Fire Safety Journal 22 (1994) 367-398

1994 Elsevier Science Limited

Printed in Northern Ireland.
0379-7112/94/$07-00
ELSEVIER

A Probabilistic Model of Fire Spread with Time

Effects

D a v i d G. Platt
Department of Civil Engineering, Queen's Building, University of Bristol,
Bristol, UK, BS8 1TR

D a v i d G. E l m s & A n d r e w H. B u c h a n a n
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury,
Canterbury, New Zealand
(Received 20 August 1991; revised version received 17 January 1994;
accepted 19 February 1994)

ABSTRACT

The paper outlines the principal elements of a probabilistic model that

analyses the spread of fire in multi-compartment buildings with respect
to time. The analysis uses a graph theoretic network and an event
hierarchy to determine the probability of fire spreading to different
locations. The probability of fire spreading between compartments is
based on a comparison of the probability density functions of the
expected fire resistance and the fire severity: failure being the condition
that severity exceeds resistance. The model is designed as a comparative
tool to compare the performance of different fire safety strategies by
calculating a 'cost index' for each design, based on the probable extent
of fire damage in the building. The analysis gives attention to the
compatibility of fire resistance and fire severity, and their conversion in
real time parameters.

NOTATION

AB Total floor area of the building (m 2)

AF Floor area of the fire c o m p a r t m e n t (m 2)
AT Internal surface area, excluding floors (m:)
Aw Ventilation area (m 2)
367
368 David G. Platt et al.

B Event fire spreads through an internal barrier

C Conversion factor taken as 0.07 (miniM Jim 225)
c,, Specific heat of hot gases leaving the compartment
(kJ/kg K)
d Expected degree of damage in a compartment due to fire
and sprinklers as a fraction
D Depth of fire compartment (m)
D Event fire spreads through an open doorway
Time at which fire enters j from i via any path, given fire
starts in i and spreads to j
Probability density function of X
Cumulative distribution function of X
Firelni Event that during an annual period compartment i
experiences a fire
FireStartsi Event that during an annual period, a fire originates in
compartment i
FS,; Event fire spreads from i to j, given fire starts in i
g Acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s)
G, Fire growth time in compartment i (s)
h Height of window (m)
hw Mean weighted height of ventilation openings (m)
HK Effective heat transfer coefficient of compartment lining
(W/m 2 K)
L Fuel load (kg)
Mass loss rate of combustible materials in ventilation
controlled fire (kg/s)
M, Mass of combustible material i (kg)
0 Event that a door is open
Q Rate of heat release in the fire (kW)
Fire load density ( A F ) - ' S M
= i . ~ ( M J / m 2)
R Fire resistance of a barrier (s)
S Duration of fully developed fire (s)
SPo. Sprinkler effectiveness
SPrel Sprinkler reliability
t Time (s)
Time equivalent as given by ISO fire curve (s)
lo Time of inception period (s)
T Temperature of hot gas layer in compartment (K)
Ambient atmospheric temperature (K) taken as 295 K
Time taken for fire to spread from i to j, given that fire
does spread from i to j (s)
u, Energy content of item i (MJ/kg)
 A probabilistic model of fire spread with time effects 369

U Interest rate (as a fraction, not a percentage)

W Width of windows (m)
w~ Ventilation parameter = AF(AwATV'hw)I/2(m -'''25)
W Width of fire c o m p a r t m e n t [m]
W Event fire spreads via external windows
X Horizontal projection of flame tip (m)
Z Height of flame tip above window (m)
Zk Time taken for fire to spread along path k, given that fire
does spread along path k (s)
o¢ Fire growth coefficient (kW/s z)
13 Capital value of the sprinklers, as a ratio of the overall
capital value of the building
Y Indirect losses, as a ratio of the capital value of the
building
r/ (At - a w ) / ( A w . X/hw)
O Ignition time for upper c o m p a r t m e n t in window fire
spread
)t Cost of passive fire protection measures, as a ratio of the
capital value of the building
/x Discount factor = (1 - e-V~)/(e v - 1)
~7 Design life of building (years)
~p Repair costs, as a ratio of the capital value of the
building
Po Density of ambient air (kg/m 3) Cnq,, is taken as
1.2 k J / m 3 K

INTRODUCTION

One of the primary concerns of fire engineering is to minimize the risks

caused by fire. These may be summarized as: risk to human life, risk to
adjacent property and risk to the exposed property. In reducing these
risks there are several strategies available to the engineer. One such
strategy is the restriction of fire spread. The aim of the present work is
to develop a model that can be used to assess the probable spread of
fire with respect to time in multi-compartment buildings. The model
could then be used by the engineer as a tool in the comparative
evaluation of different design strategies aimed at preventing fire spread.
The times at which detection and suppression of the fire occur can also
be included, 1 but they have not been described in this paper. The
370 David G. Platt et al.

problems associated with smoke spread are currently being addressed

and have not been included in this discussion.

OBJECTIVES

In setting out to develop such a model the following objectives were

identified as being important.
• The model should have a 'consistent level of crudeness '2 both
internally within the analytical routines and externally with
respect to the data required and results produced.
• The analysis should be based on a probabilistic rather than
deterministic approach. Such an approach was felt to be more
realistic given the uncertainties that exist in both the input data
and the mechanisms of fire spread. For example, the mechanisms
of fire spread are not confined to a single deterministic system;
rather, they are impacted upon by several other systems, such as
the weather conditions or the current occupancy. Therefore, any
attempt to quantify fire spread that does not consider all possible
systems, will result in a probable rather than deterministic set of
values.
• The analysis should use real time, rather than an equivalent or
modified time such as obtained from laboratory test results using
the ISO standard fire curve.
It was felt that these objectives could be met by extending the work of
Elms and Buchanan, -~ who used a graph theoretic, probability approach
to determine the way in which fire spreads between rooms in a
multi-compartment building. The probability of fire spreading from one
c o m p a r t m e n t to another was considered irrespective of how long it
might take. In this respect their model represented a worst case
scenario, and assumed that the fire would eventually burn itself out.
Whilst the Elms and Buchanan model was relatively simple in its
approach, it was consistent and well balanced with respect to its input
data and the complexity of the analysis, and for this reason was
considered a good platform from which to build a model that included
time.
The nature of any model is d e t e r m i n e d by its intended use, and also
by the availability of appropriate data. The two should be consistent
with one another, and both dictate the appropriate degree of ap-
proximation at each step in the model's theoretical development. In the
present case, the intention has been to use the model as a comparative
 A probabilistic model of fire spread with time effects 371

rather than an accurate predictive tool, for comparing the relative

effectiveness of different fire safety strategies.

U N D E R L Y I N G C O N C E P T OF T H E M O D E L

Essentially the analysis is a comparison between the expected fire

severity within each compartment and the probable resistance the build-
ing has to the spread of fire. In order to make such a comparison it is
necessary to have a consistent unit with which both the resistance and fire
severity can be measured. The unit used in the following analysis is time.
The severity of a compartment fire may be represented by the length
of time the fire burns. The uncertainty of both the mechanism of fire
growth and the contents of any particular compartment results in a
probable rather than precise time for which the fire will burn.
Associated with this value of time is a probability density function, such
as that shown in Fig. l(a).
The fire resistance of the building may be dealt with in a similar way.
For example, consider the fire resistance of an internal barrier. The
type of barrier used will have a nominal Fire Resistance Rating (FRR)
given by a testing authority. The particular barrier in a given building is
unlikely to have exactly the same fire resistance, and its value can be
represented by the log-normal probability density function shown in
Fig. l(b). The two distributions can be combined, as shown in Fig. l(c),
to evaluate the probability that the fire severity will exceed the fire
resistance, i.e. the probability that fire spreads.
The expected time at which the fire will spread, given that it does
spread, can be determined from the graphs by:
• evaluating the probability that at a particular point in time, say t,
the fire resistance will be equal to t, and the fire severity will
exceed t, so that fire will spread through the barrier at time t;

~.~ | Fi~S,v,~ity z-'~| ~ z-~

".~ -.~ .~

Tune Tune it Tm'~ L-

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 1. (a) Log normal probability density function for Compartment Fire Severity. (b)
Log normal probability density function for Fire Resistance Rating of a barrier. (c)
Comparison of probability density functions for fire severity and fire resistance.
372 David G. Platt et al.

• repeating this for all values of time t, to give a probability

distribution for the expected time at which fire will spread. From
this distribution a mean value for the expected time for fire to
spread can be obtained.
In essence this is the concept on which the model is built. However,
there are problems of consistency in using time directly as an input
parameter and consequentially the input data for the barriers have to
be modified. This is done so that the barrier resistance times used in the
model represent the resistance of the barriers when subject to a fire of
the expected severity. The severity of the 'real' fire may be quite
different from the severity of the standard ISO test fire upon which the
quoted Fire Resistance Rating times are based. A further difficulty is
representing the severity of a fire by the single variable time, a point
that will be discussed later in the paper.
As well as barrier failure, there would normally be a n u m b e r of
alternative paths for the spread of fire to an adjacent compartment.
Figure 2 illustrates the point: the numbers 1, 2 and 3 represent,
respectively, spread of fire through an open doorway, spread via
windows and spread through a barrier, which may be a wall, closed
door or ceiling.
With the spread probability and time distribution obtained between
adjacent compartments, the spread to any other c o m p a r t m e n t in the
building can then be found, using a graph theory approach. The final
requirement for the model is to express the performance of a building
as a single value. This is done through the construction of a meta-model
which takes the output of the fire spread analysis and combines it with

Fig. 2. Possiblefire spread paths to adjacent compartments.

 A probabilistic model of fire spread with time effects 373

economic data about the building. The result is a single performance

measure expressed as an economic index. It can then be used for
comparing the performance of different design strategies.
It is also possible to calculate a safety index which indicates the
probability of the fire not spreading into escape routes. This was done
in earlier work, 3 but is not considered appropriate in the present model
because, in the absence of smoke spread, the necessary assumptions
would be cruder than the rest of the model.

O U T L I N E OF T H E F I R E S P R E A D ANALYSIS

An outline of the complete analysis is given in Fig. 3. The analysis starts

with the input of physical and probability data. Expected values of the
compartment fire severity, fire growth time, size of the flame projecting
out of a window and a real-time barrier modification factor are
calculated from these input data. A comparison is then made between
the computed values. The output from these comparisons is a series of
probabilities that fire will spread via each of the three possible fire path
types. Combining the individual probabilities gives an overall probabil-
ity of fire spreading to an adjacent compartment. Repeated for each
compartment within the building, these values collectively form the
Adjacency Fire Spread Matrix, and represent the probability that a fire
in compartment i will spread to an adjacent compartment j.
The next stage is to determine the expected time for fire to spread to
an adjacent compartment, given that fire does spread. These values
form the components of the Adjacency Fire Spread Time Matrix. By
combining the two matrices, the analysis computes the probability of
fire spreading from an initial compartment i to any compartment j. The
fire may spread along any path, but is conditional on arriving at
compartment j at time t. The resulting matrix is known as the Global
Fire Spread Matrix which may be considered as a three dimensional
matrix with each layer being the probabilities evaluated at different
values of time t.
Having formed the Global Fire Spread Matrix a 'cost index' is
obtained. This is a measure of the economic performance of the
building and is expressed as the ratio of the expected fire loss to the
capital cost of the building. At this stage the cost index is conditional on
the initial occurrence of fire in a particular compartment. It may be
assumed that during the life time of a building there are certain annual
probabilities of fire occurrence in each compartment. If these annual
probabilities are combined with the conditional probabilities of the
 374 David G. Platt et al.

Input
barrier
Input
ventilation
Input Input Input ] I Input
thermal compartment spandrel / ~ probability of
resistance data properties & geometry heights / [ doorways
data fuel loads

1 1
1 1 compete compute slze
growth me barrier compartment of name
I modification fire severity projection
factor from window

1 ,j I
l ] compute probability compute probability compute probability
of fire spread via of fire spread via of fire spread via
barrier failure windows open doorway

It form Adjacency
Fire Spread Matrix
I_ I
=- calculate expected
fire spread times
and form
Adjacency Fire
Spread Time Matrix

Input [ Input form Global Fire

economic sprinkler Spread Matrix

/l
parameters data

Output
conditional
cost index
form Fire Vectors

It Output
basic cost indices

Fig. 3. Outline of fire spread analysis.

Global Fire Spread Matrix the result is a set of annual probabilities, one
for each compartment, of fire burning in the compartment either due to
ignition there or due to fire spreading, in a given time t, from ignition in
another compartment elsewhere in the building. The complete set of
these probabilities is known as the Fire Vector.
The following sections of this paper describe in greater detail a
number of the different aspects of the model.
 A probabilistic model of fire spread with time effects 375

Flashov~

i
Time
Fully Developed Decay Period L
r -1- q- q
Fig. 4. T i m e - t e m p e r a t u r e curve for c o m p a r t m e n t fire.

THE COMPARTMENT FIRE

It is assumed that the development of a compartment fire follows the

typical t i m e - t e m p e r a t u r e curve outlined in Fig. 4. As can be seen from
the curve the fire history can be divided into three distinct stages, the
growth period, the fully developed fire and the decay period. What is
required is some measure of the time duration for each of these stages.

Growth period

The growth period is described as the time from the point where fire is
initiated to the stage where flashover occurs. During the growth period
the average temperatures are low and the fire is localized. The growth
period of a fire consists of two distinct stages; the inception period and
the rapid growth period.
The inception period may last a few seconds or several hours, being
primarily a function of the fuel and ignition process. As a result of
uncertainties the inception time is taken as zero, thus assuming the
growth period starts at the point of rapid growth. This appears justified:
in the initial fire c o m p a r t m e n t the analysis starts from the time when
flames appear and the fire is detectable. For the rest of the building, any
new sources of ignition are likely to be accompanied by the 'thermal
m o m e n t u m ' of the already existing fire. Note that with the spread of
fire through a barrier the real concern is the penetration of flames
rather than insulation failure. This point is dealt with in more detail
later in the paper.
The rapid growth stage of the fire is characterized by a progressive
increase in the fire area and a growth in the heat output.
Ramachandran 4'5 developed an exponential model of fire growth that
376 David G. Platt et al.

relates the growth time to the fire area. In moderately sized compart-
ments it may be reasonable to assume that flashover occurs when the
fire area equals the total compartment floor area. However, as yet
statistical data relating to buildings other than warehouses have still to
be analysed.
A more commonly adopted approach is to define the point at which
flashover occurs in terms of a ceiling temperature and burning rate.
Using the criterion that flashover occurs at a certain ceiling temperature
it is possible to determine the rate of heat output necessary to create
this condition. Having obtained a value for the necessary level of heat
output the time taken to achieve this can be obtained by assuming a
parabolic fire growth rate as suggested by Haskestad. 6
The analysis assumes that flashover takes place when the ceiling
temperature reaches 600°C7 To calculate the rate of heat release
necessary to achieve this the model uses the following relationship, ~
which expresses the change in compartment temperature as a function
of the rate of heat release Q.
AT ~f O H~.A, ] (1)
--~o = ] Lg,/2( Cpp,,~T,,A wh ,(2 " g,/2( C,p,, )-----A-wh~2 ]
This may be expressed in the form:
AT
-- c . x ' , ' . (2)
L
where XI and X2 represent two dimensionless groups, the constant C
and exponents m and n being determined from experimental data.
McCaffrey et al. ~' analysed over 100 compartment fires, where gas
temperatures did not exceed 600 °C, and offer the following values for
C, It and m:
AT = 480. X~~-'. X~ '"' (3)
Assuming that the fire growth follows a parabolic relationship then Q
the rate of heat release is given by:
Q = o~(t - t,,) 2 (4)
Values for the coefficient, a, fall in the range, c~ = 0.1, for rapid fire
spread, to a = 0.01 for slowly developing fires. By rearranging eqn (4)
and substituting for Q then, t, the growth period, is given by:
t = t,, + (756 • ~ ~. (H~.A , A . h , ,/2) ~/2) ,.,._ (5)
A discussion concerning the merits of using an approach that is
relatively sensitive to both the ventilation and lining characteristics of a
compartment, when earlier studies have shown these parameters to be
 A probabilistic model o f fire spread with time effects 377

of least significance, 1° would be of value. For this reason other

alternatives have been explored by Platt e t al. 1 However, such a
discussion is beyond the scope of this paper.

Fully developed fire

The heat flux generated in both the growth and decay periods is small
when compared to the fully developed fire. Therefore, it seems
reasonable to assume that a barrier is only at risk during the fully
developed fire and not during the growth or decay periods. For this
reason the term fire severity shall refer only to the fully developed stage
of the c o m p a r t m e n t fire.
The expected duration of the fully developed fire, S, is given a s "11
S = L .m 1 (6)
The mass loss rate of combustible materials, rh, depends upon whether
the fire is ventilation controlled or fuel bed controlled, this being
determined by the supply of oxygen. If the supply of oxygen is greater
than that required to balance the stoichiometric equation then the fire is
fuel bed controlled. It is usual to assume that after flashover has
occurred the fire is ventilation controlled and the oxygen concentration
is nominally zero. The analysis adopts a simplified approach to this
problem based on a design m e t h o d suggested by Law and O'Brien. 12
Theobald and Heselden 13 found that in domestic furniture fuel bed
controlled fires, the fire duration is about 20 min. Taking this to
represent the m i n i m u m possible duration of a fire, the duration of the
fully developed fire is given by:
~ L . rhf ~ where S > 1200 s
(7)
S = t1200 s where S -< 1200 s
where rhr is the rate at which fuel is consumed in a ventilation
controlled fire. Based on experimental test data T h o m a s and Heselden 14
offer the following empirical expression for rhi:
rhI = 0.18. Awh~v2(W/D) m . (1 - e -°'°36n) (8)
The mass loss rate mr is based on experiment using w o o d e n cribs as the
fuel. Clearly the fuel load in real compartments will be different.
Currently these differences such as the volatility of the fuel and the
different rates of energy output are ignored. Clearly this could have
significant implications when evaluating the severity of a c o m p a r t m e n t
fire using the single parameter time) 5'16
The fuel load L of a c o m p a r t m e n t is the summation of the mass of
378 David G. Platt et al.

all the individual combustible materials. It has been assumed that the
distribution of these values will have a log normal density function. A
comprehensive series of data tables has been published in the CIB 17
report. The report summarizes many European and American surveys
of fire loads, giving average values and standard deviations for various
occupancies. The important parameter is the variability, as indicated by
the coefficient of variation (COW). For a large Swiss study it was found
that for well defined occupancies CofV = 30-50%, and for occupancies
which are rather dissimilar CofV = 50-80%.
As the mass loss rate rhs is derived from empirical data, then strictly
speaking the model should treat it as a probabilistic value. However, at
this stage of development it is assumed that rhy is a deterministic
parameter. Therefore, the duration of the fully developed fire is a
log-normal variate with an expected value and variance given by:
E{S} = rnI IE{L}; Var {S} = rhl 2 Var {L}

LIMITATION OF TIME AS A M E A S U R E OF SEVERITY

The direct use of the duration of the fully developed fire to represent
the severity has certain limitations. For example, it gives no indication
of the temperature, nor the build up of energy within the compartment.
However, it does offer one major advantage, that is, the use of a
common dimension, time, for both the fire severity and the barrier
resistance.
Consider for example, two similar compartments with identical fuel
loads but different ventilation characteristics. The time temperature
curves could appear as shown in Fig. 5. Whilst the total heat released

I000 C - (a) Unrestricted Ventilation

J Co) Restricted Ventilation

t~

OC-
TIME (0
Fully Developed Fire -Time
Period

Fig. 5. Comparison of two compartment fires.

 A probabUistic model of fire spread with time effects 379

may be the same for both compartments, the duration and temperature
will be quite different. Part of the complication with this stems from the
fact that 40 min at 400 °C is not equivalent to 20 min at 800 °C. This is
because the radiant heat flux is proportional to temperature to the
fourth power. In the example above, radiant heat exposure for 40
minutes at 400 °C is equivalent to 2.5 minutes at 800°C. For an element
of structure exposed to radiant energy, the severity experienced in the
short duration high temperature fire will be greater than that of the
long duration, low temperature fire. The problem is further complicated
if the heat absorbed by a structure, and thus its temperature, is
considered. For example, if a steel structure is clad with an insulation
material then this will retard the rate at which the temperature of the
steel increases. It is possible that the steel structure will reach a higher
temperature in the lower temperature, longer duration fire. Of course,
in a fully developed c o m p a r t m e n t fire thermal energy will not only be
transmitted by radiation but also by conduction and convection. This
further adds to the difficulty of using time as the sole measure of fire
severity.
The assumption in this paper, that the severity of a c o m p a r t m e n t fire
can be measured by its duration, is obviously crude. However, it
represents the first stage of a pragmatic approach to quantitatively
comparing the resistance of a structure to the expected fire load
measured in real time. The next stage of refinement may consider
means of estimating the c o m p a r t m e n t temperature and the quantity of
thermal energy reaching the structure from radiation sources and from
this modifying the expected resistance. In the meantime the above
limitation of the model to realistically analyse the c o m p a r t m e n t fire
must be accepted.

D I F F E R E N T M E A S U R E S OF T I M E

A further complication arises from the use of the ISO standard fire
curve. An important principle in engineering design is the ability to
compare the performance of different structures that have been tested
against a consistent frame of reference. In this respect the ISO standard
fire provides a useful flame against which various structures such as
walls and internal partitions are measured. In design it is usual to
express the duration of the c o m p a r t m e n t fire as an equivalent exposure
time to the ISO standard fire, known as the 'time equivalent' (re),
calculated using expressions such as the one given by the CIB ~7 in eqn
(9).
te = 60. wv. QI (9)
380 David G. Platt et al.

~ ~ R e a l Fire

IOO0 C '
IN.
, NISO Standard

0C --
I TIME ~[t) "
te

Fig. 6. Comparison of ISO time-temperature curve and a real compartment fire

time-temperature curve.

This allows a direct comparison between the duration of the compart-

ment fire and the fire resistance of the walls and doors, etc. The
problem with this approach in modelling the actual spread of fire, is
that the t i m e - t e m p e r a t u r e relationship given by the ISO fire curve has
only a limited resemblance to the relationship likely to be experienced
in a real fire situation, Fig. 6.
In order to resolve, at least in part, this problem the Fire Resistance
Ratings (FRRs) of the walls and barriers, as obtained by the standard
fire curve, are modified to represent their expected time to failure when
exposed to the real fire. This then allows a comparison between the fire
severity as obtained from eqn (7) and the modified F R R of the barrier
on the basis of real time.
The modified F R R , known as the 'equivalent F R R ' , is obtained by
multiplying the F R R , obtained from the ISO standard fire test, by the
ratio of the duration of the real fire given by eqn (7) to the equivalent
time given by eqn (9), giving:

t
= 1"32 --~-Tl/ (1 -- e -0"036~) i (10)
te Aw. hw • W

R E S I S T A N C E TO F I R E S P R E A D

As described earlier there are three principal ways by which fire may
spread; through a door, vertically via windows or through a barrier.
Each of these paths has a different resistance to the spread of fire.
 A probabilistic model of fire spread with time effects 381

Fire spread resistance of doors

Where a door is closed the resistance of the door to fire spread is

considered along with the barrier as outlined later. Where the door is
open then it is assumed that it offers no resistance to the spread of fire.
However, it is assumed that the fire will not spread beyond the
compartment until flashover has occurred. The expected time therefore,
for fire to spread beyond an open doorway will be given by the
compartment fire growth time.

Fire spread resistance of windows

If the windows are aligned vertically and the resulting flame projection
is large enough, fire may spread up the external facade of a building by
'leap frogging' from a window on the fire floor to a window above as
illustrated in Fig. 7. The analysis is based on the following simplified
assumption:
• Flames will emerge from the lower compartment at the time of
flashover.
• Calculations of the probable height and horizontal projection of
the flames from windows are based on an analysis of the
mechanism of fire spread given by Law. TM The mean height of the
flame tip above the window E { z } is given by:
Z = 1 2 " 8 ( v h f / A w ) 2/3 (11)

V///'q/~'//I///~'l///s////////~
XI

']
$
11

~///I/////~,/s//H/////¢////l~
Fig. 7. Fire spread via windows.
382 David G. Platt et al.

whilst the horizontal projection E { x } is given by:

x = 0 . 4 5 h w ( h / 2 w ) °53 (12)
This assumes the post flashover fire is ventilated only by natural
draft and ignores any forced ventilation caused by such things as
internal pressure or flume effects. Furthermore, it is assumed that
the ventilation area consists only of external windows and that
these have a width to height ratio w / h >-2.0.
• If the height of the flame exceeds the height of the spandrel then
it is assumed that fire will spread to the upper compartment.
• The smaller the horizontal projection of the flame from the
window the shorter the fire spread time. The time is taken
arbitrarily as 3 min if the flame tip is at the face of the building,
varying linearly to 12 min if the flame tip is 1 m or more from the
face of the building.

Fire spread resistance of barriers

Fire resistance tests are performed using the ISO standard time
temperature curve. They are usually carried out on a 'one-off' basis
due, in part, to the high cost, but mainly because sponsors only require
one successful test result to obtain a FRR. As a result there is little
information known about the expected variance for a particular type of
barrier.
In a sur*ey of the fire tests carried out in New Zealand, Platt ~9 found
that the CofV was between 5 and 12%. The larger the approved FRR
the smaller the coefficient of variation. In light construction, such as
timber framed walls lined with plaster-board, the most probable mode
of failure in testing was found to be insulation failure. An integrity
failure occurred on average some 12 min after the insulation failure was
recorded. In most cases insulation failure is unlikely to result in the
spread of fire. It is therefore suggested that the failure time for
modelling fire spread be taken as the integrity failure time. 1~'2° For light
structures this may be taken as the approved FRR plus 12 min.
In the real situation, the nominal FRR of a barrier may be
substantially reduced by the presence of a weakness. These may range
from electrical services and plumbing ducts to doors, etc. They may be
internal or externally mounted and may or may not pass directly
between the two compartments.
The analysis includes these weaknesses by reducing the expected
FRR of the respective barrier. Information concerning the expected
decrease in FRR due to weaknesses is scarce. Quintiere 21 reports that
 A probabil&ticmodel of fire spread with time effects 383

experiments with electrical branch circuit fixtures lowered the fire

resistance of a 1-h wood stud gypsum board by 13 to 23 min, the failure
being by flame penetration at the fixture. Alan Beard (unpublished,
1988) developed a fault tree analysis with the data being collected from
a Delphi group. The method developed is useful and could be readily
applied once the findings of a Delphi group have been recorded.

THE P R O B A B I L I T Y OF FIRE S P R E A D I N G TO AN
ADJACENT COMPARTMENT

Fire may spread between two adjacent compartments via three possible
path types as shown in Fig. 2.

• through an open doorway with probability P[D],

• via external windows with probability P[W],
• through an internal barrier with probability P[B],

where D, W and B represent the events that fire spreads through a

doorway, a window or a barrier, respectively. Therefore, the probability
of fire spreading to an adjacent compartment P[FS] is given by

P[FS] = P[D U W U B] (13)

The three types of fire path can be arranged in a hierarchy of events.

The spread of fire through an open doorway is at the top of the
hierarchy, that is to say, if a doorway is open fire will spread to the next
compartment via this route rather than any of the other possible routes.
At the bottom of thie hierarchy is the spread of fire through a barrier.
The justification behind the construction of this hierarchy is as follows.
If a door is open then it is very improbable that the fire path will be via
an adjacent wall or window as both of these paths will involve
significantly longer failure times. The spread through windows comes
next. For fire to spread via a window it is necessary for the projected
f a m e height to exceed the spandrel height. It is assumed that at
flashover the windows in a fire compartment will blow out and that the
flames will then pass out reaching their maximum height. Consequently,
fire spread via windows is likely to occur fairly soon after flashover.
Typically if fire is going to spread in this way then it will do so within
3 - 1 2 m i n of flashover, whereas fire spread via barriers, the lowest
hierarchical route, is likely to take much longer than this. It is very
384 David G. Platt et al.

/Windows

_ Open
Door

~Barrier

Fig. 8. Venn diagram of fire spread event hierarchy.

unlikely that a floor will have a fire rating less than 30 min even after
adjustment: r e m e m b e r the CofV is usually less than 12%. Therefore, if
both the window and barrier mechanisms exist it is assumed that fire
will spread via a window before the barrier fails. Figure 8 shows a Venn
diagram of the hierarchy.
The arrangement of the three path types in a hierarchy enables them
to be treated as mutually exclusive events. If fire spreads via a doorway,
then the probability of fire spreading via a window is zero, or P[WID]
is zero, likewise P[BID] and P[BIW] are also zero. By expanding
relationship (13) and using the above results the probability of fire
spreading P[FS] can be expressed as:
P[FS] = P[D] + P[W] + P[B] (14)
If the basic events for which probabilities can be calculated are;
D--fire spreads through open doorway;
/)--fire does not spread through open doorway;
W ]/)--fire spreads via windows, given it can do so;
/) U W--fire does not spread through an open doorway or via windows;
B ](/) U 14z)--fire spreads through internal barrier given it can do so;
where a bar above means the negation of the event, then eqn (14) may
be written as:
P[FS] = 1 - (1 - P[D])(1 - P[W I/5])(1 - P[B I(/) U !~,')]) (15)

Probability of fire spread through an open doorway

The probability of fire spread via an open doorway is assumed to be the

probability that the door is open P[O], i.e. it is assumed that if fire is
 A probabilistic model of fire spread with time effects 385
going to spread there is a 100% chance of fire spreading through an
open doorway.

Probability of fire spread via windows

The probability of fire spreading vertically up the facade of a building

via windows, given that fire does not spread via a doorway, is the
probability that the height of the external flames is greater than or
equal to the height of the spandrel:

P[W I/)] = (~ fname(Z)dz (16)

aspa n d r e l H t
where fname(Z) is the density function of the flame height.

Probability of fire spread through a barrier

The probability of fire spreading through a barrier, given fire does not
spread via a doorway or windows, is the probability that the fire
resistance is less than the fire severity, i.e.
P[B 11DU fiT] = P[n < S] (17)
where R is the barrier resistance and S the compartment fire severity.
This expression may be formulated in terms of the ratios Y = R/S. If R
and S are independent log-normal variates then Y is also a log-normal
variate. The case of barrier failure resulting in fire spread would be the
event (Y < 1); therefore, the corresponding probability of fire spread
via a barrier, is:

P[B I (/) U I,V)] = P[Y < 1] = fv(Y) dy = Fv(l'O) (18)

EXPECTED TIME T A K E N FOR FIRE TO SPREAD TO

AN A D J A C E N T C O M P A R T M E N T

Having derived an expression for the probability of fire spread to an

adjacent compartment, the next stage is to determine the expected time
it will take, given that fire does spread. In this section time refers to the
relative time it takes for fire to spread from compartment i, to an
386 David G. Platt et al.

adjacent compartment j, measured from the time fire first entered

compartment i.
Let the random variable Tq represent the time for fire to spread from
i to j. The probability of fire spreading from compartment i to j at time
t, where t lies between t and t + dt, will be given by P[Tq = t]. Note:
P[Tq = t] is used as shorthand way of writing P[t < Tq <- (t + dt)].
The T h e o r e m of Total Probability states:

P[A] = ~ P[A IBi]. P[Bi]

all B~

provided the Bis are mutually exclusive and comprehensively exhaus-

tive. Therefore, applying this theorem we have:

P[Tq = t] = ~ (P[Tq = t lfire spread condition]. P[fire spread condition])

(19)
However:
m

P[Tq = t I fire does N O T spread] = P[Tq = t ]FS] = 0 (20)

where FS is the event that fire does not spread.

Therefore, the conditional probability, that fire will spread from
compartment i to an adjacent compartment j at time t, given that fire
does spread, is given by:

P[Tq = t l FS] P[Tq = t] (21)

P[FS]

The probability of the event P[FS] is given by eqn (15), and from the
T h e o r e m of Total Probability the unconditional probability P[Tq = t] is
given by the following expression:

P[Tq = t] = P[(Tq = 0 1 D ] . P[D]

+ P [ ( L = t) l W]. P[W]
+ P[(Tq = t) [ B]. P[B]
+ P[(Tq = t) IFS]. P[FS] (22)

As the last term P[(Tq = t) ]FS]. P[FS] is zero, expression (22) may be
written as:

P[Tq = t] = P[(Tq = t) I O]. P[D] + P[(Tq = t) lW]

• P[W]+P[(Tq=/)IB].P[B] (23)
 A probabilistic model of fire spread with time effects 387

It is possible to further expand expression (23) by considering separ-

ately the three groups of terms.
The time taken for fire to spread given an open doorway is taken as
the fire growth time for the compartment. This assumes that fire will
not spread beyond a compartment until the fire has reached a fully
developed state. Therefore the probability of the events, P[(T~j =
0 1 D ] . P[D], is given by:

P[D]. P[growth time for compartment i = t I open door]

= P[D].fG,.o(t) dt (24)

where fc,~o(t) represents the density function of the variate fire growth
time, given an open doorway, in compartment i.
If the event 'time for fire to spread given it spreads via external
windows' is taken as the fire growth time for the lower compartment i
plus the ignition time Oj for the upper compartment j, then the
probability of the events, P[(T~j = t) I W]. P[W], is given by:

P[W]. P[(growth time for comp i + ignition time for comp j = t) I W]

which when expanded and expressed in terms of known probabilities,

becomes:

(1 - P [ D ] ) . P[W I/5]
• P[(growth time for comp i + ignition time for comp j = t) I W]

=(1-P[D]).P[Wlb]. {£'fo,(O).f~,(t-O)dO}dt (25)

where foj(h) represents the density function of the variate ignition time
of upper compartment j.
The probabilities of events (T~j= t ) [ B and P[B] are considered
separately and expanded as follows. The probability P[(T~i = t) I B] may
be written as:
P[(T~j = t) l B] = P[(Rij = t) fq (S i > t)] (26)

If the barrier resistance Rij and the compartment fire severity Si are
assumed independent then the above expression can be written as:

=fm(t) dt{1 - Fs,(t)} (27)

which is shown as the two areas marked on Fig. l(c). (This is not a
388 David G. Platt et al.

completely valid assumption as the value R is adjusted by the ratio tile,

which is dependent in part on the variable S. Again as the dependency
is likely to be small, and considering the accuracy of the other data, the
assumption appears valid and consistent with the level of sophistication
used throughout the rest of the analysis.)
The above expression (27) assumes that the fire starts in a fully
developed state and takes no account of the growth time. In order to
realistically model chronological time then the growth period of the fire
needs to be included. The growth time may be handled as a random
variable as described below.
Let the growth time for a fire in compartment i be represented by the
random variable Gi, which has an associated probability density
function fG,(t). Then the probability P[(T~j = t) lB] becomes:

P[(T~j = 01 B] = fa,(g), fR,,(t - g)[1 - Fs,(t - g)] dg dt (28)

The probability of fire spreading through a barrier P[B] can be

expanded so that it contains only variables for which probabilities can
be calculated.

P[B] = P[B I(D U W)]. P[D U W] + P[B I(/) U if')]. P[/5 U !¢~']
= P[B I(/) U I,V)]. P[/) U I~]
But
P[{) U 1~] = 1 - P[D U W]
= 1 - P[D] - P[W] + P[D n W]
= 1 - P [ D ] - ( 1 - P [ D ] ) . P[WI/3] + P [ W I D]. P[D]
So
P[B] = (1 - P [ D ] - (1 - P([D]). P [ W I / 3 ] ) . P[B 1(/3 U if')] (29)

Therefore, combining expressions (28) and (29) the probability P[(Tis =

t) IB]. P[B] is given by:

P[(T~j = t) I B]. P[B]

= {(1 - P[D] - (1 - P[D]). P [ W I/)]). P[B I(O u w)]}

× fa,(g), fR,(t - g). [1 - Fs,(t - g)] dg dt (30)

The substitution of eqns (24), (25) and (30) into expression (23) and the
subsequent substitution of the resulting expression into eqn (21) gives
 A probabilistic model of fire spread with time effects 389

the probability that fire will spread from compartment i to j at time t,

given that fire does spread, for a combination of all three paths, i.e.
e[Tu = t l FS].
Correctly speaking then:
P [ T u = t I FS] =- P[t < Tu <- (t + d/) I FS]
= fmFs(t) dt (31)
The expected time for fire spread, given that fire does spread,
E ( T u l F S ) is then given by the first moment of area about the origin of
the above density function.
The above algorithm presents a hierarchy of mutually exclusive
events which combines the probability of fire spreading via each of the
three path types with the expected time that each path will take. This
gives a probability that fire will spread from one compartment to the
next and a value for the expected time, for a combination of all three
path types. In the outline shown in Fig. 3 these values are shown as the
Adjacency Fire Spread Matrix and the Adjacency Fire Spread Time
Matrix. The next stage is to expand the analysis to include the spread of
fire between any two compartments.

F I R E S P R E A D TO ANY C O M P A R T M E N T

The spread of fire between two compartments may involve a number of

intermediate compartments, forming a series of alternative paths. These
alternative paths are not generally independent of each other as they
may contain compartments in common. It is, therefore, far from trivial
to compute the combined probability of fire spread between two
compartments.
The easiest way to understand the algorithm developed is to consider
the simple four compartment building shown in Fig. 9(a). Assume fire

3
1 4
PATH I ( ~ llnk24 PATH 2
2
~ ~llnk34
(a)

PATH 3 PATH 4
(b)
Fig. 9. (a) Plan of four-compartment building; (b) possible paths by which fire may
spread from (1) to (4).
390 David G. Platt et al.

~o~o~O~O~ .'

FNolFr~ure~ / ~ ~ ~ ( ~ ~nr_.._.7/..
Q~ ~ ~~"2(~ ~
- . - Pa l ®®
USZ3~ @®
i immure
• " " Path3
- - -- Path4
Branchonly
F i g . 10. Modifiedeventtree.

starts in compartment (1) and spreads to (4). Fire may spread from (1)
to (4) by any of the following four paths: (1)---~ (3)--* (4), (1)--0 (2)----~
(4), (1)--0 (2)--0 (3)--0 (4), ( 1 ) ~ ( 3 ) ~ ( 2 ) ~ (4). The simplest approach
to find the probability of fire spreading from (1) to (4) is to use an event
space method• This technique considers exhaustively all possible events•
However, this requires vast computational effort, and is not generally
feasible. Instead a modified event tree, which truncates a branch once
the final outcome is inevitable, is used. A graph of this is shown in Fig.
10. The probability of failure occurring along any one of these branches
is the probability that all the events on a branch occur. Consider for
example the branch marked - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 . The probability of this
branch occuring is P[(01) n (12) n (13) N (32) N (24)]• If the events are
assumed i n d e p e n d e n t then the branch probability becomes
P[01]. P[12]. P[13]. P[32]. P(24).
Whilst the modified event tree in Fig. 10 shows seven different
branches by which fire may spread to compartment (4). Figure 9(b)
indicates that there are only four different paths by which the fire may
reach (4). Therefore, the probability of fire spread along a path will be
the summation of the branch failures that constitute that path. For
example, consider path (3), (1)--0 (2)--0 (4):
P[Path(3)] = P[(branch (01), (12), (23), (34), (24))
U (branch (01), (12), (23), (24))]
As each branch is mutually exclusive then the separate branch
probabilities can simply be summed• It is therefore possible to derive an
expression for the probability of fire spread along each path.
 A probabilistic model of fire spread with time effects 391

TIME T A K E N F O R F I R E TO T R A V E R S E A G I V E N P A T H

Given that fire does spread from i to j, then let the time taken for fire to
spread along path k be represented by the random variable Zk. Then in
general:

Z, = ~ Tq (32)
all ij on path k

where Z, represents the conditional probability Z ~ I F S q and Tq the

conditional probability Tq I FSq. In the special case where Z, = Tq, then
fzK(t) = fT, j(t), and where Z, = Tq + T~k then:

fz~(t) = fT;,(y)frj,(t - y ) d y (33)

In general then, where Zk = Tq + Tj, . . . + Tpq, fzK(t) could be solved

algorithmically, using the above convolution integral at each step.
Alternatively the problem of having to evaluate the above convolution
integral may be avoided by applying the Central Limit Theorem to
expression (32). Interpreted liberally, this states that the sum of a
number of individual random variables, none of which is dominant,
tends to normal distribution as the number of variables increases
regardless of their initial distribution. That is, as the number of Tq terms
increases Zk will tend to a normal distribution with mean E { Z k } =
E E{Tq} and variance Var {Z,} = 3", 0.2 {Tq}.

P R O B A B I L I T Y OF F I R E S P R E A D I N G TO ANY
C O M P A R T M E N T IN A G I V E N TIME

Consider again path (3). The probability that fire will enter compart-
ment (4) via path (3) at time t, is:
P[(Path (3))N (Path time to ( 4 ) = t)]
= P[(Path time to (4) -- t) ] Path (3)]. P[Path (3)]
As all the possible paths are mutually exclusive, in general the
probability that fire will enter compartment j via any path from
compartment i at time t, is

P [ E T q = t l FSq] = ~ P[path time to j = t] path(k)]. P[path(k)]

all paths k from i to1

(34)
392 David G. Plattet al.

where ET~j I FSgj is the entry time, that is, the time taken for fire to enter
compartment, j, via any path measured from the time, t0, when fire
started in compartment i, conditional on the event fire spreads from i to
]. Substituting for Z~ eqn (34) may be rewritten as:

P[ET~j = t l FSji] = ~ P[Z, = t]. P[path(k)] (35)

all k

Thus;

fET,~,FS,,(t) dt = ~'~ fz,(t) dt. P[path(k)] (36)

all k

Given that the fire starts in compartment i, the probability that fire will
enter, or will have entered, compartment j, via any path, at or before
time t, where t lies between t and t + dt is given by:

P[ET~j <- t l FSij] =

f' fEr,,(t) dt

=~ fzk(t). P[path(k)] dt (37)

all k

This expression represents the probability that compartment j will be

damaged by fire after a certain time t, measured from the time when
fire first started in the building and is conditioned on the events that fire
starts in compartment i, and spreads from compartment i to j. The time,
t, can be given any reasonable value, but probably of most use are
values such as the response time of the fire service and human egress
times.

FIRE VECTORS

So far we have only considered the consequences of fire spread, given

that fire starts in a specific compartment, and as such eqns (13)-(37) are
conditional on this event. A more comprehensive measure of the
performance of a building can be obtained by taking into account the
probability of fire starting in different compartments.
A fire vector represents the total probability of fire occurring in a
c o m p a r t m e n t i, due either to fire starting there, or to it starting
elsewhere and spreading to that compartment. It is defined as the
probability of the event (Firelni) that during an annual period
 A probabilistic model of fire spread with time effects 393

compartment i experiences a fire and is conditional on the event that if

fire starts elsewhere in the building the time from its point of rapid
growth is less than t. If the event that during an annual period, a fire
originates in compartment i is given by FireStarts~ then:

P[Fireln~] = P[FireStarts~] U ~ P[FireStart%] fq P[FSj,] N P[ETj, <- t]

all./except i

P[Fireln,] = P[FireStarts,]

U ~ P[FireStart%]. P[FSj, I FireStart%]. P[ETj~ <- t l FSj,

all/except i

fq FireStartsj] (38)

Where sprinklers are concerned, we can assume that if fire originates in

or spreads to a compartment, and the sprinklers operate, a large
proportion of the compartment will be damaged. Let such an expected
degree of damage be d. With the inclusion of sprinklers the fire vector
becomes:

P[FireIn,] = P[FireStarts,](1 - (1 - d)P[SPre,] . P[SPe, I SP~e,])

U {(1 - P[SPre,]. P[SPep I SP~e,]) • ~ P[FireStartsj]

a l l j except i

• P[FSji I FireStartsj]. P[ETji <- t[ FSji ~') FireStartsj]} (39)

The sprinkler reliability (SPrel) is the probability that the system will
work if a fire occurs, and the sprinkler effectiveness (SPe,) is the
probability that the sprinklers, if they work, will extinguish the fire.
Note that in eqn (39), the probability terms that sprinklers are reliable
and effective modify the overall fire vector rather than individual
elements of the path. This is tantamount to saying that if the sprinkler
system fails to operate for a fire in one compartment, then it will also
fail to operate in any other compartment; secondly if sprinklers fail to
extinguish fire in any compartment then they will fail in all compart-
ments. The justification for the first assumption is that a sprinkler
system usually fails not because an individual head fails to operate but
because of some overall factor such as the water mains being turned off.
The second assumption reflects the belief that if the sprinkler heads
operate in one compartment and fail to control the fire, then the fire
will already have reached such a size that the operation of further
394 David G. Platt et al.

sprinkler heads will also fail to contain it; and furthermore, if a number
of heads are already in operation, the water pressure will be reduced
leading to a decrease in the effectiveness of the remaining heads.

P E R F O R M A N C E INDICES

A n important quality of models used in engineering for comparative

evaluation, is their ability to synthesize the relations between the many
and varied inputs, to a manageable or preferably single index. In the
example shown in Fig. 11, the inputs are synthesized to a single
economic index d e p e n d e n t upon time. Currently the model is being
extended to include the effects of smoke and this will pave the way for
the development of a safety index.
The loss cost index gives the expected loss due to fire for the overall
building as a percentage of the capital value of the building. It takes
into account the probabilities of fire occurrence and the design life of
the building. If the bulding is assumed to have a capital value of unity
then the loss cost index CIL is given by:

CIL -- lO0/z (1 + A + [3)(y + q~) ~ AF,. P[Fireln,] (40)

AB foralli

where /x is a discount factor to reduce the expected losses over the

design life of the building to an equivalent capital sum and is given by:

-- e vT

ev - 1 (41)

The assumptions used in deriving eqn (40) are that;

• damage is confined to compartments reached by fire;

• damage is proportional to floor area, unless sprinklers are
installed, in which case the expected degree of damage is given by
d;
• once fire reaches a compartment damage to that compartment is
complete;
• the total damage to a building is a linear combination of the
damage to individual compartments.

Clearly, these assumptions represent only very crude approximations

 A probabilistic m o d e l o f fire spread with time effects 395

to what happens in real fires, but as long as use of the technique is

restricted to comparisons between cases, the assumptions lead to a
consistent and useful measure of the relative economic performance of
a building.

APPLICATIONS

The prime use of the fire spread analysis is as a tool to compare

different fire spread prevention strategies. Such a comparison may, for
example, consider the relative merits of automatic door closing units
and sprinkler systems. The inclusion of time allows the effects of fire
service intervention to be considered. The simplified approach adopted
by the analysis restricts its proper use to comparisons, and as such the
model is unsuited to determine the likely fire history of a building or
the performance of a single building structure in a fire. The model has
been used to compare different fire spread prevention strategies in
small office blocks, motel units and typical apartment style dwellings. 22
As an example of typical output, consider Fig. 11 which shows the
loss cost index at times up to 2 h from ignition. The building is a simple
single storey building of five rooms. The expected fire severity is such
that 60 min F R R on all walls prevents any fire spread. Losses are lower
with sprinklers because any fire is extinguished before flashover occurs.
The other curve shows the probable damage if there is a 25% or 50%
probability of all the doors being open at the time of the fire, for both
30 min and 60 min F R R values. The importance of intervention by the
fire service within 20 min of ignition is clearly seen. This model can be
used to compare a wide range of active and passive fire protection

t60 i i i i

- - = - 3 0 m t n FRR Ooors
~.~60min FRR ~ ~ . . . . . 50*/* open"
/
120
2 / I" ~ - - 2 5 % open
v v v j .0..~-....-~
3 4 ~ ~" . . . . . . . "

¢1
..a l,O
closed
.~'inkler S

! I f I t I I
0
0 20 zo 60 80 tOO 120
Time ( m i n u t e s /

Fig. U. Cost indices for single storey building.

396 David G. Platt et al.

measures in multi-compartment buildings, provided that suitable input

data are available.

LIMITATIONS
Probably the most restrictive limitation that prevents the model being
able to accurately predict a real fire situation, is that the fire is assumed
to develop linearly. For example, after a fire starts in a compartment, it
goes through inception and growth phases before becoming fully
developed. If the fully developed fire spreads to a new compartment,
the model assumes that the fire growth period is the same as if the fire
were first ignited in that compartment. This approach ignores the
'thermal m o m e n t u m ' effect of the already developed fire, in particular,
the effect of the radiated heat flux emitted by hot gases. A n important
aspect of fire safety is the evaluation of smoke spread. This has not
been included in the model, although current developments are
extending the model.

CONCLUSION
This paper outlines the development of a probabilistic model to analyse
the spread of fire in multi-compartment buildings following flashover in
one or more compartments. The model is not intended to be a detailed
fire growth model such as developed by others. Fire growth is included
on a relatively crude basis, to allow the time and probability of fire
spread to be estimated. The model allows a single damage index to be
calculated for a given building. This takes into account the probability
of ignition and subsequent spread within the building.
Care has been taken at each stage to maintain a consistent level of
approximation, or crudeness, and to balance this against both the
crudeness of available data and also the use for which the model is
intended. The result is a useful tool for the comparison of different fire
safety strategies.
The approach presented in this paper offers the probability modeller
a means of overcoming the limitations of the more normal fault tree
and event tree analyses; that they cannot allow for the time taken for
events to happen.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors thank the Building Research Association of New Zealand
for its financial support of this work.
 A probabilistic model of fire spread with time effects 397

REFERENCES

1. Platt, D. G., Elms, D. G. & Buchanan, A. H., Modelling fire spread: a

time based probability approach. Department of Civil Engineering,
Research Report 89/7, University of Canterbury, New Zealand, 1989.
2. Elms, D. G., The principle of consistent crudeness. Proc. Workshop on
Civil Engineering Application of Fuzzy Sets, Purdue University, IN, 1985.
3. Elms, D. G. & Buchanan, A. H., Fire Spread Analysis of Buildings.
BRANZ Research Report R35, New Zealand, 1981.
4. Ramachandran, G., Exponential model of fire growth. Proceedings, 1st
Conf. Fire Safety Science, Washington, DC, 1985.
5. Ramachandran, G., Probabilistic approach to fire risk evaluation. Fire
Technology (August 1988) 205-25.
6. Haskestad, G., Engineering Relations for Fire Plumes. Society of Fire
Protection Engineers, Technology Report 82-8, 1982.
7. H~igglund, B., Jansson, R. & Onnermark, B., Fire development in
residential rooms after ignition from nuclear explosions. FOA Report
C20016-D6 (A3), Forsvarets Forskningsanstalt, Stockholm, 1974.
8. Drysdale, D., An Introduction to Fire Dynamics. John Wiley, Chichester,
1986.
9. McCaffrey, B. J., Quintiere, J. G. & Harkleroad, M. F., Estimating room
temperatures and the likelihood of flashover using fire test data correla-
tion. Fire Technology, 17 (1981) 98-119.
10. Heselden, A. J. M. & Melinek, S. J., The early stages of fire growth in a
compartment. A Cooperative Research Programme of the CIB (Commis-
sion W14), First Phase, Fire Research Note No. 1029, 1975.
11. Heselden, A. J. M., Parameters determining the severity of fire. Paper in
Joint Fire Research Organisation Symposium No. 2, Behaviour of Structu-
ral Steel in Fire. HMSO, London, 1968.
12. Law, M. & O'Brien, Fire Safety of Bare External Structural Steel.
Constructional Steel Research and Development Organisation, London,
1981.
13. Theobald, C. R. & Heselden, A. J. M., Fully developed fires with furniture
in a compartment. Joint Research Organisation Fire Research Note 718,
Borehamwood, 1968.
14. Thomas, P. H. & Heselden, A. J. M., Fully developed fires in single
compartments. A Cooperative Research Programme of the CIB, Fire
Research Note, No. 923, 1972.
15. Thomas, P. H. & Bullen, M. L., Burning of fuels in fully-developed room
fires. Fire Safety Journal, 2 (1979/80) 275-81.
16. Bullen, M. L., A combined overall and surface energy balance for
fully-developed ventilation-controlled liquid fuel fires in compartments.
Fire Research, 1 (1977/78) 171-85.
17. CIB W14, Design Guide for Structural Safety. Fire Safety Journal, 10(2)
(1986).
18. Law, M., Fire safety of external building elements--the design approach.
AISC Engineering Journal (2rid quarter, 1978).
19. Platt, D. G., Fire-resistance of barriers in modelling fire spread. Fire Safety
Journal (in press).
398 David G. Platt et al.

20. Schwartz, K. J. & Lie, T. T., Investigating the unexposed surface

temperature criteria of standard ASTM El19. Fire Technology, 21(3)
(August 1985) 169-80.
21. Quintiere, J., The Spread of Fire From a Compartment--Review. ASTM-
STP 685, 1979.
22. Buchanan, A. H. & Elms, D. G., The effect of fire resistance ratings on
likely fire damage in buildings. Department of Civil Engineering, Research
Report 88/4, University of Canterbury, New Zealand, 1988.