Introduction. The international practice of passive fire protection design, as well as some manufactures of fireproofing products recommend to apply fire proofing substances not only to the main element, whose fire resistance limit is standardized, but also to the elements that do not fall under any fire resistance standards. Various support brackets, pipeline supports (hereinafter — PS), etc. can serve as examples. They are not considered as bearing elements according to SP (Construction Regulations) 2.13130.2020, although they are connected to the structures that have fireproofing applied. It is recommended to apply fireproofing substances to such PS within the range of, at least, 450 mm from the point of attachment to the fireproof structure when the area of the PS cross section exceeds 3,000 mm2. No “supplementary” fireproofing is required by the Russian design and fire protection regulations.The subject of research. A change in the fire resistance limit of steel i-girders, caused by the PS heating, depends on the area of the PS cross section and the location of the point of its attachment.The goal. The goal of the research is to analyze the effect, produced by the area of the cross section and the point of attachment, on the fire resistance limit of fireproof steel i-girders in the course of heating.Materials and methods. ANSYS Workbench 2020 R2 (student version) was applied to perform the numerical simulation.Results. The simulation has shown that the PS, having no fireproofing, influences the fire resistance limit of fireproof structures.Conclusions. Currently available methods of analysis of the fire resistance of steel structures take no account of the fire resistance limit reduction, caused by the heating of the PS that has no fireproofing. The numerical simulation has shown that the fire proofing design must take account of the potential reduction in the fire resistance limit of fireproof structures, exposed to the heated PS that has no fire proofing. The further verification of the effect, produced by the PS, that has no fireproofing, on the time to the limit state of a fireproof steel i-girder requires fire tests and supplementary investigations to evaluate the influence of the PS on the heating of vertical fireproof constructions, including the case of the hydrocarbon fire mode.

The following article presents a methodology for developing processes concerned with modeling human evacuation and spread of hazardous factors in a fire. This methodology is utilized during evacuation exits norming in buildings and other structures.

No abstract

The article discusses the basic requirements for buildings and structures. The review of the scientific literature on fire safety revealed the lack of accounting for the working hours of pre-trial detention centers, as well as the influence of the employees of the institution. The existing risk assessment methodology is not applicable to such buildings, since the key factor in ensuring the safety of people is the time when the evacuation of people begins. The lack of standards and methods related to the risk assessment of buildings of pre-trial detention centers creates the need for large-scale experiments on the evacuation of people.

Introduction. In the last decade, various software products have been created in Russia that claim to be a computer equivalent to the statutory document “Method of determining design values of fire risk in buildings, structures and constructions of different functional fire hazard classes”. In some of them, the complex of the programs completely substituting all sections of this document is given; others concern only modelling of time of evacuation of people and determining, on this basis, the probability of evacuation P ev which value, at not functioning systems of active fire protection (K = 0.8–0.9), shall be equal 0.999.Analysis of results of Determining estimated Time of evacuation in Software and Computing Systems. However, the reference data on which it is possible to check the accuracy of calculations of estimated time of evacuation t e is not given, and the majority of buyers of these systems do not have enough skills for this purpose. Software and computing system salesmen provide demo versions of software to customers, but refuse to disclose the source data on which they are based. They explain this “secrecy” by the fact that the software sold contains a certain KNOW-HOW which is their copyright. Therefore, the purchase and sale is, in fact, based only on the trust of the buyer to the seller. But the universal thing “Try before you trust” makes you look for what to check first and how to do it. What to check first is listed in the technical regulations “On fire safety requirements”: safety of evacuation, its promptness and unhindered access. The article is motivated by these criteria, examples of tragic consequences of their non-fulfillment are given.The authors then show how to perform such a test through the simplest examples. For this purpose, calculation of time of evacuation of a human flow at consecutive change of its density under Fogard Rv programs is made, Sigma PB, Urban; the calculation of the same situations using a simplified analytical model is made “Manually”. The deviations of tp values, obtained by computer programs from the values in the manual сomputation are calculated in percents. The evaluation of these deviations, given in the tables and on the graphs, shows that the developers of software and computing systems change in their calculations the domain area (model) used in the Methodology, i.e. distort the patterns of connection between the parameters of human flows established as a result of scientific discovery.Conclusions and proposals. As a result it is shown that results of the considered commercial software and computing systems considerably underestimate estimated time of evacuation of people, defining it below time of achievement of critical levels of influence by hazards of fire tbs , i.е. create the illusion of fulfilment of the condition: t e,i ≤ tbs . This allows the customer of this software product not to fulfill expensive requirements of fire safety of the facility. Thus, the owners of these software and computing systems mislead the citizens who are in buildings and structures regarding the safety of their health and life.