Advertisement

Fire Technology

, Volume 51, Issue 4, pp 995–1017 | Cite as

A Framework for Selecting Design Fires in Performance Based Fire Safety Engineering

  • Audun Borg
  • Ove Njå
  • José L. Torero
Article

Abstract

In fire safety engineering, the concepts of design fire scenarios and design fires are important for several reasons. In the design phases of a construction project the performance of safety measures, and the potential consequences of a fire, must be assessed by exploring design fire scenarios and design fires. Active and passive fire safety measures are dimensioned by exposing the systems to predetermined fire events. A predetermined fire event can also be used to extract fire-related quantities, such as smoke production rates, temperatures, and heat fluxes. Therefore fire events, which form the basis of these analyses, must be established. In this paper we report results from our investigation of current approaches used to determine design fires and their associated input variables. We present a framework to categorize design fires based on various engineering principles, in which fuel properties and environmental factors are emphasized. The framework provides a more consistent methodology than seen elsewhere, taking the perspective of the practicing engineer into account. Furthermore the creation of design fires encompasses considerations of uncertainty and validity.

Keywords

Fire safety engineering Validation Design fire Uncertainty 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research described in this paper was supported financially by funds provided by the University of Stavanger. The authors would also like to acknowledge the anonymous reviewers for their constructive responses to this article, and Associate Professor Grunde Jomaas at the Technical University of Denmark for his advice in the revision process.

References

  1. 1.
    Borg A, Njå O (2013) The concept of validation in performance-based fire safety engineering. Saf Sci 52: 57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bjelland H, Njå O (2012) Fourteen years of experience with performance-based fire safety engineering in Norway—lessons learned. In: 9th International Conference on Performance-Based Code and Fire Safety Design Methods. 2012: The Excelsior Hong Kong, 20–22 June 2012.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    ISO (2006) Fire safety engineering—selection of design fire scenarios and design fires (ISO/TS 16733), in Technical Specification.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rose S, Flamberg S, Leverenz F (2007) Guidance Document for Incorporating Risk Concepts into NFPA Codes and Standards. Columbus: The Fire Protection Research Foundation.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bwalya A (2008) An overview of design fires for building compartments. Fire Technol 44(2): 167–184. doi: 10.1007/s10694-007-0031-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    SFPE (2000) SFPE engineering guide to performance-based fire protection analysis and design of buildings. Quincy: NFPA, p. 170.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Höglander K, Sundström B (1997) Design fires for preflashover fires. Boras: SP Swedish National Testing and Research Institute.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stern-Gottfried J, Rein G (2012) Travelling fires for structural design–Part I: literature review. Fire Saf J 54:74–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heitaniemi J, Mikkola E (2010) design fires for fire engineering. Espoo: VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Robbins AP, Wade CA (2010) Residental design fire scenario selection—using NZ fire incidents. Judgeford: BRANZ Study Report 238. BRANZ Ltd.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gutiérrez-Montes C et al. (2008) Numerical model and validation experiments of atrium enclosure fire in a new fire test facility. Build Environ 43(11): 1912–1928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rein G et al. (2009) Round-robin study of a priori modelling predictions of the Dalmarnock Fire Test One. Fire Saf J 44(4): 590–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Borg A, Paulsen Husted, B, Njå O (2014) The concept of validation of numerical models for consequence analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 125: 36–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cote AE (2008) History of Fire Protection Engineering., in Fire Protection Engineering 2008.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haack A (2004) Thematic network fire in tunnels—technical report part 1—Design fire scenarios, European Commission under the 5th Framework Program 2001–2004. 2004: WTCB, Brussels, Belgium.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Babrauskas V, Peacock RD (1992) Heat release rate: the single most important variable in fire hazard. Fire Saf J 18(3): 255–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Buchanan AH (2001) Structural design for fire safety. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Karlsson B, Quintiere JG (2000) Enclosure fire dynamics. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    World Road Association (2001) PIARC, safety in tunnels. Transport of dangerous goods through road tunnels. 2001, OECD: http://www.internationaltransportforum.org/pub/pdf/01TunnelsE.pdf. Accessed 15 Oct 2013.
  20. 20.
    Nævestad TO, Meyer SF (2012) Vehicle fires in Norwegian road tunnels 2008–2011. Institute of Transport Economics Norwegian Centre for Transport Research, OsloGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Beard A, Carvel R (2011) The handbook of tunnel fire safety, 2nd edition. London: ICE Publishing.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stensaas JP, Jacobsen HC (2001) Testing of different portable fire extinguishers against fires in twin tyres. Trondheim: SINTEF Norwegian Fire Research Laboratory.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stern-Gottfried J, Rein G (2012) Travelling fires for structural design-part II: design methodology. Fire Saf J 54: 96–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    DiNenno PJ (2002) SFPE handbook of fire protection engineering. Quincy: National Fire Protection Association.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hall JR, Defining the challenge: selecting fire scenarios for fire protection systems design and evaluation. Not dated: National Fire Protection Association: http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/files/proceedings/supdet11hallabstract.ashx. Accessed 20 Sept 2013.
  26. 26.
    Njå O (1998) Approach for assessing the performance of emergency response arrangements (PhD Thesis). HIS, Stavanger, Norway.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bjelland H, Borg A (2013) On the use of scenario analysis in combination with prescriptive fire safety design requirements. Environ Syst Decis 33(1): 33–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Morgan HP, et al. (1999) Design methodologies for smoke and heat exhaust ventilation (BR 368). Bracknell: BRE.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    BE (2000) Guide on smoke ventilation HO-3/2000 (in Norwegian). Oslo: National Office of Building Technology and Administration (BE).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    DiBK (2010) Guide to the building regulations of 2010. Oslo: The Directorate of building quality.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    HM Goverment (2010) The Building Regulations 2010, Fire safety, Approved Document B, Volume 2—buildings other than dwellinghouses.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Drysdale D (2011) An introduction to fire dynamics. Third Edition. West Sussex: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Babrauskas V (2013) Performance-based building codes: what will happen to the levels of safety? not dated [cited 2013 27.08].Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Babrauskas V (1996) Fire modeling tools for FSE: are they good enough? J Fire Protect Eng 8(2):43–51Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Aven T (2008) Risk analysis. Chichester: Wiley.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bedford T, Cooke RM (2001) Probabilistic risk analysis: foundations and methods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vose D (2000) Risk analysis: a quantitative guide. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Watson SR (1994) The meaning of probability in probabilistic safety analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 45: 261–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Aven T (2011) Quantitative risk assessment—the scientific platform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Norwegian Public Roads Administration (2010) Manual 021: road tunnels. Oslo: Directorate of Public Roads.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Roads TDoP (1990) Forskrift om bruk av kjøretøy (Regulation concerning the use of vehicles in Norwegian), in FOR-1990-01-25-92, M.o.T.a. Communication, Editor. Lovdata.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Economic Commission for Europe Committee on Inland Transport (2013) ADR European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road Volume II. New York: United Nations Publication.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ingason, H (2009) Design fire curves for tunnels. Fire Saf J 44(2): 259–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Carvel RO, Beard AN, Jowitt PW (2005) Fire spread between vehicles in tunnels: effects of tunnel size, longitudinal ventilation and vehicle spacing. Fire Technol 41(4): 271–304. doi: 10.1007/s10694-005-4050-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Johnson P, Barber D, Gildersleeve C (2013) Fire scenarios for fire engineering—Designers choice or generic by regulation? In: Interflam 2013. Interscience Comunication Limited, UK.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Chow WK (2012) Concerns on estimating heat release rate of design fires in engineering approach. Int J Eng Perform Fire Codes 11: 11–19.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Yung DY, Benichou N (2002) How design fires can be used in fire hazard analysis. Fire Technol 38: 231–242. doi: 10.1023/A:1019830015147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Bjelland H et al (2014) The concepts of safety level and safety margin: framework for fire safety design of novel buildings. Fire Technol. doi: 10.1007/s10694-014-0400-y
  49. 49.
    ISO (2013) New Work Item Proposal ISO/TC92/SC4N752 (Revision of ISO/TS 16733:2006). 2013, AFNOR.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ingason H, Lönnermark A (2004) Recent achievements regarding measuring of time-heat and time-temperature development in tunnels. Safe & reliable tunnels. Innovative European Achievements. First International Symposium, Prague 2004.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Science and TechnologyUniversity of StavangerStavangerNorway
  2. 2.School of Civil EngineeringThe University of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations