98
Fire Risk Assessment
Albert V. Condello III Ph.D. CSP CHMM
Cocciardi & Associates, Inc.
Safety Health Environmental Specialist
Learning Outcomes
1. Discuss SFPE Web Course
2. Identify the eight fire scenarios that need to be included in
the fire risk assessment.
3. Describe the various steps associated with a fire risk
assessment, as outlined in the SFPE Engineering Guide to Fire
Risk Assessment (Nov. 2006).
4. Evaluate various tools and methods available to assist in
preparing a fire risk assessment.
Enabling Outcomes
1. Review NFPA 551 Guide for the Evaluation of Fire Risk
Assessments Standard 2013 Edition
2. Mention anticipated changes to NFPA 551 2016 Edition
3. Explain what is required to be awarded 0.5 CEUs from SFPE
4. Q & A – Risk Assessment Methodologies and Techniques
Common Sense = Risk Management
SFPE Web Course
SFPE Webinar – 19 SectionsSession 1: Introduction
Session 2: Organization of Guide
Session 3: Overview
Session 4: Stakeholders
Session 5: Decision Making
Session 6: Fire Risk Assessment Process
Session 7: Project Scope and Goals
Session 8: Strategic Goals
Session 9: Risk Perception
Session 10: Hazards
Session 11: Fire Scenarios
Session 12: Scenario Structure
Session 13: Data
Session 14: Frequency
Session 15: Consequence Analysis
Session 16: Risk Estimation
Session 17: Uncertainty Analysis
Session 18: Risk Evaluation
Session 19: Documentation
Eight fire scenarios fm NFPA 101
• http://eng.sfpe.org/
video_stream/progra
m11_broadband/prog
ram11_broadband_pl
ayer.htm
Session 11 of 19
Refer to Chapter 7 of
SFPE Guide
NFPA 551 – Guide for the Evaluation of Fire Risk Assessments
(2013 Edition)
Correctly evaluate the appropriateness and execution of a fire risk
assessment for a fire safety problem with guidance in NFPA 551.
Developed for AHJs, insurance professionals, building owners, and anyone
who reviews or conducts fire risk assessments, NFPA 551: Guide for the
Evaluation of Fire Risk Assessments identifies the various types of fire risk
assessment methods and describes the properties these methods should
possess.
NFPA 551
NFPA 551 helps AHJs and others understand the basis for fire assessments and
learn how to confidently:
− Apply risk-informed decision making for fire safety
− Select fire scenarios, identify representative challenging scenarios, and
group such scenarios into clusters for the purposes of conducting more
effective consequence analysis
− Develop appropriate documentation to accompany a fire risk assessment
− Evaluate qualifications of those conducting a fire risk assessment
Anticipated changes – NFPA 551 (2016 Ed)
Guidance on how to address uncertainty when conducting a fire risk
assessment
Factors to consider when conducting or reviewing a fire risk
assessment
Guidance on how to address the changing effectiveness of fire
protection equipment, features, programs, and procedures
Discussion on the role of qualitative, semi-quantitative likelihood,
semi-quantitative consequence, and quantitative methods in a fire
risk assessment
Final Exam
• http://c.ymcdn.com/sit
es/www.sfpe.org/resour
ce/resmgr/Docs/sfpe_fr
a_fire_service_ceu_ap.p
df
To Be Awarded 0.5 CEUs from SFPE
1. Complete Fire Risk Assessment CEU Examination and Application.
2. Take the CEU examination to receive 0.50 CEUs upon completion of
the Introduction to Fire Risk Assessment.
SFPE CEU Credit: To receive SFPE CEU credit, you must complete the
multiple choice examination, complete the application, and it and a
$79.00 USD nonrefundable examination grading fee (SFPE accepts
Visa, MasterCard and American Express).
CEU certification will be awarded to those who receive a score of 70%
or higher.
Q & A – Risk Assessment Methodologies
and Techniques
Any Questions?
NFPA 550 – Fire Safety Tree
Question # 1 of 201.) An acceptability threshold is defined as:
1. The ratio of the occurrences to the opportunities of a
particular event.
2. The outcome of an event, which can be expressed
positively/negatively and/or
quantitatively and/or qualitatively.
3. A quantified value that is chosen to allow comparison
between calculated risk
to support an evaluation or design.
4. A process for estimation and evaluation of fire risk
that addresses appropriate
fire scenarios.
Question # 2 of 20
2.) Handling disagreements between stakeholders could be the most
difficult aspects of fire risk management because:
1. There needs to be excessive requirements.
2. There is one deciding entity.
3. The stakeholders may have different interests and the desire for
different consequence measures.
4. Of political obligations.
Question # 3 of 20
3.) When a fire risk assessment is conducted, why is “Protection of
Assumptions” important?
1. So that all of the stakeholders are present during the discussions.
2. To improve the cost-effectiveness of fire risk prevention.
3. To analyze disputes between stakeholders.
4. The risk analysis is tied to a set of conditions and assumptions that
may change.
Question # 4 of 20
4.) Environmental Protection is an important strategic goal to
prevent which of the following:
1. Contamination of an ecosystem.
2. A poor public image.
3. Costly cleanups.
4. All of the above.
Question # 5 of 20
5.) You are conducting a fire Risk Assessment for a warehouse. The
warehouse stores hazardous materials, and is located adjacent to a
residential community. Which of the following groups most
comprehensively represent the stakeholders that should be considered in
the fire risk assessment?
1. Owner, engineer, AHJ, fire service officer, home owners.
2. Owner, architect, engineer of record, surveyor.
3. Building official, building inspector, fire service officer.
4. Politicians, home owners, activists.
Question # 6 of 20
6.) Which of the following most comprehensively describes the fire safety
goals that might be addressed by a fire risk assessment?
1. Life Safety
2. Life Safety, Property Protection, Continuity of Operations,
Environmental Protection.
3. Life Safety, Property Protection, Continuity of Operations,
Environmental Protection, Preservation of Cultural Heritage.
4. Life Safety, Cost Effectiveness, Continuity of Operations,
Environmental Protection, Preservation of Cultural Heritage.
Question # 7 of 20
7.) The concept of “de minimis risk” is based on:
1. When risk may be acceptable when evaluated against costs
of reduction or other considerations external to the risk.
2. The premise that there is some level of risk below which
one does not need to be concerned.
3. The process of comparing the calculated risks for alternative
courses of action.
4. The evaluation of costs to define the difference between
what is practicable and what is reasonably practicable.
Question # 8 of 20
8.) Comprehensive project documentation should be provided on:
1. Any agreements made by the stakeholders.
2. Steps necessary to take if the building undergoes a
change in ownership.
3. The amount of protection systems that must be
maintained in the building.
4. The set of conditions under which the risk assessment is
considered to be valid, what types of changes in
conditions would require a new risk assessment, any
conditions that are placed on the analysis or assumptions
that are made.
Question # 9 of 20
9.) Which of the following is NOT an initiating hazard?
1. Fireworks stored in a warehouse.
2. A closed control valve on a sprinkler system.
3. Smoking.
4. Operating a propane torch to fix a roof.
Question # 10 of 20
10.) The hazard identification process involves:
1. Initiating hazards, contributing factors, vulnerabilities.
2. Initiating hazards, contributing factors, vulnerabilities, cost effectiveness.
3. Initiating hazards.
4. Contributing factors, vulnerabilities.
Question # 11 of 20
11.) A representative fire scenario of a scenario cluster should be:
1. A scenario with consequences which are equal to or greater than other
scenarios in the cluster.
2. Consequences which are similar in magnitude to other scenarios in the
cluster.
3. A worst case scenario.
4. All of the above.
Question # 12 of 20
12.) Data for a fire risk assessment must:
1. Contain several data sources.
2. Be relevant to the risk being analyzed.
3. Have no inaccuracies.
4. Contain the exact parameters of the fire risk assessment.
Question # 13 of 2013.) Frequency is:
1. The probability of an event given the occurrence of a preceding
event.
2. The ratio of the occurrences to the opportunities of a particular
event.
3. The number of times an event occurs within a specified time
interval.
4. Empirical results that, for a given set of initial conditions, will
always produce the same outcome.
Question # 14 of 20
14.) Which of the following is a contributing factor?
1. A fire burning out a data center.
2. High winds.
3. A match falling into a trash can.
4. Smoldering ashes.
Question # 15 of 20
15.) Consequences can be determined from an:
1. Evaluation of consequences using loss experience/historical data.
2. Evaluation of consequences using engineering judgment.
3. Evaluation of consequences using models.
4. All of the above
Question # 16 of 20
16.) Sources of error and uncertainty should include:
1. Relationship of uncertainty to risk calculation such as how error can
arise from any of the components of the calculation.
2. Relationship of uncertainty and variability.
3. Types of error related to information used in the fire risk assessment.
4. All of the above
Question # 17 of 20
17.) If the risk is clearly not acceptable during risk evaluation, how can an
acceptable level of risk be achieved:
1. Revisit acceptability threshold and/or reduce risk
2. Specify more fire scenarios.
3. Find more data
4. All of the above
Question # 18 of 20
18.) Documentation is the most important step of the fire risk assessment
process because:
1. A record is made of all of the analysis and outcomes of the
assessment.
2. All of the stakeholders are informed of the outcomes.
3. Any necessary solutions or compromises are specified.
4. All of the above.
Question #19 of 20
19.) The presentation of data sources in the fire risk assessment is essential
to:
1. Provide a clear view of the scope
2. Assist in hazard analysis.
3. Prove thoroughness and applicability to the reviewer.
4. Both 1 and 3.
Question # 20 of 20
20.) Refining the risk analysis can be accomplished by:
1. Reducing the uncertainties in the data by increasing the size of the
data set used.
2. Engineering judgment.
3. If simple methods were used to estimate consequences, then even
more simpler methods should be explored.
4. All of the above
Answer Key – All 20 Questions
1. Choice Three
2. Choice Three
3. Choice Four
4. Choice Four
5. Choice One
6. Choice Three
7. Choice Two
8. Choice Four
9. Choice Two
10. Choice One
11. Choice Four
12. Choice Four
13. Choice Three
14. Choice Two
15. Choice Four
16. Choice Four
17. Choice One
18. Choice Four
19. Choice Four
20. Choice One
For Further
InformationPlease feel free to contact:
Albert V. Condello III Ph.D CSP CHMM
Cocciardi & Associates, Inc.
2929 Stewart Drive, Suite 103
State College, TX 16801-7565
Cell 717-315-0063
Office 814-238-2113
Email [email protected]
Email [email protected]
ReferencesKnow the Risks Associated with CPVC
The CPVC compatibility rules change constantly. But 100% steel remains 100% compatible with everything. From
certification changes to safety risks, there are plenty of reasons to avoid CPVC and install 100% steel in your fire sprinkler
systems. Wheatland Tube believes that knowing the facts is the...
Jul. 1, 2014 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/know-risks-associated-cpvc
Fire Modeling for the Fire Research, Fire Protection, and Fire Service…
How the most recent version of the Fire Dynamics Simulator (FDS) would be applied in three different scenarios...
Oct. 1, 2014 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/fire-modeling-fire-research-fire-protection-and-fire-service-communities
Roundtable of Fire Protection Engineers Who Work in the Fire Service
A conversation about the roles, opportunities, and challenges that FPEs face, with a glimpse into their vision for the
future...
Oct. 1, 2014 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/roundtable-fire-protection-engineers-who-work-fire-service
Video Flame and Smoke Detection: Benefits and Applications
Fike will present the latest on video image technology for flame and smoke detection, and how this form of early warning
detection can help mitigate risk...
Jun. 6, 2014 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/webinar/video-flame-and-smoke-detection-benefits-and-applications
FPEs Have Diverse Career Options
Fire protection engineering is a unique profession that focuses on protecting people, property and the environment from
fire...
Nov. 1, 2014 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/fpes-have-diverse-career-options
ReferencesAn Overview of Approaches and Resources for Building Fire Risk Assessm…
Steps for fire risk assessment and places to gather further information...
Jul. 1, 2013 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/overview-approaches-and-resources-building-fire-risk-assessment
The Application of Fire Risk Assessments in Building Design and Manage…
Why fire risk assessment is gaining traction...
Jul. 1, 2013 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/application-fire-risk-assessments-building-design-and-management
Risk Assessment in the Oil and Gas Energy Industry
Many companies have standards for fire protection and many states and municipalities have building and fire codes that they follow...
Sep. 30, 2007 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/special-hazards/risk-assessment-oil-and-gas-energy-industry
Fire Protection Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance and Building Fire…
How to customize an inspection, testing, and maintenance program...
Jul. 1, 2013 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/fire-protection-inspection-testing-and-maintenance-and-building-fire-risk
How Can a Fire Risk Approach Be Applied to Develop a Balanced Fire Protection…
Quite commonly, the first thing the fire protection engineer may do when engaged in a development project is to consult the relevant building codes and regulations to seek guidance and to establish the legal requirements...
Apr. 1, 2006 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/fire-protection-design/how-can-fire-risk-approach-be-applied-develop-balanced-fire-protection-strate
A Statistical Benchmarking Framework for Developing Stakeholder Consen…
The author discusses resources for developing acceptable risk criteria using a benchmarking approach. He presents a risk analysis framework designed to provide an objective basis and repeatable methodology to establish target risk levels for a variety o...
Jan. 1, 2003 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/fire-protection-design/statistical-benchmarking-framework-developing-stakeholder-consensus
ReferencesFixed-Guideway Transit and Passenger Rail Systems Fire Saftey: An Over…
Key fire safety design issues for rail transit systems...
Apr. 1, 2014 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/fixed-guideway-transit-and-passenger-rail-systems-fire-saftey-overview
Internal Pipe Obstruction and Integrity Evaluation: A New Approach
Even though pipe failure can be operationally crippling and potentially life threatening, there are no convenient or effective ways to accurately and comprehensively detect and map the severity of internal pipe integrity issues. Mitigation techniques often seem ineffective, largely because of the...
Oct. 1, 2014 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/internal-pipe-obstruction-and-integrity-evaluation-new-approach
International Master of Science in Fire Safety Engineering a Huge Succ…
Going into its fifth year, the International Master of Science in Fire Safety Engineering (IMFSE) program in Europe has become a huge success...
Nov. 1, 2014 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/international-master-science-fire-safety-engineering-huge-success
Decision Time
3 Fire Protection Engineers Tell Their Stories of How They Chose to Become Fire Protection Engineers...
Nov. 1, 2014 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/decision-time
Effectiveness and Reliability of Fire Protection Systems
An overview of recent reliability data collected on both active and passive systems...
Oct. 1, 2014 | http://magazine.sfpe.org/content/effectiveness-and-reliability-fire-protection-systems
SAKS – Tool for
Vulnerability Analyses and
Fire Safety in Hospitals
Magnus Nordberg
Oscar Löfgren Ferraz
Brandkonsulten
Brandkonsulten is a fire and risk consultancy based in Stockholm and two
other locations in Sweden.
• Magnus Nordberg, Partner, MSc RM & BSc FPE
• Oscar Löfgren Ferraz, BSc FPE
We would also like to acknowledge our colleagues Linda Widmark and Lina
Åteg, Brandkonsulten, who have developed the model as the master
thesis in Risk Management at Lund University in cooperation with
Brandkonsulten.
NKS- A New University
Hospital in StockholmA new state-of the art general
hospital in Stockholm
• ~3 550 000 ft2 (GFA)
• Opens 2016-2018
Brandkonsulten:
− Fire safety design
− Vulnerability analysis
2015-10-06
What is a vulnerability
analysis?In this model:
A model to assess what parts of an activity or a system that is
most sensitive where the consequences of unwanted events will
be worst.
It is important to understand that the definition may vary
depending on who and for what purpose the term is used. It is
quite often used in context with risk analysis (i.e. risk and
vulnerability analysis)
Why a new model?Most models are ”incident-based” and/or are not quantitative
(Hazard Vulnerability Analysis (HVA), Willis Blue and Ibero, MVA).
The ambition for this model is to:
− Identify and analyse the vulnerability based on what is worth protecting
− Be transparent, easy to understand and use and be repeatable
− Provide a clear and understandable basis for decision-making
1. Identify what is important to protect
2. Name analysis group(s)
3. Identify critical functions
4. Identify unwanted events
5. Determine events to study
further
6. Rate the vulnerability of the
system
7. Develop action plans and
recommendations
SAKS
Before starting an analysis• Regardless of which model is being used the ambition of the analysis
needs to be determined:− What is the purpose?
− Is it based on the function of the hospital or for health care in general?
− Etc.
• A project manager need to be appointed who has a an understanding
of the SAKS and of risk- and vulnerability studies in general
• It is important that decision makers are both supporting the analysis
by setting it’s frame work, supplying proper resources and actively
taking part in the result
1. Identify what is important to protect1. Identify what is important to
protect
2. Name analysis group(s)
3. Identify critical
functions
4. Identify unwanted
events
5. Determine events to study
further
6. Rate the vulnerability of
the system
7. Develop action plans and recommendatio
ns
The project manager shall together with medical staff, safety and
security, technical management and/or other staff with important
knowledge of the systems evaluate what parts of the systems and
processes are most sensitive and valuable to protect.
It could be:
• A ward (e.g. Emergency ward),
• A specific function/machine (e.g. Lin Acc) or
• A technical system (e.g. medical gases)
1. Identify what is important to protect
A. Technical supply, e.g.:
- Ventilation
- ICT
- Electricity
- Water supply
- Heating
- Cooling
D. Health care, e.g.:
- Radiation
- Emergency ward
- Surgery
- Neo natal-unit (pre-born)
- Trauma
C. Logistics, e.g.:
- Waste handling
- Goods handling area
- Heli pad
D. Supply health care, e.g.:
- Pharmacy
- Sterile
- Medical gases
1. Identify what is important to
protect
2. Name analysis group(s)
3. Identify critical
functions
4. Identify unwanted
events
5. Determine events to study
further
6. Rate the vulnerability of
the system
7. Develop action plans and recommendatio
ns
2. Name analysis group(s)
• ~5-10 persons
• At least one employee from the affected
ward/function
• The group is lead by the project manager
1. Identify what is important to
protect
2. Name analysis group(s)
3. Identify critical
functions
4. Identify unwanted
events
5. Determine events to study
further
6. Rate the vulnerability of
the system
7. Develop action plans and recommendatio
ns
3. Identify critical functions
• Electricity
1. Identify what is important to
protect
2. Name analysis group(s)
3. Identify critical
functions
4. Identify unwanted
events
5. Determine events to study
further
6. Rate the vulnerability of
the system
7. Develop action plans and recommendatio
ns
Sterile service department
FunctionSterilization equipment
Staff
4. Identify unwanted events1. Identify what is important to
protect
2. Name analysis group(s)
3. Identify critical
functions
4. Identify unwanted
events
5. Determine events to study
further
6. Rate the vulnerability of
the system
7. Develop action plans and recommendatio
ns
Sterile service department
Function EventsSterilization equipment
Fire
Epidemic
Staff Pandemic
Strike
Transportation
5. Determine events to study further1. Identify what is important to
protect
2. Name analysis group(s)
3. Identify critical
functions
4. Identify unwanted
events
5. Determine events to study
further
6. Rate the vulnerability of
the system
7. Develop action plans and recommendatio
ns
Sterile service department
Function EventsSterilization equipment
Fire
Epidemic
Staff Pandemic
Strike
Transportation
6. Rate the vulnerability of the system1. Identify what is important to
protect
2. Name analysis group(s)
3. Identify critical
functions
4. Identify unwanted
events
5. Determine events to study
further
6. Rate the vulnerability of
the system
7. Develop action plans and recommendatio
ns
The vulnerability is rated for the system/function based on it ability
to:
• Prevent,
• Manage and
• Recover from an event
The rating is made on a four grade scale:
1 The capability is good
2 The capability is generally good, but can be improved
3 There is a capability, but it need to be improved
4 There is no or very limited capability
6. Rate the vulnerability of the system1. Identify what is important to
protect
2. Name analysis group(s)
3. Identify critical
functions
4. Identify unwanted
events
5. Determine events to study
further
6. Rate the vulnerability of
the system
7. Develop action plans and recommendatio
ns
In order to support the assessment and to create a similar level of judgement of the rating , supporting question
should be developed. These are a few examples of questions that could be the base the rating:
Prevent (1-4)
• What is the capability of the system/function to work with loss prevention?
• What is the staff’s knowledge of risks and actions in reference to the function
• How well can the system develop and use prognoses for when a risk is the greatest, e.g. time of year or time of day?
Manage (1-4)
• How capable is the system to detect the event early?
• How well staff handle the event?
• How good are the tools/resources available to handle the event?
• What is the redundancy of the system/function?
Recover (1-4)
• How well can the activity recover to the state it was in before the event?
• How capable is the system, if necessary, to restructure the activity after the event?
• How capable is the system to uphold contacts and cooperate with other systems after
6. Rate the vulnerability of the system1. Identify what is important to
protect
2. Name analysis group(s)
3. Identify critical
functions
4. Identify unwanted
events
5. Determine events to study
further
6. Rate the vulnerability of
the system
7. Develop action plans and recommendatio
ns
Sterile service department
Function Events Prevent Manage Recover SumSterilization equipment
Fire 2 4 4 10
Staff Pandemic 3 1 1 5
Transportation 1 2 1 4
1 The capability is good
2 The capability is generally good, but can be improved
3 There is a capability, but it need to be improved
4 There is no or very limited capability
3-5 Low vulnerability, No action needed6-7 Increased vulnerability, Action needed if possible
8-9* High vulnerability, Actions needed*If any ability (prevent, manage or recover) is rated 4 the vulnerability need rated as high regardless of the sum
7. Develop action plans and
recommendations
Recommendation: In order to better manage the event of a fire in the
Sterile service department additional fire compartmentation is made
between sterilization equipment to limit the consequences of a fire.
Cost: 10 000$ initial investment and 200 $ annually (e.g. service of dampers
etc.)
1. Identify what is important to
protect
2. Name analysis group(s)
3. Identify critical
functions
4. Identify unwanted
events
5. Determine events to study
further
6. Rate the vulnerability of
the system
7. Develop action plans and recommendatio
ns
Sterile service department
Function Events Prevent Manage Recover SumSterilization equipment
Fire 2 4 4 10
Sterile service department
Function Events Prevent Manage Recover SumSterilization equipment
Fire 2 2 2 6
Results so far at NKSThe result of the analysis at NKS is confidential but what can be
said about it so far is that:
− Vulnerable parts of the system has been identified and several actions have been taken.
− Many parts have been deemed not vulnerable, which is equally important acknowledge
− Actions have included:• Changes in design (e.g. the design of fire compartments) and
• Action plans
Conclusion• Using a vulnerability analysis in the design stage of a project have been a valuable
tool, both the fire safety design and building design.
• The model have been easy to understand and to use. It does require an involvement
and a commitment from all parties that are included in the process.
• It is important to recognise that SAKS is one of several ways to perform an
vulnerability analysis. It is ultimately important to choose a model that suits your
needs, what you want to achieve, resources available, time frame, etc.
The model is free to use and the full report that describes
the model can download the report from Lund university (in
Swedish…):
http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&rec
ordOId=2254838&fileOId=2255444
The report includes templates that can be used for various
steps of the analysis.
Radiative Heat Flux Calculations
for Complex Geometries
Piotr Tofilo, PhD SFPE Poland, President
The Main School of Fire Service, Warsaw
Introduction
• Motivation and background
• Simple heat flux calculations
• Problems with using CFD
• Algorithm for complex geometries
• FireRad program
Motivation and background
• Building separation rules are simplified
• Separation of buildings with complex facades may be
problematic to analyze
• Optimization of separation / required protection is
often required or desired
• No tools are widely available for precise assessment
Simple calculations and assumptions
• Methods based on radiating rectangle – sufficient for
simple, regular facades
• Weaknesses: non-uniform / non-planar distribution of
radiators, angles, obstructions
• Heat radiation: emitted, critical, compartment
temperature, emissivity
• External flames (Eurocode or +20% by Law)
CFD
• Radiation – costly and time consuming
• Post-flashover fires – long duration, underventilation
• Radiation models – lots of details and assumptions
• Rectangular grid – may be a problem
Algorithm for complex geometries
• View factor calculation for arbitrary shapes
• Integration based on Stokes theorem
• Triangulation of arbitrary shapes to triangles
• Obstruction (shading) of the radiating shape
External radiation modeling
External radiation modeling
External radiation modeling
External radiation modeling
FireRad - available objects
RadiatorObstructor
Receiver
Obstructor
+ReceiverExternal flame with
thermal gradient
Radiating
cylinder
Radiating
cone
Point source
Assisting shape
Obstructions and triangulation
Results 2D
Virtual plane
Effects of obstructions
Effects of obstructions
Effects of obstructions
Results 3D – isosurfaces
Orientation of receiving points
parallel to radiator perpendicular to radiator
Parallel vs. adaptive orientation
Adaptive orientation
STL import (export walls from Revit)
Specifying surfaces
2D results
Verification
Verification
FireRad
• Provides new and easy way of studying
thermal radiation from fires
• Rapid model creation and quick results
• You can use it to check CFD
FireRad
• One module of the Fire Engineering Platform (FEP)
• FEP = FireRad + FDS Designer + FDS Cloud Client + QuickZone
• Everything in a single Windows application
• More FEP modules under development
• Currently free of charge (but licensed)
• Version Beta available at: www.fireplatform.eu
QuickZoneFast model setup, interactive modifications, immediate results
FDS DesignerInteractive model setup, CAD import, visual FDS code control
FDS Cloud ClientCloud computing with one click, no need to own computers
