Evaluating alternative strategies for reducing residential fire loss - the fire loss model

Gomberg, Alan; Buchbinder, Benjamin; Offensend, Fred J

doi:10.6028/nbs.ir.82-2551

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence the property owner will be charged a reduced insurance premium appropriate to the deductible level for installing sprinklers in his building. From a fire safety code point of view, if a damage of 100 m2 is acceptable, a sprinklered building should be given some concessions in size and structural fire protection (Sections [5][6][7][8][9]. Such concessions are also justified due to the fact that, if a probability level of 0.08 is acceptable, the damage would be 500 m2 if not sprinklered compared with 100 m2 if sprinklered.…”

Section: : Probability Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probability-Based Fire Safety Code

Ramachandran¹

1990

Journal of Fire Protection Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper provides a probabilistic framework for identifying a fire protection system or combinations of systems likely to meet any standard for fire safety implicit in a building code. The standard can be quantified in terms of target values for probable damage or probability of damage (or fire spread) exceeding a level acceptable to the society. This approach incorporates overall systematic procedures and would introduce flexibility in designing, particularly industrial and other large buildings, for fire safety. For example, as discussed in the paper, buildings equipped with sprinklers and detectors can be allowed some concessions in regard to compartment or building size, fire resistance requirement and evacuation time. The framework recognizes the interaction between structural (passive) fire protection and active fire protection systems.Subject to some limitations, the use of fire incidence statistics in the estimation of probabilities is explained with examples. Problems for further studies and research are also suggested for refining the framework and validating the numerical results. These include the application of the framework based on "collective risk" for evaluating the risk for a specific building. I NTRODUCTIONThe first line of provision for life safety in buildings under threat from fire has traditionally been achieved through the implementation of passive fire protection measures. These include the provision of compartmentation and the selection of building materials and methods to reduce the risk of fire spread and limit the size of the fire. At the same time, the building design incorporates features of layout and facilities such that it is possible for people to escape from the effects of fire.Standards for fire protection in new buildings have been applied through Bylaws or Regulations for over a century. Regulatory control has mainly been achieved through a framework of prescriptive rules which depend heavily on simple standard fire tests and Codes of Practice. Levels of performance have been arrived at and are modified largely on the basis of experience.It has been argued that prescriptive rules are highly empirical and enforced more or less rigidly and could lead to costly over-designs, particularly for large buildings which may present a potential for major disaster. For such buildings, the safety level implicit in the Regulations or any other level acceptable to the society can possibly be achieved through combinations of passive and active fire protection measures which are appropriate to the hazard involved, having due regard to practicability. Active measures such as sprinklers which are primarily designed for property protection can provide life safety as well. This approach which incorporates overall systematic procedures would introduce flexibility in designing buildings for fire safety with due allowances for trade-offs between different measures.Among the combinations of measures providing equivalent safety level, the property owner may be permitted to select one which minimizes...

show abstract

Section: : Probability Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probability-Based Fire Safety Code

Ramachandran¹

1990

Journal of Fire Protection Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Each of these approaches assists in keeping the fire from becoming large, an important factor since most fatalities in the United States occur some distance away from the room of fire origin from smoke generated from large fires (5).…”

Section: Fire and Polymersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toxic Potency of Fire Smoke

Levin

Gann

1990

ACS Symposium Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate measurement of the toxic potency of smoke is a key to reducing human life loss in fires.This paper summarizes the approaches taken in measuring toxic potency and highlights four needed issues still to be researched. Direct comparison of only toxic potency values is not a valid means of determining the fire safety of materials and is not sufficient for evaluating fire hazard. The paper describes the N-Gas Model (a new method of assessing toxic potency) and two approaches (in which toxic potency is one of the factors) for assessing fire hazard: (a) HAZARD I, a comprehensive tool for calculating the outcome of a fire, and (b) a fire hazard index for comparing the contributions of alternative materials to the toxicity component of fire hazard.As noted nearly five centuries ago, fires produce smoke; and as learned this century, most of the fire deaths in this country result from people breathing that smoke (1).Over the years, the United States and Canada have had the worst fire loss records among the industrialized countries which keep such records (2). At present, the United States suffers 6,000 deaths and 30,000 reported injuries per year (3). The annual property damage exceeds $7 billion, and the total cost of fire is over $50 billion (4).Many factors affect fire hazard, or the threat to life safety in a fire. This chapter not subject to U.S.

show abstract

“…It has been estimated that a combination of smoke detectors and a standal sprinkler could reduce the fire death rate by 58% [14]. Recently, Budnie [17J suggested a figure of 73% if fast-acting "residential" sprinklers were used instead of the standard sprinklers.…”

Section: Prospects For Reducing Fire Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%