4.7 Article

IFC-centric performance-based evaluation of building evacuations using fire dynamics simulation and agent-based modeling

期刊

AUTOMATION IN CONSTRUCTION
卷 101, 期 -, 页码 1-16

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2019.01.007

关键词

EvacuSafe; Evacuation safety; Emergency management; Route risk index; Crowd simulation; BIM; IFC; Safety; Agent-based modeling; Fire safety; Path identification

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite recent technological advancements in the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industries, the number of fire-caused fatalities in residential and commercial buildings in the United States over the last decade has consistently been an order of magnitude higher than fatalities caused by all other types of natural disasters combined. In this research, EvacuSafe is developed as a tool for designers to allow for layout optimization of buildings and facilities in terms of their evacuation safety performance. Contributions of this research include the development and validation of two spatiotemporal risk indices to quantify the safety of the egress routes and individual building compartments. Other unique advantages of EvacuSafe include the seamless integration of fire dynamics simulation, agent-based crowd simulation and building information models (BIM) using IFC data structures, allowing EvacuSafe to be readily used by designers to analyze a building layout design under various fire scenarios and for layout design optimization based on multiple safety criteria. The development of the framework, the risk indices, and the IFC-based integration is illustrated and validated through a case study on a two-story office building with 59 compartments. The results of the implementation show that the EvacuSafe is a valuable tool for evacuation design and planning that provides a more comprehensive evaluation of the evacuation performance in comparison to the existing indices and safety measures in the industry.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据