FIRE SAFETY ENGINEERING

Question 1. a)

Building Act 1984 in Part I (4) allows to make building regulations. Approved Document B is a
document containing practical guidance for fire safety of buildings. It is approved by The UK building
regulations (Building Regulations 2000). So, it remains the main document to consider fire safety of
new buildings. The main aim of design according to Approved Document B is to secure life and health
of people in or about buildings (0.19 ADB).

Requirements of Approved Document B may be meet not only by following the provisions of the
document and linked “prescriptive” documents but also using fire engineering approach (0.30
Approved Document B) to provide the same or higher safety (0.21 ADB). For this approach we can use
document BS 7974 and its framework

If neglecting ventilation aspects there are two options to consider in this question. The first option is
taking ADB Table 2 for minimum fire resistance. Asuming the purpose group called “Industrial” and
“not sprinklered” it can be found that minimum period of fire resistance for building height not more
than 18m is 90 minutes.

Another approved approach in UK codes is BS 9999. Table 25 provides fire resistance periods not
taking into accound ventilation conditions. To use it we should choose the occupance type from
table 2. In conditions of the factory occupants will be familiar with the building and there will not be
a sleeping risk. So choosing A is reasonable. According to the task in the building there will be
different kinds of materials so it’s reasonable to assume the ordinary hazard. Using this data we can
get time for minimum fire resistance from Table 25 for unsprinklered use (not higher than 18m) – 90
minutes.

b) when taking into account ventilation factor we can use Table 26 of BS 9999. For doing so we
should choose the Fire growth rate form table 3. Again, assuming different types of materials we
can choose fast growth rate due to possibility of plastic materials. So taking this we are getting risk
profile A3, for which minimum time of fire resistance in table 26 is 90 minutes.

BS 9999 considers that well-ventilated fire can bring lower hazard due to lower temperatures and
smoke escape through openings whereas ADB assumes fire resistance parameters based only on
purpose groups. If choosing another risk profile (assuming fire growth is medium) fire resistance can
be lowered to 60 minutes. BS 9999 due to its consideration of type of occupants, fire growth rate
gives more freedom leading to more tailored solution.

ADB and Table 25 BS 9999 give less realistic numbers because they don’t assume fire growth rate.

c) ADB (B3.ii) as well as BS 9999 (31.1.1) has requirements for compartmentation to limit fire spread
between different parts of a building leading to more severe fire. “Compartmentation barriers”
should withstand fire conditions for the specified period (90 minutes in our case) keeping
fundamental requirements of B3.ii ADB:

 Resistance to collapse (stability)

 Resistance to fire penetration (integrity)
 Resistance to heat transfer (insulation)
 If there is flexibility in design (60 or 90 minutes of fire resistance) this can lead to lower costs of
compartmentation structures.

We cannot design without risk. What we have in tables is good for 90% or 99% of cases.
Assumption that risk of failure is small. Alternative of this is overdesign of the whole system. Cost is
increased. Fire resistance has embedded acknowledgement of risk. Numbers in the tables are broadly
conservative. They generally work, few building collapse. Fire system prove sufficient for the purpose.

The building in practise used for the purpose that it was designed. Otherwise you’ll be violating
the assumptions of design and put risk.

Question 2

a) Suppression can be made by means of water (sprinklers, water mist, foam), Gas (Inert gas,
Chemical agents), Powder. Application of agents can be in liquid or in gaseous form. The
reason for use instead of water suppression – is because sprinkler can not extinguish the fire,
just reduce its growth rate and limit the spread. Some agents such as Halon 1301 can be toxic
due to high concentrations and application time. If it is used in total flooding of enclosed space
than there is a health risk to occupants and egress time need to be considered. Gaseous
suppression systems are better for property protection reasons. As an agents halogens are
usually used. (Bryan paper) At high concentrations (higher 15%) breathing apparatuses need
to be in the compartment, as well as firefighters should use them to fight a fire in that
compartment. Cost of the gas suppression system depends on compartment size and
assumed release concentration of the agent. If considering powder suppression – the cost
depends on the size fo the fire, type of the fire (EN 2) according to fire load. Effectiveness of
powder suppression depends on particle size.

Performance of automatic sprinkler system will depend on how well it is maintained and and might
not work when required (Milliken carpert factory fire case). Sprinklers should be designed and
maintained according to standards (ADB, BS 12845) to avoid financial losses (introduction to BS
12845).

b) HFC 23. Identification can be made according to Bryan paper, p. 246. 1st digit is a number of
carbon atoms (2), and 2nd digit is a number of fluorine atoms (3). So HFC 23 will be C2F3.

The effectiveness can be measured by the score weight of the agent. The heavier – the more
effective. According to Bryan paper effectiveness of the agent is determined by type and
number of halogen atoms. The order of effectiveness is I, Br, Cl, F. So halon 1301 score is
3*1+1*8 = 11. HFC 23 score will be 3*1 = 3. So Halon 1301 is more effective.

c) Mass of the HFC 23 agent can be calculated using table 3 of BS 15004-6 using formula:
𝑐 𝑉
𝑚=( )∗
100 − 𝑐 𝑆
Assuming ambient temperature 20 degrees celcius

S = k1+k2T = 0.3164+0.0012*20=0.3404
V=20*7*3=420 m3
We need to choose design concentration from table 4. As we have computer room I would choose a
concentration 12,5 for PMMA. Design concentration are received by multiplying by safety factor (1.3).
12.5 420
𝑚=( )∗ = 176𝑘𝑔
100 − 12.5 0.3404
During this calculation we also assumed that pressure would be 1.013 bar. As we can see the mass of
the agent depends strongly on the assumptions of fire load (PMMA, Wood, Liquid, ABS) and increases
proportionally with the volume.

Question 3

a) According to (3.2 ADB) required number of horizontal exits depend on number of

occupants and on travel distance to the nearest exit. For more occupants to escape there
is a need for more exits because large number of people cannot move fast through one
door. Similar philosophy has a condition of travel distance: the longer travel distance –
more people stay in hazardous area for longer time. It also should be taken into account
that some proportion of people have disability (17.2 BS 9999)

Table 3 ADB shows that two escape routes are enough for 120 people, but according to Table 2 for
two directional egress travel distance is limited to 45 metres for office space whereas we have 50m.
So 3rd escape route is required.

According to BS 9999 Table 2 occupancy characteristic for a department store should be A

because occupants in the telemarketing company are usually awake and familiar with the building.
Fire growth rate according to Table 3 should be Medium because a telemarketing company usually
have wooden desks, cardboard boxes. Assuming this Risk profile will be A2 according to Table 4.
Similar definition is made in Table 5 with examples of risk profiles (open plan office – A2). Table 11
gives the same number of required escape routes. Maximum travel distance is calculated using Table
12, for risk profile A2 and two-way travel maximum distance is 55. Travel distance from the centre of
the office corridor is 55m. So according to BS 9999 requirements two escape routes are sufficient.

b) According to ADB we’ll have to use 3 stairwells discounting one (3.21 ADB). Table 4 Width
of the escape route for 120/2=60 should be 750mm as well as exits.

Assuming that fire protection measures are provided minimum door width is calculated by Table
13 BS9999. According to 17.6.1 the largest exit should be discounted for calculation of width. So for
120 people and risk profile A2 3.6*120 = 432mm. So according to 17.6.2. minimum width of the
corridor should be 1200mm whereas corridor door should be 1200-150=1050mm.
 c) For simultaneous evacuation by ADB without protected by smoke control stairwell we
should discount one (4.20). remembering that when designing with ADB we need 3 escape
routes, so after discounting we have 2 left. Maximum people served by each is
120*4/2=240. So using Table 7 we can choose the minimum width of the stairwell for 4
storeys will be 1000mm. Exits are 750mm width so no problems with narrowing.

If using BS9999 for designing we use table 15 for simultaneous evacuation. For risk profile A2, 4 floors
served after discounting one stair (18.3.2) we get. 2.75*480= 1320mm. So the stairwell is wider than
escape route (1200mm).

For phased evacuation we should consider protected stairwells with smoke control (4.34 ADB or
18.3.2 BS9999).

Considering this, if using ADB the stair width is determined by Table 8 for phased evacuation taking
into account two floors after fire floor are evacuating simultaneously (4.30). For 120 people per storey
we receive minimum width of 1000mm. According to 4.29 phased evacuation also imposes some
requirements, such as, every floor should be a compartment floor or protected lobby. We are not
discounting any stairs due to their smoke control protection.

When considering BS 9999

For phased evacuation stair width should be less than 1000mm (table 14). According to Table 15
minimum width will be A2 – 2 floors, 3.8*240/2 = 456. We are not discounting stairs because using
stairwell with smoke control.

Widths for simultaneous and phased evacuation are different because it is assumed that only people
from 2 floors will be evacuating at a time, whereas in simultaneous case. But this also imposes
requirements on greater compartmentation, fire warning system, internal speech communication
system, protected lobbies.

If choosing between designing according to ADB or BS9999 its better to use BS9999. It revisited
fire resistance requirements that were historically used in ADB and reassessment has been made. BS
9999 gives more control of the hazard, for example by fire growth or ventilation. With its risk profiles
BS 9999 considers fire growth rate, occupancy type. ADB doesn’t consider different parts of escape
route (door, corridor, corridor door) it just considers door width. When assuming width of escape
routes ADB doesn’t consider occupancy type (i.e. it takes into account only quantity of people, not if
they are familiar with the building or whether there is a sleeping risk). BS 9999 considers that well-
ventilated fire can bring lower hazard due to lower temperatures and smoke escape through openings
whereas ADB assumes fire resistance parameters based only on purpose groups.