Quantifying life safety Part II: Quantification of fire protection systems

Albrecht, Cornelius

doi:10.1016/j.firesaf.2014.01.002

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Let us not also forget that a performance-based building regulatory system puts added responsibility on fire protection engineers, as they are generally expected to demonstrate that the proposed fire safety design solution satisfies the performance objectives [19,[21][22][23]. There is another aspect and that is the cost-benefit assessment of the impact and quantitative comparison of fire safety and protection system designs [24][25][26][27][28]. This is a factor that should be considered relevant for all fire strategies.…”

Section: Issues Surrounding Reality In the Application Of A Performan...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Index Method—A Tool for Building Fire Safety Assessments

Brzezińska

Bryant

2021

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of fire safety engineering and performance-based techniques continues to grow in prominence as building design becomes more ambitious, increasing complexity. National fire safety enforcement agencies are tasked with evaluating and approving the resulting fire strategies, which have similarly continued to become more advanced and specialist. To assist with the evaluation of fire strategies, this paper introduces a methodology dedicated to sustainable building fire safety level simulations. The methodology derives from ideas originally introduced in British Standard Specification PAS 911 in 2007 and combines a visual representation of fire strategies with a semi-quantitative approach to allow for their evaluation. The concept can be applied to a range of industrial fire safety assessments and can be modified for specific needs relative to different industries.

show abstract

Section: Issues Surrounding Reality In the Application Of A Performan...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Index Method—A Tool for Building Fire Safety Assessments

Brzezińska

Bryant

2021

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The RSM is generated in step 7. Two methods are particularly useful for response surface modelling in the framework of life safety analysis [29,55]. These are the Interpolating Moving Least Squares method and the Polynomial Chaos Expansion (PCE) method.…”

Section: Rsm For Smoke Spread Modellingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of an Integrated Risk Assessment Method to Quantify the Life Safety Risk in Buildings in Case of Fire

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An integrated probabilistic risk assessment methodology is developed for the purpose of quantifying the life safety level of people present in buildings in the context of fire safety design. Multiple risk based concepts and tools have been developed in previous research to objectify performance based design methods for simple building types and layouts. However, these available models lack an integrated approach for challenging building designs and moreover they are not adequately coupled, most often resulting in a significant computational effort. Hence, there is a need for a practical and efficient framework for dealing with complicated building layouts and different occupancy types. Therefore, a computationally efficient quantitative risk assessment method is developed that provides a framework by combining deterministic sub-models and probabilistic techniques to quantify the fire safety level by means of failure probabilities, individual and societal risk. The deterministic framework is supported by analytical and numerical models. The probabilistic framework is supported by response surface modelling, sampling techniques and limit state design. Following the theoretical description of the model, a case study of a five storey commercial shopping mall of 25000 m 2 is elaborated and discussed as proof of concept. Multiple fire, building and occupant variables are implemented in the model. Three different fire safety designs are compared, resulting in quantified risks between 10 -6 and 10 -8 . The case study proves the validity of the newly developed integrated methodology for this type of buildings and its benefits in fire safety engineering.

show abstract

“…One of the biggest limitations is a sparseness of reliable failure data, which is necessary for accurate risk calculation, as well as the lack of unified levels of risk acceptability, which very often precludes a credible risk assessment. Consequently, it was found that a complex fire risk assessment process can be replaced with any much simpler fire risk index method such as, for example, the Gretener method or Dow's Fire and Explosion Index [27]. The Gretener method, originally developed in Switzerland for risk assessment by insurers, is used here as a basis for a novel assessment method of fire strategies [28,29].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Alternative Evaluation and Indicating Methodology for Sustainable Fire Safety in the Process Industry

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a mismatch between the desire to introduce greater levels of sustainability in engineering design and in the need to provide effective engineering solutions, particularly where issues of human safety and asset protection are involved. Sustainability engineering typically incorporates economic, environmental, and social factors, all of which are highly relevant and applicable to fire safety and the design of fire protection systems. The term fire strategy denotes a documented methodology to encapsulate a full range of such systems, within a single framework, for more complex risks such as those found in the process industry. The subject of fire safety is emotive and its application within building design may not change unless we refocus on a holistic and strategic approach, especially for complex building profiles. Fire is a recognized critical safety issue for most types of industrial plants. Due to the complexity of the processes, even a relatively small fire accident can lead to a chain of events that could be devastating, resulting in huge asset and continuity losses, damage to the local environment, and of course, the threat to life. More complex processes require a more flexible and relevant approach. The use of fire safety engineering and performance-based evaluation techniques, instead of prescriptive rules, continues to grow in prominence because of this. This is the case when specifying fire protection and safety for modern power generating plants. However, when it comes to critical infrastructure, such as is the case with power plants, it is sometimes not clear whether optimum fire safety engineering solutions have been applied. One of the ideas specifically developed for evaluating the most appropriate fire safety strategies and systems, especially for such infrastructure examples, is a method based upon the British Standard Specification PAS 911. This method is captured in a diagram and identifies eight main elements for fire safety and protection. The idea presented in this article is to allow assessment of a submitted actual fire strategy for a building or other form of infrastructure, against what has been predetermined as a standard baseline fire strategy for, in this case, a power plant building. The assessment makes use of a multi-level questionnaire, in this case specifically formulated for power plant fire safety needs. By comparing the actual fire strategy diagram against a baseline fire strategy, enforcement agencies, or other interested stakeholders, can recognize which fire safety factors play the most important part in the fire strategy, and determine whether proper levels of fire safety and protection have been applied. The fire strategy evaluation is realized by a team of engineers, which consists of independent fire strategist from a consultant office, internal fire and technical experts from the industrial plant, such as the person responsible for fire safety, person responsible for explosion safety, person responsible for housekeeping, and building manager. Additionally, there should be representatives of insurance companies and independent fire experts. Typically, the group consists of 7 to 12 people.

show abstract

Quantifying life safety Part II: Quantification of fire protection systems

Cited by 10 publications

References 4 publications

Risk Index Method—A Tool for Building Fire Safety Assessments

Risk Index Method—A Tool for Building Fire Safety Assessments

Development of an Integrated Risk Assessment Method to Quantify the Life Safety Risk in Buildings in Case of Fire

An Alternative Evaluation and Indicating Methodology for Sustainable Fire Safety in the Process Industry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About