See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/275957788

TESTS ON INTUMESCENT PAINTS FOR FIRE PROTECTION OF EXISTING STEEL

STRUCTURES

Conference Paper · April 2015

CITATIONS READS

3 1,248

4 authors, including:

Antonio Bilotta Donatella de Silva .

University of Naples Federico II University of Naples Federico II
66 PUBLICATIONS   650 CITATIONS    15 PUBLICATIONS   36 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Emidio Nigro
University of Naples Federico II
112 PUBLICATIONS   1,169 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Interfacial stress transfer between FRP composites and a quasi-brittle substrates View project

COST Action C26 - Urban Habitat Constructions Under Catastrophic Events View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Donatella de Silva . on 07 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 IFireSS – International Fire Safety Symposium
Coimbra, Portugal, 20th-23rd April 2015

TESTS ON INTUMESCENT PAINTS FOR FIRE PROTECTION

OF EXISTING STEEL STRUCTURES

Antonio Bilotta Donatella de Silva Emidio Nigro* Luca Ponticelli

Assistant Professor PhD Student Associate Professor Civil Engineer
Di.St. - University of Di.St. - University of Di.St. - University of Italian National Fire
Naples Federico II Naples Federico II Naples Federico II Services
Naples, Italy Naples, Italy Naples, Italy Rome, Italy

ABSTRACT
The most common fire protections (e.g. intumescent coatings, board based systems, sprayed
fire protection systems and also concrete encasement or filling) reduce the heating during a
fire. Intumescent coating (i.c.) are often used on exposed steel structures, since the structural,
aesthetic, and architectural value of the structural objects remains preserved. Indeed, i.c.
normally form a protective layer on the surface. When exposed to fire or excessive heat, the
protective layer will resist and absorb heat, thus protecting the structural member from
damage or deformation. Volume expansion and density reduction takes place when
temperature starts to rise. In order to perform rigorous and realistic analyses on protected
steel members, thermal properties of all materials, including i.c., have to be known.
Nevertheless, especially for existing buildings, the thermal characterization of these systems
is not available and therefore experimental tests at high temperature should be performed.
Recently, an experimental program was performed at the horizontal furnace of the Italian
National Fire Services in Rome to characterize the fire behavior of i.c. applied on an existing
80’s steel building. The most significant results are shown to highlight the practical
significance of the experimental research.
Keywords: Experimental tests, thermal behavior, adhesion, intumescent coating, existing buildings

*
Corresponding author – Department of Structures for Engineering and Architecture. University of Naples Federico II. Via Claudio 21, 80125. Naples
(ITALY). Phone: +39 0817683686, Fax: +39 0817683332. e-mail: emidio.nigro@unina.it
1. INTRODUCTION

An increase of the fire resistance time for steel structures can be achieved by applying fire
protection materials that insulate the steel structure from the effects of the elevated
temperatures that are generated during a fire. They can be divided into two categories
[1]:passive materials, of which the most common types are incombustible boards, and reactive
materials, of which the intumescent coatings (i.c.) are an example. Coatings are available as
solvent or water-based systems, which are applied with a thickness ranging between 400m
and 3000m. The advantages of this kind of protection include the reduced overweight
compared to other materials, easy application and a good surfaces finishing.
The reaction of i.c. starts at about 300°C but the effectiveness decreases with high
temperature, which cause the formation of some compounds that make the overall structure of
the paint more rigid, determining stress concentrations, the formation and propagation of
cracks inside of the insulating layer eroding its continuity and then irreversibly compromising
the protective properties[2].
The fire resistance of a commercial i.c. is usually tested experimentally in order to be "certified",
verifying its efficacy under fire conditions[3]. The main problems to be examined for these
materials are: (a) the testing of adhesion of the i.c. to the metal profile under load (stickability
tests) for the specific duration of fire exposure, (b) the dependence of thermal response (reaction
of the paint) under different fire curves. In fact, the dissolution of the paint can occur for heating
curves slower than standard fire curve (ISO 834), with a consequent reduction of performance.
For this reason, in EN 1363-2 [4], a slow heating curve (smouldering curves) is defined, in order
to verify the correct activation process, even in the presence of not high thermal gradients.
The knowledge of the thermal behaviour of i.c. is very important to model fire resistant structures
protected by i.c. This behaviour is not always available, especially for existing buildings. Therefore,
to implement the advanced calculation models, experimental tests on materials should be
performed.

2. EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM

The fire behavior of i.c. mainly depends on (a) thickness, (b) adhesion during normal and fire
situation and (c) swelling reaction in fire situation. Therefore, experimental tests concerned the
measurement of the thickness and the assessment of the adhesion of the i.c. as well as fire
tests in furnace[5].

2.1 Thickness
The thickness was measured according to UNI EN 2808[6], which describes both
investigation and data processing methods. A detailed survey of the thickness allowed
to group the structural elements into homogeneous categories, to simplify the
assessment of the structural behavior in fire conditions. The ultrasonic and optical

2
instruments are widely used to measure the thickness. The first type has an ultrasonic
transmitter and an ultrasonic receiver and the thickness of the paint is defined by measuring
the propagation time of the waves through the layer to be measured. Non-invasiveness and
high precision are advantages of using this instrument, but the process of instrument
calibration, above all in situ, is extremely delicate. The optical instrument allows a direct
measurement of the thickness practicing a slight cut on the painted element, up to reach the
steel substrate. The blades are normalized and the thickness value can be read directly
through a graduated microscope. The instrument is minimally invasive, and it can be
considered a good tool to check the readings obtained by the ultrasonic one.

2.2 Adhesion
The compatibility between the layers of the protective package, (primer, coating and top
coat), was assessed through adhesion tests (UNI EN ISO 4624)[7]. In particular, the
minimum tensile force necessary to cause the tearing of the layer of paint from the
support (adhesion) or inside the layer of the weakest component (cohesion), was
measured. The nature and the preparation of the substrate and the type of instrument
used may influence the mechanical properties of the system. Therefore, it is necessary to
refer to standardized procedures. However, these procedure concern new application
paints and should be adjusted for existing paints. The main steps followed for preparation
and execution of the test are described below (Figure 4).
Step1-surface preparation, to promote the bond between the dolly and the coating, degrease the dolly
and the area of the coating to be tested using alcohol or acetone to remove any oil, moisture or dust.
Step2-application of adhesive, which must have cohesive and fixing properties greater than those
of the coating under test, in order to obtain a rupture of the coating. The dolly should be gently push
down to squeeze out excessive adhesive and remove it from around the edges of the dolly (Figure
4b). Finally, wait for the time necessary for the drying of adhesive.
Step3-separation of test area: after adhesive drying, before starting the test, the paint around the
dolly should be removed, in order to isolate a specific diameter test area. The methodology to apply
the cut around the edges of the dolly depends on the mechanical properties of the paint system.
Generally, a drill with a diameter about 1mm larger than the diameter of the dolly can be used.
Step 4-load application: this step consists of placing of the actuator on the dolly (Figure 4d). The
contact between the dolly and the actuator should be carefully checked. The force must be applied
perpendicularly to the plane of coated support at a uniform speed, less than about 1 MPa/s.
dolly dolly adhesive cutting actuator

(a) (b) (c) (d)

Figure 4 – Steps of adhesion test.

3
2.2 Test in furnace
Previous studies showed that the dissolution of the i.c. can occur during the initial phase of the
heating if the input curve is characterized by low temperature rate[8]. Thus, the tests were
performed in furnace by exposing the specimens to heat in the furnace according to the ISO
834 curve and to the Smouldering Curve (or Slow Heating Curve)[4].
The 22 specimens are angle profile 850 mm long, with different sizes and different shape
factors. The fire curve, the main geometrical characteristics of the specimens and of the
protective paints are shown in Table 1. The identification code of the specimen is like A-XxYyZ-
α-β_n, where A indicates the type of cross section (ANG for angle profile), X, Y, Z indicate the
lengths of the two wings and the thickness, α indicates the type of thermal coating of the
specimen, β is the input fire curve, and n is the ordinal number of the test. Three kinds of
specimens were tested:
- Reference (REF) only with existing i.c.;
- Repainted (REP) with new i.c. (nominal thickness of 600 μm) applied on the existing i.c.;
- Restored (RES) with new i.c. (600 μm or 1200 μm) applied after removing the existing i.c..
These kinds of specimen were chosen to evaluate the behavior of the i.c. after thirty years
from the application (REF specimen), the behavior of two superimposed i.c. (REP specimen)
and, finally, the behavior of the new i.c. (RES specimen).
Table 1 – Test matrix
Dimension Thickness
ID Specimen Section Fire curve i.c.
(mm) (m)
ANG-60x60x6-ref –ISO_1 # Angle 60x60x6 ISO834 Reference 516
ANG-60x60x6-rep- ISO_1 # Angle 60x60x6 ISO834 Repainted 1203
ANG-60x60x6-res- ISO_1 # Angle 60x60x6 ISO834 Restored 660
ANG-60x60x6-rep- SM_1 # Angle 60x60x6 Smouldering Repainted 600
ANG-60x60x6-rep-SM_1 # Angle 60x60x6 Smouldering Repainted 740
ANG-60x60x6-res- SM_1 # Angle 60x60x6 Smouldering Restored 600
ANG-60x60x6-rep- -SM_2 # Angle 60x60x6 Smouldering Repainted 670
ANG-60x60x6-res –SM_2 # Angle 60x60x6 Smouldering Restored 600
ANG-70x70x8-ref- ISO_1 # # Angle 70x70x8 ISO834 Reference 517
ANG-70x70x8-res- ISO_1 ## Angle 70x70x8 ISO834 Restored 657
ANG-70x70x8-rep-ISO_1 ## Angle 70x70x8 ISO834 Repainted 1243
ANG-70x70x8-res-ISO_2 ## Angle 70x70x8 ISO834 Restored 817
ANG-70x70x8-rep-ISO_2 ## Angle 70x70x8 ISO834 Repainted 1250
ANG-70x70x8-ref-SM_1 ## Angle 70x70x8 Smouldering Reference 500
ANG-70x70x8-res-SM_1 ## Angle 70x70x8 Smouldering Restored 600
ANG-70x70x8-rep-SM_1 ## Angle 70x70x8 Smouldering Repainted 920
ANG-70x70x8-res-SM_2 ## Angle 70x70x8 Smouldering Restored 700
ANG-70x70x8-rep-SM_2 ## Angle 70x70x8 Smouldering Repainted 950
ANG-100x100x10-res-ISO_1 ## Angle 100x100x10 ISO834 Restored 660
ANG-100x100x10-res-ISO_1 ## Angle 100x100x10 ISO834 Restored 1247
ANG-100x100x10-res-SM_2 ## Angle 100x100x10 ISO834 Restored 693
ANG-100x100x10-res-SM_2 ## Angle 100x100x10 ISO834 Restored 1367
# ##
particularly exposed to weathering less exposed to weathering

4
The specimens, were placed on the top opening of an horizontal furnace, 3200 mm wide by 4500 mm
long, and they are resting on the wings of the edge beams (Figure 5a,b,c). The central zone of the
furnace was thermally insulated by two panels of silicate calcium with thickness of 9 mm. Mineral wool
was placed between the two panels in order to obtain a "package" that can ensure smoke sealing and
isolation (EI) between 60 and 120 minutes. This package was put between the specimens to directly
expose to fire only one wing of the specimen (Figure 5b-c). Seven K-type thermocouples were placed
on each element, both on the wing directly exposed and on the wing not exposed. The
thermocouples were fixed element of steel with a ceramic glue that is resistant to high temperatures,
to ensure the adhesion of the thermocouple to the profile during the test. The thermocouples were
arranged according to the scheme of Figure 5d. The test setup was modeled with the software
SAFIR2007[9] in order to predict and simulate the test results and to evaluate the temperatures
achieved in the elements. The specimen was modeled both with the protective package (Figure 6a)
and replacing the package with the condition of adiabatic surface to the sides of the element not
directly exposed to fire (Figure 6b) in order to simplify the modeling. Figure 7 shows that in both cases
the temperatures estimated by the numerical simulation of the wing directly exposed to the fire are
equal. The simplified modeling, conversely, overestimates the temperature of the upper wing,
probably because of the not perfect adiabatic of the real system for that part of the metal profile..

Sez A-A
Mineral wool plasterboard

Specimen

(b)

(a)

(c)

TCUNEXP_EST_SUP TCUNEXP_EST_INF

Figure 5 – Test setup: (a) furnace from the top, (b)

TCUNEXP_INT
specimen on the furnace, (c) specimen cross
section, (d) thermocouples.
TCEXP

(d)

5
 Specimen 1200
Mineral wool Plasterboard T (°C)

1000

800

ISO834
S.A. (a) 600
ISO 834

S.A.= adiabatic surface; 400 Lower wing unprotected ISO834-

ISO834= standard fire curve ‘‘ISO834’’ adiabatic
S.A.

Lower wing real case

200 Top wing unprotected ISO834-

adiabatic
S.A. Top wing real case
S.A.

t (min)
0
(b) 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120
ISO834

Figure 6 – Models for test setup a) test condition, Figure 7 – Comparison between models
b) adiabatic condition

3. RESULTS

The measurements of thickness and adhesion were carried out both on site and on the
specimens for the following fire tests. The data processing allowed estimating i.c. thickness
and adhesion strength and assessing homogeneity and anomalies.
As concerns the thickness information on the probability that a given value is observed in the
sample of measures, can be represented with cumulative probability function (cdf). This was
done for all painted elements of each floor of the structure. Figure 8 shows the result of a
typical floor. A good approximation with the normal distribution is observed, with a value of
CoV approximately equal to 30% and an average of about 1800 microns. But some values are
significantly higher than the mean value, likely due to the application mode of the i.c.. Indeed
the pump caused concentration of paint in specific areas.
The measures of adhesion were carried out on elements of two buildings differently exposed
to atmospheric agents. Failure mode seems to be often occurred for adhesion’s loss between
the first and the second layer (primer and i.c.). This kind of failure is not desirable because it
indicates a possible rupture between the layers of the protective package. Anyway, the failure
was attained always for force values exceeding the lower bound specified in the UNI 10898-1
Appendix B[10]. The force values of adhesion are higher for the samples taken from the
building less exposed to atmospheric agents. Finally, figure 9 shows the trend of adhesion
force measured as a function of the thickness of i.c. applied: the greater the thickness, the
lower the adhesion force measured.

6
 1700
1.2
1600
F(x) 1500
1400
1.0
1300
1200
1100
0.8

Thickness (μm)
1000
900
Average=1808.75
0.6 DevSt=525.2 800
CoV=29,4% 700
Max= 3000μm 600
Min= 900 μm
0.4 500
400
experimental CDF 300 Specimens
0.2 200
theoretical CDF 100 Trend line
0
x=measures (μm) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0.0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 Average stress (MPa)
Figure 8 – coating thickness at second floor Figure 9 – adhesion strength Vs thickness

Figure 10a shows the temperature curves which refer to angular 60x60x6mm reference. The
temperatures of the six thermocouples placed on the wing directly exposed (solid gray curves), are
very close due to the high thermal conductivity of steel and they approximate the average curve (solid
black curve). On the other hand, the temperature of the vertical wing (dashed black curve), which is
not directly exposed to high temperatures, is generally lower. This result was confirmed by readings
on other specimens (i.e. repainted and restored). Figure 10b shows the average of the temperatures.
The specimen reference shows the highest temperature, which demonstrates the ineffectiveness of
the existing i.c.. The highest level of protection is guaranteed at about 300°C, which is the ignition
temperature of the i.c. reaction. Furthermore, the new i.c. applied directly to the existing one
(repainted specimens), worked very well for about 120 minutes, with slightly better performance of the
specimen restored, where the new i.c. was applied removing the existing one. After about 130
minutes, a sudden increase of temperature occurs, due to the detachment of the i.c.. At 180 minutes,
the temperatures of the repainted specimen approach those of the reference specimen.
The Figure 11a represents the temperature curves of the angular 70x70x8mm for the three cases of
reference, restored and repainted specimens. Also in this case the specimen "reference" behaves in
a similar way to a non-protected element, confirming inefficacy of i.c.. The temperatures of the two
specimens "restored" are very close, while for the specimens "repainted", a waste from about 300°C,
can be observed; 300°C is a temperature close to the start of the reaction in the i.c.; this seems to
indicate that the existing i.c. might have reacted differently in the two cases "repainted". About 700°C
the curves show a small variation of the slope caused by a strong discontinuity in the variation of the
specific heat of the steel as the temperature changes. Finally, a partial detachment of the i.c. occurs
after about 120 minutes, for the specimen ANG-70x70x8-res-ISO_2. This is also confirmed by
observing the Figure 11b, which represents the specimens 70x70x8mm after test: there is not any
detachment of i.c. for the specimen ANG-70x70x8-res-ISO_1.

7
 1200 1200 T (°C)
T(°C) ANG-60x60x6-ref-ISO ANG-60x60x6-ISO

1000 1000

800 T4( e ) 800

T6( e )
Detachment of
T5( e )
the new i.c.
T3(i)
600
applied on the
600 T2(i)
existing one
T1(i)
average - horizontal leg ISO 834
T74
400 400
ISO 834 THEORY CURVE-
UNPROTECTED
STEEL -ISO 834
REFERENCE

200 200
RESTORED

t (min) REPAINTED t (min)

0 0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180
(a) 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180
(b)
Figure 10 - Results Test 1. (a) reference; (b) comparison.

In the Figure 13 there is the comparison between the temperature curves of the angular
100X100X10mm. The two specimens protected with 600μm of i.c. have a very similar
behavior, while the temperature curves of the specimen protected with 1200μm of i.c. differ
slightly. At the specimen ANG-100X100X10-res-ISO_2, a thick paint slightly higher (1367μm
vs 1247μm) was applied. For the same specimen, which has a thickness greater than all
other cases (1367 μ), a sudden increase in temperature occurs about 160 minutes, caused by
a detachment of the i.c..
The efficiency parameter [5] can represent the level of protection of i.c.:

Tnp,th  T p ,exp T p ,exp

 1 (1)
Tnp,th Tnp ,th

where Tnp,th is the average temperature in the exposed flange obtained by numerical
simulation of a steel unprotected specimen and Tp, exp is the average temperature in the flange
exposed recorded during the test. About 300°C there is η = 0.6 for new i.c. and η = 0.3 for
existing i.c.. These values are halved at about 600°C, that is the possible temperature of
deterioration of i.c..
Finally, the Figure 14 shows the time trend of the efficiency parameter η defined in eq. (1) for
evaluating the degree of i.c.’s protection under the two different curves. The result that
ηsmouldering> ηISO can confirm always a correct reaction of i.c. with slow heating curves. The
efficiency is always greater in the case of slow heating curve (Test 2 - smouldering) than in
the case of a standard heating curve (Test 1 - ISO). Similar efficiencies are confirmed for the
specimens repainted and restored, and the effectiveness is lower for reference specimens.

8
1200 T (°C) ANG-70x70x8-ISO  1200 T(°C) ANG-100x100x10-ISO
1100

1000 1000

900

800 800

700 Detachment
of i.c.
600 ISO834 600

THEORY CURVE - 500

UNPROTECTED STEEL-ISO 834
REFERENCE
400 400
REPAINTED 1 ISO 834
300 THEORY CURVE
REPAINTED 2 UNPROTECTED STEEL-ISO834
RESTORED_1_600 μm
200 RESTORED 1
200
RESTORED_2_600 μm

RESTORED 2 100 RESTORED_1_1200μm

t (min) RESTORED_2_1200μm
t (min)
0 0
0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180
(a)
  Restored Figure 13 – specimen 100x100x10mm (Test 1)

Restored Repainted Restored

(b)
Figure 11 – specimen 70x70x8mm (Test 1).

1 η 1 η 1 η
REFERENCE RESTORED REPAINTED
0.9 0.9 0.9

0.8 0.8 0.8

0.7 0.7 0.7

0.6 0.6 0.6 SMOULDERING

SMOULDERING SMOULDERING
ISO
0.5 ISO 0.5 ISO 0.5

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.3 0.3 0.3

0.2 0.2 0.2

0.1 0.1 0.1

0 t (min 0 t (min 0 t (min

15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 12 – Efficiency parameter per (a) reference, (b) restored e (c) repainted

9
 4. CONCLUSIONS

The experimental activity concerned the assessment of the efficiency of the existing i.c. and the evaluation
of the degree of improvement of protection that can be achieved by applying a new i.c. on the steel element
after removing the existing paint (restored) or simply by applying it on the existing paint (repainted).
For the tested building, test results showed that after thirty years from the i.c. application, it is necessary
again to protect the structural elements. Furthermore, a correlation between the thickness of the paint and
its bond strength at both normal environmental conditions and high temperatures was observed. Indeed,
elements with higher i.c. thicknesses (about 1000 µm) showed a bond strength lower than those with
thinner thicknesses. Similarly, the thickest paints detached earlier during the tests in the furnace.
Finally, the results showed the possibility of reapplying the new i.c. on the old i.c., with considerable
economic advantages, if good bond of the existing substrate is guaranteed.

5. AKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors appreciated the contributions of Guido Parisi and Fabio Dattilo of the Italian National Fire
Services. They would also like to thank Claudio Mastrogiuseppe and all the technicians of the
Laboratory of the Central Directorate for Fire Prevention and Technical Safety of the Italian National
Fire Services in Capannelle (RM) for assistance in carrying out the fire tests described briefly herein.

6. REFERENCES

[1]. UNI ENV 13381-4-Novembre 2002 “Metodi di prova per la determinazione del contributo alla
resistenza al fuoco di elementi strutturali Protezione applicata ad elementi di acciaio”.
[2]. S.Bourbigot, M.Le Bras, B.Revel. “Comprehensive study of the degradation of an intumescent EVA-
based material during combustion. Journal of materials science” 34 (1999) 5777 – 5782.
[3]. EOTA “ETAG No 018- Progress file version Novembre 2011- Guideline for European Technical
Approval of fire protective products. PART 2 - Reactive coatings for fire protection of steel elements”.
[4]. UNI EN 1363-2-Luglio 2001 “Prove di resistenza al fuoco - Procedure alternative e aggiuntive”.
[5]. Bilotta A., Dattilo F., de Silva D., Ferraro A., Mastrogiuseppe C., Nigro E., Parisi G., Ponticelli L “Prove
su vernici intumescenti per la protezione al fuoco di strutture in acciaio esistenti”. Rivista “Antincendio”
(EPC editore), Settembre 2014 da pg 58 a pg 92.
[6]. UNI EN 2808-Marzo 2007 “Determinazione dello spessore del film”.
[7]. UNI EN ISO 4624-Giugno 2006 “Misura dell’adesione mediante prova di trazione”.
[8]. Young W., Ulf G., Göran H., Alaa O. “A model for prediction of temperature in steel structure
protected by intumescent coating, based on tests in the cone calorimeter”. Fire safety science-
proceedings of the eighth international symposium, pp.235-246.
[9]. Franssen J.-M.: SAFIR. A Thermal/Structural Program Modelling Structures under Fire. Engineering
Journal, A.I.S.C., Vol 42, No. 3 (2005), 143-158.7
[10]. UNI 10898-1-Maggio 2012 “Sistemi protettivi antincendio. Modalità di controllo dell’applicazione.
Parte 1: Sistemi intumescenti”
[11]. David I. Rush, Luke A. Bisby, Allan Jowsey. “Evaluating design guidance for intumescent fire
protection of concrete filled steel hollow sections”. Structures in Fire (SIF) Shanghai, China, 2014
[12]. EN 13381-8 “Metodi di prova per la determinazione del contributo alla resistenza al fuoco di elementi
strutturali-Parte 8: protettivi reattivi applicati ad elementi di acciaio”.

10

View publication stats