Advertisement

A Multi-Grid Evacuation Model Considering the Threat of Fire to Human Life and its Application to Building Fire Risk Assessment

  • Fang Zhiming
  • Lv WeiEmail author
  • Li Xiaolian
  • Song Weiguo
Article

Abstract

In the present study, a modified multi-grid fire evacuation model (MG-Fire-Evac) was devised to study the influence of fire-related phenomena such as toxic smoke and heat on occupant evacuating from a burning building. The degree of injury suffered by the occupants is quantified in terms of “health points” (HPs) in the model. When a person’s HP is less than 0.5 or 0.8, he or she is regarded as having succumbed to the fire (becoming a fatality or serious injury). A parameter is defined to represent the degree of influence of the fire on the occupants’ movement, which is used to predict which of three possible kinds of egress is attempted. To decrease the degree of error in the data transferred between the fire simulation and egress model, a finer grid resolution is adopted in the new model. For the scenario examined, simulation results demonstrate that a higher fire load, longer pre-movement time, or narrower exit would all lead to more serious occupant injury in the event of a fire. Based on the MG-Fire-Evac model, a new building fire risk procedure is presented whereby it is possible to predict the death toll and number of serious injuries and to quantitatively evaluate evacuation plans. Compared to the conventional method, the new method is stricter and more scientific. The model and method presented herein will be useful for application to the performance-based design, assessment, and management of building fire safety.

Keywords

Fire Health point (HP) Fire risk assessment MG-Fire-Evac model 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Key Research and Development Program (No. 2017YFC0803300), and the Young Scientists Fund of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51604204).

References

  1. 1.
    Helbing D, Farkas I, Vicsek T (2000) Simulating dynamical features of escape panic. Nature. 407:487–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tajima YT (2001) Nagatani, Scaling behavior of crowd flow outside a hall. Phys A. 292:545–554.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sarmady S, Haron F, Talib AZ (2011) A cellular automata model for circular movements of pedestrians during Tawaf. Simul Model Pract Theory 19:969–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alizadeh R (2011) A dynamic cellular automaton model for evacuation process with obstacles. Saf Sci 49:315–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Song WG, Xu X, Wang BH, Ni SJ (2006) Simulation of evacuation processes using a multi-grid model for pedestrian dynamics. Phys A 363:492–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tang FQ, Ren AZ (2008) Agent-based evacuation model incorporating fire scene and building geometry. Tsinghua Sci Technol 13:708–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Joo J, Kim N, Wysk RA, Rothrock L, Son YJ, Oh Yg, Lee S (2013) Agent-based simulation of affordance-based human behaviors in emergency evacuation. Simul Model Pract Theory 32:99–115.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lovreglio R, Ronchi E, Borri D (2014) The validation of evacuation simulation models through the analysis of behavioural uncertainty. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 131:166–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zheng XP, Liu MT (2010) Forecasting model for pedestrian distribution under emergency evacuation. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 95:1186–1192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kady RA, Davis J (2009) The impact of exit route designs on evacuation time for crawling occupants. J Fire Sci 27:481–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xie Q, Lu S, Kong D, Wang J (2011) The effect of uncertain parameters on evacuation time in commercial buildings. J Fire Sci 30:55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Low DJ (2000) Statistical physics: following the crowd. Nature 407:465–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Parisi DR, Dorso CO (2007) Why “faster is slower” in evacuation process. In: Waldau N, Gattermann P, Knoflacher H, Schreckenberg M (eds) Pedestrian and evacuation dynamics 2005. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 341–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Song WG, Yu YF, Wang BH, Fan WC (2006) Evacuation behaviors at exit in CA model with force essentials: a comparison with social force model. Phys A 371:658–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jin T (2002) Visibility and human behavior in fire smoke. In: DiNenno PJ, Walton WD (eds) The SFPE handbook of fire protection engineering. Society of fire protection engineers, 3rd edn. Bethesda, Rockville, 2–42–42–53.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jensen G (2002) Wayfinding in heavy smoke: decisive factors and safety products. Findings related to full scale tests. IGP AS. http://www.hylinesafety.com/images/wayfinding.pdf.
  17. 17.
    Purser D (2002) Toxicity assessment of combustion products. In: DiNenno PJ, Walton WD (eds) The SFPE handbook of fire protection engineering. Society of fire protection engineers, 3rd edn. Bethesda, Rockville pp 2–83–82–171.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    McGrattan K, Klein B, Hostikka S, Floyd J (2004) Fire dynamics simulator (Version 5), User’s Guide, NIST Special Publication, vol 1019.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Peacock R, Jones W, Reneke P, Forney G (2005) CFAST–consolidated model of fire growth and smoke transport (Version 6) User’s Guide, NIST Special Publication, vol 1041.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Korhonen T, Hostikka S, Heli vaara S, Ehtamo H, Matikainen K (2007) Integration of an agent based evacuation simulation and the state-of-the-art fire simulation. In: Proceedings of the 7th Asia-Oceania symposium on fire science & technology, HongKong, pp 20–22.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Korhonen T, Hostikka S, Heli vaara S, Ehtamo H (2008) FDS + Evac: modelling social interactions in fire evacuation. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on performance-based codes and fire safety design methods, Bethesda, MD, pp 241–250.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shi JY, Ren AZ, Chen C (2009) Agent-based evacuation model of large public buildings under fire conditions. Autom Constr 18:338–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    ZhuW, Ding H, Wang T (2009) The application of fire spread and evacuation simulation technology in large stadium. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 23:433–439.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gwynne S, Galea ER, Lawrence PJ, Filippidis L (2001) Modelling occupant interaction with fire conditions using the buildingEXODUS evacuation model. Fire Saf J 36:327–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fang ZM, Song WG, Zhang J, Wu H (2012) A multi-grid model for evacuation coupling with the effects of fire products. Fire Technol 48:91–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Burstedde C, Klauck K, Schadschneider A, Zittartz J (2001) Simulation of pedestrian dynamics using a two-dimensional cellular automaton. Phys A 295:507–525.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Haber F (1924) Funf Vortrange aus den jaren 1920–1923. Springer, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    ZhaoCM, Lo SM, Zhang SP, Liu M (2008) A post-fire survey on the pre-evacuation human behavior. Fire Technol 45:71–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chow WK, Qu L (2014) Fire hazard assessment for a green railway station. Fire Mater 38:451–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers CIBSE (2010) Guide E: Fire Engineering. Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE): London, UK.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Babrauskas V, Fleming JM, Don Russell B (2010) RSET/ASET, a flawed concept for fire safety assessment. Fire Mater 34:341–355.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fang Zhiming
    • 1
  • Lv Wei
    • 2
    Email author
  • Li Xiaolian
    • 3
  • Song Weiguo
    • 4
  1. 1.Business SchoolUniversity of Shanghai for Science and TechnologyShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Research Center for Crisis & Hazard ManagementWuhan University of TechnologyWuhanChina
  3. 3.Colleage of Ocean Science and EngineeringShanghai Maritime UniversityShanghaiChina
  4. 4.State Key Laboratory of Fire ScienceUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaHefeiChina

Personalised recommendations