1. Fire Safety By Alicia Civile and Alexandra Fernandez FINAL CASE STUDY

2. 2 FIRE SAFETY / TABLE OF CONTENTS 1COVER PAGE 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 3 DESIGN AND SAFETY OBJECTIVES 4 PROVISIONS AND COMPONENTS 5 -10SYSTEM OVERVIEW 11 RELATED SYSTEMS 12 SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS 13 -14HYPOTHESIS 15 STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS 16 REFERENCES T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

3. FIRE SAFETY / OBJECTIVES When a building is designed to resist the start and spread of a fire, designers protect the building itself, it’s contents, and more importantly the lives of people who occupy the building. To react safely to a fire emergency, a building occupant needs early warning, the means to extinguish a small fire, and at least two ways out of the building. The design of a building may help, or may lead to a dead end, trapping its occupants. In order or importance: protection of life protection of property continuity of operation DESIGN OBJECTIVES SAFETY OBJECTIVES Figure 1: fire safety objectives chart ( Rolf Jensen & Associates, Inc. (RJA), 2010) 3

4. . FIRE SAFETY / PROVISIONS & COMPONENTS DESIGN OBJECTIVES Should be identifiable and useful to all users in the Chapman building : alarms barriers dampers fire-rated doors evacuation plan extinguishing systems FIRE SAFETY COMPONENTS FIRE SAFETY PROVISIONS code provisions for evacuation, and escape routes protecting the structure when a fire occurs fire barriers/compartments areas of refuge horizontal exits vertical openings doors and windows fire dampers and draft stops occupant load means of egress exit access, signs, passageways smoke barriers, dilution, exhaust systems standard tests of building construction and materials “THE FIRE TRIANGLE” Figure 2-9: fire safety system component.(Jessup Manufacturing Company 2009) Figure 10: fire triangle chart (East Coast Training Solutions, 2010) Three things must be present at the same time in order to produce fire: 1) enough oxygen to sustain combustion 2) enough heat to raise the material to its ignition temperature 3) some sort of fuel or combustible material Result: the chemical reaction that is fire 4

5. FIRE SAFETY / SYSTEM OVERVIEW DESIGN OBJECTIVES Figure 11 : fire system overview chart, (Siemens, 2010) Cerebrus pro fire safety system 5

6. FIRE SAFETY / SYSTEM OVERVIEW 6

7. Figure 20 7

8. FIRE SAFETY / SYSTEM OVERVIEW 8

9. 9

10. 10

11. . FIRE SAFETY / RELATED SYSTEMS Fire inhibiting structure Ceiling height Fire rated walls Stairwells: area of refuge Doors: width, fire rated Egress WATER SYSTEM STRUCTURAL SYSTEM Sprinkler system, water supply “THE FIRE TRIANGLE” Figure 38 ELECTRICAL SYSTEM Emergency Lights Audio: alarms 11 Figure 34 Figure 36 Figure 35 Figure 37

12. . FIRE SAFETY / SUSTAINABILITY ANALYSIS DESIGN OBJECTIVES Fire inhibiting structure Ceiling height Fire rated walls Stairwells: area of refuge Doors: width, fire rated Egress FUTURE SOLUTIONS EXISTING SOLUTIONS Materials that do not off-gas when ignited Dry-walls Paints with low VOC’s Furniture Textiles Flooring materials Using alternatives to HALON 1301 IG-541 HFC-227 Earthwise Fire Safety Solutions 12 Figure 39: Fire rated wall section (Mcgraw hill, 2007) Figure 40 Figure 41Figure 42 Figure 43 Figure 44 ("Consumer reports magazine:," 2009)

13. . FIRE SAFETY / HYPOTHESIS DESIGN OBJECTIVES USER: ADMINISTRATIVE H: Administrative staff members are not aware of how to escape the Chapman building in case of a fire. Disproved: Most administrative members are confident in their escape route H: Administrative members on the 2 nd floor of the Commons Hall are satisfied with the amount of exit stairs in case of a fire. Disproved: They were confident in the amount of exit stairs, just not with the amount time it takes to reach them. H: Administrative members, on both floors, are worried that in the case of an emergency they only have access to escape on one side of the building. Proved: Most members agreed there should be access on both sides of the building. H: Maintenance staff members are concerned that they would be the last to know if there were a fire. They wonder if there are adequate alarm systems and if they will be notified as quickly as everyone else. Disproved: Maintenance staff is confident that the fire safety systems will work in case of a fire. USER: MAINTENANCE 13

14. . FIRE SAFETY / HYPOTHESIS DESIGN OBJECTIVES USER: STUDENTS H: Students feel that the auditoriums should have more exit routes. Disproved: All students seemed content with the number of exits from the auditorium. H: Students are troubled about the vestibule that they need to cross in order to escape outside. Inconclusive: For this question the results varied; the students that agreed with the question, had a concern about the size of the doors, amount of doors which need to be passed, size of the space, and the number of students exiting. H: Students feel there should be an additional exterior stairwell somewhere near the middle of the arcade. Disproved. Most students were satisfied with the number of stairwells, but not the stairwell properties. Some said stairwells should be wider and that the slanted stairwell would be a problem in an emergency. Others answered that another one would decrease time taken to go downstairs, which would ultimately help in case of an emergency. 14

15. . FIRE SAFETY / STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS DESIGN OBJECTIVES STRENGTHS Availability of building Availability of building drawings Users present on a daily basis for interviews Maintenance building tours Interviews with staff and maintenance Interviews with students LIMITATIONS The study illustrated the process required to make a conclusive case study. All the mandatory steps, preparations and setbacks were noted. The building and it fire safety systems were studied along with their affect on the user. The buildings composition of systems and their relevance to each other were also noted. Fire safety systems were analyzed and their components examined according to their effect on the user. The fire safety components are functioning appropriately, and if not only need minor modifications. It is evident that the designers of the Chapman building had fire safety in mind, and did a satisfactory job. Students seemed disinterested in interviews, and did not fully consider interview questions Interview questions could have been revised Lack of system specific tours CONCLUSIONS 15 Figure 45

16. . FIRE SAFETY / REFERENCES DESIGN OBJECTIVES Figure 1: Fire middle east. Retrieved from http://www.firemiddleeastmagazine.com/pages/issue_4_feature1.aspxRolf Jensen & Associates, Inc. (RJA), Initials. (2010). Retrieved Figure 2-9: Jessup Manufacturing Company, (2009). Jessup globrite. Retrieved from http://www.globritesystem.com/safety.php http://www.globritesystem.com/safety.php Figure 10:East Coast Training Solutions,. (2010). Fire safety awareness course. Retrieved from http://www.ec- ts.ie/courses/fire_safety_awarness.html Figure 11: Siemens,. (2010). Cerberus pro fire safety system – enjoy protecting. Retrieved from http://www.buildingtechnologies.siemens.com/bt/global/en/firesafety/fire-detection/cerberus-pro-fire-safety- system/syste,-overview/Pages/system-overview.aspx Figure 12-38, 40: Alexandra Fernandez, Alicia Civile. 2010. Chapman Building http://www.buildingtechnologies.siemens.com/bt/global/en/firesafety/fire-detection/cerberus-pro-fire-safety- system/syste,-overview/Pages/system-overview.aspx Figure 39: Mcgraw hill,. (2007). mcgraw hill construction continuing education. Retrieved from http://continuingeducation.construction.com/article_print.php?L=18&C=219 http://continuingeducation.construction.com/article_print.php?L=18&C=219 Figure 41-43 : Consumer reports magazine: march 2009. (2009). Retrieved from http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine-archive/march-2009/home-garden/interior-paints/green- certification-labels/interior-paints-green-labels.htm Figure 44: Earthwise fire safety. (2010). Retrieved from http://earthwisefiresafety.com/ 16