Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Fire Science and Technology 2015 pp 73–85Cite as

Toward a Risk-Informed Performance-Based Approach for Post-Earthquake Fire Protection Design of Buildings

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Abstract

Post-earthquake fires have extracted great tolls on society. While this has been acknowledged for some time and significant effort has been expended to develop tools to simulate post-earthquake fire spread at an urban scale, to develop performance-based seismic design methods for buildings, and to develop performance-based fire design methods for buildings, there has been little research dedicated to the development of performance-based design approaches which integrate earthquake and fire design of structures. In this paper, an overview of the post-earthquake fire problem and of post-earthquake building performance is provided, performance-based seismic and fire design approaches are briefly introduced, and developments toward risk-informed performance-based approach to seismic and fire design for buildings in earthquake-prone areas are presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Photo from Steinbrugge Collection of the UC Berkeley Earthquake Engineering Research Center, as available from USGS http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/nca/1906/18april/index.php

  2. NOAA (1972) A study of earthquake losses in the San Francisco bay area – data and analysis. A report prepared for the Office of Emergency Preparedness: U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 220 p

    Google Scholar 

  3. Geschwind CH (2001) California earthquakes: science, risk and the politics of hazard mitigation. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  4. Usami T (2006) Earthquake studies and the earthquake prediction system in Japan. J Disaster Res 1(3):416–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. SPA (2008) Enhancements in HAZUS-MH fire following earthquake. SPA Project No. 10010-01-07-01, SPA Risk LLC, Berkeley CA, Prepared for PBS&J and the National Institute of Building Sciences, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  6. Scawthorn C, Cowell AD, Borden F (1998) Fire-related aspects of the Northridge earthquake. NIST GCR 98-743. National Institute of Standards and Technology Building and Fire Research Laboratory, Gaithersburg, 165pp

    Google Scholar 

  7. Scawthorn C, Eidinger JM, Schiff AJ (2005) Fire following earthquake, Technical council on lifeline earthquake engineering monograph no. 26. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, 345pp

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chung RM (1996) January 17, 1995 Hyogoken-Nanbu (Kobe) earthquake: performance of structures, lifelines, and fire protection systems, NIST special report SP 901. NIST, Gaithersburg, Available at http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=908748

  9. Ohnishi K (1997) Causes of the seismic fires following the Great Hanshin-Awaji earthquake survey. In: Beall KA (ed) NISTIR 6030, U.S./Japan Government Cooperative Program on Natural Resources (UJNR), fire research and safety, 13th joint panel meeting, vol 2, 13–20 Mar 1996 Gaithersburg, pp 337–344

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fire and Disaster Management Agency (2006) Report of the 1995 Hyogo-ken Nanbu earthquake. Fire and Disaster Management Agency, Japan

    Google Scholar 

  11. Himoto K, Yamada M, Nishino T (2014) Analysis of ignitions following 2011 Tohoku earthquake using Kawasumi model. In: Proceedings of the International Association for Fire Safety Science, 11th international symposium. International Association for Fire Safety Science. Available at http://www.iafss.org/publications/fss/11/24/view

  12. Sekizawa A, Sasaki K (2014) Study on fires following the 2011 Great East-Japan earthquake based on the questionnaire survey to fire departments in affected areas. In: Proceedings of the International Association for Fire Safety Science, 11th international symposium. Available at http://www.iafss.org/publications/fss/11/100/view

  13. Jones LM, Bernknopf R, Cox D, Goltz J, Hudnut K, Mileti D, Perry S, Ponti D, Porter K, Reichle M, Seligson H, Shoaf K, Treiman J, Wein A (2008) The ShakeOut scenario. USGS open file report 2008-1150, Reston. Available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1150/of2008-1150small.pdf

  14. Scawthorn CR (2011) Fire following earthquake aspects of the southern San Andreas fault Mw 7.8 earthquake scenario. Earthq Spectra 27(2):419–441, http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.3574013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lee S, Davidson R, Ohnishi N, Scawthorn C (2008) Fire following earthquake – reviewing the state-of-the-art of modeling. Earthquake Spectra 24(4):933–967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Zolfaghari MR, Peyghaleh E, Nasirzadeh G (2009) Fire following earthquake, intra-structure ignition modeling. J Fire Sci 27:45–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lee SW, Davidson RA (2010) Physics-based simulation model of post-earthquake fire spread. J Earthq Eng 14(5):670–687. doi:10.1080/13632460903336928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Thomas G, Heron D, Cousins J, de Roiste M (2012) Modeling and estimating post-earthquake fire spread. Earthquake Spectra 28(2):795–810, http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.4000009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. NIST (1994) 1994 Northridge earthquake: performance of structures, lifelines and fire protection systems, NISTIR 5396. NIST, Gaithersburg

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fleming R (1998) Analysis of fire sprinkler system performance in the Northridge earthquake, NIST-GCR-98–736. NIST, Gaithersburg

    Google Scholar 

  21. Scawthorn C (1996) Fire following the Northridge and Kobe earthquakes. U.S./Japan government cooperative program on natural resources (UJNR). In: Beall KA (ed) Fire research and safety. 13th joint panel meeting, vol 2, 1997. National Inst. Of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, pp 325–335. Available at http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire97/PDF/f97147.pdf

  22. LeGrone P (2004) An analysis of fire sprinkler system failures during the Northridge earthquake and comparison with the seismic design standard for these systems. In: Proceedings, 13th world conference on earthquake engineering, Vancouver. Available at http://www.iitk.ac.in/nicee/wcee/article/13_2136.pdf

  23. Chen S, Lee GC, Masanobu S (2004) Hazard mitigation for earthquake and subsequent fire. http://mceer.buffalo.edu/research/International_Research/ANCER/Activities/2004/chen_sw_mceer.pdf. Accessed on 20 Aug 2007

  24. Sekizawa A, Ebihara M, Notake H (2003) Development of seismic-induced fire risk assessment method for a building. In: Fire safety science – proceedings of the seventh international symposium, International Association for Fire Safety Science, pp 309–320

    Google Scholar 

  25. Elwood KJ, Pampanin S, Kam WY (2012) 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake and implications for the design of concrete structures. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on engineering lessons learned from the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake, 1–4 Mar 2012, Tokyo. Available at http://www.jaee.gr.jp/event/seminar2012/eqsympo/pdf/papers/178.pdf

  26. Clifton C, Bruneau M, MacRae G, Leon R, Fussell A (2011) Steel structures damage from the Christchurch earthquake series of 2010 and 2011. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 44(4):297–318, Available at http://www.nzsee.org.nz/db/SpecialIssue/44(4)0297.pdf

  27. Dhakal RP, MacRae GA, Hogg K (2011) Performance of ceilings in the February 2011 Christchurch earthquake. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 44(4):377–387, Available at http://www.nzsee.org.nz/db/SpecialIssue/44(4)0377.pdf

  28. Baird A, Palmero A, Pampanin S (2011) Façade damage assessment of multi-storey buildings in the 2011 Christchurch earthquake. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 44(4):368–376, Available at http://www.nzsee.org.nz/db/SpecialIssue/44(4)0368.pdf

  29. Villaverde R (1997) Method to improve seismic provisions for nonstructural components in buildings. J Struct Eng 123:432–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Taghavi S, Miranda E (2003) Response assessment of non-structural building elements, Report No. 2003/05. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Richmond

    Google Scholar 

  31. McMullin KM, Merrick DS (2007) Seismic damage thresholds for gypsum wallboard partition walls. J Archit Eng ASCE 13(207):22–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Reinhorn AM, Ryu KP, Maddaloni G (2010) Modeling and seismic evaluation of nonstructural components: testing frame for experimental evaluation of suspended ceiling systems, Report MCEER-10-0004, June 2010, 182 pages

    Google Scholar 

  33. Davies R, Retamales R, Mosqueda G, Filiatrault A (2011) Experimental seismic evaluation, model parameterization and effects of cold-formed steel-framed gypsum partition walls on the seismic performance of an essential facility, report MCEER-11-0005, Oct 2011, 218 pages. Available at http://mceer.buffalo.edu/pdf/report/11-0005.pdf)

  34. Tian Y, Filiatrault A Mosqueda G (2013) Experimental seismic study of pressurized fire sprinkler piping systems, report MCEER-13-0001, Apr 2013, 404 pages

    Google Scholar 

  35. Soroushian S, Maragakis EM, Zaghi AE, Echevarria A, Tian Y, Filiatrault A (2014) Comprehensive analytical seismic fragility of fire sprinkler piping systems, Technical report MCEER-14-02, 26 Aug 2014. Available at http://mceer.buffalo.edu/pdf/report/14-0002.pdf)

  36. Bersofsky A (2004) A seismic performance evaluation of gypsum wallboard partitions. MS thesis. University of California, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  37. Lang A, Restrepo J (2006) Seismic performance evaluation of gypsum wallboard partitions. In: The proceedings of the national conference on earthquake engineering. San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  38. Kanvinde AM, Deierlein GG (2006) Analytical models for the seismic performance of gypsum drywall partitions. Earthquake Spectra 22(2):391–411, http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.2191927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Badillo-Almaraz H, Whittaker AS, Reinhorn AM, Cimellaro GP (2006) Seismic fragility of suspended ceiling systems, MCEER-06-0001, 4 Feb 2006. Available at http://mceer.buffalo.edu/pdf/report/06-0001.pdf

  40. Malhotra PK, Senseny PE, Braga AC, Allard RI (2003) Testing sprinkler-pipe seismic-brace components. Earthquake Spectra 19(1):87–109, http://dx.doi.org/10.1193/1.1543160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Collier, P.C.R. 2005. Post-earthquake performance of passive fire protection systems. BRANZ Study, Report 147, Judgeford, Wellington

    Google Scholar 

  42. Naruse T, Suzuki J (2015) Experimental study on fire resistance of mid-rise steel construction exposed to post-earthquake fire. Presented at joint NIST-BRI workshop operation Tomadachi, NIST, Gaithersburg, March 2015

    Google Scholar 

  43. Pantoli E, Chen MC, Astroza R, Ebrahimian H, Mintz S, Wang X, Hutchinson T, Conte J, Restrepo J, Meacham B, Kim J, Park H (2013) BNCS report #2: full-scale structural and nonstructural building system performance during earthquakes and post-earthquake fire – test results. Structural systems research project report series, SSRP 13/10. University of California, San Diego (available at)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Chen M, Pantoli E, Astroza R, Ebrahimian H, Mintz S, Wang X, Hutchinson T, Conte J, Restrepo J, Meacham B, Kim J-K, Park H (2013) BNCS report #1: full-scale structural and nonstructural building system performance during earthquakes and post-earthquake fire – specimen design, construction, and test protocol. University of California, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  45. Pantoli E, Chen M, Wang X, Astroza R, Ebrahimian H, Mintz S, Hutchinson T, Conte J, Restrepo J, Meacham B, Kim J-K, Park H (2013) BNCS report #2: full-scale structural and nonstructural building system performance during earthquakes and post-earthquake fire – test results. University of California, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  46. Pantoli E, Chen M, Hutchinson T, Restrepo J (2013) BNCS report #3: full-scale structural and nonstructural building system performance during earthquakes and post-earthquake fire – camera and analog sensor details. University of California, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  47. Chen M, Pantoli E, Wang X, Mintz S, Hutchinson T, Hutchinson T, Restrepo J (2013) BNCS report #4: full-scale structural and nonstructural building system performance during earthquakes and post-earthquake fire – construction details and technical specifications of specific subsystems. University of California, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  48. Kim JK, Meacham BJ, Park H (2013) Full-scale structural and nonstructural building systems performance during earthquakes and post-earthquake fire: fire test program and preliminary outcomes. Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester

    Google Scholar 

  49. Hutchinson T, Restrepo J, Conte J, Meacham BJ (2013) Overview of the building nonstructural components and systems (BNCS) project. In: Proceedings, 2013 ASCE structures congress. ASCE, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  50. Pantoli E, Chen M, Wang X, Hutchinson T, Meacham B, Park H (2013) Shake table testing of a full-scale five-story building: seismic performance of the major nonstructural components: egress systems, facades. In: Proceedings, 2013 ASCE structures congress, ASCE, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  51. Meacham BJ, Kim JK, Park H (2013) Shake table testing of a full-scale five-story building: post-earthquake fire performance. In: Proceedings, 2013 structures congress, ASCE, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  52. Park H, Meacham BJ, Kim JK (2014) Fire performance of full-scale building subjected to earthquake ground motion: fire test program and outcomes. In: Proceedings, 11th international symposium on fire safety science, International Association for Fire Safety Science. Available at http://www.iafss.org/publications/fss/11/71/view

  53. Kim JK, Meacham BJ, Park H, Hutchinson T, Pantoli E (2014) Fire performance of full-scale building subjected to earthquake ground motion: test specimen, ground motions and seismic performance of fire protection systems. In: Proceedings, 11th international symposium on fire safety science, International Association for Fire Safety Science. Available at http://www.iafss.org/publications/fss/11/90/view

  54. Wang X, Pantoli E, Hutchinson TC, Restrepo J, Wood RL, Hoehler MS, Grzesik P, Sesma FH (2015) Seismic performance of cold-formed steel wall systems in a full-scale building. J Struct Eng. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001245, ASCE, Reston, VA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  55. Meacham BJ (2015) Post-earthquake fire performance of buildings: summary of a large-scale experiment and conceptual framework for integrated performance-based seismic and fire design. Fire Technol. doi:10.1007/s10694-015-0523-9, published on-line 30 July 2015

    Google Scholar 

  56. Hamburger RO, Court AB, Soulages JR (1995) Vision 2000: a framework for performance-based engineering of buildings. In: Proceedings of the 64th annual convention, Structural Engineers Association of California, 19–21, pp 127–146

    Google Scholar 

  57. Meacham BJ (1998) Assessment of the technological requirements for realization of performance-based fire safety design in the United States: final report, NIST GCR 98-763. NIST, Gaithersburg

    Google Scholar 

  58. Meacham BJ (1999) International experience in the development and use of performance-based fire safety design methods: evolution, current situation, and thoughts for the future. In: Proceedings of the international association for fire safety science, 6th international symposium, pp 59–76

    Google Scholar 

  59. SFPE (2000) SFPE engineering guide to performance – based fire protection analysis and design of buildings. NFPA, Quincy, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Cornell CA, Krawinkler H (2000) Progress and challenges in seismic performance assessment. PEER Center News, 3(2). http://peer.berkeley.edu/news/2000spring/index.html

  61. Jalayer F, Cornell CA (2003) A technical framework for probability-based demand and capacity factor design (DCFD) seismic formats, Report no. PEER 2003/08, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, Nov 2003

    Google Scholar 

  62. Porter KA (2003) An overview of PEER’s performance-based earthquake engineering methodology. In: Proceedings of the ninth international conference on applications of statistics and probability in civil engineering (ICA SP9) 6–9 July 2003, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  63. Moehle J, Deierlein GG (2004) A framework methodology for performance-based earthquake engineering. In: Proc. 13th conf. on earthquake eng., Vancouvera, 1–6 Aug

    Google Scholar 

  64. Meacham BJ (2004) Performance-based building regulatory systems: structure, hierarchy and linkages. J Struct Eng Soc N Z 17(1):37–51

    Google Scholar 

  65. Meacham BJ Editor, Johann M Associate Editor (2006). Extreme event mitigation in buildings: analysis and design. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy

    Google Scholar 

  66. ATC-58 (2012) Guidelines for seismic performance assessment of buildings (100% Draft). Applied Technology Council, Redwood City

    Google Scholar 

  67. Gunay S, Mosalam KM (2013) PEER performance-based earthquake engineering methodology, revisited. J Earthq Eng 17(6):829–858. doi:10.1080/13632469.2013.787377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Alvarez A, Meacham BJ, Dembsey NA, Thomas JR (2014) A framework for risk-informed performance-based fire protection design for the built environment. Fire Technol 50:161–181. doi:10.1007/s10694-013-0366-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. ASCE 41–13 (2013) Seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings. ASCE, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  70. FEMA 356 (2000) Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  71. Personal communication, Robert Bachman, Sept 2008

    Google Scholar 

  72. Deierlein GG (2006) Quantifying risk by performance-based earthquake engineering. In: Presentation at the IRCC workshop on use of risk in regulation, San Francisco, Oct 2006

    Google Scholar 

  73. ISO/TR 13387-1 (1999) Fire safety engineering – Part 1: Application of fire performance concepts to design objectives. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  74. BS7974 (2001) Application of fire safety engineering principles to the design of buildings. British Standard Institute

    Google Scholar 

  75. International Fire Engineering Guidelines (2005) Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB), Canberra, ACT, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  76. Alvarez A, Meacham BJ, Dembsey NA, Thomas JR (2013) 20 years of performance-based fire protection design: challenges faced and a look ahead. J Fire Prot Eng 23(4):249–276. doi:10.1177/1042391513484911

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Meacham BJ (n.d.) Fire safety engineering at a crossroad. Case studies in fire safety, Elsevier. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csfs.2013.11.001

  78. Moore AE, Albano LD, Fitzgerald RW, Meacham BJ (2005) Defining design fires for structural performance. In: Proceedings of the 2005 ASCE structures congress. ASCE, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  79. Fleischmann CM (2011) Is prescription the future of performance-based design? In: Proceedings, 10th international symposium on fire safety science. International Association for Fire Safety. Available at http://www.iafss.org/publications/fss/10/77/view

  80. C/VM2 (2013) Verification method: framework for fire safety design. Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, Wellington. Available at http://www.dbh.govt.nz/UserFiles/File/Publications/Building/Compliance-documents/c-vm2-protection-from-fire-amendment-3.pdf

  81. Albrecht C (2014) Quantifying life safety – Part 1: Scenario-based quantification. Fire Saf J 64:87–94

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  82. Albrecht C (2014) Quantifying life safety – Part 2: Quantification of fire protection systems. Fire Saf J 64:81–86

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  83. Deierlein GG, Hamilton S (2003) Framework for structural fire engineering and design methods. In: Proceedings of the NIST/SFPE workshop to develop a national R&D roadmap for fire safety design and retrofit of structures. SFPE and NIST, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  84. Hamilton SR, Deierlein GG (2004) Probabilistic methodology for performance-based fire engineering. In: Proceedings, 5th international conference on performance-based codes and fire safety design methods. SFPE, Bethesda, pp 327–341

    Google Scholar 

  85. Kim J-K (2014) A conceptual framework for assessing post-earthquake fire performance of buildings, MS Thesis, Department of Fire Protection Engineering. Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester

    Google Scholar 

  86. PyroSim User Manual, Thunderhead Engineering, Manhattan KS (2014) Available at https://www.thunderheadeng.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2014/02/PyroSimManual.pdf

  87. Fire Dynamics Simulator (Version 6) – User’s Guide (2012) U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg

    Google Scholar 

  88. Pathfinder User Manual (2014) Thunderhead engineering, Manhattan. Available at http://www.thunderheadeng.com/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2014/10/users_guide.pdf

Download references

Acknowledgment

The author gratefully acknowledges the invitation to present this paper and the support which made it possible. The author also acknowledges the contributions of Jin-Kyung Kim and of all the project participants in the referenced BNCS experimental program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Fire Protection Engineering, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 100 Institute Road, Worcester, MA, 01609, USA

    Brian J. Meacham

Authors
  1. Brian J. Meacham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brian J. Meacham .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Kyoto University, Kyoto, Kyoto, Japan

    Kazunori Harada

  2. Tokyo University of Science, Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

    Ken Matsuyama

  3. National Inst. for Land and Infra Mgmt, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan

    Keisuke Himoto

  4. Toyohashi University of Technology, Toyohashi, Aichi, Japan

    Yuji Nakamura

  5. Shinshu University, Ueda, Nagano, Japan

    Kaoru Wakatsuki

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this paper

Cite this paper

Meacham, B.J. (2017). Toward a Risk-Informed Performance-Based Approach for Post-Earthquake Fire Protection Design of Buildings. In: Harada, K., Matsuyama, K., Himoto, K., Nakamura, Y., Wakatsuki, K. (eds) Fire Science and Technology 2015. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0376-9_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0376-9_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-0375-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-0376-9

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation