EVALUATION OF

EVACUATION AT
FACULTY ENGINEERING

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION
The seven story building fitted with three lifts lies partially on a lake.
It houses offices for the Dean, Deputy Deans and eight engineering
departments as well as rooms for professors (JUSA A, B and C) and
associate professors, senior lecturers and other academic staff. This
is the biggest engineering faculty in Malaysia in terms of the number
of programmes offered and the number of postgraduates. Each
lecturer office has one wall almost covered with glass, standard
government size fitted with individual air conditioner, PA system,
sprinkler head and four foot fluorescent lights.
The objective of this work is to evaluate fire safety components using
manual and commercial software.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Fire Services act

1988 (act 341)
Regulation,
Rules and Order

Computer
simulation

Best assembly
area

Literature
Review
Fire fighting
access lobbies

Fire drilss

Stairs

Means of egress

FIRE SERVICES ACT 1988

(ACT 341) REGULATION,
RULES AND ORDER
Fire Services act 1988 (act 341) is an act that make provision for the
effective and efficient functioning of the Fire Services Department for
the protection of persons and property from the fire risk and for
purposes connected with it. (Fire Services Act 1988, 2006)

BEST ASSEMBLY AREA

Assembly area is an area where located outside the building in an
open space so everyone can gather and be identified but the area
should be clearing indicate by all occupants before emergency arise.
(Uniform Building By Law 1984, 2011)

FIRE FIGHTING ACCESS

LOBBIES
Fire safety should conform to the following requirements:

Each lobby shall have a floor area of not less than 5.587 square
meters (Uniform Building By Law 1984, 2011)
The open able area of windows or area of permanent ventilation shall
be not less than 25% of the floor area of the lobby and if ventilation is
by means of open able windows, Additional permanent ventilation
having a free opening of 464 square centimeters shall be provided
except that mechanical pressurization may be provided as an
alternative. (Uniform Building By Law 1984, 2011)

HEAT LOAD
The heat load is the maximum heat that can be theoretically generated
by the combustible items and contents of the structure. The heat load
could be measured as the weight of the combustible material
multiplied by the calorific value per unit weight. Heat load is
conveniently expressed in terms of the floor space as MJ/m2or
Mcal/m2.More often it would be expressed in terms of equivalent
quantity of wood and expressed as Kg wood / m2 (1 Kg wood = 18MJ).
The amount of heat load and the values may change from one
environment to the other and also from country to country (Patterson,
1993)

MEANS OF EGRESS
A means of egress is an exit path that occupants may use to safely exit a
building. It is designed to provide safe and easy travel during a fire or other
emergency so that the risk of injury or death is minimized. (Uniform Building
By Law 1984, 2011)
Components of means of egress
Doors

Stairs
Guards and handrails
Smoke proof enclosures

Stair pressurization
Horizontal exits
Exit passageways

STAIRS
Stairs for emergency during fire has their own dimension that need to
follow by rules that stated in Uniform Building By Law 1984.the
dimension that be suggested by the law is the rise of any staircase
shall not be not more than 180 millimeters and tread shall be not less
than 255 millimeters and dimension of the rise and the tread of the
staircase so chosen shall be uniform and consistent throughout. Other
than that, the width of staircase shall be in accordance by law 168
while the depth of landings shall be not less than the width of the
staircase. (Uniform Building By Law 1984, 2011)

FIRE DRILLS
Fire drill is an exercise in the use of firefighting equipment or the
evacuation of a building in case of a fire
There are 4 stages that will be analyze during the fire drills, which are

1-Time before fire been aware (tdet)

2- Be aware of fire (ta)
3 - Identify and respond to sound the alarm (tpre)
4 - Start clear the building and move to a place of assembly secure
(ttrav)

PYRO SIM SOFTWARE

Pyro Sim is a graphical user interface for the Fire Dynamics Simulator
(FDS). FDS models can predict smoke, temperature, carbon monoxide,
and other substances during fires. The results of these simulations
have been used to ensure the safety of buildings before construction,
evaluate safety options of existing buildings, reconstruct fires for
post-accident investigation, and assist in firefighter training.
(Engineering, 2010)

EXPERIMENTAL

EXPERIMENTAL
1) Determination of fire load from types of files and books

2) Determine air flow rate in the lift lobby

3) Checking conditions and staircases
4) Measure the lumen in the corridor and stair cases
5) Checking the condition of firefighting devices
6) Determining optimum location of new assembley points

7) Calculating distance and suitability of assembly points

8) Questionnaire on fire safety awareness

DETERMINATION OF
FIRE LOAD FROM
TYPES OF FILES AND
BOOKS

DETERMINATION OF FIRE
LOAD FROM TYPES OF FILES
AND BOOKS

DETERMINATION OF FIRE
LOAD FROM TYPES OF FILES
AND BOOKS
No
1

Classification
Furniture

Machine

Type
Reference
Carpet
(16 m x 11 m)
Chair
Curtain
Table
Pic Frame
Sofa
Book Rack
Cupboard/Cabi
net
Dashboard
Whiteboard
Refrigerator
Phone
Photostat
Computer

Quantity

Coal

30935.8

Cotton

16747.2

Dynamite

5349.8

Nylon

23260

Paper ( average)

16282

Calorie Value

Peats (average)

22097

KJ/Kg

Pitch

34890

Polyester

23260

Polyurethane

37216

Polyvinylchloride

22097

Straw

13956

DETERMINATION OF FIRE
LOAD FROM TYPES OF FILES
AND BOOKS

Materials

Acrylic

26051.2

Asphalt

40472.4

Coal

30935.8

Cotton

16747.2

Dynamite

5349.8

Waxes

39542

Nylon

23260

Woods (average hard and softwood)

18608

Paper ( average)

16282

Peats (average)

22097

Pitch

34890

Polyester

23260

DETERMINATION OF FIRE
LOAD FROM TYPES OF FILES
AND BOOKS
Heat load of material = Weight of material x calorie value of material
Average heat load (kJ) =

Heat load Furniture (kJ) + Heat load Machine (kJ) + Stationary equipment (kJ) + Papers (kJ)
Miscellaneous (kJ)

EXAMPLE OF CALCULATION
OF HEAT LOAD

1,825 910
kJ

DETERMINATION OF FIRE
LOAD FROM TYPES OF FILES
AND BOOKS
Room

Heat load (KJ)

Classification

3306292.7

Low

3434885.6

Low

4252509.5

Medium

5042651.7

High

5575073.1

Very High

6241704.7

Very High

DETERMINE AIR FLOW

RATE IN THE LIFT
LOBBY

DETERMINE AIR FLOW RATE

IN THE LIFT LOBBY

DETERMINE AIR FLOW RATE

IN THE LIFT LOBBY

CHECKING
CONDITIONS AND
STAIRCASES

CHECKING CONDITIONS AND

STAIRCASES

The time taken in actual experiment is 122

seconds which consists of 25 participants

evacuate from lift lobby level 5 to assembly

point. But by using pyro sim, the calculated time
is 119 seconds.

MEASURE THE LUMEN

IN THE CORRIDOR
AND STAIR CASES

MEASURE THE LUMEN IN THE

CORRIDOR AND STAIR
CASES
Place

Lux number

Office lighting

320 -400 Lux

Emergency Staircase

80 90 Lux

Office Pavement

80 90 Lux

Exit Sign

0 Lux

CHECKING THE
CONDITION OF
FIREFIGHTING
DEVICES

CHECKING THE CONDITION

OF FIREFIGHTING DEVICES
Firefighting devices

Equip

Condition
Good

Need to enhance

Door

Stair pressurization

Smoke proof enclosure

Guard and handrails

Fire door

Fire staircase

KELUAR Mimic Diagram

DETERMINING
OPTIMUM LOCATION
OF NEW ASSEMBLY
POINTS

FACULTY ENGINEERING UPM

1
4

Medium
Risk to
assembl
e

2
High risk
to
assemble

Safest to
assemble

1
4

Safest to
assemble

DESCRIPTION
Assembly Area

Reasons

The assembly area are high risk because the area are on a
roadway, accident could occur in this area. The best way to
control during evacuation by traffic control.

This assembly area has been gazette as medium risk as

because it is situated in the middle of lab.

This assembly are the safest place to assembly as it is in

the parking lot.

This assembly area are the safest place to assemble as it is

in the parking lot.

CALCULATING
DISTANCE AND
SUITABILITY OF
ASSEMBLY POINTS

PATHFINDER ANALYSIS

PROFILES OF OCCUPANTS

PROFILES OF OCCUPANTS
Default

Slow pace

Characteristic

Description

Characteristic

Description

Speed occupants

1.19 m/s

Speed occupants

Log speed 0.5 1.19 m/s

Standard movement

Standard normal

Standard movement

Standard normal

Shoulder Width

45.48 cm in average

Shoulder Width

44 48 cm in average

Movement

Use stairs and find any nearest

Movement

Use stairs and find any nearest

exit
Average height

1.8 m

Acceleration time

1.1 s

Slow factor

0.1

exit
Average height

1.8 m

Acceleration time

0.8 s

Slow factor

0.1

Reduction factor

U = 0.7 S = 0.1

RESULTS OF ANALYSIS
- Analysis done with 450
occupants.
- Design of the building
are approximately same
with the actual design
with standard deviation
of 1.8%.
- Results are 6.23
Minutes = 373.8
Seconds

SIMULATION VIDEO

ANALYSIS FLOW OF
OCCUPANTS
Accident can
happen in this
critical time

1st phase : 0 50 seconds

- Room compact as
occupants increase
2nd Phase : 50 100
seconds
- Time critical
- Accident could happen
3rd phase : 100 200
Seconds
- Rehabilitation time
- Major occupants able to
evacuate
4th phase : 200 end
Seconds
- All Occupants manage
to
escape

ANALYSIS IN MEANS OF
EGRESS

Accident can
happen in this
critical time

1st phase : 0 50 seconds

- Exit staircase compact
as occupants increase
2nd Phase : 50 100
seconds
- Time critical
- Accident could happen
3rd phase : 100 200
Seconds
- Rehabilitation time
- Major occupants able to
evacuate
4th phase : 200 350
Seconds
- All Occupants manage

WAY FORWARD FROM

ANALYSIS
By theory, the design of the building are safe for evacuation.
Unfortunately, by practical the occupants of the building are in high
risk. Therefore, Risk Assessment should be done in this building.

FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT

-LIKELIHOOD SCALE
Scale

Description

Rare

Unlikely

Possible

Likely

>5 people

4 people

3 people

2 people

1 people

3 minutes

4 minutes

4.5 minutes

5 minutes

5.5 minutes

Unlikely happen

Possible happen

Likely happen

Not working

Less skill

Average skills

Know little bit

Do not know

Almost

Certain

Fall from stair

during evacuation of
building
Time evacuation
Firefighting
equipment working

Predictable will
not happen

Knowledge of
occupant using
firefighting
equipment

Fully skills

FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT

-CONSEQUENCE SCALE
Scale

Description

Insignificant

Minor

Moderate

Major

Catasthropic

Injury + Slow down

Injury + death + Slow

evacuation time

down evacuation time

Fall from stair

during evacuation of

Smooth evacuation

Panic

Slow down evacuation time

building
Injury + Shortness of
Time evacuation

People safe

Fainting

Shortness of breath

Death
breath

Firefighting
Smooth evacuation

Properties damage + extend

Properties damage +

Properties damage +

time for evacuation

injury

death

Properties damage + extend

Properties damage +

Properties damage +

time for evacuation

injury

death

Properties damage

equipment working

Knowledge of
occupant using
Smooth evacuation
firefighting

equipment

Properties damage

FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT

-RISK MATRIX
For grading risk, the scores obtained from the Table 3 Risk Matrix are assign
Catasthrop
Insignificant

Minor

Moderate

Major

Scale

ic
1

grades as follows:
1-2

: Low Risk Standard Operating Procedures

to handle the risk;

Almost
5

10

15

20

25

3-4

: Moderate Risk Monitor and review;

Likely

12

16

20

5 - 12

: High Risk Attention Required; and

Possible

12

15

15 - 25

: Extreme Risk Attention, time and

Unlikely

10

Rare

Certain

resources required.
Acceptability:
Score 1 - 4

: Acceptable Risk; and

Score 5 - 25

: Unacceptable Risk.

QUESTIONNAIRE ON
FIRE SAFETY
AWARENESS

QUESTIONNAIRE
BACKGROUND
Questionnaire based from Sikap Dan Tindakbalas Penghuni
Bangunan Dalam Menghadapi Situasi Kebakaran Kajian Kes : Menara
Ansar, Johor Bahru by Nawal Bt. Hj Mohd Khudzairi

3 parts in the questionnaire :

a)
b)
c)

Background of the respondent

Awareness & understanding on fire prevention system in the building
Criteria of fire prevention system in the building

TARGET OF QUESTIONNAIRE
Respondent
population

Number of
questionnaire
distributed

Number of
questionnaire that
been returned

350

110

100

Percentage (%)

25

PART A : ANALYSIS OF
RESPONDENT BACKGROUND
Experience been in the building
80

Majority are 1-5 years

73%

70

60

Majority are from student and

staff

50
40
30
20

20%
7%

10
0
< 1 year

1- 5 years

5-10 years

0%
>10 years

Aim : To get well blended

information on fire safety

PART B: AWARENESS AND

UNDERSTANDING ABOUT THE
FIRE SAFETY IN FACULTY
ENGINEERING
The
effectiveness
of fire alarm in
the building

The training of
"fire drill"
organized by
the building
management

Briefing of fire
safety to the
respondent

Part B

PART B.1 : ANALYSIS OF THE

EFFECTIVENESS OF FIRE
ALARM IN THE BUILDING
The effectiveness of fire alarm in the building
90
80

Percentage (%)

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

2 times of
Hear a fire alarm

hearing the fire

alarm for past 2
years

Series1

61

39.3

Did not know

1 time hearing

Fire alarm in the

cause of fire

false alarm in 2

building is not

alarm

years

working well

36.1

81

37

Findings :
1. Respondent didnt alert fire
alarm
2. Respondent lack of
awareness on fire alarm
3. Fire alarm are not tested
regularly.

PART B.2 : ANALYSIS OF THE

TRAINING OF FIRE DRILL"
ORGANIZED BY THE BUILDING
MANAGEMENT.
The training of "fire drill" organized by the
building management.
80
70
60
50

65.9

66.7

56

40

45.4

30

31.8

20

Series1

10

0
never

Only 1 time

Not sure who

experience fire involved in fire organize fire

drill training

drill

drill

directly

do not know

evacuate from what happpen

the building
when hearing
fire alarm

Findings :
1. Majority of respondent
never experience fire drill
training
2. Lack of awareness among
respondent who are really
in charge on fire drill

PART B.3 : ANALYSIS OF

BRIEFING OF FIRE SAFETY
TO THE RESPONDENT
Briefing of fire safety to the respondent
70
65.8

60
57.9

50

51

40
30

38

35.2

35.2

20

Series1

10
0
Receive

Receive fire

External

seldom

briefing of

safety

consultant

recive

safety

fire safety

fire safety

brochure

give the fire

briefing

briefing

from

elsewhere

television

safety
briefing

receive fire knowing the

Findings :
1. Majority of respondent did
not aware on fire safety
briefing in Faculty
Engineering
2. Majority of respondent does
not receive the importance
of fire safety in faculty.

ANALYSIS OF AWARENESS
ON FIREFIGHTING
EQUIPMENT
Awarness on fire fighting equipment

100
90
80

Findings :
1. Majority does not know
how to use fire extinguisher

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

No
Yes

PART C : THE CRITERIA OF

FIREFIGHTING SYSTEM IN
OFFICE BUILDING

There are several point need to focus in enhancing the

fire fighting system in the building which are:
1.
Requirements of fire safety plan
2.
Effectiveness of fire alarm system
3.
Awareness of the importance of fire safety plan and
devices.
From those criteria, there are 3 aspect been observe in
this part:
1Spreading information aspect
2Effective communication devices aspect
3Maintenance aspect

PART C.1 : SPREADING

INFORMATION ASPECT
Spreading Information
strongly disagree

Disagree

No opinion

Agree

Strongly agree

58%
51%

35%
25%
13%
1%

3%

Create more systematic fire

emergency plan

12%
1%

1%

Spreading
the information
Spreading
information of
of using
fire
firesafety
fighting
device
by
brochures
devices by brochures

Demand for
systematic fire
emergency plan
Information of
fire safety should
be spread well

EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION
DEVICES
Axis Title

Effective communication devices

120.0%
100.0%
80.0%
60.0%
40.0%
20.0%
0.0%

Training
frequent
Fire drill Briefing on

Teacing

should be fire safety manual of

done more

from

frequently external

fire
fighting

Briefing on
fire safety

as trainingconsultants equipment
and
experience.
Strongly Agree

23.9%

26.1%

29.3%

Agree

47.8%

45.7%

53.3%

No opinion

21.7%

19.6%

10.9%

Disagree

2.2%

4.3%

0.0%

Strongly disagree

4.3%

4.3%

6.5%

Teaching
manual

MAINTENANCE OF
FIREFIGHTING DEVICE
Maintenance

120.0%

100.0%
52.2%

56.5%

80.0%
Strongly agree
Agree

60.0%

No opinion
Disagree

40.0%

Strongly disagree

37.0%

34.8%

20.0%

0.0%

4.3%

6.5%
1.1%

7.6%

Maintenance of fire fighting device

Routine inspection should be

should be done regularly

conducted by management

CONCLUSION

CONCLUSION
Lack of awareness
of fire safety
among occupants

Fire Drill should

be done annually
to ensure
occupants know
on how to
evacuate.

Management
should ensure
every Fire safety
devices works well

THANK YOU FOR

EVERYTHING!!!