NIST Special Publication 1137

Summary of Workshop for FireStructure Interaction and Urban and 

Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fires

Operation Tomodachi: Fire Research

Samuel L. Manzello

Sayaka Suzuki

Tokiyoshi Yamada
NIST Special Publication 1137

Summary of Workshop for FireStructure Interaction and Urban and 

Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fires

Operation Tomodachi: Fire Research

Samuel L. Manzello 

Sayaka Suzuki

Fire Research Division 

Engineering Laboratory

Tokiyoshi Yamada

University of Tokyo

August 2012

U.S. Department of Commerce 

Rebecca M. Blank, Acting Secretary 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

Patrick D. Gallagher, Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology and Director 
Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this

document in order to describe an experimental procedure or concept adequately.

Such identification is not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by the

National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that the

entities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the best available for the purpose. 

National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 1137

Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Spec. Publ. 1137, 166 pages (August 2012) 

CODEN: NSPUE2
Table of contents

1. Introduction 1 

1.1 Workshop Objective 1 

1.2 Program of Workshop 4 

2. Discussions 7 

2.1 Inputs related to the Future Workshop 7 

2.2 Summary 9 

3. Acknowledgements 10 

Appendix1 List of Poster Presentations (Poster Not Provided) 11 

Appendix2 List of Participants 12 

Appendix3 Abstracts Provided 13 

Appendix4 Presentations Delivered at Workshop 28 
1

1. Introduction

1. 1 Workshop Objective

Dr. Samuel L. Manzello of NIST’s Engineering Laboratory (EL) served as the USA organizer of the 2nd

Japan-USA workshop held in Tokyo, Japan from July 1 to July 4, 2012. This workshop was known as 

“Operation Tomodachi - Fire Research”. Tomodachi means friendship in Japanese. This workshop, led by 

Dr. Samuel L. Manzello of EL-NIST and Dr. Tokiyoshi Yamada of the University of Tokyo, was conducted 

in partnership with the Japan Association of Fire Science and Engineering (JAFSE). The objective is to 

open a dialogue for new research collaborations between Japan/USA in an effort to develop scientifically 

based building codes and standards that will be of use to both countries to reduce the devastation caused by 

unwanted fires. This is a formal continuation of the kickoff meeting held at NIST’s Engineering Laboratory 

in June 2011. EL-NIST signed a Statement of Intent with JAFSE to hold this workshop, and a follow on 

workshop at EL-NIST in 2014. On July 1, participants from the USA learned about research at the Tokyo 

University of Science (TUS) during an optional laboratory tour event. On July 2, the state of the art in Fire 

Structure-Interaction Research was presented from leading researchers from both countries. EL-NIST’s new 

National Fire Research Laboratory (NFRL) was presented. From July 3 to July 4, the state of art in 

Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI)/Urban Fire Research was presented from leading researchers from both 

countries. An overview of focused research in WUI fires by EL-NIST was provided in two presentations. 

USA side participants learned about post-tsunami fires that occurred in Japan after the March 11, 2011 Great 

East Japan earthquake. USA delegates enjoyed laboratory tours of the Building Research Institute’s 

facilities as well as those of the National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster (NRIFD). Of special 

interest was BRI’s Fire Research Wind Tunnel Facility (FRWTF) since Manzello of EL-NIST has used this 

unique facility for WUI fire research over the past six years. USA presentations were delivered from: NIST, 

Purdue University, University of Texas-Austin, Michigan State University, University of Michigan, 

Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety (IBHS), Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), University 

of California-Berkeley, California Polytechnic University (CALPOLY), Underwriters Laboratories (UL), 

and the University of Delaware (organizations are listed based on the order of oral presentation). Japanese

presentations were delivered from: The University of Tokyo, Building Research Institute (BRI), Takenaka 

Corporation, Center for Better Living, Shimizu Corporation, TUS, National Institute for Land and 

Infrastructure Management (NILIM), Kyoto University, NRIFD, Yamagata University, and Kobe University

(organizations are listed based on the order of oral presentation). The workshop closed with an open 

discussion of the future workshop to be held at EL-NIST.
2
3
4

1.2 Program of Workshop

July 2nd At Building Research Institute (BRI)

10:00 - 10:10 Workshop Objective

Coordinator

Yamada, T. (University of Tokyo, Japan)

Manzello, S. (National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA)

I. Fire-Structure Interaction

 Session Chair: Kohno, M. (Tokyo University of Science, Japan)

 Jeffers, A. (University of Michigan, USA)

10:10 - 10:30 Suzuki, J. (Building Research Institute, Japan)

Effect of Deformation of Structural Frame on Fire Resistance of Compartmentation

10:30 - 10:50 Varma, A. (Purdue University, USA)

Experimental Evaluation of Column Stability and Its Influence on Overall Structure Collapse under 

Fire Loading

10:50 - 11:10 Nishimura, T. (Takenaka, Corporation)

Fire Safety of Curtain Wall Spandrel -Proposal for Curtain Wall Spandrel Board Supported by 

Structural Members11:10 - 11:30 Coffee Break

11:30 - 11:50 Engelhardt, M. (University of Texas, USA)

Barriers to Performance-Based Structural Fire Safety Design

11:50 - 12:10 Mizukami, T. (Center for Better Living, Japan)

Calculation methods for Temperature Rise of Compartment Walls Exposed to Fire Heating

12:10 - 12:30 Morita, T. (Shimizu Corporation, Japan)

An Experimental Study on Fire Resistance of Composite Structure Consisting of Steel Beam and 

Partition Wall

12:30 - 13:40 Lunch

13:40 - 14:00 Garlock, M. and Kodur, V. (Princeton University/Michigan State University, USA)

Performance and Research Needs for Bridges Subject to Fire

14:00 - 14:20 Kohno, M. (Tokyo University of Science, Japan)

Strategic Measure for Ensuring Fire Safety of Buildings after An Earthquake

14:20 - 14:40 Jeffers A. (University of Michigan, USA)

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

14:40 - 15:00 Coffee Break

15:00 - 15:20 Manzello, S (National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA)

National Fire Research Laboratory

15:20 - 15:40 Nii, D. and Yoshioka H. (National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management, Japan)

Full-scale Fire Test for Wooden 3-Story School Building (Preliminary Test)

15:40 - 16:20 Discussion (Structural Fire)

Adjourn
5

July 3rd At Building Research Institute (BRI)

II. Urban/Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) fires - 1

 Session Chair: Himoto, K. (Kyoto University, Japan)

 Suzuki, S. (National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA)

10:00 - 10:20 Himoto, K. (Kyoto University, Japan)

Urban Fire Spread Modeling and Loss Prevention Planning

10:20 - 10:40 Manzello, S. (National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA)

Overview of NIST's Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fire Research

10:40 - 11:00 Shinohara, M. (National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster, Japan)

Fire Whirls Caused by Urban Conflagration

11:00 - 11:20 Coffee Break

11:20 - 11:40 Quarles, S. (Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety, USA)

Evaluating the Vulnerability of Buildings to Wildfire Exposures

11:40 - 12:00 Simeoni, A. (Worcester Polytechnic Institute, USA)

Wildland Fire behavior: Combustion and Dynamics

12:00 - 12:20 Suzuki, S. (National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA)

Determining Firebrand Production from Full Scale Structures and Building Components

12:20 - 13:30 Lunch

13:30 - 13:50 Fernandez-Pello, C. (University of California, Berkeley, USA)

Effect of Physical Properties on the Capability of Hot Particles to Ignite Vegetation

13:50 - 14:10 Kuwana, K. (Yamagata University, Japan)

Scale-model Experiment of Large-scale, Wind-aided Fires

14:10 - 14:30 Discussion (WUI + Post-EQ fire #1)

14:30 - 14:45 Coffee Break

Introduction of Laboratory Tour #1

14:45 - 15:00 Ohmiya, Y. (Tokyo University of Science, Japan)

Introduction of Center for Fire Science and Technology, TUS

15:00 - 15:15 Hagiwara, I. (Building Research Institute, Japan)

Introduction of Research Laboratory, BRI

15:15 - 16:15 Laboratory Tour #1 (Building Research Institute)

Adjourn
6

July 4th At National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster (NRIFD)

II. Urban/Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) fires - 2

 Session Chair: Hirokawa, Y. (National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster, Japan)

 Fernandez-Pello, C. (University of California, Berkeley, USA)

9:30 - 9:50 Tamura, H. (National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster, Japan)

Investigation and its Characteristic of Post Earthquake Fire at the 3.11.

9:50 - 10:10 Dicus, C. (California Polytechnic State University, USA)

Fuel Treatment Impacts to Fire Behavior and Ecosystem Services in the Wildland-Urban Interface.

10:10 - 10:30 Nishi, H. (National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster, Japan)

Fires and Damages of Oil Tanks Caused by the 3.11 Earthquake

10:30 - 10:50 Matsuyama, K. (Tokyo University of Science, Japan)

Experimental Study on the Possibility of the Vehicles Fire in Urban and Tsunami Fire

- About the Burning Behavior for Motorcycles -

10:50 - 11:10 Coffee Break

11:10 - 11:30 Iwami, T. and Kagiya, K. (National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management, Japan)

Fires in Non-inundated Area Following the 3.11 Earthquake

11:30 - 11:50 Fabian, T. (Underwriters Laboratory, USA)

Fire Exposure of Roof-Mounted Photovoltaic Systems

11:50 - 12:10 Nishino, T. (Kobe University, Japan)

Qualitative Aspect of the Fires Fueled by the Combustibles Arriving in the Vicinity of the Tsunami 

Refuge Buildings

12:10 - 12:30 Davidson, R. (University of Delaware, USA)

Statistical Modeling of Post-earthquake Ignitions

12:30 - 13:00 Discussion (WUI + Post-EQ fire #2)

13:00 - 14:00 Lunch

14:00 - 15:10 Future Collaboration and Workshop

Coordinator

Manzello, S. (National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA)

Nakamura, Y. (Hokkaido University, Japan)

Introduction of Laboratory Tour #2

15:10 - 15:20 Wakatsuki, K. (National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster, Japan)

Introduction of Research Laboratory, NRIFD

15:20 - 15:30 Coffee Break

15:30 - 16:45 Laboratory Tour #2 (National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster)
7

2. Discussions

2.1 Inputs related to the Future Workshop

As discussed, EL-NIST will host a follow-on workshop in 2014. A discussed session was held for 

input to the next meeting. Ideas discussed during the open discussion are delineated below.

Open Discussion on areas of Future Collaboration

• Regarding workshop size (the number of topics and the number of people) the following 

suggestions were obtained:

o There was general agreement that the size of the workshop was ideal

 One session, with no parallel sessions, should be kept for 2014

 The size of workshop was appropriate to promote more collaboration since 

people could get to know each other quickly than in a typical conference

 More discussion time would be desirable after each session to gain more 

knowledge about fire problem in Japan and USA

o It was desired combine topics that have commonality for the 2014 workshop, such 

as was done for this meeting (e.g. WUI fire spread and post-earthquake fire spread)

 It was suggested to expand the Fire Structure Interaction (FSI) session

• USA participants were interested in FSI research in Japan and would 

like to learn more about that topic 

• Perhaps in 2014 EL-NIST will have actual results from the new 

National Fire Research Laboratory (NFRL)

 WUI fires spread and urban fire spread may be grouped under the topic of 

Large Outdoor Fires

• This would allow more topics to be considered in 2014 under the 

same umbrella

o Personal protective equipment for WUI/urban firefighters

o Post-fire disaster data collection – no standard methods in 

either Japan or USA
8

• It is also important to foster collaboration amongst next generation researchers

o Future of fire research depends on the next generation

o The need also exists to have representation from experienced researchers as well

o Such experience is useful to help shape the future
9

2.2 Summary

The workshop was considered a success and was intended to bring together a diverse group of 

researchers and code officials after the initial workshop in NIST on June 2011. The valuable input 

received for future efforts will be considered by Dr. Manzello when considering the next workshop 

to be held in 2014.

The purpose of this NIST special publication is to document presentations and discussions. Six of 

participants from the workshop, led Dr. Manzello (Dr. Yamada, Dr. Jeffers, Dr. Omiya, Dr. 

Fernandez-Pello, and Dr. Himoto), will prepare a joint review paper for publication in Fire Safety 

Journal, a leading international archival publication in fire safety science. The publication in Fire 

Safety Journal is currently in process.
10

3. Acknowledgements 

The organizing local organizing committee (Dr. Hagiwara, Dr. Ohmiya, Dr. Wakatsuki, Mr. 

Yoshinaga, and Ms. Takahashi) is gratefully acknowledged for their hard work. All are indebted to 

the Building Research Institute (BRI) and the National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster 

(NRIFD) for hosting the meeting. The Tokyo University of Science (TUS) is also acknowledged 

for handling the optional laboratory tour. The excellent presentations from all the presenters are 

really appreciated. Dr. Nakamura is acknowledged for assisting the discussion for the future 

collaboration and workshop. The valuable input of all participants is warmly appreciated. The 

support from the Kajima Foundation is really appreciated. Finally, Dr. Manzello would like to 

extend a special thank you to Professor Takeyoshi Tanaka of Kyoto University. Without Professor 

Tanaka’s his unwavering support, this event would not have been possible.
11

Appendix 1 

List of Poster Presentations (posters not provided)

1. National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (NIED)

2. National Research Institute of Police Science (NRIPS)

3. Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute (FFPRI)

4. National Research Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST/EL/Fire Research Div.)

5. Tokyo University of Science (TUS)

6. National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster (NRIFD)

7. National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management (NILIM)

8. Building Research Institute (BRI)
12

Appendix 2

List of Participants 

(USA)

1. DAVIDSON, R. University of Delaware

2. DICUS, C. California Polytechnic State 

 University

3. ENGELHARDT, M. University of Texas

4. FABIAN, T. Underwriters Laboratory

5. FERNANDEZ University of California, Berkeley

-PELLO, C. 

6.

7. JEFFERS, A. University of Michigan

8. KODUR, V. Michigan State University

9. MANZELLO, S. National Institute of Standards and 

 Technology

10. QUARLES, S. Insurance Institute for Business and 

 Home Safety

11. SIMEONI, A. Worcester Polytechnic Institute

12. SUMATHIPALA, K. American Wood Council

13. SUZUKI, S. National Institute of Standards and 

 Technology

14. VARMA, A. Purdue University

(Japan)

15. HAGIWARA, I. Building Research Institute

16. HAYASHI, Y. Building Research Institute

17. HIMOTO, K. Kyoto University

18. HIROKAWA Y. National Research Institute 

 of Fire and Disaster 

19. HOKUGO, A. Kobe University

20. IWAMI, T. National Institute for Land 

and Infrastructure Management

21. KAGIYA, K. National Institute for Land and

Infrastructure Management

22. KAKAE, N. Kajima Corporation

23. KAMIKAWA,D. Forestry and Forest Products 

 Research Institute

24. KOHNO, M. Tokyo University of Science

25. KUWANA, K. Yamagata University

26. KUWANA,H. Kajima Corporation

27. MATSUBARA, Y. National Research Institute of Fire 

 and Disaster 

28. MATSUYAMA, K. Tokyo University of Science

29. MIZUKAMI, T. Center for Better Living

30. MORITA, T. Shimizu Corporation

31. MURAOKA, K. Ohbayashi Corporation

32. NAKAMURA, I. National Research Institute for 

 Earth Science and Disaster 

 Prevention

33. NAKAMURA, Y. Hokkaido University

34. NARUSE, T. National Institute for Land and 

 Infrastructure Management

35. NII, D. National Institute for Land and 

 Infrastructure Management

36. NISHI, H. National Research Institute of Fire 

 and Disaster 

37. NISHIMURA, K. Kajima Corporation

38. NISHIMURA, T. Takenaka, Corporation

39. NISHINO, T. Kobe University

40. NIWA, H. Ohbayashi Corporation

41. OHMIYA, Y. Tokyo University of Science

42. SEKIZAWA, A Tokyo University of Science

43. SHINOHARA, M. National Research Institute of Fire 

 and Disaster 

44. SUZUKI, J. Building Research Institute

45. TAMURA, H. National Research Institute of Fire 

 and Disaster 

46. TANAKA, T. Kyoto University

47. TOYODA, K. General Building Research 

 Corporation of Japan

48. WAKATSUKI, K. National Research Institute of Fire 

 and Disaster 

49. YAMADA, T. University of Tokyo

50. YOSHINAGA, J. University of Tokyo

51. YOSHIOKA, H. National Institute for Land and 

 Infrastructure Management
13

Appendix 3 

Abstracts provided in this workshop
14

Fire-Structure Interaction #1

Effect of Deformation of Structural Frame on Fire Resistance of Compartmentation

Jun-ichi Suzuki

Building Research Institute

Abstract

The objective of this study is to clarify the influence of the interaction between structural frames and non-structural elements on fire 

resistance of buildings. Fire resistance of steel buildings depends on the structural stability of steel frames and performance of partition walls to 

mitigate fire spread. Partition walls or fire protection of steel frames would be damaged by the deformation of a steel frame because of the 

response of partition walls following the steel frame when the frame is heated in a fire. Similar or severer situations of damage would also occur 

after an earthquake. If the damaged partition walls lose their fire resistance significantly, the assumption in fire resistance design that fire in a 

single compartment does not spread to adjacent rooms will fail.

Many researches on fire resistance of heated structural elements and partition walls during a fire have been conducted until now. Most 

of them, however, only examined the fire resistance of each element without the interaction between structural elements and non-structural 

elements. Partition walls or fire protections fixed on structural frames might not have enough performance to prevent fire spread or to insulate

thermal input because the present fire resistance tests do not replicate realistic deformation or thermal restriction of heated frames in a fire.

The experiments in this study focused on the behavior of protected steel columns and gypsum partition walls with light gauge steel 

during a fire. Three types of experimental studies were conducted in this study. The first experiment was the fire testing of partition walls 

damaged by in-plane shearing tests. Deformation in the in-plane shearing tests of partition walls were rough approximation of horizontal 

deformation of a heated frame in a fire and reenacted damage by seismic movement of the frame. The second experiment was the fire testing of 

protected steel columns that were horizontally deformed with the increase in steel temperature. The horizontal deformation represented the 

extension of a heated beam in a frame. The third experiment was the fire testing of non-load bearing partition walls with thermal stress and/or 

forced deformation. The thermal stress and deformation were induced by the surrounding frame of the walls.

As a result of the experiment, the followings became obvious. Fire resistance of damaged walls depended on the fastening methods 

and layouts of gypsum boards and the adherence property between under lining boards and top lining boards. Horizontal deformation weakened 

fire resistance of protected steel columns because the deformation caused opening of joints or cracks of fire protection. Fire protection of modeled 

boards especially required additional fire protection under the joints. Partition walls with common light gauge steel tended to buckle under 

thermal stress and forced deformation in fire testing. The partition walls with lower axial stiffness and strength had a possibility to increase 

deformation capacity. The next experiment related to the interaction is planning to develop a new fire resistance design.

Fire-Structure Interaction #2

Experimental Evaluation of Column Stability and Its Influence on Overall Structure Collapse under Fire Loading

Anil Agarwal1

, Amit H. Varma2, Lisa Choe1

Purdue University

Abstract

Investigation into the collapse of World Trade Center towers underlined the need for performance based design guidelines for 

structures under fire conditions. Development of such guidelines requires comprehensive research into the failure behavior of different structural 

components and their assemblies in realistic fire. This paper conducts several case-studies on a mid-rise (10 story) steel building and compares 

simulation results from these studies to understand the collapse behavior of a typical steel structure built in the USA. The study makes specific 

recommendations to reduce the risk of fire induced disproportionate collapse of steel structures. 

A 10 story steel building is designed following the current design specifications for buildings in a moderate seismic zone. Lateral load 

resistance (wind and earthquake) is provided by using moment resisting frames (MRFs) on the perimeter or a rigid elevator shaft in an interior 

compartment. Eurocode based parametric fire time-Temperature (t-T) curves are used to develop a representative fire loading. The representative 

fire has heating as well as cooling phase. In order to see the effects of various levels of temperatures in different components, three different 

thicknesses of fire protection are used (no fire protection, 1 hr FRR, and 2 hr FRR).

All the structural components, namely, steel columns, composite floor systems and connections are modeled in an FEM based 

software using macro level elements. The elements used for modeling various structural components and their sub-assemblies were validated for 

accuracy and applicability in fire conditions against experimental data. The fire effects are simulated by assigning the pre-calculated temperature 

values to different structural components. The analysis scheme includes the effects of degradation in material properties at elevated temperatures, 

concrete cracking, plastic deformations in steel and concrete, thermal strains, etc.

The paper will present the results and findings from these analytical case studies. Some of the preliminary findings indicate that: (1) If 

all the components are designed for same level for fire protection, gravity columns are most likely to fail first in a typical steel building. (2) After 

a column fails, reinforcement in the floor system plays an important role in safely redistributing the loads to the neighboring columns. (3) A 

shear-tab connection (that is not designed to resist any moment) carries significant negative moment in fire conditions, which helps increase the 

overall load capacity of the floor system.

1 Ph.D. student, anilag@purdue.edu

2 Associate Professor, ahvarma@purdue.edu
15

Fire-Structure Interaction #3

Fire Safety of Curtain Wall Spandrel

-Proposal for Curtain Wall Fire Resistant Spandrel Board Supported by Structural MembersToshihiko Nishimura

Takenaka Corporation

Abstract

In Japan, many buildings using curtain walls as the external wall are built for architectural and other reasons.

Curtain walls consist of glass in the visible portions and fire resistant board in the spandrels. When a fire breaks out, the purpose of the 

spandrels is to prevent it from spreading to the upper floors. Aluminum is used as the framing members in curtain walls, and ordinarily, the four 

corners of fire resistant spandrel boards are supported by aluminum framing members. Aluminum melts at about 660°C, so the aluminum framing 

members melt when the fire is in full blaze, and there is a possibility of spandrel fire resistant boards falling off. If the fire resistant board falls off, 

the danger of fire spreading to the upper floor is extremely high. Therefore, preventing fire resistant board from falling off is an important issue in 

fire safety. In Japan, technical advice was issued by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism in 2008, which required that fire 

resistant boards be directly supported from structural members such as columns, beams, floors, etc. However, specific methods of support were

not proposed, so in practical design excessive specifications were required from the approval authorities, and this frequently resulted in problems 

of cost and constructability. Therefore we attempted to develop a rational method of the structural members directly supporting fire resistant 

board. In this technology a joint fitting is inserted in advance into the fire resistant board, and both sides of the fire resistant board are covered 

with a steel plate. By covering both sides of the fire resistant board with the surface members, it is possible to prevent local stress concentrations 

at the joint surface of the fitting and the fire resistant board, and obtain excellent performance against imposed deformations due to earthquakes 

or wind. The structural performance was verified in various structural tests. The performance in a fire was also verified using tests.

During a fire, the curtain wall fire resistant board is heated from both sides by the fire on the interior and by the flames gushing out from the 

window. For this development, a new test method was proposed in which the curtain wall fire resistant board is heated from both sides, in order 

to perform the evaluation in accordance with reality. The results of the fire resistance tests confirmed that the curtain wall fire resistant board that 

has been developed has excellent fire resistant performance during a fire. Using this technology, it is possible to dramatically improve fire 

resistant performance of curtain walls, without increasing the cost or reducing the constructability.

Fire-Structure Interaction #4

Barriers to Performance-Based Structural-Fire Safety Design

Michael D. Engelhardt

University of Texas at Austin

Abstract

There is increasing interest in the U.S. and elsewhere in transforming building fire safety design from a prescriptive to a performancebased environment. An engineered performance-based structural-fire safety design includes three major components: modeling the fire; 

conducting heat transfer analysis to determine temperatures of structural elements; and structural analysis to determine structural response to fire. 

A great deal of research has been conducted worldwide in the area of structural-fire engineering over the last 20 to 30 years. However, this large 

base of research appears to have had very little practical impact on building design practice. Structural-fire safety in the vast majority of buildings 

is still addressed using traditional prescriptive based hourly ratings for individual structural members and assemblies.

There appear to be a number of major barriers standing in the way of more widespread application of engineered performance-based 

structural-fire safety design of buildings. These barriers include issues related to professional practice, education, technical knowledge, and 

design tools. This presentation will focus on one key technical barrier: inadequate information and characterization of “design fires” for 

structural-fire safety design. Currently, inadequate guidance is available to structural engineers for characterizing fires in modern buildings that 

generally have little or no compartmentation.

There are a number of documents that provide guidance on design fires for structural-fire safety design, including Eurocode 1 and a 

recently released SFPE standard. However, these documents, like the vast majority of literature in this field, are focused on compartment fire 

analysis, typically using one-zone fire models. Guidance is also available on localized fires that may occur, for example, with a burning vehicle in 

a parking structure. Models for compartment fires or localized fires, however, do not adequately address the nature of large fires in modern 

buildings that generally have large open plans with little compartmentation. Experience with large building fires generally shows both horizontal 

and vertical (floor to floor) spread of fires. It may be possible to model such large moving fires with programs like FDS. However, such an 

approach is impractical for routine design practice.

This presentation will make the case that more research is needed to understand and characterize moving fires in modern 

uncompartmented buildings, and the effect of these moving fires on structural response. Such an effort will require close cooperation between 

structural engineers and fire modeling specialists, and is essential for moving forward with performance-based structural-fire safety design.
16

Fire-Structure Interaction #5

Simple Calculation Methods for Temperature Rise of Compartment Walls Exposed to Fire Heating

Tensei Mizukami

Center for Better Living

Abstract

The fundamental quantities that relate heat transfer at unsteady state are the thermal diffusivity, thickness and time. The diffusivity is a 

measure of how quickly a body can change its temperature, and is expressed as

where α is the thermal diffisivity, λ is the thermal conductivity, Cw is the specific heat, and ρ is the density. In addition to these thermal properties, 

most of the building material contains some extent of moisture, for example, about 21% of the mass of gypsum board are water of hydration, and 

mud-plastered wall is known for its moisture absorption and desorption characteristic. A temperature plateau near boiling point is observed in the 

fire resistance test for such walls, and it makes significant contribution to the thermal resistance.

In our research, a series of fire resistant test for mud-plastered wall is carried out changing thickness and moisture content, and derive 

a hypothesis that the thermal resistant time of moisture containing wall can be expressed as

twet = tdw + tv

where twet is total thermal resistant time to a certain temperature for moisture containing-wall, which is consisted of the thermal resistant time to 

the certain temperature for dry wall, tdw , and the thermal retardant time by moisture, t v.

Thermal resistant time for dry wall is derived by the theoretical solution of the transient one dimensional heat conduction problem in a 

semi-infinite medium. And the retardation effect by the moisture only focused on the latent heat of vaporization and is treated as moving 

boundary problem. Therefore we have made the further assumptions:

 1. Only laminar transport processes are considered in the transverse x direction.

 2. Semi-infinite solid methodology is applied and the temperature of the exposed surface suddenly raised to s T and is maintained all the time.

 3. Thermal properties are constant and uniform through the wall and independent of temperature.

 4. Internal moisture migration is ignored.

In real fire occasion, these assumptions will not lead to accurate quantitative results unless we ultimately make some adjustments later. 

However, taking the advantage of simplified description, the equations can be taken as guide and to give insight into the interaction of thermal 

diffusivity and moisture. The equations are validated by one-dimensional thermal conductive model and test results under ISO-fire conditions.

Fire-Structure Interaction #6

An Experimental Study on Fire Resistance of Composite Structure Consisting of Steel Beam and Partition Wall

Takeshi Morita

Institute of Technology, Shimizu Corporation

Abstract

Structural fire safety design is normally based on the assumption that fire is enclosed in a compartment. Partition walls are a main

element of the compartment and usually placed under structural beams or slabs. The beam exposed to fire deforms by the result of its elevated 

temperature. It is a question that the deformation of the beam which is a part of a compartment leads to failure of the partition wall.

This study focuses on a compartment element which consists of a steel beam and a partition wall. The fire side of the beam is covered 

with fire proofing material, and the other side of the beam, i.e. non fire side, is not covered and directly exposed to ambient temperatures. The 

interaction of deformation between beam and partition wall, the thermal insulation capacity of steel beams, and the possibility of simplified 

calculation method of steel temperatures are experimentally investigated.

Specimens for fire resistance test consist of steel beam, partition wall and fireproof cover for steel. Brief specifications of these 

elements and materials are as follows;

- Steel beam section: H-250*125*6*9 and H-400*200*8*13 (mm)

- Partition wall: 2 or 3 layers of enhanced gypsum board (thickness: 21mm)

- Fireproof cover: Thermal resistant rock wool (thickness: 40 or 65mm)

A full scale compartment specimen and six small scale compartment specimens are constructed by combining these elements and materials. The 

specimens are heated only from one side under standard fire temperature-time curve prescribed in ISO834.

As the result of full scale fire resistance test, it is confirmed that the deformation of steel beam does not significantly affect the 

performance of partition wall, if surface temperatures on the beam of non fire side do not exceed allowable surface temperatures. (allowable 

average temperature rise: 140K, allowable maximum temperature rise: 180K) Fire resistance of specific combinations of beam size and fireproof 

cover thickness are made clear as the result of small scale fire resistance test. Fire resistance of up to 120min could be achieved by the 

combination of beam size, fireproof cover thickness and partition wall.

The calculation method of steel temperature rise which is a part of technical basis of the fire-resistance performance verification 

method in Japanese building code is referred here in order to get a simplified calculation method. As the result, temperatures of steel beam 

exposed to fire from one side can calculate with the referred calculation method with applying thermal properties identified by analysis on the 

experimental data.
17

Fire-Structure Interaction #7

Performance and Research Needs for Bridges Subject to Fire

Maria Garlock1

, Venkatesh Kodur2 

1 Princeton University, 2 Michigan State University

Abstract

Structural fire safety has been traditionally focused on buildings and has paid little or no attention to bridges. One cannot extend fire 

design guidelines from buildings to bridges since the behavior of a steel bridge girder (i.e., a deep beam) under fire is different to that of a steel 

beam in a building under fire. These differences include the cause of fire, fire load, fire protection, and beam depth.

Bridge fire events cannot be ignored due to the number of occurrences and the social and economic consequences. Further, a recent Department 

of Transportation survey has shown that three times more bridges have collapsed due to fire compared to earthquakes; but not many studies have 

been carried out on this topic.

This presentation summarizes three parts of an ongoing collaborative effort between Princeton University and Michigan State 

University to evaluate the performance of steel bridge girders subject to fire. The first part reviews the state-of-the-art in bridge fire design and 

the historical performance of bridges subject to fire. The second part analyzes, with a 3D numerical model, the response of a typical bridge of 

12.20 m. span length. A parametric study is carried out considering (1) the axial restraint of the bridge deck, (2) types of structural steel for the 

girders (carbon steel and stainless steel) (3) different constitutive models for carbon steel, and (4) fire loads (the hydrocarbon fire defined by 

Eurocode 1 and a fire corresponding to a real fire event). Results show that restraint to deck expansion coming from an adjacent span or abutment 

should be considered in the numerical model. In addition, the times to collapse are very small when the bridge girders are built with carbon steel 

(around 10 minutes for the hydrocarbon fire and around 18 minutes for a real fire event) but they can almost double if stainless steel is used for 

the girders.

The third part of this presentation examines the post-fire residual strength of steel bridge girders. Results from a set of numerical 

studies on fire exposed steel girders will be presented. The analysis is performed using finite element computer program ANSYS in two stages, 

namely during exposure to fire and then after cooling of the bridge girder. In the first stage of analysis, thermal and structural response of the 

bridge girder is traced under specified fire exposure and loading conditions. In the second stage (after the bridge girder cools down), the girder is 

loaded to failure to evaluate the residual capacity of the girder. Results from numerical studies indicate that the maximum fire temperature (and 

associated temperature in steel) is the most critical factor that influence the residual strength of fire exposed bridge girders. A girder exposed to 

typical external fire conditions, with maximum fire temperatures reaching 600-700 °C, retains about 70 to 80% of its strength on cooling. On the 

other hand, a steel bridge girder exposed to hydrocarbon fire with maximum temperature of about 1100 °C, looses most of its strength during 

heating phase of the fire and experiences failure.

Fire-Structure Interaction #8

Strategic measure for ensuring fire safety of buildings after an earthquake

Mamoru Kohno

Tokyo University of Science

Abstract

Up to early 1980’s, the objective of seismic design was to prevent the building from collapsing, so that the life safety of residents 

inside the building was protected. As time progressed, not only the life safety but also the quality of life in the aftermath of a disaster became 

significant issue. Huge earthquakes are expected imminent in many places in Japan including Tokyo metropolitan area. If such an earthquake 

occurs, buildings near the epicenter are subjected to a strong ground quake of upper six or larger on the seven-point Japanese scale, and 

continuous use of those buildings might not be possible because buildings might be damaged to some extent even if they do not collapse. A 

ground shaking of upper five to lower six on the Japanese scale in the surrounding wider area may cause a damage or incomplete function of 

nonstructural elements or fire safety equipment of buildings. 

There are many high-rise apartment buildings in urban area and each building accommodates a large number of residents. Residents in 

those buildings need to decide if they can continue to stay in their apartment or move to safe place such as evacuation center in case a large 

earthquake occurs. Generally, residents are apt to keep staying because of the quality of life. It will be helpful for the local area if residents in the 

high-rise building can continue to stay at their apartment because the capacity of evacuation center is limited.

The risk of fire is higher than ordinary circumstances in the aftermath of an earthquake because the chance of fire ignition is higher 

and the fire safety of building can be lower due to the potential damage of building elements and incomplete function of fire safety equipment.

A strategic plan against fire after an earthquake is needed. It is important to consider the internal and external conditions of the 

building to develop the plan. Internal conditions include living situation of individual resident, states of structural and nonstructural elements of 

the building and fire safety equipment. External conditions include the state of lifeline, such as electricity, gas and water supply and sewerage 

systems, availability of public fire service and so on. In the aftermath of earthquake the internal and external conditions change as time goes.

A four phase plan is discussed here. The phases are defined based on the varying internal and external conditions of the building. 

Results of interview and questionnaire surveys after the Great East Japan Earthquake 2011 are referenced to set up the phases. The plan focuses 

on appropriate fire safety requirements, permissible living conditions, what should be checked and who should do that in each phase. It is 

recommended that each high-rise apartment building develops specific post-earthquake fire safety plan and share it with the residents to ensure 

better quality of life even in the aftermath of a disaster.
18

Fire-Structure Interaction #9

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

Ann E. Jeffers and Qianru Guo

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Abstract

Structural performance in fire is governed by thermal and mechanical processes that are typically evaluated by three sequentially 

coupled analyses: (1) a fire model that describes the transient fire properties, (2) a heat transfer model that describes the propagation of 

temperature through the structure, and (3) a structural model that captures the temperature-dependent mechanical response of the structure. At 

present, the analysis and design of structures for fire is based on purely deterministic models, in which uncertainty in the model parameters is

completely ignored. A few recent works have explored stochastic models for fire-structure interaction; however, research to date is limited to 

simulation-based studies that are rooted in Monte Carlo simulation (MCS). Despite its versatility, MCS requires extensive computational

resources that make the method impractical for use in industry and furthermore becomes problematic when evaluating structural reliability in 

regions with low probabilities of failure.

To overcome existing limitations, the present study explores the extension of the perturbation-based stochastic finite element method 

to the analysis of structures in fire. In particular, response sensitivity analysis in the fire, thermal, and structural domains is derived based on 

direct differentiation of the governing finite element equations. While the direct differentiation method (DDM) has been studied extensively in 

structural mechanics, there has been very limited research to explore its use in problems that exhibit strong coupling between the thermal and 

structural domains. The DDM formulation for nonlinear thermo-structural analysis is therefore presented here and used to evaluate the sensitivity 

of the structural response to various parameters in the fire, thermal, and structural models. Accuracy is assessed based on comparison to the finite 

difference approximation of the response sensitivities.

Because the ultimate goal of the research is to assess the reliability of structures in fire, the response sensitivity analysis is 

incorporated into a first-order reliability analysis based on the improved Hasofer-Lind-Rackwitz-Fiessler algorithm. To demonstrate the 

effectiveness of the approach, the methodology is used to assess the reliability of a protected steel beam given uncertainty in the fire, thermal, and 

structural parameters. Comparisons between the first order reliability analysis and MCS demonstrate that the proposed formulation accurately 

predicts the probability of failure and does so with much greater computational efficiency. Thus, the perturbation-based stochastic finite element 

method offers much promise for the performance-based design of structures for fire.

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation under Grant No. CMMI-1032493. Any opinions, findings, 

conclusions or recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsoring agency.

Fire-Structure Interaction #10

THE NIST NATIONAL FIRE RESEARCH LABORATORY: 

A UNIQUE NEW FACILITY FOR INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH 

ON REAL-SCALE FIRE/STRUCTURE INTERACTIONS

J. Gross, M. Bundy, J. Yang, W. Grosshandler, F. Sadek, S. Cauffman and A. Hamins

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Abstract

The National Fire Research Laboratory (NFRL), located on the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Gaithersburg 

campus, has been designed for conducting real-scale experimental research to provide the technical basis for improvements in standards, codes, 

and practices associated with buildings and structural systems subjected to fire. The NFRL is operated by the NIST Engineering Laboratory (EL), 

whose mission includes promoting U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by anticipating and meeting the measurement science and 

standards needs for the design and construction of buildings and infrastructure systems to resist the effects of fire.

The facility is being expanded to provide the following capabilities for simultaneous application to a full-scale structural assembly or 

system: controlled multi-axial mechanical loads up to 1.5 MN, controlled fire exposures up to 20 MW for up to 4 h, measurement of structural 

deflections up to incipient collapse, and continuous measurement of heat release rate, heat flux, and structural temperatures. The expanded NFRL 

is currently under construction and is scheduled for completion in December 2012, followed by a 12 month commissioning phase. When fully 

operational in 2014 the NFRL will provide unique-in-the-world experimental capabilities for real-scale structural systems up to 9 m high 

constructed on a strong floor that is 18 m by 27 m in plan.

The NFRL is designed primarily for conducting experiments on steel and structural assemblies and systems. It can also be used for 

experiments on timber construction, polymeric-based composite structures, load-bearing wall assemblies, materials for enhancing fire resistance 

(e.g SFRM, gypsum board, and intumescents) and other designs and materials for buildings, bridges, and tunnels.

The scientific objectives of the NFRL are to develop an experimental database on the performance of materials, components, 

connections, assemblies and systems under fire loading and to gain knowledge, quantify performance, and validate physics-based predictive 

models, including a library of component and connection models. Data from experiments conducted in the NFRL will provide the technical basis 

for performance metrics; acceptance criteria for different levels of performance objectives; mitigation strategies based on evaluated performance 

to provide adequate fire protection for the structure; and the measurement science to support a transformation from prescriptive to performancebased standards in design of structures for fire resistance.

Research in the NFRL will be supported through a combination of other government agency sponsorship, grants and cooperative 

agreements, collaborative research funded by private sector organizations, and consortia. NIST invites international organizations with shared 

interest in structural fire safety engineering to participate in NFRL research.
19

Fire-Structure Interaction #11

Full-scale Fire Test for Wooden 3-Story School Building (Preliminary Test)

Daisaku NII and Hideki YOSHIOKA

National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management

Abstract

In order to achieve 3-story wooden school building beyond 3,000 m2 constructed as a quasi-fire-resistive building, which isn’t 

permitted in the Building Standard Law in Japan, it's necessary to make the way of thinking of the fire protection measure in the framework of the 

current regulations. The main purpose of this project is to clarify the problem on fire protection by understanding fire behavior in 3-story wooden 

school. In this presentation, main features of this experimental building including the detail specification of construction members, objectives of 

full-scale experiment and experiment result will be mentioned.

3-story wooden school building of 2,260 square meters of total floor area was designed and constructed in accordance with the 

specification of 1-hour quasi-fire-resistive building.

When designing this building, the recent trend of floor planning of elementary school etc. was reflected and wooden interior finish 

which would be likely used in wooden building was reproduced.

In this building, two construction methods, one of which is wood-frame construction method and another is 2 x 4 construction method, 

were applied in order to investigate the influence of construction method to fire behavior.

The part of post-beam construction method was divided by fire-resisting wall which was placed perpendicular to the corridor to 

investigate the effect of fire spread prevention.

As a result of experiment, fire had rapidly spread to upper floor and all over the building due to large-scale external flame. Although 

combustible fire load of each room was designed with total heat release rate based on the actual survey, review may be necessary from the aspect 

of heat release rate or surface area of combustible.

Because building structure could maintain self-sustainability for over one hour, it achieved 1-hour quasi-fire-resistive construction 

performance as required by regulation. Fire had spread beyond the fire-resistive wall because flame run through the fire protection door of the 

opening. The reason would be the pressure increase due to temperature rise in fire room.

Large amount of firebrands seems to have flown leeward from the attic before the collapse of the building.

It will be necessary to consider provisions to delay fire spread, reduce the impact to around and evacuation safety in the building.
20

WUI + Post-EQ fires -1 #1

An Analysis on the Burn-down Probability of Historical Temple- and Shrine-Structures in Kyoto City

in the Case of Fires Following Earthquake

Keisuke Himoto 

Kyoto University

Abstract

Burn-down probability of 2,131 historical temple- and shrine-structures in Kyoto city in the case of fires following post-earthquake 

fire is analyzed. In the present analysis, ignition is assumed to occur following an earthquake due to the shift of Hanaore fault located in the

north-east of Kyoto city. If the fire-fighting activity fails to extinguish the fire at its initial stage, the fire enlarges inside the building and spreads 

to adjacent buildings. This may be followed by broader fire spread within the urban area which consists of buildings with variable level of 

structural damage due to seismic motion. Damage of historical structures is caused when such fire spread is not prevented on the way.

The analysis is conducted by using a physics-based urban fire spread model formerly developed by the authors. In the fire spread 

model, urban fire is interpreted as an ensemble of multiple building fires, that is, the fire spread is simulated by predicting behaviors of individual

building fires under the thermal influence of neighboring building fires. Adopted numerical technique for the prediction of individual building 

fire behavior is based on the one-layer zone model. Governing equations of mass, energy, and chemical species in the component roomsare 

solved simultaneously, for the development of temperature, concentrations of chemical species, and other properties. As for the building-tobuilding fire spread, three phenomena are considered as contributing factors, i.e.: (I) thermal radiation from fire involved buildings; (II)

temperature rise due to wind-blown fire plumes; and (III) firebrand spotting.

With the model, the Monte Carlo simulation was conducted in order to obtain the burn-down probability of the historical structures. 

Factors of uncertainty considered in the analysis were the conditions on: (1) outbreak of fire; (2) firefighting activity at initial stage of fire; (3)

structural damage of individual buildings due to seismic motion; and (4) change of weather in time series.

Target historical structures includes (a) 82 national treasure and important cultural properties designated by the national government, 

(b) 117 important cultural properties designated or registered by the local government, (c) 235 structures added to the list of nominees for

important cultural properties, and (d) 1,697 structures with the age over 70 years. The result shows that the burn-down probability of structures in 

the higher categories was lower than that in the lower categories.

WUI + Post-EQ fires -1 #2

Overview of NIST’s Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fire Research

Samuel L. Manzello

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

Abstract

Wildfires that spread into communities, referred to as Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) fires, are a significant problem in Australia, 

Europe, and the United States. Little understanding exists on how to contain and mitigate the hazard associated with such fires. This is due, in 

part, to the fact that WUI fire spread is extraordinarily challenging.

From a simple point of view, the WUI fire problem can be seen as a structure ignition problem. For example, post-fire damage studies 

have suggested for some time that firebrands are a significant cause of structure ignition in WUI fires, yet research on firebrands conducted over

the past 40 years has focused on how far firebrands fly (known as spotting distance). Japan has been plagued by structural ignition from firebrand 

showers in urban fires as well.

Building codes and standards are needed to guide construction of new structures in areas known to be prone to urban/WUI fires in 

order to reduce the risk of structural ignition. Proven, scientifically based retrofitting strategies are required for homes located in areas prone to 

such fires. It is difficult to develop measurement methods to replicate wind-driven firebrand bombardment on structures that occur in actual WUI 

fires. Entirely new experimental approaches are required to address this problem.

To this end, NIST developed (in 2006) the NIST Firebrand Generator (the NIST Dragon) to generate controlled, repeatable firebrand 

showers. Since wind plays a critical role in the spread of WUI fires in the USA and urban fires in Japan, NIST has established collaboration with 

the Building Research Institute (BRI) in Japan. BRI maintains one of the only full scale wind tunnel facilities in the world designed specifically 

for fire experimentation; the Fire Research Wind Tunnel Facility (FRWTF). The coupling of the NIST Firebrand Generator and BRI’s FRWTF 

has enabled the study of building vulnerabilities for the first time and these findings are being considered as a basis for performance-based 

building standards with the intent of making structures more resistant to firebrand attack.

The other major activity in WUI fire research in NIST’s Fire Research Division is a well-coordinated post-fire data collection effort to 

gather fire behavior/structure ignition data in from actual WUI fires. Post-fire studies have been conducted in California and Texas.

Experimental research on structure ignition and the post-fire data collection effort work closely together towards the same goal of reducing WUI 

structure losses. A summary of these projects is presented.
21

WUI + Post-EQ fires -1 #3

Fire whirls caused by urban conflagration

Masahiko Shinohara1

, Sanae Matsushima1 and Ai Sekizawa2

1 National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster 2 Tokyo University of Science

Abstract

The study describes two fire whirls caused by urban conflagrations after earthquakes in Japan on March 11th, 2011 and September 1st, 

1923.

A fire whirl was witnessed in the early morning of March 15th, 2011 over a conflagration at Nainowaki-cho in Kesennuma City, 

which was struck by a Tsunami on March 11th. To elucidate the characteristics of the fire whirl, the situation, and possible causes of the 

conflagration, we conducted a field investigation that included gathering eyewitness accounts. The results suggest that the fire whirl was at least 

70 m high, and possibly as high as 230 m; the estimated diameter was 55–130 m. The wide range of these values result from differences in 

eyewitnesses’ testimonies. 55 m and 130 m are roughly equivalent to the width of one and two blocks of the area, respectively. The conflagration 

broke out because the fire spread easily over debris-filled roads, empty lots, and a park. The debris and houses were probably dry, as the tsunami 

water had receded from the area before March 14th, when the fire broke, there was no rain after March 11th, the temperature rose rapidly from 

the morning of March 13th, and the relative humidity dropped to 25 % by noon on March 14th. Possible generation mechanisms of the fire whirl 

include the horizontal shear caused by variations in surface roughness over the urban area and a river adjacent to the fire scene, and the

interaction of air entrainment into fires at the scene.

For comparison, we introduce our hypothesis regarding a fire whirl that struck Hifukusho-ato (an empty lot where 40,000 people had 

taken refuge) in the 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake. Eyewitness testimonies, the recorded fire and weather conditions, and previous experimental 

work suggest that at least one fire whirl occurred downwind of a large fire on the other side of the Sumida River adjacent to Hifukusho-ato. The

vortex did not contain fire when it was formed. It crossed the river and struck Hifukusho-ato, which was surrounded by fire at that time. The 

violent wind of the fire whirl and/or strong local winds carried firebrands into Hifukusho-ato from the area around. The strong winds (80 m/s) of 

the fire whirl spread the fire rapidly over evacuees and flammable household goods, blowing everything away. These violent winds and the rapid 

spread of the fire resulted in 38,000 deaths in this one evacuation area.

WUI + Post-EQ fires -1 #4

Evaluating the Vulnerability of Buildings to Wildfire Exposures

S. Quarles

Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety

Abstract

In October 2010, the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety (IBHS) opened their natural hazards research facility in 

Richburg, South Carolina. During 2010-11 IBHS collaborated with the Savannah River and Oak Ridge National Laboratories and the USDA 

Forest Service in the developing and conducting the Wildfire Ignition Resistant Home Design (WIRHD) program. This program was funded by 

the Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate.

The primary goal of the WIRHD program was to develop a home evaluation tool that could assess the ignition potential of a structure 

subjected to wildfire exposures. It was based on the Structure Ignition Assessment Model (SIAM) developed by the

USDA Forest Service over a decade ago. The resulting interactive software product was named the Wildfire Ignition Resistance Estimator 

(WildFIRE) Wizard and allows the user to create a home or building using software tools and specify and position vegetation and other 

components located in the area surrounding the building.

To provide material property data and to support the educational component of the software IBHS and the Savannah River National 

Laboratory (SRNL) performed ember (firebrand) and radiant exposure tests at the IBHS Research Center. Ember testing were conducted to 

document vulnerabilities associated with near-building vegetation and mulch products, vents, roof coverings and design features and attached 

decks. Burning embers were produced from each of the five ember generators inside the test chamber. The ember generators were loaded with 

dried mulch and wood dowels of various sizes. The duration of the ember exposure for each test was about 10 minutes.

Similarly, common exterior-use construction materials were exposed to radiant heat to demonstrate vulnerabilities. The test subjects consisted of 

exterior siding materials, window glass, frames, fiberglass screening and curtains and re-entrant corners.

The objective of this presentation is to describe the tests that were conducted, summarize the principal results, and discuss some of the 

implications with regard to the vulnerabilities of typical wildfire exposures to homes and buildings.
22

WUI + Post-EQ fires -1 #5

Wildland Fire behavior: Combustion and Dynamics

A. Simeoni

Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Abstract

Over the last 5 years a consistent set of studies were developed at the University of Edinburgh and at WPI that are geared towards a 

better understanding of how wildland and solid fuels ignite and burn in the context of wildland and wildland-urban interface fires.

The whole approach is based on experiments conducted with the Fire Propagation Apparatus. This device was used because of its 

versatility that allows testing wide ranges of various conditions applied to different fuels. To simplify the approach, well-characterized fuels were 

used in the form of dead pine needles and solid polymers. The main factors that were studied were the time to ignition and the heat release rate as

the third component of flammability, rate of spread, has been extensively studied in wildland fire research.

To represent this specific context, two kinds of approaches were developed. Concerning wildland fuels, the effects of an air flow 

through porous pine needle beds was thoroughly investigated; this configuration was considered as fundamentally representing the effect of wind. 

Some bulk properties of wildland fuels were determined experimentally to understand their effect on the coupling between the fuel and the flow. 

This coupling is an essential aspect that fire spread models need to capture to provide good predictions under wind conditions.

Regarding solid fuels, the influence of a time-varying heat flux was investigated as a representative of the impact of a fire front 

approaching a structure at the wildland-urban interface. The objective of this approach is to provide a mechanism to assess the potential for 

ignition while not adding an excessive computational burden to fire-spread models.

This is particularly true for CFD models as adding the full description of the interaction between the fire and the structure would be too costly 

computationally. To avoid resolving the building the objective is to extract information from the CFD model that can then be used directly to 

establish if the material has ignited or not without requiring the modeling of the solid fuel itself.

The results show that this approach enhances our understanding of wildland fire behavior and impact in general but also at the 

Wildland-Urban Interface. These experimental data, along with the models developed for describing ignition represent a successful application 

and extension to wildland fires of approaches and techniques developed for fire safety studies.

WUI + Post-EQ fires -1 #6

Determining Firebrand Production from Full Scale Structures and Building Components

Sayaka Suzuki

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

Abstract

Wildfires that spread into communities, commonly referred to as Wildland-Urban Interface Fires (WUI Fires), are a significant 

international problem. Post-fire damage studies have suggested for some time that firebrands are a significant cause of structure ignition in WUI 

fires. While firebrands have been studied for decades, most of research focused on the spotting distance which is how far firebrands could fly and 

little research has been conducted to investigate firebrand production. In order to develop scientifically based mitigation strategies, it is necessary 

to understand the firebrand generation from structures and the vulnerabilities of structures to firebrand showers.

NIST developed the NIST Firebrand Generator (NIST Dragon), which has the ability to produce controlled and repeatable firebrand 

showers. The firebrand sizes generated by the NIST Dragon have been tied to those measured from full-scale tree burns and a real WUI fire 

(Angora, 2007). It is believed that the structures themselves may be a large source of firebrands as well as the vegetation. Due to limited studies, 

it cannot be determined if firebrand production from structures is similar to the one from vegetations.

To this end, firebrand production from real-scale building components under well-controlled laboratory conditions was investigated. 

Specifically, wall and re-entrant corner assemblies were ignited and during the combustion process, firebrands were collected to determine the 

size/mass distribution generated from such real-scale building components under varying wind speed. Finally, the size and mass distributions of 

firebrands collected in this study were compared with the data from an actual full-scale structure burn (conducted by NIST in Dixon, California) 

to determine if simple component tests such as these can provide insights into firebrand generation data from full-scale structures. The results are 

presented and discussed.
23

WUI + Post-EQ fires -1 #7

Effect of physical Properties on the Capability of Hot Particles to Ignite Vegetation

Casey D. Zak, Daniel C. Murphy and A. Carlos Fernandez-Pello

University of California, Berkeley

Abstract

According to the National Fire Protection Association of the United States, “outside and other” fires caused more than $500 million 

dollars in property damage and killed 55 civilians in the year 2010 alone. These fires are also responsible for significant biomass consumption 

and a large source of combustion emissions to the atmosphere. Clearly, wildland and wildland urban interface (WUI) fires have caused severe 

environmental and property damage, as well as the loss of life. Many of these fires are allegedly ignited by heated particles generated by 

powerline interactions, hot work/welding, overheated catalytic converters, seized train brakes, and other sources of hot particles. Currently, the 

exact process by which the ignition of vegetation by hot particles occurs and the conditions necessary to initiate a spot fire are not well 

understood. Consequently, current wildland fire models lack capabilities for accurately predicting the initiation of spot fires. A greater

understanding of the ignition process and the conditions necessary for ignition could lead to improved predictive models and reduced losses due 

to fire. This work presents an experimental and theoretical study of ignition of powdered cellulose fuel beds by hot metal particles. Stainless steel 

and brass spheres with diameters in the range from 1.59 mm to 12.7 mm were heated to temperatures between 500C and 1200C and dropped onto 

cellulose fuel beds with moisture contents of 1.5% and 4.5%. The effects of varying particle diameter, temperature and thermal conductivity and 

fuel bed moisture content on flaming ignition propensity of the particles are discussed. Additionally, high-speed videos taken of the ignition event 

are presented and used in conjunction with phenomenological arguments to develop a simplified model of the ignition process. The results of this 

work indicate that ignition of fuel beds by large hot particles is a rapid surface phenomenon that most strongly depends on particle size and 

temperature. It is found that for a given material a minimum size and temperature are needed for a metal particle to ignite the fuel. This minimum 

becomes more stringent as the moisture of the fuel increases.

WUI + Post-EQ fires -1 #8

Scale-model Experiment of Large-scale, Wind-aided Fires

Kazunori Kuwana

Yamagata University, Japan

Abstract

Fire phenomena are very complicated—knowledge of fluid mechanics, heat transfer, chemical kinetics, material science, and other 

areas is required to study these phenomena. The complicated nature of the phenomena can be seen in a number of different stages that they cover: 

for example, ignition, flame spread over combustible materials, and continuous burning of combustible materials such as pool fires. Each stage 

has a different length scale; ignition may occur in a relatively small space, while a large-scale wildland fire can burn an area of greater than 1 

km2. The time scale associated with a fire scenario also greatly varies.

A number of dimensionless parameters (or Π numbers) are associated with fire phenomena. Each fire scenario, in principle, has a 

different set of the parameters, each having a specific value to the scenario. Therefore, one way of studying a fire phenomenon is its full-scale 

reconstruction either experimentally or computationally.

Full-scale experiments as well as numerical simulations, however, are usually costly and time consuming (if not impossible). Another approach 

of the study is scale modeling based on an appropriate scaling analysis, the topic of this presentation.

When designing a scale-model experiment, we need to disregard the effect of minor Π numbers (otherwise full-scale experiment 

would be the only way of research). Consequently, a scale-modeling study is a journey to identify important parameters. Important Π numbers are 

often different from scale to scale. For example, in small-scale fires the effect of viscosity may be important and the Reynolds number may be a 

governing Π number, whereas the buoyancy effect may be important in large-scale fires, making the Froude number an important parameter. On 

the other hand, a strikingly simple scaling law sometimes holds to different scales, enabling us to design a simple scale-model experiment.

This presentation first discusses difficulties in designing scale-model experiments of large-scale wind-aided fires. A method to relax 

the scaling requirement is then proposed. The proposed method is demonstrated by reconstructing a wildland fire whirl that occurred in Brazil in 

2010.
24

WUI + Post-EQ fires -2 #1

Investigation and its Characteristic of Post Earthquake Fire at the 3.11.

Tamura, H. 

National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster

Abstract

Since March 23, 2011, the National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster in Japan (NRIFD) has been investigating a specific area 

damaged by fires as a result of the March 11, 2011, Great East Japan Earthquake.

To obtain useful information in the prevention of fire outbreaks and spreading fires following future large-scale disasters, we 

investigated the following particulars: Cause of the fire, Area where the fire spread, Cause of stopping the fire, Photos and video records of the 

stricken area, Collection of testimonies. The districts where the NRIFD investigated fire are as follows: Iwate prefecture (1) Noda village (2) 

Miyako city (3) Yamada-machi (4) Ootsuchi-cho, Miyagi prefecture (5) Kesen-numa City (6) Ishinomaki city (7) Sendai City (8) Natori city, 

Fukushima prefecture (9) Iwaki city

Characteristics of the fire in the Great East Japan Earthquake had the following features:

(1) Many of the affected fire sites covered a wide spreading area (over 100,000 m2

).

(2) Fires occurred in a lot of prefectures.

(3) The total area of a large urban fire was very wide.

Forest fires also occurred in places, such as Yamada-cho, Kesennuma City, etc. Some of these fires spread over an area of 1,000,000 m2 or more.

The main features of the cause of the fire, spread of the fire, and stopping the fire’s spread end are as follows based on the fire survey:

Cause of the fire (a) Fire broke out from rubble carried away by the tsunami.

(b) Fire broke out from cars that were carried away by the tsunami or were soaked in seawater once.

(c) Electric power equipment, such as the integrating wattmeter, was soaked in seawater once and caught fire when electric power was 

restored.

Spread of the fire (a) Fire spread in places where burned cars and rubble were carried away by the tsunami.

(b) Gas cylinders carried away by the tsunami leaked their contents. There is a possibility that this gas became a factor in the fire’s 

spread.

(c) Fire spread from urban areas to the forest.

Stopping the fire’s spread

(a) A wide road, fireproof buildings, a graveyard, and a rice field stopped the fire’s spread.

(b) There were a lot of fire sites that the fire brigade was not able to approach. However, fire’s spread was halted in places where the 

fire brigade fought the blaze.

WUI + Post-EQ fires -2 #2

Fuel Treatment Impacts to Fire Behavior and Ecosystem Services in the Wildland-Urban Interface

Christopher A. Dicus

California Polytechnic State University

Abstract

To best insure sustainable communities in the wildland-urban interface (WUI), management strategies for a given area must be 

developed that minimizes both fire risk and also the residual impact to the ecosystem services (carbon sequestration, vegetative air pollution 

removal, etc.) that distinct vegetation types provide.

This presentation discusses ongoing research into how various WUI fuel treatments in shrub- and forest-dominated ecosystems 

simultaneously impact potential fire behavior and environmental benefits provided by vegetation. Multiple scales, including stand- and 

landscape-levels, are evaluated. Methodologies for these types of evaluations will be provided to assist land managers in making sound decisions 

in their local communities. The presentation also discusses critical elements necessary for holistic, sustainable fire management in the wildlandurban interface."
25

WUI + Post-EQ fires -2 #3

Fires and Damage of Oil Tanks Caused by the 3.11 Earthquake

Nishi Haruki

National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster

Abstract 

The 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku Earthquake (M9.0) occurred on March 11, 2011 and shook Miyagi Prefecture with a strong 

earthquake of magnitude 7 (Japanese scale) . A vast range over an east part of Japan suffered damage by a strong ground motion, moreover wide

range of the pacific coast of Tohoku area suffered damage by Tsunami. The earthquake caused damage to oil storage tanks and other hazardous 

material facilities in petrochemical industrial complex. For example, some of them caught fire after the earthquake and large amount of oil leaked 

from oil storage tanks. Therefore, National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster have investigated damage including the fires and failures of the 

oil storage tanks and other hazmat facilities.

In this paper, the author reports the outline of the result of the investigation. The damage of the oil storage tanks and hazmat facilities 

has a different aspect by area. The oil storage tanks and other hazmat facilities damaged mainly by the Tsunami on the pacific coast and the 

strong ground motion caused the liquefaction of the foundation ground. On the coast of the Sea of Japan, the earthquake generated sloshing of 

liquid in large oil storage tanks and caused oil spill on the floating roofs and caused damage to the pontoon of the floating roofs. Moreover, on the

shore of the Bay of Tokyo, one of the floating roofs sank after the earthquake because the deck of the floating roof cracked during the earthquake 

and lost buoyancy.

The author will examine the results in order to suggest the measure against same kind of accidents.

WUI + Post-EQ fires -2 #4

Experimental Study on the Possibility of the Vehicles Fire in Urban and Tsunami Fire

- About the Burning Behavior for Motorcycles –

Ken Matsuyama

Tokyo University of Science

Abstract 

The Great East-Japan Earthquake occurred on March 11, 2011, inflicted serious damage such as the collapse of buildings, accidents at 

a nuclear power plant, the spread of fire and others caused by main shocks, aftershocks and huge-scale tsunami. Tsunami-induced fire was one of 

most characteristic circumstances in the Great East-Japan Earthquake. Especially, as the further shocking circumstance, burning buildings and 

debris floating on top of the tsunami as well as many burning cars and motorbikes consecutively were recognized. The ignition trigger of 

tsunami-induced fires is still unclear, however the various causes such as electricity accidents, acceleration of the oxidation of metals by seawater 

and others were assumed. In any case, the debris of buildings, ships, cars and motorbikes carried by the tsunami ignited and burned, and the 

large-scale tsunami-induced fires occurred after ignited floated heavy and light oil, LPG or gasoline on the sea flowed from collapsed storage 

tanks in industrial areas burned.

As the focus for discussion in this study, the full-scale burning experiments of motorbikes were carried out to understand the burning 

behaviors of the single and multiple, and also combustion properties of the used materials were investigated in detail by using cone calorimeter. 

Firstly, the amount of combustible materials used in it was investigated. And then, full-scale experiments of two series were carried out to reveal 

the burning behavior as free burning. The first series of full-scale experiments was conducted to realize the single motorbike burning 

characteristics, for instance heat release rate (HRR) and flame height. In the series, each of twelve motorbikes which are different from the engine 

displacement and type was burned. The engine displacement was grouped into 4 sizes, and the motorbike types were classified into 3 categories. 

Experimental results indicated that the maximum HRR depended on motorbike type, not displacement.

In the other series, two motorbikes set which offset distance was 1m, and ignited one motorbike. Non-ignited motorbike was received 

heat flux from a burning motorbike, and side plastic parts ignited. The side part burned speedily and HRR of non-ignited motorbike increased 

rapidly because of a pyrolysis development of plastic materials. The maximum HRR of non-ignited motorbike was greater than it of one 

motorbike.
26

WUI + Post-EQ fires -2 #5

Fires in Non-inundated Area Following the 3.11 Earthquake

Iwami, T. and Kagiya, K.

National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management

Abstract 

Large number of fires occurred in wide area due to the 3.11 Earthquake and the tsunami following the earthquake brought severe 

damage to buildings.

Mass media have reported intensively fire due to the tsunami, but many fires due to earthquake motion in non-inundated area are also 

identified in the damaged areas which did not have the damage of tsunami.

In this presentation, it is introduced that outline of the fires reported in the municipalities damaged by the earthquake and the features of the 

building fires occurred in non-inundated area.

The total 284 fires including non-building fires reported (as of the end of March, 2012) by Fire and Disaster Management Agency 

(FDMA) of Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC). Among the prefectures damaged by the earthquake, more than half of the 

total numbers of fires were occurred in Miyagi prefecture. These 284 fires include not only fires occurred in the mainshock at 14:46 on March 11, 

but also ones in aftershocks. According to the data, out of 284 fires, 112 fires are reported in the municipalities in non-inundated area. In order to 

get the detailed information about the fires, such as damage, cause of fire, circumstances of firefighting at that time, investigations have been 

conducted. Investigation by interview with personnel of the local firehouses in charge of the area where the fire occurred, and visit to some of the 

typical fire scenes were made.

As a result, it is found that major cause of the fire in non-inundated area is heat sources contacting surrounding combustibles with the 

earthquake motion and electric fires at the recovery of power supply from power failure and misuse of the candle which is used for the light in the 

midst of blackout nights which were also seen as past time.

The main feature of the fire in non-inundated area following the 3.11 Earthquake is as follows:

1) Fire break-out ratio in non-inundated area of the earthquake is approximately 1/4 of the ratio of 2004 Chuetsu earthquake and 1/12 of the ratio 

of 1995 Hyogo-ken Nanbu (Kobe) earthquake.

2) In non-inundated area, many fires occurred immediately after mainshock (in the period from 14:46 to 18:00 on March 11).

3) Except immediately after the mainshock, the occurrences of fire were concentrated on the day of the mainshock and in the period from 18:00 

to 24:00 on the following days.

4) For the most cases, firefighting worked effectively and all of the fires died down in a single building of fire origin or with a few buildings.

5) Many fires occurred due to the effect of the recovery of power supply and the activity of residents rather than the effect of the earthquake 

motion.

WUI + Post-EQ fires -2 #6

FIRE EXPOSURE OF ROOF-MOUNTED PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEMS

Robert Backstrom, Mahmood Tabaddor PhD, Thomas Fabian PhD, and Pravinray D. Gandhi PE PhD

Corporate Research, UL LLC

Abstract 

The growth of solar photovoltaic (PV) has been substantial in the last few years, especially in the state of California (USA), that had 

approximately 58% of all grid-tied PV capacity in the US in 2007. As a consequence of the prevalence of solar PV modules on roofs, and plans 

for additional deployments as homeowners seek avenues for energy efficiency, fire and code officials are concerned about the potential fire 

hazards when a rack mounted PV array is installed on a rooftop1

. Funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, Underwriters Laboratories Inc. (UL) 

in partnership with Solar America Board for Codes and Standards (Solar ABCs) designed and conducted tests to characterize the effects of standoff mounted (elevated, parallel to roof surface) PV modules on the fire class rating of common roof covering materials.

Flammability of roofing systems and PV modules are assessed by UL 7902/ASTM E 1083 Spread of Flame and Burning Brand tests 

(PV modules are assessed under UL 17034). These flammability tests, however, are ordinarily performed on the roof covering or a PV module in 

isolation. The tests conducted for this investigation were designed to examine the combined effects of modules and roof coverings as a system 

when exposed to fire.

The presence of a rack mounted PV module on a roof assembly was found to have an adverse effect on the fire performance of the 

roof regardless of the fire rating of the roof or the Class rating of the PV panel. Greater temperatures and heat flux were observed on the roof 

surface in the area underneath the PV module. The magnitude of these effects was dependent on the gap size between the module and the roof, as 

well as the setback distance of the module from the roof leading edge.

The extent of the impact was also found to be dependent on the angle of the module relative to the roof and the type of roofing system.

1 Website: osfm.fire.ca.gov/photovoltaics.php

2 UL 790, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Roof Coverings, 8th Edition, Underwriters

Laboratories Inc., 2004

3 ASTM E 108, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Roof Coverings, ASTM International, 2011

4 UL 1703, Standard for Safety for Flat-Plate Photovoltaic Modules and Panels, 3rd Edition, Underwriters

Laboratories Inc., 2002
27

WUI + Post-EQ fires -2 #7

Qualitative Aspect of the Fires Fueled by the Combustibles Arriving in the Vicinity of the Tsunami Refuge Buildings

Tomoaki NISHINO, Dr.Eng.

Kobe Univ.

Abstract 

We present a part of the aspect of the fires in the vicinity of the tsunami refuge buildings in Kesennuma city qualitatively with 

attention to the combustibles conditions based on the image records and the eyewitness testimonies. Even if fires approach the tsunami refuge 

building, it is difficult for the housed evacuees to escape from the building because of the surrounding seawater and debris. Therefore, when 

smoke or fire flows into the building, the evacuees are likely to be put themselves in danger. To find the measures controlling the fire spread to 

the tsunami refuge building, it is essential to solve a problem how much degree we should expect as the heating strength due to the tsunamiinduced fire.

As a result, we obtained the following types of the combustibles conditions expected in the vicinity of the tsunami refuge building: (1) 

a mass of fine debris heaped up around the tsunami refuge building such as a broken piece of a member; (2) a mass of minor-damaged houses 

retaining the original form of the upper part arriving around the tsunami refuge building; (3) fine debris floating on leaked oil making a long line 

in the bay; and (4) a fire-resistant building originally in the neighborhood of the tsunami refuge building. The combustibles (1) and (2) made the 

open-space around a tsunami refuge building expected to prevent the usual fire spread disappear. Whereas slow combustion was observed for the 

fire fueled by the combustibles (1), the fire fueled by the combustibles (2) led to ignite the rooms of a tsunami refuge building and the evacuees 

housed in the building waited moving from room to room till the fire was extinguished. The combustibles (3) formed about two kilometers line 

fire inside the Gulf of Kesennuma and released the huge fire plumes. Fortunately, the tsunami refuge buildings were never exposed to the plumes 

because of the calm weather conditions. The fire fueled by the combustibles (4) involved the whole of a three-story fire-resistant building in the 

neighborhood of a tsunami refuge building and the flames vented from openings were observed.

From now, the following efforts are thought to be needed: (1) fire experiments to estimate the heat strength to the tsunami refuge 

building quantitatively; and (2) a method to predict the drifting behaviors of the above combustibles.

WUI + Post-EQ fires -2 #8

Statistical Modeling of Post-earthquake Ignitions

Rachel A. Davidson

University of Delaware

Abstract 

This paper presents a new rigorous approach to statistical modeling of post-earthquake ignitions and data compilation for such 

modeling. An application to late 20th century California is described, as is a current effort to apply it to Japan. Specifically, generalized linear and 

generalized linear mixed models (GLMs and GLMMs) are developed that can be used to estimate the number of ignitions in each area unit 

(census tract) as a function of tract characteristics and the ground shaking experienced in a specified earthquake.

This presentation begins with challenges associated with data to support ignition models. Several important issues are highlighted, 

including the need to explicitly and consistently define which ignitions are considered, which region data are collected for, and what the 

geographic unit of study is. These decisions influence the conclusions that can be drawn from subsequent statistical analysis. The data set 

developed for the California application is then described, followed by background on the models used and the model selection process.

The statistical modeling approach offers some advantages over previous efforts. Using GLMs and GLMMs provides a more natural 

treatment of discrete nonzero ignition counts. Unlike previous models that focus on a single predictor, many covariates are examined and several 

are ultimately identified as significant. Using census tracts as the unit of study also allows simulation for future earthquakes to produce estimates 

at a finer geographic resolution. Including all tracts that experience nonzero ground shaking allows better estimation of zero ignition counts. For

loss estimation and policy analysis, it is important to be able to estimate where ignitions are not likely to occur, as well as how many there will be 

in areas where they do occur.

The final recommended models developed for California are presented, including a discussion of how they can be interpreted and 

applied in a predictive mode for future or hypothetical earthquakes. Two data sets were developed to explore the effect of missing ignition data, 

each with a different assumption about the missing data. For one data set, the recommended model includes instrumental intensity; percentage of 

land area that is commercial, industrial, or transportation; total building area; percentage of building area that is unreinforced masonry; and 

people per square kilometer. The other includes the same, except area of high-intensity residential development replaces total building area, and 

median year built over all housing units is also included. Finally, the current effort to apply this ignition modeling approach in Japan is discussed, 

including the data required to support the effort.
28

Appendix 4

Presentations delivered in this workshop
Dr. Tokiyoshi YAMADA

The University of Tokyo

Chair of International Cooperation Committee of

JAPAN ASSOCIATION FOR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING 

Dr. Samuel L. Manzello

Engineering Laboratory (EL)

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

Gaithersburg, MD. USA

USA/JAPAN Workshop

July 2nd, 2012

Fire-Structure Interaction & 

Urban and WUI fires 

“Operation TOMODACHI: Fire Research”

Kick-Off Japan-USA Workshop

Focused on urban/WUI fires

Intended to Generate

Momentum for future workshops

Documented as:

NIST Special Publication

Special Issue in Fire Safety Journal

Manzello/Himoto (Eds.)

Japn/US Workshop

held at NIST June 27,2011

To explore areas of mutual 

collaborative interest on Fire Spread in 

urban and WUI fires.

JAFSE and NIST Statement of Intent

JAFSE JAPAN ASSOCIATION FOR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING 

1. As part of this agreement, the parties intend to hold two meetings over a period of four years:

 One meeting will be held in Japan (in Tokyo; venue organized by JAFSE) in 2012

 One meeting will be held at NIST (Gaithersburg, MD) in 2014 !

2. The initial meeting will be focused on the areas of:

 Fire Structure Interaction and EL’s new National Fire Research Laboratory (NFRL) 

 Urban and Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fires

3. Both organizations shall faithfully consult with each other and do their utmost to communicate any problems 

 or issues arising from activities based on this Statement. 

4. Other research interests could be explored for the 2014 meeting, according to mutual interest within the spirit 

 of international exchange and collaboration.

 ( * snif * )

STATEMENT OF INTENT ON 

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION 

 BETWEEN 

JAFSE AND NIST 

NIMLI Full-scale Fire Test for Wooden 3-Story School Building February 22, 2012

FIRE-STRUCTURE INTERACTION (IN JAPAN) Japanese Perspective ( I. Fire-Structure Interaction)

1. Effect of Deformation of Structural Frame on Fire Resistance of 

Compartmentation

 Suzuki, J. (Building Research Institute)

2. Fire Safety of Curtain Wall Spandrel -Proposal for Curtain Wall Spandrel 

Board Supported by Structural Members-

 Nishimura, T. (Takenaka, Corporation)

3. Calculation methods for Temperature Rise of Compartment Walls Exposed 

to Fire Heating

 Mizukami, T. (Center for Better Living)

4. An Experimental Study on Fire Resistance of Composite Structure 

Consisting of Steel beam and Partition Wall

 Morita, T. (Shimizu Corporation)

5. Strategic Measure for Ensuring Fire Safety of Buildings after An Earthquake

 Kohno, M. (Tokyo University of Science)

6. Full-scale Fire Test for Wooden 3-Story School Building (Preliminary Test)

 Nii, D. and Yoshioka H. (National Institute for Land and Infrastructure 

 Management) Total 6 Titles
NATIONAL FIRE RESEARCH LABORATORY 

(NFRL) 

At present, there are no science-based, established 

measurement tools to evaluate the performance of an 

entire structure, including connections, under realistic 

fire loads (e.g., uncontrolled fire).

The expanded facility will enable:

• Study of real-scale structural components or systems

• Controlled hydraulic loading simulating service load conditions

• Up to 20 MW fire exposure for 4 hrs

• Measurement of structural performance to incipient collapse

• Characterization of fire intensity (heat release rate)

This combination of features is unique in the world and 

will enable the development of measurement science 

needed for performance-based design methodologies 

for structures in fire. 

3D RENDERING OF NFRL EXPANSION 

Strong floor

Strong wall

Conditioning pit

USA Perspective ( I. Fire-Structure Interaction)

1. Experimental Evaluation of Column Stability and Its Influence on 

Overall Structure Collapse under Fire Loading

 Varma, A. (Purdue University)

2. Barriers to Performance-Based Structural Fire Safety Design

 Engelhardt, M. (University of Texas)

3. Performance and Research Needs for Bridges Subject to Fire

 Garlock, M. and Kodur, V. (Princeton University/Michigan State 

 University)

4. Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

 Jeffers A. (University of Michigan)

5. National Fire Research Laboratory

 Manzello, S (National Institute of Standards and Technology)

Total 5 Titles

1995 Kobe Earthquake January 17, 1995

URBAN FIRES FOLLOWING GREAT 

EARTHQUAKE 

WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE (WUI) FIRES 

FOLLOWING THE GREAT EARTHQUAKE 

the Great East Japan Earthquake March 11, 2011

Otsuchi-cho, IWATE Pref.

WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE (WUI) FIRES 

Of the 10 largest fire loss incidents (> $1B) in U.S. 

history, 5 were WUI fires - all within the last 17 years

WUI – structures and wildland vegetation coexist

WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE (WUI) FIRES 

FOLLOWING THE GREAT EARTHQUAKE 
Japanese Perspective ( II. Urban/WUI fires)

1. Urban Fire Spread Modeling and Loss Prevention Planning

 Himoto, K. (Kyoto University) 

2. Fire Whirls Caused by Urban Conflagration

 Shinohara, M. (National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster)

3. Scale-model Experiment of Large-scale, Wind-aided Fires

 Kuwana, K. (Yamagata University)

4. Investigation and its Characteristic of Post Earthquake Fire at the 3.11.

 Tamura, H. (National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster)

5. Fires and Damages of Oil Tanks Caused by the 3.11 Earthquake

 Nishi, H. (National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster)

6. Experimental Study on the Possibility of the Vehicles Fire in Urban and 

Tsunami Fire - About the Burning Behavior for Motorcycles –

 Matsuyama, K. (Tokyo University of Science)

7. Fires in Non-inundated Area Following the 3.11 Earthquake

 Iwami, T. and Kagiya, K. (National Institute for Land and Infrastructure 

 Management)

8. Qualitative Aspect of the Fires Fueled by the Combustibles Arriving in the 

Vicinity of the Tsunami Refuge Buildings

 Nishino, T. (Kobe University) Total 8 Titles

WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE (WUI) FIRES 

Of the 10 largest fire loss incidents (> $1B) in U.S. 

history, 5 were WUI fires - all within the last 17 years

WUI – structures and wildland vegetation coexist

2007 Southern California Fire

Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fires

2003

Southern California Fire

USA Perspective:( II. Urban/WUI fires)

1. Overview of NIST's Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fire Research

 Manzello, S. (National Institute of Standards and Technology)

2. Evaluating the Vulnerability of Buildings to Wildfire Exposures

 Quarles, S. (Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety)

3. Wildland Fire behavior: Combustion and Dynamics

 Simeoni, A. (Worcester Polytechnic Institute)

4. Determining Firebrand Production from Full Scale Structures and Building 

Components

 Suzuki, S. (National Institute of Standards and Technology)

5. Effect of Physical Properties on the Capability of Hot Particles to Ignite 

Vegetation

 Fernandez-Pello, C. (University of California, Berkeley)

6. Fuel Treatment Impacts to Fire Behavior and Ecosystem Services in the 

Wildland-Urban Interface.

 Dicus, C. (California Polytechnic State University)

7. Fire Exposure of Roof-Mounted Photovoltaic Systems

 Fabian, T. (Underwriters Laboratory)

8. Statistical Modeling of Post-earthquake Ignitions

 Davidson, R. (University of Delaware) Total 8 Titles

Other Programs for future collaboration 

Laboratory Tours

#0 Tokyo University of Science: Fire Resrach and Test Laboratory: 1st JUL.

#1 Building Research Institute : 3rd JUL.

#2 National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster : 4th JUL.

boraFire Spread in urban and WUI fires of great interest

Additional Session:Future Collaboration and Workshop

By exchanging information and ideas, we will discuss to explore areas 

of mutual collaborative interest on two topics.

Also future collaboration possibility in other topics will be welcomed.

Workshop Documentation

NIST will issue a Special Publication

All presentations will be included

A summary manuscript will be published in

Fire Safety Journal

Authored By:

Manzello (NIST) and Yamada (University of Tokyo)

Fernandez-Pello (Berkeley) and Himoto (Kyoto)

Jeffers (U. of Michigan) and Ohmiya (TUS)
Japn/US Workshop at NIST June 27,2011

To explore areas of mutual collaborative interest on Fire Spread in urban and 

WUI fires of great interest o Japan and USA these topics.

Objective of the Workshop

US/Japn Workshop at BRI/NRIFD July 2-4,2012

To open a dialogue for new research collaborations between both countries 

 in an effort to develop scientifically based building codes and standards.

Kickoff Meeting

Formal continuation meeting

Nov.2011:STATEMENT OF INTENT

on International cooperation between JAFSE and NIST

 JAFSE :JAPAN ASSOCIATION FOR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING 

 NIST : NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY )
1

 Background and objective

› Assumption of Fire Resistance Design

› Influence of Deformation of Structural Frame

› Interaction between Structures and non structural 

elements

 (Steel structures, Fire protection , partition wall)

 Experimental study 

› Fire resistance of Partition walls(Drywall of Gypsum 

boards) 

 1- Influence of Horizontal Deformation

 2- Influence thermal stress and/or Axial 

displacement 

› 3- Thermal Behavior of Protected Steel Columns with 

Deformation

 Summary

2

Collapse Temperature

Fire resistance 

design

Structural Stability

Assumption in design

 Collapse temperature(Plastic theory)

 Stress redistribution capacity of the frame

 Structural Frames ≧ a single structural 

 element

 Residual strength after column buckled

 Fire protection and fire compartment 

 Maintain performance until structures 

collapse

Compartmentalization

Small deformation in a fire

Fire barrier

(partition wall /non 

structural element)

Thermal Stress , Large Deformation

Steel Frame

(Structures, 

Column, Beam)

Fire 

room

Adjacent 

room

4

Prescriptive code 

(traditional)

Heavy Protection

Low Temperature

Optimized Protection

High Temperature

Crack of Protection, 

Boards, Opening of 

Joints

Lateral , Axial 

Deformation of column

Partition wall with Thermal 

Stress, Deformation

Change of Collapse 

Mechanism

1- Behavior of Partition Walls with 

 Horizontal Deformation

 -Influence of thermal extension of

 a heated beam

2- Behavior of Partition Walls with 

 thermal stress and forced axial

 deformation 

 -Influence of deflection of a heated

 beam

3- Behavior of heated columns

 with Horizontal Deformation

 - Influence of thermal extension of

 a heated beam

■ Three types of Experiments to clarify the performance 

5

1- Behavior of Partition Walls with 

 Horizontal Deformation

 -Influence of thermal extension of

 a heated beam

2- Behavior of Partition Walls with 

 thermal stress and forced axial

 deformation 

 -Influence of deflection of a heated

 beam

3- Behavior of heated columns 

 with Horizontal Deformation

 - Influence of thermal extension of

 a heated beam

6
7

In-plane Shearing test

-Rough Approximation 

of thermal extension of beam

-Damage of an Earthquake

- Maximum Drift Angle: 0.02(rad)

Fire testing

-Fire resistance of 

damaged wall 

-Heating condition: ISO834 

Loading system in

In-plane shearing test

-0.025

-0.020

-0.015

-0.010

-0.005 0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020 0.025

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Drift angle (radian)

Step

Hydraulic jack

Specimen

Drift Angle of Specimen

8

下張ボード

鋼製下地材

上張ボード

Single-sided Partition Wall

(EV Shaft)

I-構面 1-13

II-構面 14-26

III-構面27-31

加熱面

非加熱面

LGS C-50x45 t=0.8

@455mm 

Gypsum Board 

21mm ((Type X)

Top layer:

Gypsum Board 

21mm (Type X)

■Size

 - Width x Height:2.7m x2.9m

 

■Main Parameter

 - Fastening Strength:

 the number of Staples

 

Staples

Furnace

Room

Thermocouples

(TC)

S-2

Standard

(x 1)

50min

(Insulation)

Specimen

(fastening 

strength)

Resista

nce time

tRF

Damage

After 

shearing

No fall of top layer

S-6

Stales added

(x5.9)

90min

(Insulation)

S-3

Stales added

(x1.6)

53min

(Insulation)

S-4

Stales added

(x2.6)

85min

(Insulation)

S-5

Stales added

(x4.3)

88min

(Insulation)

IR image

At 50min

Falling of 

Top layer

22min 31min

S-2 S-2 SS--33 S-4 S-4 S-5 S-5 S-6 S-6

S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6

S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6

9

Locking Shear failure 

10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400

耐火時間(min)

単位面積当たりの留付強度(kg/m2)

S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6

無損傷試験体S-1の耐火時間

性

能

劣

化

性

能

劣

化

上張ボード31min脱落

上張ボード22min脱落

Fastening Strength of staples(kg/m2)

Fire resistance time (min)

Top layer fell at 22min

Top layer fell at 31min

43min

40min

tFR of S-1 =93min

(w/o damage )

(x2.6)

(x 1)

(x1.6)

(x4.3)

(x5.9)

1- Behavior of Partition Walls with 

 Horizontal Deformation

 -Influence of thermal extension of

 heated beam

2- Behavior of Partition Walls with 

 thermal stress and forced axial

 deformation 

 -Influence of deflection of heated

 beam

3- Behavior of heated columns 

 with Horizontal Deformation

 - Influence of thermal extension of

 heated beam

11

2

Thermal Stress , 

forced Deformation

2

12

■Influence of deflection of heated

 beam

■Main Parameter

 - Forced Axial Displacement

 (Contraction velocity: 0.5mm /hour)

*Displacement was added after

 temperature of steel studs reached to

about 300°C.

■Specimen 

 - With Forced Axial Displacement 

 Full-scale wall

Size: Width x Height:3.1m x3.0m

 - Without Displacement 

 Small wall

 Size: Width x Height:1.5m x1.5m 
熱電対配置図(中規模試験体)

W-A,B,C:3 W-A,B,C:1

W-A,B,C:2

W-A,B,C:7 W-A,B,C:6 W-A,B,C:4

W-A,B,C:5

W-A,B,C:8

W-A,B,C:10

W-A,B,C:9

910

227.5 227.5 227.5 227.5

910

455 455

3100

1550 1550

1550 1550

640 455 455 455 455 640

640 1820 640

455 455 455 455

3100

K型熱電対

W-A,B,C:1 W-A,B,C:3

W-A,B,C:2

W-A,B,C:7

W-A,B,C:8

W-A,B,C:4 W-A,B,C:5

W-A,B,C:6

W-A,B,C:9 W-A,B,C:10

W-A,B,C:11

W-A,B,C:12

W-A,B,C:13

W-A,B,C:14

W-A,B,C:0 強化せっこう

ボード

測定面WA

測定面WC

測定面WB

joints

13

Full-scale Specimen 

with Forced Axial Deformation

Small Specimen 

without Deformation

1.5m

1.5m

3.0m

3.1m

TC

TC

TC

W1 : With Forced Axial Disp.

→Buckling of wall, falling of boards

Ws1 : Without Disp.

→Opening of joints

試験体名 目視

(赤熱確認時) 熱画像(赤熱確認時) 実験後損傷状況(非加熱面) 実験後損傷状況(加熱面)

SS5

S5

14

Symbol Specimen

(Insulation)

IR image

(Insulation)

Unexposed 

surface

Exposed 

surface

W1

Ws1

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Temperature (°C)

Time (min)

Temperature History

S5 SS5

WA面

WB面

WC面

加熱温度

Damage after testing

15

測定面WA

測定面WC

測定面WB

TC

TC

TC Tf

Displacement 

was added

Boards fell

W1 Ws1

W1

Full-scale

Ws1

Small scale

TC WA

TC WB

TC WC

Tf

Boards fell because of large 

deformation and buckling.

1- Behavior of Partition Walls with 

 Horizontal Deformation

 -Influence of thermal extension of

 heated beam

2- Behavior of Partition Walls with 

 thermal stress and forced axial

 deformation 

 -Influence of deflection of heated

 beam

3- Behavior of heated columns 

 with Horizontal Deformation

 - Influence of thermal extension of

 heated beam

16

Structural Steel elements

Steel 

column

Steel 

column

Calcium silicate board

Fire protection

17

■Main Parameter

 - Loading condition: 

 w or w/o Horizontal Displacement

 - Types of Fire protection : 

Mineral Fiber, 

 Calcium silicate board 

■Specimen

 -Steel column 

 - Height : 2m

 -Shape: Boxed shape

 □-150x100

 -B/t : 16.6, 25 

Buckled 

column

■ Influence of thermal extension of a heated beam

G.L 5892

4600

軸力載荷用

油圧ジャッキ

50t 水平力載荷用

油圧ジャッキ

35t

ピン

ピン

耐火被覆

耐火被覆

試験体

鋼管柱

中型複合炉

試験体

被覆材

1500

1500

ピン

ピン ピン

面外変形拘束用

水平材

Experimental apparatus Outline Apparatus

hydraulic jack

for axial force

hydraulic jack for 

horizontal force

jig

Middle size 

furnace for multipurpose use

Specimen

(steel column 

with fire 

protection)

18
G.L 5892

4600

軸力載荷用

油圧ジャッキ

50t 水平力載荷用

油圧ジャッキ

35t

ピン

ピン

耐火被覆

耐火被覆

試験体

鋼管柱

中型複合炉

試験体

被覆材

1500

1500

ピン

ピン ピン

面外変形拘束用

水平材

1Axial Force : P = 0.5 Py

2Heating : ISO834

3Horizontal Disp. At Top of Column 

with the increase in steel 

Temperature

(up to 40mm(1/50 rad.))

4Compress 5% of height after 

column buckled

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Time(min) Temperature(°C)

19

hydraulic jack

for axial force

hydraulic jack for 

horizontal force

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0 200 400 600 800 1000

水平変位(mm)

鋼材温度(°C)

10m 10m 10m

Steel Temp. (°C)

Horizontal Disp. (°C)

Sprayed mineral fiber Calcium silicate board 

20

経過時間

(min)

83 平均温度

(°C)

720 最高温度

(°C)

819 鉛直変位

(mm)

110 水平変位

(mm)

41

中央部のひびが大きく拡大

(長さ15cm,幅7cm)

Axial Strain

5%

経過時間

(min)

56 平均温度

(°C)

580 最高温度

(°C)

615 鉛直変位

(mm)

105 水平変位

(mm)

39

損傷個所が大きく目地を開けることはな かった。幅は最大3mm程度とみられる

Elapsed 

time

83(min)

Temp. avg.

720(°C)

Temp. max

819(°C)

Vertical disp.

110 (mm)

Horizontal

disp.

41 mm

Elapsed time

56(min)

Temp. avg.

580(°C)

Temp. max

615(°C)

Vertical disp.

105 (mm)

Horizontal disp.

39 mm

Width to thickness

ratio 17

Width to thickness

ratio25

21

経過時間

(min)

61.5 平均温度

(°C)

606 最高温度

(°C)

763 鉛直変位

(mm)

101 水平変位

(mm)

39

鉛直変形が5%の瞬間に 被覆材が脱落した

Axial Strain

5%

経過時間

(min)

49.5 平均温度

(°C)

734 最高温度

(°C)

888 鉛直変位

(mm)

106 水平変位

(mm)

40.1 座屈後すぐに、側面の板が脱落し、 軸変形5%時は、ほぼすべての面の被覆

材が脱落した。

Elapsed 

time

61.5(min)

Temp. avg.

606(°C)

Temp. max

763(°C)

Vertical disp.

101 (mm)

Horizontal

disp.

39 mm

Elapsed 

time

49.5(min)

Temp. avg.

734(°C)

Temp. max

888(°C)

Vertical disp.

106 (mm)

Horizontal

disp.

40.1 mm

22

Width to thickness

ratio 17

Width to thickness

ratio25

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

試験体温度(°C)

経過時間(min)

最高温度無載荷

最低温度無載荷

平均温度無載荷

最高温度載荷

最低温度載荷

平均温度載荷

A B CD E F

A:変形角1/200 B:変形角1/100 C:変形角1/50 D:座屈開始

E:鉛直変形5%

F:消火

Width to thickness ratio =17

Horizontal Displacement didn’t have any effect on steel temperature.

Buckling caused increase in steel temperature.

Time (min)

Steel Temperature (°C)

A: Slope angle 1/200

B: Slope angle 1/100

C: Slope angle 1/50

D: Column Buckled

E: Axial strain 5%

F: Fire extinguished

Highest temp. , non-loaded test

Lowest temp., non-loaded test

Average temp., non-loaded test 

Highest temp. , loaded test

Lowest temp., loaded test

Average temp., loaded test 

23

buckling

w/o disp.

w disp.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

試験体温度(°C)

経過時間(min)

最高温度無載荷

最低温度無載荷 平均温度無載荷

最高温度載荷

最低温度載荷 平均温度載荷

A B C D E F

A:変形角1/200 B:変形角1/100 C:変形角1/50 D:座屈開始

E:鉛直変形5%

F:消火

Width to thickness ratio =17

Time (min)

Steel Temperature (°C)

A: Slope angle 1/200

B: Slope angle 1/100

C: Slope angle 1/50

D: Column Buckled

E: Axial strain 5%

F: Fire extinguished

Highest temp. , non-loaded test

Lowest temp., non-loaded test

Average temp., non-loaded test 

Highest temp. , loaded test

Lowest temp., loaded test

Average temp., loaded test 

24

Horizontal Displacement have greater effect on steel temperature.
25

 1- Behavior of Partition Walls with Horizontal Deformation

› Fire testing following In-plane shearing test was conducted.

 In-plane shearing test replicated the rough approximation of extension of a heated beam and damage 

of an earthquake.

› Horizontal deformation decreased the fire resistance of partition 

walls because adherence property between boards lost.

› Higher Fastening strength provided greater fire resistance.

 2- Behavior of Partition Walls with thermal stress and forced 

deformation 

› Thermal stress and deformation decreased fire resistance of 

partition walls

 3- Behavior of heated columns with Horizontal Deformation

› Steel columns protected with Sprayed mineral fiber had greater performance 

than those with board assemblies.

 The interaction between structures and non structural elements is 

important to estimate accurate performance.
COLUMN STABILITY AND INFLUENCE

ON STRUCTURAL COLLAPSE UNDER

FIRE CONDITIONS

Amit H. Varma, Anil Agarwal, and Lisa Choe

Purdue University, Bowen Laboratory

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 Graduate PhD students at Purdue

 Sponsors

 NIST

 NSF

 AISC

 AISI

 Purdue University

OUTLINE

 Introduction - Researcher, University, and Laboratory

 Goal and Objectives

 Part 1 - Collapse Simulation of Building Structures

 Part 2 - Column Stability Analysis

 Part 3 - Experimental Verification

 Summary and Conclusions

INTRODUCTION

 Amit H. Varma

 Associate Professor & University Faculty Scholar

 School of Civil Engineering

 Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906

 (517) 974 0936, (765) 496 3419, 

 ahvarma@purdue.edu

 Bowen Laboratory for Large-Scale Testing

 1040 South River Road

 West Lafayette, IN 47906

BOWEN LABORATORY

 Overall Testing Area Hydraulic Equipment

120 gpm MTS pump and cooler 

2 x 330 kip dynamic actuators 

4 x 220 kip dynamic actuators 

5 x 100 kip static actuators 

4 x 1000 kip cyclic actuators 

2 x 500 kip cyclic actuators

MTS Flex-Test GT Controller with 

8 channels and 4 independent 

stations

Several MTS independent (458) 

controllers

Several Hydraulic Service 

Manifolds (HSM) to facilitate 

dynamic testing. 

Special HSMs to use MST pump 

and hydraulic system to control 

Enerpac actuators

BOWEN LABORATORY

 Heating and Control Equipment

Each heater is 16 in. x 40 in. 

 or, 0.4 m x 1.0 m

More than 25 heaters 

Moveable Power distribution panel 

for Radiant Heaters 
GOAL AND OBJECTIVES

 The goal of the presentation is to familiarize with our 

research approach and some resulting achievements

 The research objectives were to:

 Investigate the collapse behavior of typical steel building 

structures designed and fire protected in the US

 Identify and further analyze the structural components and 

configurations having significant influence on the collapse 

behavior of typical steel building structures. 

 Experimentally verify the findings and hypothesis developed 

using analytical investigations and simulations

 Develop simple design guidelines that could be used to have 

maximum impact on the fire safety of building structures.

Part 1 – Building Collapse Simulation 

 Two different building designs were considered

 Structure is loaded with 1.0DL+ 0.5 LL

 Compartment fire load calculated by using Eurocode 

parametric fire T-t curves

 Heat transfer analysis is conducted to calculated T-t 

across columns, beams, and slabs exposed to fire. 

 All heat transfer modes modeled and verified using test data 

 Explicit dynamic analysis to be able to model instability 

and collapse

310.0

25.4

38.1

63.5 38.1

20.0

31.8

76.1

31.8

W12x19 beam

6.35 mm plate Two 19mm A325 bols

W18x35 beam

Bolt in shear Web in bearing

Plate in bearing One bolt

Gap element

 (+ve)

 (+ve)

Part 1 – Building Collapse Simulations

 Columns are modeled as a series of 2-node linear beam (B31) 

 Composite beams are modeled using 

 B31 elements for steel beams

 Shell (S4R) elements for slab

 Shear connections modeled using Sarraj’s (2007) springs to 

model bearing and shear in bolts

Part 1 – Building Collapse Simulations

 Shear Connection Model Verification

0

50

100

150

200

250

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Tension Force (kN)

Deformation, Δ (mm)

FEM (20 C) FEM (500 C)

Sarraj (500 C) Sarraj (20 C)

AISC (bearing strength criterion; ambient)

Part 1 – Building Collapse Simulations

 Case Study 1 – Interior Core + Design FRR + Corner 

Compartment 

o All four columns fail after 85 minutes of fire

o Column temperature = 560oC

o The floor system continues to fall

o Analysis stopped after the displacements are larger than the story 

height

Compartment in fire

LLRS

-150

-100

-50

0

50

0 30 60 90

Vertical displacement 

(mm)

Time (min)

Part 1 – Building Collapse Simulations

 Case Study 2 – Perimeter MRF + Design FRR + Corner 

Compartment

o Interior gravity column fails after 85 minutes of fire

o Floor system falls by about 1.1 meter and then stabilizes

o Connections failed

o Load gets redistributed to the neighboring columns

o Catenary action was employed to transfer loads

Compartment in fire

MRFs

-1200

-900

-600

-300

0

300

0 60 120 180 240

Vertical displacement 

(mm)

Time (min)
CONCLUSIONS FROM PART 1 AND GOAL FOR PART 2

o Gravity Columns are the weakest links

o Behavior of gravity columns ought to be studied further 

in detail

o Uniformly heated columns

 Simply supported

 Continuous

o Columns with thermal gradient in the cross section

 Gradient along the web

 Gradient along the flanges

o Scope

 Loaded concentrically in compression

 W-shape hot-rolled sections

 Jumbo sections not included

Part 2 – Column Stability Analysis

o Modeling using shell elements

 Shell (S4R) elements

 Residual Stresses ±0.3Fy

 Eurocode Material Properties

 Geometric imperfections

 Buckling mode shapes 

 Amplitude : Length/1500

 Amplitude for local imperfection: 1/16”

o Modeling using beam elements

 Use a number of 2 node beam elements connected in 

series

+0.3 Fy

-0.3 Fy

-0.3 Fy

+0.3 Fy

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

0 200 400 600 800

Normalized Material 

Properties

Temperature (C)

Yield_strength

Elastic Modulus

Proportional Limit

Part 2 – Column Stability Analysis

o All columns buckle in weak axis 

o Global imperfection governs the 

direction of buckling

o Columns with different 

slenderness values were analyzed

 Degradation in column strength is 

bounded by degradation in material 

properties

 Stocky columns are correlated with 

yield stress of steel

 Slender columns are correlate with 

elastic modulus

 A surface can be interpolated from 

the results

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Pn(T) / Pn(20)

Failure Temperature (C)

W12x58 Columns of Different 

Slenderness Values

10

30

40

50

60

80

100

150

λ= L/ry

T (oC)

Pmax (N)

Part 3 – Experimental Verification of Steel Columns 

under Uniform Temperature Loading

 Axial load-axial displacement-temperature responses

 Axial load-end rotation-temperature responses

 Axial load-lateral displacement-temperature responses

Specimen Slenderness (L/ry)

Steel temperature 

(Ts)

Steel yield 

strength (fy)

W8X35-AMB 69 

(Length = 11’-6”)

Ambient 58

W8X35-T300 69 300 oC 58

W8X35-T500 69 500 oC 58

W8X35-T600 69 600 oC 58

W14X53-T500 71 

(Length = 11’-4”)

500 oC 54

W14X53-T600 71 600 oC 54

Test matrix for steel column test under uniform thermal loading

SELF-REACTING COLUMN TEST SETUP

Column length exposed to heating = 2 m

508 mm 460 mm 460 mm 508 mm

Axial 

Load (P)

A B CL D E

760 mm 760 mm

Thermocouples at sections A-E Strain gauges at section CL

Linear displacement

transducer

Rotation

transducer

Axial displacement

Transducer (String-potentiometer)

Part 3 – Experimental Verification Part 3 – Experimental Verification

Test Procedure

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

Axial load, P (kN)

Exposed flange temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time, t (Second)

Temperature

Load

Heating controlled

Initial axial load

W14X53-T500 (Target Ts = 500 oC)

1. Initial axial loading of 133 kN to align the specimen and to confirm

 the concentricity of loading 

2. Increase the steel temperatures until the target value is achieved.

3. Increase axial loads until the buckling occurs. Heating is controlled

 to maintain the target steel temperature.
Column Deflected Shape

At the onset of buckling

Permanent deflected shape

 Failure mode: Flexural buckling (weak-axis)

 No local flange distortion was observed.

ANALYTICAL MODELS FOR COLUMN SPECIMENS

 Detailed 3D finite element models (3D FEM) 

 4-node quadrilateral shell element with reduced integration (S4R 

elements)  Uniform temperature test

 Experimentally measured load histories

 3D conduction heat transfer analysis (Eurocode-3 thermal 

properties)

 3D structural analysis (Eurocode-3 mechanical properties)

Steel Temperature-Time Responses

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(a)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(b)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(c)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel Temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(d)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 20 40 60 80 100

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(e)

W8X35-T300

W8X35-T500

W8X35-T600

W14X53-T500

W14X53-T600

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(a)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(b)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(c)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel Temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(d)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 20 40 60 80 100

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(e)

W8X35-T300

W8X35-T500

W8X35-T600

W14X53-T500

W14X53-T600

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(a)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(b)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(c)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel Temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(d)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 20 40 60 80 100

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(e)

W8X35-T300

W8X35-T500

W8X35-T600

W14X53-T500

W14X53-T600

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

40 60 80 100 120

Time (min)

(a)

40 60 80 100 120

Time (min)

(b)

30 40 50 60 70 80

Time (min)

(c)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel Temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(d)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 20 40 60 80 100

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(e)

5-T300

W8X35-T500

-T600

W14X53-T500

W14X53-T600

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(a)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(b)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(c)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Steel Temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(d)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 20 40 60 80 100

Steel temperature, Ts

(oC)

Time (min)

(e)

W8X35-T300

W8X35-T500

W8X35-T600

W14X53-T500

W14X53-T600

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Flange

Web

Increasing P

Analytical Predictions Vs. Experimental Results 

Thermal Expansion

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

0 100 200 300 400 500

Axial elongation, d/L 

(mm/mm) x 10

-3

Exposed flange temperature, Ts(oC)

Experiment

3D FEM

(a) W14X53-T500

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Axial elongation, d/L 

(mm/mm) x 10

-3

Exposed flange temperature, Ts(oC)

Experiment

3D FEM

(b) W14X53-T600

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Axial elongation, d/L 

(mm/mm) x 10

-3

Exposed flange temperature, Ts(oC)

Experiment

3D FEM

(a ) W8X35-T300

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 100 200 300 400 500

Axial elongation, d/L 

(mm/mm) x10

-3

Exposed flange temperature, Ts(oC)

Experiment

3D FEM

(b) W8X35-T500

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Axial elongation, d/L 

(mm/mm) x 10

-3

Exposed flange temperature, Ts(oC)

Experiment

3D FEM

(c) W8X35-T600

The measured expansion coefficient of the structural steel 

columns = 11~13 x10-6 oC-1

Analytical Predictions Vs. Experimental Results 

Column Load vs. End Rotations

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 Axial load, P (kN)

End rotation, q (Degree)

Experiment 3D FEM

(a) W8X35-T300 Target Ts = 300 oC

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 Axial load, P (kN)

End rotation,  (Degree)

(b) W8X35-T500 Target Ts = 500 oC

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 Axial load, P (kN)

End rotation,  (Degree)

(c) W8X35-T600 Target Ts = 600 oC

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 Axial load, P (kN)

End rotation,  (Degree)

3D FEM

Experiment

(a) W14X53-T500 Target Ts = 500 oC

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 Axial load, P (kN)

End rotation,  (Degree)

(a) W14X53-T500 Target Ts = 600 oC

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Axial load, P (kN)

Lateral displacement, c(mm)

(a) W8X35-T600 Target Ts = 600 oC

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Axial load, P (kN)

Lateral displacement, c(mm)

(b) W14X53-T500 Target Ts = 500 oC

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

-5 0 5 10 15 20 Axial load, P (kN)

Lateral displacement, c(mm)

(c) W14X53-T600 Target Ts = 600 oC

Analytical Predictions Vs. Experimental Results 

Column Load vs. Lateral and Axial Displacements

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Axial displacement, 0 1000 2000 3000 4000

d (mm)

Time, t (Second)

Experiment

3D FEM

W8X35-T600

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Axial displacement, 

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

d (mm)

Time, t (Second)

Experiment

3D FEM

W14X53-T600
Analytical Predictions Vs. Experimental Results 

Column Load vs. Axial Displacement

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

0 1 2 3 4 5 Load (kN)

Axial displacement (mm)

Fiber model 3D FEM

Experiment

(a) W8x35-T300

Target Temp. = 300 oC

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Load (kN)

Axial displacement (mm)

Fiber model 3D FEM

Experiment

(b) W8x35-T500

Target Temp. = 500 oC

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

0 1 2 3 4 5 Load (kN)

Axial displacement (mm)

Fiber model 3D FEM

Experiment

(c) W8X35-T600

Target Temp. = 600 oC

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Load (kN)

Axial displacement (mm)

Fiber model 3D FEM

Experiment

(a) W14x53-T500

Target Temp. = 500 oC

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Load (kN)

Axial displacement (mm)

Fiber model 3D FEM

Experiment

(b) W14X53-T600

Target Temp. = 600 oC

y = -0.0009x + 1.013 R2 = 0.9261

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Pu

/Pu,amb

Ts (oC)

Series2

Series5

o

+

[EXP] W8X35

[Design Eqn] W8X35

[EXP] W14X53

[Design Eqn] W14X53

Part 3 – Experimental Verification

Test Results vs. Predictions

Column Load Capacity vs. Temperature

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

 Research approach was to:

 Investigate the overall collapse behavior of gravity frames 

in steel building structures. Identify the critical components 

contributing to this collapse

 Investigate the fundamental behavior and stability of the 

critical components identified by system analysis (in this 

case columns). 

 Conduct experimental investigations to verify the results of 

analytical simulations on components

 Uniform heating of columns

 Behavior of continuous columns

 Effects of thermal gradients on columns

 Develop structural performance based design guidelines 

for columns.

DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR COLUMNS

o Use AISC ambient equations 

o With equivalent bilinear stress-strain curves

Eurocode Stress-strain

Strain

Stress

AISC (13th ed.)

ET

Fy

T

Equivalent stress-strain

A1

A2

A1=A2

0.002

Ep

EVALUATION OF DESIGN EQUATION

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 200 400 600 800

Pn

T / A.Fy20

Temperature (oC)

Slenderness = 30 Eurocode

AISC

Takagi

Proposed

W12X58 Abaqus

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 200 400 600 800

Pn

T / A.Fy20

Slenderness = 50

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0 200 400 600 800

Pn

T / A.Fy20

Slenderness = 80

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0 200 400 600 800

Pn

T / A.Fy20

Slenderness = 100

AISC (2005)

T. D., AISC (2010)

o Cold columns above and below the heated column provide 

rotational restraints

 Desirable behavior

 Reduces the effective length or ‘k’ value to less than 1.0

o Eurocode recommends

 k =0.5, if restrained at both ends

 k =0.7, if restrained at one ends

 It is a very simplistic approach

 Assumes that the cold columns provide complete fixity

 Given that no fixity is considered at ambient conditions

 Therefore amount of fixity should be a function of temperature too.

Uniformly Heated Continuous Columns

30
o Modeling

 3-column sub-system modeled in ABAQUS.

 Intermediate column modeled using shell elements

 Boundary columns modeled using beam elements

 Rest of the procedure remains same as simply-supported column

λy=30

λy=60

λy=100

Inelastic buckling 

Three hinge locations

Squashing

Predominantly elastic buckling

Uniformly Heated Continuous Columns

31

0

30

60

90

120

0 30 60 90 120

Effective Slenderness

Actual Slenderness

20

100

200

300

400

500

600

20 oC

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

0 50 100 150

Load Capacity (kN)

Slenderness

300 oC

S.S. - Empirical

Restrained - Empirical

Restrained - effective slenderness

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

0 50 100 150

Load Capacity (kN)

Slenderness

500 oC

S.S. - Empirical

Restrained - Empirical

Restrained - effective slenderness 0

400

800

1,200

1,600

0 50 100 150

Load Capacity (kN)

Slenderness

600 oC

S.S. - Empirical

Restrained - Empirical

Restrained - effective slenderness

600 oC

0

30

60

90

120

0 30 60 90 120

Effective Slenderness

Actual Slenderness

20

100

200

300

400

500

600

Design Equation

(Uniformly Heated Continuous Columns)

FUTURE WORK

 Collapse simulations used to determine next critical 

component after columns

 Gravity floors and associated shear connections

 Simulations of behavior done

 Experimental verifications of findings ongoing

Part 1 – Building Collapse Simulations

 Fire Scenarios

Building with perimeter MRFs

5

th story

Corner compartment

Building with Interior core

5

th story

Corner compartment

Compartment in fire

LLRS

Compartment in fire

MRFs

N

 

Compartment in fire

MRFs

Building with perimeter MRFs

5

th story

Interior compartment

Part 1 – Building Collapse Simulations

 Thermal Loading + Fire Protection Parameter

All the components 

rated for 1 hr FRR 

(design FRR)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 60 120 180 240

Parametric Fire

Columns: 2 hr FRR (safe);

Other components: 1 hr 

FRR

Columns: 2 hr FRR (safe);

Beams: unprotected

or

or

Gravity columns 

fail

No failure

Gravity beam fails 

in the heating 

phase

Shear connections 

fail in the cooling 

phase
Fire Safety of Curtain Wall Spandrel

Toshihiko Nishimura

– Proposal for Curtain Wall Spandrel Board 

Supported by Structural Members –

Research & Development Institute, 

Takenaka Corporation 

2

nd

 US Japan Fire Workshop 2012

INTRODUCTION 

2

Toshihiko NISHIMURA 

Research & Development Institute, 

Takenaka Corporation 

Business: Building construction work, etc 

Founded: 1610 

No. of employees: 7,570 (as of January 2012) 

Specialities (Main Work) 

 RC structures (column, beam, slab) 

 Steel Structures (column, beam, truss)

 SC structures (CFT column, SC beam)

 Fire compartment (partition wall, curtain wall)

Tokyo Tower 

Tokyo Dome 

Fukuoka Dome 

Tokyo Opera City 

Umeda Sky Building 

Takenaka Tokyo Main 

Office 

Research & Develop & Design

for fire-resistance of building structure

OBJECT OF RESEARCH 

3

Metal Curtain Wall 

Examples of curtain wall buildings constructed by Takenaka Corporation 

Currently under 

construction 

Composition of Curtain Wall 

4

▽FL

▽FL

Fire-resistant 

board 

Glass window 

Aluminum mullion Aluminum transom 

Spandrel area 

Vision area 

 Frames normally formed from 

aluminum mullions and transoms 

 Consist of a vision area and 

a spandrel area 

 In the spandrel area, 

Fire-resistant board fitted to the 

inside of the glass

[Section] 

Glass 

Fireresistant 

board 

Spandrel area 

[Elevation] 

Support on four 

sides by the 

aluminum frame

Outdoor indoor

Role of the spandrel 

5

Fire-resistant board 

Aluminum 

mullion 

Glass 

Prevent flames 

from spreading to the upper floor 

Spandrel 

Role 

Window glass 

Aluminum transom 

Flames ejected from window

Issue of Japanese Curtain Wall 

6

 Fire-resistant board is supported by an aluminum frame 

 Aluminum melts at about 660C 

 The temperature of fires fully developed is about 1000C 

The aluminum will melt and the fire-resistant board will fall out 

There is a highly possibility

<Example of the test>

 The two layers melted

 Only one layer remained

 (board escape falling somehow) 

TEST RESULTS

inside

outside

mullion

board

1 hour
Technical Advice 

7

Technical advice was issued (2008ad by the Ministry)

 Indoor side of mullions to be given the fireproof covering

 Fire-resistant boards to be directly supported 

by a structural member (column, beam, slab) 

 Fire-resistant boards to be structurally separated 

from aluminum frame 

to prevent the fire-resistant board from falling out 

■Purpose

■Contents -Regulation Pont -

Confusion Caused by the Technical Advice 

8

 Aim was appropriate 

 Only the concepts were given 

 No specific methods were given

Demanded overspecified design 

by the performance evaluation organization

Technical Advice

Specifications Recommended 

by Performance Evaluation Organizations 

9

Sprayed rockwool

RC slab 

Steel frame 

Fire-resistant board 

Aluminum transom 

Glass window 

Fire-resistant board 

supported by steel frame 

Steel frame directly supported 

by a structural member 

 Steel frame protected 

 with fire-resistive covering 

 Bad Workability 

 Jamed detail

 High cost 

Following problems

araise

Development of New Support Method 

10

Embedded fitting Closure plate 

Fire-resistant board

(supported 

by structural 

member) 

Bracket

(screw embedded in board)

Counterbore Closure plate

Embedded fitting

 The fitting is embedded in the fire-resistant board

 A bracket is connected to the embedded fitting with a bolt

 A counterbore is provided, by applying a closure plate 

the joint fixture cannot directly seen from outside

■ Basic composition ■ Method of support on the floor 

Bracket 

Bolt

(A joint development by Takenaka Corporation and Japan Insulation Co., Ltd. )

Embedded fitting

(Xonotlite calcium silicate board )

supported by structural member

■ Feature

・ good cost

・ good workability

・ good design

Characteristics of the Technology 

Developed 

11

 Performance evaluation organizations 

never allow penetration by a bolt 

Local stress 

concentration 

Fire-resistant 

board 

A crack can occur in the board 

when subjected to earthquake or wind 

Bolt 

 In this new technology 

the board is supported on the surface 

Prevents local stress concentration 

Embedded fitting 

Plate of Joint fixture 

Closure plate 

Bracket Plate 

Bolt 

Packing 

shows superior performance

in earthquakes and wind 

Structural Tests 

12

■Vibration test

◆ Structural tests was carried out

■Shear test ■Tension test ■Bending test 

■Full-size test 

1 million cycles 

Watertightness, wind resistance, 

and seismic resistance 

■Creep test 

being measured more than 3 years

◆ Superior structural performance was confirmed
Fire-resistance Tests 

– Problem Points in the Conventional Method –

13

■ Conventional testing method of Japan 

Reverse side Heating

Fire-resistant

board

Board is heated from one side

(glass)

Board closure

■ Actual building 

Board is heated from both sides 

Conventional test method cannot reflect the situation of fire appropriately 

Flames ejected 

from window Indoor fire 

Wall furnace

Fire-resistance Tests 

– Proposal of a New Test and Evaluation Method –

14

Furnace wall

Weight (applied load)

Heating

(indoor fire) 

Heating

(flame ejected 

from window) 

Furnace cover

Fire-resistant board

Floor slab(RC)

Direct support by RC slab

Outdoor 

side Indoor side 

(placed above the furnace) 

Fire resistant 

furnace 

Gap closure (rockwool)

 Fire-resistant board directly supported by RC slab 

 Heating from both sides

 Weight placed below the board

This method can reflect the situation of building fire appropriately

Outline of the specimen (1) 

15

RC スラブ

おもり

2500mm

炉壁

ボード支持部

ボード幅(1200, 1500, 1800mm)

耐火炉

おもり

耐火ボード

(2 点で支持)

耐火ボード

床スラブ

埋め込み金物

ボルト

ファスナープレート

ボルト

塞ぎ板

縁明き長さ(50, 100mm)

屋外側 屋内側

耐火ボード

隙間塞ぎ材

(ロックウール)

隙間塞ぎプレート

埋め込み金物

ファスナープレート

床スラブ

塞ぎ板

[Front elevation] Board width (1,200, 1,500, 1,800mm) [Sectional view] 

RC slab 

Furnace wall 

Fire-resistant 

board 

Weight 

Board support 

(supported at two 

points) 

Fire-resistant 

furnace 

Weight 

Outdoor side Indoor side 

Embedded fitting 

Closure 

plate 

Fire-resistant 

board 

Gap closure 

material 

(rockwool) 

80kg/m3

Fastener plate 

Floor slab 

Gap closure plate 1.6mm

Floor slab 

Bolt 

Fastener plate 

Bolt 

Closure 

plate 

Fire-resistant 

board Embedded fitting 

Edge distance (50, 100mm) 

Outline of the specimen (2) 

16

耐火ボード 

ボード支持部 

RC スラブ 

セラミックブランケット 観察窓 炉蓋 

11200, 1500, 1800mm

2 50, 100 mm 

3 50, 75, 100 kg 

Ceramic bracket 

1 50

2 100

3 1500 1400 50

4 1700 50 100

5 1600 100 75

25 1000

1800

1200 1100

50

縁明き

(mm)

作用

荷重

(kg)

試験体 厚み

(mm)

高さ

(mm) 幅(mm) 支点間(mm)

耐火ボード(ゾノトライト系繊維混入けい酸カルシウム板)

Specimen

NO. Thickness Height Width 

(mm)

Distance 

between 

supports

(mm) 

Edge distance 

Fire-resistant board (xonotlite calcium silicate board with fiber) Mas of 

weight 

Board support 

Fire-resistant 

board 

Observation 

window Furnace cover

RC slab 

Distance between supports 

2Edge distance 

1Board width 

3mass of weight

Parameters

Test Results 

17

17

Failure state (NO.4) 

 Crack appeared at support

 board fell down 

 NO.4 failed at 26 min. 

1 119 - ボード支持部

2 - 122 おもり支持部

3 - 156 ボード支持部

4 26 - ボード支持部

5 - 153 ボード支持部

破壊位置

破壊時間(分)

試験体 加熱中 2時間加熱

終了後

Specimen

NO. During heating 

Failure time (minutes) 

After completion of 

two-hour heating 

Failure position 

At board support 

At weight support 

At board support 

At board support 

At board support 

Board width:1800 mm, edge distance:50 mm, load :100 kg

26min

 Other specimen showed 2-hours fire-resistance.

most severe condition

Consideration of the Tests 

18

 The board width and the edge distance 

especially affect the fire-resistance. 

 Even when the board width is long, 

it is possible to ensure the fire-resistance 

if the edge distance is long. 

Distance between supports 

Edge distance 

Board width 

No.

Board width 

(distance between 

supports)

Edge 

distance Weight Fire-resistane time 

2

1,200mm

(1,100mm) 50mm 100kg More than 2 hours 

4

1,800mm

(1,700mm) 50mm 100kg 26 min. 

5

1,800mm

(1,600mm) 100mm 75kg More than 2 hours 

Edge distance 
Conclusion 

19

 A new method of supporting CW fire-resistant board 

has been proposed. 

 A new fire-resistance test and evaluation method of 

CW fire-resistant board has been proposed. 

 It has been confirmed that the proposed method is 

capable of ensuring a 2-hour fire-resistance. 

 Using the developed technology, it is possible to 

dramatically improve fire-resistance of curtain walls 

without increasing the cost and reducing the 

workability. 

 

20

END

Thank you for your attention 
Barriers to PerformanceBased Structural-Fire Safety 

Design

Michael D. Engelhardt

Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

US-Japan Workshop for

Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fires

July 2-4, 2012

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan

1 2

What is Performance-Based StructuralFire Safety Design ?

• Structure and structural-fire protection is engineered to 

achieve specific performance requirements.

3

Why Performance-Based Structural-Fire 

Safety Design ?

• Reduce cost of structural-fire protection.

• Enhance structural-fire safety of large, complex, or 

important buildings.

• Provide more quantifiable levels of structural-fire safety.

• Accommodate changing architectural trends in 

buildings.

• Mitigate risks of fire following other extreme events 

(earthquakes, terrorist attacks, vehicle impact, 

accidental explosions, etc.)

4

Architectural trends in building design.......

• Large open floor plans.

• Little compartmentation.

• Most partitions not fire rated and not full story 

height.

• Large floor-to-floor openings.

• More varied and complex architectural and 

structural forms.

5 6
7 8

Key Elements of Performance-Based 

Structural-Fire Safety Design......

Model Fire

Heat 

Transfer 

Analysis

Structural 

Analysis

9

Prescriptive 

Structural-Fire 

Safety Design

Performance-Based 

Structural-Fire 

Safety Design

Element Level 

Analysis

System Level 

Analysis

Key Elements of Performance-Based 

Structural-Fire Safety Design......

10

Barriers to Performance-Based StructuralFire Safety Design......

• Inadequate education of structural engineers.

• Building design culture.

• Inadequate building standards.

• Lack of consensus based performance criteria.

• Technical knowledge gaps.

• Lack of design tools.

11

Critical Barrier to Performance-Based 

Structural-Fire Safety Design......

Design fires for structural-fire safety design

12

Design Fires Structural-Fire Safety Design......

Options for Element Level analysis:

• Code specified standard fires:

ASTM E119

ISO 834

Etc.

• Compartment fire models

One-zone

Two-zone

• Parametric time-temperature curves

• Empirical time-temperature curves

• Local fire models

Good guidance in 

codes and in literature

Inadequate for 

system-level structurefire analysis
13

Design Fires Structural-Fire Safety Design......

Options for System Level analysis:

• CFD Analysis (FDS)

• Judgment ???

• Others ???

Little guidance in 

codes and in literature

CFD analysis 

impractical for routine 

design

Key technical barrier to performance-based structuralfire safety design:

Lack of information and guidance on Design Fires for

System Level analysis and design. 14

Some Examples of Major Structure Fires......

Meridian Plaza 

Parque Central East

Windsor Tower

Delft – Faculty of Architecture Building

WTC 1 & 2

One Meridian Plaza

Philadelphia

38 stories

Fire: February 1991

Fire burned 19 hours over 8 stories

Parque Central East Tower

Caracas, Venezuela

56 stories

Fire: October 2004

Fire burned 24 hours over 17 stories

Windsor Building

Madrid, Spain

32 stories

Fire: February 2005

Fire burned approx. 24 hours

Large portions of upper stories 

collapsed.
Faculty of Architecture Building

Technical University at Delft, Netherlands.

14 story Reinforced Concrete Building.

Fire: May 28, 2008

Fire burned for about 7 hours.

Fire caused complete collapse of wing of building.

21 22

23

World Trade Center Collapses

September 11, 2001
25

Ref: Report NCSTAR1- Final Report on the Collapse of the World 

Trade Center Towers, NIST 2005 26

Some Characteristics of Major Structure 

Fires......

• Fires move horizontally and vertically through 

building.

• Horizontal extent of very high temperatures 

(temperatures significant to structural response) 

does not include entire space.

• Multiple adjacent floors burning simultaneously.

• Doubtful that fire environment can be adequately 

characterized by simple fire models (standard 

fires, compartment fire models, etc.)

27

Key Research Need for Performance-Based 

Structural-Fire Safety Design...

• Better understand and characterize fires in 

building with large non-compartmented spaces 

with horizontal and vertical (floor-to-floor) 

movement of fire.

• Develop guidance for Design Fires for systemlevel structural-fire safety design that makes 

sense for modern building architecture.

28

Some Key Questions and Issues...

• What is the horizontal variation of gas 

temperatures for a fire in a large open space or 

for a fire in a partitioned space (but not fire 

rated partitions); and how does this affect 

structural response ?

• How do fires move horizontally and how does 

this affect structural response ?

• Are simultaneous fires on adjacent floors 

important for structural response ?

• How can we simplify this for structural-fire 

safety design ?

29

How do we move forward ?......

• Need close collaboration between fire 

modeling specialists and structure-fire 

specialists.

• Need to study past major fires in greater detail.

• Need detailed analysis (FDS + heat transfer to 

structure + structural analysis) for a range of 

building layouts representative of modern 

building design practice......analysis similar to 

NIST WTC study.

• Need to understand and simplify.
Simple Calculation Methods for 

Temperature Rise of Walls and Partitions 

Exposed to Fire Heating

Tensei Mizukami

The Center for Better Living

Scope

 Back ground & Fire Test for mud-plastered 

wall ~ Basic Concept ~

 Model description & validation for uniform 

heating temperature

 Application for time-temperature curve

Numerical models are being developed...but,

 Limited experimental data

→Make use of existing FR test results 

 For fire safety design,

 evaluation on the safety side is OK

 

→Simplification

& generalization

Performance-based approach

Sophistication & Accuracy

Experiment

4 weeks

4 weeks

Bamboo lath

Foundation coat

Back side

Middle coat

10 Days

Finishing coat

Mud-plastered wall

Specimen 

Assembly

A-1

Bamboo lath

Mud-plastered wall 40mm

b

a

d

Exposed

surface

Moisture 

content

3.8±0.4%

Thermocouple number

(the distance from the surface)

a---TC 1 (14mm)

b---TC 2 (26mm)

d---TC 3 (40mm)

Assembly

A-2 b

a

c

d

Bamboo lath

Mud-plastered wall 55mm

Exposed

surface Thermocouple number

(the distance from the surface)

a---TC 4 (14mm)

b---TC 5 (26mm)

c---TC 6 (40mm)

d---TC 7 (55mm)

Assembly

A-3 b

a

c

d

Bamboo lath

Mud-plastered wall 70mm

Exposed

surface

Thermocouple number

(the distance from the surface)

a---TC 8 (29mm)

b---TC 9 (41mm)

c---TC10 (55mm)

d---TC11 (70mm)

Assembly

B-1

Bamboo lath

Mud-plastered wall 40mm

b

a

d

Exposed

surface

Moisture 

content

7.6%

Thermocouple number

(the distance from the surface)

a---TC12 (14mm)

b---TC13 (26mm)

d---TC14 (40mm)

Result 

Temperature development on equal distance and 

moisture content

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 20 40 60 80 100 Time(min)

TC3(40mm)

TC6(40mm)

TC9(41mm)

TC7(55mm)

TC10(55mm)

Temperature (°C)
Hypothesis

Temp development with different distance from . exposed surface T

v

180K

dw t wet t

vt

time

:

:

:

:

wet

dw

v

v

t thermal resistant time

for moisturecontaining wall

t thermal resistant time for dry wall

t thermal retardant timeby moisture

T temperature of vaporization

temperature development

for moisturecontaing wall

temperature development

for dry wall wet dw v t t t   dw t

2

x

t

 , 

f

T x t

T





time T x t  1

, 

Temp.

Tf

Dry wall model

180K

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 0.5 1 1.5 2

ψ

ξ

ψ=erfc(ξ) ψ=1-ξ 0≦ξ≦0.6 ψ=0.8-(2/3)ξ 0.6<ξ≦0.9 ψ=0.5-(1/3)ξ 0.9<ξ≦1.2 ψ=0.3-(1/6)ξ 1.2<ξ≦1.5 ψ=0.2-(1/10)ξ 1.5<ξ≦2.0

  0

0

,

s 2

T x t T x

erfc T T t

  

     

   

2 2

1

, ,

2

dw n n n n

s s

T x t T x t x

t A B R R

T T 





                          

Semi-infinite body theory Temperature development

Thermal resistant time for dry wall

   

2 2

1

, ,

2

dw n n n n

s s

T x t T x t x

t A B R R

T T 





                          

Approx. # An Bn

The range of application

Rn-1 Non-dimentional temp. Rn

1 2 10 0 ≦   T x t T  , /  s ≦ 0.05

2 1.8 6 0.05 ≦   T x t T  , /  s ≦ 0.1

3

4

5

1.5

1.2

1

3

1.5

1

0.1

0.2

0.4

≦

≦

≦

  T x t T  , /  s

  T x t T  , /  s

  T x t T  , /  s

≦

≦

≦

0.2

0.4

1.0

    0

1

, ,

:

, : . .#

, : .

n n

n n

T x t T x t T

determined temperature rise

R R upper and lower limit of the non dimentional temp riseto applythe approx

A B coefficient given bythe range of non dimentional temp rise



  





Re-defined moisture effect

T

v

vt

time Temp.

T

v

vt

time Temp.

Empirical result Analytical approach

No stagnation, but delayed

Stagnation time Thermal retardation time

Moving boundary approach

 Stagnation time should be smoothed out

 so as not to be affected by resolution

Moisture retardant model

Tf

Tv

T0

Dry wall Moisture containgwall

x

dx Everporation point at t dt 

q



q dA dt L  dx dA w



      

Conservation of energy : 

Heat flux to evaporation point :

T T f v q D

x





    

2

3

2

4.9 10

















 























 x

D C T T

t

w f v

v

 

xdx

T T

L

D

dt

f v

w







1  

Thermal retardant time by moisture

 

2

3 4.9 10

2

v

w f v

x

t

D C T T





    

              

:

:

:

:

:

f

v

w

T temperature at fire exposed surface

T evaporationtemperature

D propotionality constant for convective heat flux

moisture content of the wall dry base

C specific heat of the wall



 

 

2 2 2 3

, 4.9 10

2 2 wet n n

s w f v

T x t x x t A B

T D C T T



 

          

                      

 

TR time for dry wall Retardant time by moisture

Total thermal resistant time
Validation

Dry wall model

 Surface temp. ≒ Heating temp. ?

Moisture retardant model

 The proportional constant D ?

Validation 

 by numerical 1-D conductive model

Numerical model

w qv

x

T

t

T C  











2

2

 

Fourier’s law of conduction in 1-D with heat absorption by vaporization :

Boundary condition :

 

 













   



 

  



 

q x L

x

T

q x

x

T

o

i







 0

Incident heat flux to the surface :

   

   

4 4

, ,

4

,1

4

,1

o o w n o o w n o

i i f w i f w

q h T T T T

q h T T T T



   



   

 

 





At evaporation temperature:

2

,

2

,

v i

v

w

T W q

q

x t L



 

  

  Tf Tw,1

Tw,2 Tw,n1

Tw,n

x

To

Exposed

x / 2 x

x

Unexposed

density

[kg/m3]

Heat capacity

[kJ/kg K]

Conductivity

×10-3[kW/m K]

1360 0.88 0.4

Material properties:

Validation I

Surface temp. ≒ Heating temp.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Time(min)

Tf = 1000°C

Tf = 800°C

Tf = 600°C

Tf = 400°C

Exposed surface Temp. (°C)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 The distance from the exposed surface(mm)

Tf = Ts Tf = 1000°C

Tf = 800°C

Tf = 600°C

Tf = 400°C

The thermal resistance time (min)

Calculated surface temp. (°C) Thermal resistance time. (min)

Time (min) Distance from exposed surface (mm)

0.6

0.65

0.7

0.75

0.8

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Moisture cotent (%)

The proportional constant: D

0

30

60

90

120

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

3.75%(numerical value) 7.5%(numerical value) 15%(numerical value) 30%(numerical value) 3.75%(regression eqn.) 7.5%(regression eqn.) 15%(regression eqn.) 30%(regression eqn.)

The distance from the exposed surface (mm)

Thermal retardant time (min)

Validation II

The proportional constant D 

Thermal retardant time by moisture(min) Proportional constant D

Distance from exposed surface (mm) Moisture content (%)

6 2 t x v

    7.3 10 

6 2 t x v

    8.1 10 

  

6 2 8.4 10 sec : vt x x m     

6 2 t x v

    7.6 10 

0.049log 0.8 D   e

Application for FR test

Equivalent averaged heating temp.

0

400

800

1200

0 15 30 60 90 120

742

930

1042

1/6 T T t f  

0   

   

1/6 1/6

, 0 0

,

6

/

7

6

7

t

f e

f e f

T T t dt t t

T t T t

    

  



Standard time-temp. curve(β=460) Equivalent averaged heating temp.

 : fire growth rate

Application for FR test

Dry wall model

Thermal resistant time for dry wall

 

 

 

  





















 





































  



n

f e d w

n

f e d w

d w n n R

T t

T x t R

x

T t

T x t

t A B

,

1

2

2

,

,

2

,



Distance reached temp. criteria at given time

 

 

 

  





















 





















   n

f e d w

d w n

f e d w

n n R

T t

T x t

t R

T t

T x t

x A B

,

1

1/ 2

,

, , 2 
Application for FR test

Moisture retardant model

Thermal retardant time

Since

   

2

,

3

2

4.9 10











































 x

D C T t T

t

w f e v v

v

T t T f e v v ,   

, let

   

1/ 6

, , 0 7

6

f e v v f e v v T t  T  T t  T  t

Thermal retardant time (Approx. equation)

6 / 7

2

3

6 2

4.9 10 7







































 

 x

D C

t

w

v

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 The distance from fire exposed surface(mm)

Assembly A-1 Assembly A-2 Assembly A-3 Assembly B-1

Thermal diffusivity×10-6(m2/s)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 20 40 60 80 100 Temperature(°C)

Thermal diffusivity×10-6(m2/s)

Application for FR test 

Apparent thermal diffusivity

Thermal diffusivity x 10-6(m2/s) (TC6)

Temperature(°C) Distance from exposed surface (mm)

Thermal diffusivity x 10-6(m2/s) (each TCs)

 

 

2 2

,

,

2

n n

f e dw dw

T x t x A B

T t t





    

                0

30

60

90

120

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 The distance from the exposed surface(mm)

Total thermal resistant time (numerical result)

Dry wall thermal resistant time (Simple formula)

Total thermal resistant time (Simple formula)

Total thermal resistant time (Expriment)

Total / Dry wall thermal resistant time (min) [ΔT(x,t)=180K, φ=3.75%]

0

30

60

90

120

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 The distance from the exposed surface(mm)

Total thermal resistant time (Numerical result)

Dry wall thermal resistant time (Simple formula)

Total thermal resistant time (Simple formula)

Total thermal resistant time (Experiment)

Total / Dry wall thermal resistant time (min) [ΔT(x,t)=80K, φ=3.75%]

Comparison

Thermal resistant time (min.) 

Distance from exposed surface (mm) Distance from exposed surface (mm)

Thermal resistant time (min.) 

ΔT(x,t)=80K, φ=3.75% ΔT(x,t)=180K, φ=3.75%

Contribution ratio of moisture is 1/3 Contribution ratio of moisture is 1/5

0

30

60

90

120

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 The distance from the exposed surface(mm)

Total thermal resistant time (Numerical result)

Dry wall thermal resistant time (Simple formula)

Total thermal resistant time (Simple formula)

Total thermal resistant time (Experiment)

Total / Dry wall thermal resistant time (min) [ΔT(x,t)=180K, φ=7.5%]

0

30

60

90

120

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 The distance from the exposed surface(mm)

Total thermal resistant time (numerical result)

Dry wall thermal resistant time (Simple formula)

Total thermal resistant time (Simple formula)

Total thermal resistant time (Expriment)

Total / Dry wall thermal resistant time (min) [ΔT(x,t)=180K, φ=3.75%]

Comparison

Thermal resistant time (min.) 

Distance from exposed surface (mm) Distance from exposed surface (mm)

Thermal resistant time (min.) 

ΔT(x,t)=180K, φ=7.5% ΔT(x,t)=180K, φ=3.75%

Summary

 Fire resistant test for Mud-plastered wall 

was investigated with different x and φ.

Hypothesis was derived: twet=tdw+tv

 Simple equations were proposed for 

thermal resistant time.

 A good agreement was obtained and 

identified the contribution ratio of moisture

Future work

 Application for multi-layer wall

 The use of cone calorimeter for quick 

reference
An Experimental Study on Fire Resistance 

of Composite Structure Consisting of Steel 

Beam and Partition Wall

JAFSE – NIST Workshop

July 2, 2012

Takeshi Morita, Shimizu Corporation

Contents of Presentation

 Objective

 Performance to be Validated

 Full Scale Fire Test – with loading

 S ll S l Fi T Small Scale Fire Test – wi h l di ithout loading

 Simplified Calculation for Temperature on 

Back Side Surface of Steel Beam

 Conclusions

Contents of Presentation

 Objective

 Performance to be Validated

 Full Scale Fire Test – with loading

 S ll S l Fi T Small Scale Fire Test – wi h l di ithout loading

 Simplified Calculation for Temperature on 

Back Side Surface of Steel Beam

 Conclusions

Objective

 To reduce fire protection on steel beams

 Especially steel beams around ELV shaft

 Because of 

 Time consuming process for construction Time consuming process for construction

ex. Assembling scaffold in the shaft 

 Very low fire load

Schematic Diagram of Composite 

Structure consisting of Beam and Wall 

Light-gauge 

t lf

Steel Beam

Fire Protection Possible to 

construct 

only from the 

Gypsum board steel frame

Fire side

office room etc.

Non-fire side

(ELV etc.)

Conventional Development

y

room side

Room ELV

Contents of Presentation

 Objective

 Performance to be Validated

 Full Scale Fire Test – with loading

 S ll S l Fi T Small Scale Fire Test – wi h l di ithout loading

 Simplified Calculation for Temperature on 

Back Side Surface of Steel Beam

 Results
Performance to be Validated

 Integrity: Steel beam – wall interaction

 Is the wall collapsed as the result of 

deformation of a steel beam?

Front View Cross-sectional View

Performance to be Validated

 Thermal Insulation: Temperatures on non 

heated surface of steel beam

 When does the temperature rise exceed 140K 

on average and 180K at the maximum? on average and 180K at the maximum?

180K

140K

Time

Temp.

Ave.

Contents of Presentation

 Objective

 Performance to be Validated

 Full Scale Fire Test – with loading

 Small Scale Fire Test – without loading

 Simplified Calculation for Temperature 

on Back Side Surface of Steel Beam

 Conclusions

Specimen

A

600 200

5,800

700 700 200 1,100 1,100 900 900

Load Load

Fire Protection Steel

Beam

A-A Section

2,550

3,125

A Front view

Gypsum

board

Light-gauge 

steel frame

Fire side

Beam

non-Fire

H-250×125×6×9 (SS400)

S li 0

ALC Panel:

L500×W600×t100

Specimen (Detail and Material)

Thermal resistant 

rock wool t=65mm

: Thermo couple

LGS -65×40×0.6

LGS -65×45×0.6,@606

Base steel -60×30×10×3.2

Rockwool felt

Sealing

100

Minimum gap = 15mm

250

350

rock wool t=65mm

Gypsum board reinforced 

with inorganic fiber

t = 21mm x 3 layers

Test Method

Fire temperature – time curve: ISO834

Heating period of time: 120 min.

Load: vertical Load for 0.8Ma

er

s

e

%)

Investigated by

Long-term bending moment

Md : design, Ma : allowable

Md/Ma at midspan

Steel beam

The numbe

of members

Cumulative

frequency (

%

1,800 900 900 1,800

Vertical load: 20.8kN x 2

Investigated by

Building Contractors Society
Experimental Setup

Weight

Appearance

Specimen

Specimen before Fire Test

Fire protection

LGS

Heated side Non-heated side

Gypsum board

Specimen after Fire Test

Fire protection

LGS

Steel beam

Heated side Non-heated side

Gypsum board

Specimen after Fire Test

Fire protection Steel beam

Heated side Non-heated side Gypsum board

LGS

Results

– Furnace temp. and temp. on surface of beam –

800

1000

1200

ture (°C)

ISO834

150

200

250

ted surface (°C)

Heated

○

Surface temp.

of steel

Surface temp.

of seal ▽

Non-heated

0

200

400

600

0 60 120 180 240

Furnace Temperat

Time (min.)

0

50

100

0 60 120 180 240

Temperature on non-heat

Time (min.)

Results

– Steel temperature –

150

200

250

ure (°C)

150

200

250

ure (°C)

0

50

100

0 60 120 180 240

Steel Temperatu

Time (min.)

Heated

△

○

▽

Non-heated

0

50

100

0 60 120 180 240

Steel Temperatu

Time (min.)

△

○

× ▽

Heated Non-heated
Results

– Deformation –

6

4

2

midspan (mm)

→ upper

6

4

2

midspan (mm)

non-fire side

0

2

4

6

0 60 120 180 240

Vertical def. at m

lower ← →

Time (min.)

0

2

4

6

0 60 120 180 240

Horizontal def. at fire side ← → n

Time (min.)

Contents of Presentation

 Objective

 Performance to be Validated

 Full Scale Fire Test – with loading

 Small Scale Fire Test – without loading

 Simplified Calculation for Temperature 

on Back Side Surface of Steel Beam

 Conclusions

Specimen

I L

◆Steel beam:

H-250×125×6×9 (SS400)

H-400×200×8×13 (SS400)

◆Fire protection:

 The number of specimens: 6 

I-shaped Section L-shaped Section

I L ◆Fire protection:

Thermal resistant rock wool 

t = 40, 65mm

◆Wall:

Gypsum board reinforced

with inorganic fiber

t = 21mm x 2 or 3 layers

: Thermo couple (steel temp.)

: Thermo couple (surface temp.)

Fire side Fire side

Test Method

 Fire temperature – time curve: ISO834

 Heating period of time: 90 – 180 min.

ALC

Steel

beam

Small scale wall type furnace

(1.3m x 1.3m) Experimental setup 

(non-heated side)

beam

Gypsum

board

Results

◆Steel beam:

H-250×125×6×9

◆Fire protection:

t = 40mm

◆Wall:

(I) t = 21mm x 2 

(L) t = 21mm x 3 before

after

before

after

I-shape section L-shape section

(L) t 21mm x 3 

◆Heating period:

90min.

◆Max. temp. rise

Steel:

(I)225K (ave.152K) 

(L)242K (ave.177K)

Steel surface:

(I)166K (ave.146K)

(L)193K (ave.172K)

Contents of Presentation

 Objective

 Performance to be Validated

 Full Scale Fire Test – with loading

 Small Scale Fire Test – without loading

 Simplified Calculation for Temperature 

on Back Side Surface of Steel Beam

 Conclusions
Basic Equation for Calculating Steel 

Temperatures

Ts = Tf(t){1-exp(-ht)} ......................................Eq.[1]

 MLIT Notification No.1433 gives basic equations. 

 The equations are arranged to suit to the matter here.

Ts Tf(t){1 exp( ht)}

where

h: Eq.[2]

Ts: maximum temperature rise [K]

Tf

(t): Tf(t) = 345log10(8t+1)

t: heating period of time [min.]

......................................Eq.[1]

Basic Equation for Calculating Steel 

Temperatures

φK0(Hs/As) =

{1+φR/(Hi

/Ai)} {1+(φ/2)(Hs/As)C/ (Hi/Ai)}

where

h ........Eq.[2]

Ai, As: sectional area of fire protection and steel

Hi

, Hs: circumferential length

C: heat capacity ratio (ρi

ci/ ρscs)

K0: 0.00067

R: thermal resistance ratio derived from test results

φ: φ = Hi

/Hs 

Thermal Resistance Ratio: R

40

50

60

As

)

(Hi/Ai)}h

y = 970.71x + 1 Correlation Coef.= 0.99

I-shaped protection

▲ : Experimental data

: Linear regression

R = 726

0

10

20

30

0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06

φK0(Hs

/A

{1+φC(Hs/As)/2

φ(Hi/Ai)

y = 726.55x + 1 Correlation Coef.= 0.63

L-shaped protection

▼ : Experimental data

: Linear regression

R = 970

Comparison between Exp. and Cal.

- Averaged maximum steel temperature rise -

150

200

90min. heating

120min. heating

180min. heating

re rise: Exp. (K)

Steel temp. = Material temp.

maxT1 maxT4

0

50

100

0 50 100 150 200

Maximum steel temperatur

Maximum steel temperature rise: Cal. (K)

y = 0.9287x Correlation Coef.= 0.74

maxT2

maxT3

maxT5

maxT6

Ave. max. steel temp. rise

= (maxT1+・・・+ maxTn)/6

Relationship between Steel Temp. 

and Surface Temp.

●Steel temp. ≠ ■Surface temp.

maxTs1

150

200

250

Experimental data

ture rise

of steel beam (K)

Max. surface temp. rise

= max(maxTs1,,・・・, maxTs3)

maxTs2

maxTs3

0

50

100

0 50 100 150 200 250

Maximum tempera

on non-heated surface o

Averaged maximum steel temperature rise (K)

y = 1.0943x 

Correlation Coef.= 0.81

150

200

250

ise on non-heated

eam : Exp. (K)

A simplified 

calculation method for 

temperatures on nonheated surface of

Comparison between Exp. and Cal.

- Maximum temperature rise on steel surface -

0

50

100

0 50 100 150 200 250

Maximum temperature r

surface of steel b

Maximum temperature rise on non-heated surface of steel beam : Cal. (K)

heated surface of

steel beam gives 

temperatures on 

almost safe sides.
Contents of Presentation

 Objective

 Performance to be Validated

 Full Scale Fire Test – with loading

 Small Scale Fire Test – without loading

 Simplified Calculation for Temperature 

on Back Side Surface of Steel Beam

 Conclusions

Conclusions

 Steel beam – wall interaction

 No significant influence was observed during the 

heating period of 120min and afterward.

 Simplified calculation method for evaluating 

t t th emperatures on the non-h td f f t l heated surface of steel

beam

 Thermal properties for the calculation was 

identified by analysis on one full scale test and 6 

small scale tests.

 The thermal insulation capacity can be evaluated 

by a simplified calculation method on non-heated 

surface temperature of steel beam.
Performance and Research 

Needs for Bridges Subject to Fire

Maria E. Moreyra Garlock

Associate Professor

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Princeton University

Venkatesh Kodur

Professor

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Michigan State University

US-Japan Fire Research Workshop July 2-4, 2012, Japan

2

Outline

 Background - Fire Problem in Bridges

 Motivation for Research 

 Response of Bridge Girder During Fire

 Residual Strength of Fire Exposed Bridge 

Girder

 Research Needs

Hazel park bridge fire, MI

3

• Fire - severe condition

– Fire safety - design requirements 

• loss of life and property

• Fire can be

– Primary event

– Secondary event

• Earthquake, Blast, Explosion, 

Impact

– Accidental or terrorist related

• Fire resistance (FR)- structural 

elements

– safe evacuation of occupants & 

fire personnel

– minimize property damage

– control spread of fire

Background

Fire Safety

Oakland bridge fire, CA 4

Bridge fires have become a growing concern due to rapid development of urban 

ground transportation system, as well as increasing transportation of hazardous 

materials.

 Common Cases:

 Gasoline tanker strikes the bridge

 Gasoline tanker hits other automobiles near the bridge 

 Electrical problems or lighting

 Repair work- welding etc.

 Impact:

 loss of life

 Traffic delay (detours)

 Significant economic and public losses

 Partial or complete collapse of structural members

Background

Fire Problem in Bridges

5

Background

Fire Problem in Bridges

 Recent years → numerous fires in 

bridges; some of these fires resulted 

in the collapse of steel girders. 

Therefore, fire hazard in bridges is 

becoming a growing concern.

 Fires in bridges can result in 

significant economic and public 

losses, as well as traffic routing 

issues.

 Fire is not considered by AASHTO 

in the design of bridges 

6

Background

Major Bridge Fires in the Last 10 Years in USA

Bridge/Location Date Cause of fire Bridge material

Bridge over I-75 near Hazel 

Park, MI July 15, 2009 Crashing of a gasoline tanker Steel girders + RC slab

Big Four Bridge,

Louisville, KY May 7, 2008 Electrical problem Steel truss bridge

Stop Thirty Road, State 

Route 386 Nashville, TN June 20, 2007 Crashing of a gasoline tanker Concrete hollow box-beam bridge

I-80/880 interchange in 

Oakland, CA

April 29, 2007 Crashing of a gasoline tanker Steel girders + RC slab

Bill Williams River Bridge, 

AZ June 20, 2007 Crashing of a gasoline tanker Prestress I girders + cast in place RC slab

Belle Isle Bridge in NW 

Expressway, Oklahoma 

City, OK

January 28, 2006 Crashing of a gasoline tanker

Prestress I girders + cast in 

place RC slab

Bridge over the Norwalk 

River near Ridgefield, CT July 12, 2005 Crashing of a gasoline tanker

Prestress box girders + 

cast in place RC slab

I-95 Howard Avenue 

Overpass in Bridgeport, CT March 26, 2003 Car striking a truck carrying 8,000 gallons of heating oil

Steel girders + RC slab
Motivation & Need

// Survey of Bridge Collapses 1876 to 2008 Survey: 1746 total recorded collapses; 1003 

hydraulic failures; remainder shown in plot 

Background

Major Bridge Fires in the Last 10 Years in USA

8

Background

Examples o f Fire Induced Collapse in Bridges 

 I-75 expressway near Hazel Park, 

MI

 - Steel girder + RC slab 

 - Tanker carrying 13,000 gallons gasoline 

 crushed beneath the bridge

 - Intense heat from the fire reached

 about 1100oC

 - Bridge girder collapsed within 20 min.

 (Hazel Park overpasscollapse, MI

Oakland highway bridge collapse, CA

MacArthur Maze I-80/880 

interchange in Oakland, CA - 

Steel girder + RC slab 

 - Tanker carrying 8600 gallons gasoline

 crushed beneath the bridge

 - Intense heat from fire reached 1100oC

 - Bridge girder collapsed within 22 min.

- Direct Loss – 22 million USD

Motivation & Need

References: Garlock, M., Payá-Zaforteza, I. Kodur, V., Gu, L., (2011). “Fire Hazard in Bridges: Review, 

Assessment and Repair Strategies”, Engineering Structures, Elsevier, V. 35, p. 89-98.

Kodur V.K.R., Gu L., Garlock, M, (2009), “Review and assessment of fire hazard in bridges”, Journal of 

the Transportation Research Board, Vol. 2172/2010, ISSN 0361-1981, pp. 23-29, 2010.

I-65 / I -20 - I 59 

Interchange, 

Birmingham, AL, 2002

Background

Examples o f Fire Induced Collapse in Bridges 

10

 There is very limited information and research data in the literature 

on the fire resistance of structural members in bridges

 Much of the data on fire resistance is from building elements and 

can not directly be used for bridge members.

Motivation and Need

Motivation and Need 

Bridge Fire vs. Building Fires

11

Scenario Building Bridge

Fire source wood/plastic based 

material Gasoline based

Fire severity ASTM E119/ISO 834/ 

Natural fire

Hydrocarbon fire/

ASTM E1529

Fire protection Active and passive None

Failure limit state Flexural Flexural/Shear

Connections web and/or the flange Bearing of the bottom 

flange

Sectional 

slenderness web slenderness ratio 

(50)

web slenderness ratio 

(150 with no longitudinal 

stiffeners)

12

PU-MSU Research Project

Fire Resistance of Bridge Girders 

(DL+0.3LL)

12.2 m

Stiffener (16mm thickness) Concrete slab of 0.20m thickness Steel girder (W33x141) Loading

(a) Elevation 

12.2 m

Concrete slab of 0.20m thickness Steel girder (W33x141) Diaphrgm (lateral support)

Stiffener

(16mm thickness)

2.59 m 2.59 m 1.3 m

Loading

2.59 m 2.59 m 1.3 m

(b) Section near the supports 

2.0m

0.3m

0.2m

0.85m

Literature Review

Fire Tests on Girders

Numerical Model – ABAQUS and ANSYS Models

Evaluating Response during Fire

Evaluating Post Fire Residual Strength

Design Guidelines
Parametric Study

// Prototype

FHWA 12.2 m (40 ft) span, W33 x 141, noncomposite - ABAQUS Model

Reference: Payá-Zaforteza, I, Garlock, M. (2011). “A numerical investigation on 

the fire response of a steel girder bridge, Journal of Constructional Steel 

Research, Elsevier, Vol. 75, p 93-103.

Evaluating Response during Fire Parametric Study

// Parameters & Results

Influence of Live Load: 

Parameters: D + L ; D + 0.3L ; D + 0.5L; D

Result: essentially no effect

Influence of Fire Load: 

Parameters: Hydrocarbon

vs. real bridge event 

(Stoddard)

Result: Stoddard has 

longest survival time 

(~20 min vs ~10 min)

Evaluating Response during Fire

Parametric Study

// Parameters & Results

Influence of Steel Type: 

Parameters: 

 Carbon vs. Stainless 304, 316, 

and duplex 2205 (EN No. 

1.4301, 1.4401, and 1.4462)

Result: 

 Stainless models > 60% 

longer survival than carbon

carbon

stainless

Evaluating Response during Fire Parametric Study

// Parameters & Results

Influence Axial Restraint: 

Parameters: 

 Free expansion vs. Fixed expansion after 0.036 m.

Result: Fixed models have smaller midspan deflection; failure mode 

is different; failure times about the same.

Free models

Fixed models

Defl. Limit L/20

Defl. Limit L/20

stainless

stainless

carbon carbon

Evaluating Response during Fire

Post-Fire Behavior

• Develop an approach for evaluating residual strength of fire 

exposed steel bridge girders.

• Develop strategies for retrofitting structural members in 

bridges. 

• Establish factors governing residual capacity of fire exposed 

bridge girders.

// Objectives

References: Kodur V.K.R., Essam A. and Dwaikat M.A.S., "Evaluating fire resistance of steel girders 

in bridges", in Press: Journal of Bridge Engineering (ASCE), 2012.

Essam A. and Kodur V.K.R., “An approach for evaluating the residual strength of fire exposed bridge 

girders”, Seventh International Conference on Structures in Fire, Zurich, Switzerland, 2012.

Evaluating Post Fire Residual Strength Post-Fire Behavior

Start

Discretization for thermal and 

structural analysis

Evaluating the capacity at room 

temperature

Room temperature 

mechanical 

properties 

Evaluating the response during 

fire exposure

High temperature 

thermal and mechanical 

properties

Evaluating the residual strength 

after cooling

Stop

Residual strength 

(mechanical) 

properties 

No

failure

failure

Stage 1

Stage 2

Stage 3

// Stages of Analysis

Evaluating Post Fire Residual Strength
Post-Fire Behavior

B

B

A

A

Concrete slab Steel girder Loading Stiffener

(a) Typical girder in 

a bridge

(b) 3-D mesh of segment (A-B)

 Solid70 element :

 -3D-thermal solid element for both slab

 and girder. 

 - 8 noded element with single degree 

 of freedom (temperature).

Evaluating Post Fire Residual Strength

ANSYS - Finite Element Thermal Model 

Post-Fire Behavior

//ANSYS - Finite Element Strucutral Model

 Shell181 element :

-Used to idealize the steel girder .

-4 noded element with six degree of freedom 

-(3 translations +3 rotations) per node.

 Solid65 element :

-Used to idealize the concrete slab.

-8 noded element with three degree of freedom per node.

Boundary Conditions

Shell181 element Solid65 element

Evaluating Post Fire Residual Strength

Post-Fire Behavior

// Case Study

Concrete slab of 0.20m thickness Steel girder (W33x141) Diaphrgm (lateral support)

Stiffener

(16mm thickness)

2.59 m 2.59 m 1.3 m

Loading

2.59 m 2.59 m 1.3 m

(b) Section near the supports 

2.0m

0.3m

0.2m

0.85m

Typical simply supported bridge girder selected from literature.

Residual strength analysis carried out.

Analyzed after exposure to different fire scenarios 

Evaluating Post Fire Residual Strength

2.0m

0.3m

0.2m

0.85m

Post-Fire Behavior

// Thermal Analysis Results

fire scenarios used in analysis

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150

Temperature (°C)

Time (min)

Hydrocarbone fire (Case 1)

Moderate design fire (Case 2)

External design fire (Case 3)

60 minutes

45 minutes

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135

Temperature (°C)

Time (min)

Bottom flange

Web

Top flange

Mid-depth of oncrete slab

Cross sectional temperature (Case 1)

Fire scenarios used in analysis and thermal analysis results

Thermal Analysis Results

Evaluating Post Fire Residual Strength

Post-Fire Behavior

// Structural Analysis Results

Table 1. Residual strength analysis results of fire exposed bridge girder

Evaluating Post Fire Residual Strength

Case Fire scenario Max. fire 

temperature

Max. steel 

temperature

Room 

temperature capacity load (kN)

Residua l capacity load (kN)% of original capacity

Case 1Hydrocarbo n fire 1100°C 1000°C 4270 Failure under fire ----

Case 2Moderate fire 800°C 795°C 4270 2974 70%

Case 3

External fire 680°C 670°C 4270 3579 84%

Post-Fire Behavior

// Structural Analysis Results

-200

-175

-150

-125

-100

-75

-50

-25

0

0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165

Mid-span deflection (mm)

Time (min)

Hydrocarbon fire (Case 1)

Moderate design fire (Case 2)

External design fire (Case 3)

Response of girder during fire 

exposure (stage 2)

-120

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500

Mid-span deflection (mm)

Load (kN)

Room temperature

Moderate design fire (Case 2)

Extenal design fire (Case 3)

Response of girder after exposure 

to fire (residual capacity) (stage 3) 

Evaluating Post Fire Residual Strength
Post-Fire Behavior

// Findings Thus Far...

• ANSYS can successfully be applied to evaluate the response of 

fire exposed bridge girders. The thermal response can be 

simulated using SOLID70 elements, while structural response 

can be simulated using SHELL181 and SOLID65 elements.

• Type of fire exposure and fire severity has significant influence 

on the resulting residual capacity of fire exposed steel bridge 

girders.

• A bridge girder when exposed to external design fire with 

maximum fire temperature of 680 °C, has a residual capacity of 

about 84% as compared to 70% when exposed to moderate 

design fire with a maximum fire temperature reaching 800°C. 

• A steel bridge girder experiences failure under fire conditions 

when the maximum fire temperatures is around 1100°C, as in 

the case of typical hydrocarbon fires.

Post Fire Residual Strength – Findings thus Far Research Needs

• Effect of parameters such as transverse stiffeners, other span 

lengths & beam depths, composite action.

• Effect of Web shear buckling at elevated temp. (study begun 

at Princeton)

• Design and retrofit recommendations (guidelines for Department 

of Transportation)

• Fire tests on replicate bridge girders to generate data for 

validating models

• Parametric studies to evaluate the critical factors governing the 

residual strength of fire exposed bridge girders.

• A methodology for assessing the residual strength of fire exposed 

bridge girders

• Strategies for mitigating fire hazard in steel bridge girders.

Research Needs

Acknowledgements

Funding Agencies

• NSF CMMI-1068252 (Princeton University)

• NSF CMMI-1068621 (Michigan State University)

• Michigan State SPG 71-4434 (Michigan State University)

Researchers

• Ignacio Paya-Zaforteza, Universitat Politècnica de València

• Jonathan Glassman, Ph.D. student Princeton University

• Esam M. Aziz, Ph.D. student, Michigan State University

• Lensir Gu, PDF (formerly), Michigan State University

Acknowledgements
1

P R O F . M AM O R U K O H N O

T O K Y O U N I V E R S I T Y O F S C I E N C E 

STRATEGIC MEASURE FOR ENSURING FIRE 

SAFETY OF BUILDINGS AFTER AN 

EARTHQUAKE

CONTENTS

• Research background.

• Damages incurred by the Great East Japan 

Earthquake 2011.

• A four phase strategic plan for life continuity and 

restoration of fire safety. 

• Concluding remarks.

2

RESEARCH BACKGROUND (1/2)

3

Devastating damage area

Major to slight damage area

• Old wooden houses 

collapse.

• Some of old 

engineered buildings 

may collapse.

• Few of new seismic 

design building may 

collapse.

• Life Safety is the issue.

• Some of wooden houses 

collapse.

• A few of engineered 

buildings may collapse.

• Partial damage in seismic 

design building.

• Quality of Life is the issue.

A large number of high-rise 

residential buildings in urban area.

If very large earthquake occurs in urban area;

In case of fire:

Faster fire spread (Impaired fire compartment, Less firefighting.)

Evacuation Difficulty (Obstruction in path, Impaired fire compartment.)

RESEARCH BACKGROUND (2/2)

4

It may have enough structural resistance to aftershocks.

Following items must be secured for continuous use: 

• Lifeline is available. (Quality of Life)

• It will not collapse even a fire occurs. (Fire Resistance)

• Residents can evacuate from the building in fire. (Evacuation Safety) 

Damaged building after a large earthquake 

Continue to live in the high-rise apartment building.

(Limited capacity of public evacuation centers.)

Residents

Is fire safety the same as that of before earthquake?

Higher risk of 

fire than usual

TARGET BUILDING

High-rise apartment building are the main target. 

“Mansion” in Japanese wording.

Building characteristics:

Fire Service Law does NOT require:

 

 to to these builgings.

5

• Residential use. Accommodates 

a lot of people.

• Heat source is used.

“Self-help” 

and “mutual 

assistance” of 

residents are 

necessary.

• Self fire brigade.

• Emergency preparedness 

manager.

DISASTER PREVENTION CAPABILITY OF HIGH-RISE

APARTMENT BUILDING IN AFTERMATH OF EARTHQUAKE

6

• Maintain seismic strength. 

• Priority in safety confirmation 

and life saving. 

Assumed Situation

高層建築物:

• Obstructed evacuation path.

• Limited rescue operation.

If fire safety equipment is impaired...

• Phases considering internal and external conditions.

• Fire safety requirements appropriate to each phase.

• Strategic restoration plan and checkup methods.

Discussion and proposal

Disaster prevention capability

Immediate 

evacuation for 

apparent danger

Vulnerable 

to fire
IF

A fire started in 10th floor of 30-story 

high-rise apartment building. 

7

room

collider

住戸

stairs

SP suppresses 

the fire.

room

fire

Before earthquake

OR

8

Fire will not spread 

beyond the 

compartment

Before earthquake

HOWEVER, IF

9

room

room

collider

stairs

Staircases are 

filled with smoke.

Unable to escape.

Smoke 

invasion thru 

open door.

A fire started in 10th floor of 30-story 

high-rise apartment building. After earthquake

Fire or smoke 

spreads thru 

damaged 

walls and 

floors.

Smoke spreads 

thru open door.

DAMAGE BY LIQUEFACTION

Temporary repairs of level 

difference and sewage pipe.

Inclined wall of parking

10

Photo taken in August 10, 2011

DAMAGE IN EXTERNAL WALLS

External wall

Expansion joints

11

Photo taken in August 10, 2011

DAMAGE NEAR EXTERIOR STAIRWAY

Exterior door (view from collider)

Exterior wall

12

Photo taken in August 10, 2011
DAMAGE IN EXPANSION JOINTS

Detached exterior stairway 

13

Closer look at exp. joint

Photo taken in August 10, 2011

ITEMS EXTRACTED FROM INTERVIEW AND

QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEYS

Three items;

An appropriate phase division clarifies who can conduct 

checkups and what items to be checked at each phase.

14

(1) Who does the 

checkup?

(2) Phase definition in 

the aftermath of 

earthquake.

(3) Requirements for 

life continuity in 

high-rise apartment.

Number and capability 

of checkers

Fire risk

Relates to 

(1) and (3)

Relates to (1), 

(2) and (3).

DEFINITION OF PHASES

15

Elapsed time 

after main shock

Returning of 

residents (life 

situation).

State of lifeline 

restoration

Availability of 

public fire 

service

State of fire 

preventive 

capability

Phases

SUMMARY OF PHASES

Phase Period Residents Lifeline Public fire 

service Fire usage

1

A day and 

a night

Partial 

return Shutdown Unavailable Fire ban

2.0 Two days 

to four 

weeks

Full return

Partial 

recovery

Unavailable Fire ban

Restricted

usage 2.5 Full

recovery

Available

3

Six to 

twelve 

months

Full return Full

recovery

Available Allowed

4 Usual state

16

DETAILED DESCRIPTION - PHASE 1

17

Period A day and a night after earthquake

Expected 

situation

Part of residents cannot return home. Lack of manpower 

for checkup.

Heat source may not be available due to shutdown of 

lifeline.

Fire fighting nor rescue operation cannot be expected.

Functionality of fire preventive equipment is not checked. 

Requirements Reduction in fire ignition (Fire ban)

Securement of evacuation path especially evacuation 

stairs.

Confusing period

DETAILED DESCRIPTION - PHASE 2.0

18

Period After the second day.

Expected 

situation

Most of residents returns home. Increased manpower for 

checkup.

Partial recovery of lifeline. Increased chance for usage of 

heat source. 

Neither firefighting nor rescue by public fire service is 

available. 

Requirements Reduction in fire ignition. (Fire ban or restricted fire use)

Securement of evacuation path.

Prevention of fire spread
DETAILED DESCRIPTION - PHASE 2.5

19

Period Up to four weeks.

Expected 

situation

Quasi-compliant fire preventive capability. 

Chance of fire source usage increases as lifeline recovers.

Firefighting and rescue by public fire service are 

available. However, building equipment for fire brigade is 

not checked or confirmed.

Requirements Reduction in fire ignition. (Restricted fire usage)

Securement of evacuation path.

Prevention of fire spread.

Assistance for fire brigade.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION - PHASE 3

20

Period Until six to twelve months

Expected 

situation

Lifeline and public fire service is fully recovered.

Fire preventive capability is restored to quasi-compliant 

level by temporal repairs of damaged building and 

equipment.

Requirements Normal fire safety. 

Period for full repairs of damaged building elements and fire 

safety equipment. 

Periodic checkups are necessary until complete recovery.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION - PHASE 4

• The building restored its original safety level.

• The life gets back to usual, unrestricted, state.

21

STRATEGIC RESTORATION PLAN AND CHECKUP

METHODS

22

For each phase, determine the permissible states of; 

• Structural elements,

• Fire compartments, and

• Fire preventive equipment

for the life continuity plan. 

Select appropriate checker from residents or 

building experts.

Emergency checkup methods, temporary and full 

repairs are discussed. 

Focus on who should do it.

CHECKUP METHOD IN PHASE 1

Checkup of evacuation paths, such as colliders and stairs, 

in parallel to the safety confirmation by residents.

23

Earthquake

Gather at designated place of 

each floor

Residents will check and record 

following information.

• safety confirmation

• state of individual rooms 

• State of path to designated 

place

チェックシートの一例 

 上記のシートは実際に高層共同住宅で準備されているもの。 

「階別安否確認シート」に階段までの状況 

「ブロック別安否確認シート」に階段の状況 

 を記録するような欄を設ける。

階別安否確認シート ブロック別安否確認シート

Report to the emergency 

headquarters

CHECKUP ITEMS IN PHASE 2.0

 Check of evacuation path, building elements and equipment by 

residents.

 Fire ban may be relaxed if following items are all confirmed.

24

Items to be confirmed.

(1) Evacuation paths. (Re-check of Phase 1)

(2) Inclination of building.

(3) Cracks in columns, girders, or floors.

(4) Major damage in party wall.

(5) Major damage in wall between an apartment and collider.

(6) Falling of external wall or tiles on it.

(7) Falling of exterior opening elements, such as glazing.

(8) Damage in fire extinguisher.

(9) Functionality check of automatic fire alarm equipment (at control panel)

(10) Functionality check of fire alarm and warning system. (at control panel)

(11) Functionality check of emergency lightning system. (at control panel)
CHECKUP METHODS IN PHASE 2.0

• Conduct basic checkup by residents.

• Prepared manualized methods will be helpful. 

25

Emergency response

• Facility and equipment 

checkup. Repair request.

• Safety confirmation of 

residents

• Information share

• Acceptance of relief goods

• Setting up evacuation center

• Meals outdoors

• Volunteer activities

Example of a check sheet for structural elements.

Itemize checkup parts for “Anyone can do it.”

部位 被害状況(目視確認) 有無 備考

イメージ図 項目

柱 ・コンクリート面に

斜めひび割れ

有 無

・コンクリート面の欠け 有 無

・仕上げはがれ、割れ 有 無

・仕上げの脱落、破壊 有 無

梁 ・躯体に斜めひび割れ 有 無

・躯体コンクリートの欠け 有 無

・仕上げはがれ、割れ 有 無

・仕上げの脱落、破壊 有 無

床 ・傾斜(球体を転がす) 有 無

・躯体に斜めひび割れ 有 無

・躯体コンクリートの欠け 有 無

・天井又は仕上げの

はがれ、割れ

有 無

・天井又は仕上げの

脱落、破壊

有 無

耐震壁 ・躯体に斜めひび割れ 有 無

・躯体コンクリートの欠け 有 無

・仕上げはがれ、割れ 有 無

・仕上げの脱落、破壊 有 無

柱

コンクリ

ート斜め

ひび割れ

又は仕上

げの割れ

コンクリ

ート面の

欠け又は

仕上げの

脱落

コ ン ク リ ー

ト 斜 め ひ び

割 れ 又 は 仕

上げの割れ

コンクリ

ート面の

欠け又は

仕上げの

脱落

梁

梁

コ ン ク リ ー

ト 斜 め ひ び

割 れ 又 は 天

井・仕上げの

割れ 床

コンクリ

ート面の

欠け又は

仕上げの

脱落

耐震壁

(戸境壁)

コンクリ

ート面の

欠け又は

仕上げの

脱落

コ ン ク リ ー

ト 斜 め ひ び

割 れ 又 は 天

井・仕上げの

割れ

Emergency warning system, 

and walkie-talkies are helpful.

From interview survey

AN EXAMPLE OF CHECK SHEET FOR STRUCTURAL

ELEMENTS (FLOORS AND WALLS)

26

部位 被害状況(目視確認) 有無 備考

イメージ図 項目

柱 ・コンクリート面に

斜めひび割れ

有 無

・コンクリート面の欠け 有 無

・仕上げはがれ、割れ 有 無

・仕上げの脱落、破壊 有 無

梁 ・躯体に斜めひび割れ 有 無

・躯体コンクリートの欠け 有 無

・仕上げはがれ、割れ 有 無

・仕上げの脱落、破壊 有 無

床 ・傾斜(球体を転がす) 有 無

・躯体に斜めひび割れ 有 無

・躯体コンクリートの欠け 有 無

・天井又は仕上げの

はがれ、割れ

有 無

・天井又は仕上げの

脱落、破壊

有 無

耐震壁 ・躯体に斜めひび割れ 有 無

・躯体コンクリートの欠け 有 無

・仕上げはがれ、割れ 有 無

・仕上げの脱落、破壊 有 無

柱

コンクリ

ー ト斜 め

ひび割れ

又は仕上

げの割れ

コンクリ

ート面の

欠け又は

仕上げの

脱落

コ ン ク リ ー

ト 斜 め ひ び

割 れ 又 は 仕

上げの割れ

コンクリ

ート面の

欠け又は

仕上げの

脱落

梁

梁

コ ン ク リ ー

ト 斜 め ひ び

割 れ 又 は 天

井・仕上げの

割れ

床

コンクリ

ート面の

欠け又は

仕上げの

脱落

耐震壁

(戸境壁)

コンクリ

ート面の

欠け又は

仕上げの

脱落

コ ン ク リ ー

ト 斜 め ひ び

割 れ 又 は 天

井・仕上げの

割れ

部位 被害状況(目視確認) 有無 備考

イメージ図 項目

柱 ・コンクリート面に

斜めひび割れ

有 無

・コンクリート面の欠け 有 無

・仕上げはがれ、割れ 有 無

・仕上げの脱落、破壊 有 無

梁 ・躯体に斜めひび割れ 有 無

・躯体コンクリートの欠け 有 無

・仕上げはがれ、割れ 有 無

・仕上げの脱落、破壊 有 無

床 ・傾斜(球体を転がす) 有 無

・躯体に斜めひび割れ 有 無

・躯体コンクリートの欠け 有 無

・天井又は仕上げの

はがれ、割れ

有 無

・天井又は仕上げの

脱落、破壊

有 無

耐震壁 ・躯体に斜めひび割れ 有 無

・躯体コンクリートの欠け 有 無

・仕上げはがれ、割れ 有 無

・仕上げの脱落、破壊 有 無

柱

コンクリ

ー ト斜 め

ひび割れ

又は仕上

げの割れ

コンクリ

ート面の

欠け又は

仕上げの

脱落

コ ン ク リ ー

ト 斜 め ひ び

割 れ 又 は 仕

上げの割れ

コンクリ

ート面の

欠け又は

仕上げの

脱落

梁

梁

コ ン ク リ ー

ト 斜 め ひ び

割 れ 又 は 天

井・仕上げの

割れ

床

コンクリ

ート面の

欠け又は

仕上げの

脱落

耐震壁

(戸境壁)

コンクリ

ート面の

欠け又は

仕上げの

脱落

コ ン ク リ ー

ト 斜 め ひ び

割 れ 又 は 天

井・仕上げの

割れ

Floor

Wall

Damage state 

(visual check)

• Inclination y/n

• Diagonal crack y/n

• Concrete spalling y/n

• Cracked ceiling finish y/n

• Falling of ceiling finish y/n

Element

CHECKUP ITEMS IN PHASE 2.5

 Confirmation of equipment for firefighting by experts.

 Phase 3 will start if following items are all confirmed.

27

Items to be confirmed

Equipment for firefighting

• Emergency elevator

• Indoor fire hydrant

• Water supply pipes

• Water for firefighting

• Emergency outlet

Water for 

Water supply pipes firefighting

ITEMS AND METHODS OF REPAIRS IN PHASE 3

Full Repairs are conducted to restore original fire safety by 

building experts.

Proceed to Phase 4 (usual state) if following items are restored.

28

Items to be restored.

• Fire preventive elements and equipment,

• Structural elements,

• Fire compartment constructions, such as floor and wall, and

• Disaster prevention equipment.

SUMMARY OF PHASES

Phase Period Residents Lifeline Public fire 

service Fire usage

1

A day and 

a night

Partial 

return Shutdown Unavailable Fire ban

2.0 Two days 

to four 

weeks

Full return

Partial 

recovery

Unavailable Fire ban

Restricted

usage 2.5 Full

recovery

Available

3

Six to 

twelve 

months

Full return Full

recovery

Available Allowed

4 Usual state

29

CONCLUDING REMARKS (1/2)

• If a large earthquake affects a high-rise building, the fire safety 

of the building can be lower than usual, even though its 

structural damage is slight. 

• In the aftermath of the earthquake, quality of life of the 

residents will be the most important issue.

• A four-phase recovery plan was proposed. 

• The phases were determined considering elapsed time, 

internal and external conditions of the building.

• Permissible life state (usage of fire) was proposed to each 

phase.

30
CONCLUDING REMARKS (2/2)

• Checkup items and viable methods at each phase were 

discussed. 

• In the earlier phase the checkup and temporary repairs 

should be conducted by available residents.

• In the later phase, however, building experts should 

investigate the building elements and safety equipment. 

Then full repairs would be done accordingly to restore 

the original safety level.

• Each high-rise apartment is recommended to prepare its 

recovery plan before an earthquake strikes. The quality 

of life of the residents will be highly dependent to the 

appropriateness of the plan.

31
Response Sensitivity and Reliability 

Analysis of Structures in Fire

Ann Jeffers 

Assistant Professor

Qianru Guo

PhD Student

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

University of Michigan

Ann Arbor, MI USA

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Motivation

 Structural performance in fire is highly sensitive to a number of 

parameters (e.g., temperature, level of fire protection, magnitude of 

applied load)

 Current methods for fire resistant design do not provide a quantitative 

measure of structural reliability

 Reliability analysis is a key component of performance-based design

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Sources of Uncertainty

Mechanical Response of the Structure

Material properties, applied loads, 

mechanical boundary conditions Deformation, Force

Thermal Response of the Structure

Material properties, boundary 

conditions Temperature in the structure

Fire Behavior

Compartment geometry, amount 

and distribution of fuel, ventilation Fire temperature, Surface flux

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Principles of Structural Design

 Structural systems are 

defined in terms of load R

and resistance S

 R and S are continuous 

random variables that are 

dependent on parameters 

X that are random in 

nature

 Generally, we treat the 

system as deterministic

and conservatively 

choose design values SN

and RN based on a factor 

of safety

Standard Fire (?)

= ??

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Quantification of Structural Reliability

 Monte Carlo Simulation

 Extremely versatile

 Computationally inefficient

 First Order Reliability Method

 Linear approximation for the limit state function

 Only requires the response and response gradient 

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Quantification of Structural Reliability

 First Order Reliability Method

Performance function: g(X) = R(X) – S(X) 

In the present study, g(X) = u(X) – L/30

g(x)=0

Physical Space

X1

x2 Failure Domain

X1* X2* P*: design point

Transfer

G(u)=0

Standard Space

u1

u2 Failure Domain

u1* u2* P*: design point β FORM
Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

First Order Reliability Method

Transform Y into original space X

Evaluate limit state function G(Y) Initial Y

Evaluate response gradient G(Y)/ Y

Calculate temperature T(X) and displacement u(X)  

Transform G(Y)=g(X)

Calculate temperature T(X)/ Xi and displacement gradients u(X)/ Xi  

 

Transform Check convergence Calculate reliability index b

Update Y Based on iHL-RF algorithm

No Yes Y

X

X

u

Y u 















G g

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Response Sensitivity Analysis

 Finite Difference Method (FDM)

 Inefficient (for N parameters, need to run analysis N + 1 times)

 Accuracy is dependent on perturbation size

 Direct Differentiation Method (DDM)

 Response gradient obtained directly by differentiating governing 

finite element equations

 Accurate and no iteration needed

X

u

X

u











Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

u fixed

u P P K

X X X

int

n

ext

n n

n 

 











Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

DDM in Structural Mechanics

ext

n

int Pn

 P

Differentiate with respect to parameter X

?

 





































Nels

n T n

n

T

n

int T

n dV

X X fixed X fixed X fixed fixed u u ε u

σ Bε

σ B E

P B

(Haukaas, 2006)

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006









































































Nels n

n

T n T n

n

n

n

n

n T

n

T

n

T

int

n dV

X X

X X X

X

, fixed fixed

fixed , fixed fixed

fixed

T εε

u u T u

u T

T

σ Bσ B

T

T

ε B Eε

σ B E

B

P

u fixed

u P P K

X X X

int

n

ext

n n

n 

 











Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

DDM in Structural Fire Engineering

ext

n

int Pn

 P

Differentiate with respect to parameter X

 





































Nels

n T n

n

T

n

int T

n dV

X X fixed X fixed X fixed fixed u u ε u

σ Bε

σ B E

P B

Dependent on temperature T

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Application

 Design based on the AISC steel design specification and the ANSI/UL 263 

requirements for prescriptive fire resistant design in the U.S.

 A cementitious spray-applied fire resistant material was selected to provide a 

one-hour fire resistance rating

 Concrete slab only affected the heat transfer to the beam and did not contribute 

to the structural response

L = 4.88 m W8x28

Concrete Slab

Spray-Applied Fire Resistant Material (SFRM)

Fire

Fire Fire

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

 Parametric fire curve (EN1991-1-2)

Parameters: 

 Fuel load density qt

 Ventilation factor Fv

 Thermal inertia of surroundings b

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Fire Model
Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

 Fiber-based thermal and structural elements 

(Jeffers and Sotelino 2012)

Parameters: 

 Surface boundary conditions (convection, radiation) 

 Thermal properties of spray applied fire resistant material

 Thermal and mechanical properties of steel

 Applied load

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Thermo-Structural Model

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Model Input

Parameter Mean COV Distribution

Fire

Ventilation factor, Fv 0.04 m1/2 0.05 Normal

Fire load density, qt 564 MJ/m2 0.62 Extreme I

Thermal inertia, b 423.5 Ws1/2/m2K 0.09 Normal

Thermal

Heat transfer coeff., h 35 W/m2K -- Unknown

Emissivity, e 0.80 -- Unknown

Thickness, tsfrm Nominal + 1.6mm 0.20 Lognormal

Density, rsfrm 300 kg/m3 0.29 Normal

Conductivity, ksfrm 0.120 W/m-K 0.24 Lognormal

Specific heat, csfrm 1200 J/kg-K -- Unknown

Thermal props. of steel EC3 -- Unknown

Structural

Dead load, wDL 1.05 x Nominal 0.10 Normal

Live load, wLL 0.24 x Nominal 0.60 Gamma

Yield strength, Fy 380 MPa 0.08 Normal

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Results

Deterministic analysis:

(a) Fire and steel temperatures under natural 

fire exposure

(b) Mid-span displacement

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Results

Response sensitivity to various parameters:

-0.06

-0.04

-0.02

1E-17

0.02

0.04

0.06

du/

0 2000 4000 6000

dX*X

Time (s)

FDM

DDM

Conductivity of SFRM

Dead Load

Live Load

SFRM Thickness

 (a) Fire model (b) Thermal and structural models

-0.06

-0.04

-0.02

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0 2000 4000 6000

du/dX*X

Time (s)

FDM

DDM

Thermal Inertia

Ventilation Factor

Fire Load

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

 Probability of failure

 7.9% by Monte Carlo simulation (10,000 samples)

 8.4% by First Order Reliability Method

 Simulation time

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Results

29

0.8 0.4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

MCS FORM with 

FDM

FORM with 

DDM

Simulation time (h)

Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Conclusions

 This research is an initial step towards reliability-based design of 

structures for fire

 The first order reliability method exhibits good accuracy and significant 

savings in computational cost.

 For calculating the response gradients, both the FDM and DDM offer 

excellent agreement, but the DDM results in considerable time savings.

 Additional research is need to study structural systems, which have 

multiple failure surfaces and exhibit interactions between structural 

components.

 Discussion is warranted regarding what might be considered an 

acceptable level of risk for structural fire design
Prof. Vineet R. Kamat

November 11, 2006

Response Sensitivity and Reliability Analysis of Structures in Fire

University of Michigan – Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation 

under Grant No. CMMI-1032493. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or 

recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect 

the views of the sponsoring agency.
National Fire Research 

Laboratory (NFRL)

Dr. Samuel L. Manzello

Fire Research Division

Engineering Laboratory (EL)

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

A Brief History

• Large Fire Laboratory (LFL) – NFRL predecessor 

– Commissioned in 1972

– Advance real-scale fire measurements

• Fire sizes

• Material ignition propensities

• Fire growth and spread

• Tenability

• Fire suppression and detection

• Fire fighting

– Enable experimental validation studies of fire models

– Conduct experiments to support post-fire studies

– Enable advances in fire & building codes and standards

LFL + Expansion = NFRL

Recent Experiments at NFRL (before Expansion)

Doorway flow PIV Wind Effects on Fire World Trade Center Study

measurements

Mattress Fires Compartment Fires Fire Brands

Staffing

• Current level

– 4 technical staff (3 with PhD and 1 with MS)

– 3 technical support staff

– 1 administrative assistant

• FY13 level

– 6 technical staff (5 with PhD and 1 with MS)

– 4 technical support staff

– 1 administrative assistant

– 3 guest scientists

Why NFRL Expansion?

• At present, there are no science-based, established 

measurement tools to evaluate the performance of an entire 

structure, including connections, under realistic fire loads 

(e.g., uncontrolled fire).

• The expanded facility will enable:

– Study of real-scale structural components or systems

– Controlled hydraulic loading simulating service load conditions

– Up to 20 MW fire exposure for 4 hrs

– Measurement of structural performance to incipient collapse

– Characterization of fire intensity (heat release rate)

• This combination of features is unique in the world and will 

enable the development of measurement science needed 

for performance-based design methodologies for structures 

in fire. 

NFRL Expansion Timeline

• Oct 2003 NIST/SFPE Roadmapping Workshop

• ... 2008 Stakeholder meetings and workshops

• Apr 2009 Selected for ARRA funding

• Nov 2010 Construction “Notice to Proceed”

• Dec 2012 Construction completed 

• Dec 2013 Commissioning completed 
NFRL Expansion

Specification Existing Laboratory New Expansion

Total Floor Area 10,800 sq. ft. 21,400 sq. ft.

Fire Capacity

1 MW (small hood)

3 MW (medium hood)

10 MW (large hood)

20 MW

Strong Floor/Strong Wall None 60 ft. x 90 ft. x 4 ft. thick strong floor and 

60 ft. x 30 ft. x 4 ft. thick strong wall.

Structural Loading None Reconfigurable hydraulic loading system, 

55-215 kip actuators; 30 inch stroke

Section through the Building

Box cell basement Strong Floor Conditioning Pit

Overhead 

Crane

Hood Strong wall

Test Specimen 

Preparation Area

3D Rendering of NFRL Expansion

Strong floor

Strong wall

Conditioning pit

9/25/2011 – Basement Shear Walls

11/1/2011 – Align Floor Anchors 4/1/2012 –Strong Wall / Floor
6/7/2012 Unique Challenges:

NFRL’s uniqueness poses significant challenges not faced 

by other structural or fire research facilities

 Structural loading in a fire environment

 Thermal protection of facility (strong wall/floor) and 

equipment (hydraulic system and reaction frames)

 Measure structural response (deformations, strains) in a 

fire environment

Research Focus:

• Measure the performance of real-scale structures under 

realistic fire and structural loading in controlled 

laboratory conditions.

• Develop an experimental database on the performance 

of large-scale structural connections, components, 

subassemblies and systems under realistic fire and 

loading.

• Validate physics-based models to predict fire resistance 

performance of structures.

• Provide the technical basis for performance-based 

standards for fire resistance design of structures and 

foster innovation in the building design and construction 

industry.

Anticipated Outcomes and Impact

• Public databases, models, guidelines, and improved 

standards, codes, and practices for the built environment;

– Affected codes and standards include: ICC, ASCE 7, AISC, 

ACI, ASTM, SFPE, NFPA

• Accelerated transformation from prescriptive to 

performance-based fire safety design of buildings and 

infrastructure;

• Enhanced safety of buildings, infrastructure, emergency 

responders, and the public at large.

Working with NIST

• Informal collaborations

– Joint peer-reviewed papers; laboratory visits; sharing of research 

methods

• CRADAs

– Formal partnering agreement to work with universities, industry, and 

other organizations on joint R & D projects

• Guest researcher arrangements

– Scientists and engineers from universities (faculty, post-docs, 

students), non-profits, industry, and government agencies working 

with NIST researchers on projects of mutual interest

• Use of facilities at NIST

– Cost-reimbursable basis

Thank you.

Questions?

http://www.nist.gov/el/
Full-scale Fire Test for

Wooden 3-storey School Building 

– Preliminary Test

Daisaku NII 

Hideki YOSHIOKA

National Institute for Land and 

Infrastructure Management

(NILIM) 

Introduction

• Legislation: Building Standard Law of Japan has mandated fire-resistive 

building for 3-storey school buildings. It is practically difficult to construct 

3-story wooden school as fire-resistive building. 

The Act for Promotion of Use of Wood in Public Buildings (enacted Oct 

2010) requires promotion of research activities to review building code 

regulations for the utilization of wood in building applications.

• Feasibility: This full-scale fire test was planned to verify that quasi-fireresistive wooden building can be treated equally to fire-resistive building.

• Research project: Research project will be conducted from FY2011 to 

FY2013. Based on the information from this preliminary test (FY2011), it is 

scheduled to conduct another full-size fire tests in FY2012. Other issues 

on fire safety ,ex. evacuation safety, will be investigated in FY2013.

Objectives of this Full-scale test

• Indoor Fire Spread:

 compartment penetration

 Horizontal spread 

 external flame

• Indoor Smoke Flow Characteristics: 

 on the floor of fire origin 

 via staircases, floor cracks and compartment penetrations

• Influence to adjacent buildings: 

 Radiation heat to adjacent buildings 

 Fire brands scattering 

• Influence of long-time fire to building structures: 

 Possibility of collapse

Overview of the Test Building

Full-scale Fire Test Overview

• Conducted on 22nd February in experimental site of NILIM (large 

open field)

• Building area: 830m2 : Total Floor Area: 2,260m2

• Designed and built in accordance with 1-hour quasi-fire-resistive 

construction

South side

East side

Fire Wall

17m

Fire Origin A Block

(Post and Beam 

50m Construction) 

16m

B Block

(2x4 Construction)

Library

Corridor Hall

Toilet

Stairway

locker 

room

Computer

room

office

Corridor

preparation 

room

Entrance

Teachers’ room

archives locker 

room

locker 

room

Fire origin Fire wall

50m

Floor area 830m2

Plan of the 1st Floor

16m

2x4 construction Post and beam construction

Fire door Fire door

Teachers’ Room

Corridor

Entrance Hall
Science lab

Corridor

Toilet

Stairway

locker 

room

Crafts room

assembly 

hall

Open space

preparation 

room

Well hole

(Void)

Classroom Classroom

preparation 

room

Fire wall Floor area 830m2

50m

Plan of the 2nd Floor 

16m

2x4 construction Post and beam construction

Fire door

Fire door Hall

Corridor on the 2nd Floor Open space on the 2nd Floor

Science Lab on the 2nd Floor 

Music 

room

Corridor

Toilet

Stairway

Open space

preparation 

room

locker 

room

Open space

Crafts room Classroom Classroom Classroom

Fire wall

2x4 construction Post and beam construction

Floor area 830m2

Plan of the 3rd Floor 

Fire door

16m

Fire door Hall Open space and Classroom on the 

3rd Floor

Staircase

Main Features of Test Building (1)

• Floor Plan: Class rooms located on 2 – 3 storey levels are designed as "opentype" being popular in recent years. Other rooms are also allocated to 

simulate teachers' rooms and special.

• Type of Construction: For the purpose of pursuing the difference in fire 

behavior between construction types, the combination of post & beam (P&B) 

construction and wood frame construction (2x4 construction / PFC: platform 

wooden construction) was applied.

Almost floor and wall members were composed by the combination of gypsum 

board, Japanese Cedar panel and structural plywood. Columns and beams 

were made of Japanese Larch. It was verified that these were satisfied quasifire-resistive performance by furnace test 

Main Features of Test Building(2)

• Interior Finishing: Interior for the 1st floor level (floor to be ignited) 

was finished entirely with wooden materials considering that wooden 

interior finishing is potentially demanded for wooden school buildings.

• Exterior Finishing: In principal, exterior is finished not with wooden 

but with ceramic-type siding to clarify the influence of external flam for 

upward fire spread. It was expected that large external flame would be 

ejected from the window openings.

• Fire Wall: Effectiveness of fire wall is to be verified by isolating one 

classroom or entrance by self-standing fire wall from other compartments. 

This fire wall was installed in the North-South direction with 1-hour fire 

rate.

Main Features of Test Building(3)

• Ignition: Teachers room was ignited. Result of statistical survey shows 

school fire originates at highest probability from teachers' rooms where 

much combustible materials tend to be located. 

• Fire Load: Each room will be loaded with fuel (Japanese Cedar lumber) 

of the heat amount of 400 MJ/m2 simulating furniture, etc. The lumber 

volume has been determined by the equivalent heat per unit mass 18 

MJ/kg for wood.

Measurement

• Temperature: About 700 points of inside/outside of air temperature, 

temperature of surface and inside of fire walls and beams are measured 

by thermocouples.

• Heat flux: Over 60 points of heat flux (most of all is outside) are 

measured by heat flux gauges in order to quantify the thermal effect to 

surroundings.

• Video: Video and thermal images on each side of the building are 

recorded.

CCD video cameras are installed in fire origin and corridors of each floor in 

order to capture smoke movement and fire spread.

• Detector and sprinkler: Fire detectors, smoke detectors and sprinkler 

heads (without water) are installed in order to measure the activation 

time.

• Environmental conditions: Wind speed and direction, air 

temperature, humidity are measured around the building.
Briefing on Fire Test Results

• Overview of fire scenario 

– shown by still pictures. Collapse of building.

• Characteristic points of this fire

– 1-hour semi-fireproof construction performance 

• Some major events in this fire test:

– Fire spread within the room of fire origin

– Vertical fire spread to upper floors by flame ejected 

out of the broken window

– Horizontal fire spread over the fire wall

– Impact to Surroundings/neighborhood

• Incident Heat Flux at surroundings.

• Firebrands scattering.

Start of the Fire Test 

8 minutes after ignition

30 minutes after ignition

1 hour and 18 minutes after ignition

1 hour and 36 minutes after ignition

Approx. 2 hours after ignition

Characteristics of this Fire Test

• Rapidly spread of fire all over the building was due to largescale blowout fire.

• Fire spread all over the building, but it could maintain selfsustainability for over 1 hour. Therefore, it achieved 1-hour 

semi-fireproof construction performance as required by the 

Standard.

• Combustible volume of each room was designed with total 

heat release based on the actual survey, but review is 

necessary from the aspect of heat generation rate. 

• Fire spread beyond the fire protection wall because the fire 

protection door of the opening area was run through.

• Large amount of firebrands seems to have flown on the lee 

from the attic area before collapse of the building.

I. Hagiwara, T. Naruse, etc.

Fire spread in the room of fire origin

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30

Time(min)

Heat Flux (kW/m

2

)

1FYr-1

qr''(T-1FY,1FY')

Incident heat flux at desktop in the room of fire origin

Black : measured by heat flux meter

Red : calculated by temperature 

2 min:

Flame reached ceiling.

HF: 10 kW/m2.

6 min:

Glass in the south broken.

Air flowed into the room.

HF: 50 kW/m2.

10 min:

Glass in the north broken.

HF: 100 kW/m2.

12 min:

Flashover. 1,200°C

HF: 300 kW/m2.

J. Suzuki, etc.

Vertical fire spread by external flame

時

間

南側から 東側から

熱画像

(東側から)

点

火

3

分

後

点

火

5

分

後

点

火

7

分

後

30

13

15

190

600

176

104

19

20

356

900

222

707

710

782

707

941

765

約8m

約4m

約3.6m

約6m

約8m

約13m

1200

900

600

300

0

図中の数値は火炎寸法と壁面温度[°C] 温度スケールの D 単位[°C] . Nii, H. Yoshioka, etc.

3 min:

Glass broken partially, 

and flame ejected.

Flame: 3.8m(width), 5m(height).

5 min:

Glass broken entirely,

Flame: 8m(width), 6m(height).

Then, 2

nd Floor ignited.

7 min:

Glass in adjacent opening broken.

Flame reached eaves (8m height).

8 min:

3

rd Floor ignited.
Horizontal fire spread over Fire Wall

1.5 min: (inside)

Fire door on 1st floor opened,

Smoke moved through the gap of 

20cm.

17 min: (southern facade)

External flame from openings, 

crossed over the fire-wall to the 

next compartment, horizontally 

under the eaves.

26 min: (eastern facade)

Glass at X1 was broken, and flame 

ejected from there.

27 min:

Glass at X2 and X3 were broken.

All three stories burned together.

I. Hagiwara, K. Kagiya, etc.

X1

X3

X2

X1

X3

X2

Southern facade

Eastern facade

Eastern facade

Incident Heat Flux at Surroundings

L (m) : Distance from the eastern facade.

J. Suzuki, etc.

Maximum value measured by 

heat flux meter at each position, 

is described in the picture.

L=0(m): eastern facade.

23min, 23.5min:

Huge flame emerged from 

openings. 

Maximum at 6(m) from facade, 

over 300 (kW/m2).

Even at 14(m) from facade, 

70 (kW/m2).

Other than above:

HF decreases, as distance 

increases from the facade wall.

Firebrands scattering

Y. Hayashi, T. Hebiishi, etc.

Firebrands generated when roof was 

broken, caused another fire at a leeward 

place after scattering.

Brand size: 20 ~ 30 cm.

Wind direction: east-northeast ~ east.

Wind velocity: 4.6(m/s) Average.

Firebrands landed at large leeward area 

(fan-shaped, angle of 44°).

Especially, many landed at 700~800m.

Brands size.

Within 100m: 10cm ~ 30cm ~

500~600m: 2~3cm

Total weight of brands landed: 170 kg,

0.2 % of total wooden material in test 

building.

Tentative future plan

• This test: February 22nd, 2012

• Final test: November, 2012

• After 2013: Planning to revise BSL

Thank You for Your Attention

Y. Hasemi, I. Hagiwara, T. Naruse, M. Kohno, etc.

and All the members.

Specifications (Exterior)

Exterior Finishing

Roof Eave Exterior Wall

A Block

Coloured Steel Sheet

Structural Plywood

Horizontal Rafter

Structural Plywood

Structural Plywood

(Exposed Rafter)

Blocking

(South, North and

West)

Ceramic-Type Siding

(East)

J-C Siding

B Block

Coloured Steel Sheet

Roof Sheathing Boards

Rafter

J-C Boards

Fibre-Reinforced

Cement Boards

Ceramic-Type Siding

*J-C: Japanese Cedar

Specifications (Interior)

Interior Finishing

Floor Wall Ceiling

1

st Floor 

Level

A 

Block

J-C Flooring

Type X Gypsum board

Structural Plywood

J-C Panelling

Structural Plywood

Structural 

Plywood

B 

Block

Gypsum board

Structural Plywood

J-C Boards

Type X Gypsum 

board

Structural Plywood 

J-C Panelling

Type X Gypsum 

board

2

nd and 3rd

Floor 

Level

A 

Block

J-C Flooring

Type X Gypsum board

Structural Plywood

Type X Gypsum 

board

Structural Plywood

Structural 

Plywood (Rafter 

Exposed)

B 

Block

Gypsum board

Structural Plywood

Gypsum board

Structural Plywood

Gypsum board

Each Floor 

Level

A 

Block

(Fire Wall)

2-Layer of Type X 

Gypsum board

*J-C: Japanese Cedar

*Columns and Beams: Domestically manufactured Larch glulam, Domestically manufactured 

 J-C glulam and J-C sawn lumber also used
2012/07/03

Keisuke HIMOTO

(Kyoto University)

An Analysis on the Burn-down Probability of

Historical Temple- and Shrine-Structures

in Kyoto City due to Fires Following Earthquake

Urban Fire = Group of Building Fires

 Fire behavior of individual building: 

• One-layer zone model for uncollapsed buildings

• Flame model for collapsed buildings

 Building-to-building fire spread

Post-earthquake Fire Spread Model 

U

QB

 m



qR



QL



m



m



m



QB

 QL qR 



Q

II. Crib Fire

(Flame Model)

I. Compartment Fire

(One-Layer Zone Model)

Two Modes of Building Fire:

Agglomeration of historical structures

 Designated important cultural property : 205/ 2,386

 National treasure : 40 / 216

Kyoto represents the culture of Japan 

Most of Structures are wooden constructions

Historical Structures in Kyoto City Location of Historical Structures in Kyoto City

N

S

Higashiyama Area

Hanamikoji (historical site)

San-neizaka (historical site)

Nineizaka (historical site)

Maruyama Koen (park)

Chion-in (temple)

Yasaka Jinja (shrine)

Ken-ninji (temple)

Rokuharamitsuji (temple)

Kodaiji (temple)

Hokanji (temple)

Kiyomizudera (temple)

Jishu Jinja

(shrine)

Fires following earthquake in Kyoto

 Fire may involve loss of historical structures

 Historical structures are essential features of Kyoto

Kobe in 1995 and Kyoto in 20XX !(

!(!(

!(!(!

!(!

!(

!(!!(

!(!(!(!!!(

!(!!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!( !(!( !( !. !(!(!

!(!

!( !!( !(!( !(!

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!!(!(

!(!(!!(

!!(

!!(

!(!(!(

!

!(!(!(

!(!

!(

!!(!( !( !(

!(

! !(!( !(!(!!!(

!!(

!(!

!.

."/

!.!(.!(

!(

!(

!(!

!!.!( !(!(

!("/!(!(!

!(!(

!

!( !!(!

!(

!!(!!.

!(

!(""//

!("/

!( !(

!("/!("

!!(

!!(

!.!(

!(!(!

!!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!

!(

!(

!

!!

! !( !(!(

!(

!!(

!(!

!(!( !(!(!( !(!.

!( !(!(!.!(!(!(

!.

!(

!.

!(

!(!(

!( !(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(! "/ !(

!(!(

!

!(

!

!(

!(!(

!

!(!

! !(!(

!(!

!( !

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!( !(

!(!(

!( !(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!!(

!

!(!(

"/"/"/ "/ "/"

!(!(!

"/"/"/

!(

"/

!("/"/

!( "/!(

!!("/

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!!(!(

!!!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!

!(

!(

!( !(!( !(

!!(

!(!(!(

!!(

!(!(

!(! !(!(

!

!(!(!(

!(!( !(! !(

!(!(

!(!(

!!!( !(!( !.

!(!.!.!. ! !.! !(!(!!(

!(!!(

!(

!(

!!(

!(

!(

!!

!(

!(!(

!

!(

!(

!(!!(!(

!(!(

!!(

!(

!(!(!( !(

!

!!(

!

!(!(

!(!( !(!( !!( !(

!.

!.

!( !.!.

!( "/"/!( !(!

!( !.

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!

!(!( !(!!

!(!! !(!. !( !(

!( "/

!. !( !.

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!.

!(!(!(!!

!

!(!(!(!(!(

"/

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!

!!(

!(!(

!

!(

!(! "/

!(!(!

!(!(!(

!!(

!(

!

!(!!(

"/

!(

"/

!(!(!(!.. !.

!(!(

!!.

!.

!( !.!( "/

!(

!

!!( !.!(

!(

!.

!.

!(!(

!(!(!(

!!(!(

!!(

!(

!(

!(!(!

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!

"/"/"

!(

!(

!( "/

!(

!(

!("/"/

!("/"/"

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!!

!(

! !(!

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!!(

!

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(!

!

!(!(

!(!

!(

!(

!(

!

!(

!(

!( !(!!(

!(!!( !(!

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!!(

!

!( !.!..!.

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!("/

!(

!(

!"/

!(!(

"/

!(

!( "/

!(

!(!!( "/"

!( !( ! "/

!

!( !(

!(

!( "/

"/

!(

!(

"/"/

!( !("/

!(

! "/ "/

!(!(

!(!.!.!( !.

!(

!(!(

!(

!.!( !(!(

!!!( .

!(

!.

!.

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!!( !(

!(!(!(

!!(

!(!!(

!!!(

!(!(

!( !(

!!(!(

!!( !(

!(

!( !(

!( !.!.!(!.!(!(

!!

!(

!(

!(

!(

!.!.

!(

!.

!.

!.

.!.

!.

!(!(

!.

!!(.

!(

!(!.

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!

!(

!(!(!(

!(!( !.

!..

!(!!(!.

!(

!(!!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(!!.!.

.!

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!( !(!(!( !(!!(

!!!(! !(!.

!(!!(!(!(!(

!(!

!(!(!

!(!!(!

!

!(

!(

!!(

!(!(!

!!(

!(!(

!

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(!( !(!(

!(

!

!(

!(

!( !(!(!(

!(!!(

!(!(!!

!(

!( !!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(!(

!(

!(!(

!

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(

!(!"/

!(

!(

!( !(

!(!( !(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!!(!!( !!(

! !(!(

!(!(!!(!(

!(

!(!(

!!

!(

!(!(

!(!!(!!!(

!(

!

!(

!(!

!(

!!(

!(

!(

!!(!(

!

!!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!!(!(!

!

!(!

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!!

!(

!!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!

!(!!(

!(!(!.!(

!(!(.!(

!!(

!(

!!( !(

!(

!!(!

!

!(!!

!(!(

!(!(

!

!(

!(

!

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!

!(

!(!(

!.

!(

!(!!! !(!(!(!

!( !( !(!(!!!(!(!(

!(!(

!!(

!(! !(

!!!(!(

!

!(!

!( !

!

!

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!!

!!

!!!(

!(!(

!(

!

!(

!( !(!

!(

!( !

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!!!(!(

!(!

!(!!(

!(!

!( !( !!(!!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!( !(

!(

!!(

!(!( !!(

!( !( !

!(!!! !(

!!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!

!

!( !(!

!(

!!(

!!(!

!!(

!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!!(

!(

!!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!( !(!(

!(!

!(

!(!!!(

!(

!(!(

!(!!(

!(!

!(

!(!(!

!

!!(

!!(

!!(! !(

!(

!(

!

!

!!!(!(

!

!!

!.

!(

!(!(

!(!!(

!(

!(

!!!(!(

!(

!( !(!(

!(

!

!!(!

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!.

.

!.

. !.

.

.

.

!(

!(!(

!.

!.

.

.

.

!(

!(

!!!(

!(

!(!!(! !.

!(!(

!(

! !(!!!!(!!( !(! !

!( !(!(!

!(

!(

!(!(!.

!.!..!(

!

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!

!(

!(!

!(!!(

!(

!(

!(!

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!

!(

!

!! !(!(

!(

!!

!(

!(!

!!(

!(!

!(!!

!(!

!(!(

!!!(

!(!(! !(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(!(!(

!!(

!(

!(!(

!(!

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!!( !(!(

!(!(

!

!(!(!

!(!(

!

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!

!

!(!

!!(

!

!

!(

! !(

!( !( !

!!!(!( !(!(!!(

!(!(

!(!!(

!(!(

!( !.!(!.

.

!(!(

!(

!

!(

!!(!

!(

!(

!(!!

!!(

!(

!( !

!(!

!(!(!(

!!(

!

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!!(

!(

!(!(

!(!

!(

!(!( !(

!(!

!(! !( !(

!( !( !!(

!

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!.!.

!(.!(!.

!(!...

!(

!(!(

!

!( !( .

!(!(!( !(

!!(!( !(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!.!( .

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!!(!!(!(

!(

!!(!

!(!!(

!(!( !(!(!!(

"/

"/

!(

!(

!!(

!

!(!( !!( !(

!(!(

!(!

!!!(

!(

!!(!

o

0 0.5 1 2km

Nijo Castle

Kyoto Station

Old

Imperial Palace

Ken-ninji

Toji

Nishi-Honganji

Kitano-Tenmangu

Higashi-Honganji Rengeo-in

Kamomioya-Jinja

Category

"/ I

!. II

!( III

!( IV

Target Area (2012)

Target Area (2011)

Numbe

r

%

Historical

Structure 2,131 1.7

Others 121,01

7

98.3

 Extending Target Area

 Risk of entire city of Kyoto

 Analysis with extended number of samples
Category

Time of Construction

Total

1

(-1708)

2

(1708

-1788)

3

(1788

-1884)

4

(1884

-1945)

I

National Treasure 15 0 2 0

82 Important Cultural Property 63 1 1 0

II

Tangible Cultural Asset 0 0 2 14

117

Designated Cultural Property

(Prefecture of Kyoto) 14 3 21 0

Registered Cultural Property

(Prefecture of Kyoto) 0 1 0 0

Designated Cultural Property

(City of Kyoto) 21 12 27 2

III

No Registration / No

Designation

(in the nominee list)

45 59 121 10 235

IV

No Registration / No

Designation

(not in the nominee list)

34 77 791 795 1,69

7

Category of Historical Structures Assumed Burn-down Scenario

(I) Seismic Motion

(IV) Fire Spread

(II) Ignition

Fire Stop

(Wide street, Open space, etc.)

Computational 

Domain Target

(III) Firefighting at 

Initial Stage

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 2 4 6 8 相対度数 (-)

風速 (m/s)

累積相対度数

相対度数

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 6 12 18 24

時刻変動係数 (-)

時刻

夏季

冬季

Uncertain Factors

 Ignition (date and time, number, location)

 Firefighting (extinguishment at initial stage)

 Damage level of buildings (5 grades)

 Weather (wind velocity, direction)

Monte Carlo Simulation

Reference time

winter

summer

variation coefficient

time

cumulative 

wind velocity (m/s)

relative frequency

relative frequency

An Example of the Fire Spread Simulation

* Hanaore Fault case

o

0 0.5 1 2km

Nijo Castle

Kyoto Station

Old

Imperial Palace

Ken-ninji

Toji

Nishi-Honganji

Kitano-Tenmangu

Higashi-Honganji

Kamomioya-Jinja

Probability

0.00 - 0.05

0.05 - 0.10

0.10 - 0.15

0.15 - 0.20

0.20 - 0.25

0.25 - 0.30

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0 1x104 2x104 3x104 4x104 Relative Frequency

Number of Burnt-down Structures

overall

Overall Number of Burnt-down Structures

Num. %

Min. 3 0.0

Mean 13,368 10.9

Max. 38,386 31.2

Mean
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0 20 40 60 80 100

Relative Frequency

Number of Burnt-down Structures

category (III)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Relative Frequency

Number of Burnt-down Structures

category (I)

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0 100 200 300 400 500

Relative Frequency

Number of Burnt-down Structures

category (IV)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Relative Frequency

Number of Burnt-down Structures

category (II)

Number of Burnt-down Historical Structures

Num. %

Min. 0 0.0

Mea

n

2.4 2.9

Max. 30 36.6

Num. %

Min. 0 0.0

Mea

n

5.7 4.9

Max. 32 27.4

Num. %

Min. 0 0.0

Mea

n

25.3 10.8

Max. 79 33.6

Num. %

Min. 0 0.0

Mean 136.7 8.1

Max. 432 25.5

Burn-down Probability of Historical Structures 

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

I

II

III

IV

0.00-0.05

0.05-0.10

0.10-0.15

0.15-0.20

0.20-0.25

0.25-0.30

Category of Historical Structures

Site Area

0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1

0 2x104 4x104 6x104 8x104 1x105 1.2x105 Fraction

Site Area (m2)

category (I)

0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1

0 2x104 4x104 6x104 8x104 1x105 1.2x105 Fraction

Site Area (m2)

category (II)

0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1

0 2x104 4x104 6x104 8x104 1x105 1.2x105 Fraction

Site Area (m2)

category (III)

0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1

0 2x104 4x104 6x104 8x104 1x105 1.2x105 Fraction

Site Area (m2)

category (IV)

Why site area is large?

 Most advanced technology of that time used

 Financial ability is required for construction

 Financial ability → Large site area

!(

!(!(

!(!(!

!(!

!(

!(!!(

!(!(!(!!!(

!(!!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!( !(!( !( !. !(!(!

!(!

!( !!( !(!( !(!

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!!(!(

!(!(!!(

!!(

!!(

!(!(!(

!

!(!(!(

!(!

!(

!!(!( !( !(

!(

! !(!( !(!(!!!(

!!(

!(!

!.

."/

!.!(.!(

!(

!(

!(!

!!.!( !(!(

!("/!(!(!

!(!(

!

!( !!(!

!(

!!(!!.

!(

!(""//

!("/

!( !(

!("/!("

!!(

!!(

!.!(

!(!(!

!!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!

!(

!(

!

!!

! !( !(!(

!(

!!(

!(!

!(!( !(!(!( !(!.

!( !(!(!.!(!(!(

!.

!(

!.

!(

!(!(

!( !(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(! "/ !(

!(!(

!

!(

!

!(

!(!(

!

!(!

! !(!(

!(!

!( !

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!( !(

!(!(

!( !(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!!(

!

!(!(

"/"/"/ "/ "/"

!(!(!

"/"/"/

!(

"/

!("/"/

!( "/!(

!!("/

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!!(!(

!!!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!

!(

!(

!( !(!( !(

!!(

!(!(!(

!!(

!(!(

!(! !(!(

!

!(!(!(

!(!( !(! !(

!(!(

!(!(

!!!( !(!( !.

!(!.!.!. ! !.! !(!(!!(

!(!!(

!(

!(

!!(

!(

!(

!!

!(

!(!(

!

!(

!(

!(!!(!(

!(!(

!!(

!(

!(!(!( !(

!

!!(

!

!(!(

!(!( !(!( !!( !(

!.

!.

!( !.!.

!( "/"/!( !(!

!( !.

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!

!(!( !(!!

!(!! !(!. !( !(

!( "/

!. !( !.

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!.

!(!(!(!!

!

!(!(!(!(!(

"/

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!

!!(

!(!(

!

!(

!(! "/

!(!(!

!(!(!(

!!(

!(

!

!(!!(

"/

!(

"/

!(!(!(!.. !.

!(!(

!!.

!.

!( !.!( "/

!(

!

!!( !.!(

!(

!.

!.

!(!(

!(!(!(

!!(!(

!!(

!(

!(

!(!(!

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!

"/"/"

!(

!(

!( "/

!(

!(

!("/"/

!("/"/"

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!!

!(

! !(!

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!!(

!

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(!

!

!(!(

!(!

!(

!(

!(

!

!(

!(

!( !(!!(

!(!!( !(!

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!!(

!

!( !.!..!.

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!("/

!(

!(

!"/

!(!(

"/

!(

!( "/

!(

!(!!( "/"

!( !( ! "/

!

!( !(

!(

!( "/

"/

!(

!(

"/"/

!( !("/

!(

! "/ "/

!(!(

!(!.!.!( !.

!(

!(!(

!(

!.!( !(!(

!!!( .

!(

!.

!.

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!!( !(

!(!(!(

!!(

!(!!(

!!!(

!(!(

!( !(

!!(!(

!!( !(

!(

!( !(

!( !.!.!(!.!(!(

!!

!(

!(

!(

!(

!.!.

!(

!.

!.

!.

.!.

!.

!(!(

!.

!!(.

!(

!(!.

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!

!(

!(!(!(

!(!( !.

!..

!(!!(!.

!(

!(!!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(!!.!.

.!

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!( !(!(!( !(!!(

!!!(! !(!.

!(!!(!(!(!(

!(!

!(!(!

!(!!(!

!

!(

!(

!!(

!(!(!

!!(

!(!(

!

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(!( !(!(

!(

!

!(

!(

!( !(!(!(

!(!!(

!(!(!!

!(

!( !!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(!(

!(

!(!(

!

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(

!(!"/

!(

!(

!( !(

!(!( !(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!!(!!( !!(

! !(!(

!(!(!!(!(

!(

!(!(

!!

!(

!(!(

!(!!(!!!(

!(

!

!(

!(!

!(

!!(

!(

!(

!!(!(

!

!!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!!(!(!

!

!(!

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!!

!(

!!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!

!(!!(

!(!(!.!(

!(!(.!(

!!(

!(

!!( !(

!(

!!(!

!

!(!!

!(!(

!(!(

!

!(

!(

!

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!

!(

!(!(

!.

!(

!(!!! !(!(!(!

!( !( !(!(!!!(!(!(

!(!(

!!(

!(! !(

!!!(!(

!

!(!

!( !

!

!

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!!

!!

!!!(

!(!(

!(

!

!(

!( !(!

!(

!( !

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!!!(!(

!(!

!(!!(

!(!

!( !( !!(!!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!( !(

!(

!!(

!(!( !!(

!( !( !

!(!!! !(

!!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!

!

!( !(!

!(

!!(

!!(!

!!(

!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!!(

!(

!!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!( !(!(

!(!

!(

!(!!!(

!(

!(!(

!(!!(

!(!

!(

!(!(!

!

!!(

!!(

!!(! !(

!(

!(

!

!

!!!(!(

!

!!

!.

!(

!(!(

!(!!(

!(

!(

!!!(!(

!(

!( !(!(

!(

!

!!(!

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!.

.

!.

. !.

.

.

.

!(

!(!(

!.

!.

.

.

.

!(

!(

!!!(

!(

!(!!(! !.

!(!(

!(

! !(!!!!(!!( !(! !

!( !(!(!

!(

!(

!(!(!.

!.!..!(

!

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!

!(

!(!

!(!!(

!(

!(

!(!

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!

!(

!

!! !(!(

!(

!!

!(

!(!

!!(

!(!

!(!!

!(!

!(!(

!!!(

!(!(! !(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(!(!(

!!(

!(

!(!(

!(!

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!!( !(!(

!(!(

!

!(!(!

!(!(

!

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!

!

!(!

!!(

!

!

!(

! !(

!( !( !

!!!(!( !(!(!!(

!(!(

!(!!(

!(!(

!( !.!(!.

.

!(!(

!(

!

!(

!!(!

!(

!(

!(!!

!!(

!(

!( !

!(!

!(!(!(

!!(

!

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!!(

!(

!(!(

!(!

!(

!(!( !(

!(!

!(! !( !(

!( !( !!(

!

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!.!.

!(.!(!.

!(!...

!(

!(!(

!

!( !( .

!(!(!( !(

!!(!( !(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!.!( .

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!!(!!(!(

!(

!!(!

!(!!(

!(!( !(!(!!(

"/

"/

!(

!(

!!(

!

!(!( !!( !(

!(!(

!(!

!!!(

!(

!!(!

o

0 0.5 1 2km

Nijo Castle

Kyoto Station

Old

Imperial Palace

Ken-ninji

Toji

Nishi-Honganji

Kitano-Tenmangu

Higashi-Honganji Rengeo-in

Kamomioya-Jinja

Category

"/ I

!. II

!( III

!( IV

!(

!(!(

!(!(!

!(!

!(

!(!!(

!(!(!(!!!(

!(!!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!( !(!( !( !. !(!(!

!(!

!( !!( !(!( !(!

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!!(!(

!(!(!!(

!!(

!!(

!(!(!(

!

!(!(!(

!(!

!(

!!(!( !( !(

!(

! !(!( !(!(!!!(

!!(

!(!

!.

."/

!.!(.!(

!(

!(

!(!

!!.!( !(!(

!("/!(!(!

!(!(

!

!( !!(!

!(

!!(!!.

!(

!(""//

!("/

!( !(

!("/!("

!!(

!!(

!.!(

!(!(!

!!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!

!(

!(

!

!!

! !( !(!(

!(

!!(

!(!

!(!( !(!(!( !(!.

!( !(!(!.!(!(!(

!.

!(

!.

!(

!(!(

!( !(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(! "/ !(

!(!(

!

!(

!

!(

!(!(

!

!(!

! !(!(

!(!

!( !

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!( !(

!(!(

!( !(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!!(

!

!(!(

"/"/"/ "/ "/"

!(!(!

"/"/"/

!(

"/

!("/"/

!( "/!(

!!("/

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!!(!(

!!!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!

!(

!(

!( !(!( !(

!!(

!(!(!(

!!(

!(!(

!(! !(!(

!

!(!(!(

!(!( !(! !(

!(!(

!(!(

!!!( !(!( !.

!(!.!.!. ! !.! !(!(!!(

!(!!(

!(

!(

!!(

!(

!(

!!

!(

!(!(

!

!(

!(

!(!!(!(

!(!(

!!(

!(

!(!(!( !(

!

!!(

!

!(!(

!(!( !(!( !!( !(

!.

!.

!( !.!.

!( "/"/!( !(!

!( !.

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!

!(!( !(!!

!(!! !(!. !( !(

!( "/

!. !( !.

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!.

!(!(!(!!

!

!(!(!(!(!(

"/

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!

!!(

!(!(

!

!(

!(! "/

!(!(!

!(!(!(

!!(

!(

!

!(!!(

"/

!(

"/

!(!(!(!.. !.

!(!(

!!.

!.

!( !.!( "/

!(

!

!!( !.!(

!(

!.

!.

!(!(

!(!(!(

!!(!(

!!(

!(

!(

!(!(!

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!

"/"/"

!(

!(

!( "/

!(

!(

!("/"/

!("/"/"

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!!

!(

! !(!

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!!(

!

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(!

!

!(!(

!(!

!(

!(

!(

!

!(

!(

!( !(!!(

!(!!( !(!

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!!(

!

!( !.!..!.

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!("/

!(

!(

!"/

!(!(

"/

!(

!( "/

!(

!(!!( "/"

!( !( ! "/

!

!( !(

!(

!( "/

"/

!(

!(

"/"/

!( !("/

!(

! "/ "/

!(!(

!(!.!.!( !.

!(

!(!(

!(

!.!( !(!(

!!!( .

!(

!.

!.

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!!( !(

!(!(!(

!!(

!(!!(

!!!(

!(!(

!( !(

!!(!(

!!( !(

!(

!( !(

!( !.!.!(!.!(!(

!!

!(

!(

!(

!(

!.!.

!(

!.

!.

!.

.!.

!.

!(!(

!.

!!(.

!(

!(!.

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!

!(

!(!(!(

!(!( !.

!..

!(!!(!.

!(

!(!!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(!(!!.!.

.!

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!( !(!(!( !(!!(

!!!(! !(!.

!(!!(!(!(!(

!(!

!(!(!

!(!!(!

!

!(

!(

!!(

!(!(!

!!(

!(!(

!

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(!( !(!(

!(

!

!(

!(

!( !(!(!(

!(!!(

!(!(!!

!(

!( !!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(!(

!(

!(!(

!

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(

!(!"/

!(

!(

!( !(

!(!( !(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!!(!!( !!(

! !(!(

!(!(!!(!(

!(

!(!(

!!

!(

!(!(

!(!!(!!!(

!(

!

!(

!(!

!(

!!(

!(

!(

!!(!(

!

!!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!!(!(!

!

!(!

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!!

!(

!!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!

!(!!(

!(!(!.!(

!(!(.!(

!!(

!(

!!( !(

!(

!!(!

!

!(!!

!(!(

!(!(

!

!(

!(

!

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!

!(

!(!(

!.

!(

!(!!! !(!(!(!

!( !( !(!(!!!(!(!(

!(!(

!!(

!(! !(

!!!(!(

!

!(!

!( !

!

!

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!!

!!

!!!(

!(!(

!(

!

!(

!( !(!

!(

!( !

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!!!(!(

!(!

!(!!(

!(!

!( !( !!(!!(

!(!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!( !(

!(

!!(

!(!( !!(

!( !( !

!(!!! !(

!!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!

!

!( !(!

!(

!!(

!!(!

!!(

!( !(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!!(

!(

!!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!( !(!(

!(!

!(

!(!!!(

!(

!(!(

!(!!(

!(!

!(

!(!(!

!

!!(

!!(

!!(! !(

!(

!(

!

!

!!!(!(

!

!!

!.

!(

!(!(

!(!!(

!(

!(

!!!(!(

!(

!( !(!(

!(

!

!!(!

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!.

.

!.

. !.

.

.

.

!(

!(!(

!.

!.

.

.

.

!(

!(

!!!(

!(

!(!!(! !.

!(!(

!(

! !(!!!!(!!( !(! !

!( !(!(!

!(

!(

!(!(!.

!.!..!(

!

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!

!(

!(!

!(!!(

!(

!(

!(!

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!

!(

!

!! !(!(

!(

!!

!(

!(!

!!(

!(!

!(!!

!(!

!(!(

!!!(

!(!(! !(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(!(!(

!!(

!(

!(!(

!(!

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!!( !(!(

!(!(

!

!(!(!

!(!(

!

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!

!

!(!

!!(

!

!

!(

! !(

!( !( !

!!!(!( !(!(!!(

!(!(

!(!!(

!(!(

!( !.!(!.

.

!(!(

!(

!

!(

!!(!

!(

!(

!(!!

!!(

!(

!( !

!(!

!(!(!(

!!(

!

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!!(

!(

!(!(

!(!

!(

!(!( !(

!(!

!(! !( !(

!( !( !!(

!

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!.!.

!(.!(!.

!(!...

!(

!(!(

!

!( !( .

!(!(!( !(

!!(!( !(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!.!( .

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!!(!!(!(

!(

!!(!

!(!!(

!(!( !(!(!!(

"/

"/

!(

!(

!!(

!

!(!( !!( !(

!(!(

!(!

!!!(

!(

!!(!

o

0 0.5 1 2km

Nijo Castle

Kyoto Station

Old

Imperial Palace

Ken-ninji

Toji

Nishi-Honganji

Kitano-Tenmangu

Higashi-Honganji Rengeo-in

Kamomioya-Jinja

Category

"/ I

!. II

!( III

!( IV

Kan-ei Fire (1708) Ten-mei Fire (1788)

Why located in the peripheral area?

 Kyoto frequently suffered from conflagrations

 Structures in the central area burnt down

 Structures in the peripheral area survived

Burn-down Probability of Historical Structures

 Burn-down probability of 2,131 historical structures in 

Kyoto evaluated

 Burn-down probability of category (I) lower than those 

of the other categories

Summary
Dr. Samuel L. Manzello

Mechanical Engineer

Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Group

Engineering Laboratory (EL)

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8662 USA

samuelm@nist.gov; +1-301-975-6891 (office)

Japan/USA Workshop

July 3rd, 2012

Overview of NIST’s Research On

Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fires

Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fires

Of the 10 largest fire loss incidents (> $1B) in U.S. 

history, 5 were WUI fires - all within the last 17 years

Proven risk assessment and mitigation tools are needed

WUI – structures and wildland vegetation coexist

Structure Ignition Physical Modeling

Pre- and Post-Fire Data Collection & Analysis

.

Large Scale Fire Behavior and 

Wind Measurements

Economic Modeling

Integrated Approach to Reducing 

Losses in the WUI

Lab Scale Fire Behavior 

Measurements

WUI Field Data Collection Studies 

• 274 residences

• 245 within fire line

• 74 residences completely 

destroyed

• 16 partly damaged

The Trails

• Identify structure ignitions 

and fire/firebrand exposure

• Develop timeline

• Identify suppression 

actions

• Firewise analysis

• Modeling

• Post fire incident data 

collection methodology

3.8 km (2.4 

miles)

The 

Trails

Witch Creek 

Fire

Amarillo Deployment Summary

• Primary focus: Tanglewood 

Complex Fire

• Secondary focus: Willow 

Creek Fire

• 21 days

• Field data collection initiated 

within 48 hours of ignition

Locations of fires around Amarillo Texas
California and Texas Fires

Fire behavior reports

Structure Ignition Studies 

Firebrands

• Post-fire studies – firebrands a major cause of ignition

• Understanding firebrand ignition of structures – important to mitigate 

fire spread in communities

Improved understanding of structure ignition in WUI fires

Major recommendation (GAO 05-380)

National Science and Technology Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction

Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD 8; Paragraph 11)

 

2007 Southern California Fire 

 

2003 Southern California Fire 

 

Who cares?

• Codes and standards

•ICC

•ASTM

•NFPA

•CALFIRE

•GAO

•USFS

•DHS

•Insurance industry

•Homeowners

•Construction Industry 

International Collaboration

BRI (Japan) and EL-NIST (USA) 

• Research focused on how far firebrands travel for 40 yrs!!

• Nice Academic Problem – Not helpful to design structures

• Vulnerable points where firebrands may enter structure

• Unknown/guessed!

• Difficult to replicate firebrand attack!

• Entirely new experimental methods needed!

• Firebrands: generation, transport, ignition

 Goals

 Science - Building Codes/Standards; Retrofit construction

Design structures to be more resistant to firebrand ignition

Douglas-Fir Tree Burns at NIST

– Firebrand Collection using water pan array

• Range of crown heights: 2.4 m – 4.5 m

• Different moisture regimes

– Mass loss using load cells

4.5 m Douglas Fir, MC = 25%
Firebrand Sizes from Angora Fire

Image analysis:

Determine firebrand size

Firebrand Generator 

Side View

Firebrand Generator 

Front View

Firebrand Generator (NIST Dragon)

Capable of producing controlled and repeatable size and mass 

distribution of firebrands

Building Research Institute (BRI)

• Fire Research Wind Tunnel Facility (FRWTF)

• Unique facility – investigate influence of wind on fire

– Constructed more than 10 years before IBHS wind tunnel

BRI

Fire Research Wind Tunnel Facility

(FRWTF)

NIST Dragon

Firebrand size/mass commensurate to full scale tree burns

and actual WUI fire (2007 Angora Fire) 

Current Roofing Standards

Roofing test: ASTM E108; UL 790

Does not simulate dynamic firebrand attack!

12 mi/hr

(5.3 m/s)

Japan/USA

Use This Test!

Mitchell &Patashnik [2007 ] – possible correlation homes ignited

in 2003 Cedar Fire with those homes fitted with ceramic tile roofing

Ceramic Roofing

U∞ (m/s) OSB/TP/CT

No Bird Stops

OSB/TP/CT

With Bird 

Stops

OSB/CT

No Bird Stops

OSB/CT

With Bird 

Stops

7 SI NI SI to FI SI

9 SI NI SI to FI SI

Aged Roofing Simulated: OSB, then tiles (no tar paper)

New Roofing Construction: OSB, Tar Paper, then Ceramic Tiles
Firebrand Penetration Through Vents

Gable Vent

Screen Behind Vent

Three sizes tested 6 mm , 3 mm , and 1.5 mm

Firebrand Goes Through

Experiments conducted in 2007

Worked with CALFIRE as part of a task force (invitation only) to reduce mesh size used to 

cover building vent openings to lessen the potential hazard of firebrand entry into structures

Changes were formally adopted into the 2010 

California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, 

Chapter 7A, and are effective January, 2011

Workshops for Input

Hosted by CALFIRE Hosted by ICC

Input to conduct experiments necessary to provide 

scientific basis for code change and new test methods

• Determine siding treatment vulnerability to firebrand showers

• Do firebrands become trapped within corner post/under siding itself?

• Determine glazing assembly vulnerability to firebrand showers

• Do firebrands accumulate inside corner of framing of glazing assemblies, 

and lead to window breakage?

• Determine eave vulnerability to firebrand showers

• Do firebrands become lodged within joints between walls/eave 

overhang?

• Determine if fine fuels adjacent to structure can produce ignition

First experiments ever conducted 

Research Plan Siding Treatments

Image of vinyl siding (from bottom) 

after firebrand exposure at 7 m/s

• Corner - believed that firebrands may become trapped within the 

corner post and under the siding itself

• OSB, moisture barrier applied (OSB dried; 11 % )

Eave Vulnerability

Firebrand accumulation in eaves

Does this really happen??

overhang

Side view

Wind direction

• A very important, long standing question is whether firebrands may 

become lodged within joints between walls and the eave overhang

• There are essentially two types of eave construction commonly 

used in California and the USA

• Open eave

• Boxed in eave

• In open eave construction, the roof rafter tails extend beyond the 

exterior wall and are readily visible

• In the second type of eave construction, known as boxed in eave 

construction, the eaves are essentially enclosed and the rafter tails 

are no longer exposed

Wall Fitted With Eave 

Exposed to Firebrand Showers
Wall Fitted With Eave Results

• The base of the wall actually ignited due to the accumulation of 

firebrands (9 m/s)

• It was very easy to produce ignition outside the structure since 

many firebrands were observed to accumulate in front of the 

structure during the tests

• Although some firebrands were observed to enter the vents, the 

ignition of the wall assembly itself demonstrates the dangers of 

wind driven firebrand showers

• The base of wall assembly ignited without the presence of other 

combustibles that may be found near real structures (e.g. mulch, 

vegetation)

Firebrand Accumulation

Continuous Firebrand Showers

Improved Dragon!

Motivation for Bench Scale Test Methods

• NIST Firebrand Generator (NIST Dragon) shown the 

vulnerabilities of structures to ignition from firebrand showers 

for first time

• Full scale experiments are required to observe the 

vulnerabilities 

• Bench scale test methods afford the capability to evaluate 

firebrand resistant building materials/technologies

• Bench scale test methods may serve as the basis for new 

standard testing methodologies 

119 cm

89 cm

68 

cm

40

21 cm

cm

5

14 cm

cm

Gate 2

Gate 1

Blower

Burner (to propane cylinder)

13 cm

Φ=10 cm

Φ=15.25 cm

Φ=10 cm

Mesh for 

firebrands

Conveyor belt system

25 cm

30

°

24 

cm

Coupled with wind tunnel 

Continuous Feed Baby Dragon

Conveyor

Gates Burner

Firebrand Injection 

into Wind Tunnel

Coupled to Dragon’s LAIR

Generate continuous firebrand showers

0.4kW Blower

1.1 kW Axial Tube Fan

Propane burner

Test section 200.0 cm

50.0 cm

122.5 cm

Φ=91.0 cm 80.0 cm

130.0 cm

120.0 cm 150.0 cm 170.0 cm 100.0 cm

100.0 cm

120.0 cm

91.0 cm

14.5 cm

Φ=10.2 cm Test screen

100.0 cm 15.2 cm

Propane gas cylinder

Expose materials to continuous, wind driven firebrand showers

NIST Dragon’s LAIR (Lofting and Ignition Research) 

• Coupled continuous feed baby dragon with 

bench scale wind tunnel

• Ability to evaluate and compare material 

performance to firebrand showers

Baby Dragon

HERE!!!
Improved NIST Dragon’s LAIR

0

50

100

150

200

0 20 40 60 80

Time to Smoldering Ignition (s)

Feed Rate (g/min)

Ignition Regime

No Ignition Regime

Ignition 

Not Observed 

at Lowest 

Feed 

of 11.7 g/min

Cedar

Cedar SI of Cedar

Firebrands

IGNITION REGIME MAPS

FI of Cedar

Full Scale Continuous Firebrand Generator 

Developed and Characterized

Decks exposed!

Developing Rapid Response Instrumentation

Packages to Quantify Structure Ignition

In Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fires

Field deployable instruments – heat flux, wind speed, firebrand generation

Quantify WUI Fire Exposures

WHAT IS THE NEW TECHNICAL IDEA?

4h 6m 26s

4h 6m23s

4h 6m 20s

4h 6m 07s

4h 5m 54s

4h 5m 41s

4h 5m 28s

Time Camera #2 Camera #3 Camera #5

Video Sequence 

Instrumentation Setup

In 20 minutes

Fire started 4 hours 

Later For Desired

Wind Conditions

IDAI – Largest WUI Fire Research Institute in Europe 

Cloned 

Bench Scale Continuous Feed Firebrand Generator

Recent Impacts

IBHS Cloned 

Full Scale Firebrand Generator (NIST Dragon)

NIST working with industry

Guest Editor of Fire Safety Journal too
Recent Publications Special Thanks

• Dr. Sayaka Suzuki (NIST)

• LFL Staff (Dr. Matthew Bundy – Supervisor)

• Dr. Yoshihiko Hayashi (BRI)

Summary

• NIST Dragon coupled to BRI’s FRWTF

• Capability to experimentally expose structures to wind driven 

firebrand showers for first time!

• Structure vulnerability experiments conducted for:

• Roofing (cermaic/asphalt)

• Vents/mesh (gable/different mesh sizes)

• Siding (vinyl, polypropylene, cedar)

• Eaves (open)

• NIST Dragon’s LAIR Facility

• Capability to expose materials/firebrand resistant technologies 

to wind driven firebrand showers

• With newly developed Continuous Feed Baby Dragon, evaluate 

and compare relative performance
Fire Whirls Caused by 

Urban Conflagration

Masahiko Shinohara1, Sanae Matsushima1, Ai Sekizawa2

1 National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster, Japan

2 Tokyo University of Science, Japan

311 まるごとアーカイブス提供(311Marugoto archives)

Contents

1 Background

Fire Whirls Caused by 

Urban Conflagration

1. Background

2. Purpose Purpose

3. Results Results

The 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake

The 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake

4. Conclusions

311 まるごとアーカイブス提供(311Marugoto archives)

Background

(Wood, V. T., Monthly Weather Review, Vol.120, 

1992. Photo by Steve Campbell,1990)

(Yomiuri shinbun 

October .27 2003) (AP)

Experiments Experiments Numerical simulations Numerical simulations

Φ80cm methanol

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Φ3 cm methane

Φ80cm methanol flame 

The 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake

Purpose

The 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake

Katsuro Miura and Taishi Itoh, 2011 

Masaru Kanno, 2012 

Results

The 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake

March 11th :Tsunami

Nainowaki-cho

Kesennuma City

Miyagi Prefecture
Results

The 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake

March 11th :Tsunami

March 14th 22:34: Fire was discovered

March 15th about 4:30: Fire whirl was witnessed

Fire station

1.4 km Kesennuma City

Miyagi Prefecture

Nainowaki Nainowaki-cho

Eyewitness testimony

Characteristics of the fire whirl 

・vortex containing fire

・straight

・if compared to spring, it is not stretched spring but 

contracted spring

・continued for about 5 minutes

・did not move

Eyewitness testimony

= the height of the signboard

< the height of the signboard

Eyewitness A 

Eyewitness B 

Height of the fire whirl

= the width of the signboard

= 2/3 of the longitudinal length of

the signboard

Eyewitness testimony

Eyewitness A 

Eyewitness B 

Width of the fire whirl

Eyewitness

(Fire station)

Signboard

c ZENRIN

1.4 km

Grove

70.5 Fire scene 1427

27.7(A)

38.4 

Fire Whirl = 225(A)

27.6(B)

< 228(B) [m]

579

46 - 50

71 - 80

Eyewitness Testimonies

Signboard

Eyewitness

Grove

H i ht

Fire Whirls

> 70m 

(A) 230m

(B) < 230m

above the grove

(A) = the height of the signboard

(B) < the height of the signboard

Height

Width

(A) = the width of the signboard

(B) = 2/3 of the longitudinal 

length of the signboard

Diameter

(A) 55m

(B) 130m

Height
1

2 Φ 55 m

Φ 130 m

Fire Whirl

Diameter

(A) 55m

(B) 130m

c ZENRIN

3

5

4

6 7

8

9

・not crowded area

・many empty lots and a park

・not narrow roads

Geographical condition

・flat land

prevent fire from 

spreading

Nainowaki

1 Chome Nakamachi

c ZENRIN

3.8 ha

1 Chome

Nakamachi

2 Chome

c ZENRIN

Causes of Fire Spreading

Debris filled roads, empty lots between hoses, 

and even if a park 

13 March 2011 Two days after tsunami. 

Before fire break out

©2011 ZENRIN Image ©2011 GeoEye ©2011 Geocentre Consulting

Causes of Fire Spreading

Debris filled roads, empty lots between hoses, 

and even if a park 

Ohkawa Park

13 March 2011 Two days after tsunami. 

The day before fire broak out

©2011 ZENRIN Image ©2011 GeoEye ©2011 Geocentre Consulting

- Tunami water had receded from this area water had receded from this area

Causes of Fire Spreading

Debris and houses: probably dry

Nainowaki Nainowaki 1-Chome 15 March 2011 about 1:30 a.m. Chome 15 March 2011 about 1:30 a.m. 
10

15

20

気温 [°C]

FIRE

Air Temperature erature [

°C]

6.1°C 7.2°C

15.2°C 17.7°C

Tsunami

63.9  ̊ F

43.0  ̊ F 45.0  ̊ F

20 59.4  ̊ F

15

10

-5

0

5 気

March 11 12 13 14 15

Air Temp

(Kesennuma Fire Department)

Day

5

0

-5

Humidity

50

60

70

80

90

100

湿度 [%]

Humidity [%]

100

60

80

0

10

20

30

40

50

相対

湿 Relative 

H

34.5% 27.9% 30.9%

25.2% FIRE

(Kesennuma Fire Department)

March 11 12 13 14 15 0

20

40

Tsunami

1 0

1.5

2.0

量 [mm]

escipitation [mm] 2.0

1 0

1.5

Tsunami FIRE

Precipitation

0.0

0.5

1.0

降水

量

Ammount of Pre

0

0.5

1.0

(Kesennuma Fire Department)

March 11 12 13 14 15

Possible Generation Mechanism of Fire Whirls

1 Horizontal shear caused by

variations in surface roughness 

over the urban area and a river.

c ZENRIN

March 14                            4:00                             5:00

Mean Wind Speed           0.2 m/s, NNW        0.4 m/s NNE

Max. Inst. Wind Speed    3.3 m/s   WNW       1.8 m/s   E

Fire whirls: about 4:30

Horizontal wind shear Horizontal wind shear
Photo by Seiichi Kikuta

15 March 2011 about 5:19 a.m.

Cross-flow

Counter-rotating Vortex Pair

Air

Flame

2 Interaction of air entrainment 

into fires

Zhou, R., Wu, Z-N, J, J. Fluid Mech., Vol. 583, 2007

The 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake The 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake

15:30~16:30

1923.9.1

Fire whirls 

11:58 14:00

15:00

The 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake

Tokyo: 110

300m Yokohama: 30

Ryogoku

station

16:00

Seiji Nakamura,1924

Empty lot

(Hifukusyo-ato)

38,000 deaths

Fire whirls

Hifukusyo Hifukusyoato

Crosswind

A Hypothesis of a Fire Whirl that Struck Hifukusho-ato

Large fire on the other 

side of the Sumida river 

adjacent to Hifukusho-ato

(no fire within 1km on this 

side of the river)

From eyewitness testimonies, 

fire and weather conditions, 

previous experimental work

Fi hi l

Hifukusyo Hifukusyoato

Crosswind

Wind

12~16m/s

(Motoe-cho)

300m

Fire whirls
200 L th

10m diameter

200m Length

700MW

Dessens, J., Nature, Vol. 193, 1962

2003.10.27日14:21 Yahoo!

ニュースより(AP=共同)

Hokkaido Shinbun, 1965 北海道新聞, 1965

100 Burner

125m×125m

Side view of fire whirls D = 3cm U0 = 0.18m/s Fuel: Methane

M. Shinohara, 2008

A Hypothesis of a Fire Whirl that Struck Hifukusho-ato

High possibility: 

A Fire whirl occurred 

downwind of the fire

Large fire on the other side of 

the Sumida river adjacent to 

Hifukusho-ato

Eyewitness testimonies:

Fire whirls occurred around 

this large fire.

Wind

12~16m/s

(Motoe-cho)

(no fire within 1km on this 

side of the river) Hifukusyo Hifukusyoato

Testimony: A fire whirl crossed the 

river and struck Hifukusho-ato

A Hypothesis of a Fire Whirl that Struck Hifukusho-ato

High possibility: 

A Fire whirl occurred 

downwind of the fire

Large fire on the other side of 

the Sumida river adjacent to 

Hifukusho-ato

Eyewitness testimonies:

Fire whirls occurred around 

this large fire.

T ti W t il d

Hifukusyo Hifukusyoato

(no fire within 1km on this 

side of the river)

Testimony: Water was coiled up 

on the river.

Testimony: Water was coiled up 

on the river.

Testimonies: The vortex 

became black smoke vortex 

and struck Hifukusho-ato.

Wind

12~16m/s

(Motoe-cho)

A fire whirl did not 

contain fire.

Testimony: A fire whirl crossed the 

river and struck Hifukusho-ato

A Hypothesis of a Fire Whirl that Struck Hifukusho-ato

High possibility: 

A Fire whirl occurred 

downwind of the fire

Large fire on the other side of 

the Sumida river adjacent to 

Hifukusho-ato

Eyewitness testimonies:

Fire whirls occurred around 

this large fire.

Hifukusho-ato was (no fire within 1km on this 

side of the river)

Hifukusho-ato was

surrounded by fire

Hifukusho-ato was

surrounded by fire

Wind

12~16m/s

(Motoe-cho)

Hifukusyo Hifukusyoato

Hifukusho-ato:40,000 people / 66,000 m2

( 0.6 people / m2 )

Hifukusho-ato:40,000 people / 66,000 m2

( 0.6 people / m2 )

Household goods

+
Testimony: A fire whirl crossed the 

river and struck Hifukusho-ato

A Hypothesis of a Fire Whirl that Struck Hifukusho-ato

High possibility: 

A Fire whirl occurred 

downwind of the fire

Large fire on the other side of 

the Sumida river adjacent to 

Hifukusho-ato

Eyewitness testimonies:

Fire whirls occurred around 

this large fire.

Hifukusho-ato was

Hifukusyo Hifukusyoato

Wind

12~16m/s

(Motoe-cho)

(no fire within 1km on this 

side of the river)

Hifukusho-ato was

surrounded by fire

Hifukusho-ato was

surrounded by fire

Strong winds carried 

firebrands into Hifukushoato from the area around

40,000 evacuees and their 

household goods in 

Hifukusho Hifukusho-ato

40,000 evacuees and their 

household goods in 

Hifukusho Hifukusho-ato

Testimony: A fire whirl crossed the 

river and struck Hifukusho-ato

A Hypothesis of a Fire Whirl that Struck Hifukusho-ato

High possibility: 

A Fire whirl occurred 

downwind of the fire

Large fire on the other side of 

the Sumida river adjacent to 

Hifukusho-ato

Eyewitness testimonies:

Fire whirls occurred around 

this large fire.

Hifukusho-ato was

Wind velocity of 

the fire whirl: 80 m/s

Hifukusyo Hifukusyoato

Wind

12~16m/s

(Motoe-cho)

(no fire within 1km on this 

side of the river)

Hifukusho-ato was

surrounded by fire

Hifukusho-ato was

surrounded by fire

Rapid fire spread 

in Hifukusho-ato

Strong winds carried 

firebrands into Hifukushoato from the area around

40,000 evacuees and their 

household goods in 

Hifukusho Hifukusho-ato

40,000 evacuees and their 

household goods in 

Hifukusho Hifukusho-ato

Cause of death

Metropolitan Police Department : Death of fire 

Eyewitnesses testimonies : 

Death of fire 

H d d f l lift i th i Hundreds of people were lift up in the air.

Faces and teeth were stick into a stone wall. 

Dead caused by flying objects

Testimony: A fire whirl crossed the 

river and struck Hifukusho-ato

A Hypothesis of a Fire Whirl that Struck Hifukusho-ato

High possibility: 

A Fire whirl occurred 

downwind of the fire

Large fire on the other side of 

the Sumida river adjacent to 

Hifukusho-ato

Eyewitness testimonies:

Fire whirls occurred around 

this large fire.

Hifukusho-ato was

Wind velocity of 

the fire whirl: 80 m/s

Hifukusyo Hifukusyoato

Wind

12~16m/s

(Motoe-cho)

(no fire within 1km on this 

side of the river)

Hifukusho-ato was

surrounded by fire

Hifukusho-ato was

surrounded by fire

40,000 evacuees and their 

household goods in 

Hifukusho Hifukusho-ato

40,000 evacuees and their 

household goods in 

Hifukusho Hifukusho-ato

Strong winds carried 

firebrands into Hifukusho Hifukushoato from the area around from the area around

Strong winds carried 

firebrands into Hifukusho Hifukushoato from the area around from the area around

Rapid fire spread 

in Hifukusho-ato

38,000 

death

Conclusions

1. A fire whirl was witnessed on March 11th, 2011 over a 

conflagration at conflagration at Nainowaki Nainowaki-cho in Kesennuma Kesennuma City.

2. The fire whirl was at least 70 m high, and possibly as high as 

230 m; the estimated diameter was 55 230 m; the estimated diameter was 55–130 m.

3. We made a hypothesis of a fire whirl that struck 3. We made a hypothesis of a fire whirl that struck Hifukusho Hifukusho-ato

(an empty lot where 40,000 people had taken refuge) and caused 

38,000 death in the 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake. 

311 まるごとアーカイブス提供(311Marugoto archives)

・The Kesennuma Kesennuma Fire Department Fire Department

・ The citizen of The citizen of Kesennnuma Kesennnuma-City

・ Seiichi Seiichi Kikuta, Former fire chief of , Former fire chief of 

Kesennuma Kesennuma Fire Department Fire Department

Acknowledgements

311 まるごとアーカイブス提供(311Marugoto archives)
Evaluating the Vulnerability of Buildings to 

Wildfire Exposures 

 

Presented at the Fire Research Workshop 

July 3, 2012 

 

by 

 

Steve Quarles 

Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety 

The Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety is a 

nonprofit initiative of the property insurance industry. 

 

The IBHS mission is to conduct objective, scientific 

research to identify and promote effective actions that 

strengthen homes, businesses, and communities against 

natural disasters and other causes of loss. 

Wildfire Ignition Resistant Home Design (WIRHD) program: 

 

 Funded by DHS Science & Technology Directorate 

 

 Develop a home evaluation tool that could assess the ignition 

potential of a structure subjected to wildfire exposures 

 

 Update SIAM (Structural Ignition Assessment Model) – home 

ignition assessment tool 

 

 Collaborators included USDA Forest Service, Savannah 

River National Laboratory, Insurance Institute for Business & 

Home Safety, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Clemson 

University. 

www.wildfirewizard.com 

IBHS 1) provided video and 

other information made 

available to the user, and 2) was 

a team member in developing 

the assessment tool 

Radiant Heat 

Ember / Firebrand 

Flame Contact 
3 ducts at 

floor level 

(center units) 

2 ducts at 

low level 

(end units) 

5 ducts at 

mid-level 

5 ducts at 

upper level 

IBHS Research Center 

105 5.5 ft (1.7 m) 

diameter fans 

Test building set 

on a turn table 

Red circle – field of roof 

Yellow square – edge of roof 

Roof vulnerabilities ... 

Edge of Roof Vulnerability 

Vents in open eave – 

embers easily entered 

Vents in soffited eave 

– minimal ember entry 

Gable End vents – 

embers easily entered 

vinyl gutter 

metal gutter 
Drip edge missing 

Ember accumulation 

Drip edge installed 

No observable 

ember accumulation 

Ember entry at the 

soffited eave / roof edge 

1. Burning debris in the 

gutter. 

2. Wind-blown embers / 

firebrands. 

Drip edge 

Embers at gap between roof 

sheathing and top of fascia. 

Photo taken inside the attic. 

Through-roof 

Gable end 

Foundation & other 

(dryer vent, doggie 

door, etc.) 

Under Eave 

Vents 

Embers 

collecting on 

fiberglass screen

When intact, screen protects 

against ember entry 

Screen failure after 

flame contact. Ember 

and flame entry. 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0:06:440:06:560:07:080:07:200:07:320:07:440:07:560:08:080:08:200:08:320:08:440:08:560:09:080:09:200:09:320:09:440:09:560:10:080:10:200:10:320:10:440:10:560:11:080:11:200:11:320:11:440:11:560:12:080:12:200:12:320:12:440:12:560:13:080:13:210:13:330:13:450:13:570:14:090:14:210:14:330:14:450:14:57

Heat Flux, kW/m2

Time, min:s

Pine Needle Mulch Bed Adjacent to an Exterior Wall 

~ 1 minute 
Radiant Panel 

Water-cooled 

radiator panel 

Heat flux sensors 

behind window 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

 No Screen 

Metal Screen 

Fiberglass Screen 

No Screen - Curtain 

Radiant exposure to 

window, 35 kW/m2 Radiant exposure, inside, kW/m2 

Time, s 5 min

Ignition of curtain occurred after both 

panes of glass in upper light fell out. 

Metal re-enforced meeting rail 

in vinyl single-hung window 

No reinforcement 

Fiber cement: ~25 min. exposure 

Vinyl: < 1 min. exposure 

Cedar lap: Ignition ~ 4:30 

Exposure: 

35 kW/m2 

Fire front radiant 

heat flux 

Figure courtesy of Jack 

Cohen, USDA FS; Glass 

breakage data complied by V. 

Babrauskas 

~80 s 

Annealed glass 

breaks ~10 kw/m2 

Dual pane annealed 

breaks at ~25 kw/m2 

Tempered glass 

breaks at ~ 45 kW/m2 
Longer term radiant 

exposure from near 

by burning building, 

firewood pile, etc. 

Firewood pile 

Thanks for your attention! 

 

Steve Quarles 

squarles@ibhs.org 

http://www.disastersafety.org 

 

http://www.eXtension.org/surving_wildfire 
Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Wildland Fuel Behavior: Combustion 

and Dynamics 

Focus on the Ignition Process 

Albert Simeoni & Jose Torero

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Department of Fire Protection Engineering 

Worcester Polytechnic Institute 

+1 508 831 5785 – asimeoni@wpi.edu 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Outline 

• Introduction 

• Time to ignition of pine needles 

(Protocol, results, and conclusions) 

• Time to ignition of polymers 

(Protocol, results, and conclusions) 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Introduction 

• In fires, CFD-based fire models (and almost every kind of 

model) are closed thanks to a variety of sub-models 

• The accuracy of the models depends on the reliability of 

the sub-models but many sub-models are based on 

empirical data with a lack of understanding of the 

underlying chemical and physical processes 

• This is particularly true for wildland fires because of the 

complexity of wildland fuels 

• The WUI adds a level of complexity with the fire/structure 

coupling 

• We will focus on ignition of wildland and solid fuels 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Thermal transfer 

Microscopic (TGA, DSC) 

Bench laboratory scale (small scale static fires or 

spreads) 

Large laboratory scale (large scale static fires or 

spreads) 

Field scale (from small shrub to tree canopy) 

Uncontrolled fires (observation) 

Combustion 

Turbulence No control 

Maximal control 

Introduction 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Ø Modified FPA experiments 

Ø Moisture content: 4.9-6.4% 

Ø Three flow levels 

Ø Heat fluxes from 0 to 60 kW/m2 

TI of Pine Needles Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Two different models: 

4

s s K α σ = (attenuation coefficient) 

ρs [kg/m3] σs [m-1] αs [m3/m3] as Cps [J/kg K]

789 7377 0.0492 1 3100

Parameters come from literature or from measurements (here Ph): 

t

1 T

x

T

T

2

2

∂

∂

α = ∂

∂ x = 0, q (0,t) x

T k S = ʹʹ ∂

∂ −  , → ∞

=

x

t 0 BC: T = T∞

q (0,t) aq h (T(0,t) T ) S e − T − ∞ ʹʹ = ʹʹ

• Solid fuel model: 1D, thermally thick, semi-infinite solid: 

• Porous fuel model: 1D, thermally thick, thermal equilibrium: 

Global parameters representative of the ignition process 

Kx

2 e

2

s s ps g g pg g,x R q Ke x

T k xT c V tT c − + ʹʹ ∂

∂ = ∂∂ + α ρ ∂∂ α ρ 

TI of Pine Needles 
2 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

0.00	

0.05	

0.10	

0.15	

0.20	

0.25	

0.30	

0.35	

0.40	

0.45	

0.50	

15.0	 25.0	 35.0	 45.0	 55.0	 65.0	

Ps,	NF	

Ps,	LF	

Ps,	HF	

Linear	(Ps,	NF)	

Poly.	(Ps,	LF)	

Poly.	(Ps,	HF)	

White	

Pine	(Ps)	

0.00	

0.05	

0.10	

0.15	

0.20	

0.25	

0.30	

0.35	

0.40	

0.45	

0.50	

15.0	 25.0	 35.0	 45.0	 55.0	 65.0	

Pr,	NF	

Pr,	LF	

Pr,	HF	

Linear	(Pr,	NF)	

Poly.	(Pr,	LF)	

Poly.	(Pr,	HF)	

Red	

Pine	(Pr)	

0.00	

0.10	

0.20	

0.30	

0.40	

0.50	

15.0	 35.0	 55.0	 75.0	

Ph,	NF	

Ph,	LF	WPI	

Ph,	HF	WPI	

Linear	(Ph,	NF)	

Poly.	(Ph,	LF	WPI)	

Poly.	(Ph,	HF	WPI)	

Aleppo	

Pine	(Ph)	 • Convergence at “critical” HF (radiation) 

• Ps is linear after convergence 

• Pr and Ph show a “plateau” after convergence 

• < convergence: flow effects are complimentary 

to slow down TI 

• > convergence: flow effects are competing 

6 

TI of Pine Needles Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

0%

Theory

63%

63%, 100 l/mn Flow

Model, No Flow

Model, 100 l/mn Flow

Experimental Tendency

ig t

1

qe

ʹʹ 

• Inflexion with no flow (in-depth radiation) 

• Convergence at high fluxes underestimated 

• Inflexion at high flows not represented 

TI of Pine Needles 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Ø If the flow is blocked, the fuel bed behaves like a solid 

fuel and solid fuel theory is sufficient to describe TI

Ø If the flow is allowed, a porous fuel model is necessary to 

describe TI

Ø Cooling and dilution effects are coupled in the same flow 

– Each effect must be investigated separately 

Future work 

Ø Changing inlet air temperature and O2 concentration to 

decouple cooling and dilution effects 

Ø Use of “simpler” fuels such as excelsior wood shavings 

Ø Temperature distribution inside the sample 

TI of Pine Needles 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Ø The objective is to provide a mechanism to assess the potential for 

ignition while not adding an excessive computational burden to (CFDbased) fire-spread models. 

Ø If it is assumed that the same functional dependency as before 

between external heat flux and time is valid, integration over time 

shows that time scales with: 

Ø The validity of the relationship between TI and a time evolving external 

heat flux remains to be tested. 

Ø If the surface temperature and the ignition delay time can be presented 

as a function of the integral of the heat insult, then, a single curve can 

be used to completely decouple the solid and gas phases in the 

numerical modeling of the ignition process. 

BRE Centre for Fire 

Safety Engineering 

Borowiec P., Reszka P., Steinhaus T., Torero J.L. (2009) Characterization of 

ignition by direct radiation from flames for Urban/Wildland applications. 6th

Mediterranean Combustion Symposium, Ajaccio, 7-11 June. 

TI of Polymers 

q!!

e dt 0

t

( ∫ )

2

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Ø Similar protocol but 

Ø 110 x 110 x 12 (4.9 for PMMA) mm samples (36 samples tested) 

Ø Three polymer fuels: PA6, PA6 with nano-compostites and PMMA 

Ø Quartz tube used (standard FPA test) 

Ø In-depth temperature measurement (PA6 and PA6 + nano-composites) 

Ø Ramping heat fluxes from 0.01 to 0.5 kW/m2 s 

TI of Polymers 

q!!

e = m t

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

TI of Polymers 

Ø Initial times: Inert heating with an increase in temperature close to the 

surface 

Ø Longer times: Surface reaches pyrolysis temperature and signs of 

endothermicity (no further temperature evolution) but this period is close to 

ignition and endothermic pyrolysis has a weak effect on ignition 

Ø In-depth temperature measurements were performed to ensure that the heat 

transfer process was similar to the one with constant heat fluxes (here PA6) 
July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

TI of Polymers 

Ø Ignition delay times vs. average heat flux 

PA6 and m = 0.1 kW/m2 s PMMA and m = 0.01-5.0 kW/m2 s 

Ø The results are very similar to those obtained for the constant heat flux 

q!!

e ( = m t)

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

TI of Polymers 

Ø Ignition delay times vs. q!!

e dt 0

t

( ∫ )

2

PA6 and m = 0.1 kW/m2 s PMMA and m = 0.01-5.0 kW/m2 s 

Ø The results are again very similar to those obtained for the constant heat flux 

Ø Time can effectively be scaled by for a linear heat flux q!!

e dt 0

t

( ∫ )

2

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Ø This work provides a realistic approach to the heat flux 

impacting a structure from a spreading fire by considering an 

incident heat flux that grows linearly with time. 

Ø The adaptation of the ignition protocol, utilizing ramping heat 

flux on three different materials has shown that the scaling of 

the time to ignition by the integral of the square of the incident 

flux is possible. 

Ø A future step will be to obtain an expression relating the 

ignition delay time to the incident heat flux for this particular 

case. This expression would completely decouple solid and 

gas phase processes and would serve as a tool to predict the 

time to ignition as a function of a realistic incident heat flux. 

TI of Polymers 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Ø Jan Thomas 

WPI 

Ø Phil Borowiec, Pedro Rezska, Thomas Steinhaus

University of Edinburgh 

Ø FM Global: Donation of the FPAs 

Acknowledgements 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and WUI fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, July 2th-4th, 2012 

July 3, 2012 Wildland Fire Behavior: Combustion and Dynamics 

Advertisement! 

http://www.iawfonline.org/

2013FuelsConference/

index.php 
Determining Firebrand Production 

from Full Scale Structures and 

Building Components

Dr. Sayaka Suzuki

Guest Researcher

Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Group

Fire Research Division

Engineering Laboratory (EL) 

National Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST)

Gaithersburg, MD 20899 USA 

sayaka.suzuki@nist.gov; +1-301-975-3908

July 3rd, 2012

2

nd Japan/USA Workshop

• Post-fire studies – firebrands a major cause of ignition

• Understanding firebrand ignition of structures – important to 

mitigate fire spread in communities

Improved understanding of structure ignition in WUI fires

Major recommendation (GAO 05-380)

National Science and Technology Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction

Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD 8; Paragraph 11)

 

2007 Southern California Fire 

 

2003 Southern California Fire 

 

Structure Ignition in WUI Fires

Previous Research on Firebrands

• Firebrands: generation, transport, ignition

• Research focused on how far firebrands travel for 40 yrs!!

• Nice Academic Problem – Not helpful to design structures

• NIST Dragon (ignition research)

• Simulate firebrands by coupling with the wind tunnel in 

BRI, Japan

• Firebrands by NIST Dragon are tied with the firebrand 

data from vegetation and from Angora fire (2007) 

Douglas-Fir Tree Burns at NIST

– Firebrand Collection using water pan array

• Range of crown heights: 2.4 m – 4.5 m

• Different moisture regimes

– Mass loss using load cells

4.5 m Douglas Fir, MC = 25%

Firebrand Generation from Structures

• Firebrands are produced not only as vegetation 

burns but also as structures are ignited and burned 

• Little data exists regarding firebrand production 

from actual structures

• Firebrand production from burning structures 

needed for EL-NIST’s modeling of WUI fires

• Data will also enable the NIST Firebrand Generator to 

generate firebrand showers representative of 

burning structures

Previous Study by Vodvarka

• Measured firebrand generation by laying out 3 m x 3 

m plastic sheets downwind from five separate 

residential buildings burned in full-scale fire 

experiments

• Measured firebrand size and transport distances of 

4,748 firebrands that were collected from five fullscale experimental building fires

• Very small firebrands dominated the size distribution 

– 89% of the firebrands less than 0.23 cm2 (0.1875 in x 0.1875 

in)
Research Plan

• Firebrand production from an actual full-scale 

structure burn conducted by NIST in Dixon, CA

- proof-of-concept test

• Firebrand production from real-scale building 

components under well-controlled laboratory 

conditions in BRI’s wind tunnel

- Simple component test 

• Firebrand production from a real-scale structure burn in 

BRI’s wind tunnel 

Full Scale burn in CA

• In collaboration with Northern California Fire 

Prevention Officers, (NORCAL FPO), a full scale, 

proof-of-concept experiment conducted to investigate 

firebrand production from burning structure

• The structure is mainly built from wood and brick

• Wind speed – 5.8 m/s

• This burn was as a part of 

 firefighter training

Before burn

Burned 

structure

Water pans placed 

around structure

Water pans placed on the road , 

18m downwind from the structure

North 2nd Street

East B Street

Wind direction (southwest to northeast) N

E

18 m

4 m

Firebrand collection

The dimensions and mass are measured 

 after dried

4:45 pm

6:15 pm

5:00 pm

5:30 pm

4:15 House Burn started

6:30 House Burn ended

•The size distribution of firebrands at two different 

places were similar to the ones from vegetation

•Most firebrands with mass less than 1g

0

3

6

9

12

15

0 0.5 1 1.5 2

firebrands collected about 18 m downwind from a structure

firebrands collected about 4 m from a structure

firebrands collected from 4.0 m Korean Pine

firebrands collected from 5.2 m Douglas-Fir

firebrands collected from 2.6 m Douglas-Fir

Projected Area (cm

2)

Mass (g)

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Percentage (%)

Area (cm2)

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Percentage (%)

Area (cm2)

Firebrand collected around structure Firebrand collected around 18m from structure

•Most firebrands collected at burn site, both around structure, and around 

18 m from structure, have less than 10 cm2 projected area

•Compared with Vodvarka (1969), the size distribution is bigger and broader
Firebrand Generation from Components

• To determine if simple 

component tests can provide 

insights into firebrand 

generation data from full-scale 

structures

• Simple building components

– OSB & studs

• Two configurations

– Wall & reentrant corner assembly

• Varying wind speed

– 6 & 8 m/s Wind Velocity – 8 m/s

Corner assembly

Wall assembly Re-entrant corner assembly

Experimental Condition

Experiment No. 1 6 m/s Experiment No. 2 6 m/s

Experiment No. 3 8 m/s

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 1 2 3 4 5

Re-entrant Corner Assembly with a 8 m/s wind (Experiment No. 3)

Re-entrant Corner Assembly with a 6 m/s wind (Experiment No. 2) Wall Assembly with a 6 m/s wind (Experiment No. 1)

Projected Area (cm

2

)

Mass (g)

• The size and mass distribution of firebrands 

from experiment No.2 and No.3 were similar 

• The one from experiment No.1 had more 

variety of projected area at a certain mass, 

especially within 10 cm2 projected area

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 1 2 3 4 5

Firebrands from 4.0 m Korean Pine Firebrands from 5.2 m Dougras-Fir Firebrands from 2.6 m Dougras-Fir

Re-entrant Corner Assembly with a 8 m/s wind (Experiment No. 3) Re-entrant Corner Assembly with a 6 m/s wind (Experiment No. 2) Wall Assembly with a 6 m/s wind (Experiment No. 1)

Firebrands from 4 m from a structure Firebrands from 18 m downwind from structure

Projected Area (cm

2

)

Mass (g)

The size and mass distribution from components was 

found to be similar to the one from vegetation and the 

one from a full-scale burn 

0

20

40

60

80

100

0-0.23 0.23-0.90 0.90-3.61 3.61-14.44 14.44-

Vodvarka Wall Assembly with a 6 m/s wind (Experiment No. 1 ) Re-entrant Corner Assembly with a 6 m/s wind (Experiment No. 2) Re-entrant Corner Assembly with a 8 m/s wind (Experiment No. 3)

Firebrands from 18 m from a structure

Firebrands from 4 m from a structure

Percentage (%)

Projected Area (cm2)

The size distributions of our studies are larger 

and broader than the one from Vodvarka
Summary

• Collaborative work between CAL CHIEFS Training, 

Operations, and Prevention officers sections and 

NIST was successfully accomplished

• Firebrands data were compared to that from 

vegetation

• The size distribution of firebrands at two different 

places (one 4 m around a structure, the other is 18 m 

from structure) were similar

• The size distribution of firebrands from structure 

was bigger and broader than those of Vovardka

• Most firebrands were less than 10cm2 area and with 

mass less than 1g

• Important to note water applied during burn

Summary

• Wall assemblies were used in these experiments 

since it was expected that they are a significant 

source of firebrand production

• The mass/size distributions of firebrands from wall 

assemblies were similar to the one from vegetation 

and from structure test in CA

• The size distributions of firebrands from wall 

assemblies were similar to the one from structure 

test conducted in CA

• Individual building components provide insight into 

firebrand generation from full-scale structures as 

similar size/mass classes were found compared to 

the full-scale structure fire experiments

Research in progress

• Other generation tests were 

conducted. Analysis is in 

progress

– Structure Test

• OSB & stud 

– Components Test

• Wall with cedar siding

– Cedar siding & Tar 

paper added

Wind Velocity - 6m/s

OSB and Stud

Structure

Acknowledgements 

• Dr. Samuel L. Manzello from EL-NIST

• Dr. Matthew F. Bundy from NFRL, EL-NIST 

• Mr. Laurean DeLauter from NFRL, EL-NIST

• Mr. Anthony Chakalis from NFRL, EL-NIST

• Mr. Matthew Lage from Vacaville Fire Department, CA

• Mr. George Laing from Contra Costa County, CA

• Dr. Yoshihiko Hayashi from BRI

• Dr. Jun-ichi Suzuki from BRI
Effect of Physical Properties on the Capability of 

Hot Particles to Ignite Vegetation 

C. D. Zak, D. C. Murphy and C. Fernandez-Pello

Department of Mechanical Engineering

University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban 

and Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fires 

Tsukuba and Chofu, Japan, 2-4 July 2012 

Motivation: Fire Prevention

Costly wildland and building fires 

are often ignited when hot metal 

particles from grinding, welding 

or powerline interaction contact 

combustible fuels like forest 

vegetation or wood operations 

Motivation: Fire Prevention and Fighting

A greater understanding of the ignition of cellulosic 

fuels by metal particles and embers can help:

• Understand the fire danger conditions of particular 

wildland areas or construction materials 

• Guide regulatory agencies in fire prevention (fire 

maps or codes, power lines inspection frequency, etc)

• Develop better wildland and building fire models

• Develop better fire fighting approaches 

3

Overall Goals of Work

• Identify controlling mechanisms of the ignition of 

natural fuels by hot metal particles

• Better understand the fundamental ignition process 

through experiments and computational modeling

• Approach: determine the influence of problem 

parameters on the ignition of the fuel 

– Particle size, temperature, thermal properties, shape, etc.

– Fuel bed composition, moisture content, porosity, etc.

4

Basic Test

Particle with particular dp, Tp, kp

Powdered fuel bed with 

particular moisture content (MC)

Ignition or lack thereof is visually 

observed and recorded

Experimental Setup

Sand

Fuel bed

1. Particle equilibrates with T-controlled furnace

3. Particle contacts fuel bed mounted in 

floor of bench scale wind tunnel 

2. Particle rolls out of furnace 

and drops 120mm onto fuel 

bed

Lab air @ uniform 

0.5m/s

g

6
Experimental Setup

Wind Tunnel Tube Furnace

Fuel Bed Viewing Window

7

Particle Characteristics: Thermal properties

Vcp (Tp Ti)  E

Stainless Steel 

(302)

Brass (260)

k (W/mK) 21.5 120

ρcp(MJ/m3K) 3.2 4

∆Tm (°C) 1400 - 1420 915 - 955

8

T

t

T

k

c p 2

 



 

k, ρ, and cp are pertinent thermal properties for particle 

energy content and energy transport by conduction

Fuel Bed Characteristics

• Composed of powdered α-cellulose

– chemical and physical homogeneity → lab fuel

– largest component of woody biomass

• Two moisture contents tested: 

 ~4.5%(dry) and ~1.5%(driest)

• Bulk density held constant at 

 239 kg/m3from test to test

9

Effect of dp and Tp and MC: Steel Particles

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400

Particle Diameter (mm)

Particle Temperature (K)

Steel Particles , MC = 4.5%

FI

PFI

NFI

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400

Particle Diameter (mm)

Particle Temperature (K)

Steel Particle s, MC = 1.5%

FI

PFI

NFI

10

Flaming ignition (FI); Possible flaming ignition (PFI): No flaming ignition (NFI)

Effect of dp and Tp: Brass particles

• Flaming ignition (FI); Possible flaming ignition (PFI): No flaming ignition (NFI)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400

Particle Diameter (mm)

Particle Temperature (K)

Brass Particles, MC = 4.5%

FI

PFI

NFI

11

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400

Particle Diameter (mm)

Particle Temperature (K)

Brass Particles, MC = 1.5%

FI

PFI

NFI

Effect of kp

• Non-flaming limit 

dependent on kpfor 

small particles 

– All the energy of the 

particle needed to 

ignite material 

• Flaming limit 

dependence on kpless 

clear 

• Results for MC~4.5% 

are very similar

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400

Particle Diameter (mm)

Particle Temperature (K)

For 1.5% Moisture Content

NFI Steel

FI Steel

NFI Brass

FI Brass

12
Effect of Fuel Bed Moisture Content

• Flaming limit depends on MC 

for low temperatures but is 

independent of MC at high 

temperatures – Water content important when 

energy of the particle is small 

• Non-flaming limit independent 

of MC for range studied – Suggests fuel characteristics 

more important at this limit

• Results for SS are very similar • Range of MC’s may be too 

small to reach conclusions 

0123456789

10

11

12

13

700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400

Particle Diameter (mm)

Particle Temperature (K)

For Brass Particles

NFI 4.5%

FI 4.5%

NFI 1.5%

FI 1.5%

13

Concluding Remarks

• Primary ignition mechanism: Porous fuel is heated by 

the particle, causing its pyrolysis, pyrolyzate mixes with 

air forming a flammable mixture near the particle

• Ignition occurs when fuel/air mixture receives sufficient 

energy from particle to overcome losses to surrounding 

air

• Flame kernel develops into diffusion flame as long as 

pyrolysis continues to supply fuel

• Non-ignition occurs when VpandTpare such that 

particle and/or mixture cannot overcome losses

• These mechanisms are dependent of particle size and 

composition, and fuel bed properties and moisture 

content

14
Scale-model experiment of 

large-scale, wind-aided fires

Kazunori Kuwana, 

Yamagata University

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and 

Urban and Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fires 7/3/2012

1

Fires are ...

LPG tanks fire at oil refinery (3/11/2011)

2

Large!

Scale-model experiments

 Full-scale experiments (or CFD simulations) 

are extremely difficult.

 Scale-model experiments

3

Turbulence near Mr. Fuji (Courtesy K. Sekimoto)

Designing a scale-model experiment

 Identify the most important dimensionless 

parameter(s).

 Match the parameter of a scale model to that 

of the prototype.

4

Dimensionless heat release rate

5

Wind-aided fire

 Example: fire whirl

6

Los Angeles, CA, 2006

Los Angeles, CA, 2009

Orange county, CA, 2007
Fire whirls after 

Great Kanto Earthquake

7

(From Newton, August issue, 2012)

Scale-model experiment

8

Heptane pool fire

Open space

1/1,000th scale-model experiment2.5 mPrototype mass fires

Scaling laws

9

Prototype 1/1000th

scale model

~ 2500 m ~ 2.5 m

~ 10 m ~ 1 cm

Proposed modification

10

Reconstructed fire whirls

11

Scale models of different scales

12

1/1,000th scale model 1/10,000th scale model

The proposed scaling law can be validated by 

experiments of different scales.
Fire whirl of other type

13

Brazil fire whirl in August, 2010

Scale-model experiment

14

Summary

15
Investigation and its 

Characteristic of Post 

Earthquake Fire at the 3.11.

National Research Institute of 

Fire and Disaster, Japan (NRIFD)

Hiroyuki Tamura

Objective of the survey and method

To obtain useful information in the prevention of fire 

outbreaks and spreading fires following future largescale disasters, we investigated the following 

particulars:

 Cause of the fire

 Area where the fire spread

 Cause of stopping the fire

 Photos and video records of the stricken area 

 Collection of testimonies

Table 1 The area of the fire spread 

in the urban large fire

Great East Japan Earthquake. 

district area(m2) 

 Ohtsuchi town 116,000 

 Akahama, Ohtsuchi town 14,000 

 Taro Miyako city 40,000 

 Yamada town 170,000 

 Shishiori, Kesen-numa city 110,000 

 Nihohama, Kesen-numa city 27,000 

 Nainowaki, Kesen-numa city 38,000 

 Kadonowaki, Ishinomaki city 58,000 

 Hebita, Ishnomaki city 500 

 Yuriage 7chome, Natori city 12,500 

 Hiratabashi, Natori city 42,000 

 Hisanohama, Iwaki city 18,400 

Characteristics of the fire 

in the Great East Japan 

Earthquake had the 

following features: 

(1) Many of the affected 

fire sites covered a wide 

spreading area (over 

100,000 m2).

(2) Fires occurred in a lot 

of prefectures. 

(3) The total area of a 

large urban fire was very 

wide.

Investigation Site

(1) Otobe and Kerasu, 

 Miyako City, Iwate Pref.

(2) Yamada Town, Iwate Pref.

(3) Funakoshi, Yamada Town, Iwate Pref.

(4) Ohtsuchi and Akahama, 

 Ohtsuchi Town, Iwate Pref.

(5) Shishiori, Ninohama, Kogoshio, and 

 Nainowaki, 

 Kesen-numa City, Miyagi Pref.

(6) Kadonowaki and Hebita, 

 Ishinomaki City, Miyagi Pref.

(7) Yuriage 7-chome and Hiratabashi, 

 Natori City, Miyagi Pref.

(8) Hisanohama, 

 Iwaki City, Fukushima Pref.

(1)

(4)

(2)

(3)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

Iwate 

Prefecture

Miyagi Prefecture

Fukushima 

Prefecture

Fig. 1

(1) Otobe and Kerasu, 

Miyako City, Iwate Pref.

・The fire site was approximately 600-800 m inland. 

・The fire broke out from the house that flowed by the 

tsunami and arrived. 

Fig. 2

Kerasu

Otobe

Kerasu District

The fire damage in 

the Kerasu district Photo. 1

Because rubble gathered at the 

foot of a mountain by the tsunami, 

a fire spread to rubble after the 

fire had broken out. 
Otobe District

The fire damage in 

the Otobe district 

The fire ultimately spread 

to the forest. 

(2) Yamada Town, Iwate pref.

Fig. 3

Nagasaki 1

Hachimancho

Yamada 

Town 

Office

Rikuchuyama

da Station

Spot of fire 

break

The range of the fire in the vicinity of Yamada town office in Hachimancho and Rikuchuyamada station in Nagasaki 1

The fire broke out around the two places indicated by circles in Fig.3, 

immediately after the raid of the tsunami.

Town pffice

parking

spot of fire break 

(2)Yamada Town( vicinity of Town office)

Photo 2 The fire damage as seen from the rooftop of 

the town office

3. 11 15:27 smoke

3. 11 16:05 fire

(2)Yamada Town( vicinity of Town office)

Fire fighting 

in the rubble

Rubble drifted on the road and between the building. 

And buildings were in the fire while standing.

3.11 

16:05

(2)Yamada Town( Nagasaki 1 )

The inhabitants heard gas leaking from gas cylinders 

broken as a result of the tsunami.

The fire damage as seen from the rooftop of the town office

(2)Yamada Town( vicinity of Town office)

The fire expanded at nighttime. 
The range of the fire in Funakoshi District

Mountain 

side Sea 

side

Spot of fire 

break

Fig. 4

(3) Funakoshi District, Yamada Town, Iwate Pref.

The fire broke out from the house which was carried away 

by the tsunami. The fire broke out around the town block 

indicated by circles in Fig.4.

Photo 3 The fire spread to the mountain side. 

(3) Funakoshi District, Yamada Town, Iwate Pref.

Fire brigade had a fire fighting using a fire protection water 

tank of 40t. However, the supply of water was insufficient to 

prevent the spread of the fire. 

(3) Funakoshi District, Yamada Town, Iwate Pref.

There were some cars 

that had been 

abandoned on the 

road. 

Therefore, the fire 

spread beyond the 

road as the medium of 

the cars. 

Ohtsuchi 

Elementary 

School

末広

町

大

町

Hon 

cho

Kami 

mach

i

Ohtsuchi

Station

JR Yamada line

Fig. 5

(4)Ohtsuchi Town, Iwate Pref.

The range of the fire in the vicinity of the Otsuchi 

Elementary School

Photo 4 The fire damage around the north side of 

the Ohtsuchi Station

(4)Ohtsuchi Town, Iwate Pref.

An urban area in a foot of a mountain to where the tsunami 

struck burnt. In addition, the forest adjacent to the firedamaged urban areas burned.

The fire spread to the forest from the urban area.

Fires that broke out from several sources joined and spread.

(4)Ohtsuchi Town, Iwate Pref.
(4)Akahama, Ohtsuchi Town, Iwate Pref.

The range of the fire in the Akahama District 

Akahama 2

Fig. 6 Photo 5

(4)Akahama, Ohtsuchi Town, Iwate Pref.

The fire damage seen from the inland in the 

Akahama district 

This place was approximately 400m inland from a coast. 

And the fire broke out after the tsunami struck. 

The fire destroyed buildings that had not been damaged by 

the tsunami. 

Inhabitants said that two ships made of FRP (Fiber 

Reinforced Plastics) drifted and burned for three days. 

(5)Shishiori, Kesen-numa City, Miyagi Pref.

Shishiorikarakuwa 

Station

Higashiminat

omachi

新浜町

1

港

蔵

底

Spot of fire break

Water way

Railway track 

and Cliff

Fig. 7 The range of the fire in the Shishiori District 

The tsunami impact occurred after the electricity was cut by the 

earthquake, and fire started immediately afterwards in three 

places.

Photo 6 The fire damage seen from the vicinity of the Ofunato

railway track 

(5)Shishiori, Kesen-numa City, Miyagi Pref.

The fire brigade fought fires by 

using waterway, railway track, and 

the cliff. Fire was prevented by the 

fire fighting. Flooding hampered 

efforts to fight the fire on the south 

and east sides.

In the Kesen'numa bay, the rubble that drifted and 

burnt were taken of a picture by the helicopter of the 

Self Defense Forces at night.

(5)Shishiori, Kesen-numa City, Miyagi Pref.

E F

The Self Defense 

Forces

Kesen-numa City

(5)Ninohama and Kogoshio, Kesennuma City, Miyagi Pref.

Shrine

Ninohama

Kogoshio

Fig. 9

The range of the fire in the Ninohama and 

Kogoshio District 
(5)Ninohama and Kogoshio

Photo 8 The seashore road on the west side of the shrine

A fishing boat ran aground on March 11, 2011. The boat 

caused a fire and continued to smolder for several days. The 

fire spread to the rubble on the road and then along a hill side. 

The burning 

rubble was 

carried ashore 

by the tsunami. 

The fire was 

finally stopped 

by a cliff, 

gravel road, 

and cemetery.

(6)Ishinomaki City, Miyagi Pref.

Kadonowaki 

Elementary 

School

Kadonowaki

cho 5

Kadonowaki

cho 4 Minamihamacho 4

Nankohcho 1

Spot of fire break

Fig. 10 The range of the fire in the vicinity of the Kadonowaki

Elementary School 

The fire started in five places, immediately after the tsunami.

The fire damage seen from the north side of the 

Kadonowaki Elementary School Photo 9

(6)Ishinomaki City, Miyagi Pref. (6)Ishinomaki City, Miyagi pref.

Many cars belonging to the evacuees stopped in the 

schoolyard as they were inundated by the tsunami. (3/15)

(6)Ishinomaki City, Miyagi pref.

A fire broke out one of these cars. The burnt car set fire 

to the building while the car was drifted. 

The fire brigade did the fire fighting activity using the cliff in the 

rising ground to obstruct the fire spread. And they defended the 

residential area on the rising ground.

(6)Hebita, Ishinomaki City, Miyagi Pref.

Fig. 11 The range of the fire in the Hebita district 

This fire was located 2 km inland near the river.

This fire broke out at about 0:20 on March 12, 2011. 
Photo 10 The fire damage to residences and cars

(6)Hebita, Ishinomaki City, Miyagi Pref.

The person who lived in the 

neighboring second floor said 

that the fire broke out from the 

car when they saw the outside 

because the outside of the 

window became light in the 

night.

(7)Yuriage 7, Natori City, Miyagi Pref.

Yuriage 7

Fig. 12 The range of the fire in Yuriage 7chome 

The fire damage in the 

Yuriage 7chome

Photo 11

(7)Yuriage 7, Natori City, Miyagi Pref. (7)Yuriage 7, Natori City, Miyagi Pref.

Fire broke out at about 16:30 on March 11, 2011, immediately 

after the tsunami. It was difficult for the fire brigade to approach 

the fire site under the influence of the tsunami. 

A lot of rubble gathered on the surface of the water around the 

building that was not broken. And the rubble burnt. 

(7)Yuriage 7, Natori City, Miyagi Pref.

When we watched the picture on web, it was confirmed that gas 

cylinders were carried away while leaking the contents. 

(7)Yuriage 7, Natori City, Miyagi Pref.

When we watched the picture on web, it was confirmed that gas 

cylinders were carried away while leaking the contents. 
(7)Yuriage 7, Natori City, Miyagi Pref.

When we watched the picture on web, it was confirmed that gas 

cylinders were carried away while leaking the contents. 

(7) Hiratabashi, Natori City, Miyagi Pref.

Fig. 13 The range of the fire in the vicinity of Hiratabashi 

The range of the fire was confirmed along the 

small river to the north of prefectural road No. 10.

When we watched the news picture which shot this district 

from the air, the rubble that were carried away while burning 

gathered in the fields, and the fire spread. 

(7) Hiratabashi, Natori City, Miyagi Pref. (7) Hiratabashi, Natori City, Miyagi Pref.

The fire damage in the 

Hiratabashi district

Photo 12

When we watched the 

news picture which shot 

this district from the air, the 

rubble that were carried 

away while burning 

gathered in the fields, and 

the fire spread. 

(8) Hisanohama, Iwaki City, Fukushima Pref.

Hisanohama 

Higashimachi

Kitamachi

Spot of fire break

Fig. 14 The range of the fire in Hisanohama 

The fire broke out immediately after the tsunami. Under the 

influence of the tsunami, it took more than 30 minutes for the 

fire brigade to go to the fire site. 

(8) Hisanohama, Iwaki City, Fukushima Pref.

Photo 13 The fire damage in Hisanohama
N

According to the photo of the magazine, some buildings were 

broken by the tsunami, but many buildings which were not 

broken by the tsunami received damage from spreading fire.

(8) Hisanohama, Iwaki City, Fukushima Pref.

The fire brigades could not approach the sea side of the fire 

site under the influence of the tsunami. Fire brigade pumped 

up water from a nearby river. They extended hoses and 

sprayed water on the burning buildings. The fire spread was 

prevented in the west and the south side by fire fighting.

(8) Hisanohama, Iwaki City, Fukushima Pref.

(1) Fire broke out from rubble carried away by the tsunami.

(2) Rubble was burning as it was carried away.

(3) Fire broke out from cars that were carried away by the 

tsunami. 

(4) Electric power equipment, such as the integrating 

wattmeter, was soaked in seawater once and caught fire 

when electric power was restored.

(5) Fire broke out from ships that were carried away by the 

tsunami.

Cause of the fire (1/2)

(6) In the on-site survey, fire-damaged kerosene tanks, stoves, 

boilers, etc., were found in rubble from the vicinity where the 

fire erupted. However, positive proof that these items 

caused the fire to break out was not determined.

Cause of the fire (2/2)

(1) Fire spread in places where 

burned cars and rubble were 

carried away by the tsunami. 

Rubble and parked cars were 

deposited on the roads. Therefore, 

the road did not become a 

firebreak.

(2) Gas cylinders carried away by the 

tsunami leaked their contents. 

There is a possibility that this gas 

became a factor in the fire’s spread.

(3) Fire spread from urban areas to 

the forest.

Spread of the fire (1/2)

(4) Although buildings were fireproof, 

their outside walls and windows 

were broken by the tsunami. 

Therefore, the buildings caught fire.

(5) In specific regions of a large-scale 

urban area, fire broke out from two 

or more places.

(6) Buildings that were not destroyed 

by the tsunami received damage 

from spreading fire. 

Spread of the fire (2/2)
(1) Spread of the fire stopped because 

combustibles disappeared in the 

tsunami, and the city block was 

soaked with water.

(2) A wide road, fireproof buildings, a 

graveyard, and a rice field stopped 

the fire’s spread.

Cause of stopping the fire (1/2)

N

(3) There were a lot of fire sites 

that the fire brigade was not 

able to approach. However, 

fire’s spread was halted in 

places where the fire brigade 

fought the fire. The fire brigade 

fought the fires by using the 

road, the waterway, the railway 

track, and the cliff.

Cause of stopping the fire (1/2)

Concluding remarks

• The urban large area fire that the NRIFD 

surveyed was summarized. In the earthquake, 

there were not only the urban fire reported 

here but also residential fires, industrial 

complex fires, and forest fires. 

• Because of the tsunami damage and the wide 

range of spreading fires, it was difficult to 

clarify what specifically caused the fires and 

how they spread.

END
Fuel Treatment Impacts to Fire 

Behavior & Ecosystem Services in 

the Wildland-Urban Interface

Christopher A. Dicus, PhD

Tunnel Fire (Oakland/Berkeley Hills) – October 1991 

• 2900 structures destroyed

• New law requires 10m of “Defensible Space”

• The result???

• Plant 100,000 trees

• 4847 homes destroyed 

 

• The result??? 

• Directly led to 30 m Defensible Space Law 

Cedar Fire (San Diego, October 2003)

Hazards vs. benefits

• Vegetation provides benefits

• Air pollution removal

• Carbon sequestration

• Soil stabilization

• Home cooling costs

• Stormwater retention

• Wildlife habitat

• Home value

• And on and on...

 

Pismo Beach, California

Vegetation is 

more than fuel!!!

Bridging the stereotypes in 

the WUI...

Dang hippies like 

bushes more than 

people!

Stupid rednecks 

wanna pave the 

world, bro!
Early work...

• Shrubs & Grasses need 

not apply...

• “CityGreen” (Dicus & 

Zimmerman 2007)

• (San Diego still spends 

another $200,000 for 

follow-up)

• “Stratum” (Dicus 2009a)

• “UFORE” (Dicus et al. 

2009b)

• Now in mixedconifer forests

Then Now 

The Treatments...

Fire Only

Thin + Fire Thin + Pile & Burn

Thin Only

The Methods...

Fire Behavior

Ecosystem Services

• Measure fuel complex 

before and after

• Model changes to fire 

behavior and 

ecosystem services

The Results

• Big differences in fire 

behavior affected by...

• Weather (duh)

• Changes to fuels

• Surface fuels

• Canopy fuels

Dicus et al. in review
Ecosystem Services

Annual carbon sequestration

Annual air pollutant removal

Dicus et al. in review

• Ecosystem services 

reduced slightly

• No differences 

between treatments

Treatments are like cuddly, 

innocent babies...

But forests grow up...

and sometimes get scary

Same data, different methodology

Fire Behavior Ecosystem Services

• Modeled out 50 years

• Shows changes to...

•Fuels

•Fire Behavior

•Carbon storage, 

sequestration, 

emissions

Flame Length

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1 5 10 15 20

Flame Length (m) 

Time 

Untreated 

Fire Only

Thin Only

Pile&Burn

Thin+Fire 

Dicus et al. in preparation

Carbon Storage

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36

Total Stand Carbon (Mg ha-1) 

Untreated 

Fire Only

Thin Only

Pile&Burn

Thin+Fire 

What about 

landscape???

• 4 Treatment Types

• 3 Treatment “Intensities”

• Arc Fuels

• GIS extension

• Models through time

• Fuels

• Fire Probability

• Fire Behavior

• Carbon Emissions

• Carbon Storage
• Through time, treatments affected...

• Fire probability

• Fire behavior

• Carbon storage and emissions

• Through time Thin+Fire had most C storage

• Little impact after 20% intensity

Dicus et al. in review

•Fuels aren’t always the problem...

• All disciplines get tunnel vision

We must prepare 

the battlefield!!!

• Fuels

• Structures

• Fire infrastructure

• A whole lot else

Domo arigato!!!

Thanks Kate Dargan and Tonya Hoover!
Fires and Damage of Oil Tanks 

Caused by the 3.11 Earthquake

Haruki Nishi, Dr.

4th, July, 2012

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and

Urban and Wildrand-Urban Interface fires

b

Primary cause of the damage of 

the hazmat facilities

Overall 211,877 facilities 

Earthquake

Tsunami

Unknown

Earthquake

Fire:5

Hazmat leakage:79

Tsunami

Fire:36

Hazmat leakage:106

Total 226

Oil leakage in Refinery

1Tsunami reached to 3.5m high from the bottom plate

※The tank was empty, but not displaced

2Bent and fractured

pipelines → Heavy 

oil leakage 

(aprox. 4,000kL)

3Sea banks, piers,

dykes collapsed heavily

4Sloshing height approx. 1m

→Oil spill onto the floating roof Total 10 fractures on three pipelines

Pipelines swept away by the tsunami

(photo from the Pacific Ocean side)

Displaced Oil Storage Tank

Floated and displaced tank (capacity 2,00kL)

*Empty at the arrival of the tsunami

Three other AST (all empty) displaced.

Heavy Oil Leakage

Heavy Oil

Leaked oil approximate 4,000kL( 25,000 barrel)
Oil attached to the shell plate

Magnified view of the broken part

Broken part of the pipe

Broken earth wires

Fires at Refinery (3.13)

Pacific

Ocean

River

Collapsed Asphalt Tank

Leaked asphalt

Inclined

after the

Tsunami

incursion

Burnt Gasoline Tank

Inclined Concrete Ring of the foundation

Fracture of the shell and the bottom plate

Fracture length appox. 2.4m→Both inside and outside welded joints fractured

Shell plate

Bottom plate

側板

底板

破断部

Shell Plate

Bottom Plate

Fracture

Tank lorry (gas)

Electric spark

Tank lorry (oil)
22 tanks out of 23 tanks located in Kesenmuna City flowed 

out by the momentum and the buoyancy of the Tsunami.

Total amount of oil outflow is assumed approx. 11,521kL.

The type of the oil is heavy oil, kerosene, diesel fuel and 

gasoline.

Oil Storage Tanks damaged by Tsunami

Height of tsunami from the bottom plate (m)

Capacity of tanks (kL)

No damage Failure of pipelines

Failure of tanks and 

pipelines

Heavy Oil leaked onto the deck of the floating roof.

Completely sank three days after the leakage

Sinking of the Floating Roof Damage of the Inner Float Roof

Ruptured Deck Skins

Broken Float Tube 1 Completely Broken Inner Floating Roof

Broken Float Tube 2

Gasoline tank

Cap. 2,000kL

Diameter 15.5m

Fire Ball

(LPG)

Diameter : approx. 600-750m

The largest BLEVE(Boiling Liquid 

Expanding Vapor Explosion) that 

have been occurred in Japan.

Fires and Explosions at Petro. Complex Debris of the LPG Tank
Fires and Explosions at Petro. Complex

All legs of the LPG tank collapsed and buckled by the earthquake and the aftershock.

The LNG tank damaged the connecting pipelines after buckling. Then LNG leaked.

Broken braces

Top of the collapsed tank

Pictures of the surveillance camera just after 

the ignition,15:47, 2011/03/11

Summary

 Few damage of the tank body by the earthquake

 Many pipelines were damaged by the tsunami. 

Emergency shutdown valves did not work because of the 

blackout after the earthquake. Then, large amount of oil 

spilled out to the dykes.

 Many fractures were found in the floating roofs which did 

not meet the technical standard of the earthquake 

proofness.

 Many small tanks were swept away by the tsunami. The 

bottom plates of the tanks were broken. However, even 

the empty tank did not sweep away by the tsunami.

 The tsunami washed away the foundations of the tanks 

and the ground inside the dykes. Some tanks tilted and 

collapsed after the tsunami. 

Fires and Damage of Oil Tanks Caused 

by the 3.11 Earthquake

Haruki NISHI, Dr.

(nishi@fri.go.jp)

+81-422-44-8331

Any Questions?
Experimental Study on the Possibility of the 

Vehicles Fire in Urban and Tsunami Fire

– About the Burning Behavior for Motorcycles –

Ken Matsuyama, Dr.,  Assoc. Prof.,

Center for Fire Science and Technology,

Tokyo University of Science, Japan

2

Topics

 Outline of the mechanism of “Tsunami‐induced

Fires” occurred after ignited floating debris and

heavy oil .

Introduction; “Tsunami‐induced Fires by Small Scale

Experiment”

 Burning behavior of typical debris equipped with a

fuel tank and battery

Introduction; “Burning Behavior of Motorbikes” as typical

debris by experimental study, and investigation of fuel load

Consideration; Possibility of the Tsunami‐induced fires

July 4, 2012

 Experimental study on “Mechanism of Tsunami‐induced

Fires”

 Prof. A. Sekizawa, Tokyo University of Science

 Experimental study on “Burning Behavior of

Motorbikes”

 Prof. S. Sugahara, Tokyo University of Science

 Prof. Y. Ohmiya, Tokyo University of Science

 Dr. N. Kakae, Kajima Technical Research Institute

 Dr. W. Takahashi, ING Cop.

July 4, 2012 3

Acknowledgments

4

Introduction

 “Tsunami‐induced Fires” occurred after ignited the

floating debris and heavy oil .

July 4, 2012

July 4, 2012 5

Experimental Study

 The mechanism of “Tsunami‐induced Fires”

Experimental set up

0.7m

Fuel pan(0.7x0.7m)

debris thermocouples

6 July 4, 2012

Experimental Study

 The mechanism of “Tsunami‐induced Fires”

Results
 The previous experiment indicated that flame

spread on a sea doesn’t depend on a kind of the

debris if oil such as the heavy and light oil

flowed out by a tsunami even though ships, car,

train and motorbike.

 As a next topic, the full‐scale experiments and

investigation on the burning behavior of the

motorbikes carried out in the past will be

introduced.

 Finally, the possibility of the tsunami‐induced

fires will be considered through the experiments.

 Because of no experimental data on HRR

 Burning behavior of itself

 Investigation on elements of combustible

materials

July 4, 2012 7

Burning Behavior of Motorbike

< Individual Burning>

< Plural Burning>

Types Experimenta

l

Scooter 1-5

Road 6, 7

Scooter 8

Road 9, 10

Sports 11

Large 400~ Road 12

Size of motorbikes

(Engine displacement [cc])

Small

Middle 50~400

~50

Types Experimenta

l

Small ○ ~50 Scooter

Small ~50 Scooter

Small ○ ~50 Scooter

Middle 50~400 Road

Middle ○ 50~400 Sports

Middle 50~400 Road

Size of motorbikes

(Engine displacement [cc])

1

2

3

○ : Ignition side

July 4, 2012 8

Experimental Condition

0

50

100

150

200

250

0 150 300 450 600 750 900

排気量 [cc]

初期重量 [kg]

 Correlative between “Total weight”

and “Engine Displacement”

 Not depend on Types

 Predictable roughly

Total Mass (Initial) [kg]

Engine Displacement [cc]

July 4, 2012 9

Total Weight of Motorbikes

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0 150 300 450 600 750 900

排気量 [cc]

重量比 (可燃部位重量/初期重量)

[-]

Sports Type

Scooter Type  Ratio of Combustible Mass

(combustible parts / Initial Total

weights)

 Scooter Type : 20 [%]

 Sports Type : 13 [%]

 Road Type : 6 [%]

Engine Displacement [cc]

Ratio of Combustible Mass [kg]

(Combustible Part / Total )

July 4, 2012 10

Road Type

Ratio of Combustible Mass

 Type of Specimens

‐ ABS Resin               : Cover for engine

‐ Polycarbonate       : Windbreak

‐ Polypropylene       : Fender and Covers

‐ Polyethylene          : mainly Foot rest (Low density)

‐ Polyvinyl Chloride : Surface of the sheet

‐ Polyurethane : Cushion of the sheet

 Intensity of Radiation (Heat Flux)

‐ 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40 and 50 [kW/m2]

Representative Combustible Materials of Motorbikes

July 4, 2012 11

Ignitability of the Materials

50 50

 Surface Temperature of Specimens

‐ By thermocouple

Specimen (ABS Resin)

 Heat Release Rate

 Time to Ignition

‐ By using Oxygen consumption method installed in Conecalorimeter

Thermocouple

July 4, 2012 12

Outline of Specimen

 Measurement Items
 Threshold of the ignition is about 10kW/m2

 Time to Ignition and Heat Flux is almost proportion

y = 0.0076x - 0.0647

R2 = 0.9764

y = 0.0087x - 0.0716

R2

 = 0.9923

y = 0.0054x - 0.0097

R2 = 0.9758

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

放射強度 [kW/m2]

1/√ tig [1/sec1/2]

k c

h q t k c T T e

ig ig  

           1.18

( )

1 1.18

0



    2

2 , ,

t

T t x k tT t x c x x



      

< ABS Resin>

Heat Flux [kW/m2]

July 4, 2012 13

ABS 塗装有

ABS 塗装無

PA6+ABS

Results of Ignitability

 Relation between Heat Flux and Ignition time

y = 15.611x + 268.17

R2 = 0.9971

y = 10.339x + 211.39

R2 = 0.9408

y = 9.4476x + 186.56

R2 = 0.9734

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

放射強度 [kW/m2]

最大発熱速度 [kW/m2]

y = 25.669x + 34.99

R2

 = 0.9473

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

放射強度 [kW/m2]

最大発熱速度 [kW/m2]

< Low density Polyethylene> < ABS Resin>

Heat Flux [kW/m2] Heat Flux [kW/m2]

Max. HRR / Area [kW/m2]

Max. HRR / Area [kW/m2]

July 4, 2012 14

Results of Combustibility

 Relation between max HRR and heat flux

ABS 塗装有

ABS 塗装無

PA6+ABS

3 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0

3 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 8 0 0

Load Cell

Thermocouples

‐ Under the 5 x 5m Hood and Open Space

‐ By using Oxygen Consumption Method

‐ By Thermocouples (at 300 mm intervals)

 Distribution of Temperature

 Heat Release Rate

 Mass Loss Rate

‐ By Load Cells

July 4, 2012 15

Experimental Setup (1)

 Measurement Items

300 300

300 300 300 300

1200

Video Camera

Heat Flux Gage

Thermocouples

Video Camera

Video Camera

 Heat Flux

‐ By 2 Heat Flux gages located at 600

and 1200 mm from Specimen

 Video Record

‐ Form 3 directions

July 4, 2012 16

Experimental Set up (2)

 Measurement Items

Water:500ml

n- Hepten

:100ml

120mm

< Ignition Point >

: Ignition Point

July 4, 2012 17

Experimental Set up (3)

 Ignition Point

0

300

600

900

1200

1500

1800

2100

0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800

時間 [sec]

発熱速度 [kW]

max HRR 1300kW

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

高さ [m]

Time [sec]

HRR [kW] Height [m] July 4, 2012 18

Results of Experiments

 Individual Burning Behavior   [Size: Small, Type: Scooter]
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400

時間 [sec]

発熱速度 [kW]

max HRR about 5000kW

Time [sec]

HRR [kW] July 4, 2012 19

Results of Experiments

 Individual Burning Behavior [Size: Middle, Type: Scooter]

0

300

600

900

1200

1500

1800

2100

0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400

時間 [sec]

発熱速度 [kW]

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

高さ [m]

1800kW

Time [sec]

HRR [kW] Height [m] July 4, 2012 20

Results of Experiments

 Plural Burning Behavior    [Size: Small, Type: Scooter]

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

01234

可燃部位表面積 [m2]

最大発熱速度 [kW]

y = 40.537x

R2 = 0.8753

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

可燃部位重量 [kg]

総発熱量 [MJ]  Heat of Combustion of Motorbike is about 40.5 [MJ/kg]

 Max. HRR is relative to Surface area of combustible materials.

Mass of Combustible Materials [kg]

Total Heat Release [MJ]

Surface Area of Combustible Materials [m2]

Maximum HRR [kW]

July 4, 2012 21

Consideration

 Consideration of Burning Behavior

22

Summary

 “Tsunami‐induced Fires”

Flame spread on a sea doesn’t depend on a kind of the

debris if oil such as the heavy and light oil spilled out by a

tsunami even though ships, car, train and motorbike.

 “Burning Behavior of Motorbikes”

The ratio of combustible mass does not depend on the

engine displacement.

Two types of experiments were carried out. One is

individual to check its burning behavior [total 12 cases].

Another one is plural to check the behavior of flame spread

to next one [total 3 cases].

Possibility of the Tsunami‐induced fires will be investigated.  

July 4, 2012

23

Thank you for your attention.

July 4, 2012
1

Fires in Non-inundated Area Following the 3.11 

Earthquake

Tatsuya IWAMI and Koji KAGIYA

National Institute for Land and Infrastructure Management(NILIM),

Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), 

Japan

Workshop for

Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and Wildland-Urban Interface(WUI) fires Both are important

1

20

10

5

30

Number of Fires

JMA* Seismic 

Intensity Scale

SI 

[kine = cm/s]

7 100 or more 

6+ 71 ~ 99

6- 41 ~ 70

5+ 21 ~ 40

5- 11 ~ 20

4 4 ~ 10

Tsunami Fire Non-Tsunami Fire

3

Overview

4

Outline of Fire after the Earthquake

Distribution of post-earthquake fires

• 284 fires occurred (Reported by FDMA)

• Large spread fire occurred in 

inundated area

• 112 fires occurred in noninundated area

5

7

5+

6-

6+

5-

4

3

2

Under Investigation

Tsunami Attacked 

Municipalities

JMA Seismic Intensity

1

20

10

5

30

Number of Fires

Aomori

Iwate

Miyagi

Fukushima

Ibaraki

Chiba

Tokyo

Kanagawa

Hokkaido

Saitama

Gunma

Akita

*JMA: Japan Meteorological Agency

JMA* Seismic 

Intensity Scale

SI 

[kine = cm/s]

7 100 or more 

6+ 71 ~ 99

6- 41 ~ 70

5+ 21 ~ 40

5- 11 ~ 20

4 4 ~ 10

500km

Fire Break-Out Ratio

(Proportion of Number of Fires to Households)

6

Seismic intensity raise the Fire break-out ratio.

There is large Difference between less than 5+ and 

further than 6-.

Fire break-out ratio in non-inundated area due to the 

3.11 earthquake is less than the ratio of fire due to 2004 

Chuetsu Niigata Prefecture Earthquake.

0.0 

0.2 

0.4 

0.6 

0.8 

1.0 

3 

Fire Break-Out Ratio [1/1000]

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

3 4 5- 5+ 6- 6+ , 7 Fire Break-Out Ratio [1/10000]

JMA Seismic Intensity

2011All Fires after the Earthquake

2011Fires in Non-inundated Municipalities

2004 Chuetsu Niigata
7

Characteristics of Fire

- Non-inundated area

Investigation by Interview

8

Investigation period: April 2011~June 2011

Target Area

Aomori, Iwate, Miyagi and Ibaraki Prefecture

We got detail information about 81 Fires

Non-inundated Area: 52 Fires

Inundated Area: 29 Fires

Analysis in the following is based on the detail 

information of 52 fires in non-inundated area.

Time of Fire Occurence

• 1/3 of Fires occurred before 18:00 of the March 11th.

• Almost 1/2 Fires occurred a time zone from 18:00 to 24:00.

9

before 18:00 of 

the March 11th

18:00~24:00

0:00~6:00

6:00~12:00

12:00~18:00

unknown

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

11-March 12:0011-March 18:00

12-March 00:0012-March 06:0012-March 12:0012-March 18:0013-March 00:0013-March 06:0013-March 12:0013-March 18:0014-March 00:0014-March 06:0014-March 12:0014-March 18:0015-March 00:00

Number of Ignition (accumulation)

Ratio of fire occurrence by time

Cumulative distribution of fire occurrence

since the mainshock attacked

Major Cause of Fire

– Heat sources contacting surrounding 

combustibles with the earthquake motion

– Short-circuit at the recovery of power supply 

from power failure

– Misuse of the candle which is used for the 

light in the midst of blackout nights which were 

also seen as past time

10

Property of Fire Origin and Fire Spread

11

Type of Structure of 

Building

Number of Burnt 

Down Building

Number of Damaged 

Building by Fire (Including 

small damage)

RC

13%

S

12%

Wooden

23%

unknown

46%

non- Building

6%

3 Buildings 2%

2 Bldg. 7%

1 Bldg. 25%

None

52%

unknown

8% non- Building

6%

7 Bldg. 2%

6 Bldg. 2%

5 Bldg. 2%

4 Bldg. 2%

3 Bldg. 6%

2 Bldg. 2%

1 Bldg. 69%

None

2%

unknown 7%

non- Building 6%

1 Bldg.

83%

None

6%

unknown

11%

Use of Building

Housing

46%

non- Housing

35%

unknown

13%

non- Building

6%

Examples of Fire

12
13

Fires in inundated area Characteristics of Fire

- Inundated area

Features of Fire in inundated area

• Cause of Fire Outbreak (Example)

– Most of fires are unidentified the cause of ignition.

– In what has been identified, There are many fires by bad insulation of 

vehicles due to tsunami flood.

– A fire broke out in stockyard of quicklime at a factory flooded by tsunami.

– Some fires originated in integrating wattmeters flooded by tsunami.

• Cause of Fire spread (Example)

– Accumulation of debris

Many buildings collapsed by tsunami are poured inland → Accumulate at the 

edge of undated area → Fire brake out → Spread in the debris.

– Advection of debris

 Factorys or warehouse bear tsunami → Collapsed buildings Accumulate 

around the factorys or warehouse → Debris carry fire to the borne buildings.

– Aligned Vehicles

 Fire spread among a lot of vehicles which had aligned for export.

14

15

Summary

16

Summary

1. Fire break-out ratio in non-inundated area of the 

earthquake is approximately 1/4 of the ratio of 

2004 Chuetsu earthquake and 1/12 of the ratio 

of 1995 Hyogo-ken Nanbu (Kobe) earthquake.

2. In non-inundated area, many fires occurred 

immediately after mainshock (in the period from 

14:46 to 18:00 on March 11).

3. Except immediately after the mainshock, the 

occurrences of fire were concentrated on the 

day of the mainshock and in the period from 

18:00 to 24:00 on the following days.

17

Summary (Cont’d)

4. For the most cases, firefighting worked 

effectively and all of the fires died down in a 

single building of fire origin or with a few 

buildings.

5. Many fires occurred due to the effect of the 

recovery of power supply and the activity of 

residents rather than the effect of the 

earthquake motion.

18

Acknowledgement

• We deeply appreciate offering the precious information of 

fires after the earthquake by personnel of local 

firehouses.

• The field survey to get the detail Information of fires was 

carried out with following researchers:

– Ichiro Hagiwara (BRI)

– Yoshihiko Hayashi (BRI)

– Junichi Suzuki (BRI)

– Hideki Yoshioka (NILIM)
19

Thank you!
Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

2

nd Japan-USA Fire Research Workshop

“Operation TOMODACHI: Fire Research”

Photovoltaics in Fires

Robert Backstrom, Mahmood Tabaddor PhD,

Thomas Fabian PhD, and Pravinray D. Gandhi PE PhD

UL LLC

Corporate Research

4 July 2012

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

Photovoltaics in Fires

2

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

Applicable Standards

3

UL 790 Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Roof Coverings

UL 1703 Standard for Flat-Plate Photovoltaic Modules and Panels

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

Spread of Flame

Test Fixture & Instrumentation

4

Setback

Gap

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

Spread of Flame

Noncombustible Roof & PV

5

PV at 0 Set back & 25 cm Gap PV at 0 Set back & 6.4 cm Gap

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

Spread of Flame Results

Noncombustible “PV” & Roof

6

Reference Critical Flux for Ignition (minimum radiant energy to ignite a material):

Paper ~ 10 kW/m2 FR PVC ~ 35 kW/m2 PTFE ~ 50 kW/m2

 Increasing setback distance diminishes temperature and heat flux

 Gap distance affects air flow and therefore cooling and fire spread

Roofing PV Rail Gap (cm) Setback (cm)

1 3 4 1 2

Noncombustible -- N/A N/A N/A 261 81 66 15 3

Noncombustible Noncombustible N/A 6.4 0.0 509 241 183 23 9

Noncombustible Noncombustible N/A 6.4 30.5 397 196 144 16 8

Noncombustible Noncombustible N/A 6.4 61.0 236 146 111 7 6

Noncombustible Noncombustible Vertical 12.7 0.0 523 409 294 29 22

Noncombustible Noncombustible Horizontal 12.7 0.0 542 399 318 34 17

Noncombustible Noncombustible N/A 25.4 0.0 332 189 164 19 9

Noncombustible Noncombustible N/A 25.4 30.5 288 190 167 17 7

Noncombustible Noncombustible N/A 25.4 61.0 254 158 138 11 7

Noncombustible Noncombustible N/A 12.7 0.0 574 382 302 41 25

Noncombustible Noncombustible N/A 12.7 61.0 316 221 187 12 9

Noncombustible Noncombustible N/A 12.7 30.5 463 270 208 23 12

Max Heat Flux (kw/m2Temperature (°C) at 5 min. )
Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

Spread of Flame: Class A Shingle Roof w/ 

Class C PV – 0 Set Back, 12.7 cm Gap

7

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

Spread of Flame

5:12 Sloped Roof

Wood Shake Roof Architectural Shingle Roof

8

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

Spread of Flame

Low Sloped Roof

Membrane Roof Hot-mop Built-up Roof

9

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

Spread of Flame Results

Different Class Rated PV & Roofs

UL 790 flame spread ratings (from leading edge of the sample):

Class A: 6 ft (1.82 m)

Class B: 8 ft (2.4 m)

Class C: 13 ft (3.9 m)

10

Roof PV Gap Setback Flame Spread Time

Type - rating Rating (cm) (cm) (ft) (mm:ss)

3 tab shingle - A A 12.7 0 > 8 4:17

Noncombustible C 12.7 0 > 8 2:03

Wood shake - C C 12.7 0 > 8 0:47

Membrane - A A 12.7 0 > 8 1:00

Architectural shingle - A C 12.7 0 > 8 1:57

Hot Mopped - A C 12.7 0 > 8 1:43

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

Mitigation Concepts

11

Single Screen Staggered Screens

Each opening and spacing about 10 cm

• FDS: Fire Dynamics Simulator v5 developed by NIST for fire modeling

• 12.5 cm gap between module and roof (both non-combustible)

• No incline

11

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing. 12

Gas Temperature Contours

Mid-plane between roof and module
Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing. 13

Flame Visualization

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

• Rack mounted PV module on a roof has an adverse effect on the 

roof Spread of Flame fire performance

• Extent of fire performance degradation depends upon setback and 

gap distances

• The same air flow conditions that cool panels also promotes fire 

propagation

• FDS modeling of a staggered screen appears to provide significant 

heat blocking versus single screen

• PV panels at an angle to a flat roof also degrade roof fire rating

Summary

14

Photovoltaics and Fire Fighter Safety

(DHS Assistance to Firefighters Grant)

Focused on firefighter concerns of:

• Shock hazard from direct contact with 

energized components during firefighting 

operations

• Shock hazard from water and PV power 

during suppression activities

• Potential shock hazard from damaged PV 

modules and systems

• PV power during low ambient light, 

artificial light and light from a fire 

• Emergency disconnect and disruption 

techniques 

• Severing of conductors

15 Photo courtesy of College Park MD Fire Department Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

PV and Fire Fighter Safety

16

Pre-fire

20 panels = 480 VDC, 12 A

Post fire

No power: 5 panels 

Partial power: 3 panels

Full power: 12 panels

Current (mA) Hazard

Leakage Safe

2 Perception

40 Lock On

240 Electrocution

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

PV and Fire Fighter Safety

Suppression Shock Hazard Potential

17

This image cannot currently be displayed. • 2 nozzles: smooth bore and adjustable

• 3 – 60 PSI (21 – 414 kPa)

• 50 – 1000 VDC

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

PV and Fire Fighter Safety

Power Generation, Fireground Illumination Highlights

Experiments using ground lighting towers indicate that artificial light at night (e.g. ground scene 

lighting) can cause a typical rooftop PV array to generate current at hazardous levels. 

1000 Volt Array with Night-Time Illumination from Fire Truck(s) Lighting

Truck #1 Truck #2 Total Distance 

Bed 12 kW Bed 6 kW Lighting from

Boom 6 kW Boom 4.5 kW kW

Array 

(Feet) Volts MilliAmps Hazard

None 48 0 Safe

Bed + Boom 18 25 812 132 Lock On

Bed + Boom 10.5 38 780 88 Lock On

Boom 4.5 38 738 50 Lock On

Bed + Boom Bed + Boom 28.5 25 & 38 836 212 Lock On

Partial Bed 3 25 657 22 Perception

Partial Bed 1.5 25 575 11 Perception

Bed + Boom 18 50 735 37 Perception

Bed + Boom 10.5 75 700 22 Perception

Bed + Boom Bed + Boom 28.5 50 & 75 773 49 Lock On

Partial Bed 1.5 50 340 1.5 Safe

18
Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

PV and Fire Fighter Safety

Power Generation, Fire Illumination Highlights

A stack of burning wood skids illuminating a PV module resulted in high hazardous power 

levels at various distances from the fire.

Light from a Fire (Single Module)

Distance from Open Circuit Short Circuit

Fire (Feet) Volts MilliAmps Hazard

75 30 52 Lock On

50 31 57 Lock On

40 32 59 Lock On

15 33 62 Lock On

Full Sun 37 7500

19

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

PV and Fire Fighter Safety

Depowering by Shielding Highlights 

The effectiveness of commercially 

available salvage tarps and generic plastic 

sheet tarps ranged from minimal impact 

on voltage output to null as compared to a 

baseline measurement.

20

Photo above courtesy of San Jose Fire Department..

Use of Various Tarps to Block Illumination

Open 

Circuit

Short 

Circuit

Tarp Color Layers Volts Amps Hazard

4.0 mil sheet Black 1 33 0 Safe

4.0 mil sheet Black 2 0.5 0 Safe

5.1 mil tarp Dark Blue 1 126 2.1 Electrocution

5.1 mil tarp Dark Blue 2 121 1 Electrocution

Salvage Canvas Dark Gray 1 3.2 0 Safe

Salvage Vinyl Red 1 124 1.8 Electrocution

Full Sun 148 8.1

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

• Cable cutter, rotary saw, 

chain saw, axe

• Various wiring systems 

and wiring cables

• Different voltages

PV and Fire Fighter Safety

Severing of conductors

21

Copyright© 2012 UL LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this material may be reprinted in any form 

without the express written permission of UL LLC or as otherwise provided in writing.

PV and Fire Fighter Safety

Dissemination 

http://www.ul.com/fireservice

• Formal Report

• Web Based Outreach

22

THANK YOU!

Robert Backstrom

Robert.Backstrom@ul.com

Thomas Fabian

Thomas.Fabian@ul.com

http://www.ul.com/fireservice
Qualitative Aspect of the Fires Fueled by the 

Combustibles Arriving in the Vicinity of the 

Tsunami Refuge Buildings

Tomoaki NISHINO

Kobe University, Japan

tomoaki.1098@dolphin.kobe-u.ac.jp

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and Wildland-Urban Interface(WUI) fires @ BRI&NRIFD, 2012 

Outline of tsunami-fire

 Tsunami-fire scenario

 Some kind of heat sources lead to ignitions of combustibles 

washed away by tsunami.

 Certain fires repeat ignition drifting in the flooded area.

 Certain fires develop into conflagrations in the easy places for 

combustibles to densely arrive.

Inundation depth

U∞

Oil leakage

Taking refuge on the rooftop

Taking refuge on high ground

Arriving of automobile

LPG leakage

Drift of broken pieces of houses Drift of ship Arriving of minor-damaged house 

retaining the upper compartment

Keeping in a room 

A formidable problem caused by tsunami-fire

 Fire spread to tsunami refuge building

 Escaping from tsunami refuge building is difficult because of the 

surrounding seawater and debris.

 Fire fighting and rescue from outside are not expected immediately.

 When smoke or fire flows into the building, the evacuees are likely 

to be put themselves in danger.

People on the rooftop of tsunami refuge building Fires drifting nearby tsunami refuge building

Planning for fire spread controlling

 One basic question

 How much degree we should expect as the heating strength to the 

tsunami refuge building due to the tsunami-fire? (What fire conditions 

are potential in the vicinity of the tsunami refuge building?)

 Contents of this presentation

 I present a part of the fires in the vicinity of the tsunami refuge 

buildings in Kesen-numa area based on the image records and the 

eyewitness testimonies.

 I arrange the idea of the fire types expected in the vicinity of the 

tsunami refuge building qualitatively.

N

Gulf of

Kesen-numa

3.75m

3.67m 4.42m

Tsunami refuge buildings in Kesen-numa area

0 500 1000 2000m

Nursing home (35)

Food factory (400)

Fish market (1000)

Hotel (50)

Joint prefecture government

building (200)

Joint state government

building (120)

Central public hall (450)

Kesen-numa junior high school

Kesen-numa high school

City hall

ID District Usage Floor 

number

Flooded 

floor 

number

No. of 

evacuee

s

Fire 

sighting

Fire 

catching

Analysis 

target

A Asahi Government 

building 5 2 120 ○ × ×

B Asahi Government 

building 5 ― 200 ― × ×

C

Uoichibamae

Fish market 3 2 1000 ○ × ×

D Shiomi Public hall 2 1 450 ○ × ○

E Hama Food factory 4 ― 400 ○ × ×

F Benten Hotel 6 2 50 ○ × ○

G

Nakaminato Nursing home 3 2 35 ○ ○ ○

List of tsunami refuge buildings
Outline of tsunami refuge building (D)

Usage (construction type) Public hall (RC)

Floor number (inundated) 2 (1)

Number of evacuees 450

Fire sighting ○

Fire catching ×

N

0 500 1000 2000m

Public hall

(3)

(1)

Public hall

Burned-out area

recorded by Kobe Univ.

on April 10th, 2011

(1)

(3)

Shooting angle (A) Shooting angle (B)

Shot by a local resident on the rooftop

at 6:00 p.m. on March 11th, 2011.

(2)

(2)

0 60 120 240m

Outline of tsunami refuge building (F)

Usage (construction type) Hotel (RC)

Floor number (inundated) 6 (2)

Number of evacuees 50

Fire sighting ○

Fire catching ×

N

0 500 1000 2000m

(1)

(2)

(3)

Hotel-I

(1)

(2)

Shot by Japan Ground Self-Defense Force

at 8:20 p.m. on March 11th, 2011.

(1)

Hotel-I

(3)

(4)

(5) (6)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(7)

(2)

0 30 60 120m

(6)

Shooting angle

Burned-out area

recorded by Kobe Univ.

on April 10th, 2011

(7)

Outline of tsunami refuge building (G)

Usage (construction type) Nursing home (RC)

Floor number (inundated) 3 (2)

No. of evacuees (attributes) 35 (over age 60 requiring no care)

Fire sighting ○

Fire catching ○ (15 rooms burned-out)

N

0 500 1000 2000m

 Image before the earthquake

Aluminum handrail (h=1.1m)

 1F floor plan (flooded)  2F floor plan 

 (flooded)

 3F floor plan 

 (non-flooded)

Common glass (h=1.9m)

Private room

Private room

Dining 

room

Kitchen

Entrance

Private room

Private room

(1) Fire approaching from north side

(2) Fire approaching from south side

(4) Fire approaching

from west side

6m

6m

6m

1.6m 7m

3.5m

Parking space

(3) Fire approaching from east side

Road

Road

Road

Toilet Bathroom

Private room

Private room

EV

EV

EV
room

North side South side

West side East side

Nursing home

0 50 100 200m

(1)

(3)

(2)

(3)

(2)

Shot by Sankei Newspaper

early in the morning on March 12th Burned-out area , 2011.

recorded by Kobe Univ.

on April 10th, 2011

(6)

(6)

(5)

(1)

(5)

(4)

(4)

N

S

E

W

Shooting angle Nursing home

Combustible condition before fire approaching

 Image before the earthquake

 1F floor plan (flooded)  2F floor plan 

 (flooded)

 3F floor plan 

 (non-flooded)

1

Private room

Private room

Private room

Private room

1

2

2

2 3

Dining 

room

Kitchen

Entrance

Private room

Private room

(1) Fire approaching from north side

(2) Fire approaching from south side

(4) Fire approaching

from west side

6m

6m

6m

1.6m 7m

3.5m

Parking space

(3) Fire approaching from east side

Road

Road

Road

Toilet Bathroom EV

EV

EV

w

h

H

rw, rO

d

w

h

d

rw, rO

h

d

rw, rO

s w

V

Expected fire types (combustible condition types)

d

l

(1) A heap of broken pieces (2) A mass of arriving houses

 retaining upper compartment

(3) A mass of drifting broken pieces (4) Neighboring fire-resistant building

Conclusions

 Contents of this presentation

 I presented a part of the fires in the vicinity of the tsunami refuge 

buildings in Kesen-numa area based on the image records and the 

eyewitness testimonies.

 I obtained several fire types related to combustible conditions 

expected around the tsunami refuge building.

 Future issues

 Fire experiments to estimate the burning behavior of the obtained 

fire types quantitatively

 Building design enabling keeping in rooms and on the rooftop 

enclosed by fires (a method to evaluate the design effectiveness) 

Thank you for your attention.

Workshop for Fire-Structure Interaction and Urban and Wildland-Urban Interface(WUI) fires @ BRI&NRIFD, 2012 
Statistical Modeling of 

Post-earthquake Ignitions

Rachel Davidson (University of Delaware)

Operation TOMODACHI: Fire Research, JAFSE and NIST Workshop

Tokyo, Japan

July 2012

2

Post-earthquake ignitions

Reducing ignitions is key to estimating and reducing postearthquake fire losses. 

Need to understand and better predict:

 Number of ignitions

 Geographic distribution

 Timing

Kessenuma conflagrations (Photo Asia Air Survey)

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

Kobe earthquake

3

Previous work on post-eq ignitions

Accomplishments

Collected historical ignition 

data

Identified main ignition 

causes

Developed early models to 

estimate number of ignitions 

in future earthquakes

Limitations

Missing info of data collection

 Which ignitions considered?

 Which areas included (zeros?)

Large unit of study (e.g., city)

Only 1 covariate considered

Few details on 

 How models were fit

 Resulting goodness-of-fit

Used least squares. Don’t 

recognize counts as discrete.

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

Ignitions 

per floor area

Ground motion intensity

4

 Improve post-eq ignition data collection

 Improve statistical modeling to estimate number 

and geographic distribution of post-eq ignitions

Applications

Objectives

Present day California

Present day Japan

1

2

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

5

 GIS database

 Unit of analysis: 1990 census tracts

 48 variable values for each tract

Data collection overview

Variables (num. variables) Source(s)

Ignitions (1) Reconnaissance reports

Ground shaking (4) USGS Shakemap archives

Building damage (6) HAZUS-MH MR2 output

Building area by structural type (14) HAZUS-MH MR2 default

Building area by occupancy type (7) HAZUS-MH MR2 default

Building age (2) Census

Heating fuel type (5) Census

Land area (1) Census

Land cover type (6) National Land Cover Data

Population (2) Census

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

6

Includes ignitions that:

 Became structural fires

 Required fire department help to extinguish

 Occurred within 10 days of earthquake

 Were identified as earthquake-related

 Initial ignitions (not ignited by other buildings)

Data collection: Ignitions

Earthquake Ignitions

Coalinga (1983) 3

Morgan Hill (1984) 6

N. Palm Springs (1986) 1

Whittier Narrows (1987) 20

Loma Prieta (1989) 36

Northridge (1994) 82

Total 148

Geocoded each ignition

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going
7

2 assumptions to account for missing ignition data

Data collection: 

Missing ignition data

Dataset B

• Tracts with PGA>0 not in regions 

w/ignition data have zero ignitions

• Likely overestimates zeros

• 7920 obs.

Dataset A

• Includes only tracts with PGA>0 

in regions with ignition data

• Likely underestimates zeros

• 3213 obs.

Northridge

PGA>0.1g

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

8

 Want to estimate num. of ignitions in a tract i, Yi

 OLS regression assumptions do not hold (e.g., Yi~Normal) 

 Since ignitions are discrete counts (0, 1, 2, ...), and possible 

ignitions in a tract occur independently, assume 

 Yi|xi~Poisson(μi)

Modeling

Poisson Regression 1

P(Y=y)

y

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

9

Yi = Num. of ignitions in a tract i

Yi|xi~Poisson(μi)

 In Poisson regression, estimate, i, with log-linear model

 ln(i) = i0 + i1xi1 + ... + inxin

 Assumes: i can be computed exactly

Counts in each cell actually have Poisson distrib.

E[Yi] = Var[Yi ] = μi

 In reality, data are often overdispersed

Modeling

Poisson Regression 2

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

P(Y=y)

y

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

10

Modeling

Negative Binomial Regression

 Instead assume Yi|xi, ~NB(μi, )

 where ln(i) = i0 + i1xi1 + ... + inxin

E[Yi] = μi

Var[Yi] = μi + μi

2   0

 NB is equivalent to Poisson regression that includes 

Gamma-distributed error

ln(i) = i0 + i1xi1 + ... + inxin + i

 Error i describes:

1. Effect of omitted explanatory variables

2. Error in measurement of Yi

 Extra variability beyond Poisson described by parameter 

~

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

P(Y=y)

y

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

Modeling:

Poisson Generalized Linear Mixed Model

Instead assume Yi|xi~Poisson(μi)

where ln(i) = i0 + i1xi1 + ... + inxin + uk

uk ~ N(0, u)

uk are iid earthquake-specific variability 

 (like random intercepts, one per eq)

12

Comparison of Model Types

Model selection

1. pseudo-R2

dev

2. pseudo-R2



3. NB overdispersion

parameter 

4. Likelihood ratio tests

5. AIC

6. Avg predicted vs observed counts

7. Residual diagnostics

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

Poisson regression Simplest but often data are overdispersed

NB regression Higher variance due to 

1 parameter to capture extra-Poisson variability

Poisson GLMM

Higher variance due to ukfor each EQ k 

k parameters to capture extra-Poisson variability

Predicted counts overestimate a lot
13

Recommended models

2 negative binomial models, 1 per dataset

Goodness-of-fit

 R2

dev (0.31, 0.34)

 R2

 (0.86, 0.89)

A.NB2 B.NB2

Instrumental intensity  

% land area that is commercial, industrial, or transportation  

% building area that is unreinforced masonry  

People per sq. km  

Total building area 

Area of high-intensity residential development 

Median year built over all housing units 

Dataset

A B

 most variability in counts not captured

 most extra-Poisson variability is captured

 Most randomness in ignition counts due to inherent Poisson 

randomness (cannot be reduced), not uncertainty in means 

(can be reduced with better data/models)

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

14

Observed vs. predicted ignitions

Model Total 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Observed 148

3,086 or 7,793 110 14 2 1 0 0 0 A.P2.noeq 148 3,080 121 11 1.4 0.2 0 0 0 A.P5.eq 148 3,082 118 11 1.8 0.4 0.1 0 0 A.NB2.noeq 150 3,087 109 13 2.9 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.1 A.NB5.eq 150 3,087 109 13.0 2.8 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.1 A.MM3 356 2,931 229 39 9.6 3 1 0.4 0.1 B.P4.noeq 148 7,782 130 7.7 0.8 0.1 0 0 0 B.P6.eq 148 7,784 126 8.6 1.2 0.2 0 0 0 B.NB2.noeq 148 7,793 112 12 2.4 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.1 B.NB6.eq 150 7,793 110 12 2.8 1 0.4 0.2 0.1 B.MM3 347 7,632 245 32 7.1 2.2 0.8 0.3 0.1

Number of ignitions

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

15

Earthquake effect

Earthquake covariate is significant, possibly because:

 Missing characteristics of specific eqs or regions they affected

 How ignition data were collected

Predicts more ignitions for eqs

likely to be missing more zero 

ignition count observations

Predicts fewer ignitions for eqs

likely to be missing more nonzero

ignition count observations

Dataset A 

(use only areas where 

ignitions collected)

Dataset B

(assume zero counts 

where not collected)

Comprehensive data collection is important

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

16

Relative importance of covariates

Change covariate value xa by 1 st.dev. 

 expected num. ignitions in tract i changes by (100a)%

-0.8

-0.4

0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

xii xhires x%CIT xtbldg xyrblt x%URM xdens

A.NB2

B.NB2

a 

-0.8

-0.4

0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

xii xhires x%CIT xtbldg xyrblt x%URM xdens

A.NB2

B.NB2

a 

 Instrumental intensity is most influential

 Then % land that’s commercial/industrial/trans.

 ground motion intensity, 

building area, pop. 

density increase ignitions

 % com/in/trans 

decreases ignitions

 %URM could indicate 

building types or damage

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

17

Applying the models for prediction

1. Estimate for each census tract i using:

2. Simulate many realizations of yi, number of ignitions in 

tract i, using NB distribution with and :

Result: For a given EQ, a map showing number of ignitions 

in each census tract (mean with confidence interval)

Implemented in our Urban Fire Simulation model

ˆ

i

ln(i) = i0 + i1xi1 + ... + inxin

^

^ ^ ^

1

1 1

1 1 1

( ) ( | , ) ,

( 1) ( )

i y

i i

i i

i i i

y

f y

y



  

 

    



 

  

     

             

 α≥0, y=0, 1, 2, ...

ˆ

i

^

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

18

Modeling for Japan

with Professor Charles Scawthorn and Sizheng Li

Opportunity

 ≈300 ignitions in Tōhoku EQ (vs. 148 in 6 Calif. EQs)

 50/50 tsunami-generated vs shaking-generated

Objectives

Repeat data collection and model fitting for Japan

 More data  better models! (training/validation split)

 Resolve zero ignition problem

 Examine tsunami-generated ignitions

 Compare to California

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going
19

Japan data needs

Seeking ignition data

 With ignitions consistently defined

 With specific location (not num. per prefecture)

 For all regions with nonzero ground motion or 

inundation

And if possible

 Covariate data

 Ignition timing

Introduction

Data collection

Modeling approach

California results

Japan on-going

Distribution of fires overlaid on PGA (SPA Risk) 20

Final remarks

Conclusions from California study

Data collection 

 Ignition definitions

 Data collection region

 Unit of study

Modeling approach

 Treatment of discrete counts

 Many covariates

 Higher geographic resolution

 Better estimation of zero counts

 Prediction model implemented in Urban Fire Simulation 

model

On-going work in Japan

21

Acknowledgements

(Japan RAPID project)

(California project)

For more information

 Davidson, R. 2009. Modeling Post-earthquake fire ignitions using 

generalized linear (mixed) models. Journal of Infrastructure Systems

15(4), 351-360.

 Davidson, R. 2008. Generalized Linear (Mixed) Models of Postearthquake Ignitions. MCEER technical report, MCEER-09-0004, 

Buffalo, NY.
Introduction of

Center for 

Fire Science and Technology,

Tokyo University of Science

Yoshifumi Ohmiya, Dr.

Professor

Tokyo University of Science

Presentation outline

1. Tokyo University of Science(TUS)

1. History

2. Organization

2. Center for Fire Science and Technology (CFST) ,TUS

1. Achievement

2. COE Program

3. Fire Research and Test Laboratory

1. Facilities and Devices

2. Experimental Research

Tokyo University of Science

Tokyo University of Science (TUS)

:Established in 1881.

:Japan's first private educational institution in natural 

sciences

:The Most prestigious science-oriented university in Japan. 

1881 2012

Science Div. I & II

Mathematics

Information ScienceMathematical 

PhysicsApplied Physics

Chemistry

Applied Chemistry

Electrical Engineering

Engr. Div. I & II Architecture Industrial Chemistry Management SciencePharma. Sci. Medical & Life Sci.Science and Technology

MathematicsPhysics

Info. Science

Applied Biological Sci.

Architecture

Pure & Applied Chemistry

Electrical Engineering

Industrial Admin.

Mechanical Eng.

Civil Engineering Industrial 

Sci. & Tech. Applied Electronics Material S&T

Biological S&T

Mathematics

Sci. for Info. Sci.Mathematical 

Indus. Chemistry

Electrical Eng.

Mgmt. Science

Mechanical Eng.

Pharmacy

Mathematics

Physics

Info. Science

ChemistryPure & Applied

Electrical Engr.

Industrial Admin.

Mechanical Eng.

Civil Engineering

Applied Electronics

Material S&T

Management

Science EducationMathematics and

Science Engineering Science and

Technology 

& Technology

Industrial Science

& Technology

Mgmt.

Sci. Management

School 

of Mgmt.

Architecture

Architecture

Depts.

Majors

Field of Research

Faculty/Schools Tokyo University of Science

Mathematics & Sci. Education

Tokyo University of Science – Organization Chart Physics Applied Physics

Chemical Sci.

& Technology Pharma. Sci.

Applied Biological Sci.

Chemical Science

Pharmacoscience

Mechanical Eng.

Pharmacy

Biological S&T

Biological Sci. Biological Sci.

Innovation Studies Innovation Studies/MOT/MIP

Independent

Graduate

SchoolsG Fire Sci. & Tech. Fire Sci. & Tech.

Tokyo University of Science – Organization Chart

Tokyo University of Science

Research-Education Organization 

for Infomation Sci.&Tech.

Research institute for 

Biological Science Life Information Science Biotechnology

Laboratory Animal

Center for Fire Science & Technology

Center for Colloid and Interface Science

Center for Technologies against Cancer

Green and Safety Research Center

Center for Physical Pharmaceutics& Energy

Research Center for RNA Science

for the Next GenerationCenter for Environmental Health Sci. 

Research institute for 

Science and Technology

IR FEL Research Center

Research Center for Chirality

Research Institutes

Immunobiology

Molecular Biology

Development and AgeingIntramural Cooperation

Extramural Cooperation

Technologies R & D CenterLeading-Edge Holography

Education CenterInformation Science 

Bioinfomatics Education Center

TUS’s COE Program

 Center of Excellence(COE) Program supported by 

Japan’s Government

 To cultivate a competitive academic environment among 

Japanese universities by giving targeted support to the 

creation of world-standard research and education bases

 21st Century COE Program (FY2003-2008) 

 “Center for Advanced Fire Safety Science and 

Technology for Buildings”

 “Fire Research and Test Laboratory” was built in 

2005.
TUS’s COE Program

 Global COE Program (FY2008-2013) 

 “Center for Education and Research on Advanced 

Fire Safety Science and Technology in East Asia”

 New Graduate School was established in 2010.

 Graduate School of Global Fire Science and 

Technology

 First in Japan, focused on “Fire Science and 

Technology”

Name Research Interests

M. Tsujimoto Dean

Professor Smoke Movement, Reliability Engineering, Laws 

and Regulations

K. Ikeda Professor Building Fire Resistance Performance

M. Morita Professor CFD, Simulation, Suppression System

A. Sekizawa Professor Fire Risk Analysis, Evacuation Behavior, Urban 

Disaster Prevention, Firefighting and Disaster 

Prevention

S. Sugahara Professor Building Material Science, Theory of Safety and 

Security

Y. Ohmiya Professor Building Fire Safety Design, Evacuation 

Behavior, Smoke Control, Fire Spread

K. Kobayashi Professor Building Standards Law, Fire Defense Law

K. Matsuyama Assoc.

Professor Fire/Combustion Engineering, Fluid Dynamics, 

Fire Suppression, Measurement Methodology

M. Mizuno Lecturer Evacuation Safety, Evacuation Simulation

Faculty Listing

Graduate School of Global Fire Science and Technology, TUS

Fire Research and Test Laboratory, 

CFST, TUS

Fire Research and Test Laboratory

Center for Fire Science and Technology(CFSaT)

Building 

Research 

Institute 

26m

40m

20m

40m

(East side) Main entrance (North side)

Fire Research and Test Laboratory, 

CFST, TUS

 First Floor 

40m

26m

Plan (1st Floor) Plan (2nd Floor)

Fire Research and Test Laboratory, 

CFST, TUS

Plan (1st floor)

Full Scale Furnace

for Wall

Medium Scale Furnace

Multiple Full Scale Furnace

Facilities and Devices
Steel Construction Building

Story drift 1/75 Story drift 1/75

Fire resistance performance of partition wall 

after an Earthquake

Facilities and Devices Facilities and Devices

Fire resistance performance of partition wall 

after an Earthquake

Plan (1st floor)

Full-Scale Compartment for Fire 

Experiment (with Water Pump)

Facilities and Devices

火源設置位置

火源位置:b 廊下区画

T.C.A(10点)

2400

煙濃度計測定点(5点) ガス濃度計測定点(1点)

火源位置:c

ピトー管(5点)

散水ヘッド取付位置

900

6500

6500

700700

700

300

300

300

T.C.C(10点)

T.C.B(10点)

T.C.D' (壁面温度分布)

T.C.a T.C.b T.C.c T.C.d T.C.e

T.C.f

3600

700 700 700 700 700

周壁温度K-3(位置:1350mm)

T.C.D(壁際1cm温度分布)

周壁温度K-2(位置:1350mm)

周壁温度K-4(位置:1350mm)

開口

1600

1600

熱流束計NO.3 火源位置:a (位置:1350mm)

熱流束計

(位置:0,300,900,1350(NO.2),1800,2100,2700mm)

ビデオ設置

ビデオ設置

ビデオ設置 ビデオ設置

火災区画

Fire source Plan

Advanced Fire Safety Design Method

considering effect of SP system

Facilities and Devices

Plan (1st floor)

Hood (5 m × 5 m)

Cone Calorimeter 

Testing Device

Heat Radiation Panel

Room Corner Testing 

Unit

Facilities and Devices

5000

4000 1000 1400 1100

7000

φ800

Stage

Load cell

Camera

Camera

Measurement

:Heat release rate 

:Mass burning rate

:Temperature distribution

:Heat flux

・Ignition point: Center of seat

•Residential Fires

Specimen

Facilities and Devices
Thank you for your attention.
Introduction of 

Building Research Institute 

Dep. of Fire Engineering

Ichiro HAGIWARA

Brief History of BRI

 Dec. 1942 Founded as a Building Research Section

 Jul. 1948 Renamed as the Building Research Institute, 

Ministry of Construction. 

 Apr. 1980 Moved to Tsukuba Science City from Tokyo. 

 Apr. 2001 Independent Administrative Institution 

Building Research Institute make a start.

At the same time, NILIM established.

Original BRI was divided two, NILIM and New BRI.

 Present - BRI is still same status, 

not National Research Institute.

It means that a large part of budget come from the government,

but become independent and self-control/management.

2

Organization

(7 Research groups)

1. Department of Structural Engineering

2. Department of Environmental Engineering

3. Department of Fire Engineering

4. Department of Building Materials and Components

5. Department of Production Engineering

6. Department of Housing and Urban Planning

7. International Institute of Seismology and 

 Earthquake Engineering

Chief Executive Deputy Chief Executive

Executive Director for Building Research

Research Coordinator of Building Technology

•Department of Research Planning and Management

•Department of General Affairs

3

Dept. of Fire Eng 6 +1 Guest Researcher

+1 Visiting Researcher

(Ref.) 6 for fire research in NILIM

Staff

1 April, 2012

4

Staff : 88

Full time staff : 85 (57 researchers,

 31 non-researchers)

Full time officer : 3 (incl. 1 part-time)

Fire Research Projects: 36 M Yen = 0.45 M USD

1 April, 2012

Ref. 1,000,000 Yen = 12 ,500 dollars

5

Outline of the 3rd Interim plan

 Research and Development are more 

concentrated for quickly achieving clear 

results which meet social and user needs.

 10 Priority Research Projects are selected.

75% of total research budget are reserved for 

them. 

 They are classified 4 categories. 

• Sustainable development / Green innovation

• Ensure safety and security in building and city

• Reconstruction/redevelopment corresponding 

to social changes (Aged society)

• International contribution by building and city 

planning technology (for developing countries) 6
Dept. of Fire Engineering

R&D Strategy

 Fire safety design methods and 

engineering tools 

 Advanced methods for estimating and 

preventing damage by fires during/after 

earthquakes

 Provide technical standards, test 

methods, references, guides and other 

documents for the BSL and related 

regulations. 

For promoting fire safety design with 

engineering tools

7

Current Research Projects

1. Wooden large / mid-rise buildings

2. Fire safety of existing non-conformed

buildings

3. Evaluation test methods on interior and

exterior finishing system using combustible

material

4. Fire resistance of fire compartment

members under loading condition

Most projects linked for revising the Building

Standard Law of Japan in near future

(201x) 8

Test Facilities

 Full-scale Fire Test Laboratory

 Fire Research and Test Laboratory

 Fire Wind-tunnel

 Model Fire Experimental Field

9

Cone Calorimeter

ICAL

SBI 10

Fire Research and Test Laboratory

Material

Wall Furnace

11

Fire Research and Test Laboratory

Structural Elements

Column Furnace Floor Furnace

Full Scale Fire Test Laboratory

12

Fire Test Hall

Smoke Movement

in a Corridor

Evaluating fire propagation along 

combustible exterior facade walls

Large Calorimeter

Measuring HRR of a Vehicle

Flash-over Experiment
NIST Dragon

13

Firebrands coming through the 

gaps cause ignition penetrating 

the OSB board

Firebrands falling on the bare 

board by assuming that tiles are 

removed by a big earthquake 

cause ignition 

Fire Wind-tunnel

Thank you for your attention !

14

Laboratory Tour

Group A: US side + 

Group B: Japanese side


Presentations Delivered by University of Michigan, CALPOLY, UL, NIST, and WPI 

During Optional Laboratory tour to TUS
Building Materials, Life Safety, & Security Industries

Reaction to Fire Fire 

Resistance

Fire 

Suppression

Fire Equipment 

Services PPE / PFD

Inspection & testing 

• Aerial devices / 

pumpers at plants

• In-service inspection 

of same at fire 

departments

Building Contents

• Mattresses

• Fabrics

• Floor Coverings

• Upholstered 

Furniture

C t

Building Products

Roofing

• Roofing Systems

• Roof Covering Materials

Surface Flammability

• Surface Burning

Et i C t

• Sprinklers

• Extinguishers

• Extinguishing Systems

• Fire Main Equipment

• Foam

• Pipe & Fittings

P &E i

• Swing/Specialty Doors

• Hardware / Frames

• Dampers

• Wire & Cable

• Firestops & Joints

• Record Protection

Fi R i ti

• Garment & Component

• Glove, Boot, Helmet, 

Face Protection

• HazMat

• Life Safety Equipment

• Marine Rescue 

E i t / Lif J k t

Raw Materials > > Products > > Systems > > Structures

• Components • Exterior Components • Pumps & Engines

• Valves

• Fire Resistive 

Construction - Marine

Equipment / Life Jackets

Security Equipment

Initiating & 

Indicating 

Devices

Certificate 

Services

• Fire Alarm Control Panel

• Smoke Control Equipment

• Fire Suppression Equipment

• Emergency Communication 

Systems 

• Fireman’s Telephones

• Hand-held Microphones

• Audio Speakers

• Physical & Electronic

• Safes / Vaults

• Bullet-resistant Materials

• Locks / Bank Equipment

• Jaws of Life

• PASS Safety Devices

• Biometric Devices

• Access Control Systems

• Security Alarm Panels

• Microwave/PIR Sensors

• Balanced Magnetic Switches

• Suppression 

Systems Water flow 

devices

• Smoke Alarms / 

Detectors

• Heat/Flame 

Detectors

• CO/Gas Detectors

• Fire Horns

• Fire Strobes

Fire Alarm Control & 

Communication Equipment

• Burglar/Fire Alarm 

Monitoring

• National Security 

System Monitoring

• Industrial Security 

System Monitoring

US Government

• CBRNE Detection

• Hazmat Detection

• TSWG Security 

Program

• NEMA-UL Partnership

• DHS Standards 

Development

• Secure Borders 

Initiative

Approximately 2,000 CCNs