CC BY
17doi: 10.18720/MCE.79.9
Fire protective dry plaster composition for structures in
hydrocarbon fire
Огнезащитный штукатурный состав для конструкций в условиях углеводородного горения
M.V. Gravit, E.V. Golub,
Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, St. Petersburg, Russia S.P. Antonov,
LLC Prozask, Moscow, Russia
Key words: oil and gas facilities; steel structures; fire resistance limit; passive fire protection; fire protection means; hydrocarbon fire
Канд. техн. наук, доцент М.В. Гравит, студент Е.В. Голуб,
Санкт-Петербургский политехнический университет Петра Великого, Санкт-Петербург, Россия генеральный директор С.П. Антонов, ООО «Прозаск», Москва, Россия Ключевые слова: сооружения нефтегазового комплекса; стальные конструкции; предел огнестойкости; пассивная огнезащита; средства огнезащиты; углеводородный пожар
Abstract. The result of the combustion of fire hazardous materials at the facilities of the oil and gas complex is extensive fires, characterizing the rapid temperature rise, and as a result the destruction of load-bearing structures occurs. The dynamics of the development of such fire type requires a different approach to test the structures in order to determine the limit of fire resistance. The article presents European and American normative documents that contain methods for testing structures taking into account the requirements for the hydrocarbon temperature regime of a fire. I-steel cross-sections with flame retardant coating "Fendolite MII" are tested, and the fire resistance of these structures is defined. Conclusions on the need to conduct numerous fire tests with different types of fire protection under a hydrocarbon fire regime in Russia were made in order to obtain the necessary experimental database sufficient to create a unified methodology for calculating and introducing it into national standards.
Аннотация. Результатом сгорания пожароопасных веществ на объектах нефтегазового комплекса являются обширные пожары, характеризующиеся стремительным ростом температуры, и как следствие разрушение несущих конструкций. Динамика развития такого пожара требует иной подход к проведению испытаний конструкций с целью определения предела огнестойкости. В статье приведены европейские и американские нормативные документы, содержащие методы испытаний конструкций с учетом требований к углеводородному температурному режиму пожара. Проведены испытания стальных колонн двутаврового сечения с огнезащитным покрытием «Fendolite MII», и определен предел огнестойкости данных конструкций. Сделаны выводы о необходимости проведения в России многочисленных огневых испытаний конструкций с различными типами огнезащиты в условиях углеводородного режима пожара с целью получения необходимой экспериментальной базы данных, достаточной для создания единой методики расчета и внедрения ее в национальные стандарты.
1. Introduction
Explosive combustion of fire hazardous substances at oil and gas facilities is the main cause of destruction of buildings and structures, as well as tanks, equipment, tankers and offshore platforms. The subsequent extensive fires resulting from the burning of petroleum products, as a rule, can be attributed to the so-called hydrocarbon fire.
In the articles [1, 2] the necessity of introduction and subsequent use for fire tests of building structures for fire resistance of a new temperature regime of a fire taking into account the real fire conditions is substantiated [3].
Hydrocarbon fire is characterized by a rapid temperature rise: the average surface temperature of the flame during the combustion of petroleum products reaches 1000 °C, which is much higher than the temperature of a conventional (cellulose) fire.
Similar to the standard fire regime, in which not only cellulose can be a combustible material [4], combustion of a whole group of substances similar in ease of ignition and type of combustion is a hydrocarbon fire. This group of substances consists from not only pure hydrocarbons (petrol and natural gases - methane, ethane, propane, butane, etc.), but also from their organic derivative (alcohols, phenols, ketones), virtually all petroleum products, lubricants, paint and varnish materials, many plastics with a low oxygen index.
The dynamics of the development of hydrocarbon fire requires a different approach to ensuring fire resistance of building structures. Most fire-retardant and fire-resistant building structures have proved their effectiveness under the conditions of a standard fire [5-7]. In foreign publications, many studies are devoted to fire protection of steel structures. One of the papers is devoted to the calculation of the operation of a steel plate under high-temperature conditions [8]. However, the structures studied under these conditions can not provide the same characteristics under conditions of a hydrocarbon fire [9].
An important approach for ensuring the safety of petrochemical production is the use of the risk analysis method, which allows to determine the places of the most probable occurrence of an accident, and assess their consequences. This makes it possible to adequately protect the structures from special loads caused by hydrocarbon combustion. The method of risk analysis enables the development of safer and at the same time cost-effective design solutions, including for the protection of structures. This method was adopted in Russia, Great Britain, USA, Norway, Australia, France [10-15].
Recently, modeling of hydrocarbon fires in software complexes has been used to determine the duration of fires in different areas [16], and empirical relationships connecting the values of the fire resistance limits of structures in the hydrocarbon and standard temperature regimes of a fire [17], which makes it possible to approximately estimate the fire resistance limits of structures under the hydrocarbon fire condition, when the fire resistance limits are known at the standard fire regime, and thereby facilitate the testing of the structure.
Traditionally, researches in the field of fire safety is focused on providing the required degree of fire resistance of buildings, and a little attention has been paid to the construction of bridges. The works [18, 19] are aimed to develop knowledge about the behavior of steel bridges under the influence of the hydrocarbon fire regime, which occurs, for example, in the collapse or fire of a gasoline tanker.
On the international scale, the Technical Committee 92 "Fire Safety" of the International Organization of Standardization (ISO) is engaged in the improvement and unification of the methodology for testing structures for fire resistance. Within the framework of this committee and on the basis of international cooperation, a standard of ISO 834-75 "Fire resistance tests. Elements of building constructions" (in the updated version - ISO 834-1: 1999) has been developed for the method of testing the building structures for fire resistance, which is the methodological basis for conducting such tests, including in Russia.
In determining the fire resistance of structures under the conditions of the hydrocarbon fire regime, standards such as UL 1709 (USA) [20], ASTM E 1529-14A "Standard test methods for determining effects of large hydrocarbon pool fires on structural members and assemblies" (USA) and European EN 1363-2: 1999* "Fire resistance tests - Part 2: Alternative and additional procedures", DIN 4102-21977 "Fire tests on building materials and structures. Methods for determination of the fire resistance of load bearing elements of construction" (Germany), BS 476-20: 1987 "Fire tests on building materials and structures. Method for determination of the fire resistance of elements of construction (general principles)" (Great Britain) [21]. In most cases, these standards are used to assess the stability and fire resistance of load-bearing structures of railway and automobile tunnels, as well as to evaluate the efficiency of external technological installations for the extraction, processing and transportation of gas, oil and petroleum products on offshore oil platforms. They determine the criteria for the resistance of fireproof coatings in a hydrocarbon fire. Especially for evaluating the effectiveness of fire protection of pipelines, the method of "direct impact" of the jet flame is additionally applied. The criterion for the effectiveness of the fireproof composition is the time from the beginning of the test to the onset of the limit state.
It should be noted that, according to the research of the American insurance and engineering company Global Asset Protection Services LLC (GAPS), the values of the consumption and thickness of coatings for fire-retardant products for structures according to methods of ASTM E-119 "Fire tests of building construction and materials" and UL 1709 under the hydrocarbon fire regime had a significant difference and the data obtained by these methods, respectively, required correlation between themselves [22].
Up to date, Russia has not developed a regulatory framework for fire protection of load-bearing steel structures in conditions of hydrocarbon combustion. In 2015, the normative documentation introduced the concept of a "hydrocarbon curve" [23]. This standard is identical to the European regional standard EN 1363-2: 1999.
According to [23] the hydrocarbon temperature regime is an alternative to the standard temperature regime and takes into account the real fire conditions for burning hydrocarbon fuels.
Graphical representation of the hydrocarbon fire curve and other temperature regimes is shown in the figure:
1200
1000
О
0 800
E 600
o>
s.
1 400
f-
200
°0 30 60 90 120
Time, min
Figure 1. Fire curves. 1 - standard time-temperature curve; 2 - hydrocarbon curve;
3 - external fire exposure curve; 4 - slow heating curve
The curve for cellulose combustion is also called the standard combustion curve. As can be seen from the figure, the hydrocarbon scenario of the fire development is fundamentally different from the cellulose fire: the temperature jump is much sharper and the temperature effect is higher. In such conditions, traditional fire-retardant materials do not provide the necessary level of fire-protective efficiency.
Despite of the urgency of the problem of protection in the conditions of hydrocarbon combustion for Russia, this normative document of the Russian Federation became the first official standard in this field. However, it only establishes a temperature regime, and the test methods for various types of products under the conditions of hydrocarbon combustion are only to be developed. Despite the absence of requirements and norms in the Russian Federation for the limits of fire resistance of structures under the conditions of a hydrocarbon fire, Russian manufacturers voluntarily conduct tests of the available fire protection means according to the procedures given in various foreign regulatory documents, which is an additional competitive advantage, but because of the high costs applied only for a specific security object.
One way to protect structures is passive fire protection - solutions used to prevent the occurrence and spread of fire. The most common means of passive fire protection include special refractory compounds, paints, impregnations, varnishes and fireproofing plasters [24], which can significantly reduce the likelihood of fire and spread of fire. As a passive protection against a hydrocarbon fire, 2 types of materials are used [25]:
• Lightweight cement coatings (usually based on portland cement and lightweight aggregates)
• Intumescent paints and varnish coatings
Lightweight cement coating is a relatively inexpensive material, but the application works in several stages, which ultimately increases the cost of using this type of fire protection. It is not used in rooms with a high humidity level.
Intumescent coating protects the structure by forming a heat-insulating protective layer at high temperatures. This coating is easier to apply, and to increase the protection time of steel it can be applied in several layers.
In order to increase the operational characteristics of intumescent coatings, such as durability, elasticity, homogeneity of the foam layer being formed, additional additives are applied to the standard formulations of intumescent coatings [26].
Intumescent coatings are used for protection against hydrocarbon fires, mainly on an epoxy basis. Since the epoxy has a very high resistance to almost any chemical attack, this type of product adds to its
fire-retardant characteristics an even higher level of anti-corrosion protection. In the article [27] the influence of external factors such as ultraviolet radiation, humidity, temperature changes, seawater, on the flame retardant properties of epoxy coatings examines. It is determined to what extent the protective properties of coatings in aggressive environments are reduced. Among the epoxy fireproof materials, the most common are "Jotachar 1709", "Chartek 7", "Chartek 8", "Interchar 212", "Firetex M90".
Another type of intumescent coating is a silicone-based coating. In work [28], the effect of clay as a filler on the fire resistance of a coating as a whole is considered. In [29], a new test method was developed to determine the strength of intumescent coating in a fire test and tests were conducted for epoxy and silicone based coatings.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the behavior of the "Fendolite MI I" coating in the hydrocarbon combustion regime. "Fendolite MII" is a dry plaster composition based on expanded vermiculite and portland cement, used to increase the fire resistance of bearing steel and reinforced concrete structures, equipment, tanks, pipelines, etc. in civil and industrial construction, at chemical and petrochemical facilities, fuel and energy complex and in tunnels [30].
Figure 2. Coating "Fendolite MII" on an I-beam and on steel elements
Table 1. Properties and performances of "Fendolite MII"
Color and finish Off-white, monolithic, spray texture. May be floated or roller finished
Minimum practical thickness 8 mm when unreinforced, 15 mm when reinforced
Theoretical coverage 62 m2/tonne at 25 mm thickness
Cure By hydraulic set
Initial set 2 to 6 hours at 20°C and 50% RH
Density (nominal) 775 kg/m3 ±15% (when dry and in place)
Combustibility Non-combustible to BS476:Part 4
Smoke generation Does not contribute to smoke generation
Thermal conductivity 0.19 W/mK at 20°C
Corrosion resistance Does not promote corrosion of steel. However, a primed substrate is recommended for long term corrosion resistance, particularly when the structure is to be fully exposed to the elements
pH value 12.0-12.5
Sound absorption Noise reduction coefficient (NRC) 0.35
Y
Y
__b
Figure 3. Sample cross-section
The object of the further test was 2 samples of steel columns with fireproof coating "Fendolite MII", which are rolled I-beams. The reduced thickness of the column metal is 6.3 mm.
Table 2. Characteristics of rolled I-beam profile
Profile characteristic Dimension, mm
h 298
b 299
S 9
t 14
r 18
Material of the rolled I-beam is steel grade S345. Mechanical characteristics for the thickness t=14 mm are given in Table 3.
Table 3. Mechanical characteristics steel grade S345
Mechanical characteristic Value
Yield strength, MPa 325
Tensile strength, MPa 470
Elongation, % 21
2. Methods
Tests of prototypes of steel columns with a flame retardant "Fendolite MII" on the fire impact in order to determine the fire resistance limit are performed in accordance with Russian State Standards GOST 30247.0-94 "Construction structures. Test methods for fire resistance. General requirements", GOST 30247.1-94 "Construction structures. Test methods for fire resistance, bearing and enclosing structures" provided that a hydrocarbon temperature regime is created in the fire chamber of the furnace.
According to the "Technological Regulations for the design and manufacture of works on the installation and operation of a coating based on a fire retardant mixture "Fendolite MII" to improve the fire resistance of metal structures", the application of a fire-protective coating is carried out on one layer of anticorrosion primer with a thickness of 0.05 mm, in two layers, fire retardant coating with steel plaster mesh. Thus, the average thickness of the dry coating layer for performing fire tests in a hydrocarbon fire is 30 mm for the 1st and 2nd prototype.
Experimental samples are installed in the fire chamber of the furnace and subjected to a four-sided thermal action. The furnace generates a hydrocarbon temperature regime, characterized by the dependence (1):
T = 1080 • (1 - 0.325e-0167t - 0.675e-z5t) + 20 (1)
where T - the temperature in the furnace, corresponding to the time t, °C;
t - time, calculated from the beginning of the test, min.
Tests of load-bearing elements must be carried out under load. In this paper, the effect of a static load equals to 294 kN (30 tons) was taken into account under the condition of vertical central compression with hinge support on one side and rigid fixing on the other side of the column. The load is established 60 minutes before the start of the test and is maintained constant (with an accuracy of not less than ± 5 %) during the entire duration of the fire impact.
The temperature in the fire chamber of the furnace and on the test samples is measured with oven thermocouples, and the vertical deformations of the samples during the test are a deflectometer.
For load-bearing vertical bar structures, the limit state for a fire resistance test in accordance with 8.2 of Russian State Standard GOST 30247.1 is loss of bearing capacity (R) due to collapse of the structure or occurrence of ultimate deformations. According to Appendix A of Russian State Standard GOST 30247.1, the maximum vertical deformation for a given column is 30 mm, the rate of increase of vertical deformation is more than 10 mm/min.
3. Results and discussion
During the tests in the external state of the flame retardant coating "Fendolite MII", applied to the prototypes of the steel columns, no visible changes were recorded.
Figure 4. Appearance of the experimental image of a steel column with a flame retardant "Fendolite MII" after the fire impact (sample No. 1. view of the technological
opening of the fire chamber)
The average temperatures in the fire chamber corresponded to the dependence (1). Curves of temperatures and vertical deformations changes of prototypes of steel columns with a flame retardant coating "Fendolite MII" are shown in Figure 4.
E iooo e
!
soo -I-------
0 ID 20 30 40 50 50 70 30 50 100 110 120 130
Tine» min
-Vertical deform dticnof the column, sam pie 1
--Vertical defonnatianef the column, sam pit 2 --Average tempe ratureon the columa samp le 2
Figure 5. Curves of temperature changes and vertical deformations of prototypes of a steel
column with a flame retardant coating "Fendolite MII" in the fire chamber of the furnace
On the 124th minute of the 1st and 126th tests of the 2nd test, the prototypes of steel columns passed to the limit state, characterized by a rapid increase in vertical deformation and not the ability of the design to accept a test load equal to 294 kN (30 tons).
At the time when the prototype limit state reached the loss of load capacity of the structure (R), the average temperature of the thermocouples (critical temperature) established on the metal of the test samples was 710 °C and 707 °C for the first and second samples.
Accordingly, the fire resistance limit according to the loss of bearing capacity (clause 8.1.1 and Annex A to Russian State Standard GOST 30247.1-94) of the construction of an I-steel column of height (3000 ± 10) mm with a reduced metal thickness of 6.3 mm with a flame retardant coating "Fendolite MII" at an average thickness of the dry coating layer of 30.0 mm, tested under the action of a static load equal to 294 kN (30 tons), provided the hydrocarbon temperature regime in the fire chamber of the furnace, was 125 minutes, which shows the significant ability of a fire-retardant coating "Fendolite MII" hydrocarbon type resists combustion, significantly exceeding the standard fire temperature regime.
For buildings and structures of the I degree of fire resistance according to Russian normative document SP 2.13130.2012 "Fire protection systems. Provision of fire resistance of protection facilities" the required fire resistance of load-bearing structures is 120 min, which means that the coating under investigation is capable of providing maximum regulatory requirements, but for a standard fire regime. At present, the standardization of fire resistance limits for the hydrocarbon fire regime is absent, the testing process goes randomly and leads to additional costs for manufacturers of fire protection means.
Plastered fire retardant compositions based on portland cement are the first in use as a flame retardant, the second is epoxy compositions [21].
According to the official websites of some companies that reported test results for fire retardant products for building structures tested for fire resistance under hydrocarbon fire, and UL 1709 certificates available in the open online database of Underwriters Laboratory [31] the reduced thickness of columns (column W10 x 49 according to the American classification) is about 6 mm. The thickness of the coating layer with a flame retardant efficiency of 120 minutes averages 30 mm. For example, for "Chartek 7", these data are 15 mm (epoxy base), for coating on the basis of portland cement "Pyrocrete 241" - 28.6 mm [27-29].
To use the correctly selected passive fire protection in conditions of hydrocarbon fire, and accordingly the most effective protection of objects at risk of this fire, there is a need to introduce a calculation procedure to determine the fire resistance of structures in the hydrocarbon combustion condition. To do this, it is necessary to collect and systematize the database for testing various types of load-bearing elements using different types of fire protection.
In the future, it is planned to test steel columns under different loads, with other reduced metal thicknesses to create an integral picture of the behavior of the fire-retardant coating under conditions of hydrocarbon combustion.
4. Conclusions
The results of experimental studies have shown that the fire resistance limit due to the loss of the load-carrying capacity of the I-section steel column with the "Fendolite MII" flame retardant coating, with an average dry film thickness of 30.0 mm, tested under a constant load of 294 kN (30 tons) the condition for creating a hydrocarbon temperature regime in the fire chamber of the furnace, was 125 minutes.
As a result of the work, conclusions on the need to create a national regulatory framework with a clear regulation of the test methods for designs and the relevance of research on passive fire protection in hydrocarbon combustion were made.
Reference
1. Golovanov V.I., Kuznetsova Y.V. Effektivnyye sredstva ognezashchity dlya stalnykh i zhelezobetonnykh konstruktsiy [Effective means of fire protection for steel and reinforced concrete structures]. Promyshlennoye i grazhdanskoye stroitelstvo. 2015. No. 9. Pp. 82-90. (rus)
2. Shvyrkov S.A., Yuryev Y.I. Temperaturnyy rezhim pozhara dlya opredeleniya predela ognestoykosti ograzhdayushchikh sten neftyanykh rezervuarov [Temperature mode of fire for determination of the fire resistance limit of wall walls of oil tanks]. Tekhnologii tekhnosfernoy bezopasnosti. 2016. No. 4. Pp. 50-56. (rus)
3. Khasanov I.R., Gravit M.V., Kosachev A.A., Pekhotikov A.V., Pavlov V.V. Garmonizatsiya yevropeyskikh i rossiyskikh normativnykh dokumentov, ustanavlivayushchikh obshchiye trebovaniya k metodam ispytaniy na ognestoykost stroitelnykh konstruktsiy i primeneniyu temperaturnykh rezhimov, uchityvayushchikh realnyye usloviya pozhara [Harmonization of European and Russian regulatory documents that establish general requirements for fire test methods for building structures and the application of temperature regimes that take into account the real fire conditions]. Pozharovzryvobezopasnost. No. 3. 2014. Pp. 49-57. (rus)
4. Saknite T., Serdjuks D., Goremikins V., Pakrastins L., Vatin N.I. Fire design of arch-type timber roof. Magazine of Civil Engineering. 2016. No. 4(64). Pp. 26-39.
5. Schaumann P., Tabeling F., Weisheim W. Heating behaviour of intumescent coatings in steel constructions -
Литература
1. Голованов В.И., Кузнецова Е.В. Эффективные средства огнезащиты для стальных и железобетонных конструкций // Промышленное и гражданское строительство. 2015. № 9. С. 82-90.
2. Швырков С.А., Юрьев Я.И. Температурный режим пожара для определения предела огнестойкости ограждающих стен нефтяных резервуаров // Технологии техносферной безопасности. 2016. № 4. С. 50-56.
3. Хасанов И.Р., Гравит М.В., Косачев А.А., Пехотиков А.В., Павлов В.В. Гармонизация европейских и российских нормативных документов, устанавливающих общие требования к методам испытаний на огнестойкость строительных конструкций и применению температурных режимов, учитывающих реальные условия пожара // Пожаровзрывобезопасность. 2014. № 3. С. 49-57.
4. Сакните Т., Сердюк Д.О., Горемыкин В.В., Пакрастиньш Л., Ватин Н.И. Проектирование огнестойких арочных деревянных покрытий // Инженерно-строительный журнал. 2016. № 4(64). C. 26-39.
5. Schaumann P., Tabeling F., Weisheim W. Heating behaviour of intumescent coatings in steel constructions -Advanced numerical simulations taking the foaming process into account // Stahlbau. 2014. № 83(9). Pp. 646-651.
6. Schaumann P., Kirsch T. Protected steel and composite
Advanced numerical simulations taking the foaming process into account. Stahlbau. 2014. No. 83(9). Pp. 646-651.
6. Schaumann P., Kirsch T. Protected steel and composite connections: Simulation of the mechanical behaviour of steel and composite connections protected by intumescent coating in fire. Journal of Structural Fire Engineering. 2015. No. 6(1). Pp. 41-48.
7. Kraus P., Mensinger M., Tabeling F., Schaumann P. Experimental and numerical investigations of steel profiles with intumescent coating adjacent to space-enclosing elements in fire. Journal of Structural Fire Engineering. 2015. No. 6(4). Pp. 237-246.
8. Salminen M., Heinisuo M. Numerical analysis of thin steel plates loaded in shear at non-uniform elevated temperatures. Journal of Constructional Steel Research. 2014. No. 97. Pp. 105-113.
9. Shabalin S. Metody passivnoy ognezashchity [Methods of passive fire protection]. Gazovaya promyshlennost. 2017. No. 9. Pp. 122-125. (rus)
10. Gimranov F.M. Prognozirovaniye stsenariyev razvitiya avariy na neftekhimicheskikh proizvodstvakh [Prediction accident scenarios in the petrochemical industry]. Vestnik Kazanskogo tekhnologicheskogo universiteta. 2010. No. 5. Pp. 301. (rus)
11. Mordvinova A.V., Gordiyenko D.M., Shebeko Y.N., Lagozin A.Y., Nekrasov V.P. Metody upravleniya pozharnym riskom morskikh statsionarnykh neftegazodobyvayushchikh platformakh. Gazovaya promyshlennost [Methods for managing fire risk for offshore stationary oil and gas production platforms. Gas industry]. Promyshlennaya bezopasnost i protivopozharnaya zashchita obyektov gazovoy promyshlennosti. 2014. Pp. 30-34. (rus)
12. Lazarevska M., Cvetkovska M., Knezevic M., Trombeva Gavriloska A., Milanovic M., Murgul V., Vatin N. Neural network prognostic model for predicting the fire resistance of eccentrically loaded RC columns. Applied Mechanics and Materials. 2014. Vol. 627. Pp. 276-282.
13. Paik J.K., Czujko J. Engineering and design disciplines associated with management of hydrocarbon explosion and fire risks in offshore oil and gas facilities. Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. 2013. Vol. 120. Pp. 167-197.
14. Paik J.K., Czujko J. Assessment of hydrocarbon explosion and fire risks in offshore installations: Recent advances and future trends. IES Journal Part A: Civil and Structural Engineering. 2016. Vol. 4. Pp. 167-179.
15. Imran M., Liew M.S., Nasif M.S., Niazi U.M., Yasreen A. Hazard assessment studies on hydrocarbon fire and blast: An overview. Advanced Science Letters. 2017. Vol. 23. Pp. 1243-1247.
16. Shebeko A.Y., Shebeko Y.N., Gordiyenko D.M. Raschetnaya otsenka ekvivalentnoy prodolzhitelnosti pozhara dlya stalnykh konstruktsiy tekhnologicheskoy estakady neftepererabatyvayushchego predpriyatiya [The estimated duration of the fire for the equivalent steel structure technology overpass refinery]. Pozharnaya bezopasnost. 2017. No. 1. Pp. 25-29. (rus)
17. Shebeko A.Y., Shebeko Y.N. Vzaimosvyaz velichin temperatury stroitelnykh konstruktsiy pri standartnom i uglevodorodnom temperaturnykh rezhimakh pozhara [Interrelation of temperature values of building structures under standard and hydrocarbon temperature conditions of a fire]. Pozharnaya bezopasnost. 2017. No. 2. Pp. 46-49. (rus)
18. Payá-Zaforteza I., Garlock M.E.M. A 3D numerical analysis of a typical steel highway overpass bridge under a hydrocarbon fire. Structures in Fire - Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference, SiF'10. 2010. Pp. 11-18.
19. Alos-Moya J., Paya-Zaforteza I., Garlock M.E.M., Loma-Ossorio E., Schiffner D., Hospitaler A. Analysis of a bridge failure due to fire using computational fluid dynamics and finite element models. Engineering Structures. 2014.
connections: Simulation of the mechanical behaviour of steel and composite connections protected by intumescent coating in fire // Journal of Structural Fire Engineering. 2015. No. 6(1). Pp. 41-48.
7. Kraus P., Mensinger M., Tabeling F., Schaumann P. Experimental and numerical investigations of steel profiles with intumescent coating adjacent to space-enclosing elements in fire // Journal of Structural Fire Engineering. 2015. No. 6(4). Pp. 237-246.
8. Salminen M., Heinisuo M. Numerical analysis of thin steel plates loaded in shear at non-uniform elevated temperatures // Journal of Constructional Steel Research. 2014. № 97. Pp. 105-113.
9. Шабалин С. Методы пассивной огнезащиты // Газовая промышленность. 2017. № 9. С. 122-125.
10. Гимранов Ф.М. Прогнозирование сценариев развития аварий на нефтехимических производствах // Вестник Казанского технологического университета. 2010. № 5. С. 301.
11. Мордвинова А.В., Гордиенко Д.М., Шебеко Ю.Н., Лагозин А.Ю., Некрасов В.П. Методы управления пожарным риском морских стационарных нефтегазодобывающих платформах. Газовая промышленность // Промышленная безопасность и противопожарная защита объектов газовой промышленности. 2014. С. 30-34.
12. Lazarevska M., Cvetkovska M., Knezevic M., Trombeva Gavriloska A., Milanovic M., Murgul V., Vatin N. Neural network prognostic model for predicting the fire resistance of eccentrically loaded RC columns // Applied Mechanics and Materials. 2014. Vol. 627. Pp. 276-282.
13. Paik J.K., Czujko J. Engineering and design disciplines associated with management of hydrocarbon explosion and fire risks in offshore oil and gas facilities // Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. 2013. Vol. 120. Pp. 167-197.
14. Paik J.K., Czujko J. Assessment of hydrocarbon explosion and fire risks in offshore installations: Recent advances and future trends // IES Journal Part A: Civil and Structural Engineering. 2016. Vol. 4. Pp. 167-179.
15. Imran M., Liew M.S., Nasif M.S., Niazi U.M., Yasreen A. Hazard assessment studies on hydrocarbon fire and blast: An overview // Advanced Science Letters. 2017. Vol. 23. Pp. 1243-1247.
16. Шебеко А.Ю., Шебеко Ю.Н., Гордиенко Д.М. Расчетная оценка эквивалентной продолжительности пожара для стальных конструкций технологической эстакады нефтеперерабатывающего предприятия // Пожарная безопасность. 2017. № 1. С. 25-29.
17. Шебеко А.Ю., Шебеко Ю.Н. Взаимосвязь величин температуры строительных конструкций при стандартном и углеводородном температурных режимах пожара // Пожарная безопасность. 2017. № 2. С. 46-49.
18. Payá-Zaforteza I., Garlock M.E.M. A 3D numerical analysis of a typical steel highway overpass bridge under a hydrocarbon fire // Structures in Fire - Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference, SiF'10. 2010. Pp. 11-18.
19. Alos-Moya J., Paya-Zaforteza I., Garlock M.E.M., Loma-Ossorio E., Schiffner D., Hospitaler A. Analysis of a bridge failure due to fire using computational fluid dynamics and finite element models // Engineering Structures. 2014. Vol. 68. Pp. 96-110.
20. UL 1709 «Standard for safety for rapid rise fire tests of protection materials for structural steel».
21. Gravit M., Gumerova E., Bardin A., Lukinov V. Increase of fire resistance limits of building structures of oil-and-gas complex under hydrocarbon fire // Springer, Cham: International Scientific Conference Energy Management of Municipal Transportation Facilities and Transport. 2018. Vol. 692. Pp. 818-829.
22. Fireproofing for hydrocarbon fire exposures. GAPS Guidelines. Publication of Global Asset Protection Services
Vol. 68. Pp. 96-110.
20. UL 1709 «Standard for safety for rapid rise fire tests of protection materials for structural steel».
21. Gravit M., Gumerova E., Bardin A., Lukinov V. Increase of fire resistance limits of building structures of oil-and-gas complex under hydrocarbon fire. Springer, Cham: International Scientific Conference Energy Management of Municipal Transportation Facilities and Transport. 2018. Vol. 692. Pp. 818-829.
22. Fireproofing for hydrocarbon fire exposures. GAPS Guidelines. Publication of Global Asset Protection Services LLC.
23. Russian State Standard GOST R EN 1363-2-2014 "Konstruktsii stroitelnyye. Ispytaniya na ognestoykost. Chast 2. Alternativnyye i dopolnitelnyye metody" [Fire resistance tests. Alternative and additional procedures]. (rus)
24. Gravit M., Gumenyuk V., Sychov M., Nedryshkin O. Estimation of the pores dimensions of intumescent coatings for increase the fire resistance of building structures. Procedia Engeneering. 2015. Vol. 117. Pp. 119-125.
25. Dybal D.A., Shishilov O.N., Garustovich I.V. Passivnaya ognezashchita v usloviyakh uglevodorodnogo pozhara [Passive fire protection in a hydrocarbon fire]. Lakokrasochnyye materialy i ikh primeneniye. 2017. No. 6. Pp. 16-19. (rus)
26. Zybina O., Gravit M., Stein Y. Influence of carbon additives on operational properties of the intumescent coatings for the fire protection of building construction. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2017. Vol. 90. Pp. 1-4.
27. Jimenez M., Bellayer S., Revel B., Duquesne S., Bourbigot S. Comprehensive study of the influence of different aging scenarios on the fire protective behavior of an epoxy based intumescent coating. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research. 2013. Vol. 52. Pp. 729-743.
28. Gardelle B., Duquesne S., Vandereecken P, Bellayer S., Bourbigot S. Resistance to fire of intumescent silicone based coating: The role of organoclay. Progress in Organic Coatings. 2013. Vol. 76. Pp. 1633-1641.
29. Bourbigot S, Naik A.D., Bachelet P., Duquesne S. Novel dynamic method for evaluating the char strength of intumescent coatings. Foreign Language Association of Maine, Annual Conference. 2016.
30. Ognezashchitnaya shtukaturka FENDOLITE-MII [Fireproof plaster FENDOLITE-MII] [Online]. System requirements: Internet Explorer. uRL: https://www.promat.ru/ru-ru/ognezaschitnye-materialy/ognezaschitnye-shtykaturki/promaspray-f5. (date of reference: 16.04.18).
31. Database of Underwriters Laboratory [Online]. System requirements: Internet Explorer. URL:http://database.ul.com/cgi-
bin/XYV/template/LISEXT/1FRAME/index.html?_ga=2.154 590717.417029873.1502435981-973715613.1499071474 (date of reference: 16.04.2018).
LLC.
23. ГОСТ Р ЕН 1363-2-2014 "Конструкции строительные. Испытания на огнестойкость. Часть 2. Альтернативные и дополнительные методы".
24. Gravit M., Gumenyuk V., Sychov M., Nedryshkin O. Estimation of the pores dimensions of intumescent coatings for increase the fire resistance of building structures// Procedia Engeneering. 2015. Vol. 117. Pp. 119-125.
25. Дыбаль Д.А., Шишилов О.Н., Гарустович И.В. Пассивная огнезащита в условиях углеводородного пожара // Лакокрасочные материалы и их применение. 2017. № 6. С. 16-19.
26. Zybina O., Gravit M., Stein Y. Influence of carbon additives on operational properties of the intumescent coatings for the fire protection of building constructions // IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2017. Vol. 90. Pp. 1-4.
27. Jimenez M., Bellayer S., Revel B., Duquesne S., Bourbigot S. Comprehensive study of the influence of different aging scenarios on the fire protective behavior of an epoxy based intumescent coating // Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research. 2013. Vol. 52. Pp. 729-743.
28. Gardelle B., Duquesne S., Vandereecken P, Bellayer S., Bourbigot S. Resistance to fire of intumescent silicone based coating: The role of organoclay // Progress in Organic Coatings. 2013. Vol. 76. Pp. 1633-1641.
29. Bourbigot S, Naik A.D., Bachelet P., Duquesne S. Novel dynamic method for evaluating the char strength of intumescent coatings // Foreign Language Association of Maine, Annual Conference. 2016
30. Огнезащитная штукатурка FENDOLITE-MII [Электронный ресурс]. Систем. требования: Internet Explorer. uRL: https://www.promat.ru/ru-ru/ognezaschitnye-materialy/ognezaschitnye-shtykaturki/promaspray-f5. (дата обращения: 16.04.18)
31. Database of Underwriters Laboratory [Электронный ресурс]. Систем. требования: Internet Explorer. URL:http://database.ul.com/cgi-
bin/XYV/template/LISEXT/1 FRAME/index.html?_ga=2.154 590717.417029873.1502435981-973715613.1499071474 (дата обращения 16.04.2018).
Marina Gravit,
+7(912)912-64-07; marina.gravit@mail.ru Elena Golub,
+7(911)972-24-66; alen-go@bk.ru Sergey Antonov,
+7(903) 107-61-52; asp@prozask.ru
Марина Викторовна Гравит,
+7(912)912-64-07;
эл. почта: marina.gravit@mail.ru
Елена Владимировна Голуб, +7(911)972-24-66; эл. почта: alen-go@bk.ru
Сергей Порфирьевич Антонов, +7(903)107-61-52; эл. почта: asp@prozask.ru
© Gravit M.G.,Golub E.V.,Antonov S.P.,2018
