Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075

DOI 10.1617/s11527-013-0036-2

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Simplified approach for evaluating residual strength

of fire-exposed reinforced concrete columns
V. K. R. Kodur N. K. Raut X. Y. Mao

W. Khaliq

Received: 20 October 2012 / Accepted: 21 February 2013 / Published online: 28 February 2013
 RILEM 2013

Abstract An approach for evaluating residual strength approach is capable of predicting the residual strength
of reinforced concrete (RC) columns is presented in of fire-exposed RC columns.
this paper. The approach is based on the maximum
temperature attained in the concrete core and rebars, Keywords Fire resistance  Fire exposed columns 
and associated reduction in strength of steel and Reinforced concrete column  HSC column 
concrete. For validating the proposed approach, post- Residual strength  Analytical procedure
fire residual strength tests were carried out on five high
strength concrete columns. The test variables included List of symbols
type of concrete, presence of fibers (polypropylene Acore Area of core region
and/or steel) in concrete and load ratio. The columns As Area of steel rebars
were loaded and exposed to a design fire, allowed to d Width (or depth) of the column
cool, and then residual strength tests were carried out. ds Diameter of steel rebar
Results from these fire tests indicate that high strength e Initial bending displacement of steel bar
concrete columns retain most of their room-tempera- fct Residual strength of concrete
ture load carrying capacity after exposure to a design fst,d Design yield strength
fire. A comparison of residual strength predictions with fst,k Nominal yield strength
measured values from tests indicates that the proposed fyt Residual strength of steel rebar
L Column length
Nr Residual strength of fire exposed RC column
V. K. R. Kodur (&)  N. K. Raut  X. Y. Mao  kst Reduction coefficient due to buckling
W. Khaliq
ksh Factor used to represent increased strength due
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Michigan State University, 3546 Engineering Building, to strain hardening
East Lansing, MI 48824, USA s Spacing of stirrups
e-mail: kodur@egr.msu.edu Tbar Temperature in rebars
Tc Temperature in concrete
N. K. Raut
Offshore Structural Analysis (SACS), Bentley System Inc, Tf Fire temperature
3850 N. Causeway Blvd, Suite 1555, Metairie, LA 70002, th Time (h)
USA x Depth of rebar from the surface (m) in x direction
x0 Depth of core region (m)
X. Y. Mao
Department of Civil Engineering, Suzhou University of y Depth of rebar from the surface (m) in
Science and Technology, Suzhou 215011, China y direction
2060
ey Strains related to yield strength
ed Strains related to design strength
eu Strains related to ultimate strength
1 Introduction
When exposed to fire, reinforced concrete (RC)
columns lose their strength and stiffness as a result
of increased temperature in the concrete and rein-
forcement. The extent of strength loss is dependent on
a number of factors, including type of fire exposure,
column size, temperatures in the concrete and steel,
concrete and steel properties (including strength) and
load level. Due to high thermal capacity and low
thermal conductivity of concrete, RC columns may
retain much of their initial strength under most
realistic fires. Determination of their residual strength
after fire exposure is crucial in post-fire damage
assessment and repair. However, such evaluation of
residual strength may not be an easy task due to a
number of factors.
Exposure of a RC column to a severe fire generally
leaves evidence of significant structural damage such
as spalling, exposed reinforcement and relatively large
permanent deformations. However, exposure to a
moderate fire may result in only minor spalling and
deformations in the columns. In such cases, loss of
strength in RC columns may not be significant.
However, rapid evaluation of the residual strength of
columns is crucial for assessing the functionality
(ensuring load bearing capacity) of the structure.
Generally, concrete structural members [mostly
fabricated from normal strength concrete (NSC)]
exhibit good performance under fire situations. Over
the last three decades, there has been significant
research and development in improving the properties
of concrete. This has led to new types of concrete
which are often referred to as high strength concrete
(HSC), high performance concrete (HPC), self-con-
solidating concrete (SCC) and fly ash concrete (FAC).
The construction industry has shown significant inter-
est in the use of these new types of concrete due to the
improvements in structural performance, such as high
strength and durability, that they provide compared to
conventional normal-strength concrete (NSC). This
property of high compressive strength has led to wider
use of HSC in columns of high rise buildings.
Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075
Results from a number of studies have shown that
there are well-defined differences between the prop-
erties of HSC and NSC at high temperatures [22, 23,
30]. Further, concern has developed regarding the
occurrence of explosive spalling when HSC is sub-
jected to rapid heating, as in the case of a fire. Spalling
is the phenomenon in which pieces of concrete break
off from the surface of a concrete structure when it is
exposed to high and rapidly rising temperatures. The
effect of such spalling must be properly accounted for
in estimating the residual strength of RC columns [24].
At present, there are no data or simplified method-
ologies for evaluating the residual strength of fire-
exposed concrete columns. In the literature a few fire
tests have been reported on the residual strength of
NSC columns, but there are no test data or method-
ologies on residual column strength for columns made
of newer types of concrete. To overcome these
research gaps, both experiments and analytical studies
were undertaken to develop an approach for estimat-
ing the residual strength of RC columns.
2 Factors governing residual strength of RC
columns
The residual strength of a fire-exposed RC column
depends on the internal temperatures experienced by
the column, the load level during the fire event, the
cooling rate and type of cooling method, and the
strength recovery time following the cooling phase of
fire. The cooling method (air-cooled or water-
quenched) does not influence the post-fire compressive
strength of the concrete as significantly as it does the
failure strain and the elastic modulus [27]. Heated
concrete that is cooled by quenching typically attains a
higher compressive strain at failure than it would if it
were cooled gradually under ambient conditions.
There is no significant change to the post-fire failure
strain of concrete from its original room-temperature
value for concrete temperatures up to about 220 C [6].
After cooling to room temperature, the residual
compressive strength of structural concrete that has
experienced temperatures of 220 C decreases by up to
20 % of its original room temperature strength [3, 8].
However, with at least 6 months of recovery time at
room temperature, this concrete can regain 100 % of its
original (room temperature) compressive strength [3].
Generally, concrete and steel strength, both have a
Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075 2061

significant influence on the load carrying capacity of 3.1 Test specimens

RC columns. Thus, the residual strength of concrete
and rebars is crucial in estimating the residual load
carrying capacity of a RC column after fire exposure.
3 Fire resistance experiments
To evaluate the residual strength of fire exposed RC
columns an experimental program was designed. The
two-stage test program comprised exposing the RC
columns to typical design (non-standard) fire first and,
after cooling, undertaking residual strength tests.
Detailed information on the first stage of the test
program (fire resistance tests) is provided elsewhere
[29] and the focus of this paper is on the second stage
(residual strength tests) of the test program. All tested
columns were made of HSC, since limited residual
strength data are available in the literature for NSC
columns.
For the fire resistance tests, five RC columns desig-
nated HSC2 (plain HSC), HSCP1 (HSC with poly-
propylene fibers), FAC-P (FAC with polypropylene
fibers), HSC-S (HSC with steel fibers) and HSC-H
(HSC with hybrid fibers, containing both steel and
polypropylene fibers), were designed as per ACI 318
specifications [1]. All columns were 3,350 mm long
and had a 203 9 203 mm cross-section. The columns
were fabricated with HSC and had 4 /19 mm (#6)
longitudinal rebars and /10 mm (#3) lateral ties,
spaced at 200 mm, as transverse reinforcement. The
ties were anchored in the core to a length of 75 mm (as
per ACI 318 provisions [1]). The steel of main
reinforcing bars and lateral ties had specified yield
strengths of 420 MPa. Based on the tensile strength
tests the yield strength, ultimate strength, and ultimate
strain of steel rebars were found to be about 450, 705
and 0.17 MPa, respectively. Figure 1 shows the

Fig. 1 Sectional
dimensions and locations of Plate 406 x 406 x 25 mm 75 mm
thermocouple and strain
gauges in RC columns TC 1
10 mm Lateral Ties(135 ) @ 200 mm c/c

50mm TC 7
100 x 100 x 12 mm angle

TC 4
TC 6

TC 3 TC 2
TC 5
203 mm
Section B-B
3350 mm

SG 1
A
A

LVDT
B
B

203 mm

SG 3 SG 2

4-19 mm rebars
Section A-A
Plate 406 x 406 x 25 mm
2062 Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075

0
0
0
0
43
elevation and cross-sectional details of the RC

%
columns, while Table 1 gives additional information

No spalling
No spalling
No spalling
Extent of
on columns.

Minimal
spalling

Severe
Visual
Five batches of concrete were used for fabricating
columns. Column HSC2 was fabricated from HSC
mix (Batch 2), while for column HSCP1 the batch mix
strength (kN)

consisted of HSC with polypropylene (HSCP) fibers

Residual

214 (Batch 3). FAC-P mix (Batch 4) comprised of 25 % fly

899
694
680
734
ash as replacement to cement and also included
polypropylene fibers. HSC-S and HSC-H mixes
load (kN)

(Batches 5 and 6) consisted of batch mix identical to

Applied

HSC (Batch 2), but included steel and hybrid

445
436
374
454
463
(steel ? polypropylene) fibers respectively. All
Load ratio (%)

batches of concrete were made with general purpose,

Type I Portland cement and carbonate aggregate. The
mix proportions, per cubic meter of concrete, are
presented in Table 2. The average compressive cylin-
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.6

der strength of concrete, measured at 28 days and on

Column strength (kN)

the day of the testing, is provided in Table 1. 28-day

strength ranged from 71 to 98 MPa.

3.2 Instrumentation
1,121
1,094
943
756
772

The Instrumentation in the columns included thermo-

Test day

couples, strain gauges and displacement transducers.

Concrete strength
Table 1 Summary of test parameters and results of post-fire residual strength tests

Type-K Chromelalumel thermocouples, 0.91 mm

93

77
80
106

100

thick, were installed at the mid-height cross section

in each column for measuring concrete and rebar
28 days
(MPa)

temperatures. Each column was instrumented with 7

91
85
98
71
75

thermocouples. Also strain gauges (both high temper-

duration (min)

ature and normal temperature types) were mounted on

the rebars at mid-height of columns. The location and
Total test

numbering of thermocouples and strain gauges in the

180
260
435
270
270

cross-section are shown in Fig. 1. The axial deforma-

tion of each column was measured at the top of the
DF3 decay @4.16 C/min
DF3 decay @4.16 C/min
DF3 decay @4.16 C/min
DF2 decay @11 C/min

column using displacement transducers (LVDTs).

DF1 decay @8 C/min

3.3 Test apparatus

Fire exposure

The fire resistance tests on RC columns were carried

out using the structural fire testing furnace at Michigan
State University. The test furnace has been specially
Column designation

designed to produce conditions, such as temperature,

load and heat transfer, to which a structural member
might be exposed to during a fire [18]. The furnace,
shown in Fig. 2, has the capacity to supply both heat
HSCP1

HSC-H
FAC-P
HSC-S
HSC2

and applied loads that are present in a typical building

exposed to fire.
Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075 2063

Table 2 Concrete mix proportions for fabricating different test columns

Constituent Batch 2 Batch 3 Batch 4 Batch 5 Batch 6

Columns fabricated HSC2 HSCP1 FAC-P HSC-S HSC-H

Concrete type HSC HSCP FAC HSC HSC
Cement (kg/m3) 513 513 420 513 513
Coarse aggregate (kg/m3) 1,078 1,078 1,040 1,078 1,078
Fine aggregate (kg/m3) 684 684 708 684 684
Fly ash (25 % replacement of cement) (kg/m3) 140
Water (kg/m3) 130 130 105 130 130
Water reducing agent (kg/m3) 15 15 15 15
3
Silica fume (kg/m ) 43 43 42 43 43
Polypropylene fibers (kg/m3) 2 2 2
Steel fibers (kg/m3) 42 42
Water binder ratio 0.23 0.23 0.19 0.23 0.23
Concrete strength 28 day (MPa) 91 0.3 85 0.5 81 0.3 67 0.5 62 0.4
Slump (mm) 100 90 175 100 100
3
Density (kg/m ) 2,490 2,464 2,390 2,350 2,320

the columns were tested under three fire exposures.

Fig. 2 Structural fire test furnace at MSUs civil and infra-
structure laboratory
3.4 Test conditions and procedure
Prior to residual strength tests, the five columns were
exposed to fire in the structural fire test furnace shown
in Fig. 2. The fire resistance tests were carried out by
placing RC columns in the furnace, loading them to
the desired load ratio, and subjecting them to a
specified fire exposure. The columns were 3.35 m
high, with the middle 1.7 m of the column height
exposed to fire.
To investigate the residual strength of RC columns
under typical fire scenarios encountered in buildings,
These design fires represent typical parametric fires
specified in Eurocode 1 [10] wherein the resulting fire
consists of a growth phase followed by decay phase.
Both phases of the fire are influenced by the compart-
ment characteristics including fuel load (amount of
combustible materials), ventilation openings, and wall
lining materials [13].
The design fire 1 (DF1), selected for fire test on
column HSC2, corresponds to Eurocode 1 parametric
fire for a room with dimensions of 6 m 9 4 m 9 3 m
having a fuel load of 250 MJ/m2 and a ventilation
factor of 0.04. Similarly, design fire 2 (DF2) selected
for column HSCP1, HSC-S, and HSC-H, corresponds
to a Eurocode 1 parametric fire for the same size room
but with a fuel load of 600 MJ/m2. Further in the long
fire it is assumed that the ventilation factor increases to
0.2 after attaining peak temperature due to breakage of
windows (glass). The values of fuel load and opening
dimensions are given in Table 3. FAC-P column was
tested under design fire 3 (DF3), which has the same
heating phase as DF2, but a slower cooling phase since
no breakage of glass is assumed so that the ventilation
factor remains same both for heating and cooling
phase.
The time temperature curves for the three fire
scenarios (DF1, DF2, and DF3) are shown in Fig. 3. It
can be seen that design fires DF1, DF2, and DF3
follow similar timetemperature profile as that of
2064 Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075

Table 3 Compartment and

Design Lining Thermal capacity Opening Fire load
material characteristics
fire material of lining material dimension (MJ/m2
assumed for developing
(W s0.5/m2 K) (m) floor area)
design fire scenarios
DF1 Concrete 1,900 2.25 9 1.5 250
DF2 Concrete 1,900 2.25 9 1.5 600
DF3 Concrete 1,900 2.25 9 1.5 600

ASTM E119 [4] in the growth phase of the fire, but
have a well-defined decay (cooling) phase. This
cooling was simulated by controlling the temperatures
in the furnace (by blowing air through the furnace) to
decay at a predetermined rate of cooling, as encoun-
tered in real fires in buildings.
All columns, slender as per ACI 318 specifications
[1], were tested under a concentric axial load with
fixed supports. Since special care was taken to align
the center of the loading actuator and the top steel
plate, the eccentricity of the applied load was within
5 mm. The type of fire exposure and the load ratio
for the various columns are tabulated in Table 1. The
load ratio is defined as the ratio of the applied (test)
load to the column capacity computed according to
ACI 318 provisions [1].
The load was applied approximately 30 min before
the start of the fire test and was maintained until a
condition was reached at which no further increase of
the axial deformation of the column could be
measured. During the test, the column was subjected
to heating in such a way that the average temperature
in the furnace followed, as closely as possible, the
targeted fire scenario (measured in terms of time
temperature curve of DF1, DF2, or DF3). The load was
maintained constant throughout the fire test duration.
The columns were considered to have failed when the
hydraulic jack could no longer maintain the load.
Cross-sectional temperatures and axial deformations
were measured during the fire resistance tests; and also
the visual observations were recorded. Full details of
the recorded data on columns HSC2 and HSCP1 have
been presented by [29]. The temperature and defor-
mation response of other columns followed trends
similar to column HSCP1.
4 Response of fire-exposed columns
The five columns exposed to design fires, with a well-
defined decay phase, survived the burnout conditions
which lasted from 3 to 7 h (including cool down). The
typical thermal response of RC columns is illustrated
in Fig. 4 by plotting rebar temperature as a function of
fire exposure time for columns HSC2 and HSCP1. The
cross-sectional temperature, in all five columns,
plateau at about 100 C and this can be mainly
attributed to the utilization of heat energy (from fire)
for the evaporation of water in concrete. After this
plateau, the temperatures in rebar and concrete
increase with fire exposure time.

700
1200
Rebar Temperature ( C)
Furnace temperature ( C)

600
ASTM E119
1000
DF1 500
DF2
800 DF3 400

600 300

200
400
HSC2
100
200 HSCP1
0
0 0 60 120 180 240 300
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 Time (min)
Time (minutes)
Fig. 4 Measured rebar temperatures in RC columns HSC2 and
Fig. 3 Time temperature curves used in the fire tests HSCP1
Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075
Fig. 5 Illustration of fire-induced spalling in RC columns HSC2 and HSCP1
The extent of spalling during fire tests was mon-
itored by making observations through the window
ports of the furnace and through post-test (fire
exposure) observations on these HSC columns. Based
on the observations, the extent of spalling in the five
tested columns was classified as minor, moderate, and
severe and results are summarized in Table 1. Spalling
is said to be minor when only small fragments of
concrete break-off the surface (from outer layers) of
the RC column. Spalling is said to be moderate when
pieces of concrete break-off the surface but does not
reach the steel reinforcement, while it is said to be
severe when spalling results in reinforcement (lon- columns HSC2 and HSCP1
gitudinal and transverse) being exposed to fire. After
the fire tests, the extent of spalling, represented as
percentage loss of volume, was measured and is
tabulated in Table 1. Spalling in HSC2 column started
at 15 min and ended at 35 min into the fire resistance
test. The extent of spalling in this column was 43 % of
its fire exposed volume; however, no fire induced
spalling occurred in other tested columns. Figure 5
illustrates the state of column HSC2, resulting from
spalling, after completion of fire test.
The typical structural response during fire is
illustrated through axial deformationtime plots for
columns HSC2 and HSCP1 in Fig. 6. All columns
expand in the early stages of fire exposure which is
mainly due to the thermal expansion of both concrete
and steel. With increased fire exposure time, the
columns contract as a result of loss of strength and
reduced modulus of elasticity in steel reinforcement
due to increasing cross-sectional temperatures and
also due to load redistribution to concrete from
reinforcement. Since the reinforcement (longitudinal)
is outside the concrete core, the temperature rises
much faster in the steel rebars than in the inner core of
2065
0.2
0.15
Deflection (mm)
0.1
0.05
0
-0.05
-0.1
HSC2
-0.15
HSCP1
-0.2
0 60 120 180 240 300
Time (minutes)
Fig. 6 Measured axial deformations as a function of time for
concrete. When the steel (reinforcement) yields,
concrete carries a progressively increasing portion of
the load. However, due to the start of cooling phase,
the rebars and concrete did not experience very high
temperatures and thus significant creep deformation
may not have occurred in these columns. The five
columns did not fail under fire exposure and were able
to sustain full burnout conditions. This can be
attributed to recovery in strength and stiffness prop-
erties of concrete and steel once the column enters the
cooling phase in the design fire. Further discussion on
the behavior of columns HSC2 and HSCP1 under fire
exposure can be found elsewhere [29].
5 Residual strength test procedure
The post-fire residual strength tests were conducted
24 h after the fire resistance tests, after ensuring that
the steel rebars cooled down to room temperature.
Each column was tested to failure under the same
support conditions as that existed during fire exposure.
2066
The axial load on the column was increased gradually
at a rate of 10 kN/min until failure occurred. As in the
case of fire tests, axial deformation was recorded as a
function of load. During post-fire residual strength
tests, significant spalling was observed due to the
crushing of concrete at mid-height of the column prior
to collapse.
6 Residual strength results
The measured load deflection response for the five
columns during post-fire residual strength tests is
plotted in Fig. 7. It was observed that all five columns
experienced unrecoverable axial deformation during
the fire test, and this was taken as the initial
deformation in the residual strength test. The axial
load carrying capacity and post-fire residual strength
of RC columns are listed in Table 1. From tabulated
results in Table 1 and Fig. 7, it can be seen that
spalling is the major contributor to the reduction of
residual strength in RC columns. In fact, the residual
strength of column HSC2 is significantly lower than
that of other four columns. This can be attributed to the
loss of cross-section (resulting from spalling), expo-
sure of rebars to higher temperatures, and faster
degradation of strength and stiffness in plain HSC
column as compared with HSC/FAC columns with
fibers.
The residual load-carrying capacity for the tested
columns was found to be approximately 90 % of the
room temperature capacity computed as per ACI 318
[1] for the four columns which did not spall. This is in
spite of the occurrence of fire-induced damage in these
800
Axial Load (kN)
600
400
200
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Axial Deformation (mm)
Fig. 7 Load-deformation plot for fire exposed RC columns
under residual strength tests
Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075
columns. This can be attributed to the partial regain of
strength by concrete and steel upon cooling, and strain
hardening of the steel reinforcement.
The above results clearly indicate that the residual
load-carrying capacity of a fire-exposed RC column is
mainly dependent on cross-sectional temperature
attained during fire exposure and even more so on
the fire-induced spalling occurring due to rapid rise in
temperatures. Thus, for evaluating the residual
strength of a RC column, a reliable assessment of
cross-sectional temperature and spalling is critical.
The following section presents the development of a
simplified approach for estimating the residual load
carrying capacity of a RC column.
7 Proposed post-fire assessment approach
7.1 General approach
The proposed approach for estimating the residual
strength of RC columns after fire exposure involves
the following steps:
(a) Estimation of maximum fire temperature and
duration of fire exposure using fire incident
reports generated by fire fighters, visual obser-
vations of fire-exposed concrete columns, obser-
vation of concrete color or any other means.
(b) Estimation of the maximum temperature attained
in rebars and concrete cross section utilizing
maximum fire temperature, fire duration and
sectional characteristics. Wickstroms [32] simpli-
fied empirical method can be applied to estimate
the maximum rebar and concrete temperatures.
(c) Estimation of the residual strength of reinforcing
steel and concrete using strengthtemperature
relationships for reinforcing steel and concrete,
respectively.
(d) Computation of the residual capacity of the
column by applying ambient temperature strength
equations, but with appropriate reduction factors
HSC-S
HSC-H to account for reduced strength of steel reinforce-
FAC-P ment and concrete. Modification of temperature in
HSC2
HSCP1 core region and reinforcing steel due to spalling
12 are to be taken into consideration.
The various aspects to be considered in estimating
the critical parameters in each step are discussed
below.
Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075
7.2 Maximum fire temperature
The first step in evaluating the residual capacity of a RC
column is to estimate the duration and maximum
temperature attained in a fire. This information can be
ascertained from first responders fire incident reports,
from visual observations of the fire exposed column or
any other reliable method (e.g. computer models using
relevant information on compartment characteristics).
Generally the first responders (fire fighter) reports
provide a rough estimate of maximum fire temperature
and duration of fire. Other methods such as correlation
of fire exposed concrete color to fire temperatures and
detailed fire modeling (using relevant information on
compartment characteristics) can also be used. In recent
years there are some improvements in the way fire
fighters assess temperatures in fire incidents (through
micro thermal imaging, IR thermometers, and pocket
meters) and thus fire temperatures can be estimated to a
reasonable degree of accuracy. Further, guidelines are
available in literature for estimating fire temperatures
based on color changes in fire exposed concrete [2, 31,
32, 35]. For example, Annerel and Taerwe [2] suggest
that the temperature in the fire exposed concrete, as
indicated by color, can be assumed to be approximately
90 % of the maximum temperature of the fire. Post-fire
visual observations of damaged concrete column and
the extent of fire-induced spalling can also provide
some clues for gauging the fire temperature and also the
overall state of the column.
If the fire exposed column has sustained severe
spalling and damage such that the concrete cover to
rebar is fully spalled off, then the concrete in the cover
region will be ignored in the calculation of residual
strength. In such a scenario, the reduced section
without spalled concrete cover, is to be used to
calculate the 500 C isotherm, and the effect of
buckling of rebars is taken into account. If, however,
there is partial or no loss of concrete cover, the residual
strength of the column can be calculated as a
summation of strength of rebars and concrete within
the concrete core, but with a reduced strength of
concrete and steel resulting from higher temperatures.
In lieu of any other reliable methods, maximum fire
temperature can also be estimated by examining the
color change and microstructure of the exposed
surface of the concrete. Based on previous fire tests,
guidance is available to link concrete color to fire
temperature. So, if the concrete color is pink or red, it
2067
Table 4 Guidance for estimating maximum temperature attained
in fire-damaged concrete based on color changes [31, 35]
Color Pink or Whitish Buff
red grey
Temperature range 300600 600900 9001,000
(C)
is an indication that concrete temperature is in the
range of 300600 C [31, 35]. Table 4 shows the
correlation between concrete color and temperatures
attained on the surface of concrete. While the exact
color of concrete is dependent on several factors (e.g.
aggregate mineralogy) [31], the color transformation
of concrete can provide a rough correlation to
maximum temperature reached during a fire event.
The temperature in the concrete, as indicated by color,
can be assumed to be approximately 90 % of the
maximum temperature of the fire [3]. Thus an estimate
of temperatures reached in fire can be back calculated.
7.3 Maximum steel temperature
Once the maximum fire temperature has been esti-
mated, the next step is to evaluate maximum rebar
temperature. There are some empirical methods,
mainly derived for standard fire exposure, to estimate
concrete temperatures [15, 16, 32]. Since temperature
of rebar can be taken to be the same as that of the
concrete in the same position, Wickstroms method
[32], can be used to determine the temperature of rebars.
Accordingly the temperature in rebars, Tbar, is given as:
   
Tbar gw gx gy  2gx gy gx gy Tf 1
in which, gx, gy and gw are calculated as:
gw 1  0:0616 th0:88 2
ht i  
h th
gx 0:18 ln 2  0:81; gy 0:18 ln 2  0:81
x y
3
where, Tf is the fire temperature, th is the time (h), and
x and y are the depth of rebar from the surface (m) in
x and y direction, respectively.
Figure 8 shows the comparison between the calcu-
lated temperatures (C) by Wickstroms method and
those measured in fire exposed columns at the end of
heating phase. It can be seen that good comparison is
achieved in all columns except columns HSC-2 and
2068
Fig. 8 Comparison of
estimated temperature with HSC-H
measured value in fire
exposed RC columns
HSC-C
Concrete type
FAC
HSCP1
HSC2
0 100
FAC-P. The reason for this variation is that for column
HSC-2 spalling occurred resulting in a higher mea-
sured temperature, and for column FAC-P thermo-
couple was damaged at final stage leading to a lower
measured temperature.
The temperature induced strength loss in steel and
concrete is dependent on the maximum temperature
attained in the growth phase of fire. The residual
strength of column can be an issue when the fire
temperatures are close to or higher than ISO 834 fire
(or ASTM E119 fire). If the fire temperatures remain
much below ISO 834 or ASTM E119 temperatures,
the column may not experience any loss of strength at
all. The temperatures in growth phase of building fires
often do not vary beyond 1015 % from those of
standard fires; thus Wickstroms equation, being the
best equation available in literature, can be used [32].
However, some modification needs to be applied if
spalling occurs in the column and reinforcing steel is
exposed directly to fire. Under such scenario, maxi-
mum fire temperature can be taken as the temperature
of the rebar in fire exposed RC columns.
7.4 Determination of core region in concrete
section
In simplified fire resistance analysis of RC columns, it
is often assumed that no loss of strength occurs in
layers of concrete below 500 C, while no strength is
left in layers of concrete above 500 C [5, 19]. The
layers beneath 500 C isotherm are referred to as
core region which is defined as the region in the
concrete section with a temperature lower than 500 C
(see Fig. 9). It can be assumed that concrete outside
(greater than 500 C) the core region has no
Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075
Thermalcouple damaged
Computed (Eq.1)
Measured (test)
200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Temperature ( )
contribution to strength of the column after fire
exposure; while concrete within the core region
provide full strength contribution to the residual load
bearing capacity of a fire-exposed RC column.
The boundary for this key layer can be evaluated by
finding the 500 C isotherm in the column section. As
seen in Fig. 9a, there exists a rounding effect at the
corners of the column section in realistic temperature
distribution. This rounding effect at corners arises due
to heating of column from two sides. For simplicity an
idealized square, denoted by P1P2P3P4 in Fig. 9b,
is taken as the core region of column section after
fire exposure. The depth to the core region that
corresponds to 500 C isotherm, x, can be calculated
by applying Wickstroms method.
For a square column section heated from 4-sides, gx
has a same value as that of gy due to symmetry in the
column section and fire exposure conditions. Under
these conditions, substituting Tbar with Tc and gy with
gx, Equation (1) can be rewritten as
Tc
1  2gw g2x 2gw gx  0 4
Tf
Denoting (12gw) by A, 2gw by B and Tc/Tf by C, Eq. 4
can be expressed as
Ag2x Bgx  C 0 5
The solution to above quadratic equation yields
p
B  B2 4AC
gx 6
2A
According to physical meaning, gx should be greater
than zero and less than 1.0, since temperature in the
inner concrete layers is to be higher than the room
temperature and lower than that of the fire-exposed
Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075 2069

500 x Core region x

Isotherm
P1 P4 P1 P4

x
D

D
P2 P3 P2 P3

D D

(a) Actual 500C isotherm (b) Idealized core region

Fig. 9 Core region (500 C isotherm) in RC column section

 p
column surface. Hence, B B2 4AC =2A is the proposed design approach, the loss of strength in
the rational root for gx. reinforcing steel is assumed to follow according to
Substituting gx in Eq. 3, depth to core region, x0 , can temperature-residual strength test data reported by
be determined as Neves et al. [28]. The variation of residual strength of
s steel as a function of maximum temperature is shown
0 th in Fig. 10.
x gx 0:81 7
e 0:18 When the extent of spalling is such that the cover
concrete to steel rebar fully spalls off, steel rebars
Hence the area of core region of concrete can be between two adjacent stirrups act as separate com-
determined as pression bars due to loss of confinement of concrete,

0 2
Acore d  2x 8 buckling, a buckling strength reduction coefficient, kst,
where, d is the width (or depth) of the column.
However, a modification is to be applied in
temperature calculations if the fire exposed column
has sustained severe spalling and damage such that the
rebars were fully/partially exposed to fire. In such a
scenario, concrete cover is assumed to be lost and the
reduced cross-section is utilized to determine the
and thus experience buckling. To account for this local
should be applied. According to recent research [18],
kst is mainly affected by initial bending displacement
of steel bar, spacing of stirrups, diameter and initial
strength of steel bars (see Fig. 11). Jiang et al. [18]
proposed the following relation to calculate the
coefficient kst as:
Residual strength ratio fyt /fy

1.2
500 C isotherm and the core region. 1.0

7.5 Residual strength in rebar and concrete 0.8

0.6
fyt/fy=1-0.28 (T-500)/300
Knowing the temperature in rebars and concrete
0.4
layers, the temperature induced loss of strength in
steel (rebars) and concrete can be evaluated. Gener- 0.2

ally, reinforcing steel recovers most of its strength and 0.0

stiffness upon cooling [9, 28]. However, the higher the 0 200 400 600 800 1000

maximum temperature attained in rebars, the lower is Maximum temperature ( )

the residual strength of steel, particularly when the Fig. 10 Variation of residual strength of rebar as a function of
maximum temperature in rebars exceeds 500 C. In experienced maximum temperature
2070 Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075

Stress

N K sh fst,k
Idealized

K sh fst,d

f st,k

Spalling
e

s
f st,d
Design

Longitudinal bar Stirrup Strain

Fig. 11 Buckling of steel reinforcing bars in a fire exposed RC o y d u
column
Fig. 12 Effect of strain hardening on strength of rebar
e

kst 1:136  111:6 original strength after cooling and rehydrate when the
s  2 !
s s
 0:972 0:004  0:003
ds ds
where e is the initial bending displacement of steel bar,
s is spacing of stirrups and ds is the diameter of steel
rebar.
Another factor that can contribute to residual
strength is due to strain hardening effect in rebars.
The strain hardening effect in structural steel is
illustrated in Fig. 12 [12, 14], in which fst,k and fst,d
are nominal yield strength and design yield strength,
respectively, Ksh is the factor used to represent
increased strength due to strain hardening, and ey, ed,
and eu are strains related to yield, design and ultimate
strength, respectively. In situations where there is
reliable information on strength property of rebars
(through post residual strength tests on steel coupons),
a strain hardening factor can be applied for evaluating
residual strength of rebars, i.e. fyt0 = Kshfyt. However,
there is very little data on strain hardening effect
specific to reinforcing steel, especially after cooling
(residual) of steel. Therefore, in most practical situ-
ations, the strain hardening effect can be ignored
(Ksh = 1.0) so as to obtain a more conservative
estimation of residual strength.
The temperature-induced strength loss in concrete
occurs at a lower rate than that in reinforcing steel.
Based on the fact that concrete can regain most of its
maximum temperature attained in concrete is below
9 500 C, the coefficient of residual strength of normal
strength concrete (NSC) is taken to be 1.0 [26].
However, for residual strength calculations the
strength contribution from portion of concrete which
reach temperatures higher than 500 C is taken to be
zero [26].
The temperature induced strength degradation in
high strength concrete (HSC) is higher than NSC
[17, 21, 33, 34]. Figure 13 shows the residual strength
ratio (fct/fc) of NSC and HSC as a function of
temperature, where fct and fc are concrete strength at
temperature T and that at room temperature, respec-
tively [3, 7, 17, 25, 33]. It can be seen that little
strength loss in HSC occurs when temperature is
below 200 C, however, strength loss increases after
200 C and is much steeper beyond 500 C. Also,
there are noticeable deviations in strength loss of HSC
reported by two researchers. This may be due to the
fact that the residual strength of HSC is affected by
many factors including mix proportions, heating
characteristics and the level of loading. Considering
the fact that the strength loss in HSC is steeper than
that in NSC in 20500 C, a strength reduction
coefficient of 0.9 is recommended for HSC (as
opposed to 1 for NSC). This strength reduction
coefficient for HSC was arrived at by computing
weighted means of concrete residual strength
Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075 2071

1.2 7.6 Residual capacity of columns

T=500
Residual strength ratio: fct/fc

NSC-ASCE
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0 have to be substituted in place of the room-tempera-
0 200
Fig. 13 Residual strength ratio of HSC and NSC as a function
of temperature
Table 5 Calculation process of the weighted means of residual
strength of core region concrete
Temperature 200
range (C)
ki 1.000
kef 0.911
coefficient at temperature 200, 300, 400, and 500 C,
respectively (shown in Table 5). In Table 5, ki is the
strength reduction coefficient of concrete at different
temperatures and kef is the mean value of the strength
reduction coefficients of concrete residual strength.
Here, strength reduction coefficient of concrete at each
of the temperatures (ki) is taken from the test data
reported by Xiao and Konig [33]. For temperature
above 500 C, there is no strength contribution from
HSC, as in the case of NSC, towards residual capacity
of the column. In lieu of 0.9 as a consolidated
reduction factor to account for higher deterioration of
strength in high strength concrete core at temperatures
beyond 500 C, the strength loss can be assumed to
start when temperature in concrete core (of HSC)
exceeds 400 C isotherm [11].
Once the residual strength of steel reinforcement and
NSC-Dong concrete in core region are estimated, the residual
HSC-Hu
capacity of the fire-exposed column can be computed
HSC-Xiao by applying the room-temperature design strength
equation specified in standards (e.g. [1, 11]). The
residual strength of reinforcing steel, concrete and
NSC-Li reduced dimensions of the damaged concrete section
400 600 800 1000
Temperature ( ) ture strength of rebar and concrete, and the full
sectional dimensions of the column. Buckling of rebar
is accounted for through coefficient kst, when concrete
cover to rebars completely spalls off. Accordingly, the
residual strength capacity of a fire exposed RC column
is given as:
300 400 500 Nr Acore fct kst As fyt 10
where Nr is the residual strength of fire exposed RC
0.988 0.892 0.764 column, Acore is the area of core region, As is the
area of steel rebars, kst is the reduction coefficient due
to buckling (only used when cover concrete to rebars
spalls off), fct is the residual strength of concrete, fyt is
the residual strength of steel rebar.
8 Validation
The validity of the aforementioned approach is
established by comparing the predicted residual
strength from the proposed approach with values
measured in the residual strength tests. The validation
was carried out for both NSC and HSC columns (see
Table 6). Based on the test data on rebars from fire
exposed columns, ksh was taken as 1.15 for all
columns. Value of e/s was taken as 0.006 for column
HSC2 to account for buckling of longitudinal bar after

Table 6 Comparison of estimated and measured residual strength in fire exposed RC columns
Columns fc (MPa) x0 (mm) D (mm) Acore (mm2) fct (MPa) As (mm2) fst0 (MPa) kst Ncal (N) Ntest (N) Ncal/Ntest

NSC-2 42 305 67 29,241 31.0 2,040 482 1 2,169 2,671 0.81

HSC2 107 98 203 49 95.4 1,136 362 0.458 213 214 1.00
HSCP1 93 81 203 1,681 83.7 1,136 410 1 656 899 0.73
FAC-P 100 84 203 1,225 90.0 1,136 400 1 613 694 0.88
HSC-S 77 81 203 1,681 69.3 1,136 409 1 630 836 0.75
HSC-H 80 82 203 1,521 72.0 1,136 407 1 621 734 0.85
2072
spalling of concrete cover, and as zero for the other
columns where no serious spalling occurred.
For the validation of NSC column, results of
residual strength reported in the literature [26] are
used. Lie [26] tested a normal strength RC column
(designated as NSC-2) of 3.81 m length and
305 mm 9 305 mm square cross-section. The com-
pressive strength of concrete in the columns was
42 MPa. The column was reinforced with four /
25 mm longitudinal bars and /10 mm stirrups at
305 mm spacing. The clear concrete cover was 48 mm
in both columns. The yield strength of the longitudinal
bars was 444 MPa, and that of stirrups was 427 MPa.
The column was exposed to ASTM E-119 fire for 2 h
and then allowed to cool down at 4.66 C/min. The
column was loaded throughout the fire duration with
an axial load of 1,022 kN. After the column cooled
down, the residual strength test was carried out by
loading the fire-exposed column at a rate of 12.5 kN/
min till failure was attained.
A comparison of predicted and measured residual
strength for NSC column NSC-2 is presented in
Table 6. Ratio of the predicted residual strength to
that of measured capacity is 0.81 for NSC column,
indicating that the predicted residual strength is
conservative and that the proposed method is
capable of estimating the residual load-carrying
capacity of a fire-exposed NSC specimen with
sufficient accuracy.
For validation of the proposed equations to HSC
columns, data from the above discussed five HSC
columns were used. The residual strength of these fire
exposed HSC columns was evaluated by applying the
proposed equations and the predicted residual strength
was compared to measured value in residual strength
tests. The computed and measured residual capacities
of columns, together with key factors, are compared in
Table 6. The obtained results infer that the proposed
approach gives conservative estimation (in the range
of 0.731) of residual capacity for different type of
HSC columns. It can be seen that for high strength
concrete column HSC2, the residual strength in rebar
(fyt) and area of core region of concrete are smaller
than that of the other columns, although this column
was exposed to fire for shorter duration. In the case of
column HSC2, a lower strength reduction coefficient
(kst) was used to account for bulking of rebar since
there was significant spalling during fire test on this
HSC column.
Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075
For the other four HSC columns, with same cross-
sectional size and reinforcement but different concrete
mixes, the residual strength is mainly affected by
heating time, temperatures in rebars and concrete and
compressive strength of concrete. Ratio of predicted to
measured residual strength of these four columns
ranges from 0.73 to 0.88. The main reason for this
variation can be attributed to concrete batch mix with
different columns having different concrete mixes.
It can also be seen from the tabulated results that the
predicted residual compression capacity is more
conservative for columns without spalling (columns
FAC-P, HSC-H, HSCP1 and HSC-H) than for HSC
specimen with significant spalling (column HSC2).
The maximum deviation of the predicted capacity is
about 27 % as compared to measured one. The reason
for wider variation may be due to high temperature
creep effect and un-even spalling caused additional
bending in the column, which is not accounted for in
the calculations. Overall, the proposed method is
capable of estimating the residual load-carrying
capacity of fire-exposed NSC and HSC columns with
reasonable accuracy.
9 Design applicability
The proposed methodology provides an approach for
estimating the residual strength of fire-exposed RC
columns. It should be noted that the aim of this
approach is for estimation of residual capacity rather
than evaluation of actual load carrying capacity of
fire exposed RC columns. For evaluating such
actual capacities, accurate assessment of residual
strength in steel and concrete and accurate assessment
of temperatures is required.
The applicability of the proposed approach in a
practical situation is illustrated through a numerical
example in Appendix A. The calculation of critical
parameters together with the residual capacity assess-
ment of a fire-exposed RC column is presented in
detail.
It should be noted that the proposed method has a
few limitations. The approach can only be used for
concentrically loaded non-slender columns with a
square cross-section. It is due to the fact that stability
becomes a main factor which may have notable effect
on the residual strength of fire-exposed slender
columns. Interaction of bending and compression, as
Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075
well as column stability, need to be considered for
eccentrically loaded columns. For columns with non-
square section, modifications are needed to the
proposed method to account for the effect of uneven
temperature increase in two orthogonal directions.
Also, the proposed method is applicable only when the
spalling in columns does not reach beyond the
reinforcement cage. In the case of severe spalling
condition (beyond reinforcement cage), details of the
spalled section need to be studied, so as to achieve a
reliable estimation of residual load bearing capacity.
The current approach to post-fire residual strength
assessment is mainly based on visual inspection and
lacks scientific basis. Thus, at present, there is no
rational approach for estimating the residual load
carrying capacity of fire-exposed RC columns.
Knowledge of structural integrity is a key consider-
ation in post-fire damage assessment and in develop-
ing quick rehabilitation strategy. A simple, readily
available tool such as the one presented here facilitates
estimation of residual strength of fire-exposed RC
columns. Such an approach would help to determine
the most cost effective repair and rehabilitation
strategy in fire-damaged RC columns.
10 Conclusions
Based on the presented results, the following conclu-
sions can be drawn.
RC columns exposed to realistic fire incidents can
retain most of their original load carrying capacity,
particularly if the columns do not experience
significant fire-induced spalling.
There is relatively higher loss in load carrying
capacity in fire exposed HSC columns as com-
pared to NSC columns due to the occurrence of
fire-induced spalling.
Addition of fibers (polypropylene, steel, or hybrid)
mitigates fire-induced spalling in HSC columns
and thus these columns, similar to NSC columns,
regain most of their load carrying capacity after
being exposed to fire.
Rebar temperature is the main parameter govern-
ing the residual load carrying capacity of fire-
exposed RC columns.
The proposed approach is capable of estimating
the residual strength of fire-exposed RC columns
2073
with an accuracy that is sufficient for practical
applications. The approach is applicable for wide
range of RC columns.
Acknowledgments The research presented in this paper is
primarily supported by Michigan State University through
Strategic Partnership Grant (No. 71-4434). Any opinions,
findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in
this paper are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect
the views of the sponsors.
Appendix A: Calculation of residual capacity of fire
damaged RC column
Problem definition
Determine the residual strength of a fire exposed RC
column. The square cross-sectioned (305 mm in size)
column is 3 m in length, and is made of 42 MPa
concrete. The column has four /20 mm longitudinal
bars and /10 mm stirrup spaced at 305 mm and the
clear concrete cover is 50 mm. The yield strength of the
longitudinal bars is 444 MPa, and that of stirrups is
427 MPa. The typical service load on the column is
1,992 kN. Assume that this column was exposed to
ISO834 fire for 2 h and then the fire cooled down for 2 h.
Solution
Ultimate bearing capacity of the column at room
temperature is
 
N 0:8  Ac fc As fy
0:8  305  305  42 1;256  444
3;571;771 N 3;572 kN
Step 1: Estimation of the fire duration and maximum
fire temperature
According to the first responders report, the duration
of fire was 60 min. Although we can make a coarse
estimation of the maximum fire temperature from the
color change of the exposed surface of the concrete,
here, we take the temperature of the fire to be
according to ISO834 standard fire curve which is
given by
Tf 20 345  log10 8  t 1
20 345  log10 8  120 1 1; 049  C
2074 Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075

0 2
Step 2: Calculation of the maximum rebar temperature Acore d  2x 203  2  672 29;241 mm2
experienced during fire
Step 4: Determination of residual strength in rebar
Distance from the column surface to the center of rebar
and concrete
is 50 ? 20/2 = 60 mm, so x = 0.06 m and
y = 0.06 m. As stated above, th = 120 min (2 h),
The variation of the residual strength of steel as a
and Tf = 1,049 C. Applying Eqs. 1 to 3, gx, gy, gw
function of maximum temperature is shown in Fig. 10,
and Tbar can be calculated as
from which we can find the reduction coefficient of
t

h residual strength of rebar which is 0.9449 for this case.

gx gy 0:18 ln 2  0:81
 x Thus, the residual strength of rebar after fire exposure
2:0 is 420 MPa.
0:18 ln  0:81 0:3276
0:062 As aforementioned in the paper, the reduction
gw 1  0:0616th0:88 1  0:0616  2:00:88 coefficient for concrete in core region is 1.0. Hence,
0:9665 the residual strength of concrete in core region is
   42 MPa.
Tbar gw gx gy  2gx gy gx gy Tf
0:9665  0:3276 0:3276  2  0:3276 Step 5: Calculation of residual capacity of the fire
0:3276 0:3276  0:3276  1; 049 exposed RC column
559  C
The residual capacity of RC column can be determined
Step 3: Determination of core region in concrete by applying Eq. 10,
(section enclosed by 500 C isotherm)
N Acore fct kst As fyt
29; 241  42 1  1; 256  420 1;749;211 N
Using gw and Tf values calculated above, the location 1;749 kN:
of 500 C isotherm, Tc is 500 C, can be evaluated.
Then coefficients A, B and C in Eq. 5 are found:
Here, stability factor kst is taken to be 1.0, since no
A 1  2gw 1  2  0:9665 0:93 spalling has been reported.
B 2gw 2  0:9665 1:933
Summary
Tc 500
C 0:48
Tf 1;049 Applying the proposed approach the residual strength
Applying Eq. 6, gx can be calculated as of fire exposed RC column is found to be 1,749 kN. The
p residual capacity of this column is about 39 % of the un-
B B2 4AC factored ultimate bearing capacity at room temperature,
gx
2Ap and is a little lower than the service load which is
1:933 1:9332  4  0:93  0:48 1,992 kN. Thus this fire damaged RC column needed to

2  0:93 be strengthened to enhance the load bearing capacity.
0:2861

According to Eq. 7, the depth x of 500 C isotherm is

calculated as References
s s
0 th 1:0 1. ACI 318-08 (2008) Building code requirements for rein-
x gx1
0:28611
0:067 m 67 mm
e 0:18 e 0:18 forced concrete and commentary. American Concrete
Institute, Farmington Hills
So the area of core region is equal to 2. Annerel E, Taerwe L (2011) Techniques for the evaluation
of concrete structures after fire. In: Proceedings of the
Materials and Structures (2013) 46:20592075
applications of structural fire engineering, Czech Technical
University in Prague, pp 9296
3. ASCE (1992) Structural fire protection. ASCE Committee
on Fire Protection, Structural Division, American Society of
Civil Engineers, New York
4. ASTM E119-08b (2008) Standard test methods for fire tests
of building construction and materials. ASTM International,
West Conshohocken
5. Buchanan AH (2002) Structural design for fire safety.
Wiley, Chichester
6. Chowdhury EU, Bisby LA, Green MF, Kodur VK (2008)
Residual behavior of fire-exposed reinforced concrete
beams prestrengthened in flexure with fiber-reinforced
polymer sheets. ASCE J Compos Constr 12(1):6168
7. Dong YL, Fan WC, Wang QG, Yang BR (1996) Study on
load-carrying capacity and reliable index of reinforced
concrete slab post-fire. Fire Saf Sci 5(2):711 (in Chinese)
8. Drysdale DD, Schneider U, Babrauskas V, Grayson SJ
(1990) Repairability of fire damaged structures, CIB W14
report. Fire Saf J 16(4):251336
9. Edwards WT, Gamble WL (1986) Strength of grade 60
reinforcing bars after exposure to fire temperatures. Concr
Int 8(10):1719
10. Eurocode 1 (2002) EN 1991-1-2: actions on structures. Part
1-2: general actionsactions on structures exposed to fire.
European Committee for Standardization, Brussels
11. Eurocode 2 (2004) EN 1992-1-2: design of concrete struc-
tures. Part 1-2: general rulesstructural fire design. Euro-
pean Committee for Standardization, Brussels
12. Eurocode 4 (2005) EN 1994-1-2: design of composite steel
and concrete structures. Part 1-2: general rulesstructural
fire design. European Committee for Standardization,
Brussels
13. Feasey R, Buchanan A (2002) Post-flashover fires for
structural design. Fire Saf J 37(1):83105
14. Felicetti R, Gambarova PG, Meda A (2009) Residual
behavior of steel rebars and R/C sections after a fire. Constr
Build Mater 23(12):35463555
15. Harmathy TZ (1993) Fire safety design and concrete. Wiley,
New York
16. Hertz K (1981) Simple temperature calculations of fire-
exposed concrete construction. Report 159, Institute of
Building Design
17. Hu HT, Dong YL, Liu YL (2004) Experimental study of
strength of high strength concrete under/after high temper-
ature. China Concr Cement Product 1(1):1820
18. Jiang FC, Zhu CM, Xue JS (2007) Nonlinear analysis of
load-carrying capacity for bar buckling based on arc-length
method. Build Sci 23(11):912
19. Kodur VKR, Dwaikat MB, Fike RS (2010) An approach for
evaluating the residual strength of fire-exposed RC beams.
Mag Concr Res 62(7):479488
2075
20. Kodur VKR, Fike R (2009) Guidelines for improving the
standard fire resistance test specifications. J ASTM Int
6(7):16
21. Kodur VR, Harmathy TZ (2008) Properties of building
materials. In: DiNenno PJ (ed) SFPE handbook of fire
protection engineering. National Fire Protection Associa-
tion, Quincy, 1-167-161-195
22. Kodur V, Mcgrath R (2003) Fire endurance of high strength
concrete columns. Fire Technol 39(1):7387
23. Kodur VKR, Phan L (2007) Critical factors governing the
fire performance of high strength concrete systems. Fire Saf
J 42(6):482488
24. Kodur VKR, Wang TC, Cheng FP (2004) Predicting the fire
resistance behaviour of high strength concrete columns.
Cement Concr Compos 26(2):141153
25. Li W, Guo ZH (1993) Experimental investigation of
strength and deformation of concrete at elevated tempera-
ture. J Build Struct 14(1):816 (in Chinese)
26. Lie TT (1986) Residual strength of fire-exposed reinforced
concrete columns. American Concrete Institute, ACI SP 92,
vol 92, no 9, pp 153174
27. Nassif A (2006) Postfire full stress-strain response of fire-
damaged concrete. Fire Mater 30(5):323332
28. Neves IC, Rodrigues JC, Loureiro AP (1996) Mechanical
properties of reinforcing and prestressing steels after heat-
ing. J Mater Civ Eng 8(4):189194
29. Raut N, Kodur VKR (2011) Response of high strength
concrete columns under design fire exposure. J Struct Eng
ASCE 137(1):6979
30. Raut N, Kodur VKR (2008) Fire resistance of reinforced
concrete columnsstate-of-the-art and research needs. ACI
SP-255-5 CD-ROM: designing concrete structures for fire
safety V255, pp 97124
31. Short NR, Purkiss JA, Guise SE (2001) Assessment of fire
damaged concrete using colour image analysis. Constr
Build Mater 15(1):915
32. Wickstrom U (1986) A very simple method for estimating
temperatures in fire exposed structures. In: Grayson SJ,
Smith DA (eds) New technology to reduce fire losses and
costs. Elsevier Applied Science, London, pp 186194
33. Xiao J, Konig G (2004) Study on concrete at high temper-
ature in Chinaan overview. Fire Saf J 39(1):89103
34. Yuan J, Wu B (2001) Experiment and research on work-
ability and compressive strength after high temperature of
HSC with polypropylene fiber. Concrete 137(3):3033
35. Yuzer N, Akoz F, O zturk LD, Cakir O
(2001) Compressive
strength-color change relation in fire-damaged buildings.
International Scientific Session, VSU, Sofia, pp 2935