Fire and the Built Environment - Case Study Example

FIRE AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT Student’s Name Course Tutor Date FIRE AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT Introduction Fires have been reported in various parts of the world in which buildings and people have been badly affected. Fire in the built environment has been an issue for many years with both major and minor fires being experienced in various countries (Quincy 2001 pp. 43). In this paper three case studies of fires in buildings will be conducted. These built environment fires were experienced in the United Kingdom, Sweden and Russia. A thorough analysis will be done for all of these case studies. Stockholm Sweden On 4th May 2011 on an early Wednesday morning a fire broke out at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) located in Stockholm in Sweden. The fire started in the auditorium of the institute’s School of Architecture. The fire destroyed several buildings. The blaze continued into the afternoon as fire fighters increased to about 75. One fire fighter was injured in the process and taken to hospital (thelocal, 2011). The fire produced a very large amount of smoke causing air pollution. The fire service of Stockholm could not ascertain if the smoke contained any toxic substances. Students and staff were immediately evacuated from the buildings affected by the fire. At the architectural school 130 staff members and 600 students were affected. (thelocal2011). Fire safety analysis The problem of fire in the School of architecture buildings was compounded by the way the buildings were designed. Building design is critical especially when it comes to fire safety. The fire took along time to put off because of the huge halls of the building. This happened in spite of the fact that the fire fighters were working all day. The design of the building made it hard for them to access all the parts of the buildings in good time. The magnitude of the fire was big since it destroyed many other buildings around. From this we can deduce that the building was not equipped with fire safety equipment that could help in controlling the fire. The only source of help came with the fire fighters. Opinion on lessons learnt From the incident of the Royal Institute of Technology a number of lessons can be learned. The safety of the occupants of a building is very important. These occupants should be allowed to occupy a building that is equipped for fire protection. In case of fire they should have some means of trying to control its growth before fire fighters are called to the scene. Fire fighting equipment should have been in these buildings to help control its growth and spread. Such equipment includes systems for suppressing fire and fire alarms. Recommendations The fire had various effects including the destruction of buildings and the production of thick probably dangerous smoke. The renovation of the institution’s affected buildings should be done in a way that the fire safety regulations are completely obeyed (Chitty, Fraser- Mitchell 2003). The interiors of the renovated buildings should have flame retardant materials. The materials that are used in the interior of a building endanger or save lives. The renovated buildings should therefore be made with materials that do not enhance fast spread of fire. Inflammability of materials is important in slowing down the growth of fire. The doors to the buildings will have to be fitted with doors that are fire resistant. This will make them able to resist excessive temperature and fire without collapsing (Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, 2010, pp. 101). Local fire brigades should be allowed in to assess fire safety in the building (Quincy 2009 pp. 90). Vladivostok, Russia A fire was reported to break out on Monday in an office building on the pacific coast of Russia in the city called Vladivostok. The fire started on floor number seven which was being used by the Sberbank bank owned by the state. It affected the floors above the seventh floor. The fire injured nine people and more than fifteen fatalities were reported (independent 2011). According to officials stairwells within the building had gates on them blocking those who wanted to escape from the fire. Rescue efforts were also hampered by these gates. All the people who died at the building had plunged through the windows and fell or jumped over (independent 2011) It was reported that there were violations of fire safety rules and lethal negligence in the design of the building. Rescue operations were hampered because of lack of emergency exits and ropes. Fire fighters could not access the building easily or bring their equipment near the building because there was a commercial parking lot outside the building hindered them. This parking lot was built in violations of the regulations of fire safety. Fire fighters managed to extinguish the fire later on (independent 2011) Fire safety analysis The fire in the building in Vladivostok was not that of a big magnitude although it affected a number of floors on the upper side of the seventh floor. The injuries and fatalities reported were did not result from the fire itself or its smoke. Many of those who died or were injured jumped through the windows. The fire safety problem with this building was so huge. People lacked ways of escape (Quincy 2009 pp. 23). Because the stairwells had gates on them people were locked inside with no way of escape. Fire safety rules were grossly violated meaning the building was not designed for any fire eventuality. There were no ropes or emergency exists that could help those escaping the fire. This made people to make risky options like jumping through the windows only to meet their deaths. The commercial parking lot near the building prevented effective access of the building by fire fighters. This was another violation of the fire safety rules. The parking lot was not supposed to be where it was and as a fire safety measure there was supposed to be enough space to allow easy movement of fire fighters to and from the building. The people in the building affected by the fire were probably not taught how to behave in the event of a fire. There reactions were very risky and dangerous (independent 2011) Opinion on lessons learnt From what happened in the above fire incident in Russia, is it important to obey the regulations of fire protection. A violation of these rules was the main problem in this fire incident. Lack of exit ways and other equipment necessary for escape caused more deaths the fire itself. The main lesson here is that equipment and facilities for escape from a fire incident are very critical in any building. The building could have had no gates on the stairwells to facilitate escape of those trapped within the building as well as for free movement of fire fighters. Ropes should be provided on a building especially if it is a tall one. These ropes could have been very important in rescue operations. Recommendations The greatest problem identified on the building affected was the failure of the designers and constructors of the building to observe the rules of fire protection. It will require that any renovation of the building should incorporate all the fire safety requirements that were not obeyed. Adequate means of escape should be created on the building. Fire exit and escape routes should be created on the building. The gates on the stairwells that prevented people from escaping the fire must be removed. The occupants of the building should be taught how to maintain the stairwells, staircases and the corridors. They should be well ventilated to be made to be free from obstacles so that it can be easy to for people to escape in case of emergencies (Quincy 2009 pp. 65). Clear pathways to the doors of exit should also be outlined. According to the relevant laws the maximum distance to the fire exits should be observed. There should be refuge areas such as terraces so that people can be allowed to congregate there if they are required to get out of the building in phases. The building should be renovated with smoke detection signals being put in place. Automatic fire alarms like heat and smoke detectors are important on this high rise building. Other things to be fitted in the building include Fire doors, Smoke exhaust systems, exit signs, emergency lighting, fire hose reels, and fire hydrants. (Quincy 2007 pp. 89). Since the building is a high rise one, it should have fire extinguishers being checked regularly. The building being a high rise structure can be hard to access and evacuate people. As a result there should be installed automatic sprinkler systems. Fire drills for the occupants of the building should be conducted regularly. Through regular fire drills people are familiarized about the methods of evacuation and the immediate reactions they can take when the fire starts. London UK On 24th January 2012 at eleven in the morning, a fire was reported to have broken out in a landmark building in central London. The cause of the fire was believed to be the act of workers using welding torches or Bunsen burners which set light to the insulation in the room. Over 75 fire fighters were brought on the scene of the fire with more than 20 appliances in order to extinguish the fire (thesun 2011).The burning building produced thick black smoke which covered the city. Marconi house at the Strand and Aldwych junction was the building affected by the fire. The 10 storey building had a five star hotel with 86 flats. People were immediately evacuated from the affected building. A special fire protection improvement had been done in the building. This made it possible for the firefighters to get to the roof. The fire consumed a bout one quarter of 100 sq m roof on the 10 storey building. Only one small injury was reported and no people were reported to be trapped in the building. The fire was controlled and contained at the roof so that it could not spread to other parts of the building. Local traffic and public transport were heavily affected after parts of the affected strand were closed. (thesun 2011). Fire safety analysis This fire incident in London did not have very bad effects. Fire safety regulations on the building were adhered to because the building had gone through a fire protection improvement. Most of the existing problems in fire protection had been rectified. It was therefore ready to for any fire incident. Fire exits were in place and nobody was trapped in the burning building. Evacuation of people was done very swiftly. There was enough space for more than 75 fire fighters to get to the burning parts of the building. No major injuries were reported except for one person who sustained minor injuries. This is an indication that the fire was contained in good time before it could cause much destruction. The fire produced thick black smoke which covered the city. In the area of smoke control however not much had been done. Much of the smoke produced was released into the atmosphere and the surrounding areas were badly affected (thesun 2011). Opinion on lessons learnt The fire in the London building allows us to learn a few things. The building had been prepared for a fire eventuality. The major lesson to be learnt from this incident is that all buildings should be constructed in a way that every fire safety regulation is adhered to. When this happens it is easy for fire to be detected early enough and to be controlled in time not to destroy many lives and property. The design of the building, space planning and lay out should be good. Escape facilities such as fire exists and fire lifts should all be in place (Quincy 2009 pp. 67). This incident is a good example of what a fire protection system should look like. It is also important to have smoke control mechanisms in place to avoid the poisonous effects of toxic smoke. Management and control of smoke was not up to date on the affected building. Smoke management should be taken seriously so that the effects of the fire are not compounded. Recommendations Enough care should be taken in future to ensure that flammable materials are not used in the renovation of the roof. Materials to be used for construction of the roof should be fire retardant. Smoke management and control should be stepped up in the building. Equipment should be installed which can act as barriers to smoke and fire. Smoke can be dangerous to health especially if it contains poisonous particles. Smoke barriers help to reduce free movement of the smoke (Christian, British Standards Institution 2003 pp. 56) Conclusion In conclusion, three case studies of fire incidents have been examined in this paper. The aim was to analyze the built environment fires in terms of fire protection engineering issues identified on the buildings. The discoveries made were that all the fires were accidents and such accidents must have measures for fire safety in place to control them. Buildings in Stockholm Sweden, Vladivostok in Russia and London in the UK were used for the case studies. All these buildings suffered fires of different magnitudes causing different levels of damage. The building in Russia had the most fatalities because its fire protection system was the poorest. Many of the fire protection regulations had been ignored in the design of the building. Fire safety equipment, space to access the building and fire exits were all missing on the building at the time the fire incident occurred. All the fire safety regulations should be followed in renovation activities and the construction of any new building. Bibliography Bethesda, M.D, 2006. SFPE Engineering Guide to Fire Risk Assessments, Society of Fire Protection Engineers. Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, 2010. Fire Safety Engineering, London McGraw Hill. Chitty R., Fraser- Mitchell J. 2003. Fire Safety Engineering; A reference Guide New York Oxford. Christian S. D, British Standards Institution 2003; A guide to Fire Safety Engineering Penguin Books. Purkiss J. A. 2007. Fire Safety Engineering: Design of structures London Oxford. Quincy, M.A, August 2001 Structure fires in Vacant or Idle properties, or properties and construction, Demolition or Renovation. NFPA fire analysis and Research Division. Quincy, M.A, 2009. NFPA 241, Standard for Safeguarding Construction, Alteration and Demolition Operations, National Fire Protection Association. Quincy, M.A, 2007. NFPA, 550, Guide to the Fire Safety Concepts Tree, National Fire Protection Association. http://www.the sun.co.uk retrieved 31 January 2012 http://www.independent.co.uk/news Retrieved 31 January 2012 http://www.thelocal.se/33568/20110504/ Retrieved 31 January 2012 Read More