A Review of Building Evacuation Models - NIST Virtual Library

More documents

Recommendations

Info

parameters yields realistic results, as already demonstrated by the investigation of other evacuation drills.” For the tallest building, a 21-story office building with 1400 occupants, the calculated total evacuation times ranged between 616 s and 648 s, with a mean value of 627 s, while the measured evacuation time for the structure was 629 s. More information on this validation case study is provided in ASERI references. The final case study to be discussed in this section involved the evacuation from a hotel conducted by the Norwegian SINTEF organization. The input information provided to the model for this case study involved the building layout, means of egress, geometrical staircase information, location and the sequence of the fire incident, and the communication events put in place by the evacuation plan. The evacuation case that follows the evacuation plan is called the “schedule case” and actual observation of the drill is referred to as the “actual case.” Also, information about the occupants was available such as the gender, age, room number, and activity engaged in before evacuation began. The staff was not included in the egress movement during the simulation, but was modeled to perform actions during the alarming sequence. Also, delay and response times associated with certain occupant actions were included in the simulation. The occupant total was 104, and since the available egress routes were many, the evacuation was not influenced by crowding. As mentioned earlier, runs were performed in ASERI to simulate 1) immediate evacuation of all occupants at the start of the fire alarm, 2) the scheduled case, and 3) the actual case. According to the developers, the actual case was very much in agreement with the observation of the monitored hotel drill. The only difference noted was that “the number of occupants not leaving the guest rooms or returning into the room was much larger than predicted by the simulation.” The developers relate this discrepancy to the fact that the information available was ambiguous in the drill, resulting in guests ignoring the alarm. Additional validation studies can be found in the referenced ASERI publications. Special features: Manual exit block/obstacles – Yes, if smoke is very heavy. Fire conditions affect behavior Yes, the output of KOBRA-3D can be transferred to ASERI through a cut and paste method. Defining groups – Yes, because of the ability to assign each individual certain mobility parameters (body size, walking speed, and behavioral conditions) as well as providing a distribution of these for a specified group. Disabilities/slow occupant groups – Yes, walking speed and increased body size can be specified. Delays/pre-movement time – Delays are achieved either by assigning alarm and reaction times or introducing intermediate stop positions. Toxicity of the occupants – Yes. A-38
Route choice of the occupants/occupant distribution – Route choice is either shortest distance or user-defined. Routes then become altered due to the building environment and the occupants’ behavior during the evacuation (conditional). Limitations: The number of specified levels (floors), units, passages, and obstacles is limited by computer memory. A-39
Page 1:
Technical Note 1471 A Review of Bui
Page 4 and 5:
Disclaimer Certain commercial entit
Page 6 and 7:
Tables Table 1. Overall features of
Page 9 and 10:
A Review of Building Evacuation Mod
Page 11 and 12:
2 Features of Egress Models This re
Page 13 and 14:
The current model categories for pu
Page 15 and 16:
• Inter-person distance (ID): Eac
Page 17 and 18:
2.11 Validation The models are also
Page 19 and 20:
(2-D): 2-Dimension visualization av
Page 21 and 22:
Table 1. Overall features of egress
Page 23 and 24:
Table 2. Models Available to the Pu
Page 25 and 26: Table 4. Models Not Yet Released Ch
Page 27 and 28: 3.2 Overview of Model Features The
Page 29 and 30: If the user has a project that invo
Page 31 and 32: 5 References 1. Custer, R. L. P. &
Page 33 and 34: 29. IES. (2001). Simulex User Manua
Page 35 and 36: 57. Fraser-Mitchell, J. (2001). Sim
Page 37: 86. Okazaki, S. & Matsushita, S. (2
Page 40 and 41: Models Publicly Available A.1 Egres
Page 42 and 43: Use of fire data: None. Output: The
Page 44 and 45: y the arc), which is calculated by
Page 46 and 47: A.3 TIMTEX Developer: S.S. Harringt
Page 48 and 49: A.4 WAYOUT Developer: V.O. Shestopa
Page 50 and 51: A.5 STEPS Developer: Mott MacDonald
Page 52 and 53: Occupants can also be introduced in
Page 54 and 55: A.6 PedGo Developer: TraffGo Purpos
Page 56 and 57: Any interaction between the occupan
Page 58 and 59: A.7 PEDROUTE and PAXPORT Developer:
Page 60 and 61: Limitations: No individual consider
Page 62 and 63: Occupant movement: From the Simulex
Page 64 and 65: Body Type Table A.5: Body sizes for
Page 66 and 67: Table A.6: Validation study results
Page 68 and 69: A.9 GridFlow Developer: D. Purser &
Page 70 and 71: adjusts the FED susceptibility of e
Page 72 and 73: A.10 ASERI Developer: V. Schneider,
Page 74 and 75: the FED model by Purser. This inclu
Page 78 and 79: A.11 buildingEXODUS Developer: E. G
Page 80 and 81: higher potential for a short time d
Page 82 and 83: level includes the movie player, da
Page 84 and 85: • Occupants stop investigating if
Page 86 and 87: A.13 Legion Developer: Legion Inter
Page 88 and 89: • Qualitative reproduction of eme
Page 90 and 91: Validation studies: No publications
Page 92 and 93: Special features: Route choice of t
Page 94 and 95: Table A.8: Fruin data and correspon
Page 96 and 97: Validation studies: Validation was
Page 98 and 99: Table A.12: Building/Occupant chara
Page 100 and 101: A.18 CRISP3 Developer: J. Fraser-Mi
Page 102 and 103: maximum value. Lastly, the lower di
Page 104 and 105: A.19 EGRESS Developer: N. Ketchell,
Page 106 and 107: Movement algorithm The unimpeded me
Page 108 and 109: Disabilities/slow occupant groups -
Page 110 and 111: Occupant movement: Cellular automat
Page 112 and 113: graphical format in the article in
Page 114 and 115: not gained, and this is labeled as
Page 116 and 117: A.22 EXIT89 Developer: R.F. Fahy, N
Page 118 and 119: evacuation time and the number of o
Page 120 and 121: the ceiling. This is the same metho
Page 122 and 123: factor,” the current goal is chan
Page 124 and 125: Use of fire data: The model can acc
Page 126 and 127:
• Physical scale - This scale is
Page 128 and 129:
• Free - elevator is idle Use of
Page 130 and 131:
are applied to the entire populatio
Page 132 and 133:
A.26 EgressPro Developer: P. Simenk
Page 134 and 135:
A.27 BFIRES-2 Developer: F. Stahl,
Page 136 and 137:
types of subroutines consist of tho
Page 138 and 139:
• Boundaries of room subdivisions
Page 140 and 141:
Fire Influence Smoke Influence Prox
Page 142 and 143:
Model Availability Unknown A.29 Mag
Page 144 and 145:
A.30 E-SCAPE Developer: E. Reisser-
Page 146 and 147:
affected by the movement of others,
Page 148 and 149:
A.31 References 1. Nelson, H. E. (2
Page 150 and 151:
28. Barton, J. and Leather, J. (199
Page 152 and 153:
57. Gwynne, S., Galea, E. R., Lawre
Page 154 and 155:
86. Lo, S. M. & Fang, Z. (2000). A
Page 156:
115. Gwynne, S. & Galea, E. R. (200
show all

A Review of Building Evacuation Models - NIST Virtual Library

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?