Comparison IFEG 2005 Vs BS 7974 2001

BS7974 and the International Fire Engineering Guidelines
Anthony Ferguson
Arup Fire Ove Arup & Partners Ltd 13 Fitzroy Street, London W1T 4BQ
July 2006 Summary This report was commissioned by the Scottish Building Standards Agency to compare BS 7974: 2001 Application of Fire Safety Engineering principles to the Design of Buildings with the International Fire Engineering Guidelines and to assess whether both documents should be cited in the Technical Handbooks. The Technical Handbooks in support of the Building (Scotland) Regulations 2004 state that fire safety engineering can provide an alternative to the fire safety measures contained in the Technical Handbooks. It refers to BS 7974: 2001 as an appropriate framework to identify one or more fire safety design issues to be addressed using fire engineering. This is however, only one method of achieving compliance with the standards. Fire engineering is a continually developing field with a large degree of international cooperation. A document that aims to embrace the best practise worldwide is the International Fire Engineering Guidelines, jointly published by the Australian Building Codes Board, the National Research Council of Canada, the International Code Council of the United States of America, and the Department of Building and Housing, New Zealand. Fire engineering designs can be complex and generally require extensive use of engineering judgement. Therefore, to assist Local Authority Verifiers and Fire and Rescue Services in carrying out an assessment of alternative fire engineered solutions, the report assess the commonality and differences between the two documents to ensure that the guidance we give encompasses best practice worldwide.
Scottish Building Standards Agency
BS7947 and the International Fire Engineering Guidelines Review for Scottish Building Standards Agency
Contents
1 2 Executive summary Introduction 2.1 2.2 2.3 3 Brief Format of the report Study method Page 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 9 10 11 12
The significance of differences between the BS and the IFEG 3.1 3.2 3.3 Procedural issues Methodology Data
4 5
Functional standards Conclusions and recommendations
Appendices
Appendix A Process and Methodology Appendix B Data and numerical methods
Executive summary
The brief for this study is to compare the BS and the IFEG to assess whether both documents should be cited in the Technical Handbooks. The study has been conducted in two phases. This report covers the second phase, assessing the significance of differences identified between the two documents in the first phase. It also presents the results of the first phase in Appendices A and B. The general approach advocated by both documents is very similar, and would not present conflicts if both were cited. The IFEG tends to provide less specific technical detail than the BS. There are also a few detailed technical differences concerning data and methodology. The IFEG handles procedural issues more graphically and more comprehensively, and might therefore be regarded as more user-friendly for those less experienced in fire safety engineering. The IFEG puts forward a fire service intervention model, based on Australian practice, which the SBSA may wish to review. In the UK it is unusual for fire service intervention to be considered when developing fire safety strategy for a building project. Each of the four different regulatory bodies that support the publication of the IFEG, has written its own introductory section in Part 0 of the IFEG. They explain how the guidance is intended to be applied in their particular jurisdiction. The following points could be addressed by the SBSA in a Scottish part 0 to the IFEG: Regulatory objectives that should be addressed by a fire engineering brief the IFEG list issues such as environment protection which may not be relevant under the building regulations [see 3.1.2] The importance of sensitivity analysis and the way that assumptions need to be tested in a fire engineering analysis. There are some differences in data and analytical methods [see appendix B] between the BS and the IFEG. These apparent conflicts can be addressed if users appreciate the importance of exploring the effect of different assumptions or methods. Specific instances are:o o o Fire load density and the use of fractiles [see 3.3.1] Burning rate [see 3.3.2] Ignitability [see 3.3.3]
An issue that the SBSA will need to consider is whether the guidance of a Scottish Part 0 to the IFEG will have to be in place before the IFEG is cited. The recommendation of the studys authors is that this is desirable but not essential, since similar issues arise from citing the BS, which has already been done without the benefit of such clarification.
F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC
Page 1
Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006
Introduction
2.1 Brief
The Scottish Building Standards Agencys brief for the Arup study which is the subject of this report was as follows:The Technical Handbooks in support of the Building (Scotland) Regulations 2004 state that fire safety engineering can provide an alternative to the fire safety measures contained in the Technical Handbooks. It refers to BS 7974: 2001 Application of Fire Safety Engineering principles to the Design of Buildings as an appropriate framework to identify one or more fire safety design issues to be addressed using fire engineering. This is however, only one method of achieving compliance with the standards. Fire engineering is a continually developing field with a large degree of international cooperation. A document that aims to embrace the best practice worldwide is the International Fire Engineering Guidelines, jointly published by the Australian Building Codes Board, the National Research Council of Canada, the International Code Council of the United States of America, and the Department of Building and Housing, New Zealand. Fire engineering designs can be complex and generally require extensive use of engineering judgement. Therefore, to assist Local Authority Verifiers and Fire and Rescue Services in carrying out an assessment of alternative fire engineered solutions, it would be prudent to assess the commonality and differences between the two documents to ensure that the guidance we give encompasses best practice worldwide. Aim and Objectives The aim of this project is to compare BS 7974: 2001 Application of Fire Safety Engineering principles to the Design of Buildings with the International Fire Engineering Guidelines and to assess whether both documents should be cited in the Technical Handbooks. If this is not possible the areas of conflict need to be highlighted and resolved. The specific tasks required as part of this project are: to determine the differences between the two documents, highlighting areas not covered and identifying alternative approaches; to highlight areas where the documents may give conflicting guidance; and to examine and offer views on whether the SBSA could joint badge the document with the International Fire Community and reference it in the Technical Handbook as an appropriate framework for addressing fire safety design issues.
Desired Business Outcome The output from this research will be a report, with an Executive Summary clearly identifying what the differences between the two documents are. The report should identify any critical areas that need to be addressed to allow both documents to be referenced in the Technical Handbooks. The contractor should discuss any particular weakness identified in either document and make appropriate recommendations. The key issue is to determine if it is appropriate to cite both documents in the Technical Handbooks to assist verifiers and the Fire and Rescue Authorities in determining whether the aims of the functional standards have been met.
Page 2
2.2
Format of the report
The study has been conducted in two phases. In phase one the two references were examined and the differences between them were noted and analysed. This led to an interim report being submitted to the SBSA by the contractor for comment. In phase two of the study the implications of the identified differences were assessed so that this final report could be prepared. Because the key issue is the question of whether or not both references could appropriately be cited in the technical handbooks, this report presents the assessment and conclusions first. The detailed comparison of the two documents is contained in appendices to the report. These deal with: Appendix A - the procedures and methods. The emphasis is on the IFEG document, because BS7974 is already referred to in the guidance on the Building Standards, and the aim is to identify possible conflicts that would arise if the IFEG was also to be a reference document. Appendix B - a comparison of the data and numerical methods given in the two documents.
Throughout this report British Standard 7974:2001 Application of fire safety engineering principles to the design of buildings Code of Practice is referred to as BS7974 or the BS. This title includes the set of Published Documents, PD 7974-1 to -7 associated with the British Standard. Throughout this report the International Fire Engineering Guidelines are referred to as the IFEG. The term verifier is used in this report to indicate the body responsible for checking or approving proposals. Text in italics indicates a quotation from the document being referred to. 2.3 Study method
The contractor, Arup, has fire engineering staff with experience of writing fire safety standards, codes and regulations in the UK, USA and Australia, including BS7974 and the International Fire Engineering Guidelines. The study was conducted in the UK and involved consultation with, and input from, Arup colleagues in the other two countries. In examining and comparing the two reference documents Arup was able to apply its knowledge of the background and development of both documents, as well as the fire engineering knowledge required to carry out the comparison.
Page 3
The significance of differences between the BS and the IFEG

As a general summary the British Standard and the IFEG are essentially equivalent in concept. The BS generally provides rather more detailed information while the IFEG handles procedural issues more graphically and more comprehensively. Within this generalisation lie a very few detailed differences which are discussed in the following section. However, in the opinion of the authors, they do not prevent the IFEG being cited in the Technical Handbooks. Fire engineering is not as mature as some other branches of engineering. In a regulatory context there are therefore likely to be more issues of professional judgement made by engineers that have to be assessed by the appropriate authorities, than in some other disciplines. These issues raise questions of training, experience and qualifications, both for the design professions and for the verifiers. The reference to BS7974 in the Technical Handbooks has already presented these issues, and inclusion of the IFEG should not, in our opinion, change the existing situation. 3.1 Procedural issues
The two documents use a very similar approach. Fire engineering embraces a wide range of phenomena, design features and systems, and both documents break the subject down into sub-systems. Originally the sub-system concept grew from the analogy of a computer processor in which many items of data were passed around and processed under the control a central mechanism; the results of one process often feeding into another. While this somewhat mechanical view of the process is not entirely realistic, it has allowed some structure to be imposed on a very diverse field. Neither the BS nor the IFEG cling relentlessly to the process analogy, and both make it clear that the illustrations they give are subject to variation, iteration, deletion when applied to any specific project. In both cases the process begins with an appraisal of the task; called the Qualitative Design Review by the BS, and the Fire Engineering Brief by the IFEG. Figure 1.2 reproduced from the IFEG shows a process for developing a Fire Engineering Brief. As described, the Fire Engineering Brief [FEB] is very comprehensive; to the extent that some of the factors suggested for consideration are unlikely to be known at the earlier stages of a construction project. The less detailed guidance in the BS does not raise this issue. It will be important for the verifier to understand that it is not always essential that all the elements listed against FEB development in the IFEG should be fully determined.
3.1.1 AHJs and Verifiers
The term Authority Having Jurisdiction [AHJ] is used in the IFEG to embrace the roles of approver / enforcer. The Scottish term Verifier is used in this report to refer to the approval function, noting that the role of enforcement is carried out [at present] by the same Local Authorities who have been appointed as verifiers.
Page 4
Page 5
3.1.2
IFEG Part 0
Part 0 in the IFEG document contains introductory sections for each of the national regulatory authorities jointly responsible for publishing these Guidelines. They are the Australian Building Codes Board; the National Research Council of Canada; the International Codes Council of the USA; and the Department of Building and Housing, New Zealand. Each introductory section explains how the Guidelines are intended to be applied in that jurisdiction. They have not been reviewed in detail for this report because none of them specifically address the circumstances found in Scotland. This aspect of the IFEG clearly provides an opportunity for any particular considerations relevant to Scotland to be described or highlighted. This would entail the Scottish Building Standards Agency preparing a Scottish Part 0 for the IFEG, assuming that they would wish to become joint participants in the publication of the IFEG. The following procedural issues could be addressed in a Scottish Part 0. Later in this report other issues, concerning methods and data, are identified as ones which could be addressed using commentary in a Scottish Part 0. Section 1.2.1.2 of the IFEG notes that the regulatory framework for the design must be understood from the outset. It lists some questions to elicit the relevant information. Section 1.2.5.1 and .2 identify possible building regulatory objectives for inclusion in a FEB: protecting building occupants facilitating the activities of emergency services personnel protecting the property in question preventing the spread of fire between buildings. And some other possible regulatory objectives: environmental protection occupational health and safety fire services dangerous goods land use and other planning matters. A Scottish Part 0 to the IFEG could make it clear which of these objectives were relevant for purposes of the Scottish Building Standards.
Page 6
Figure 1; examples from IFEG of acceptance criteria
Page 7
Given the functional nature of the standards set in the Scottish building regulations, section 1.2.8 of the IFEG is significant:In order to determine the specific objectives or performance requirements it is necessary to determine where the trial designs do not comply with the relevant deemed-to-satisfy or prescriptive provisions. This process will identify the issues that need to be addressed in the analysis of the trial design. In cases where there are no deemed-to-satisfy or prescriptive provisions, the relevant objectives or performance requirements need to be identified directly (see 1.2.8.2) and the determination of non-compliance issues (Section 1.2.8.1) omitted {bold ed. By Arup}. This situation may occur where the relevant codes comprise objectives or performance requirements only or when general objectives, other than those covered by recognised codes, have been agreed to during the FEB process. The verifier will need to be able to identify the underlying objectives or performance requirements of the Functional Standards, so that acceptance criteria can be agreed. A Scottish Part 0 to the IFEG could be used to give assistance here by giving examples of the selection of relevant performance requirements. The SBSA may wish to consider whether this kind of modification has to be made to the IFEG before it can be called up for use in Scotland. Arguably the need already arises with BS7974, which is already cited, and therefore incorporation of Scottish examples in the IFEG does not have to precede it being cited in the guidance, although it is clearly desirable that it should.
3.1.3 Acceptance criteria
The IFEG does not set acceptance criteria, and given the range of possible cases it is not possible to do so. It does give some examples in section 1.2.10 of performance parameters relevant to certain common fire safety objectives. Factors of safety are also discussed in this section, at a very general level. The passage emboldened in the extract from 1.2.8 of the IFEG reproduced above was to draw attention to the importance of determining acceptance criteria, in a functional-based system, rather than simply identifying non-compliances.
Page 8
3.2
3.2.1
Methodology
Sub-system on fire service intervention
The BS reflects British practice in a largely qualitative way, while the IFEG presents the Australian Fire Brigade Intervention Model as a method for quantifying this intervention. In England and Wales there has been reluctance to take fire service intervention into account when the fire strategy for a building has been put forward for regulatory approval. Similarly in Scotland, while various facilities are expected to be provided to assist the firefighters to access the building, it is not customary to reduce some aspect of a buildings performance in fire in recognition of fire brigade activity. The SBSA may wish to consider including some reference to the account that may or may not be taken of fire service actions, should they decide to write a Scottish Part 0 to the IFEG.
3.2.2 Changes in the state of the art
Fire safety engineering is a relatively new branch of engineering and advances in understanding of fire phenomena, and development of new analytical methods, happen frequently. The BS was set up with the detailed technical material in a set of Published Documents because this makes it easier to revise parts of the whole body of knowledge and information as necessary. The IFEG reduces its exposure to content becoming out of date by giving less detailed technical information, and calling up other sources. However this makes the IFEG more dependent on outside sources and gives the publishers less control, unless they choose to add material specifically to address new developments.
Page 9
3.3
3.3.1
Data
Fire load
Both the BS and the IFEG refer to the CIB W14 report on fire loading. Fire loads are given as ranges, for various types of occupancy. However the BS recommends that the 80% fractile of the range of fire load should be used while the IFEG recommends that the 95% fractile should be used. If one is following the guidance in BS7974 to calculate a post flash-over fire then it would be inappropriate to use the 95% fractile in favour of the recommended 80% one. The 95% fractile is very conservative when compared with other fire loads recommended elsewhere, e.g. EuroCode1, Law and OBrien on external steelwork; and measured in real fire tests such as the Cardington office series. While the SBSA might consider addressing this question if they prepare a Scottish Part 0 to the IFEG, the essential point, which applies to any aspect of fire engineering analysis where assumptions are being made, is that sensitivity studies should be carried out to ensure that a solution's acceptability is not critically dependent on some assumption, such as fire load.
3.3.2 Rate of heat release
The guidance in the two documents on the subject of heat release or burning rates in fuel bed controlled conditions [i.e. where the rate of burning is not restricted by a limited air supply] is different, as summarised in the table below. Topic
Fuel bed controlled HRR
IFEG
No equations are suggested. References are made to Babrauskas section in the SFPE handbook and Sardqvists Initial fires. It is recommended that appropriate engineering judgement should be applied when setting fire rates.
BS7974
An effective fire duration of 20 minutes can be assumed in houses, offices and shops. Burning rate is based on the assumption that the total initial fire load burns in 1200 seconds Another equation for fuel bed controlled fires is presented with no reference to its origins. The time to reach burnout after flashover is shown as two times the mass of fuel left when flashover occurs, divided by peak mass burning rate.
The BS guidance is an engineering approximation to a complex situation. The SFPE reference called up by the IFEG discusses these complications, but it requires a higher level of understanding of fire dynamics to make use of the advice given. This should not be considered as a weakness of the IFEG. The fundamental point, which applies to any aspect of fire engineering analysis where assumptions are being made, is that sensitivity studies should be carried out to ensure that a solution's acceptability is not critically dependent on some assumption, such as release rate.
Page 10
3.3.3
Ignitability
In data associated with sub-systems 3 structural response, the two references give different advice on spontaneous or auto-ignition temperatures for timber elements.
Topic Heat flow by radiation IFEG Various references to publications regarding external fire spread. Some data on ignitability limits under radiant heat flux. The spontaneous ignition criterion for wood is set to 250-400C. BS7974 Standard radiation relationships shown. 2 12.6kW/m is mentioned as a criterion, giving some factor of safety It is possible to base analysis on the increase of surface temperature of the object exposed. For organic solids a surface temp. criterion of 600C is suggested for spontaneous ignition, and 300-410C for ignition by flying brands under a radiative heat flux..
The range of values offered by both documents overlap. They reflect the fact that this is a very complex subject. The value depends on many variables, such as the nature of the heat transfer mechanism, the specimen thickness and period of exposure to heating. The measurement of specimen surface temperature is technically difficult. It is suggested that this is a relatively trivial issue in the overall question of whether the IFEG is a suitable reference. It might have been better if the BS had adopted the IFEG approach of simply referring to other sources, without attempting to summarise a complicated topic. The IFEG gives less data and relies more on other references.
Functional standards
The Scottish building regulations identify 15 functional standards. It is obviously essential that the two documents, BS7974 and IFEG, do address all of the Functional Standards. In Appendix A section 4 the scope of both the BS and the IFEG have been compared to the Functional Standards. This confirms that the functional standards are capable of being addressed by following the guidance in the two reference documents.
Page 11
Conclusions and recommendations

The brief for this study is to compare the BS and the IFEG to assess whether both documents should be cited in the Technical Handbooks. The general approach advocated by both documents is very similar, and would not present conflicts if both were cited. The study has identified a difference in the general character of the IFEG it tends to provide less specific technical detail than the BS and a few detailed technical differences concerning data and methodology. The IFEG handles procedural issues more graphically and more comprehensively, and might therefore be regarded as more user-friendly for those less experienced in fire safety engineering. The IFEG puts forward a fire service intervention model, based on Australian practice, which the SBSA may wish to review. In the UK it is unusual for fire service intervention to be considered when developing fire safety strategy for a building project. Normally the safety of building occupants in case of fire is regarded as a matter of self-help without reliance on outside intervention. Each of the four different regulatory bodies that support the publication of the IFEG, has written its own introductory section in Part 0 of the IFEG. They explain how the guidance is intended to be applied in their particular jurisdiction. The following points could be addressed by the SBSA in a Scottish part 0 to the IFEG: Regulatory objectives that should be addressed by a fire engineering brief the IFEG list issues such as environment protection which may not be relevant under the building regulations [see 3.1.2] The importance of sensitivity analysis and the way that assumptions need to be tested in a fire engineering analysis. There are some differences in data and analytical methods [see appendix B] between the BS and the IFEG. These apparent conflicts can be addressed if users appreciate the importance of exploring the effect of different assumptions or methods. Specific instances are:o o o Fire load density and the use of fractiles [see 3.3.1] Burning rate [see 3.3.2] Ignitability [see 3.3.3]
An issue that the SBSA will need to consider is whether the guidance of a Scottish Part 0 to the IFEG will have to be in place before the IFEG is cited. Arguably the need already arises with BS7974, which is already cited, and therefore incorporation of a Scottish Part 0 in the IFEG does not have to precede it being cited in the guidance.
Page 12
Appendix A Process and Methodology
A1
BS7974
BS7974 is in effect a headcode under which sit a set of Published Documents [PDs]. This study embraces the PDs along with the BS7974. The BS code of practice: provides a framework for developing a rational methodology for design of buildings using a fire safety engineering approach based on the application of scientific and engineering principles to the protection of people, property and the environment from fire. It may be applied to new or existing buildings, to show that regulatory requirements can be met. It is intended to be applied in three main stages:1. Qualitative design review [QDR]; in which the scope and objectives of the fire safety design are defined, performance criteria established and one or more potential design solutions proposed. 2. Quantitative analysis; engineering methods are used to evaluate the potential solutions identified in the QDR 3. Assessment against criteria; the output of the quantitative analysis is compared to the acceptance criteria identified in the QDR The BS7974 provides guidance on these procedures. The sub-systems in the PDs provide data and analytical methods for tackling the relevant quantitative analysis, and advice on acceptance criteria and suitable design approaches. The document structure with the sub-systems is illustrated in figure 1.
Page A1
BS7974 Code of Practice Application of fire safety engineering principles to the design of buildings
BSPD79740 Guide to design framework and fire safety engineering procedures BSPD79741 Initiation and development of fire within enclosure of origin BSPD79742 Spread of smoke and toxic gases within and beyond the enclosure of origin BSPD79743 Structural response and fire spread beyond the enclosure of origin BSPD79744 Detection of fire and activation of fire protection systems BSPD79745 Fire service intervention BSPD79746 Evacuation BSPD79747 Probabilistic risk assessment
Figure A1 structure of sub-systems in BS7974 Note that 0 and 7 are not sub-systems as such, ie they do not address characteristics of fire or safety systems. PD0 provides guidance on procedure and PD7 provides guidance on risk assessment techniques, both being applicable to any of the other subsystems.
Qualitative Design Review
Quantitative analysis
Assessment against criteria
Figure A2; the engineering approach described in BS7974
Page A2
A2
The International Fire Engineering Guidelines

The guidelines document and approach uses a very similar sub-systems break-down of the subject to that used in BS7974. The guidelines are derived from an earlier Australian document [the draft National Building Fire Safety Systems code]. In the early 1990s the original consultant team commissioned to draft the document that eventually became BS7974 in the UK, were in contact with members of the team who were working on the first edition of the Australian Fire Engineering Safety Systems code at the same time. There was cross-fertilisation between these groups. The UK group picked up the Australian sub-system concept and the Australian group adopted the UK QDR concept (though some of the terminology was altered). It is assumed that Scotland would prepare an introductory section [Part 0] for a new edition of the IFEG, should they wish to cite the IFEG, in a similar fashion to the other regulatory authorities who have adopted the IFEG. The present study does not examine Part 0 of the IFEG document as these are written for other national jurisdictions. The structure of the IFEG after the national introductory sections, is in three parts: 1. process 2. methodologies 3. data A2.1 IFEG Process
The first stage in the Guidelines is the preparation of a Fire Engineering Brief [FEB]. The process follows the following sequence:-
Prepare FEB
Carry out analysis
Collate and evaluate results
Draw conclusions
Prepare report
FigureA3; sequence of the fire engineering process in the IFEG The Process section of the IFEG offers guidance on what issues should be addressed in the Fire Engineering Brief [FEB]. The FEB is a process as well as a document. It defines the scope of the fire engineering analysis, and the basis on which that analysis will be undertaken. All interested parties, including the Authority Having Jurisdiction [AHJ], have to be involved, since key components of the FEB include acceptance criteria. These criteria are likely to be more detailed than the Functional Standards of building regulations. This section of the IFEG gives an illustration [fig.1.2 see below] of a process for developing a FEB. Clearly this is only illustrative as the particular characteristics of a project will determine its content to some extent. The IFEG notes that the FEB for an analysis to evaluate a simple departure from some prescriptive guidance in a code or standard, may be a much shorter document than the FEB for a major project with many departures from Code. The steps shown in fig 1.2 may be re-ordered, omitted or an iterative process introduced.
Page A3
Page A4
A practical criticism of the FEB principle is that it is generally impossible to follow in a real project. This is essentially because there are many unknowns in the early stages. The IFEG acknowledges this in noting that there may well be iterative loops in its development, and in accepting that there may be preliminary test calculations/analyses to establish the likelihood of success before trial designs are defined ready for fuller analysis. Typically there may be some exploratory hand calculations before the fire engineer advises the design team to take a particular approach, after which a more time-consuming analysis may be carried out to test the approach, once the design has been further developed. The FEB is not necessarily fixed [1.2.14]:Sometimes, as the analysis of a design proceeds or as a project develops, it may be appropriate to revise the FEB, adopting the same consultative approach as with the original. The 'final' FEB will be incorporated into the overall report
A2.1.1 Regulatory requirements
Section 1.2.1.2 of the IFEG notes that the regulatory framework for the design must be understood from the outset. It lists some questions to elicit the relevant information. Section 1.2.5.1 and .2 identify possible building regulatory objectives for inclusion in a FEB: protecting building occupants facilitating the activities of emergency services personnel protecting the property in question preventing the spread of fire between buildings. And some other possible regulatory objectives: environmental protection occupational health and safety fire services dangerous goods land use and other planning matters.
A2.1.2 Trial designs
Section 1.2.7 describes activity during the development of trial designs. It notes that each of these should be clearly identified and all its features, including fire safety features, should be recorded. Sections 1.2.3 and 1.2.6.2 list the types of feature to be included.
Page A5
A2.1.3
Given the functional nature of the Scottish Standards section 1.2.8 of the IFEG is significant:-
In order to determine the specific objectives or performance requirements it is necessary to determine where the trial designs do not comply with the relevant deemed-to-satisfy or prescriptive provisions. This process will identify the issues that need to be addressed in the analysis of the trial design.
Page A6
In cases where there are no deemed-to-satisfy or prescriptive provisions, the relevant objectives or performance requirements need to be identified directly (see 1.2.8.2) and the determination of non-compliance issues (Section 1.2.8.1) omitted {bold text ed. Arup}. This situation may occur where the relevant codes comprise objectives or performance requirements only or when general objectives, other than those covered by recognised codes, have been agreed to during the FEB process . The verifiers will need to be able to identify the underlying objectives or performance requirements of the Functional Standards, so that acceptance criteria can be agreed. Another issue raised by this section is whether the FEB has to show equivalent performance to the solutions given in guidance/codes, or whether it is acceptable to demonstrate compliance with the functional/performance standard. From our understanding of the Scottish regulatory system, both options would be available. Reflecting the importance of this section, the IFEG gives examples of the selection of relevant performance requirement in Australia, USA, Canada and New Zealand. Presumably an example under the Scottish regulatory system could be included as part of the process of adopting the IFEG, if so-desired. The SBSA will need to consider whether it is necessary for this kind of modification to be made to the IFEG before it can be called up for use in Scotland.
A2.1.4 Selection of analytical approaches
The Process section includes a discussion of the selection of the approaches and methods of analysis, section 1.2.9. It gives useful advice on the principles involved, but is not a substitute for experience and training in fire engineering. It is probably more helpful than BS7974 in this area, and certainly goes into more detail than the somewhat cursory section 6.4.6 in the BS, although similar information can be gleaned from other parts of the BS and its PDs.
A2.1.5 Acceptance criteria
The IFEG does not set acceptance criteria, and given the range of possible cases it is not possible to do so. It does give some examples in section 1.2.10 of performance parameters relevant to certain common fire safety objectives. See illustration Figure A4. Factors of safety are also discussed in this section, at a very general level.
Page A7
Figure A4; examples from IFEG of acceptance criteria
Page A8
A2.1.6
Sub-systems
The sub-system approach is introduced in section 1.3.1 of the IFEG document. As noted the IFEG sub-systems bear a very close resemblance to those used in BS7974. They are set out in figure Figure A5. The following quote from IFEG 1.3.2 is important in that it qualifies the importance of the whole sub-system principle:Typically, each building project is unique and similarly, each fire engineering evaluation is unique. It is not sensible, therefore, to set down detailed guidance on how the fire safety analysis should be undertaken. Instead, it is the responsibility of the fire engineer to plan the analysis for the particular project, based on the decisions taken during the preparation of the FEB as discussed in Chapter 1.2.
Subsystem A Fire initiation and development and control of fire within enclosure of origin as well as enclosures to which fire subsequently spreads
Subsystem B Development and spread of smoke within the building, and its control
Subsystem C Spread of fire beyond the enclosure of origin, impact on structure and how spread and impact may be controlled
Subsystem D Fire detection warning and suppression. Enables suppression effectiveness to be estimated
Subsystem E Occupant evacuation and control. Enables estimate of time to reach place of safety
Subsystem F Fire services intervention. Effectiveness of intervention including suppression.
Figure A5; the IFEG subsystems BS7974 Code of Practice Application of fire safety engineering principles to the design of buildings
BSPD79740 Guide to design framework and fire safety engineering procedures BSPD79741 Initiation and development of fire within enclosure of origin BSPD79742 Spread of smoke and toxic gases within and beyond the enclosure of origin BSPD79743 Structural response and fire spread beyond the enclosure of origin BSPD79744 Detection of fire and activation of fire protection systems BSPD79745 Fire service intervention BSPD79746 Evacuation BSPD79747 Probabilistic risk assessment
Figure A6; the BS7974 sub-systems repeated for ease of comparison The point is made that the sub-systems actually used will depend on the non-compliance issues identified and the specific objectives established in the FEB. The FEB is therefore integral to the overall process.
Page A9
A2.1.7
Sub-system Flow charts
Each sub-system description includes flow charts indicating how analysis may be undertaken. IFEG Section 1.4.1 notes that these charts are only for guidance, and do not necessarily cover all the factors which may be relevant to a particular case. An example from sub system 1 fire initiation and development is shown as an illustration in Figure A7 below.
Page A10
Figure A7: flow chart from IFEG for sub-system on fire initiation and development
Page A11
A2.1.8
Preparation of the Fire Engineering brief
The IFEG gives more information about the documentation of the fire engineering work than the BS. The BS lists information that may be appropriate to include in the report.
A3
Methodologies
Part 2 of the IFEG is devoted to methodologies that may be appropriate for the preparation of the FEB and for the analysis in each subsystem It touches on the: Identification and definition of fire scenarios Use of event trees for scenario identification.
PD7 of the BS has a section on these techniques, in the context of probabilistic approaches generally, as they may be employed in any sub-system. A comparison of the data and methodologies is provided in Appendix B.
A4
Functional standards
The Scottish building regulations identify 15 functional standards, reproduced below. Standards n.1 and n.13 do not apply to domestic buildings and Standard n.11 only applies to a building which is:- a dwelling; or is a residential building; or is an enclosed shopping centre. Standard n.15 applies only to a building which is an enclosed shopping centre; is a residential care building; is a high rise domestic building; or forms the whole or part of a sheltered housing complex. The IFEG and BS7974 do not discriminate between domestic and other types of building work. The procedures defined in the two documents are applicable to dwellings and to other buildings. It is obviously essential that the two documents, BS7974 and IFEG, do address all of the Functional Standards. This section is to confirm that all the Functional Standards are capable of being addressed by following the guidance in the two reference documents A4.1 Functional standard 2.1
Every building must be designed and constructed in such a way that in the event of an outbreak of fire within the building, fire and smoke are inhibited from spreading beyond the compartment of origin until any occupants have had the time to leave that compartment and any fire containment measures have been initiated. Limitation This standard does not apply to domestic buildings. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS1, SS2, SS3, SS4, SS5, SS6 IFEG SSA, SSB, SSC, SSD, SSE, SSF
Page A12
A4.2
Functional standard 2.2
Every building, which is divided into more than one area of different occupation, must be designed and constructed in such a way that in the event of an outbreak of fire within the building, fire and smoke are inhibited from spreading beyond the area of occupation where the fire originated. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS1, SS2, SS3, SS4 IFEG SSA, SSB, SSC, SSD
A4.3
Every building must be designed and constructed in such a way that in the event of outbreak of fire within the building, the load-bearing capacity of the building will continue to function until all occupants have escaped, or been assisted to escape, from the building and any fire containment measures have been initiated. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS1, SS3, SS4, SS5, SS6 IFEG SSA, SSC, SSD, SSE, SSF
A4.4
Every building must be designed and constructed in such a way that in the event of an outbreak of fire within the building, the unseen spread of fire and smoke within concealed spaces in its structure and fabric is inhibited. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS2, SS3, SS4 SSB, SSC, SSD IFEG
A4.5
Every building must be designed and constructed in such a way that in the event of an outbreak of fire within the building, the development of fire and smoke from the surfaces of walls and ceilings within the area of origin is inhibited. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS1, SS2, SS4, SSA, SSB, SSD IFEG
Page A13
A4.6
Every building must be designed and constructed in such a way that in the event of an outbreak of fire within the building, the spread of fire to neighbouring buildings is inhibited.
Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS1, SS2, SS3, SS4, SS5 IFEG SSA, SSB, SSC, SSD, SSF
A4.7
Every building must be designed and constructed in such a way that in the event of an outbreak of fire within the building, or from an external source, the spread of fire on the external walls of the building is inhibited. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS1, SS2, SS3, SS5 IFEG SSA, SSB, SSC, SSF
A4.8
Every building must be designed and constructed in such a way that in the event of an outbreak of fire in a neighbouring building, the spread of fire to the building is inhibited. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS2, SS3, SS4, SS5 SSC, SSD, SSF IFEG
A4.9
Every building must be designed and constructed in such a way that in the event of an outbreak of fire within the building, the occupants, once alerted to the outbreak of the fire, are provided with the opportunity to escape from the building, before being affected by fire or smoke. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS1, SS2, SS3, SS4, SS5, SS6 IFEG SSA, SSB, SSC, SSD, SSE, SSF
Page A14
A4.10
Every building must be designed and constructed in such a way that in the event of an outbreak of fire within the building, illumination is provided to assist in escape. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS1, SS2, SS4, SS6 IFEG SSA, SSB, SSD, SSE
A4.11
Every building must be designed and constructed in such a way that in the event of an outbreak of fire within the building, the occupants are alerted to the outbreak of fire. Limitation This standard applies only to a building which: (a) is a dwelling; (b) is a residential building; or (c) is an enclosed shopping centre. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS2, SS4, SS6 SSB, SSD, SSE IFEG
A4.12
Every building must be accessible to fire appliances and fire service personnel. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS5, SS6 SSE, SSF IFEG
A4.13
Every building must be provided with a water supply for use by the fire service. Limitation This standard does not apply to domestic buildings. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS5 SSF IFEG
Page A15
A4.14
Every building must be designed and constructed in such a way that facilities are provided to assist fire-fighting or rescue operations. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS2, SS3, SS4, SS5, SS6 IFEG SSB, SSC, SSD, SSE, SSF
A4.15
Every building must be designed and constructed in such a way that, in the event of an outbreak of fire within the building, fire and smoke will be inhibited from spreading through the building by the operation of an automatic life safety fire suppression system. Limitation This standard applies only to a building which: (a) is an enclosed shopping centre; (b) is a residential care building; (c) is a high rise domestic building; or (d) forms the whole or part of a sheltered housing complex. Sub-systems relevant to this functional standard BS7974 SS1, SS2, SS4 SSA, SSB, SSD IFEG
Page A16
Appendix B Data and numerical methods
B1
Data and numerical methods

The following series of tables compares the guidance given on input data for each subsystem in the two documents under review [BS7974 including PDs, and the IFEG] The object of the assessment has been to identify possible conflicts that might arise if both the reference documents are afforded equal status as sources of guidance for satisfying the Scottish Building Standards. Potential conflicts identified below are discussed in section 3.3 of the main report.
Sub-system 1- Initiation and development of fire within the enclosure of origin. Design Calculations-Pre-flashover
Fire load densities IFEG Allowed to be assessed by surveys. Generic data-Swiss data collected 1967-1969, it is also reproduced in WarringtonBCCs Fire resistant barriers and structures (2000) The CIB W14 workshop report is also referred to. 7974-1:2003 Allowed to be assessed by surveys. Generic data-The CIB W14 workshop report is referred to. Conclusion Identical. Both use the same equation for fire load density. Similar. IFEG provides more information.
Where the CIB W14 workshop figures are utilised, it is recommended the 95% fractile value should be taken as the fire load.
Where the CIB W14 workshop figures are utilised, it is recommended that in the UK the 80% fractile value should be taken as the fire load.
Contradicting
Ignition
It is appreciated that in most cases a deterministic approach is utilised and a fire initiation is a presumption for the fire engineered analysis. The use of event trees to determine fire ignition and spread is recognised. Some information is provided on ignition characteristics. Time to ignition of second object is discussed. The time to flame contact is given as a conservative value. For fire spread through radiation Babrauskas relationship between mass loss rate and ignition distance is shown. Data is provided on ignitability limits for common fuels for both piloted ignition and spontaneous ignition. Extensive references to Babrauskas Ignition Handbook
A list of common ignition sources is provided.
NA. The IFEG is more detailed and also provides more references for additional information.
Page B1
Heat release rates IFEG Convective fraction is approximated to 70% of total heat release. No recommendation on an appropriate heat release model. Growth times referenced to NFPA 204 Occupancy related fire growth times referenced to NFPA 204 7974-1:2003 Data for convective heat release fractions rates refers to SFPE handbook Q*-Dimensionless heat release rate as described by Zukoski, referred to Drysdale-An introduction to fire dynamics. Fire growth parameters as described in NFPA92B Picture gallery-slow Dwelling-medium Office-medium Hotel reception-medium Hotel bedroom-medium Shop-fast Industrial storage or plant roomUltra-fast 2 Shops-550kw/m Offices-290kw/m2 Hotel rooms-250kw/m2 Industrial (excl. storage) 90620kw/m2 Equation developed by Quintere et al. (1982). Walton & Thomas (2002) equation for heat release rates needed to induce flash-over. Equation presented by McCaffrey et al. 1981 recommended. Flame length according to Cox and Chitty, 1980. (0.2*Q^(2/5)) The equation shown is referenced to DD240-1. Corner room fires are likely to increase flame heights by 75% and wall fires by 32% this is referenced to Zukoski. No recommendations If the flame length is over 1m and the flame is luminous it is common to assume black body behaviour. Emissivity = 1 Standard radiation calculation with view factor. It is suggested that the influence of air flow should be taken into account Smoke mass conversion factors for flaming and non-flaming combustion. The smoke mass conversion factors are referenced to the SFPE handbook. Conclusion NA
Characteristic fire growth curves-t
Similar/Identical Similar/Identical
Heat release rates per unit area
No recommendations on peak heat release rates
NA-More info in 7974
Smouldering fires Heat release within enclosure for flashover Temperature within enclosure prior to flashover Flame length for axi-symmetric fire source. Flame length for line sources Flame lengths for corner room and wall fires. Flame temperature Flame radiation & flame emissivity
Equation developed by Quintere et al. (1982) Walton & Thomas (2002) equation for heat release rates needed to induce flash-over. No recommendations
Identical Identical. Noted misprint in IFEG on definition of terms NA
Flame length is estimated with the McAffrey and Heskestad equations No recommendations No recommendations
Dissimilar, but not contradicting
NA-7974 provides more information NA-7974 provides more information
Heskestad (2002) equations Standard radiation calculations. The emissivity can be conservatively set to 1
NA-IFEG provides greater detail Identical
Smoke yield
No relationships are given for mass conversion factors. A basic equation is shown.
NA-7974 provides more information.
Page B2
Optical density IFEG The light depletion equations is Bouguers law. It is however shown in the fire detection section 7974-1:2003 The light depletion equations is Bouguers law. Conclusion Identical
Optical density data required for smoke detector activation is expressed in dB/m.
Optical density given in dB/m.
Mass optical density
No discussion on mass optical density.
Visibility
No discussion on visibility of signage etc.
Mass production of CO and other species
CO yield factors referenced to part three of these guidelines no data is however found in the appendices. The equations shown are basic concentration equations. IFEG Flashover occurs when the hot layer temperature reaches approximately 600C or when radiation at floor level from the hot smoke layer reaches 20kW/m2.
Relations for mass optical density for different fuels is shown. Referenced to SFPE handbook S=(10/D), S=visibility distance, D=optical density db/m If a sign is back illuminated its visibility distance can be increased by a factor of 2.5 The mass conversion factor for CO is given as 0.013mf.. This value, and other conversion factors, is referenced to the SFPE handbook.
NA-7974 provides more information
Design Calculations-Fully developed fire

Time to flashover 7974-1:2003 Flashover can be assumed to occur when sustained flaming from combustibles reaches that ceiling and the temperature of the hot gas layer is between 550C and 600C. If flames from the combustibles do not reach the ceiling, or the temperature remains below 550C, flashover can be assumed to be unlikely. For design purposes it may be assumed that heat release rates remain constant until 80% of the fuel has been consumed and the decay phase starts. Kawagoe and Sekine equation for linear decline. Walton & Thomas (2002) for no consideration to wall thermal properties. McCaffrey for when thermal effects of enclosures is considered. 7974-1:2003 Uses Thomas,1973, equation for the mass flow in an underventilated fire or an unreferenced equation for fuel mass flow (it is identical to the one in Drysdale 1999). Conclusion Similar
Heat release rate at flashover
When 80% of the fuel has been consumed the fire can be assumed to decay either: -linearly -at rate determined experimentally -at any rate than can be justified Thomas (1981) for no consideration of wall thermal properties. No recommendations for thermal effects of enclosures. IFEG Uses Drysdales equation for mass flow, with a reasonable and referenced assumption regarding underventilated fires.
Similar
Identical for cases where no consideration is taken for thermal effects of enclosures. 7974 provides further information. Conclusion Similar
Steady state fires Mass burning rate in ventilation controlled conditions
Page B3
Mass burning rate in fuel bed controlled conditions IFEG No equations are suggested. References are made to Babrauskas section in the SFPE handbook and Sardqvists Initial fires. It is recommended that appropriate engineering judgement should be applied when setting fire rates. 7974-1:2003 An effective fire duration of 20 minutes can be assumed in houses, offices and shops. Burning rate is based on assessment that the total initial fire load burns in 1200 seconds Another equation for fuel bed controlled fires is presented with no reference to its origins. Time to reach burnout after flashover is shown as two times the mass of fuel left at flashover divided by peak rate mass burning rate. 7974 recognises the ISO and BS 476 temperature-time curve Large pool fire, in accordance with BS 476-20 Temperature curve in accordance with BS EN 1991-12:2002 Two heating curves for slow heating fires. Reference to BS 1363-2:1999. Equation referenced to M.law 1978 Kawagoe and Sekine equation dependant on opening factor. Conclusion Different
Standard temperature-time curve Hydrocarbon temperature-time curve
Short discussion on the existence of empirical timetemperature curves. Reference given to Lie (1994).
NA-The 7974 provides many equations and data whilst the information found in IFEG is very limited.
Slow heating curve
Maximum temperature curve Ventilation controlled temperature-time curve Summary
Both documents provide quite comprehensive quantitative guidance on the subject. BS7974 however provides the most information.
Page B4
Sub-system 2- Spread of Smoke and toxic gases within and beyond the enclosure of origin.
Hazards of smoke IFEG Visible and non visible products of combustion or pyrolysis and entrained air. CO, CO2 and HCN are often considered for life safety criteria. Influence of buoyancy and combustion generated products. Amount of air entrained greatly exceeds mass flow of fuel burned. 7974-2:2002 airborne products of combustion, solid or liquid particulates within a gaseous mass. Most fire deaths from smoke inhalation. CO2, H2O, CO, HCN. Further preamble of smoke dangers. Initial flow influenced by air currents; fuel controlled fire creates a plume, smoke rises to ceiling, then radially spreads. Air entrainment increases volume and decreases temperature. Fire growth may be limited by limited ventilation. 7974-2:2002 Protection of MoE clear layer solutions Temperature Control protects materials within the smoke zone Assist fire fighting operations prevent hot smoky layers occurring in certain situations. Property Protection limiting heat flux on structure through exhaust. Smoke containment physical measures to prevent the spread of hot and smoky products smoke curtains, walls etc. Smoke clearance removal of smoke after smoke has finished being produced. Smoke Dilution mixing smoke with clean air to reduce the concentration of toxic products and increase visibility. Smoke exhaust ventilation natural or mechanical means of removing smoke from top of layer. Pressurization effectively contains smoke. Uses pressure differences over openings. Depressurisation limiting smoke movement by pressure differentials. Fans pull air out of designated spaces rather than supplying it. Conclusion Similar/Identical
Similar.
Smoke Dynamics
Dissimilar, but not contradicting.
Smoke Control
Design Objectives IFEG Evaluate effect on Means of Escape [MoE] Temperature control mentioned with regards to fire spread. Evaluate effect on FF operations Conclusion Identical Similar both outline advantages of controlling temperatures. Identical
Techniques
Containment mentioned.
N/A No mention in IFEG of limiting heat fluxes. Similar
Extraction mentioned.
Similar
Dilution mentioned.
Similar
Natural ventilation mentioned.
Similar
Zone pressurisation mentioned.
Similar
N/A depressurisation not mentioned in IFEG
Design Procedure
Inputs IFEG SS-C Building characteristics, heat release rate profile, smoke yield, characteristics of smoke management equipment, time to smoke detection, environmental effects. IFEG SS-C Qc=0.7Q 7974-2:2002 Building Characteristics Occupant characteristics Design fire sub system 1 Environmental influences wind, internal air movement, stack effect. Active systems activation time. 7974-2:2002 Qp=XQ where X is the fraction of heat Conclusion Identical.
Analysis
Heat content Conclusion Dissimilar, but not
Page B5
IFEG of plume Smoke plumes above fire source Mean flame height and virtual origin mentioned. 7974-2:2002 as convection (0.4 0.9). table provided for different fuels. Luminous flame height Cox and Chitty or Heskestad whichever is more onerous. Calculations outlined for flame height and mass flow rate of smoke and entrained air. Axi-symmetric plumes: Discussion about the movement of smoke and air entrainment. Conclusion contradicting. More information in 7974. Dissimilar, but not contradicting. More detail in BS 7974.
McCaffrey Model equations given for mass entrainment rate for flame region, intermittent flame region and buoyant plume. Not mentioned.
Dissimilar, but not contradicting. BS 7974 has greater detail and commentary. N/A not mentioned in IFEG
References the use of reflection (Mowrer and Williamson 1987). No calculation given.
Not mentioned.
Ceiling Jets
Stack effect makes reference made to Klote and Milke (2002). Equation given for vertical smoke flow rate (kg/s). Ceiling jet mentioned in Detection sub system. Short explanation.
Axi-symmetric ceiling jet: temperatures and velocities in unconfined spaces discussed. Equations outline the maximum temperature rise and maximum gas velocities and is dependant on the radial distances and height of ceiling above the fire source. (Alpert 1972). References Delichatsios 1981.
Line Plume: Where L=5W of fire base. Flame height, mass flow of smoke. Dependant on length of side and HRR. Effect of Adjacent Walls: the reduction of entrained air from the perimeter causes the flame height to lengthen. Flame height and mass floor of smoke given for fire against wall and in corner. Fire induced winds: Inlet air velocity causes the flame jet to move away from opening. Mass flow of smoke can be calculated. Stratification of Smoke: two equations for stratification of smoke rise (m). Dependant on temperature and height of rise. Plume impingement on ceiling. Ceiling jets are typically 5-12% of fire source to ceiling height in depth. Maximum velocities and temperatures occur in first 1% of fire source to ceiling height. Axi-symmetric ceiling jet: temperatures and velocities in unconfined spaces discussed. Equations outline the maximum temperature rise and maximum gas velocities and is dependant on the radial distances and height of ceiling above the fire source. (Alpert 1972). Two-dimensional ceiling jet: Where beams or corridors inhibit plume spread, the velocity and temperature rises will be different to unenclosed spaces. The velocity and temperature rises are dependant on the width of the corridor and the distance to a point which wants to be found. (Delichatsios 1981) Calculation of mass flow of smoke from a vertical opening before the onset of flashover is considered (Thomas 1992). This is based on the temperature rise, air density, depth of smoke layer and the profile correction factor. Depth of smoke layer is presented based on a constant of proportionality.
Dissimilar, but not contradicting. More detail in BS 7974.
N/A BS 7974 has more information.
Dissimilar, but not contradicting BS 7974 goes into more detail.
Identical.
Identical references BS 7974 goes into more detail.
Flow from enclosure openings
Rockett (1976) and Edmonds (2002) equation given for mass flow out of an opening. Dependant on density of smoke and opening.
Page B6
IFEG Smoke spread from other than the enclosure of fire origin is stated as being difficult using hand calculations are rarely used although SFPE handbook has some calculations. Flow through a horizontal vent references Klote and Milke (2002). Equation given for vertical smoke flow. Briefly mentioned. Upper temperature of layer from McCaffrey. Dependant on openings, materials in room and fire size. Not mentioned. 7974-2:2002 Spill Plumes: discusses the effect of large spill areas. Large uncertainties can be involved. The mass flow rates include the effect of the width of the opening. Calculations for mass flow of smoke presented. Flow of hot gases through natural horizontal vents: calculation given to determine the mass flow rate through a horizontal vent (Thomas et al 1963). Essential for inlet to be provided, maximum speed 5m/s. Temperature of the hot gases: represented by the relationship between fire size and mass flow of smoke. Smoke volume flow rate: well mixed smoke layer volume flow rate represented by temperature and mass flow of the smoke. Optical density of smoke: expression given on the way light is attenuated in respect to source intensity and optical density of smoke. The optical density of smoke is a function of the total volume of smoke and the mass optical density of the fuel. Visibility through smoke: visibility through the smoke is one over the optical density per unit length (Tewarson 1995). Gas species mass concentrations: discussion about the means by which the mass concentration of a particular species can be found. Gas volume concentrations: dependant on the density of species. Limits for smoke reservoir sizes in the absence of computer modelling to 2 2 2000m for MoE, 2600m for powered 2 and 3000m for property. Conclusion Dissimilar, but not contradicting. BS 7974 provides greater discussion and provides hand calculations. Similar Different equations with same basis used.
Replacement Air Properties of Smoke
BS 7974 provides more detail. Dissimilar, but not contradicting.
N/A BS 7974 goes into more detail.
Optical density of smoke: expression given on the way light is attenuated in respect to source intensity and optical density of smoke.
Visibility through smoke is not given. Optical density per unit length can be found. Short discussion on the use of gas species concentrations. Consideration required for certain toxins when related to life safety. Not mentioned. Smoke Reservoir Size No information given, references made to; Drysdale (1999), SFPE Handbook (DiNenno 2002), Klote and Milke (2002), Evans and Klote (2003). Referes to NFPA92B and NFPA 204. Refers to NFPA92B and NFPA 204.
Similar BS 7974 goes into more detail.
Dissimilar, but not contradicting. 7974 allows calculation of species concentration by mass. N/A BS 7974 goes into more detail. Dissimilar, but not contradicting. Greater detail in BS 7974.
Minimum number of exhaust Ventilators
Interactions of sprinklers and smoke ventilation Free hanging smoke curtains
No mentioned.
Not mentioned.
Not mentioned.
The phenomenon of plug holing is discussed and the calculation for critical exhaust rate of ventilators away form a wall is given from BRE 368. The number of vents can be found from the mcrit and the mass flow entering the layer. References BRE 368 to determine whether sprinklers will affect the designed smoke control system and the effect the temperature control will have on the sprinkler system. Discussion on the problems associated with free hanging smoke curtains and horizontal deflections. Curtains containing a smoke layer: the deflection of the smoke curtain
N/A BS 7974 goes into more detail. N/A BS 7974 goes into more detail.
Page B7
IFEG 7974-2:2002 can be calculated from the parameters of the curtain and projected smoke layer. Length of curtain required is iterative. Curtains closing an opening: deflection of curtain and length can be found. 7974-2:2002 Defines the use of BS 9999: 4 to determine frequency of maintenance. Conclusion
Not mentioned.
Fire Safety Management

Management IFEG SS-C Suggest management procedures for active systems particularly and consideration required for passive systems. IFEG SS-C 0.7 referred to as standard. Means of determining via use of extinction coefficient. Not mentioned. Conclusion IFEG goes into more detail, 7974 references a management document.
Data
Convected fractions Mass optical density 7974-2:2002 Convected fractions for various materials Mass optical densities and CO yield of various products. Mass optical densities and CO yield of various materials. Conclusion N/A BS 7974 goes into more detail. N/A BS 7974 goes into more detail. N/A BS 7974 goes into more detail.
Computer Modelling
IFEG SS-C Mentioned as a means of analysis, no advice given. 7974-2:2002 Discussion of model types, zone models, CFD, thermal radiation etc. Conclusion N/A BS 7974 goes into more detail.
Conclusions
IFEG SS-C Where calculations and concepts are not given, reference one of a number of books/papers. Good flow chart of procedures. Some details are brief. Some information in other sub-systems. 7974-2:2002 Provides defined areas to provide smoke ventilation and smoke control in enclosures and large spaces. Conclusion Both provide the answers, although only BS 7974 provides them within the document. IFEG references other document heavily, some widely-used calculations are not present.
Page B8
Sub-system 3- Structural response and fire spread beyond the enclosure of origin
IFEG 7974-3:2003 Information from standard tests is reasonably well understood. In most cases this allows a rapid appraisal of an elements ability to resist fire spread and maintain structural function. Recognises and shows the Eurocode1 approach. kb is set in a range of 0.09-0.05 with a recommendation for UK for 0.07. This is higher than the values found in EC1. Conclusion Dissimilar, but not contradictory
General
Recognition of fire tests It is appreciated that the standard fire test curves do not represent a real fire timetemperature curve.
Time equivalence
Recognises and shows the Eurocode1 approach. The recommended kb value (0.080.045) is however higher than the recommendations given in EC1. This is referenced to Kirby (1999) IFEG Basic heat balance and references to simple relationships.
The recommendations given are similar between the two publications. They do however differ from the EC1. The EC1 suggests a kb ranging between 0.04 and 0.07.
Fire severity
Determination of fire conditions through engineering calculations 7974-3:2003 Maximum temperature equation shown, as well as a similar equation for through draught conditions. Transient fire conditions equations shown from DD ENV 1991-2-2 7974-3:2003 Very detailed on the structural performance of different construction units in fire conditions. Conclusion NA-7974 provides more information.
Structural Performance
General IFEG Much of the information given on this subject seems to be taken from a standard presented by the American Society of Civil Engineers. ASCE/SFPE 29, 1999. Simplified design processes for reinforced concrete members are referenced to a number of national standards from Australia, New Zeeland, Eurocode. Conclusion NA-7974 provides more information.
Concrete
Empirical equations based on the standard time temperature curve to predict temperature profiles within concrete members Information given on thermal elongation and shrinkage, specific heat capacity, thermal conductivity, density and emissivity. Section factors from BS 5950-8 and temperature rise within a steel member is calculated from DD ENV 1993 1-2.
NA-7974 contains a lot of practical guidance. IFEG references to other sources and only provides a rough commentary.
Steel
Eurocode 3-Design of Steel structures is recommended as a suitable guide for steel design. Guidance is given on when FEM methodology should be used over simpler methodologies.
Information given on thermal elongation, specific heat capacity, thermal conductivity, density and emissivity.
NA-IFEG provides a fair bit of information on existing standards. No practical guidance is found in the document. BS7974 provides more data and guidance in the document but other sources will still need to be studied to perform an analysis.
Timber
Protection to external steel member is referenced to Law and OBrien (1981) and EC1 and EC3 Short discussion on the possible fire protection measures available for steel structures. Confirms a charring line equal
Protection to external steel member is referenced to Law and OBrien (1981). Detailed recommendations of calculation methodologies for protected steel. The charring rate is estimated
Identical
NA-7074 provides more practical guidance.
Dissimilar, but not contradictory-
Page B9
IFEG to the 300C line of heating. Refers to White (2002) and an Australian Standard. EC 5 is mentioned as a source of charring rate equations 7974-3:2003 using Hadvigs (1981) equations. Equations for time to maximum charring rate and time dependant charring rates shown. Charring rates from BS 5268-4.1 and DD ENV 1995-1-2 is shown. It is suggested, in accordance with BS 5268-4.1, that charring rates to columns should be increased by 25% compared to a beam. Information given on thermal elongation and shrinkage, specific heat capacity, thermal conductivity, density and emissivity. Information given on thermal elongation and shrinkage, specific heat capacity, thermal conductivity, density and emissivity. Conclusion IFEG only provides a very short commentary of timber behaviour in fire, with references to external sources. BS7974 provides more data and practical guidance, but studies of external sources is still necessary for a complete analysis.
Masonry
Reference for methodologies given to Australian Standard AS 3700
Lightweight Timber/ Steel Frame assemblies
Plastics
Aluminium
Summary of information on structural performance
Information given on thermal NA-7974 provides more elongation and shrinkage, specific information, mostly on the thermal heat capacity, thermal properties but some also on conductivity, density and structural performance. emissivity. No information given Information given on thermal NA-7974 provides more elongation and shrinkage, specific information, mostly on the thermal heat capacity, thermal properties but some also on conductivity, density and structural performance. emissivity. Some guidance on structural stress behaviour in raised temperatures. 7974 provides a great deal of information on the structural performance of most the common building materials. IFEG is very limited in its guidance and refers to other sources.
References given to thermal calculations on lightweight timber walls performed by Clancy (1999), Collier (1996) and others. Lightweight steel frame guidance is referenced to Gerlich et al. No information given
General description on the fire performance of these constructions. The structural performance is referenced to BS 5268.
NA-7974 provides information that is more related to thermal properties rather than structural design. IFEG appreciates that there is not much guidance available but still references a national standard for some guidance. NA-IFEG does not provide any data or practical guidance but refers to a number of sources.
Fire spread
General IFEG The recommended approach to determining the appropriate fire resistance of barriers is to utilise the time equivalence model and then use a barrier that can achieve the resulting fire period. 7974-3:2003 Design guidance on openings into fire enclosure: -doors should be assumed open if enclosure has no other openings -doors should be assumed closed if the enclosure has other openings -all enclosure surfaces (including glazed openings) may be assumed to be imperforate for the duration of fire provided analysis hasnt proved otherwise. -Monte Carlo analysis is recommended to evaluate combinations of openings Designer should take great care if deciding to use a criterion of a surface temperature on the unexposed side in Conclusion NA
Heat flow by conduction
No information given
NA-7974 provides quantified guidance.
Page B10
IFEG Heat flow by convection No information given 7974-3:2003 Conclusion excess of 200C Criteria of 500C can be used when NA-7974 provides quantified establishing likelihood of spontaneous guidance. ignition due to convection only. Piloted ignition is assumed to be probable in the region 400-450C Some criteria given for human tolerability levels, 60C saturated air is mentioned as intolerable. NA-7974 provides quantified Standard radiation relationships shown. 2 guidance. IFEG provides a 12.6kW/m is mentioned as a criterion, giving some factor of safety short commentary and Possible to base analysis on the increase references to other guidance of surface temperature of the object documents. Only very brief exposed. For organic solids a surface quantified guidance on temp. criterion of 600C is suggested for ignitability.. spontaneous ignition, and 300-410C for ignition by flying brands under a radiative Some dissimilarity in the heat flux.. criteria for ignition of solids. NA-IFEG provides a very Presence of flying brands hard to short commentary, but does determine with any certainty. Should be reference a test method for considered as piloted ignition leads to assessing ignitability of lower necessary surface temperatures. surfaces exposed to flying Design care should be taken to mass brands. 7974 does not flow of burning liquids. provide any quantified guidance. A reasonable design approach is to NA-Some practical guidance assume that all combustibles within from 7974. No guidance in enclosure will at some point become IFEG. involved in the fire. Any part of continuous combustible construction that extends outside the enclosure the enclosure should be viewed as permitting fire spread beyond that enclosure. It is recognised that the size of the Similar-The IFEG suggests a enclosure influences the potential fire quantified value, whilst 7974 severity and that a fire in a large only provides a qualitative compartment is more likely to be fuel bed comment. controlled than fires in smaller compartments.
Heat flow by radiation
Various references to publications regarding external fire spread. Some data on ignitability limits under radiant heat flux. The spontaneous ignition criterion for wood is set to 250-400C.
Heat flow by mass transfer
BS 476-3 is recommended for a methodology assessing the ignitability of roof coverings subject to radiative heat fluxes and flying brands
Heat flow by direct pyrolysis and reaction to fire
No information given
Fire spread in large enclosures
Computer models
Summary
It is recognised that assuming simultaneous combustion in enclosures over 150m leads to unrealistically high temperatures in the enclosure. It is recommended that the floor area should be sub-divided into smaller grids (10-50m) and that fire spreads from one grid to another. Provides information on the No information NA- IFEG provides more use of computer models in information. the design process, and what one should keep in mind when utilising computational modelling. The models discussed are zone and field models used to establish fire severity. The use of FEM models is also discussed. It seems that 7974 provides comprehensive quantified guidance to many aspects of structural performance in fires. The section regarding thermal properties is extensive but the information is effectively very simple physical properties.
IFEG is more qualitative and often only suggest other sources for where the information can be found.
Page B11
Sub-system 4-Detection of fire and activation of fire protection systems.

IFEG General 7974-4:2003 Extensive References to BS 5839 and BS EN 54 Conclusion
Type of detectors
Smoke IFEG Two models mentioned: Optical density and Heat detector equivalence 7974-4:2003 Mentions the research performed regarding the temperature rise needed to activate a smoke detector. Conclusion Identical
Smoke detectors is assumed to activate when the temperature is raised 13C above ambient. (Heskestad 1981) For the optical density detection model only brief information is provided, and a simple correlation between light depletion and detector threshold. It is stated that calculations of the optical density should be performed for the plume or preferably the ceiling jet. Heat detectors The concept of RTI is described. Alpert (1972) ceiling jet model for gas temperature and gas velocity predictions. Additional equations shown for special applications such as high ceilings or partially confined ceilings. These are referenced to NFPA 92B.
13C above ambient is mentioned.
For flaming fires, DD 240-1 is referenced for the equation showed for smoke detector activation time. It does also require the detectors specific sensing threshold. Point-type smoke detectors need a surrounding air velocity of at least 0.15m/s to be able to detect fire. For non-flaming fires alternative method will have to be sought The concept of RTI is described. BS EN 54-5 is referenced for tables showing detector response times
Dissimilar, but not contradicting. IFEG does not really provide any calculations on the activation of smoke detectors. 7974 provides more practical information, especially on the heat detector equivalence.
Identical Dissimilar, but not contradicting. It should be noted that the equations shown for heat detector activation are quite dissimilar, it is however hard to determine how much of an impact this has on the estimation of activation time.
Beam detectors
An unreferenced equation is shown for the optical density required to cause activation of a beam detector.
Quintere et al. (1982) model for temp. rise in the hot layer. This is suggested as a worst case scenario for combined fixed-temperature/ heat-rise detectors. Qualitative commentary on cases where smoke spread is confined by beams and narrow corridors etc. A relationship for the obscuration is shown. This is referenced to an EN standard in draft. EN 54-12
Aspirating detectors
Manufacturers specifications and SS-B smoke development and control parameters Each sampling point can be modelled as an individual point detector. Long detection time delays in large
British Fire Protection Systems Association COP for Category 1 Aspirating Detection Systems (1996) is referenced for information. When considering location of smoke sampling points, the best analogy is to consider them as individual point detectors. Long detection time delays in
Similar-The equations shown are almost the same, but they differ by a factor 10. One would think that 7974 would therefore be expressed in bel rather than decibel, but this does not seem to be the case. It is therefore unclear if the references used in the two guides are interchangeable. NA
Identical
Page B12

Linear heat detectors IFEG systems. No information 7974-4:2003 large systems. A brief discussion of the applicability of linear detectors. The most practical way of assessing their performance is recommended to be by regarding them as a continuous line of heat detectors. SFPE handbook relationship for the level of radiation impinged on the detector. The SFPE refers to standard curves for fire size and distance. The BS EN 54-10 standard is mentioned. Carbon monoxide detectors mentioned, with a relationship for the mass flow of CO as a function of total mass flow. A threshold value of 40 ppm is mentioned. It is stated that manual call points should be provided to aid in raising an alarm. 7974-4:2003 It is recognised that siting and spacing of detectors to a standard template (BS 5839-1 mentioned) is not likely to provide the optimum performance and that engineered layouts can provide a more effective system. Conclusion NA-7974 provides more information
Flame detectors
Gas detectors
It is recommended that normal radiation and view factor equations should be utilised to calculate the radiation impinged on the detector. No acceptable methodology available for detection times.
Dissimilar, but not contradicting.- 7974 provides quantitative guidance.
Manual detection
No information
NA-7974 provides more information Conclusion NA
Spacing of detectors
IFEG No information given
Automatic suppression
Sprinklers IFEG Madrzykowski and Vittori (1992) relationship for heat release after sprinkler initiation. Evans (1993) NIST relationship between spray density and heat release. An extended radius is recommended to incorporate a degree of conservatism in the detection time equations. 7974-4:2003 Evans (1993) NIST relationship between heat release and spray density. This is presented as a conservative estimate. Bs 5306-2 is referred to for engineering guidance Conclusion Similar
Water mist
Referred to applicable national standard.
General discussion on the subject. Reference to NFPA 750 for more information
Gaseous suppression system Foam system
Referred to applicable national standard. No information given
General discussion on the subject. Reference to BS ISO 14520 for more information General discussion on the subject. Reference to SFPE handbook for more information 7974-4:2003 General discussion on the subject, including failure modes.
NA-7974 provides more information, mostly qualitative but with some guidance on high, low or medium pressure systems. NA-7974 provides more information, such as the impact of fire growth. NA-7974 provides more information, such as the impact of fire growth. Conclusion NA-7974 provides more information, such as the impact of fire growth.
Activation of fire barrier system

IFEG No information given
Page B13

IFEG IFEG No information given Summary 7974-4:2003 Conclusion
Activation of smoke control systems

7974-4:2003 Conclusion General discussion on the subject, NA-7974 provides more including failure modes information 7974 provides more practical information and quantified guidance. It also addresses issues such as choosing the right detection system with regards to false alarms. The IFEG keeps the quantified guidance to a minimum, and the equations shown are often very basic physical relationships.
Sub-system 5-Fire service intervention.

IFEG The Australian FBIM (Fire Brigade Intervention Model) Model) is presented as an appropriate method for quantification of fire service intervention. The FBIM employs a structured decision-based framework necessary both to determine and measure fire service activities on a time-line basis. The fire service operation is split up into 16 flowcharts. 7974-5:2002 The time for fire service attendance is referenced to the Home Office, and a table of recommended time limits is shown for different areas depending on the areas risk classification. The only details to support a quantified analysis are the recommended time limits and a notation that the initiation of fire tackling will take upwards 10 minutes from the time of arrival A detailed description of what is expected of fire service provisions installed in a building, but their respective relation to fire service operations is not thoroughly explained. Conclusion NA-IFEG provides a model or a framework for fire service intervention. 7974 provides more information, but this is qualitative to a great extent.
Summary
The description of the FBIM is Very little information on where the very much an overview, and the reader can find more information IFEG does not cover any about quantified analysis of fire technical details of fire service service operations. provisions and operations. The FBIM (2004) is referenced for quantified estimates for each flowchart. The IFEG effectively refers all of its recommendations to the FBIM. It also appreciates that the FBIM is a unique document as Australia is the only country that has produced such an extensive quantified guide. It is also appreciated that the guidance given in FBIM is developed with Australian conditions in mind, and that the guidance given in the document may not be directly applicable to other countries. It is however suggested that the quantitative guidance in FBIM can be used as a semi-quantitative utility in other locations. 7974-5 is highly qualitative and does not provide any model for setting up a quantified model for fire service intervention. Some quantified guidance on the likely fire service response times as a function of the areas UK risk category.
Page B14
Sub-system 6-Occupant evacuation, behaviour and condition.

General IFEG The Required Time for Escape (RSET) is divided into a detection phase and a movement phase. It is recommended that Fire engineered Solutions should be based on data in publications such as the SFPE handbook and other scientific publications. Very little quantitative guidance on the subelements of the escape time. A list of information sources is however presented. A model for travel times is referenced to Nelson & Mowrers work presented in the SFPE handbook. 7974-6:2004 A description of Available Safe Escape Time (ASET) and Required Safe Escape Time (RSET). A quantified strategy is proposed, separating RSET into sub-elements, and guidance is given on quantified values for the time needed in the different subelements. Extensive quantified guidance on time to detection, travel speeds, evacuation times etc. given in appendices. A tenability criterion is given for zero exposure. This is given as a clear layer height of 2.5m and a smoke layer temperature not exceeding 200C. Conclusion NA- the two documents are similar in such that they both appreciate the basic model for evaluating egress time, but 7974 provides more information in regards to the different parameters.
Summary
The IFEG provides only qualitative guidance and refers extensively to other sources for guidance on several subjects in regards to evacuation. 7974 provides a mainly qualitative commentary on many different aspects of evacuation times and evacuation behaviour. Some quantified guidance is provided, most of the figures originates and relates from the UK.
Page B15
Sub-system 6-Occupant evacuation, behaviour and condition.

General IFEG The use of a probabilistic approach is recognised and described in the Overview section of Part 1. One method of probabilistic risk assessment is shown. This method is based on Beck and Yungs work, presented in1994. It is recognised that the acceptable risk can be of absolute type or comparative type. For life safety the result is shown as Occupant safety and Occupant number of deaths. It is appreciated that risk analysis can be used to estimate financial loss. Fire Cost Expectation is mentioned. An event tree technique is utilised to show different fire scenarios and establish the risk parameters. A similar methodology is shown for estimations of monetary risk. No information given on the cost-benefit side of fire protection or any target values for acceptable fire risk. 7974-7:2003 Three method categories are described in some detail: -simple statistical analysis -logic tree analysis -sensitivity analysis A section also discusses complex analysis tools. Conclusion NA, but it is clear that 7974-7 provides more detail than IFEG
Acceptance criteria are shown as absolute or comparative. A number of examples of criteria is shown but it is highlighted that there is not a generally accepted criteria for fire risk in the UK. . A brief discussion on the financial aspects of probabilistic risk assessment. An example of cost-benefit analysis is shown. Data and information given on many of the parameters needed in a Probabilistic Fire Risk Assessment.
Summary
7974 provides the most guidance, both qualitative and quantitative, on the subject of risk analysis. Different techniques are described and the probability of different aspects of fire scenario models is discussed. IFEG provides some information on setting up a fire risk assessment and the results of such an analysis. Some quantitative guidance is provided on some parameters of fire scenarios, such as ignition frequencies, fire loads and detection/suppression system reliability. In general the 7974 provides better quantitative guidance as the guidance for several parameters is shown as a distribution rather than a point estimate or a mean value.
Page B16

Comparison IFEG 2005 Vs BS 7974 2001

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Comparison IFEG 2005 Vs BS 7974 2001

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BS7974 and the International Fire Engineering Guidelines

Scottish Building Standards Agency

Functional standards Conclusions and recommendations

Scottish Building Standards Agency

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

Format of the report

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

The significance of differences between the BS and the IFEG

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

Figure 1; examples from IFEG of acceptance criteria

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

Conclusions and recommendations

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Appendix A Process and Methodology

Scottish Building Standards Agency

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

Qualitative Design Review

Assessment against criteria

Figure A2; the engineering approach described in BS7974

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

The International Fire Engineering Guidelines

Carry out analysis

Collate and evaluate results

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency

F:\FINAL REPORT WORD COPY FOR WEBISSUE REV A A4.DOC

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Rev A 3 July 2006

Scottish Building Standards Agency