A. Alvarez – M. Ferreira – B. Meacham 11 June 2013 The VULCAN INITIATIVE: A Web-based Platform for the Next Generation of Performance-Based Fire Protection

A. Alvarez – M. Ferreira – B. Meacham 11 June 2013

The VULCAN INITIATIVE: A Web-based Platform

for the Next Generation of Performance-BasedFire Protection Engineering (W56)

Alberto ALVAREZ, Ph. D.

Matthew A. FERRIERA

Prof. Brian J. MEACHAM – WPI (Advisor)

The VULCAN INITIATIVE

This work is supported by NIST Grant 60NANB10D228


Presentation layout

1st part: background and context• Why? Need to change• What? “next generation of PBD”

2nd part: the Vulcan Initiative• How?• Who? The importance of participants


Challenges related to the use of current PBFPD processes (1) Generic guidelines

Challenges related to the application of generic guidelines

how to integrate the specifics of a project into considerationin the definition of the problem to solvein the analysisin the integration of the fire protection measures into the global

project ("idealized" design features and "real life" installed and running features)

How to get the results of the

application of the process accepted

by the stakeholders?

How to get the results of the

application of the process

continuously understood by

the stakeholders (and building

users)?


Challenges related to the technical aspect of the current PBFPD processes

Estimation of the consequences of fire design scenarios

Determination of influential factors affecting the evaluation of trial designs

Selection and adaptation of literature values, when available, to use in models

Comparison of levels of performance between an engineering solution and the one based on prescriptive requirements

How to apply the technical steps of the process to a specific project?

Challenges related to the use of current PBFPD processes (2) Technical aspect


Challenges related to the political aspect of the current PBFPD processes

Definition, use and quantification of the performance/acceptance criteriaSelection of fire design scenariosDealing with a priori lists of performance criteria and design fire scenarios

How to separate the technical actions from the political decisions?

Challenges related to the use of current PBFPD processes (3) Political aspect

Technical level of challenges Political level of challenges

Engineering process itself Decision making process

Manuscript to be published in the Journal of Fire Protection Engineering “20 Years of Performance-Based Fire Protection Design: Challenges Faced and a Look Ahead”


Need for a paradigm shift

Paradigm associated with the current PBFPD processesFire Protection measures would perform as designed to mitigate the effects of design fire scenarios in comparison with performance criteria

Paradigm associated with the new PBFPD processThe “building-occupant” system has to integrate Fire Protection measures which would mitigate the effects (amplitude and duration) of fire events on its overall performance

Challenges


Fire as one of many disruptive events of the building-occupant system

Time

Performance of the Philips Plant: daily number of chips produced

The 10 minute fire is extinguished by sprinklers and staff interventionChips on the furnace where the fire started are lost

According to the current application of the PBFPD processes, the designed system was operative and successful… Nevertheless….




Chip

s on

all

the

plan

t are

lost

an

d th

e w

hole

pla

nt p

rodu

ction

is

stop

ped

Smoke spread and tramping of staff and fire fighters from the fire scene (in the mix of dirt and water) contaminate chips at every stage of the production

Full impact of the fire event

Time





Several weeks to restore the clean rooms


Time


Chip

s on

all

the

plan

t are

lost

an

d th

e w

hole

pla

nt p

rodu

ction

is

stop

ped






Full impact of the fire event Restarting

production

Time


Chip

s on

all

the

plan

t are

lost

an

d th

e w

hole

pla

nt p

rodu

ction

is

stop

ped







Preparation for recovery Recovery

Long term impact

Fire disruptive event

Restarting

production

Pre- event "chronic" state

Post- event "chronic" state

Time

Performance of the Philips Plant

Chip

s on

all

the

plan

t are

lost

an

d th

e w

hole

pla

nt p

rodu

ction

is

stop

ped


Design fire scenario


“Chronic” objectives vs. “Acute” objectives

People focused on what they are doing, no attention to the surroundingsLoss of time perception

“chronic” = everyday use of the building

“acute” = disruptive event occurring in the building or affecting the normal use of the building

How to make people aware of the fire?How to decide which fire protection measures (technical and managerial) to install in the building?


Competing “chronic” objectivesOriginal design vs. real usage

The “vision” of the architect

The reality of the system

The conceptual and design phase

The actual building usage


Blocked exit in Australia

Combustible load in exit stairwell in a student housing in UK

Competing “acute” and “chronic” objectivesConceptual design vs. real usage

http://idighardware.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Blocked-Exit-Boxes.jpg


Characteristics of the new paradigm

• Paradigm associated with the new PBFPD process– The “building-occupant” system has to integrate Fire

Protection measures which would mitigate the effects of fire events on its overall performance

– “Building-occupant” system: system defined by a structure (i.e. building) inside which “targets” (i.e. occupants interacting with building contents) are primarily engaged in a specific activity.

– This activity is quantified (e.g. activity number carried out by day or week) and then the performance of the system is estimated by the level of this activity.


Definition of a “building-occupant” system

Institutional

Child care facilities (2 ½ years of age or less)

Detoxification facilities

Hospitals and mental hospitals (medical, psychiatric, obstetrical or surgical treatment of in-patients)

Nursing homes

In the current paradigm, all these institutional buildings are treated the same

In the new paradigm, all these systems are treated according to their targets



• Paradigm associated with the new PBFPD process– During normal every day conditions or "chronic states of the

system", “targets” (i.e. occupants using important building components) are located in "functional zones" where they carry out their activities associated with "chronic objectives", established in accordance with the system scope. "Utility zones" include system support components such as electricity, HVAC and plumbing.


Definition of a building-occupant system

Hospitals and mental hospitals (medical, psychiatric, obstetrical or surgical treatment of in-patients)

Hospital

Reception

Emergency rooms

Examination rooms

Intensive Care Unit…

Cafeteria

Storage units

Electrical rooms…

Atrium

High-rise

Main systems / “functional zones”Support systems Specificities

Hospital


Targets in functional zones of a hospital

Hospital

Reception

Emergency rooms

Examination rooms

Intensive Care Unit

Patient Rooms

Staff + in-patients (mostly mobile) + visitors

Staff + in-patients (not mobile)

In-patients (not mobile / mobile)

In-patients (not mobile)

Staff + in-patients (not mobile / mobile)

Operating rooms Staff + in-patients (not mobile)

Occupants


Targets in functional zones of a hospital

Hospital

Reception

Emergency rooms

Examination rooms

Intensive Care Unit

Patient Rooms

Computers (data entry) or paper files

All room (maintain usability)

Life supporting equipment

Life supporting equipment

Equipment for examination (e.g. scanner)

Operating rooms All room (maintain usability)

Functional building components

Electrical room Loss of electricity Occupant affected

Indirect effect

Direct effect


Functional zones and support systems

Patient room

Operating room

Intensive Care Unit

Storage room

Nurse station


“Performance” zoning and FP zoning

Patient room

Operating room

Intensive Care Unit

Storage room

Nurse station

Smoke compartment(illustrative example)



• Paradigm associated with the new PBFPD process– In order to mitigate the “event effects” on the system

performance, “acute objectives” have to be set up so to take into consideration “direct effects” and “indirect effects” with which the disruptive events can possibly damage the targets.

• Within this “building-occupant” paradigm, FPEs– Perform a target focused risk analysis– Verify the FP measures are integrated into the system– Indicate the cost/benefits of the FP measures to the

stakeholders


Overview of the new system specific risk informed performance-based process

Technical steps of the new PBD process

Disruptive event risk

characterization

Target vulnerability

criteria estimation

Disruptive event scenario analysis (quantification

of the likelihood)

Disruptive event scenario analysis (quantification of the impacts)

Evaluation of the integration in the system of the protection

measures against the disruptive

event

Cost-benefit analysis

Political

Stakeholders’ project

definition

Stakeholders’ decision

PoliticalManuscript to be submitted to Building, Research and Information


Separating the political aspect from the technical aspect of the PBD process

Technical steps of the new PBFPD process

Risk characterization

Target vulnerability

criteria estimation

Scenario analysis

(quantification of the likelihood)

Scenario analysis

(quantification of the impacts)

Evaluation of the integration

of the fire protection

measures in the system


stakeholders define the project and present all the characteristics of the “building-occupant” system to examine

the same stakeholders decide on the trial designs proposed by the FPE. This again is a "political" issue. The technical fire

protection engineering is done at that point

Political

Stakeholders’ project

definition

Stakeholders’ decision

PoliticalManuscript to be published in the Journal of Fire Protection Engineering “ A Framework For Risk-Informed PB Fire Protection Design For The Built Environment”


Technical steps of the new PBFPD process


Target Vulnerability criteria estimation

Scenario analysis

(quantification of the

likelihood)

Scenario analysis


Evaluation of the integration of the fire protection measures in

the system


Damage metric

Fre

quen

cy o

f th

e di

srup

tive

eve

nt

Translation of the stakeholders’ concerns in FPE terms: List of system targets

How the targets are affected by the fire

Quantification of the fire risk and proposition of fire protection measures

ʃ

$

Documents for the stakeholders

to make their decisions



Damage criteria estimation

Scenario analysis

(quantification of the likelihood)

Scenario analysis


Evaluation of the integration

of the fire protection

measures in the system


Path to obtain the guidelines to every process step

Guideline or standard

related to the Process Step

Research related to the Process Step

Cli

mbi

ng th

e R

esea

rch

toA

ppli

cati

on /

Reg

ulat

ory

ladd

er For specific systems


The Vulcan Initiative: Principal Menu

To help people navigate this web-platform, the Vulcan Initiative is organized around a menu located at the top of each page.

The Vulcan Initiative was created around a new Risk Informed PBFPD process with 5 technical steps at the center of the menu.

Nevertheless, participants from all the spectrum of the Fire Protection Engineering community do not necessarily need to get involved in using this process in order to get benefits from the Vulcan Initiative.

Indeed, FPEs dealing with research or PBD process or engineering issues, may be interested in one aspect of the Vulcan Initiative such as the definition of scenarios or the calculation of fire consequences.


The Vulcan Initiative: (1) Projects

A participant to the Vulcan Initiative can propose a Project.

In order to do so, a participant uploads the characteristics of a project, that is to say of a system including building components and occupant distributions.

The ultimate goal of the Vulcan Initiative is to have participants upload a project and successively go through the 5 technical steps of the risk-informed PBD process.

Independently of following this new process, participants could be interested in applying a single step for their own analysis.



Applying the 5 steps of the new risk-informed PBFPD process

Applying a particular step of the new risk-informed PBFPD process






















Examples of current PROJECTS



One participant to the Vulcan Initiative could be interested in only one step of the new Risk Informed Performance-Based

Fire Protection Design Process

For that purpose, The Vulcan Initiative contains ‘test bed’ environment (or TBE) STUDIES

The Vulcan Initiative: (2) TBE Studies



























For each PBFPD technical step, the FPE has to evaluate parameters relevant to the step using:

- Tools that are appropriate to the analysis,

- Data that is representative of the considered project.



Fire consequences +Impact on people, contents, and structures



Occupants

Building type 1

Building type 2

Buildings

Highschool

(Building – Occupant) interactions


Hospital

Occupants

Building type 1

Building type 2

Buildings

(Building – Occupant) interactions


Buildings

Fires

Building type 1

Building type 2

Fire in a classroom

Fire in a nursing ward of a hospital

(Building – Fire) interactions


Occupants

Fires

Building type 1

Building type 2

Students and staff evacuating school

“Patient” being evacuated

(Fire – Occupant) interactions


Buildings

Fires

Occupants

Entire domain of possibilities

‘Test bed’ environments

Domains of tool validation for the Tool Developers

Domains of interest for the Tool Users

‘Test bed’ Environments


Tool UserTU

Tool DeveloperTD

AcademiaFire Protection EngineerEngineering

societies

Research Institute

Tools are developed and used to solve problems for which the tools are known to be validated

Defines the problems Provides models,Validates and verifies the tools

Helping the Tool User (TU)-Tool Developer (TD) communication

The actors of the ‘Test bed’ Environment studies

Private company


Tool UserTU

Built Environment

BE

Project teamFire Protection

EngineerEngineering societies

Authority Having Jurisdiction

Knows the values and characteristics of their built environment

Knows the types of input data in order to run the toolsKnows the problems to be solved

Tools are used to solve well defined problems

Decides the values of the performance criteria

Helping the Tool User (TU)-Built Environment (BE) communication



Creation of a ‘test bed’ environment

Environment in which TU, TD and BE collaborate on the use of tools to solve particular problems and decrease the uncertainties related to the use of tools.

This environment should be structured in order to contain all the input data needed to use the considered tools

Built Environment

BE

ToolDeveloper

TD

Tool User TU

Creating a ‘test bed’ environment



A dynamic ASET/RSET assessment

Studies related to tools used to estimate fire scenarios consequences

Creation of 3D ‘fuel packages’

global fire effluent production

Near field and far field analyses

Examples of the ‘Test bed’ Environment studies


Snapshots of an experiment involving the combustion of a mattress with central ignition (source: NIST)

Snapshots of the corresponding “fuel package”: “NIST mattress with corner ignition” (for the same times)

“Fuel package” “NIST couch”“Fuel package” “NIST dresser”

Note the collapse of the dresser at the end of the test

90s 120s 210s 300 s


Clothing fire data (1)

Use of experimental data (as in SFPE)


Clothing fire data (2)

Use of experimental data (as published)


Links to experimental reports

http://firebid.umd.edu/burning-item-database.php

Links to other databasesVulcan Initiative “own”

database


Item Number:Reference:Document Name:Item Type:Primary Material:Secondary Materials:Mass (kg)Dimensions (m):

Test Type:Burner Type:HRR & Duration:

Max HRR (kW):Time To Max HRR (s):Mass loss (kg/s):Heat of Combustion (MJ /kg):CO Measurement: NS -CO2 Measurement: NS -Soot Measurement: NS -HCl Measurement: NS -HCN Measurement: NS -HBr Measurement: NS -Additional Notes:Additional Notes:

Time (s) Fire Size (kW)0.00E+00 6.00E+001.00E+01 2.30E+016.90E+01 6.50E+011.28E+02 1.25E+021.87E+02 1.99E+022.46E+02 3.19E+023.05E+02 5.96E+023.64E+02 8.95E+024.23E+02 1.76E+034.36E+02 1.68E+034.50E+02 1.55E+034.88E+02 1.07E+035.27E+02 6.38E+025.65E+02 4.49E+026.04E+02 4.32E+026.42E+02 4.63E+026.81E+02 4.99E+027.20E+02 5.12E+027.65E+02 3.67E+02

Furniture Calorimeter

Material Overview5

http: / /fire.nist.gov/fire/fires/dress2/dress2.htmlSmall Dresser NIST Test

Small DresserNSNSNS

Test Overview

NSNS

--

Result Overview1756423

0.00E+00

2.00E+02

4.00E+02

6.00E+02

8.00E+02

1.00E+03

1.20E+03

1.40E+03

1.60E+03

1.80E+03

2.00E+03

0.00E+00 2.46E+02 4.50E+02 6.42E+02

HRR

(kW

)

Time (Seconds)

Small Dresser“NIST dresser”

Fire effluent production

Original HRR data

Photos from test

Usable HRR data

Vulcan Initiative database associated with fire effects tools


Vulcan Initiative version b

Web address: http://www.vulcan-initiative.net

Release date: summer 2013

If interested in providing information on a project, sharing experience on a technical step, building databases

Email address: [email protected]

[email protected]

http://www.vulcan-initiative.net/

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Thank you for your attention

And future participation