Volume 8, Issue 3 (Autumn 2021)
johe 2021, 8(3): 19-26 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Chahardeh I, Nikoomaram H, Miri Lavasani S M. Analysis of Fire Safety in Office Buildings Applying Fire Safety Evaluation System. johe 2021; 8 (3) :19-26
URL: http://johe.umsha.ac.ir/article-1-686-en.html
URL: http://johe.umsha.ac.ir/article-1-686-en.html
1- Department of Environmental Management, Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Environmental Management, Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran , hani.nikoo@gmail.com
2- Department of Environmental Management, Faculty of Natural Resources and Environment, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran , hani.nikoo@gmail.com
Abstract: (2227 Views)
Background and Objective: Fire outbreaks in buildings have diverse negative consequences for the occupants’ life safety and assets. Determining the level of fire safety is of great help in the provision of appropriate solutions to increase fire safety and reduce the negative consequences. Therefore, the present study aimed to analyze the level of fire safety in office buildings.
Materials and Methods: This analytical-descriptive study was conducted to analyze the fire safety level in office buildings of a car manufacturing company on the basis of three aspects: fire control, egress routes, and general fire safety. This study was performed using Fire Safety Evaluation System (FSES) methodology and NFPA 101A.
Results: Based on the results, the fire control aspect was revealed to have the best condition in all seven buildings under the study, and they obtained the required scores in this regard. On the other hand, egress routes had the worst condition. In terms of general fire safety, all the selected buildings, except one building, maintained the required requirements.
Conclusion: As evidenced by the obtained results, conducting more than two fire exit drills per year would make the condition of the selected buildings acceptable in the aspect of egress routes. It could also have a significant effect on the improvement of general fire safety. Moreover, installing a quick-response automatic sprinkler system with entire building coverage would enhance the overall fire safety condition in buildings. Furthermore, considering smoke control systems could make the condition of the buildings better in terms of egress routes and general fire safety.
Materials and Methods: This analytical-descriptive study was conducted to analyze the fire safety level in office buildings of a car manufacturing company on the basis of three aspects: fire control, egress routes, and general fire safety. This study was performed using Fire Safety Evaluation System (FSES) methodology and NFPA 101A.
Results: Based on the results, the fire control aspect was revealed to have the best condition in all seven buildings under the study, and they obtained the required scores in this regard. On the other hand, egress routes had the worst condition. In terms of general fire safety, all the selected buildings, except one building, maintained the required requirements.
Conclusion: As evidenced by the obtained results, conducting more than two fire exit drills per year would make the condition of the selected buildings acceptable in the aspect of egress routes. It could also have a significant effect on the improvement of general fire safety. Moreover, installing a quick-response automatic sprinkler system with entire building coverage would enhance the overall fire safety condition in buildings. Furthermore, considering smoke control systems could make the condition of the buildings better in terms of egress routes and general fire safety.
Type of Study: Research Article |
Subject:
Safety
References
1. Askaripoor T, Shirali GA, Yarahmadi R, Kazemi E. Fire risk assessment and efficiency study of active and passive protection methods in reducing the risk of fire in a control room of at an industrial building. Saf Health Work. 2018; 8(1):93-102.
2. Van Weyenberge B, Deckers X, Caspeele R, Merci B. Development of an integrated risk assessment method to quantify the life safety risk in buildings in case of fire. Fire technol. 2019;55(4):1211-42. DOI: 10.1007/s10694-018-0763-6 [DOI]
3. Jahangiri ME, Rajabi FA, Darooghe FA. Fire risk assessment in the selected Hospitals of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences in accordance with NFPA101. Iran Occup Health. 2016;13(1):99-106.
4. Parchami M, Mirzaei M, Kalatpour O. Identification and Analysis of Critical Activities of Fire Department for Residential Fire Scenarios Using Task and Training Requirements Analysis Methodology. J Occup Hyg Eng. 2020;7(1):41-50. DOI: 10.29252/johe.7.1.41 [DOI]
5. Rahardjo HA, Prihanton M. The most critical issues and challenges of fire safety for building sustainability in Jakarta. J Build Eng. 2020;29(4):101133. DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2019.101133 [DOI]
6. Beck VR, Yung D. The development of a risk-cost assessment model for the evaluation of fire safety in buildings. Fire Saf Sci. 1994;4:817-28.
7. Buchanan AH, Abu AK. Structural design for fire safety. John Wiley & Sons; 2017.
8. Shahedi Aliabadi S, Assary MJ, Kalatpour O. arei, E.; Mohammadfam, I.“Consequence Modeling of Fire on Methane Storage Tanks in a Gas Refinery”. J Occup Hyg Eng. 2016;3(1).
9. Feiz Arefi M, Delju H, Ghasemi F, Kalatpour O. Accident Scenarios Identification and Assessment in the Central Oxygen of Hospital through FTA and evaluation of the control Systems by LOPA. J Occup Hyg Eng. 2020;7(2):26-32. DOI: 10.52547/johe.7.2.22 [DOI]
10. Koffel WE. Changes to NFPA 101-2018: NFPA 101-2018: Life Safety Code has three important updates that are vital to fire protection engineers. Consult Specif Eng. 2019;56(1):26-31.
11. Brzezińska D, Bryant P. Risk Index Method–A Tool for Sustainable, Holistic Building Fire Strategies. Sustainability. 2020;12(11):4469. DOI: 10.3390/su12114469 [DOI]
12. Šakėnaitė J. A comparison of methods used for fire safety evaluation. Science Future of Lithuania. 2010;2(6):36-42. DOI: 10.3846/mla.2010.109 [DOI]
13. Khakkar S, Ranjbarian M, Khodakarim S, Pouyakian M. Evaluation of Fire Risk in Commercial Complexes of District 12 of Tehran and its Relationship with their Structural and Usage Characteristics. Saf Health Work. 2020;10(3):273-89.
14. Hesarshahabi AK, Mirzaei R, Gholamnia R. Fire Risk Assessment in Selected Commercial Buildings in Mashhad, Iran, Based on NFPA 101 Standard in 2018. Revista J Rescue Relief. 2019;11(3):184-91. DOI: 10.52547/jorar.11.3.184 [DOI]
15. Khakkar S, Ranjbarian M, Pouyakian M. Study of CFSES software compliance with Iranian national standards for fire safety assessment of commercial complexes. Journal of Health in the Field. 2019;7(1):26-35. DOI: 10.22037/jhf.v7i1. 23734 [DOI]
16. Benichou N, Kashef AH, Reid I, Hadjisophocleous GV, Torvi DA, Morinville G. FIERAsystem: a fire risk assessment tool to evaluate fire safety in industrial buildings and large spaces. J. Fire Prot. Eng. 2005;15(3):145-72. DOI: 10.1177/1042391505049437 [DOI]
17. Rajabi F, Jahangiri M, Tavana Shooli F. Rastkar Sh. Fire risk Assessment in Multi-story Commercial Buildings Using Computerized Fire Safety Evaluation System: A Case Study in Shiraz. J Health Syst Res. 2019;15(1):74-82. DOI: 10.32592/hsr.2019.15.1.106 [DOI]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Articles Copyright © The Author(s).
Owned by Hamadan University of Medical Sciences.
Published by UMSHA Press
Journal Tel: +9881 38380090
Publisher Tel: +988138380548
Website: http://johe.umsha.ac.ir
Email: johe[at]umsha.ac.ir
