## 3 Results
### Distribution of ASET in Room Size Conditions  
The ASET of the building finishing material tended to increase with the increase in the aspect ratio. However, it was confirmed that there was no significant difference between the ASET changes in polyurethane foam and MDF. On the other hand, while the ASET change for CFRBFM did not differ significantly in the temperature and visibility items, it was observed that the ASET increased significantly with the increase in the aspect ratio in the FED item.  
Therefore, when CFRBFM is used as indoor finishing material, the correlation between excess time and the aspect ratio of temperature and visibility is represented by Equation (6), while the correlation between the FED and aspect ratio is represented by Equation (7).  
\[y_{T,\;V}=0.10107x^{2}+1.41607x+2.163 \tag{6}\]  
\[y_{FED}=-1.54286x^{2}+38.62514x+31.444 \tag{7}\]  
Figure 6 illustrates the ASET distribution of CFRBFM based on life safety criteria.  
An increase in the aspect ratio of the floor area results in a corridor-shaped structure. Therefore, we conducted an additional fire impact assessment of building finishing materials to account for changes in area while maintaining the same aspect ratio. With the aspect ratio being maintained at 1, an increase in the area corresponds to an increase in the square of the length.  
As a result of the simulation, when CFRBFM is used as an indoor finishing material, the correlation between the ASET of temperature, visibility, and FED and the length of the floor area is shown in Equations (8)-(10), respectively. However, in Case 5, the ASET for  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Properties**} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Case**} \\ \cline{3-6} \multicolumn{2}{c}{} & **1** & **2** & **3** & **4** & **5** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Polyurethane foam} & Temperature & 3.20 s & 6.00 s & 8.80 s & 11.20 s & 13.21 s \\ \cline{2-6}  & Visibility & 3.20 s & 6.00 s & 8.80 s & 11.20 s & 13.61 s \\ \cline{2-6}  & FED & 8.40 s & 12.40 s & 16.00 s & 22.81 s & 28.82 s \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{MDF} & Temperature & 3.20 s & 6.00 s & 10.40 s & 17.61 s & 24.42 s \\ \cline{2-6}  & Visibility & 3.20 s & 8.40 s & 12.40 s & 17.61 s & 23.61 s \\ \cline{2-6}  & FED & 14.40 s & 22.01 s & 27.61 s & 36.03 s & 41.65 s \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{CFRBFM} & Temperature & 3.60 s & 7.20 s & 11.61 s & 41.22 s & 167.62 s \\ \cline{2-6}  & Visibility & 4.00 s & 7.20 s & 17.21 s & 36.81 s & 56.81 s \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-6}  & FED & 68.81 s & 156.02 s & 250.81 s & 351.25 s & \textgreater{}400.00 s \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 8: ASET for each building finishing material under same aspect ratio conditions.  
FED was not measured during the simulation operation time and was excluded.  
\[y_{Temperature}=4.83571x^{2}-39.92557x+73.032 \tag{8}\]  
\[y_{Visibility}=0.77125x^{2}-2.4935x+5.432 \tag{9}\]  
\[y_{FED}=0.82687x^{2}+38.83675x-12.2675 \tag{10}\]  
Applying Equation (10), the FED standard ASET for Case 5 is predicted to be 458.79 s. Figure 7 illustrates the distribution of the ASET for CFRPM based on life safety criteria under the same aspect ratio condition.  
In terms of temperature and visibility of CFRPM, the ASET showed a similar distribution, but the difference in the ASET increased when a certain length was exceeded. Trend  
Figure 6: Distribution of ASET in CFRPM with aspect ratio changes.  
Figure 7: Distribution of ASET in CFRPM under same aspect ratio conditions.  
line analysis confirmed that the trend line of temperature and the trend line of visibility intersect at approximately 6.74 m. Therefore, it is judged that mixing Equations (9) and (10) based on a floor length of 6.74 m provides a more accurate correlation for CFRBFM's ASET of the temperature criteria.