: 1 ;> . Y < 1

"> » IF 'HfclH.GE.u.. GD TO 100

OF rnjhl'P IL.HTEFRL

ml: ' t-it\'A < =?, bO TO H"

3> » Y C3:> » SX» SY» BRER)

150

160

170

180

190

£1 0

£20

£» SY» RRER>

l\L s HLS

hLS

r<xY=tii. GO TD

EPYi:

E'.RYi;

. fiM. 1 ' =HM

(Hh. i>=i

(MM.£>=0

. NX.Y

ERYC CNN. 3) =0

GD TD £20

CRLL TRRER

RRER1=RPER

Kl (l) =X <;3;) YI a>=Yc3>

:ki <:£> =x (:4> YI i:£>=Y<4>

XI C3::'=X<1> YI <3> =Y a)

XI ( 4> =X <3> YI <4> =Y <3'> GD TO 160

CRLL TRRER

RRER1=RRER

XI ' :i> =X : £> YI a>=Y';£>

XI •:£> =X «:3> YI •:£> =Y <3'> XI <3:) =x a>

YI (:3> =Y a>

XI ::4> =x <:£> :4> =Y <£ > 170 II=1»3

CRLL TRRER

(X < 1 > > Y < 1 > > X C5> > Y C?.> J X (4 ) , Y < 4> » RPER)

CX C 1 > J Y a > > X :£> > Y <£> > X <3> > Y <:3'> t RRER>

YIDD

txi ai> .YI (ii> .XI ai + i> »Yi<ii + i> >sx BPYC <m . 1 1 > =RRER.' RPER 1 CONTINUE

GD TO ££0

CONTINUE

CONTINUE

I.IRITE (6.£10:) NN

FOFNRT CO ERROR

CRLL EXIT

CONTINUE

RETURN

END

CRNNDT LOCRTE BRR'>I5.>

58
SUEPOUTIhE IhlTflL

C

CDMMDH- TTEMP'TIME

l.iRITE (€f 1 0£>

lLi£ FDPMRT <1H0>

I.IRITE '.b. 1 03> TIME

1 0 :-: FDPMRT : 1 OX »

' ELRPSED T I ME = ' • F8 . £ »

- Ml MUTES ' > C IMITIHLIZE- COMPUTE MRTEPIRL PRPRMETEPS. TEMPEPRTUPES IN

C CDMCPETE lihli STEEL ELEMEMTS. RhD MDM-EOU 1 L I ERRT I MG STPRINS

C IM SECT I DM, THIS SET OF CDMPUTRTIDMS MEED EE PEPFDPMED

C DMLY DhCE EVEPY TIME IhCPEMEMT.

C

C TEMPEPRTUPE BISTPIBUTIDM DM CROSS SECT I DM

CRLL TEMSET

C MRTEPIRL PROPERTIES FOP THIS TEMPEPRTUPE DISTRIBUTIDM

CRLL MRTPPP

C IF TEMPEPRTUPE IS ELEVRTED- COMPUTE THEPMRL EXPRMSIDM

C OF STEEL RHD CONCRETE. HMD CREEP STRRIMS IM REIMFOPCEMEMT

C THEPMRL STRRIMS

CRLL THSTRM

C CREEP STRRIMS IM THE STEEL

CRLL CREEP

101 COMTIMUE

RETURM

EMD

59
SUFRDUTIME TEMSET

C TEMiET set: UP THE TEMPEPRTUPES IM STEEL hND COIiCPETE ELEMENTS

CnriMOH' bEOM JPHMI5E. IMIM> 'f>Oi . IMR,X<50>

CDMMDM STL hSS. SDEPT <2f\> , STEMP CSO!) » STEMl <20>

COMnOM COhC -CDEPT :29. 49:> . ChPER 49) • CTEMP «: £9 • 4"?) >CTEM1 <29.49>

CDMMDh -TTEMP 'TIME. Tlhip. TEMP 30. 50^ . TEMPIM'. TFCTR

iIDNMOM • IhDEX ' NTIMC . I PEF » TDL » h I TEP . S I DEAL . STCflL

C IF riTIMC = 1. PDOM tEMPEPmTUPE CRLCULhT IDNS

IF ' NT INC .EO. 1> i5D TD 4 0 DD 10 I.= 1. NSS

10 STENl ( I> = stemp a>

IF'STCRL .EQ. PERDST'> GO TD £0

C CRLT CRLCULRTES THE TEMPERRTURE OF ERCH BRR

CRLL CRLT

GO TO 7 0 C IF-.:STCRL = PERD> . STEEL TEMPEPRTURES RPE PERD SEPRPRTELY

£0 PERU ^^, 30) CSTEMP (N> >N=1 >NSS>

30 FDRMRT at.E10.5>

70 riQ 71 J ^ 1. JRRNhE

IPRNGE = IMRX •.:..!> -IMINCJ)

DO 71 I = 1. IPRNbE

CTEMl CI . .I> = CTEMP - I » J> IR = I-t-IMINf J:'-IMIN' J+i:)

71 CTEMP>: I» J> = .£5»': TEMP':;i» .j;>+TEriPa + l'. J>+TEMP<IR> J+l> + lTEMPaR+l..J+l.)>

RETURN

C

C PDQM TEMPERRTUPE RSSIGHMENT

4 0 LD f.O N=1,NSS

STEMP - n:^ =TEMPIN

50 CONTINUE

no ko j=i,jrrnge

NI = IMRV vJ . -IMIN'::j>

DO 60 I=1>NI

CTEMP a. J = TEMP IN

60 CONTINUE

RETURN

END

SUBROUTINE CRLT

C THIS ELEMENT CRLCULRTES THE STEEL TEMPEPRTURES FROM CRLCULRTED

C TEMPEPRTURES

iIDMMnM 6EDM-^JRRNGE» IMIN^SO') » IMRX^^O » JM IN. JMRX . NEQ v50) >

1 XX •• 5i:i«50> > YY (:?0>50.) » XS fSO'' » YS > £0:> . BRYC t:20» 3> . NLS <20»4>

COMMON-STL NSS. SDEPT (£0) . STEMP (£0>

COMMON. TTEMP - TIME. T IMP J TEMP C50»50;) » TEMP IN. TFCTR

DO t.O N=1>NSS

NXY*NLS '-N' 4>

J=NLS vN. 3> -JMIN+1

I=NLS N. £> -IMIN CJ:> +1

IT=I + IMIN r -IMIN U+l)

GO TO ' I 0. £0. 3 0> . NXY

1 0 STEMP ( N> =TEMP < I , .J> GO TO 4 0 £0 STEMP <W =ERYC ^N. 1> TEMP <I » J) -t-BRYC CN. £) TEMP CIT+l j J + l) +BRYC (;N»3

£> TEMP • IT. .J+l> GO TO 4 0 3 0 STEMP '::n:> =BRYC (.N . 1 > TEMP C I . .J> +BRYC (N . £> TEMP U + 1 > J> +BRYC <N » 3> T

£EMPaT+l..J+i:)

4 0 STEMP ^N ) = ''STEMP f;N> -TEMPIN> TFCTR+TEMP I

N

60 CONTINUE

RETURN

END

60
lUBPDUTiriE MftTPRP

C lUPRDUTIME COMPUTES RMDDC> FPC. HLPHhC FOP CDMCPETE

C ftHD RMDDS. YIELD STPEMGTH* STPEMhTH CDEFF IC lEfST » HhPDENGIh

C EXPDNEMT» RMD RLPHRS FOP STEEL BhPS RtiD STPRML.

C

rDriMDh/i?EOM.''JPRHGE. IMiri<5n) , inRX«;!50>

CDMMDM' STL '-fHSSj SDEPT -rSCO ,STEhP'.20:) » STEM1 <2iO ?MSMRT(£0) »FY<£0> »

1 RK >. £ 0> yJ=^f^ ' 2 0> . RMDDS • £ h> • RLPHRS < 2 0)

CDMMOM' C MC/CriEPT (£9. 49> t CRPER <29,49> » CTEMP '.29- 49> • CTEMl (29. 49.) » 1 FPC ': £9« 49> » FPT £9« 49> • RMDDC • ,29- 49> « RLPHRC <29^ 49>

CDMMDfi/ MRT I M •• FC » EC » HFC . PFCT 1 u , £> . hFT . PFT < 1 0 - £> » hEC » PECT ( 1 0» 2> »

1 HRLC > MLPHC CIO. 2.> - FYS ' ES . MYS . RYS U 0 !> £> > fiRH . RMT < 1 0 » £> » £ hK » RKT •: 1 0 !. £) ? FYSPS » HYSP . PYSPS C 1 0 • £> , hRhPS - RhPST a 0 » 2) » 3 NKPS J RKPST <;. 1 0 . £> . NES • PES C 1 0 . £> > NRLS » RLPHS < 1 0 . 2> COMMDtS/ 1 NDEX/MT I MC

IF'.MTIMC .GT. n GO TO 101

C TIME = 0 — ROOM TEMPEPRTUPE ~ SECTION PPOPERTIES COtSSTRMT

FT = 5. SQPT CFO

DO 110 J = It JPRMGE

IPRHGE = IMRX<J> - IMIN<.J> DO 110 I = 1- IRRriGE

RMDDC < I , J!) = EC

FPC- If J) = FC

FPT<I».J> = FT

110 RLPHRC a » .J> = 0. DO 111 I = 1» NSS

IF -MSMRT a> .EQ. l) GO TO 112

C HiMRTCI) = 0 - DRDIMRRY PE-ERP

FY<I> = FYS

RK'::i> = RKT<:i»2>

HH':I> = RMT<1j2>

GO TO 113

C NSMRTU ) = 1 - PPESTPESSIfiG CRELE

112 FYa> = FYSPS

RKCi:- = RKPST a. 2>

Rfi' l> = RhPST <:i>2> 113 RMODSa) = ES

111 RLPHRSa> = RLPHS (1»2>

RETURh

61
C TIME .hE. 1 - ELEVRTED TEMPEPftTUPE - CRLCULRTE MRTERIflL

C PPDPEPTIES FDP EfiCH CDhCPETE ELEMENT RMD ERCH STEEL BRR

101 CDMTINUE

C FROPEPTIES FDP CDHCPETE

DG 1£0 J = 1» JPRHGE

IPRhbE = IMhX<J> - iriIM<.J>

DD 1£0 I = 1> IPRNGE

C-Tn = OI TEMP ^ I • J;' +C TEMi <:i > J> > HMnriC<:i. J> = EC^VRLUE ^MEC^PECTfCTfl)

FPCa. J:' = FC*VHLUE (hPCjPFCT.CTR)

FPT •'. 1 1. J:< = FT*VRLLIE < MPT - PPT , CTR)

HLPHRC :; I , -.0 = VRLUE ChRLC > RLPHC » CTR>

120 CCMTIhUE

C PPDPERTIES FDP STEEL - EDTH PEIMFDPCING RMD PRESTRESSIN6

DD 121 I = 1> NSS

STR = <STEMP<I>+STEM1 <:i>>/'2.

IFChSMRTa^ .EQ. 1> GD TD 1£2

C NSnRTa> = 0 - DPDIMRPY PE-BRR

FYa;> = fys*vmlue 'rMYs, pysjSTr:)

RK a.:' = VRLUE ^NK.RKTjSTR^

m ': I > = VRLUE - HRM . htH , STR>

GO TD 1£:3 c rtzMHTa:- = i - erp i is ppestpessimg crble

Idd FYvI) = FYSPS*VRLUE'::HYSP.PYSPS,«STR>

HK I > = VhLUE Mt- PS , RK PST . STR>

RM-;i> = VHLUE':liRHPS»HhPST.STR>

C EDTH FEIIhFDPCIMG Rhli PPFSTPESS HRVE SRME EXPRESS IDMS

C FDP MOnULUl. CDEFFICIEhT DP THEPMRL EXPRhSIDM

li3 HriDriS-i:> = ES^VRLUE (hES.PES.STR)

hLPHR : ' I > = VRLUE ' MRLS , RLPHS » STR)

1£1 CDNTIMUE

PETUPh

EhD

FUNCTION VRLUE • NP- PRP» T> C FUNCTIDN DETEPrilNES MRTERIRL PROPERTY VRLUE FOR TEMPERRTURE T DIMENSION PRR<lCi!.£>

I = 1 104 IF (PRP a . 1

:• -T> 1 01 > 1 Ci£> 1 03

102 VRLUE = PRP<:i>£:)

RETURN

1 05 VRLUE = "PRP • I - 1 » £> + < PRP < I > 2> -PRP < I - 1 j £> v <T-PRR (I - 1 » 1) )

1 - PRP I J 1 > -PRP < I - 1 > 1 > :> RETURN

101 1=1+1

I pa .LE. NP> GO TD 104

VRLUE = prp<;np.c:>

lilPITE ' ri., 1 05> T. PRP'::NP?1>

105 FDPMRT :5X» ' ERROR - BOUNDS OF CURVE DESCRIBING MRTERIRL

IPRPRMETER EXCEEDED. T = ' > E12. 5. 5X. • TEMP (NP) =' »E1£.5>

RETURN

END

62
SUFFOUTIliE THSTPN

C THIS PDUTIME COMPUTES THE THEPMRL STPRIHS IN CQIHCPETE t> STEEL

CDMMDH ' GEOM - JRRNkE » I M I M 5 U ) . I MRX • 5 0 ) CDtinnh- STL- hSi . SDEPT (£0> .STEMP':£0> . STEMl <S0> .MSMhT<20> >FYi20>»

1 MK d 0> -> 0> » RMODS < £ 0) « RLPHRS < d 0> ? EPST <2 Ct> CDMMDN'CDMC -'CDEPT (£•?. 49> . CRPER ' £9. 4-?^ . CTEMP 49^ .CTEMl (29>49> > 1 FPr • £9. 49:" . FPT <:£9' 49:' « RMDDC '.:£9» 49> » RLPHRC -la?* 49> - CEPT (:29» 49> » 2 RLDTCT

rDMMDh IfiriEX ' HTIMi: » IPEF

C SI MCE RT PODM TEflPEPRTUPE THSTPH IS NOT CRLLED*

C CEPT HMD EPST MUST EE IhlTIRLIZED MHEM MTiriC = 1 IF'::MTINC .GT. 1> GD TD 72

RLDTCT = 0.0

nn 63 J = 1- jprnge

IR = IMRX ^j;) -IMIM<:.J> DD 68 I = 1» IR 63 CEPT a » J) =0.

no 69 M = 1» MSS

69 epstc;h> = 0. RETURN

C

C THERMRL EXPRMSIOM IM CONCRETE

72 DO 70 J = 1» JRRNGE

IRRHGE = I MRX-: J.) - IMIN<:.J> no 70 I = 1, IRRNGE

DCEPT = RLPHRC C I ? J) < CTEMP < I . J> -CTEM 1< I • .J> > 70 CEPTa» .J> = CEPT CI J . J> + DCEPT

C THERMRL EXPRNSI.ON RT TOP OF BERM

II = IREF - IM IN (JRRNGE)

la = IREF - IMIN< JRRNGE- 1> SL = CEPT a 2 . JRRNGE- 1 > -CEPT a 1 » JRRNGE)

SL = SL -' OSDEPT JRRNGE- 1 > -CDEPT C 1 1 » JRRNGE) ) RLDTCT = CEPT'.:il» JRRNGE) -SL*CDEPT (11 > JRRNGE)

C

C THERMRL EXPRNSION IN THE REINFORCEMENT

DO 71 N = 1-i NSS

DSEPT = RLPHRS CN) < STEMP CN) -STEM 1 <N)

)

71 EPSTCN) = EPSTCN) + DSEPT

C

RETURN

END

63
EUPPDUTIME CREEP

^THE CPEEP HMHLYII^ IS BhSED Dh THE DOPh-HHPMRTHY THEORY RMH ON THE

C* TlhE HHP DEM IMG PULE

c CDMMDM :TL'MSS»SDEPT'cO> -STEMP'^O^ . 5TEM1 (£0) >M::MhT<£:0> »FY':20> » 1 HK '-£0 ' .MM <c-0=> »FiMODS (2 0^ » RLPHRS <:20> • EPST ' c'O) » EPSPST (20> »' £ :STPM':;£0 ' .TSTSi^O .SRPER^clO) • STRESS (£0) .EPSUKSCO .FSUIc£0>

COnnOM -CPP •'•CREEP •:£:n> , TCMPT (SCO » Z CSCD , EPTD (2 0) , EPSCl (20> »

1 EP i Cc' < c' 0 ) « CZ 05 • £>

CDMMDM • TTEMP.' T IME > T IMP

L DriMOM I MDEX -' MT I MC

DIMEM'IOM rELH<c:0>

DOUBLE PPECISIOM TCMPT, DELH. TRV, DEP

C I.IDPKIM6 STRESS IM PE I MFDPCEMEMT IS REQUIRED FOP THIS ROUTIME

C l-IHEM MTIMC^= !• PRRRMETEPS MUST BE IMITIRLIZED

IF'T-iTIMC .GT. 1> GO TO 16

DO 17 I = 1. MSS

TCMPT a > = 0.0

CPEEP <;d = 0. 0 EPSC1<I> = 0. K = MSMRTa>+l

1? DELHa> = CZ(3»K)

PETURM

C DETERMIMc HRRMRTHY-DDPM CDMSTRMTS

16 DO 10 I = 1. MSS

RFSM = RES':;FSI.KI>> K = MSMRT<I>+1

EPTOCD = CZ<1.K>*RFSW**CZC2>K>

IFCRFSI..! - CZ';:7?K::0 1£» 12» 13

12 Za> = CZ C3« K::- RFSM**CZ (:4> K> GO TO 10

13 2<I> = C2 <:5» K> EXP CCZ <6» K;> ftFSW>

10 COMTIMUE

C IMITIRLIZE EPSCl WHEN MTIMC .ME. 1 DO 13 M = 1, MSS

Y = Z-'M::- TCMPT 'i MV- EPTa CM)

IFvY .GT. .29> GO TO 19

y. - C ER T ( Y 5 . 0 33> GO TO IS

19 X = -£.^<1.+Y)

X = Y+1 . -£. EXP <>;> 15 Epsc 1 m:> = >>EPTO ^m:) rbs cfsw m> > /fsw <:m> C COMPUTE CREEP IMCPEMEMT FOR THIS TIME IMTERVRL RMD

C TOTRL RCCUMULRTED CREEP STRftIM

DO ££0 N=1»MSS

130 TRV=. ? CSTEMP ^M!) +STEM1 •:M>>+460.

DEP = DELH':M> 'TRV

TCMPT m-> =TCMPT ^M) +DEXP <-DEP) (TIME-TIMP) y&O.

150 Y = Z m> TCMPT (M) •'EPTD CM) IF (Y.GT..£9:> GO TO 16 0

: :=CERT CY^S. 033>

GO TO 170

16 0 X = -£.^(1.+Y>

X = Y+1 . -£. EXP <:x> 170 EPSC£<M> = X^EPTD-::M>^RBS<FSI>KM>>/FSW(M>

DEPSC = EPSC2<M> - EPSCl <:M> IF':DEPSC .LT. 0.;^ DEPSC = 0.0.

22 0 CPEEP (M ) = CREEP <.N> + DEPSC

PETURM

EMD

64
MOMCUR

Determines Moment -Curvature Relation for Fixed Time Temperature Using Concrete Strain, c

Select Concrete Strain e

ITER <- 1

Concrete Strains,

(CEARC,

Stresses, Forces

FCONC)

1 Steel Strains, S (SEARC,

tresses. Forces

FSTEE)

yes

ITER < NlTE^>-^^2 ^ Terminate ^

yes

f) + A(|) ITER ^ ITER + 1

Define Moment M

Output

1

Steel Stresses at Working Load

65
Output Time

Moment Capacity

Steel Stresses, Strains

Return to Main

c

C :iJl:RDUTIhE CRLCULRTES MECHRr^ICRL EQU IL I PPfT I STPFlINS

C m CDNCRETE PhU STEEL RT h GIVEN TEMFEFRTUFE • RMD

C CRLCULRTE? MD("EHT-CUPVRTURE PELRTION FPOM R SET OF

C TRFULRTEr CDMCPETE STPRINS

C

III MEMS I ON Eri'.:'50> CDMMDN. I3EDM .JRRrii3E» IMIHf50> » IMRXt SO^ . JMIM. JhRX . NEQ c'SO) »

1 XX 5 0 • 5 0> • VY ^ 3 0 • 5 CO • XS ^ £ 0 > » YS 0 > • BPY C £ 0 • 3:' • MLS < £ 0 » 4> ? YDEP

COriMOM' STL MSSjSDEFT' iO j STEMP <iO> .STEMl r^Cu .MShRT<:£0> .FY<;20> »

1 RK i i'Ci) . RM •:£0> ? RriDDS Cc:!.'!;) , RLPHRS <2(\:> i. EPST (SO « EPSPST <20> > £ SSTPM 0 ) » TSTS <£0:) j SRPER <20) » STRESS <2C0 » EPSW (£0.) » FSUI <20> » EPSULT (.2 0> , FSULT <£ 0)

CDriMDM.'TTEMP.'TIME

CDMhDM I MDEX - NT I NC . I PEF • TDL » M I TEP • S I PERL • STCRL » I EPSC • I STRSR» ICOMV

DOUBLE PREC I S I DN PH I . PH I ML t PH I L » BELT . GMMR • GML • GMWL

IF (NT IMC .ME. 1> GD TD 1069

PHI ML = 0. 0004 YHEP

10^.9 NSTEP = 1 PHIL = PHIWL

BMP = 0.

0

MM = 0 3000 ICDMV = 0 1074 EPSC = EPS<MTrNC!.MSTEP>MM.EPSI«n.>

PHI = PHIL

ITER = 1

' C RSSUME PHI RMD ITERRTE THROUGH ITER -LE. NITER CYCLES TO

C FIMIi PHI<THPUST=0>

107£ CRLL CERRC<EPSC»PHI>

CRLL FCDNC OSUMC » SUMT > SUMM>

CRLL SERRC<EPSC-.PHO

CRLL FSTEE < SUMC » SUMT » SUNM>

THRUST = SUMC + SUMT

IFCRBSaHRUST:) .LE. TDL> 60 TO 1071

C HDRIZDMTRL FORCES HO NOT BRLRNCE - RDJUST PHI RND TRY RGR IN

IF <: I TEP .bE. NITER) GO TD 107:-! PHI = PHI - BELT vICOMV. MM. ITER. EPSC» PHI. THRUST. PHIL »GNL»

IGNUL.GMMR)

ITER = ITER + 1 GO TD 1 072

C SOLUTION FDR PHI EXCEEDS NITER TRIRLS RLLDMRBLE.

1073 l.iRITE it.. 1 001>

1001 FOPMRT.' IX J SOLUTION FOP PHI DDES NOT CONVERGE")

IF-ICDNV .EQ. 1) CRLL EXIT

MPITE '6. 1101)

1101 FDRNRT 1 OX .

' PH I' . 9X .' P " . 8X .' PH I R ' . SX .' PR ' , 9X »

' GMR ' , ^X ' DPH I

' ) ICDNV = 1 GO TD 1074

66
C DEFINE BEMDING MDMEMT

1071 EtKNSTEP) = SUMM

C FlSSUMEP PHI FOP EPS<MSTEP+1)

PHIL = PHI

I5ML = GMMR

IF<ISTRSft .EQ. 1> CALL STSROT (MSTEP» EPSC? PHI » SUMM. ITER>

IFCIEPSC .EQ. 1> CRLL EPiCOT <MM. NSTEP. EPSC. PHI , SUMM. ITER)

C CHECK IF CRLCULftTED MDMEMT fiPPPaX IMRTES WDPKIMb LORD

C MOMENT BMML

lF<BMtNSTEP> .LT. BMl.lL> GO TO 1077

C CHECK FDR FIRST RSSUMED STPRIN 'NSTEP = 1> IM TIME IMCREMEtIT

IFtNSTEP .NE. 1> GO TO 1090

MM = -1

GO TO 1074

1090 IF'::BMP .GE. BMWL> go to 1075

C COMPUTE WORK IMG STRESSES IM STEEL RT BMWL

CBMI..IL = (.BMI..IL-BMP> CBM ( MSTEP> -BMP>

DO 1076 N = 1j MSS

EPSM-rM ) = EPSI.KM> + CSSTRIS -rN) -EPSW ':N> !) CBMWL

1 076 FSW cm:) = STESTR (EPSW 'M) » FY m> » RK Ch) > RH <ti:> > RMODS CM!) » S I BERL)

PHII.IL = PHI ML + CBMWL 'PHI - PHIWL>

EPSWL = EPSC

GMML = GMMR

IF <; I EPSC .EO. 1 .OR. ISTRSR .EQ. i) CRLL STMLOT

GO TO 1075

1077 DO 1078 M = 1» NSS

1073 EFSUKM.) = SSTRN<M:>

PHI ML = PHI

MM = 1 1075 IFCBMtMSTEP) . GE . BMP .DP. BM <MSTEP) .LE. 0. 0> GO TD 1079

UR I TE '.6 > 1 0 0:3) T I ME » BM ; MSTEP- 1 > 100?. FORMRT (.5X!. • TIME =' . Fl 0. 4. 5X. ' ULTIMRTE MDMEMT CRPRCITY =''.E15.

IFUEPSC .EQ. 1 .DR. ISTRSR .EQ. 1) CRLL STULDT

IF CBM (MSTEP- 1> .GT. BT1I..IL> RETURN

lilRITE C6. 1 0S6>

1056 FORMRT C5X> - BERM CRNMOT CRRRY WORKING LORD*****')

RETURN 2 5x 1079 BMP = BMCMSTEP)

DD 1031 N = 1. NSS

EPSULTCM:> = SSTPNCN)

1031 FSULTCN!) = STRESS CN)

MSTEP = MSTEP + 1 GO TO 30 00

END

67
FUMCTIDti EPS 'NT IhC » HSTEP MM- EPSWL>

THI" FUhCTIOH rETEPMIhES THE INCPEMEMT FOR EPSC

BHIED DM THE PPEVIDUS EPSCML RND MHETHEP THE

CDMPUTED Bh IS . GT . DP .LT. BMWL >:m = -1 OR MM = 1> MCE EPSCML IS LDCftTED EPSC IS IMCEREMENTED UNTIL

THE ULTIMBTE BM IS PEFtCHED

1 0 £0

4 Ci 0

IF (MM .HE. IT) IF MTIhi>

IF '^hSTEP

HQ TO £00

IF 'HITEP

IF 'MM .GT.

EPS = EPSL

EQ.

EQ.

EQ.

+

GO TO £00

1 GO TO 100

1:j EPSL = EPSWL

1> EPSL = -0. 0 004

GO TO 300

0. oooa EPvL = EPS

PETUPN

IF -EPSL .LE.

EPS = EPSL - EPSL = EPS

PETUPM

EPS = EPSL - EPSL = EPS

RETURM

Em

-0. 00 09)

0. 0002

0. 0005

GO TO 400

SUBPDUTIME CEfiRC (EPSCjPHO

C THIS ELEMEhT FINDS THE STRESS IM EFtCH ELEMENT RTTRE LOCRTING THE

C RPPPOPPIRTE TEMPEPRTUPE LEVEL

rnUBLE PRECISION PHI

COMMON GEOM'- JPRNGE> IMINv=.D> . IMRX<!50>

COMMON. CONC - CDEPT <£9. 49> . CRRER < £9 . 49> » CTEMP '::£9. 49> HSTEMl <29»49>»

1 FPC ' £9- 49 ^ . FPT •:£9. 49 > . RMODC ':£9.49> .RLPHRC <£9> 49> » CEPT <29» 49) » £ RLHTCT. CSTPN •;£9- 49':' ? TSTC • £9. 49) • CSTPES <:£9. 49>

C RLL IiISTRNCES EXCEPT YY RPE MERSURED FROM THE TOP OF

C THE BERM

DO ££0 J = 1, JPRNGE

IRRNGE»= IMRX'J) - IMIN(j:)

DO ££0 1=1. IRRNGE

CSTPN a, J> = EPSC + PHI CDEPTCI.J:) - 0:.EPT(;i,J>-RLDTCT)

TSTC a » J ' = CSTPN ' I - J;- + CEPTa»J>

CSTPES ( I » J> = CONSTR VCSTRN •: I . J ) , FPC < I

!> > FPT C I > j;) . RMODC < I » .J> > ££0 CONTINUE

RETURM

END

68
FIJHCTION CDNSTP <'X . FC > FT > EMDrO

C

C FUnCTIDN CDMPUTES CONCRETE ELEMEHT STRESS. GIVEH STRAIN

C

R = FC'-EMDDC

ECULT = 1,75*P

IF :>: .LT. ECIJLT> GD TD 13

IF <X . >3T . 0. 0 ' GD TD 1 0 IF-X' 11.12,12

1 1 CDhoTP = EMODC^X.-' < 1 . + -iX-'R) a)

RETURN

12 CDNSTR * EMDDC^X

RETURN

13 RE = ECULT'- R>**2

d = EMDIiC^ECULT '-

•: 1 . -»-RE> SLR = Erinric*a . -PE> .' •:, 1 . +RE> a

CDNSTR = R + SLR* ( X-ECULT!)

IF'jIDNSTR .LE. O.) RETURN

C STRESS IN ELEMENT IS ZERO IF IT EXCEEDS CRUSHING STRAIN

C DP TENSILE STRENGTH

1 0 CDNSTR = 0.

0

RETURN

END

SUEPDUT I NE FCDNC CSUMC , SUMT , SUMM)

C THIS ELEMENT FINDS THE FDRCE RND NDMENT FDR EfiCH ELEMENT

CDMMDN ' GEDM - JRRNGE. IMIN' ^iV:' . IMRX<50)

CDMMDN CDNC- CDEPT':£9,49> , CRREfl '.29 , 4-9> > CTEMP (£9. 49> »CTEM1 '29, 49) ,

1 FPC •;29, 4-='> , FRT •:29, 49) , RMDDC (29, 49> , RLPHRC •:£9, 49:> , CEPT <:29, 49> » 2 RLDTCT«CSTRN'r29,49> , TSTC •;£9 « 49::- , CSTRES <29, 49)

SUNC =0.

SUNT = 0. SUMM = 0. DD J;1,.JPRNGE

IIPRN = IMRX(.J:)-IMIN(J>

DD 40 1=1 , I IRRM

FDRCE=CSTRES C I , .J> CRRER ( I > J) IF CFDRCE) 10,40,20

10 SUMC=SUNC+FDRCE

GD TD 3 0 SO SUMT=SUMT+FDPCE

30 SUMN=SUhM+FDRCE*CDEPT <I , J> 40 CONTINUE

50 CONTINUE

RETURN

END

69
SUBPOUTINE SEftPC'EPSCfPHI)

C DETEPMIMES STPESS Ih ERCH STEEL ELEMEhT DF BERM SECTIOti

C

IiQUBLE PPECISIOH PHI

CDMUDM- STL' NSS . SDEPT (20> .STEMP'^O .STEMl -E'n) , HSMRT ( 2 0) .FY<20> .

1 MK ': £m ) ,RM'£0> - hMODS •:

£

0> - RLPHRS t^O) .EPST(20> EPSPST <£0:) » 2 SSTFh ':20> • TSTS •.:2fr) » SRPEft f20:) STRESS <20'> CDFiriOM.'CDNC.CriEFT •:c"?'i49.> . CRPER v^"? - 49> • CTEMP (£9. 49> »CTEM1 (29.49> »

1 FPC ' £9. 49> - FPT (29. 49 • • RMDDC ::29^ 49> • RLPHRC ':£9. 49.> - CEPT •;:29. 49> » £ RLDTCT.

CDMMDM ' CPP ' CREEP <'20> CDMMDM • I hDEX ' hT I ML - I PEF ? TOL » tS I TEP ? S I DEAL

C PDDM TEMPEPRTUPE - hO IMPOSED STRRIMS OTHER THRM

C PPESTrESi- IF RhY

C ELEVRTED TEMPEPRTUPE CRLCULRT lOMS REQUIRE THERMRL EXPRhSIDH RMD CREEP

STRRIMS

DO 10£ I = l!. NSS

SSTPh- r- = EPSC + PHI SrEPT<I> - <EPSTa> + CREEP<i:> - RLDTCT)

IF'ihSMRT' I) .EQ. 0) GO TO 101

ssTPMu:' = ssTRNa:) + epspst<i>

101 TSTSa:> = SSTRHa::- + EPST<n +CREEP<n

10£ STRESS CI) =STESTR (SSTRHa:) jFY<I> . rk u > » rm <: i> .rmdds<i> »siderl>

RETURM

END

FUNCTIOM STESTR<X!.YS»RK»RM.ES'.SIDERL">

c

C FUNCTION COMPUTES REINFORCEMENT STRESSES. GIVEN

C NECHRNICRL STRRIN.

C

IFi'SIDERL .EQ. 'FLRTTO 60 TO 16

RX = X EPL = 0.75 YS y ES

IFvRX) 1«, 10» 11

10 RX = -RX

11 EU = (ES ' (RK^RN^W^a. .'(RN-l.)) + EPL

IF (RX .GT. EU> GO TO 13

IF (RX .GT. EFL> GO TO 12

STESTR = RX ES

GO TO 15

13 RX = EU

12 STESTR = ES*RX - RK> (.RX-EPL> RN

15 IF(X .LE. 0.:) STESTR = -STESTR

RETURN

C

C THIS PORTION INSERTED FDR NSITIVITY STUDY OF STRESS-STRRIN

C IDERLIZRTION

C

16 RX = RBS<;X>

EY = YS y ES

IF< RX .GE. EY :> GO TO 17

STESTR = RX ES

GO TO 13

17 STESTR = YS

13 IF C X .LT. 0.0 > STESTR = - STESTR

RETURN

C

END

70
SUBPDUTIME FSTEE • SUMC - i UMT . SUMM^

C THIS ELEMENT CRLCULRTES THE FORCE IM THE STEEL HhD THE MOMEtiT

C CHRP I ED FY THE STEEL

CDMMDh' STL.- MSS» SDEPT (^O) » STEMP (3\y> , STEMl vEO) . hSMRT »2 0> . FY (20> , 1 RK • £ CO « Hfi ; £ 0> > HMDDS Cc 0:> « HLPHRS • £ 0) » EPST <£ 0> » EPSPST <£ 0) » £ SSTPfi •:£ri:> , TSTS «:;£n:) , SRPEH • £ir) , STRESS <£0> c sunn. suMT? Rhn summ hrve beeh imitirlized im pconc

c force = stress ';N> SRPER iN> IF '::F0RCE> 10.40!.£0

10 slimc=sumc+fdrce

GO TO 3 0 20 sumt=sumt+fdpce

30 SLIMn = SUMM+FORCE*SriEPT (M>

40 CDHTIMUE

RETLIRM

EMD

DOUBLE PPECISIDM FUHCTIDN DELT C ICONV » MM» IE • EPSC. PHIPj

IDELTMX. GML» i5MI.lL. i3RI1MR>

C

C PPOGPRM DETERMINES DPTIMPL INCREMENT FOP ZEROING. THRUST

C DM BERM USINb SELF-RCCELLEPRT I NG ITEPRTIDN.

C REFERENCE - J. TPRUE, ITERRTIVE METHODS FDR SDL'N OF EQNS. P. 186

C

C IF FIRST STPRIN. SELECT INITIRL VRLUES

COMMON - INDEX NT INC

DOUBLE PRECISION PHI » RPHI . GRMMR. BETR. BTP. DELTMX , GML ? btlWL

IF.;:iE .J?T. i:.' 60 TO 101

C DEFINE INITIRL VRLUE OF RCCELLEPRTING PRPRMETER BETA.. C UTILIZING FRCT THRT DP-D^.PHI) .GT. 0 IF - MM .EQ. i.O GO TO 104

BETR = -1. 'GML

GO TO 10,2

104 IF (NT INC .EO. i:> GO TO 103

BETR = -1. GMML

GO TO 102

103 BETR = -1.0

GO TO 102

101 BETR = -l.-GRMMR

10£ BTP = BETR P RPHI = PHI + BTP

CRLL CERRC CEPSC » RPH I

CRLL FCDNC cSUMC - SUNT > SUMM>

CRLL SERRC <EFSC. RPHI)

CRLL FSTEE •:. SUMC . SUMT . SUMM)

PR = SUMC + SUMT

GRMMR = (.PR - P> /BTP

DELT = P GRMMR

IF (DRBSCDELT^ .GT. DELTMX;;. DELT = DELTMX DRBS(DELT> DELT

I F C I CDNV . EQ . 1 > l.iP I TE (6 . 1 0 0 > PH I . P , RPH I . PR . GRMMR » DELT

100 FDRMhT(:D1£.5.E1£.4.D1£.5.E1£.4,£D1£.4:)

RETURN

END

71
vlJBPDUTIME OUTPUT

CDMMDIi 'GEDM' JPflMGEf IMIfSC^O) > IMRXC^O » JMIIi. JMRX . NEQ (50) .

1 XXcSru^O' »YY<30.50> jXi-SO) .Y? (20> » BPYC "^dO. :3> iNLS';20»4>

CDMMDH 'STL' NSS. SDEPT(£0> jSTEMP <20) .STEMl <£0) ^hSMRT <20> »FY(20) »

I RK <£0> « RM f RMODS '.:£n> , RLPHRS (2 0> , EPST (£0 > . EPSPST (£0) » £ i:STPM(:£0> .TSTS-:£0> . SRPERvaCO » STRESS (SO) .EPSM< £0) .FSW<£0> » 3 EPSULT (:£0> »F::ULT(;£0>

CDMMDM'CDMC''CriEPT(:£9.49> » CRPER «;£9 « 49) . CTEMP (£?• 49> »CTEM1 <£9'>49> » 1 FPC •:£9.49.-' .FPT<£9.49:) . RMDDC •::£9» 49> « RLPHRC (£9. 49) » CEPT <.£9> 49) » £ RLDTi::T«CSTPN':£9.49> « TSTC (:£9. 49) CSTPES (£9. 49)

COMnnM t RP /-CREEP «;£0:) « TCMPT -;£0) » Z < £0) » EPTQ (£0) . COMMDN ' TTEMP.'- TIME

DDUELE PRECISIOh TCMPT » PHI

C

EMTRY GEDMQT

/ JRRM = JMRX - JMIM + 1 i.lRITE<€.»710)

710 FORMRT <9X» ' J

' .bX* ' IHRX' j6X. ' IMIM-^ j7X» ' MEQ")

no 7;30 J =1. JRRM

M = J + JMIN - 1 73 n I.IR I TE '. ^f 7£ 0> M » I MRX <.J) » I M 1 N U) > MEQ < J)

7£fi FOPMRT<4I10)

WRITE 'X? 74 0)

74 0 FDRMRT : 4X J

' I ' . 4X »

' J ' 1 3X » XX '" j 1 3X » YY " ) nn 750 J= l.JRRN

IRRH = NEQCJ)

DO 750 I =1 « IRRM

J J = J + JMIN - 1 II = I + iriIM<J) - 1 750 WRITE <:6. 760) 1 1 , JJ ? XX < I » J) » YY < I » J)

760 FDRMRT •:£I5»£E15.5)

riD £4 0 h=ljMSS

I.IRITE '::b»£30:> (N!- K» NLS CH? K) > K=l , 4)

£30 FDRMRT (AC' MLS ( j I£j ' »

' » I£> ') =' > 12) > £4 0 CDhTIMUE

I.IRITE -re* £50)

£5 0 FORMRT (' ')

DO £7 0 M=l>fiSS

I.IRITE :b.£6 0) (N? K, BPYC vM. K) , K=l » 3)

£60 FORMRT CI-i •: ' BRYC <

" » I£ . »

' » 1 1

,

' ) = '• » E 1 0. 5) ) £70 CONTItSUE

I.IRITE .::fc.,£50) RETURM

C

EMTRY TEMPDT

C

WRITE <:6» £00)

£00 FDRMRT <:7X. ' ERR' »5X» ' TEMP')

I.IRITE .^6' £01) <H.STEMP<M)» M=liMSS)

£01 FORMRT<I10»F10.4)

WRITE Ct* 300)

3 0 0 FDRMRT <:7X • ' BRR ' » 1 OX -

' FY ' - 7X ,' RMODS ' 1 OX .

' RK '' > 1 OX .

'' RN ' ) WP I TE ( 6 » 3 0 1 ) (M < FY < H ) . RMDDS < M > n RK .::M) . RM (M) . M= I » MSS)

301 FORMRTU 10.4E1£.4)

WRITE Cbf 40 0)

4 00 FDRMRT <7X. ' BRR' »7X. ' EPSTHO

WRITE ':6»401) 'M? EPST<M). M=1»MSS)

4 01 FORMRT a 1 0> El£. 5)

WRITE <6. £80)

£3 0 FDRMRT <7X >

' BRR ' » 1 1 X »

' 2 ' ? 3X >

' EPTD » 9X ,

' TCT '' , 7X >

'' CPP ' ) WRITE (bj £71) CM-Z'M' »EPTD'M) » TCMPT CM) .CREEP'M) »M=1>MSS)

£7 1 FDRMRT < I 1 0 • £E 1 £ . 4 . D 1 £ . 5 > E 1 £ . 4)

RETURM 7,
EMTPY STSRDT <MSTEP»EPSC»PHI » SUMtl* ITER)

C

WRITE -rt.* 1 1S6> TIME.EPSC

FDFMRTc iV lOX. ' TDTftL STRFIIMS FIT TIME' -F^. 1 »

' EPSC'»E12.4>

DD 415 J = , 1 » JPhNGE

IP = IMFlX<:j> - IMIN<;j>

41? l.lPITE»-i..50 0> J. aSTC<I» J) » 1 = 1, IR>

I.JPITE <6. 1187>

lis? FDPMhT<:7X, BRP . 4X, ' TDTftL STEEL STRfllhO

MPITE 1 1S8> -Ji, TSTS <ti> »M=1 »NSS>

1188 FOPMHT':I10,Eie.4:)

i.lPITE <;t.. 1 1'89:> 1189 FDPMRT <' 0' -'1 OX, ' MECHFltilCflL CONCRETE STPRIMSO

DO 414 J = 1,JPRM8E

IP = iMnx<j:> - iriiri(j>

4 1 4 I.IP I TE '..S , 5 0 0> J , OI STRN < I , J> , I = 1 , I R>

I.IRITE 1 Ci84> 1084 FDPMRTaHO/ 1 OX, CDMCRETE STRESSES')

no 41 £ J = 1, JRRMhE

IP = IMRX'J) - IMIHCJ)

4 1 £ MP I TE •::6 , 5 0 0> J , •: CSTRES <! , J> , I = 1 , I R)

5 0 U FDPMRT < 1 5 , <7E 1 0 . 4)

I.lPITE Cb, 1 190>

1190 FDPMRT 0' .1 OX, ' MECHRhlCRL STEEL STRRINS STRESSES')

I.lPITE C^, 1 19i:)

1191 FDPMRT '::7X , ' ERR ' , tX ,

' STPR I M ' , 6X ,

' STRESS ' ) • MPITE '::6, 1083;:' <:h,SSTRH':;M> , STRESS ,N=1,MSS)

I.IRITE <.6f 1 19S:)

1198 FDPMRT <;- 0')

GD TD 3000

C

ENTRY EPSCDT CMM , HSTEP , EPSC , PH I , SUMM , I TER)

C

IF (MM .HE. 0") GO TD 4 000

3000 MPITE Ct., £0 02)

£ 0 0£ FDPMRT C 1 1 X

,

' EPSC ' , 1 £X , • PH I ' , 9X , MOMENT ' , 4X , ' CYCLES '

)

4 0 0 0 MP I TE <:6 , 1 0 0£;:' EPSC , PH I , SUMM , I TER

100£ FDPMRT'::El'5.5,ril5.55E15.5, 1 1 0> RETURN

C

ENTRY STI-JLOT C

MPITE <:6,10l>

101 FDPMRT a OX,' WORKING STRESSES !^ STPRINS IN STEEL')

WPITECt., 10£:)

1 0£ FDPMRT <:7X ,

' BRP ' , 8X ,

' FSWL ' , 7X ,

' EPSWL ' > WRITE Cb, 1 083> <:N,FSW<.N>,EPSW<N), N=1,NSS)

MPITE ::t.,£00£>

RETURN

C

ENTRY STULDT

C

MPITE (6, 1 08£>

1 n;?£ FDPMRT < 7X ,

' BRP ' , AX , ' EPSULT ' , 7X , ' FSULT ' > MP I TE . b , 1 083> .::N , EPSULT N.> , FSULT <:N> » N= 1 , NSS)

1 08 ? FDPMhT •:: I 1 0 , £E 1 £ . 4)

RETURN

FNTi

73
! NBS-n4A (BEV.-7.T3)

U.S. DEPT. OF COMM. BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET

1. PUBLICATION OR REPORT NO. BSS"76

2, Gov't Accession

No.

3, Recipient's Accession No.

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Beams Subjected to Fire

5. Publication Date July 1976

6. Performing Organization Code

7. AUTHOR(S) , , , , ^ „, Bruce Ellmgwood and James R. Shaver

8. Performing Organ. Report No.

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20234

10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.

11. Contract/Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Complete Address (Street, City, State, ZIP)

same as 9

IS. lype of Report & Period Covered Final

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 76-608159

16. ABSTRACT (A 200-woTd or less factual summary of most significant information. If document includes a significant

bibi iography or literature survey, mention it here.) Methods for analytically predicting the behavior of simply supported reinforced

concrete beams subjected to fire are presented. This is generally a two-step process

involving a thermal analysis followed by a stress analysis. This study emphasizes

the latter, wherein the determination of moment-curvature-time relationships for the

beam cross section incorporates the temperature-dependent strength degradation in the

steel and concrete as well as thermal and creep strains. The sensitivity of the

predictions to various phases of analytical modeling is investigated to establish the

parameters most important for the prediction of beam behavior and to indicate where

additional data should be gathered. A comparison of predicted behavior with that

observed in fire tests shows excellent agreement when realistic reinforcement

temperature histories are used.

17. KEY WORDS (six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only the first letter of the first key word unless a proper name; separated by semicolons)

Creep; fire endurance; fire tests; reinforced concrete; sensitivity analysis; steel;

structural mechanics; uncertainty.

18. AVAILABILITY Unlimited

I

' For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

I X' Order From Sup. of Doc, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402, SD Cat. No. C13 . 29/2: 76

I I Order From National Technical Information Service (NTIS)

Springfield, Virginia 22151

19. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS REPORT)

UNCLASSIFIED

21. NO. OF PAGES

83

20. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS PAGE)

UNCLASSIFIED

22. Price

$ I .45

USCOMM-DC 29042-P74
ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEW PUBUCATIONS IN

BUILDING SCIENCE SERIES

Superintendent of Documents,

Government Printing Office,

Washington, D.C., 20402

Dear Sir:

Please add my name to the announcement list of new publications to be

issued in the series : National Bureau of Standards Building Science Series.

Name

Company _

Address

City State Zip Code

(Notification key N-339)
V

0^

,o<S^- X

A®

0^° .e^^ 6^^

-'^ s°
make

color

work

for

1|0U

Color in our Daily Lives, a new consumer booklet

from the National Bureau of Standards, takes the reader

step by step through the

fundamental principles

of color and light, families

of color, influence of colors

upon other colors, and

color harmony. This full- color, 32-page illustrated booklet highlights

practical applications %

of color, including: • Your personal

color plan. • Your color

environment.

• Color plans -t^?^ for the home.

• Using color to dramatize or to hide. • Color and illumination. • Experimenting with color. This new basic guide can

serve as your handbook in helping you make decisions

about how to use color in your

life and make it work for you. Order Color in Our Daily Lives

prepaid for $1.70 from the

Superintendent of Documents,

U.S. Government Printing

Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.

Use SD Catalog No. C1 3.53:6.
Special Issue Sales American Chemical Society 1155 16th St., N.W., Washington, D. C. 20036

Please send 420 page supplement to the Journal

of Physical and Chemical Reference

Data, Volume 2, "Physical and Ther- modynamic Properties of Aliphatic Alcohols," at the priceschecked below.

Members: Hard cover edition: $33.00 Nonmembers: Hard cover edition: $33.00 Members: Soft cover edition: $10.00 Nonmembers: Soft cover edition: $30.00

copies of the Please send

Members: Hard cover edition: $60.00 Nonmembers: Hard cover edition: $60.00 Members: Soft cover edition: $25.00 Nonmembers: Soft cover edition: $55.00 Check or money order must accompany order. $1.00 extra for foreign postage and tiandling. Name

Address

Importont

Additions

TO THE JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL AND

CHEMICAL REFERENCE DATA

Two comprehensive reference volumes, each, like the Journal itself, published by The American

Institute of Physics, The National Bureau of Standards and The American Chemical Society . .

.

your triple assurance of their accuracy, immediacy, and usefulness.

SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 TO VOLUME 2 "Physical and Thermodynamic

Properties of Aliphatic Alcohols"

by R. C. Wilhoit and B. J. Zwolinski, Thermodynamics Research Center, Department of Chemistry, Texas A&M University. The most exhaustive review and critical analysis of selected physical and

thermodynamic properties of aliphatic alcohols that has been published.

Coverage of the Important properties of the liquid, vapor, and ideal gaseous

states as well as pertinent solid state data necessary for equilibrium

calculations ordinarily encountered in chemical and chemical engineering

applications. All available quantitative data on each property for each aliphatic alcohol are fully documented and critically analyzed providing a "data bank"

for the 640 monohydroxy alcohols in the carbon range of Ci to Cso. Internally consistent tables of critical, standard, or selected "best" values are tabulated

for each compound. Index included.

SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 TO VOLUME 3 'Thermal Conductivity of the Elements:

A Comprehensive Review"

by C. Y. Ho, R. W. Powell, and P. E. Lilly, 1974 Thermophysical Properties Research Center, Purdue University. Comprehensive review of the world's thermal conductivity data presents recommended or estimated values for all 105 elements. Reliable thermal

conductivity data for those elements which can be used as standard reference materials to calibrate or check apparatus. Original data, specimen characterization and measurement

information for 5200 sets of raw data. Detailed discussions for each element, review of the

available experimental data and considerations by which the authors arrived at final assess- ments. Complete bibliographic citations for 1658 references. Only original sources have been used. All cited documents are available

at TPRC in standard microfiche.

copies of the 796 page supplement to the Journal

of Physical and Chemical Reference

Data. Volume 3, "ThermalConductivity

of the Elements: A Comprehensive

Review," at the prices checked below.

City. State. Zip.

American Chemical Society
NBS TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS

PERIODICALS JOURNAL OF RESEARCH reports National Bureau

of Standards research and development in physics,

mathematics, and chemistry. It is published in two sections, available separately:

• Physics and Chemistry (Section A)

Papers of interest primarily to scientists working in these fields. This section covers a broad range of physical and chemical research, with major emphasis on

standards of physical measurement, fundamental constants, and properties of matter. Issued six times a

year. Annual subscription: Domestic, $17.00; Foreign,

$21.25.

• Mathematical Sciences (Section B)

Studies and compilations designed mainly for the mathematician and theoretical physicist. Topics in mathematical statistics, theory of experiment design, numerical analysis, theoretical physics and chemistry, logical

design and programming of computers and computer

systems. Short numerical tables. Issued quarterly. Annual subscription: Domestic, $9.00; Foreign, $11.25. DIMENSIONS/NBS (formerly Technical N«w8 Bulletin) —This monthly magazine is published to inform

scientists, engineers, businessmen, industry, teachers,

students, and consumers of the latest advances in science and technology, with primary emphasis on the work at NBS. The magazine highlights and reviews such

issues as energy research, fire protection, building tech- nology, metric conversion, pollution abatement, health and safety, and consumer product performance. In addition, it reports the results of Bureau programs in measurement standards and techniques, properties of matter and materials, engineering standards and services, instrumentation, and automatic data processing.

Annual subscription: Domestic, $9.46; Foreign, $11.85.

NONPERIODICALS Monographs—Major contributions to the technical liter- ature on various subjects related to the Bureau's scientific and technical activities. Handbooks—Recommended codes of engineering and

industrial practice (including safety codes) developed

in cooperation with interested industries, professional

organizations, and regulatory bodies.

Special Publications—Include proceedings of confer- ences sponsored by NBS, NBS annual reports, and other

special publications appropriate to this grouping such

as wall charts, pocket cards, and bibliographies.

Applied Mathematics Series—Mathematical tables, manuals, and studies of special interest to physicists,

engineers, chemists, biologists, mathematicians, computer programmers, and others engaged in scientific and technical work.

National Standard Reference Data Series—Provides

quantitative data on the physical and chemical properties of materials, compiled from the world's literature and critically evaluated. Developed under a world-wide

program coordinated by NBS. Program under authority

of National Standard Data Act (Public Law 90-396). NOTE: At present the principal publication outlet for these data is the Journal of Physical and Chemical

Reference Data (JPCRD) published quarterly for NBS

by the American Chemical Society (ACS) and the American Institute of Physics (AIP). Subscriptions, reprints,

and supplements available from ACS, 1155 Sixteenth

St. N. W., Wash. D. C. 20056.

Building Science Series—Disseminates technical infor- mation developed at the Bureau on building materials,

components, systems, and whole structures. The series presents research results, test methods, and performance criteria related to the structural and environmental functions and the durability and safety characteristics of building elements and systems.

Technical Notes—Studies or reports which are complete

in themselves but restrictive in their treatment of a

subject. Analogous to monographs but not so comprehensive in scope or definitive in treatment of the subject area. Often serve as a vehicle for final reports of work performed at NBS under the sponsorship of other' government agencies.

Voluntary Product Standards—Developed under pro- cedures published by the Department of Commerce in Part 10, Title 15, of the Code of Federal Regulations.

The purpose of the standards is to establish nationally

recognized requirements for products, and to provide

all concerned interests with a basis for common understanding of the characteristics of the products. NBS

administers this program as a supplement to the activities of the private sector standardizing organizations. Federal Information Processing Standards Publications (FIPS PUBS)—Publications in this series collectively constitute the Federal Information Processing Standards Register. Register serves as the official source of information in the Federal Government regarding stand- ards issued by NBS pursuant to the Federal Property

and Administrative Services Act of 1949 as amended.

Public Law 89-306 (79 Stat. 1127), and as implemented

by Executive Order 11717 (38 FR 12315, dated May 11, 1973) and Part 6 of Title 15 CFR (Code of Federal

Regulations).

Consumer Information Series—Practical information, based on NBS research and experience, covering areas

of interest to the consumer. Easily understandable language and illustrations provide useful background

knowledge for shopping in today's technological

marketplace.

NBS Interagency Reports (NBSIR)—A special series of interim or final reports on work performed by NBS for

outside sponsors (both government and non-government). In general, initial distribution is handled by the sponsor; public distribution is by the National Technical Information Service (Springfield, Va. 22161) in paper

copy or microfiche form.

Order NBS publications (except NBSIR's and Biblio- graphic Subscription Services) from: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington,

D.C. 20402. BIBLIOGRAPHIC SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES

The following current-awareness and literature-survey

bibliographies are issued periodically by the Bureau:

Cryogenic Data Center Current Awareness Service A literature survey issued biweekly. Annual subscription: Domestic, $20.00; foreign, $25.00.

Liquefied Natural Gas. A literature survey issued quarterly. Annual subscription: $20.00. Superconducting Devices and Materials. A literature

survey issued quarterly. Annual subscription : $20.00.

Send subscription orders and remittances for the preceding bibliographic services to National Bureau of Standards, (Cryogenic Data Center (275.02)

Boulder, Colorado 80302. Electromagnetic Metrology Current Awareness Service Issued monthly. Annual subscription: $24.00. Send

subscription order and remittance to Electromagnetics

Division, National Bureau of Standards, Boulder,

Colo. 80302.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

Penalty for Private Use, $300

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

COM-215

SPECIAL FOURTH-CLASS RATE BOOK

YEARS

1301-13"7B

IMBS