NBS

PUBLICATIONS

NBSIR 79-1796

A 1 1 1 0 4

Preliminary Findings Concerning

the Validity of "BFIRES":

A Comparison of Simulated With

Actual Fire Events

Fred I. Stahl

Environmental Design Research Division

Center for Building Technology

National Engineering Laboratory

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

August 1, 1979

QO

100

.U56

79-1796

eveloped with the partial assistance of the

snter for Fire Research, in support of the

EW-NBS Fire/Life Safety Program

C.2

NBSIR 79-1796

e v 1 PRELIMINARY FINDINGS CONCERNING

THE VALIDITY OF "BFIRES":

A COMPARISON OF SIMULATED WITH

ACTUAL FIRE EVENTS

' DEC 3 1979

CjOt, &CC - 6KUCO

c -

Fred I. Stahl

Environmental Design Research Division

Center for Building Technology

National Engineering Laboratory

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D C. 20234

August 1 , 1979

Developed with the partial assistance of the

Center for Fire Research, in support of the

HEW-NBS Fire/Life Safety Program

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Juanita M. Kreps, Secretary

Luther H. Hodges, Jr., Under Secretary

Jordan J. Baruch, Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Ernest Ambler, Director

PREFACE

The Environmental Design Research Division, Center for Building Technology, National Bureau of Standards (NBS), addresses problems of accessibility to - and egress from - the built environment. Research into the

responses of building occupants during fire emergencies is a vital

component of this effort. Under the sponsorship of the Center for Fire

Research at NBS, this investigator conducted research into the computer

simulation of emergency egress behavior. That effort culminated in the

development of BFIRES/ VERSION 1, a program written in FORTRAN V. An

enhanced version of this program is under development. Under the sponsorship of the Center for Building Technology, the predictive validity

of BFIRES and its usefulness as a building design and regulatory tool are being addressed. This report presents data contributing to the

validation of the computer program.

The author expresses his appreciation to Mr. Harold E. Nelson and to

Dr. Bernard M. Levin of the Center for Fire Research, for their support

of the BFIRES project. In addition, the author thanks Dr, Edward Arens,

Dr. Belinda Collins and Mr. Sanford Adler of the Environmental Design

Research Division, and Ms. Patsy Saunders of the NBS Center for Applied

Mathematics, for their comments on the manuscript. Finally, the staff

of the Center for Building Technology Word Processing Center is gratefully acknowledged.

iii
ABSTRACT

This report presents preliminary findings regarding the validity of

BFIRES/ VERSION 1, a computer program developed at the National Bureau

of Standards to simulate egress movement by building occupants during

fires. A computer simulation experiment was conducted in order to compare outcomes from BFIRES runs with data selected from an archival file

summarizing actual fire results. Findings from this experiment suggest

that BFIRES is capable of reproducing such important fire outcomes as loss-of-life and numbers of persons ultimately escaping. In addition,

patterns of egress behavior produced by BFIRES were compared with those

found in the literature, with professional opinions, and with impressions gathered from anecdotal accounts. With few exceptions, these

comparisons illustrate agreement between simulations and other data

sources.

Key Words: Architectural research; building fires; computer-aided

design; computer' simulation; environmental psychology; fire research;

fire safety; human performance; modeling technique; simulation.

iv
CONTENTS

Page

PREFACE ....... iii

ABSTRACT iv

LIST OF FIGURES vi

LIST OF TABLES vi

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 PROBLEM AND OBJECTIVE 1 1.2 OVERVIEW OF BFIRES/ VERSION 1: STATE-OF-THE-ART ... 1

2.0 AN EXAMINATION OF THE EXTERNAL VALIDITY OF "BFIRES". ... 2

2.1 LEVELS OF EXTERNAL VALIDITY, AND GENERAL APPROACH . . 2 2.2 TEST OF PREDICTIVE VALIDITY: A CASE STUDY 2

2.2.1 Description and Objective 2

2.2.2 Experimental Design 3

2.2.3 Data Collection and Analysis 6

2.2.4 Findings and Discussion 6

2.3 AN EXAMINATION OF FACE VALIDITY 9

2.3.1 Comparisons with the Literature 9

2.3.2 Conventional/ Professional Wisdom About

Egress Behavior During Fires ... 10

2.3.3 Correspondence with Anecdotal Accounts .... 11

3.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 12

REFERENCES 14

i

V
LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 1. Schematic Plan of Dwelling Unit Showing Variations in

D. U. Exit and Kitchen Entry Locations . .... 4

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Loss-of-Lif e Indices for Simulated Residential Fires ... 7

Table 2. Comparisons of Loss -of -Life Indices Between Real and

Simulated Residential Fires 8
1.0

1.1 INTRODUCTION

PROBLEM AND OBJECTIVE

Numerous attempts to simulate pedestrian movement in buildings appear

in the literature (Krystiniak, 1972; Studer and Hobson, 1973; Baer,

1974; and Lozar, 1974, are important examples). In addition, several

investigators addressed the specific problem of emergency egress during

fire conditions, using computer simulation techniques (Wolpert and

Zillmann, 1969; Edmondo, Hahin, and Sinay, 1969; Korkemaz, 1977; and

Stahl, 1976, 1978, 1979).

These studies represent a wide variety of approaches to conceptualizing

pedestrian movement behavior. For example, the discrimination learning

model employed by Studer and Hobson contrasts with the information processing approach used by Wolpert and Zillmann, and by Stahl. Similarly,

a broad spectrum of simulation techniques have been employed. Almost

the entire range from deterministic input/deterministic simulation,

through stochastic input/stochastic simulation, is represented in the

literature.

None of the investigators discussed above, however, has published results

of research illustrating the predictive validity^ of a simulation program.

As a result, it is not yet possible to make specific statements regarding

the usefulness of these programs to building design, regulation, and

evaluation. The objective of this report, therefore, is to report preliminary findings concerning the external validity of BFIRES/ VERSION 1. This computer program was designed to simulate egress movement behavior

by building occupants, and was developed at the National Bureau of

Standards (Stahl, 1978, 1979).

1.2

OVERVIEW OF BFIRES/ VERSION 1: STATE-OF-THE-ART

The conceptual development, structure, and function of the BFIRES com- puter simulation program was presented in detail by Stahl (1978). In

brief, the model underlying this program was derived from a nonstationary,

discrete time Markovian analysis of the building fire problem. The

model postulates that occupants formulate strategies, make decisions,

and take actions dynamically, in response to social and environmental

information fields which change over time. The model recognizes the

transactional relationship between occupants and their environment, which

results when the responses of humans are influenced by features of the

environment which the occupants themselves change or control. The com- puter simulation of these processes is accommodated through BFIRES, a library of FORTRAN V routines. This report presents an analysis of

outputs from BFIRES/ VERSION 1. A second generation of this program

is currently under development at the National Bureau of Standards.

1 Predictive validity concerns the ability of a simulation to predict

future real-world events.
Stahl (1979) documented results of experiments designed to calibrate

BFIRES, to determine its range of applicability, and to assess the

program's sensivity to important parameters. That study illustrated

a number of important findings. Namely:

(1) a variety of general egress situations could be simulated

by BFIRES;

(2) every such event is unique, and is defined by the set of user

supplied parameter values which describe the building, the

fire threat, and the occupants;

(3) BFIRES is useful in simulating environments of known (or

desired) spatial dimension, and events of known (or anticipated) temporal duration; and

(4) BFIRES outcomes are sensitive to variations in a number of

parameters of immediate interest to the building designer

(e.g., floorplan configuration, exit arrangment, occupants'

locations ).

2.0 AN EXAMINATION OF THE EXTERNAL VALIDITY OF "BFIRES"

2. 1. LEVELS OF EXTERNAL VALIDITY, AND GENERAL APPROACH

Two criteria are essential to the validation of computer simulation

models. These involve questions of predictability and plausibility : Does the computer program generate outcomes predictive of those found

in the real-world under the conditions allegedly simulated? Are behavioral scenarios and outcomes produced by the program reasonable, or likely to occur in the real world (i.e., do they exhibit face validity)

The predictive validity of BFIRES outcomes was tested indirectly, not

by attempting to predict results of future fires, but rather by measuring the degree to which the program could replicate actual historical

fire events for which appropriate data was available. The plausibility

criterion was examined by comparing simulation outcomes with conclusions drawn by other investigators.

2.2 TEST OF PREDICTIVE VALIDITY: A CASE STUDY

2.2.1 Description and Objective

The objective of this case study was to determine whether data describing simulated fire outcomes conformed with those found for real events.

Meyers (1977) reviewed the NFPA-FIDO 1 data base in order to determine

whether certain trends were strong enough to justify various design

recommendations. Data in the FIDO files are derived from news media.

1 National Fire Protection Association Fire Incident Data Organization

2
reviews of accounts published in trade and technical journals, NFPA

investigative reports, fire department reports, and insurance company

reports.

This data base contains information in a number of categories, primarily:

(a) property identification; (b) fire origin; (c) fire spread; (d) casualties; and (e) physical losses. For some incidents, floor plans of residential units are also provided. Three types of data were of particular

interest in this study:

(1) dwelling unit floor plan;

(2) dwelling unit loss-of-life index;

(3) adjacency of dwelling unit exit to room-of -origin entry.

These are explained below, and in section 2.2.2.

Meyers reviewed the FIDO files, and selected those incidents in which

residential fires originated in kitchens. All dwelling units chosen had

substantially similar floor plans and numbers of occupants, and varied

primarily in the degree of exit adjacency. For such cases, he recorded

loss-of-life index data reported in the files. For this study of predictive validity, the floor plans reported in the FIDO files were Idealized

for input into BFIRES, and to as great a degree as possible, the fire

events were recreated.

2.2.2 Experimental Design

All simulated fire events were run for several variations of a basic

floor plan. These variations were constructed to simulate those found

in the FIDO files. In all cases, four occupants were assumed to inhabit

the dwelling units. It was also assumed that the events occurred during

the night hours, and that the occupants were located in the bedrooms.

The floor plans varied across classes of events, in order to reflect:

(a) adjacency of dwelling unit exit to kitchen entry; and (b) number of

exits from the dwelling unit. The floor plans are exhibited in Figure 1.

Two levels of the adjacency variable were studied. In the adjacent condition (Condition A), an occupant would be forced to pass within a single

"step” (in BFIRES terms) 1 of the kitchen entry in order to reach the

dwelling unit exit. In the non-adjacent condition (Condition B), an

occupant could reach the dwelling unit exit without even entering a space adjacent to the kitchen entry.

Floor plans with both one and two dwelling unit exits were studied. In

the two-exit case (Condition C), one exit was relatively near the kitchen

BFIRES simulates pedestrian movement as a sequence of discrete spatial

relocations, or "steps." In the current experiment, such a step is

equivalent to 30 inches (0.76 m).

3
4
entry, while remote from the sleeping areas. The second exit was located

within one of the bedrooms, and was remote from the room of fire origin

(the kitchen).

In order to make direct comparisons with data reported in the FIDO files,

dwelling unit loss-of-life (D.U. LOL) indices were computed from simulated fire outcome data. The loss-of-life index was intended by NFPA as an indicator of the number of fire fatalities relative to the total

number possible for a given dwelling unit. Since the actual number of

occupants must be expected to vary from time to time for any dwelling,

the index was defined in terms of average potential occupancy (determined by the number of bedrooms present). Thus:

LOL = dwelling unit loss-of-life index;

f = number of fatalities in the dwelling unit;

b = number of bedrooms in the dwelling unit.

Simulated events were run for 200 time frames, corresponding to approximately four minutes of real time. Most fire professionals agree that,

in general, a person who has not been removed from a fire in a small

area (such as an apartment) within four minutes has a very low chance

of survival at all. Thus, the simulated D.U. LOL index was computed as:

LOL* = simulated dwelling unit loss-of-life index;

f* = number of simulated occupants in the dwelling unit at

the 200th time frame;

b = number of bedrooms in the dwelling unit.

Comparisons between simulated events, and those reported in the NFPAFIDO files were studied through the examination of three hypotheses:

(1) In simulated one-exit dwelling units, LOL' is greater in cases where there is kitchen entry/ d. u. exit adjacency, and lower

in cases where no adjacency exists.

(2) In simulated cases where there is kitchen entry/ d.u. exit

adjacency, LOL' is lower when an alternative d.u. exit is

provided, and higher when no alternative is available.

(3) For all exit and floor plan arrangements, simulated data

does not differ significantly from actual fire data

reported in the NFPA-FIDO files.

LOL = L

b + 1

( 1 ) where

( 2 )

where

5
2.2.3 Data Collection and Analysis

As mentioned above, LOL data for cases corresponding to the experimental

design were extracted from the FIDO files (Meyers, 1977). Data from

simulated cases were obtained by establishing computer input files corresponding to each hypothetical condition, and then by replicating each

condition ten times^. Because the FIDO sample was quite small, comparisons were made using only five of the original ten computer replications,

and in particular, zero values of LOL* were selectively omitted. This was done to bring the balance between cases having fatalities and those

having no fatalities more closely in line, beteween the simulated and

real situations. It is recognized, however, that the selective omission

of cases may have biased results reported below® The hypotheses enumerated above were examined by means of one-tailed t-tests for independent

groups.

2.2.4 Findings and Discussion

Simulated data are reported in Table 1. Comparisons between simlulated

and FIDO data are shown in Table 2. When comparing differences between

simulated fire conditions, it was found that: (a) the dwelling unit

loss-of-life index was significantly greater for the plan exhibiting

kitchen entry/d. u. exit adjacency, than for the plan in which no such

adjacency was present (t=16.00, 18 degrees of freedom (d.f.), significant

at the .01 level); and (b) the loss-of-life index was significantly lower

for the floor plan which provided a second means of egress from the

dwelling unit, than for the plan containing only a single exit adjacent

to the kitchen entry (t=lCLQQ, 18 d.f., significant at the .01 level).

When simulated data were compared with those obtained from the FIDO

files , the following results were found: (a) no significant difference

in D.U. LOL was noted for the one exit/adjacency condition (t=-1.29,

6 d.f., n.s.); (b) D.U. LOL was significantly higher in simulated fires

than in the actual events, for the one exit/non-adjacent condition

(t=13.00, 6 d.f., significant at the .01 level); and (c) no significant

difference in LOL was noted for the two exit condition (t=-1.40, 7 d.f.).

The analyses of comparisons between the simulated conditions support

hypotheses (1) and (2), and indicate that, for the environmental and

occupancy situations specified, BFIRES produces trends conforming to

those found in an actual historical data base. For two of the three

conditions studied, analyses of comparisons between simulated and historical data support hypothesis (3), and suggest that BFIRES is capable

of reproducing certain kinds of event outcomes.

^ BFIRES generates stochastic simulations. Thus, numerous runs conducted under identical starting conditions result in a distribution

of outcomes.

6
Table 1. Loss -of -Life Indices for Simulated Residential Fires

Replication Condition A Condition B Condition C

1 .00 .33 .33

2 .00 .00 .33

3 .00 .00 .00

4 .67 .33 .00

5 .00 .00 .00

6 .33 .00 .33

7 .33 .00 .00

8 .00 .00 .00

9 .33 .00 .00

10 .67 .00 .33

Means .23 .07 .13

Std. Devs. .28 .14 .16

Note: Condition A: kitchen entry/d.u. exit adjacency

Condition B: no adjacency

Condition C: two d. u. exits

7
Table 2 Comparisons of Loss-of-Life Indices Between Real and

Simulated Residential Fires

Replication

Condition A Condition B Condition C

Simul. Real Simul. Real Simul. Real

1 .67 .67 .33 .00 .33 • o o

2 .33 1.00 .33 .00 .33 1.00

3 .33 .67 .00 .00 .33 .00

4 .33 © 0 0 .33 .33

5 .67 .00 .00

Means .47 .78 .13 9 oo .26 .33

Std. Devs. .20 1. 10 .14 .00 .10 .47

Note: Condition A:

Condition B:

Condition C:

kitchen entry/d. u. exit adjacency

no adjacency

two d.u. exits

8
These comparisons with the NFPA-FIDO data reinforce the possibility

that BFIRES is sensitive to certain important parameters, as illustrated

earlier by Stahl (1979). In particular, variations in factors under the

direct control of building designers and regulators (floor plan and exit

arrangement, and numbers of exits) seemed to have a substantial impact

upon the likelihood of escape.

The study illustrating the sensitivity of BFIRES also suggested that

this effect should be especially pronounced in cases where occupants

could be assumed not to vary in such factors as exit knowledge (familiarity with the building's layout) and mobility. In the comparisons

described here, occupants were assumed not to vary in both the simulated

and historical cases. A test of the hypothesis that occupant factors

interact with environmental variables, such that under certain conditions

variation in occupant factors wash out environmental effects, is left

for future study.

Finally, it must be noted that while simulated fire outcomes (i.e. , lossof-life indices) generally conformed to those found in an actual historical data base, these findings offer only indirect evidence of the

correctness of the behavioral processes simulated by BFIRES. Important

tasks for future research will be, therefore, to examine BFIRES-simulated

behavior under a very wide spectrum of cases, and similarly to examine

alternative models and explanations of emergency egress behavior.

2.3 AN EXAMINATION OF FACE VALIDITY

Comparisons such as the one discussed above provide primary evidence

concerning the validity of a computer simulation program, and help to

delineate the boundaries and conditions of its application. Of somewhat

less obvious value are analyses of a simulation's "face validity," in

which correspondence between simulated events and results reported in

the literature is sought, and in which comparisons between simulations

and conventional and professional wisdom are considered.

2.3.1 Comparisons With the Literature

Comparisons between BFIRES outcomes and phenomena reported independently

by other investigators may be of value in determining (at least on some qualitative level) the external validity of the simulation model. Moreover, such comparisons should further illuminate the boundaries within

which BFIRES is applicable.

Perhaps the most important contribution by the London Transport Board

researchers (London Transport Board, 1958) was their realization that

complex pedestrian systems must be studied in their entirety, since

various segments of such systems tend to vary in terms of their carrying capacities and other characteristics. BFIRES sensitivity analyses

reported by Stahl (1979) appear to conform with the overall opinions

of the former investigators. That is, BFIRES data suggest that varying

degrees of route "constriction" produce differences in movement behavior.

9
and variation in such important outcomes as egress time* These simulated

data indicate that, to a point, increased constriction results in more

direct movement toward the exit goal, and thus shorter egress time.

Appleton and Quiggen (1976) reported that stress, fatigue, and indecision all had negative effects on rescue performance during a mock

evacuation on an actual hospital ward* Although rescue activities are

not accommodated by BFIRES, sensitivity tests reported by Stahl (1979)

suggest that, in general, indecision and mobility impairments act to

increase occupants’ egress times, and reduce their overall performance

during computer-simulated fire events*

Finally, Wood (1972) and Bryan (1977) reported that evacuation often

is not the first action taken during residential fires, and that it

often occurs in conjunction with such other actions as alerting other

occupants, rescuing others, and calling the fire department. BFIRES

directly simulates pedestrian movement only, and on the assumption that

the decision to evacuate has already been made prior to the onset of a simulation run , such movement may be construed as "evacuation." However,

the movement of occupants during the simulated events frequently deviated

from an optimal path toward a safe exit, even when simulated individuals

were "familiar" with the building (i.e®, knew the location of the safe

exit), were mobile, and were making decisions on the basis of unambiguous

and correct information. Although simulated occupants did not "investigate the fire," "alert others," etc*, per se, each of these activities

has the effect of using up potentially valuable time . It is this characteristic of the Wood and Bryan findings which appears to be simulated

by the deviations and detours generated by BFIRES® Thus, both the Wood

and Bryan surveys, and BFIRES simulations all agree that uni -directed

exiting behavior is not necessarily an outcome of a fire alert.

Occupants may choose to traverse a less direct --but equally purposeful-

route to that final exit goal.

Bryan and Wood also reported that, on the basis of their findings, familiarity with the building layout correlated with neither evacuation speed

nor the directness of the egress route. These findings do not support

BFIRES results which indicate that, despite the deviations and detours

described above, familiarity is a necessary component of rapid and direct

evacuation.

2.3.2 Conventional/ Prof essional Wisdom About Egress Behavior During

Fires

Over the years, professional architects, fire protection engineers, and

building regulatory officials have developed a body of opinion concerning various aspects of occupants’ emergency egress behavior patterns.

Much of this conventional /professional wisdom has been built into design

and regulatory practice, and concerns: (a) the provision of appropriate

numbers of exits; (b) the problem of blocked egress ways; (c) the clarity

and simplicity of egress system design; (d) dead-end corridors; (e) occupant density; (f) familiarity and emergency training; and (g) the effects

10
of special occupant capabilities (e.g., those of elderly or handicapped

populations). In many ways, independently derived outcomes from BFIRES

simulations concur with professionals' opinions and beliefs about many

of these issues.

Design professionals have long agreed that no building occupant should

ever be trapped in a situation where the only egress path was blocked.

As a rule, a minimum of two exits are therefore provided in buildings

larger than two-family dwellings. The possibility that a single exit

could, if blocked, easily entrap occupants, and the notion that this

problem is readily mitigated by the provision of an alternative exit, are amply demonstrated by the simulated data presented in Section 2.2

of this report.

Professionals have also believed that in general, shorter and more

direct pedestrian circulation paths reduce ambiguity and increase the

likelihood of safe emergency escape, especially where occupants are unfamiliar with the building layout and exit locations. This belief was partially replicated by BFIRES simulations, which suggest that welldefined paths result in short egress times when people are familiar

with exit locations. However, simulated occupants who are not familiar

with exit locations are not likely to escape, regardless of the clarity

with which the circulation system was designed.

Finally, building professionals generally agree that: (a) persons

familiar with exits and egress routes (whether through continual use

or through training) are more likely to escape in a reasonable period

of time; and (b) mobility impaired occupants will require more time for

evacuation than will their unimpaired counterparts. Both of these

expectations are amply supported by BFIRES data presented earlier by

Stahl (1979).

2.3.3 Correspondence with Anecdotal Accounts

Fire reports published by the National Fire Protection Association in

the last five years were reviewed during the course of this investigation. Fires in various types of residential facilities were selected

for content analysis. These included: (a) multi-family dwellings;

(b) hotels; (c) dormitories; and (d) nursing homes. A number of general

patterns were recorded, and BFIRES-produced behaviors appear to conform

with these:

(1) After being alerted to the fire danger, occupants frequently

took time to dress and collect their belongings. In these

cases, evacuation was neither immediate nor direct.

(2) Where dead-end corridors were present, some occupants reported

overshooting emergency exit doors.

11
(3) Walking toward the fire was occasionally reported by persons

specifically seeking the exit, even in cases where the safe

exit was in the opposite direction®

(4) Evacuees tended to move toward the most familiar exit.

(5) Mid-stream direction changing was often reported, even in cases where such behavior could not be traced to any sudden

change in environmental circumstances.

(6) Indecision was frequently reported.

3.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The external validity of the BFIRES simulation program was evaluated.

An analysis comparing outcomes from BFIRES simulation runs with data

selected from an archival file was discussed. Results of this analysis

suggest that, within the boundaries established by the sample, BFIRES

is capable of reproducing certain important fire outcomes, such as numbers of persons ultimately escaping, and loss-of-lif e.

In addition, the general patterns of emergency egress behavior produced

by BFIRES were compared with those found in the earlier research literature, with professional opinions about such behavioral patterns, and

with general impressions gathered from anecdotal accounts® In general,

these comparisons illustrate agreement between simulation results and

various independent sources, and suggest that convergence is possible.

Two important exceptions are: (1) BFIRES results exhibit a positive

correlation between occupants' familiarity with the building layout,

and the speediness and directness of their escape, although no such

correlation was found during the field surveys by Wood (1972) and

Bryan ( 1977 ); and (2) BFIRES results suggest that occupants unfamiliar

with the physical layout of the building will not be helped by designs

providing shorter and more direct egress routes, while conventional

wisdom suggests that short, direct, and unambiguous routes should be

especially helpful to unfamiliar occupants.

In view of the findings discussed above, several directions for future

research are anticipated. First, additional simulation studies of the

type presented in Section 2.2 will be conducted over as broad a range as permitted by available data bases. These studies will provide BFIRES

users with much needed empirical evidence concerning the boundaries

within which the simulation program may be considered valid and applicable. Further, as the program is validated against a broader range of

occupancy categories, these boundaries will themselves be expanded.

Second, other methods of validating BFIRES will be examined and applied,

in order to demonstrate convergence more analytically than has been

attempted thus far. One candidate method is a variation of "Turing’s

Test", in which experts in the fire field would be asked to distinguish

real fire scenarios from those generated by the computer. Finally, it

is expected that future validation efforts will illuminate important

12
aspects of emergency egress behavior that either have not been accommodated by BFIRES, or have been treated incorrectly within the program.

Thus, future research concerned with validating BFIRES will be simultaneously directed toward modifying and improving the capabilities of

the computer simulation program.

13
REFERENCES

Appleton, I. and Quiggen, P. Hackney Hospital Fire Precautions Project:

An Evacuation Model * Boreham Wood, UK: Building Research Establish

ment. Fire Research Station, Operations Research and Systems Study

Section, 1976.

Baer, A. E. A Simulation Model of Multidirectional Pedestrian Movement

Within Physically Bounded Environments. Pittsburgh, PA: CarnegieMellon University, Inst, of Physical Planning, Report No. 47,

June, 1974.

Bryan, J. L. Smoke As a Determinant of Human Behavior in Fire Situations

"Project People." Washington, D.C.: National Bureau of Standards,

NBS GCR 77-94, 1977.

Edmondo, P. M. , Hahin, R. and Sinary, J. P. Emergency Egress from Ships

Compartments; Phase II: A Systems Analysis. Annapolis, MD: Naval

Ship R&D Laboratory, Report No. 3203, November, 1969.

Korkemaz, P. N. A Discrete Event Simulation of a Burning Occupied Building. South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame, Unpubl. masters

thesis. May, 1977.

Krystiniak, J. A. A Stochastic Simulation of Horizontal Pedestrian

Circulation in Buildings. State Colelge, PA: The Pennsylvania

State Univ. , Unpubl. masters thesis, Sept., 1972.

London Transport Board. Second Report of the Operational Research Team

on the Capacity of Footways . London: London Transport Board,

Research Report No. 95, August, 1958.

Lozar, R. C. A Methodology for the Computer Simulation of Behaviorenvironment Interactions in Dining Halls. In Carson, D. (gen.

ed. ) and Bazjanac, V. (ed. ), Man-environment Interactions, Part 10:

Computers and Architecture . Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson

and Ross, 1974, 211-1234.

Meyers, W. T. Room Arrangements and Fire Safety: An Analysis of

Relationships Between Dwelling Unit Spatial Characteristics and

Fire Losses in Multifamily Residential Occupancies. Princeton, NJ:

School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Princeton Univ., Unpubl.

ms, 1977.

Stahl, F. I. Some Prospects of Simulating Human Behavior in High-Rise

Building Fires. In Suedfeld, P. and Russell, J. (eds.). The

Behavioral Basis of Design, Book 1 . Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden,

Hutchinson and Ross, 1976, 211-218.

14
Stahl, F. I. A Computer Simulation of Human Behavior in Building Fires:

Interim Report. Washington, D.C. : National Bureau of Standards,

NBSIR 78-1514, 1978.'

Stahl, F. I. Final Report on the BFIRES/ VERSION 1 Computer Simulation

of Emergency Egress Behavior During Fires: Calibration and Analysis

Washington, D. C.: National Bureau of Standards, NBSIR 79-1713, 1979

Studer, R. G. and Hobson, R. H. Simulation of Human Learning in Urban

Movement Systems. In Preiser, W. (ed. ), Environmental Design

Research, Vol. 2. Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross,

1973.

Wolpert, J. and Zillmann, D. The Sequential Expansion of a Decision

Model in a Spatial Context. Environment and Planning, 1969,

_1, 91-104.

Wood, P. G. The Behavior of People in Fires . London: Dept, of the

Environment and Fire Officers' Committee, Joint Fire Research

Organization, November, 1972.

15
NBS-114A (REV. 9-76)

U.S. DEPT. OF COMM. BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET

1. PUBLICATION OR REPORT NO. NBSIR 79-1796

>* No.

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Preliminary Findings Concerning the Validity of "BFIRES"

A Comparison of Simulated with Actual Fire Events

5. Publication Date August 1979

7. AUTHOR(S)

Fred I. Stahl

8. Performing Organ. Report No.

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

WASHINGTON, DC 20234

14 Projact/tasM/Wortt IBBljiie

11. Contract/Grant No.

12. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME AND COMPLETE ADDRESS (Street, City, state, ZIP) 13. Type of Report & Period Covered Final

Same as item 9 M. Agency Code

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

n Document describes a computer program; SF*185, FIPS Software Summary, is attached.

16. ABSTRACT (A 200-word or leas factual summary of moat significant information. If document includes a significant bibliography or

literature survey, mention it here.) This report presents preliminary findings regarding the validity of BFIRES /VERS ION 1, a computer program developed at the National Bureau of Standards to simulate egress

movement by building occupants during fires. A computer simulation experiment was conducted in order to compare outcomes from BFIRES runs with data selected from an archival file summarizing actual fire results. Findings from this experiment suggest

that BFIRES is capable of reproducing such important fire outcomes as loss-of-life

indices and numbers of persons ultimately escaping. In addition, patterns of egress

behavior produced by BFIRES were compared with those found in the literature, with

professional opinions, and with impressions gathered from anecdotal accounts. With

few exceptions, these comparisons illustrate agreement between simulations and other

data sources.

17. KEY WORDS (six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only the firat letter of the first key word unless a proper name;

separated by semicolons

)

Architectural research; building fires; computer-aided design;

computer simulation; environmental psychology; fire research; fire safety; human

performance; modeling technique; simulation.

18. AVAILABILITY py| Unlimited

I I For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

I I Order From Sup. of Doc., U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC

20402, SD Stock No. SN003-003- m Order From National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, VA. 22161

19. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS REPORT)

UNCLASSIFIED X

20. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS PAGE)

UNCLASSIFIED

21. NO. OF

PRINTED PAGES

21

22. Price

$ 3.00

U SCOMM- DC

1?))