7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
1/36
High Rise Buildingsand
Large firesStructural loads & thermal strainWhat can happen?
As presented to the Northern California-Nevada Chapter of theSociety of Fire Protection Engineers
On April 21, 2006 in Walnut Creek, California.
by Edward Munyak, [email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
2/36
Probable Maximum Loss
PML assumes a fire scenariowith a loss of one suppressionsystem and a delay in manualfire fighting.
The 9/11 Commission reportignores the collapse of WTC 7
The NIST Report on WTC 1,2 &7 implies that global collapsewas inevitable for these steelstructures.
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
3/36
Is there a new paradigm
for building collapse? What follows is a study of steel frame
building response to maximum fireconditions based on:
Historical catastrophic fires in high rise buildingsfrom 1986 to 2005
Actual fire tests in steel frame buildings in the UK
Thermodynamic simulations
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
4/36
Fire Resistance
Unprotected steel that resists high windsand seismic forces has considerable fireresistance.
Adding dead weight at a cost of 20% ?
Structures need to be designed to resisthigher wind, seismic loads and increasedfire resistance will automatically follow.
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
5/36
Inherent fire resistance
In many instances, particularly in tallbuildings or massive structures, the mass ofsteel required to support loads and resistmoments is very large and thus the thermal
mass of the steel itself provides inherentresistance to weakening by fire fire exposurefor periods of time that can be determined byengineering analysis page 17 NISTstructural steel report GCR 04-872 7/2004
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
6/36
ASTM E-119 is the standard test for fullsize structural components.
Oven temperature(not structure) versustime.
One side of the structure is exposed toheat.
If temperature on unexposed side isexcessive or if deflection is above a
certain limit after the test duration, thecomponent fails.
Structure is always within the elasticrange
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
7/36
ASTM vs Real fires
Recent and historical large firesin steel frame buildings havedemonstrated that actual fireperformance of the structuralsystem is much better thanresults of the test of a singlecomponent.
Broadgate Fire in UK occurredprior to fire proofing. Structureexceeded 650 degree C. but didnot collapse.
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
8/36
mu a ons o an arFires
on whole frame designPerformance based approachdeleted fire proofing on most
secondary steel.Catenary action on beams and
Tensile membrane action offloor slabs compensated for thereduction of strength at highertemperatures
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
9/36
High rise Building fires
20 year time spanMontreal, Canada 1986, 15
stories
Los Angeles, 1988, FirstInterstate Bank
One Meridian Plaza,Philadelphia, 1991
WTC 1, 2 & 7, NYC. 9/11/2001
Parque Central, Caracas,Venezuela 2004
Edificio Madrid, Spain 2005
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
10/36
Montreal, Canada
October 26, 1986 15 story SFRM Steel frame building with a
fire load estimated to be at least twice WTC (10 - 11 lbs/sq ft vs 4 lbs/ sq ft in WTC)
Fire burned for over 13 hours on multiplefloor levels due to vertical openings.
A 30ft x 40ft section on the 11th floor fell tothe 10th floor when welded clips failed. Noinelastic deformation noted on surroundingstructure.
Loss demonstrated the need for automaticsprinkler protection and protection of verticalopenings.
Interesting example of girder to columnfailure of weld clip.
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
11/36
First Interstate Bank Fire
Los Angeles, May 4, 198862 story type II. SFRM steel frame,
open floor plan
Fire duration was 3 1/2 hours
Fire spread vertically from 12 th to15th floors internally and externally.
Many broken windows resulted in asevere fire and auto-ignition
Smoke spread throughout buildingbut there was no structural framedamage.
Fire damper in HVAC failed at
critical point
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
12/36
One Meridian Plaza, Philadelphia,Pa
February 23, 1991 Fire gutted 8 floors of a 38 story building
3 fire fighters died,$100 million in direct fire loss,$ 4 billion civil damage
Fire burned for over 19 hours Major power and water supply failure
Severe fire broke most windows on the fire floors
Fire spread externally by auto-ignition
Fire was stopped by automatic sprinklers on the30th floor.
Vertical columns were not damaged, horizontalbeams sagged as much as 3 feet.
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
13/36
WTC 1 and 2
NYC Sept 11, 2001
Applying the equal-area
principle for the time-temperature curve, fires werenot as severe as ASTM standardand less than all otherexamples.
Each tower was more massivethan other high rise examples.
NIST report, page 77, estimates
a fuel loading of 4 lbs/ sq ft or60 tons of combustibles er
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
14/36
WTC 1 & 2 Structure
Designed in accordance with the 1968 NYCbuilding code with a 50 year wind storm ofjust under 100 mph which exceeds existingand current codes.
Designed to resist the impact of a Boeing707@ 600 mph
Originally designed with gypsum board andSFRM to protect core.
Building core supported gravity load, external
high strength columns could be undercompression or tension
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
15/36
ASTM vs WTC South
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
temperature
WTC South Temperature
After the initial fireball1050 C for 2min.
Fuel burns off in 10 minutes
4 lbs/ ft fire load equates
To 30-40 min duration.
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
16/36
NIST analysis of WTC
collapseThe towers withstood the
impact and would haveremained standing if not for thedislodged insulation(fireproofing) and subsequent multi-floor fires.
Towers were built in accordancewith 1968 NYC Building Code.
Recommended objective shouldbe survival of an uncontrollablefire without local or globalcollapse.
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
17/36
WTC Tower structure
Gravity loads were supported by47 steel columns in the core.
Wind loads were resisted by 59columns on each of 4 sides thatcould be in compression ortension.
The floors were compositeconcrete and steel. Steel trusseshad viscoelastic dampers onbottom chord.
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
18/36
Thermal simulation of south
tower A steel frame building with the mass of WTC 1 or 2
could have partial structural collapse after aircraftimpact only if the heat output was at least 100 timesthe heat release rate of the accountable fuel load and
ventilation conditions in the south tower. This fire would need to involve every floor from
impact floor to the roof with most windows brokenand providing plenty of oxygen as in the EdificioWindsor fire in Madrid.
This most severe fire would need to burn for at least12 hours before loss of strength from heat; andthermal strains from expansion and contractioncaused partial collapse.
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
19/36
Anomalies within an Anomaly
Unprecedented total collapse of a steelframe building.
The tower with the least structural damageand smallest fire collapsed first.
If lack of fire proofing brought down WTC 1& 2 why did intact fire proofing not help
WTC 7? On the scene professional fire fighters
knew that the building was not damaged tothe verge of collapse.
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
20/36
WTC 7
WTC 7 was one city blockaway from Towers
No damage to fire proofing
Small fires were observed
Global collapse was initiatedon the lowest level
Different structure
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
21/36
Parque Central Office BuildingCaracas, Venezuela
October 15, 2004 South Americas Tallest building at 56 stories
Automatic sprinkler system impaired
The fire burned for over 24 hours and consumed 17floors at a rate one floor every 2 1/2 hours.
Five spray fire proofed structural steel sections weresandwiched between concrete protected steel macroslabs that were supported by exterior reinforced columns
Fire spread by auto-ignition and through unrated floorpanels in the two hour rated floors. Total glass breakageon fire floors..
Two floor areas partially collapsed, fire chief ordered fire
fighters to abandon interior fire fighting but there was nofurther collapse.
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
22/36
Edificio Windsor
Madrid, Spain 12 Feb, 2005 Fire started on the 21 st floor of a 32 story
concrete core column building with unprotectedsteel beams on perimeter with unprotectedperimeter columns
Building was being renovated; there were largeunprotected vertical openings.
Unknown fire load but judging by the 18- 20 hourfire duration, and massive flames, the fire loadmust have been high.
The suspicious fire spread from the 21 floor to the
top 32nd floor within one hour and then downwardto the lowest floor(4th) within the next 10 +hours.
Property was valued at 72 million Euros before thefire that gutted it.
A portion of the floor slabs above the 17th floor
that was supported by unprotected steel beamscollapsed but the reinforced concrete core
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
23/36
Madrid,Spain12/2/2005
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
24/36
Edificio Windsor Madrid, Spain
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
25/36
Edificio Windsor, Madrid 2/12/2005
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
26/36
Edificio Windsor
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
27/36
Theorem of CastiglianoElements of Strength of Materials by Timoshenko & Young 4th edition
page, p. 246-263
Strain energy that must be overcome beforelimit collapse is complete is proportional toall forces squared and inversely
proportional to high strength modulus ofelasticity.
Integration of area under the stress-straincurve represents a massive amount ofstrain energy that must be overcomebefore collapse is complete in the caseWTC 1, 2 & 7.
The only available source of energy of thatmagnitude is the potential energy of atleast 10 floors and it had to be released in
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
28/36
Energy available for
releaseFire tests in the UK shown the
structure under load at veryhigh temperatures slowlyreleasing potential energy ofmass and height by plasticdeformation of the heated steel.
Chemical energy in the fuel andpotential energy (mass xheight) is released by plasticdeformation wheretemperatures are hottest.
The load path then shifts to
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
29/36
Steel in plastic range
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
30/36
Magnitude of Available Energysources
Chemical energy in jet fuel(2 planes)=6.9.e+10metric joules
(applied over 5 -10 minute time duration)
Kinetic energy (2 planes) = 1.9 e+9 metric joules(less than one second)
Potential energy (2 towers) =6.8 e=11 metric joules
(controlled demolition can release this in less than
one second)
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
31/36
Releasing Gravitational
Energy Collapse in WTC was initiated near the floors of
Impact.
The center core suddenly dropped without anyresistance from the structures below.
If column severing energy was sequentially timed sothat as the total mass accelerating down met minimalresistance for 2 or 3 floor enough potential energywill be converted into downward momentum so thatin the words of the NIST report global collapse was
inevitable. All potential energy was suddenly released and
available for inelastic deformation of steel andsimultaneous pulverizing of concrete within a timespan of about 10 seconds
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
32/36
RecommendationReimbursement of any loss must be
contingent upon access to and analysis offire damaged structure:
The wreckage of WTC 1, 2 & 7 was worthhundreds of millions of dollars in terms ofresearch and practical knowledge.
There was evidence of sulfadation on beamsfrom explosive material
The severed ends of beams were observedto be partially molten for days after clean-
up. This is characteristic of thermite.
WTC C ll
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
33/36
WTC CollapseProfessor Steven Jones of BYU
Department of Physics and Astronomy
WTC 7 collapsed rapidly and symmetrically-even though fires were randomly scattered in
the building
Where is the delay that must be expected dueto conservation of momentum-one of thefoundational laws of physics
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
34/36
http://www.implosionworld.com/cinema.htm
What is incredible in the fire effectscontinua is routine in the world ofcontrolled demolition.
Even with explosives, achieving suchresults requires a great deal of pre-planning and expertise
The explosive demolition hypothesisbetter satisfies tests of repeatability andparsimony states Professor Steven Jones
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.htmlhttp://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.htmlhttp://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.htmlhttp://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
35/36
To be continued
For additional informationcontact
Edward Munyak, P.E.
esmunyak@ earthlink.net
(650)948-8035
7/27/2019 4-21 col SFPE
36/36
References NFPA Journal, March/April 2005 Fire Unchecked page 47 Caracas, Venezuela Fire
Culver, Charles, Characteristics of fire loads in office buildings Fire Technology1978, Vol 14, No.1 pages 51-60
NFPA investigation of High Rise office Building Fire, Montreal, Canada, October 26,1986
NFPA investigations of May 4, 1988 First Bank Building Bank Fire, Los Angeles, Ca
WWW. Implosionworld.com
http://911reserach.wtc7.net
Building Regulatory Systems in a post-September 11 World by Richard Bukowski,P.E. NIST Building and Fire Research Laboratory
http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/casestudy/historicfires/building fires/default.htm
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
Fire Protection of Structural Steel in High Rise Buildings, NIST GCR 04-872
Moscatelli, Frank, WETC energy calculations
9/11 Commission Report, Omissions and Distortions. David Ray Griffin
9/11 Synthetic Terror-Made in the USA, Webster Griffin Tarpley
http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/casestudy/historichttp://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.htmlhttp://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.htmlhttp://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/casestudy/historicTop Related