31.01.2015 Views

FRAME Calculation examples book. - FRAME Fire Risk Assessment ...

FRAME Calculation examples book. - FRAME Fire Risk Assessment ...

FRAME Calculation examples book. - FRAME Fire Risk Assessment ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

F.R.A.M.E.<br />

Special Protection addressable automatic<br />

S= 2.41<br />

fire detection<br />

<strong>Fire</strong> resistance Structure: 15<br />

steel<br />

F=1.06<br />

Walls: 0<br />

Ceiling: 15<br />

Partitions:0<br />

Escape protection max. 300, detection,<br />

U=3.46<br />

protected staircase<br />

Salvage none Y=1.00<br />

Calculated <strong>Risk</strong>s: R= 0.38 R1= 0.43 R2=0.43<br />

Conclusion:<br />

The risk levels were lower than the code complying concept.<br />

There is equivalency.<br />

Other equivalent concept calculations.<br />

The next table gives an overview of other similar calculations that have been made to prove<br />

the equivalency of concepts with <strong>FRAME</strong>.<br />

Description R R1 R2<br />

4500 m² warehouse for combustible liquids, 7.5 m high ,<br />

concrete construction . <strong>Fire</strong> load was estimated at 10950<br />

MJ/m². The building as +/- 1 % smoke vents, part of it is<br />

“zone 2 classified”, and public water supply is limited. There<br />

is a pre-action sprinkler system actuated by heat detectors.<br />

No internal separations exist.<br />

The code requirements (at the time the building was built)<br />

2005<br />

per<br />

1.02<br />

4.28<br />

0.87<br />

1.42<br />

0.45<br />

1.76<br />

are to have R30 fire resistive construction and sub<br />

compartments for the flammable liquids.<br />

Note that these code requirements are far below the <strong>FRAME</strong><br />

recommended levels.<br />

code<br />

A 19 th century post office, which was externally protected as 2002 0.21 0.39 0.22<br />

historical building found a new destination as a civil court.<br />

The building was only 500 m² large, but had 20 %<br />

mezzanines, as the architect opened the upper floors of the<br />

building to bring more light in it. This did not fit with the<br />

prescriptive codes that the local authorities applied, unless<br />

some of the partition walls would be made of fire resistive<br />

glass. This would be very expensive and spoil the architects’<br />

concept.<br />

As an alternative, sprinkler protection was proposed for the<br />

building, as well as automatic fire detection.<br />

The <strong>FRAME</strong> calculation indicated that installing both<br />

sprinklers and fire detection was overdone, but the project<br />

manager maintained both to avoid further discussions with<br />

the local fire authorities.<br />

A new housing project combined two 4 level apartment<br />

buildings of each 400 m² floor area with a covered internal<br />

court yard. The prescriptive code defines this arrangement<br />

as an atrium, that has to be fire separated from the adjacent<br />

buildings and the exits are not allowed to go through this<br />

atrium. Each level of each apartment block would then be a<br />

separate compartment. The code complying risk calculation<br />

considered only 36 persons to be evacuated per level.<br />

2004 0.54 0.89 0.55<br />

48

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!