High Rise Buildings With Combustible Exterior Wall .

3y ago
37 Views
2 Downloads
3.33 MB
78 Pages
Last View : Today
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Ronan Garica
Transcription

High Rise Buildings withCombustible ExteriorWall Assemblies:Fire Risk Assessment ToolFINAL REPORT BY:Susan LamontArupSigurjon IngolfssonArupFebruary 2018 February 2018 National Fire Protection Association1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02169 USAEmail: research@nfpa.org Web: nfpa.org/research

ABSTRACTBased on a number of recent fires in high rise buildings clad with combustible wall insulationsystems, global enforcement authorities are revisiting their existing building inventories to assesspotential risks. There are a number of risk factors which may impact the level of risk and theconsequent priority for inspection and/or remediation. Authorities are seeking a means to makethese assessments and decisions based on them, using a risk informed methodology.Such a risk informed methodology involves: the identification of key variables (e.g., componentmaterials, connection systems, installation techniques and geometries, occupancy type, age ofapplication, proximity to other structures, external factors such as weather, building fire protectionsystems, etc.); characterization of those variables in terms of risk or mitigation potential; andincorporation of them into an engineering based risk model whose output will be a means forauthorities to prioritize mitigation. Because there is limited test data or statistics to further inform aquantitative approach to risk ranking or scoring, a qualitative assessment is being utilized based onengineering judgement.The goal of this project has been to develop and make available a risk assessment methodology toassist global authorities to assess the risks and prioritize inspection/remediation efforts for the highrise building inventory in their jurisdiction with exterior wall assemblies containing combustiblecomponents. The methodology is qualitative rather than quantitative and follows internationallyrecognized risk assessment approaches. The method does not recommend specific mitigationmeasures, but rather prioritizes the need for mitigation based on risk factors and providessuggestions for possible mitigation to be assessed on a project by project basis.This report provides the baseline approach and information to support a larger effort to separatelydevelop and implement an electronic tool and user guide (based on the information in this report) todirectly support Authorities who are attempting to address this topic in their respective jurisdiction.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis has been an NFPA-led project with administrative oversight provided by the Fire ProtectionResearch Foundation in accordance with its advisory services policies. NFPA expresses gratitudeto the authors of this final report Susan Lamont (Arup) and Sigurjon Ingolfsson (Arup), with reviewby James Bychowski (Jensen Hughes) and Art Parker (Jensen Hughes).NFPA appreciates the project management by the Fire Protection Research Foundation ProjectManagers Amanda Kimball and Casey Grant, the guidance provided by the Project TechnicalPanelists, and all others that contributed to this research effort.The content, opinions and conclusions contained in this report are solely those of the authors and donot necessarily represent the views of NFPA, the Fire Protection Research Foundation, or theTechnical Panel. NFPA makes no guaranty or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of anyinformation published herein.Keywords: High Rise Buildings, Combustible Exterior Wall Assemblies, Fire Risk AssessmentTool, façade fire, fire tests, NFPA 285, Cladding, InsulationNFPA No. USS109Page i

FOREWORDBased on a number of recent fires in high rise buildings clad with combustible wall insulationsystems, global enforcement authorities are revisiting their existing building inventories to assesspotential risks. There are a number of risk factors which may impact the level of risk and theconsequent priority for inspection and/or remediation. Authorities are seeking a means to makethese assessments and decisions based on them, using a risk informed methodology.Such a risk informed methodology involves: the identification of key variables (e.g., componentmaterials, connection systems, installation techniques and geometries, occupancy type, age ofapplication, proximity to other structures, external factors such as weather, building fire protectionsystems, etc.); characterization of those variables in terms of risk or mitigation potential; andincorporation of them into an engineering based risk model whose output will be a means forauthorities to prioritize mitigation. Because there is limited test data or statistics to further informa quantitative approach to risk ranking or scoring, a qualitative assessment is being utilized basedon engineering judgement.The goal of this project has been to develop and make available a risk assessment methodology toassist global authorities to assess the risks and prioritize inspection/remediation efforts for thehigh-rise building inventory in their jurisdiction with exterior wall assemblies containingcombustible components. The methodology is qualitative rather than quantitative and followsinternationally recognized risk assessment approaches. The method does not recommend specificmitigation measures, but rather prioritizes the need for mitigation based on risk factors andprovides suggestions for possible mitigation to be assessed on a project by project basis.This report provides the baseline approach and information to support a larger effort to separatelydevelop and implement an electronic tool and user guide (based on the information in this report)to directly support Authorities who are attempting to address this topic in their respectivejurisdiction.Page ii

PROJECT TECHNICAL PANELKathleen Almand, NFPA Sponsor Rep (MA USA)Ville Bexander, Swedish Fire Protection Association (Sweden)Dana Bres, US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (DC USA)Ben Caldwell, BIG (CPH Denmark)Nicole Comeau, NFPA (MA USA)Emad Al Hashimi, UAE Civil Defense (UAE)JC Harrington, FM Global (MA USA)Jonathan Herrick, National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC) (UK)Kevin Hughes, London Fire Brigade (UK)Marc Janssens, SWRI (TX USA)Ed Kaminski, Clark County (NV USA)Brian Meacham, WPI (MA USA)Birgitte Messerschmidt, NFPA Sponsor Rep (MA USA)Robert Solomon, NFPA Sponsor Rep (MA USA)Dwayne Sloan, Underwriters Laboratories (IL USA)Stacy Welch, Marriott (DC USA)Nathan White, CSIRO (Australia)Chris Wieczorek, FM Global (RI USA) (Alt to JC Harrington)Hui Zhang, Tsinghua University (China)RESEARCH TEAMJames Bychowski, Jensen Hughes (UAE)Sigurjon Ingolfsson, ARUP (UAE)Susan Lamont, ARUP (UAE)Art Parker, Jensen Hughes (UAE)PROJECT SPONSORPage iii

NFPAHigh rise buildings withcombustible exterior façadesystems: Fire risk assessment toolBackground and development of thetoolRev A February 1, 2018This report takes into account the particularinstructions and requirements of our client.It is not intended for and should not be reliedupon by any third party and no responsibilityis undertaken to any third party.Job number257224-00Arup Gulf Ltd39th floor Media One TowerDubai Media CityPO Box 212416Dubaiwww.arup.com

NFPAHigh rise buildings with combustible exterior façade systems: Fire risk assessment toolBackground and development of the g this ReportAcronymsDefinitionsProject Team12352Objective of this ble Materials in Facade AssembliesHigh Rise Fires involving the Exterior Facade AssemblyHigh Rise Fire Safety11.215578Conclusion6513Further Work and Suggested Next Steps6514References66AppendicesAppendix AFire Risk Assessment ToolAssumptions8Appendix B5Limitations9Users Guide6Literature Review106.16.26.36.41014161678Variables Associated with Combustible Façade Systems and High RiseBuilding Fire Safety177.17.27.3171818AHP8.19Façade SystemFacade Ignition SourcesOther Variables20Weighting of alUser GuideTier 1 PrioritizationTier 2 Fire Risk Assessment10Mitigation Measures5711Data Gathering5911.159General Rev A February 1, 2018C:\USERS\SUSAN.LAMONT\DOCUMENTS\FACADE\NFPA FOUNDATION PROJECT\TASK 5\TASK 5 FEB 2018\2018-02-01 TASK 5 EFFECT TECHNICAL BACKGROUND REPORT REV A.DOCX60124Risk Assessment ToolsWeighting of Variables in Risk Ranking ToolsGlobal Survey of High Rise Fire Safety ProvisionsSummary of Literature ReviewSuggested Process for ID of Façade Systems and CombustibleComponent Materials

NFPA1High rise buildings with combustible exterior façade systems: Fire risk assessment toolBackground and development of the toolIntroductionThis report is the final deliverable for the NFPA Research Foundation Project High RiseBuildings with Combustible Exterior Façade Systems: Fire Risk Assessment Tool. Itdocuments the background, development, beta testing and refinement of the fire riskassessment (FRA) tool. It also provides the final version of the FRA tool and a detailed user’sguide to accompany the tool.At the request of NFPA, the FRA tool focuses on life safety only. Business continuity orproperty protection are not addressed.The FRA tool is applicable in any geography but is currently limited to residential (hotel,apartments) or business (office) or a mix of both occupancies that are over 18m high whereheight is measured as the total vertical distance from fire department access level to thefinished floor level of the top most occupied floor of the building. NFPA selected theseoccupancies for the FRA tool as the majority of high rise buildings internationally are thesetypes of occupancy.The FRA tool is intended to be used by Enforcers or Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) toassess a portfolio of buildings across a town or city where there is a concern that the exteriorfacade systems are built-up from combustible materials. The FRA tool is intended to providea framework to aid the AHJ to prioritize buildings in their jurisdiction and to conduct fire riskassessments of each building, assessing the highest priority buildings first. A range ofpossible mitigation measures are suggested to help the AHJ and building owner to beginreducing the fire risk where necessary. The tool can be used to measure the success of themitigation by revisiting the risk assessment.understanding the various facade systems and in particular the combustible materials withinthese systems. The Jensen Hughes team provided peer review and advice based on theirunderstanding of risk assessments and experience of witnessing fire testing and identifyingcombustible materials through forensic testing. A panel of experts and interested parties wasformed by NFPA to further peer review and comment upon the development of the FRA toolat key stages of the project. Input from the peer review teams has been addressed andincorporated.The project team would also like to acknowledge the fire testing and consulting team ofThomas Bell-Wright International Consultants (TBW), Dubai. TBW provided invaluableinput in terms of their experience of fire testing of façade systems which allowed the projectteam to estimate the likely fire hazard of a range of potential existing façade systems andincorporate this within the FRA tool.1.1Navigating this ReportThe following table summarizes each section of the report to help navigate the document.SectionTitleSummary2ObjectiveThis section sets out the objective of the report3BackgroundThis section looks at the history of combustible materials in facadesystems to help inform the age of buildings or the age of facadesystems that may contain combustible insulation or cladding. Note:Facade systems are replaced over the life of a building therefore theage of the building may not reflect the age of the façade.The mitigation measures suggested provide a means of reducing risk but will not eliminaterisk unless the combustible façade materials are removed from the system and replaced bynon-combustible materials.In some instances this assessment will highlight the need for a more detailed risk assessmentby a qualified engineering team of façade and fire engineers. This could be because of thecomplexity of the building, complexity of the façade patterns (combustiblecladding/insulation is randomly arranged or non-uniform) across the building or difficulties inidentifying the façade systems/materials.It is important to note that the FRA tool is for existing buildings with combustible façadesystems only. It assumes there is the potential for fire spread to multiple stories of thebuilding via the façade system. The guidance is not appropriate for the risk assessment ofbuildings without a combustible façade, other published tools are widely available for this.None of the guidance is applicable to the design of new buildings and therefore should not beused in this context.The FRA tool has been developed by Arup with peer review and technical input from JensenHughes. The Arup team comprised a core team of three fire engineers in Dubai to develop thetool with support and input from two fire engineers in each of Australia, Asia, UK, Europeand USA to address the global nature of the tool. The Arup façade engineering team haveprovided input in terms of the façade systems that could be present in each geography andthey have developed guidance to help the end user of the FRA tool in identifying and Rev A February 1, 2018C:\USERS\SUSAN.LAMONT\DOCUMENTS\FACADE\NFPA FOUNDATION PROJECT\TASK 5\TASK 5 FEB 2018\2018-02-01 TASK 5 EFFECT TECHNICAL BACKGROUND REPORT REV A.DOCXIt also provides a brief summary of some of the high rise firesinternationally involving combustible facades, with reference to otherdocuments which provide more detail.4Assumptions andLimitationsThis section states the assumptions made in developing the FRA tooland the limitations of the FRA tool.5ChallengesThis section states the project challenges.6Literature ReviewThis section looks at available fire risk assessment approaches andtools in the fire industry and other industries. It also looks at methodsdeveloped by various industries for weighting of risk variables. Itconcludes with the proposed approach for the FRA tool.7Variables Associatedwith CombustibleFaçade Systems andHigh Rise BuildingsFire SafetyThis section outlines the variables to be assessed in the FRA tool.Page 1

NFPAHigh rise buildings with combustible exterior façade systems: Fire risk assessment toolBackground and development of the toolSectionTitleSummary8AHPAn analytical hierarchy process (AHP) is used in a number ofindustries to rank the relative importance of variables to each other.This section outlines the application of AHP to this project.1.2AcronymsA number of acronyms are used in the report. These are defined as follows:91011MethodologyMitigation MeasuresData GatheringThis section described the FRA tool methodology forACPAluminium Composite PanelASTMAmerican Society for Testing and Materials-Sleeping risk and total evacuation strategy (which may occurin phases);AHJAuthority Having Jurisdiction-Sleeping risk and remain-in-place evacuation strategy; andAHPAnalytical Hierarchy Process-No sleeping risk, i.e. Office premises and all out evacuationstrategy (which may occur in phases)AHUAir Handling UnitBCABuilding Code of AustraliaBSBritish StandardEIFSExterior Insulation and Finishing SystemETICSExternal Thermal Insulation Composite SystemsENEuropean StandardThis section lists potential mitigation measures, their likely impactand how to assess their impact using the FRA tool.This section provides guidelines for gathering information aboutexisting façade systems on buildings. It describes the information tolook for in as-built drawings and what other methods there are toidentify façade systems and component materials if as-builtinformation is not available or deemed unreliable. These includevisual non-destructive inspections, destructive inspections andlaboratory testing of façade component materials.12ConclusionConcluding statementsEPSExpanded Polystyrene13Further Work andSuggested Next StepsThis section suggests further work and next steps for development ofthe FRA tool for consideration by NFPAFRAFire Risk AssessmentGFAGross Floor AreaGRCGlass Reinforced ConcreteGRPGlass Reinforced PlasticGUIGraphical User InterfaceHPLHigh Pressure LaminateIBCInternational Building CodeISOInternational Standards OrganizationLDPELow Density Polyethylene14ReferencesThis is a list of the papers, codes and standards referenced in thisreport.AppendixAFire Risk AssessmentToolThis is the FRA tool in excel form for development by NFPA as anonline application with Graphical User InterfaceAppendixBUsers GuideThis is the user’s guide for NFPA to circulate along with the FRA tool Rev A February 1, 2018C:\USERS\SUSAN.LAMONT\DOCUMENTS\FACADE\NFPA FOUNDATION PROJECT\TASK 5\TASK 5 FEB 2018\2018-02-01 TASK 5 EFFECT TECHNICAL BACKGROUND REPORT REV A.DOCXPage 2

NFPAHigh rise buildings with combustible exterior façade systems: Fire risk assessment toolBackground and development of the toolLPGLiquid Propane Gas1.3MCMMetal Composite MaterialDefinitions taken directly from NFPA 5000 (2015 Edition) are in italics. Definitions takenfrom the Merriam-Webster Dictionary are underlined.NFPANational Fire Protection AssociationPASPublically Available olyurethaneSIPStructural Insulated PanelSNGSynthetic Natural GasSPFSpray Polyurethane FoamXPSExtruded PolystyreneVAVinyl AcetateDefinitionsAll-out evacuation An “all-out” evacuation can only be assumed if there is the ability to soundstrategythe alarm throughout all areas of the building using an “all-out” or “allcall” button at the main fire alarm panel. As most high rise buildings adopta phased evacuation strategy, an all-out alarm would usually be activatedmanually by the fire department or building managementCavity barrier or A material, a barrier, or construction installed in concealed spaces tofireblockingprevent the extension of fire for an unspecified period of time.In some countries the cavity barrier of fireblock may be specified for aparticular fire resistance period such as 15 minutes.CombustiblematerialA material that, in the form in which it is used and under the conditionsanticipated, will ignite and burn; a material that does not meet thedefinition of non-combustible or limited-combustible.Façade systemThe assembly of framing and materials used to envelope a building.NFPA 5000 treats a façade system as a load bearing exterior wall or nonloadbearing exterior wallFlame spreadThe propagation of flame over a surfaceFlame spreadindexA comparative measure, expressed as a dimensionless number, derivedfrom visual measurements of the spread of flame versus time for a materialtested in accordance with ASTM E 84, Standard Test Method for SurfaceBurning Characteristics of Building Materials or UL 723, Standard forTest for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building MaterialFire resistanceThe time, in minutes or hours, that materials or assemblies have withstooda standard fire exposure as determined by standard testing to ASTM E119or equivalent.IgnitionThe process or means of igniting fuel; the starting of a fireLimitedcombustiblematerialA material shall be considered a limited-combustible material where bothof the following conditions are met:(1) The material does not comply with the requirements for a noncombustible material.(2) The material, in the form in which it is used, exhibits a potential heatvalue not exceeding 8141 kJ/kg (3500 Btu/lb),when tested in accordance Rev A February 1, 2018C:\USERS\SUSAN.LAMONT\DOCUMENTS\FACADE\NFPA FOUNDATION PROJECT\TASK 5\TASK 5 FEB 2018\2018-02-01 TASK 5 EFFECT TECHNICAL BACKGROUND REPORT REV A.DOCXPage 3

NFPAHigh rise buildings with combustible exterior façade systems: Fire risk assessment toolBackground and development of the toolwith NFPA 259, Standard Test Method for Potential Heat of BuildingMaterials.And7.1.4.2.1 The material shall have a structural base of no

6.3 Global Survey of High Rise Fire Safety Provisions 16 6.4 Summary of Literature Review 16 7 Variables Associated with Combustible Façade Systems and High Rise Building Fire Safety 17 7.1 Façade System 17 7.2 Facade Ignition Sources 18 7.3 Other Variables 18 8 AHP 20 8.1 Weighting of Categories 20 9 Methodology 22 9.1 General 22

Related Documents:

High-rise drainage design27 High-rise drainage design 5 High-rise drainage design Emporis Standard ESN 18727 defines high-rise buildings as multi-story structures between 35-100 meters tall or a building of unknown height from 12-39 floors. Skyscrapers are at least 100 meters tall. A high-rise building drainage system interconnects many separate

STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS. Abstract High-rise buildings are exposed to both static and dynamic loads. Depending on . This translated into a case study of a high-rise building on which analytical calculations of deflection, critical buckling load, resonance frequencies and shear flow were made. The analytical calculations have

Table 2. Percentage of fires and fire losses in the five occupancies in high-rise buildings 8 Table 3. Risk of fire casualty per thousand reported fires and average loss per fire 9 A. High-Rise Buildings 9 B. Buildings that Were Not High-Rise 9 Table 4. Fires in selected properties, by number of stories above ground 10

STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS 55213HO.indd 1213HO.indd 1 22016-08-08 17:22:53016-08-08 17:22:53. . High-rise buildings are exposed to both static and dynamic loads. Depending on the method used and how the structure is modelled in finite element software the

for high-rise residential buildings in high-density, warm and humid urban settings. Drawing from on-site fieldwork, . play a role in shaping the thermal environments both within and outside of tall buildings. Conventional knowledge . Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat Journal, Issue III, pp24-32, Council on Tall Buildings and Urban .

this technology, JFE Steel has placed steel plates, wide-flange H-shapes, and steel tubes on the market to meet diversifying design and construction needs in high-rise buildings. This paper presents the features and applications of the steel materials JFE Steel uses in superhigh-rise buildings. 2. Product Development and Applications

Specifically related to low-rise apartment buildings ( 5 storeys) in British Columbia, the average energy intensity is 0.86 GJ/m2 (239 kWh/m2), compared to 1.10 GJ/m2 (306 kWh/m2) for all of Canada. Data for high-rise apartment buildings ( 5 storeys) or condominiums was not collected or specifically identified as part of this previous study.

c. Describe the major events of the American Revolution and explain the factors leading to American victory and British defeat; include the Battles of Lexington and Concord, Saratoga, and Yorktown. d. Describe key individuals in the American Revolution with emphasis on King George III, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Benedict Arnold, Patrick Henry, and John Adams .