4 Conclusion This report provides model users with the information to narrow down choices on the appropriate model or models to use for specific projects. It is up to the model user to review the details placed in the appendix and make a final and informed decision as to which model(s) is best for the project at hand. As time passes, more evacuation models will be developed and many <strong>of</strong> the current models will be updated by developers. It should be noted that this review will require updates as new models are used and older ones retire. It is up to the user to take the model version, the publish date <strong>of</strong> the report, and any more recent publications on particular evacuation models into account when choosing the appropriate model. 22
5 References 1. Custer, R. L. P. & Meacham, B. J. (1997). Introduction to Performance-Based Fire Safety Bethesda, MD: Society <strong>of</strong> Fire Protection Engineers. 2. Nelson, H. E. & Mowrer, F. W. (2002). Emergency Movement. In P.J.DiNenno & W. D. Walton (Eds.), The SFPE Handbook <strong>of</strong> Fire Protection Engineering (Third ed., pp. 3-367-3-380). Bethesda, MD: Society <strong>of</strong> Fire Protection Engineers. 3. Gwynne, S., Galea, E. R., Lawrence, P. J., Owen, M., & Filippidis, L. (1999). A <strong>Review</strong> <strong>of</strong> the Methodologies used in the Computer Simulation <strong>of</strong> <strong>Evacuation</strong> from the Built Environment. <strong>Building</strong> and Environment, 34, 741-749. 4. Fire Model Survey (2002). http://www.firemodelsurvey.com/Egress<strong>Models</strong>.html [On-line]. Available: http://www.firemodelsurvey.com/Egress<strong>Models</strong>.html 5. Olenick, S. M. & Carpenter, D. J. (2003). Updated International Survey <strong>of</strong> Computer <strong>Models</strong> for Fire and Smoke. Journal <strong>of</strong> Fire Protection Engineering, 13, 87-110. 6. Watts, J. M. (1987). Computer <strong>Models</strong> for <strong>Evacuation</strong> Analysis. Fire Safety Journal, 12, 237-245. 7. Friedman, R. (1992). An International Survey <strong>of</strong> Computer <strong>Models</strong> for Fire and Smoke. Journal <strong>of</strong> Fire Protection Engineering, 4, 81-92. 8. Deal, S. (1995). Technical Reference Guide for FPETool Version 3.2 (Rep. No. <strong>NIST</strong>IR 5486-1). Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. 9. Francis, R. L. & Saunders, P. B. (1979). EVACNET: Prototype Network Optimization <strong>Models</strong> for <strong>Building</strong> <strong>Evacuation</strong> (Rep. No. NBSIR 79-1593). Natl. Bur. Stand., (U.S.). 10. Kisko, T. M., Francis, R. L., & Nobel, C. R. (1998). EVACNET4 User's Guide, Version 10/29/98 University <strong>of</strong> Florida. 11. Harrington, S. S. (1996). TIMTEX: A Hydraluic Flow Model for Emergency Egress. MSci Department <strong>of</strong> Fire Protection Engineering, University <strong>of</strong> Maryland. 12. Shestopal, V. O. & Grubits, S. J. (1994). <strong>Evacuation</strong> Model for Merging Traffic Flows in Multi-Room and Multi-Story <strong>Building</strong>s. In Fire Safety Science -- Proceedings <strong>of</strong> the 4th International Symposium (pp. 625-632). 13. Wall, J. M. & Waterson, N. P. Predicting <strong>Evacuation</strong> Times -- A Comparison <strong>of</strong> the STEPS Simulation Approach with NFPA 130. Fire Command Studies, (in press). 14. MacDonald, M. (2003). STEPS Simulation <strong>of</strong> Transient <strong>Evacuation</strong> and Pedestrian Movements User Manual. Unpublished Work 23
- 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: If the user has a project that invo
- 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 76 and 77: parameters yields realistic results
- 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