I a word, no.
Longer answer... there are techniques available to determine (based upon fire load) whether structural fire protection (which might include plasterboard) is adequate or not (in terms of load-bearing capacity) - normally defined within the relevant structural Eurocode (e.g. EN1993-1-2 - see here:
https://eurocodes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/doc/2012_11_WS_fire/presentations/04-ZHAO-EC-FireDesign-WS.pdf ). This is only, however, relevant to load-bearing capacity (R), not 'E' and 'I'.
The issue with fire
separating elements is that their fire resistance is often not entirely controlled by the heat energy input alone - e.g. they can be sensitive to the rate of heat rise. Their response is often not linear - failure can be sudden and not necessarily predictable (e.g. due to distortion - most fire separating elements fail the fire test due to gaps forming because of distortion,
not burn-through). They can be extremely sensitive to the smallest variation in constructional detail (e.g. fixing type and spacing, joint detailing etc)
The difficulty is compounded when the element is also load-bearing (e.g. it's a floor). A good example - we had a case where someone had built a timber load-bearing partition that needed 60 mins fire resistance using the board details from a tested 2-hour non-loadbearing partition. They argued that the boards would stay in place and protect the studs for at least 60 mins, hence all was fine. We refused to endorse this approach, & eventually the construction was fire tested. The 'two-hour' non-loadbearing board make-up did 40 mins in the load-bearing construction!
Like I say, I know of no published and verified methodology of doing what you describe (i.e. demonstrating that a fire separating element will stay in place and effective for the length of time required for full 'burn-out' of a compartment). I've seen people try, but their approaches have never stood up to technical scrutiny, in my experience.
There's probably a PhD in this, if someone were so inclined...!
