China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
An Overview of Basic Life Safety Principles
Published in Peter C. Ashbrook, Malcolm M. Renfrew, Safe Laboratories, 2018
Peter Ashbrook, Paul Restivo, Stephen Szabo
As was true with construction/building codes, it is important to determine which fire codes have been adopted by the local jurisdiction. This discussion will concentrate on National Fire Protection Association codes although other codes such as the Uniform Fire Code may be adopted by localities. The core code of NFPA is NFPA 101 (Code for Safety to Life From Fire In Buildings and Structures — “The Life Safety Code”).7 The Life Safety Code was developed “… to establish minimum requirements that will provide a reasonable degree of safety from fire in buildings and structures.” (NFPA 101–1–2.1)
Emergency Preparedness, Fire Prevention, and Protection
Published in Ron C. McKinnon, Risk-based, Management-led, Audit-driven, Safety Management Systems, 2016
Document Scope of NFPA 101 The Life Safety Code is the most widely used source for strategies to protect people based on building construction, protection, and occupancy features that minimize the effects of fire and related hazards. Unique in the field, it is the only document that covers life safety in both new and existing structures. (NFPA website, 2015)
Fire Prevention and Life Safety
Published in Charles D. Reese, Occupational Safety and Health, 2017
The Life Safety Code (NFPA 101) from the National Fire Protection Association provides minimum requirements for the design, operation, and maintenance of a building or facility for safety to life from fire and similar emergencies. The code requires new and existing buildings or facilities to allow for “prompt escape” or to provide people with a reasonable degree of safety through other means.
Effect of design code and evacuation information on strategic location of Shelter in Place (SIP) in light rail station
Published in Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 2022
Young-Hwi Kim, Sun-Jae Yoo, Tian-Feng Yuan, Young-Soo Yoon
As shown in Table 6, the stair raiser and tread presented in Korea’s Building Structural Code (2009) (International Code Council 2012) stair structure are somewhat different from those of overseas standards such as BRE (Building Research Establishment) (BD2438), NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) (NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) 2015), IBC (International Building Code) (International Code Council 2012), and LSC (NFPA’s Life Safety Code) (National Fire Protection Association 2012). Stair raiser is usually 200 mm in Korea, up to 178 mm in IBC & LSC and 180 mm in BRE (BD2438). According to Templer (1992), the value of raiser between 117 mm and 183 mm can reduce most missteps. BRE research shows that the lower stair riser and the higher tread make a more positive impact for occupants’ evacuation, but more missteps occur at a stair tread over 350 mm (BD2438). Therefore, this study conducts how the change of stair risers and tread affects evacuation time based on Scenario A. The stairs raiser is reduced to 180 mm considering the maximum misstep suggested by Templer (1992) and limited to the BRE, IBC & LSC. Cases A and B change stair riser. Cases C, D and E changes tread, and Case F changes stair width. Table 11 shows the variable values for each case.
Experimental Study on Fire Performance of Weathered Cedar
Published in International Journal of Architectural Heritage, 2019
Biao Zhou, Hideki Yoshioka, Takafumi Noguchi, Xuan Wang, Chi Chiu Lam
There have been many attempts in the literature to develop approaches that address the fire risks of historic buildings (Zhou, Zhou, and Chao 2012; Ibrahim et al. 2011; Zhuang, Lu, and Wang 2007; Li 2014; Liu, Dong, and Yuan 2014; Code for Fire Protection of Historical Structures NFPA 914 2001; Life Safety Code NFPA 101 2000; Code for the protection of cultural resources NFPA 909 2001). Zhou, Zhou, and Chao (2012) investigated the fire risks for the Group-living Yards in Tianjin and provided comprehensive suggestions for fire protection and disaster mitigation methods. Ibrahim et al. (2011) developed a fire risk assessment method for heritage buildings in Malaysia. Zhuang, Lu, and Wang (2007) used semi-quantitative methods to assess the fire risks for a historic building called the Potala Palace in Lhasa in the Tibet Autonomous Region. Furthermore, Li (2014) applied the Code for Fire Protection of Historic Structures or NFPA 914 to discuss the fire risks for buildings made of wooden frames in the Lijiang city of China, which has been designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site since 1997. Liu, Dong, and Yuan (2014) examined the fire risks for ancient buildings in Xi’an and made good recommendations that would reduce the risks. Furthermore, NFPA914 also provides the requirements for the fire protection, fire safety, and security of historic building (Code for Fire Protection of Historical Structures NFPA 914 2001) On the other hand, the Life Safety Code or NFPA101 provides eight specific fire scenarios for historic buildings (Life Safety Code NFPA 101 2000). NFPA909 lists the practices that protect cultural resources, including museums and libraries, against different types of possible physical damage (Code for the Protection of Cultural Resources NFPA 909 2001). Although the fire risks for historic buildings have been documented and a large number of suggestions have been offered to reduce the vulnerability of these buildings to fires along with mitigation methods, fires still occur frequently in historic buildings. Therefore, rather than merely identify fire risks, there is merited to applying technology as a means of protection against fires. For instance, the performance of portable water-mist fire extinguishers in historic buildings has been discussed (Zhou, Zhou, and Chao 2012). An intelligent evacuation guidance system for improving the fire safety of Italian-style historic theatres without changing their architectural characteristics has been reported by Bernardini et al. (2016). The flame spread of chemically coated natural wood as determined by using a modified Schlyter test is reduced from 48 inches to 44 inches after simulated outdoor exposure from 0–10 years (LeVan and Holmes 1986). However, the time for the occurrence of flashover of the wood samples after accelerated weathering was found to be severely reduced (Östman and Tsantaridis 2016). With respect to weathered timber, there are few studies on the reaction-to-fire performance of fire retardant treated timber before and after a series of accelerated weathering tests.