Codes and Standards Requirements for Building Evacuation

“Integrating Physical Systems and Human Behavior Using Codes and Standards Requirements for Building Evacuation,” Norman Groner, John Jay College, CUNY

Codes need to be based on a fundamentally different approach to incorporating considerations of human behavior. Past approaches based on physical systems representations do not serve well when integrating physical systems approaches with the goal-driven adaptive performance of people. One potentially viable approach might be a single holistic systems representation based on the achievement and preservation of desirable systems states.

“The Use of Egress Modeling in Performance-based Code Applications,” Brian Rhodes, Hughes Associates, Inc.

The presentation will address how egress modeling is being used by fire protection engineering consultants to address performance-based design problems. The discussion will focus on specific issues/problems encountered in recent design projects and their effect on egress modeling.

“Overview of the SFPE Engineering Guide on Human Behavior in Fire,” Daniel O’Connor, Schirmer Engineering

The presentation will address the development and content of the Engineering Guide on Human Behavior in Fire. The key chapters on occupant characteristics, human response to cues, decision making and movement will be outlined. This will provide an overview of the qualitative and quantitative information available to assist engineers in evaluating or addressing evacuation and /or relocation scenarios.

“Developing Trends from Deadly Fire Incidents: A Preliminary Assessment,” Jeffrey Tubbs (presenting) and Brian Meacham, Arup Fire

A number of tragic fire incidents have refocused the design, engineering and enforcement communities upon the need for critical life safety features within buildings. This presentation will overview the ten most deadly assembly fires, and present some of the commonalities between these incidents. A case study will also be presented to review how egress components were used during The Station nightclub fire event.

“Use of Elevators for Egress and Firefighter Access,” Richard Bukowski, NIST

The events of September 11 have generated renewed interest in the use of protected elevators for egress and access. U.S. building codes contain requirements for accessible elevators for assisted evacuation of people with disabilities. Firefighter lifts, required in tall buildings in some countries, are being discussed to improve both the safety and efficiency of firefighting operations. The desire for increased egress capacity of tall buildings to facilitate simultaneous evacuation has rekindled interest in elevators as a secondary means of egress for all occupants. Elevators used for each of these purposes share many of the same design characteristics and the need for an extraordinary level of safety and reliability.

This paper will review the technology, safety, and reliability issues associated with the use of elevators during fire emergencies for all three of these purposes and the solutions being considered to address them. Operational procedures and arrangements that influence system design considerations will be suggested. An innovative system for operating the elevators under the remote, manual control of the fire service will be described. Important human factors issues including communication, signage, and training will be identified.

Session Summary

 The session addressed several themes that serve as an effective summary. These fall under four main categories: 1) A definition of risk for which we are designing buildings 2) Reactive vs. proactive environment for code changes 3) An integrated model for evacuation from a building and 4) Performance-based design.

The first theme of the codes and standards discussion revolves around the question that was continually asked by several participants, and that question is, “For what risk should we be designing buildings?” Without an answer to this question, code developers and all others involved in the process have to struggle between designs that will prevent an infrequent airplane attack to a building vs. the more likely smaller-sized fire in a building.

Related to the first theme of risk, the second theme that was discussed in the codes session involved the reactive vs. proactive methods for code changes. Some participants expressed the danger in making reactionary code changes, for instance, changes in the requirements for night clubs in Rhode Island in response to the Station nightclub fire. However, if only a select number of states make the same changes, the code requirements get established out of fear instead of based on solid evidence that this change is appropriate. Also, instead of waiting for an event to happen that encourages a change in the codes, suggestions were made to be more pro-active in anticipating problems in the codes and making those changes before a large loss of life and/or property occurs.

The third theme discussed in the codes and standards session was the topic of developing an integrated model. There is a need to understand how the people, the building, and the environment react together. This involves an integrated “model” and more of a systems view of the evacuation. Suggestions were made to use technology in buildings (sensors) to help people during their evacuation. For instance, giving them specific information on which route to take or which elevator is in service, and providing them with a sensor at each door to let them know if there is fire or smoke behind the door.

Another related comment made during this discussion was that even if a building is designed a certain way and management trains their employees to follow certain safety procedures, there is no current way to legally bind employees to follow the procedures. A suggestion was made that codes should be the link to ensure that employees follow the procedures for which they were trained in an emergency.

The fourth theme of the codes and standards session involved performance-based design of buildings. This discussion brought up the need for data in certain areas to aid designers of building systems. For instance, when engineers are faced with a unique stair structure, such as a spiral stair, they lack the data which explains how the unique stair will affect the egress of the occupants.

The session chairs of all three sessions were asked to summarize the session discussion answering the following four questions.

The current state of research in the field of fire evacuation is that we are in a vague period in code development. We are still asking the question of what risks we should design for. We are also in a state of transition with the use of elevators in emergencies.

The presentations and discussion established that there were several gaps in the data used for performance-based design. Also, there were gaps in the reasons given for changes in the codes. Some participants noticed that changes in the codes follow a similar pattern of significant changes in response to large-scale events, such as September 11 or the MGM Grand fire.

To bridge this gap, a better understanding of the design risks should be established as well as a more pro-active environment for code changes in order to avoid large loss of life and property in the future.


Graphic Rule

Privacy Statement/Security Notice  |  Disclaimer  |  FOIA

NIST is an agency of the U.S. Commerce Department's Technology Administration.

 BFRL Logo