Differences of Fire Resistance According to Boundary Conditions of Submarine Structural Steels

In Kyu Kwon

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.905.137

Paper Titles

Synthesis of an In Situ Aluminum Matrix Composite Fabricated by Al-Cr₂O₃ System
p.119

The High Temperature Oxidation Behavior of Hot-Dipping Al Coating on 0Cr18Ni10Ti Stainless Steel
p.123

The Influence of Chemical Compounds on the Sulfur K-Edge X-Ray Absorption near Edge Spectrum of the Vulcanized Rubber
p.128

Research of Fluxless Soldering of High-Purity Aluminium with Solders Type Zn-Al
p.132

Differences of Fire Resistance According to Boundary Conditions of Submarine Structural Steels
p.137

A Hydrogen Embrittlement Mechanism for Sensitized Types 304, 316 and 310 Austenitic Stainless Steels
p.141

Modification of Mg Alloy Surfaces Based on Micro-Arc Oxidation Methods
p.146

Plasmids Role in Survival of Acinetobacter calcoaceticus A1 Exposed to UV-Radiation and Hydrocarbons
p.151

Effect of Electrical Potential on DPPC Liposome Lubrication for Artificial Joint
p.156

HomeAdvanced Materials ResearchAdvanced Materials Research Vol. 905Differences of Fire Resistance According to...

Differences of Fire Resistance According to Boundary Conditions of Submarine Structural Steels

Abstract:

Structural steels have been developed in terms of users needs. Particularly, easy welding is one of the most important factors of steel works that results in submarine structural steel (SM). The SM has become a popular structural steel in building construction in columns and beams proving as good as ordinary structural steels (SS). However, evaluation of fire resistance at H-section made of SM steels was not suggested in terms of boundary conditions. In this paper, to compare the fire resistance of H-section made of SM steels, such as SM 400, SM 490, and SM 520 was tested and analyzed in terms of load carrying capacity at high temperature. The facts showed that as the strength is increased, the reduction ratio of an allowable load is rapid and fixed to fixed boundary condition was more robust than others in high temperatures.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Advances in Applied Materials and Electronics Engineering III

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volume 905)

Pages:

137-140

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.905.137

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

April 2014

Authors:

In Kyu Kwon*

Keywords:

Buckling, Elastic Modulus, Fire Design, Structural Stability at High Temperature, Submarine Structural Steels

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] K. J. Lamalva, Thermal response of steel structures to fire: test versus field conditions, Journal of Fire Protetion Engineering, 21(2011) pp.285-299.

DOI: 10.1177/1042391511427101

Google Scholar

[2] In-Kyu Kwon, A study of the properties of SM 400 for evaluation of structural stability at high temperature, Journal of Korean Institute of Fire Science and Engineering, 4(2013) pp.1-7.

Google Scholar

[3] Korean Standard Association, KS B 0802, Method of tensile test for metallic materials, Seoul, Korea(2003).

Google Scholar

[4] Korean Standard Association, KS D 0026Method of elevated temperature tensile test for steels and heat-resisting alloys, Seoul, Korea (2002).

Google Scholar

[5] SBI, Fire engineering design of steel structures, Swedish Institute of Steel Construction, Stockholm(1976).

Google Scholar