The assessment of fire safety measures in

service risers

Dârmon R.1, Babota F.1

1
T echnical University of Cluj-Napoca (ROMANIA)
Ruxandra.Darmon@ccm.utlcuj.ro, florin.babota@ccm.utcluj.ro

Abstract
The service cupboards, located in communal areas of dwelling blocks of flats or student accommodation
facilities are a typical example of concealed spaces, where a fire could occur and develop. Requiring easy access
for maintenance, it is often the case that service riser cupboards are built on the main evacuation routes, within
the stairwells or in the common hallways. Therefore, the walls which separate the service area and the egress
paths are required to be fire rated so that in the event of a fire outbreak, all the building occupants should be
evacuated in safe conditions. This article purpose is to demonstrate that a proposed design solution meets the
standard fire regulations regarding the fire resistance of compartmentation walls, using performance based
design calculations.
Keywords: service riser cupboards, suppression system response time, fire resistance, ceiling jets.

1 Introduction
Any change in the system of the fire protection of a building will have an impact on the fire strategy.
After some refurbishment works being carried out for a student accommodation building, the walls which
separate the service riser cupboards and the stairwells have been replaced. The purpose of this paper is to assess
the level of fire resistance achieved by the new separation walls, which have not been certified by fire resistance
test evidence, taking into account the other, supplementary, fire protection measures installed in the building.
Based on the basic principles and calculation methods, the assessment method is an example of the application
of the simple engineering tools available in the fire safety literature in order to demonstrate compliance with the
regulations for fire separation walls.

2 Fire stategy

2.1 Riser cupboard wall construction

The student accommodation building is a nine storey lightweigth steel frame system, designed with two
staircases. Each staircase is destined to serve two clusters of 6 bedrooms. The access to the riser cupboards,
containing mechanical and electrical equipment, is from the main corridor. The walls separating the stairwells
and the service main risers are built as a structural system of 100 mm metal frame studs, with a mineral wool
insulation core, covered with two layers of cement plaster boards having the thickness of 9 mm and 18 mm
respectively.

2.2 Functional and safety requirements

According to the fire safety regulations, every building must be designed and constructed in such way
that in the event of a fire outbreak, the building load bearing capacity should not be affected for a certain period
of time, while all the occupants have been evacuated to a place of safety and any fire containment measures have
been initiated. All the compartimentation elements bounding the egress paths should be at least 30 minutes fire
resistent. The stairwells shafts are required to be 120 minutes fire rated [1], therefore the wall separating the
stairwells and the riser cupboards is required to provide 2 hours fire resistance from both sides.

2.3 Performance criteria

The people evacuation is usually considered safe when all of the egress paths are clear of smoke and
their structural integrity is maintaned for a sufficient period of time.

1
3 Calculation methodology

3.1 Assumptions
The service riser cupboards have a volume of 4.70m3 for the floors from 1 to 8 and approximately
3
5.20m at the lower levels. The amount of oxygen available for combustion would be limited in case of a fire
occurrence. For this analysis it will be assumed, in a pessimistic manner that a fire will develop with a medium
growth rate and with adequate ventilation to allow its growth. A sensitivity study is also carried out assuming a
slow growth rate. The heat release rate varies with the time sqared and the growth rate is given by the
assimptotic coefficient alpha [2,3].
Alpert [4,5] correlations for ceiling jets have been used to estimate the required fire size to activate the
temperature detectors. Assuming the maximum radius from the centre of the fire to a detector head, being 1,5m
and the ceiling height, h = 3,0m, one can calculate the ceiling jet smoke temperature and the velocity using the
following formulae:
2/3
5.38(𝑄̇ /𝑟)
𝑇𝑔 = (1)
ℎ

0.195 𝑄̇1/3 ℎ1/2

𝑈= (2)
𝑟 5/6
Where:
𝑇𝑔 is the maximum temperature of gases above ambient temperature [ºC]
𝑄̇ is the rate of heat released from the fire [kW]
𝑟 is the radial distance from the centre of the fire plume impiengement [m]
ℎ is the vertical distance between the fire source and the ceiling [m]
𝑈 is the gas velocity [m/s]

3.2 Suppression system response time

A localized gas suppression system is installed within each storey riser cupboard. The gas suppression
system is activated in a similar manner to a sprinkler system, having the response time index RTI = 50 [m s]1/2
and the activation temperature of detectors egual to 68°C. When the activation temperature is reached at the
detector head, the glass bulb breaks and the suppression media is released within the riser cupboard,
extinguishing the fire by the lack of oxygen. This type of suppression systems are considered to be effective in
small enclosed areas such as riser cupboards where the media is restrained by the walls within a smaller volume
than a room.
If the temperature rise, of the smoke and hot gasses above the fire, is plotted in time, it can be
determined the moment when the detector actuates, using the following expression [7]:
1
𝑑𝑇𝑑 𝑈 2 (𝑇𝑔 − 𝑇𝑑 )
= (3)
𝑑𝑇 𝑅𝑇𝐼
Where:
𝑇𝑑 is the detector temperature [ºC]
𝑈 is the instantaneous velocity of the fire gases [m/s]
𝑇𝑔 is the temperature of the fire gases [ºC]
RTI is the response time index [m1/2s1/2]

3.3 Maximum temperature from the ISO 834 standard curve

The principle of the fire resistance test method [6], is that an individual construction element as a slab or
a wall, exposed on one side to a fire following the ISO 834 fire curve [8], should maintain the loadbearing
capacity for a sufficient period of time, assessed as a fire resistance rating in minutes. The standard curve gives
the temperature variation in time as a logaritmic expression:

𝑇 = 345 lg(8𝑡 + 1) + 𝑇0 (4)

Where:
𝑇 is the hot gas temperature [ºC]
𝑡 is the time [minutes]
𝑇0 is the ambient temperature, assumed egual to 20 ºC.

2
 To satisfy the fire resistence requirents, the material around a steel-stud element should prevent the steel
from reaching 550ºC for the time required. Structural steel normally starts to lose loadbearing capacity around
temperatures in the region of 550ºC- 620ºC. Therefore, in order to assess the wall assembly resistance in case of
a fire, it can be acceptable to maintain the steel profiles, within the wall, below the critical temperature range.

3.4 Thermal analysis of the wall assembly

3.4.1 Heat transfer analysis
Modelling the heat transfer through the stud wall assembly became a common practice in the last years,
as an alternative method to the expensive full-scale fire resistence tests. In case of steel-stud walls, the failure is
expected to be due to the covering layers protecting the steel. Because the steel has a high thermal conductivity,
the effect of the steel studs to the heat transfer can be neglected [9]. Therefore, it may be assumed a uni
directional heat flow through the covering layers only, while modelling the heat transfer through the cross
section of the wall assembly.
Finite element method (FEM) is an approximate numerical method for calculating the behaviour of a
real structure under various conditions. The structure is approximated by a geometrical model, which is
subdivided into small “finite elements”, connected at nodes. FEM based software packages are used to calculate
the unknown values as temperatures or displacements at the nodes. The behaviour of the structure is then
approximated by the aggregate behaviour of all the small elements.
For the purpose of this analysis SAFIR [10] has been used to calculate the temperatures within the riser
cupboard wall. SAFIR is a finite element program, developed at the University of Liège (Belgium), which can
predict the temperature distribution inside the structural members.
The covering layers of the steel-studs have been modelled in SAFIR as shown in Fig.1. The wall has
been exposed to ISO 834 standard fire from the top side, corresponding to the inside of the riser cupboard. The
wall would lose its bearing capacity if the critical temperature is attained within the steel profiles. Therefore,
only the layers covering the steel profiles have been analysed.The thermal analysis with SAFIR has been carried
out for 900 seconds (15 minutes).

Fig. 1 SAFIR model for thermal analysis

3.4.2 Air properties at ambient conditions

The properties of air at standard temperature and pressure are taken as:
 Density: ρa = 1.204 kg/m3;
 Specific heat: cp = 1.005 kJ/kg-K;
 Ambient temperature: Ta = 293 K = 20˚C.
3.4.3 Thermal properties
The properties for the covering materials of the steel-stud composite wall structure, used for thermal
analysis, are shown in Table 1, below:

Table 1 Thermal properties of the materials used for the steel covering

Conductivity Density
Specific heat

3
 Material k capacity ρ
[W/mK] c [kg/m³]
[kJ/kgK]

Cement Particle Board [11] 0.23 1000 1200

Cement Particle Panel [12] 0.26 840 1300

4 Results
A fire occuring within the service riser cupboard will develop until the suppression system actuation.
Table 2 is a summary of the calculations results for the two possible fire scenarios considered here. It is shown
that the fire, in the worst case scenario, assumed to have a slow growth rate, can only develop for about 6
minutes, prior to the suppression media being released. If a medium growth rate it is assumed for fire, the heat
release rate is slightly higher, but the fire is detected after less than 3 minutes. In the last column of Table 2 it is
plotted the corresponding temperature on the ISO 834 fire curve at the time moments when the suppression
system goes off. If the riser wall was exposed to the standard fire curve, which would be the heating regime as in
a furnace fire test, the maximum fire temperatures, retrieved for each of the previously calculated suppression
response times are still below the the critical temperature range for unprotected steel.
Table 2 Fire size at the suppression system actuation

Time to detector Heat relese rate Temperature on ISO

actuation when the detectors 834 fire curve at the
Fire growth rate
actuate activation time
tact
[s] (min) 𝑸̇ TISO
[kW] [ºC]

Medium growth 168 (2.8 min) 331 492

Slow growth 304 (5.6 min) 271 578

The time-temperature curves for the medium growing fire and the slow growing fire are plotted in Fig.2
at the left and right side, respectively. The dashed lines show the the detector temperature rise in time.

Fig. 2 Temperature rise for medium and slow growing fires

Fig. 3 to Fig. 5 show the temperatures within the covering layers of the steel studs at different time
steps. It can be seen that the temperature at the bottom of layer remain close to ambient temperature even after
15 minutes of standard fire exposure at the surface layer. Therefore in the time period for which a slow growth

4
rate fire is considered to develop up until the gaseous suppression activates, the wall temperatures will be well
within tolerances with the plywood portion fixed to the steel supports remaining at little more than ambient
temperature both at this time and for a significant period thereafter.

Fig. 3 Temperatures within the steel covering panels after 160 sec of fire exposure

Fig. 4 Temperatures within the the steel covering panels after 400 sec of fire exposure

5
 Fig. 5 Temperatures within the the steel covering panels after 900 sec of fire exposure

5 Conclusion
It can be concluded that for the affected service riser cupboards the addition of gaseous suppression,
together with the thermal performance of the wall build-up will give a level of confidence that a fire in these
areas would not grow to such an extent that the integrity, insulation and loadbearing of the wall adjoining the
stairwells would be affected.

REFERENCES
[1] SR EN 1991-1-2/NA. (2006). Romanian Standards Association, Bucharest, Romania.
[2] Karlsson, B., Quintiere, J. (2000). Enclosure Fire Dynamics, CRC Press, Boca Raton London,
New York, Washington DC.
[3] NFPA 72. (1999) National Fire Alarm Code, Appendix B, Engineering guide for automatic fire
detection spacing.
[4] Alpert, R.L. (1972). Calculation of response time of ceiling-mounted fire detectors. Fire
Technology 8, pp. 181.
[5] Alpert, R.L. (2011). The fire induced ceiling-jet revisited. Proceedings of Fireseat at National
Museum of Scotland, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, pp. 1-21.
[6] ISO 834-10:2014. Fire resistance tests – Elements of building construction – Part 10: Specific
requirements to determine the contribution of applied fire protection materials to structural steel
elements.
[7] CIBSE Guide E: Fire safety engineering, The Chartered Institution of Building Services
Engineers London, Third edition May 2010, pp.136.
[8] ISO, ISO 834, (1999), Fire-resistance tests – Elements of building construction, International
Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland.
[9] Sultan, M.A. (1996). A model for predicting heat transfer through noninsulated unloaded steel-
stud gypsum board wall assemblies exposed to fire, Fire Technology, 32, pp.3.
[10] Franssen, J-M (2005). SAFIR: A thermal and structural program for modeling structures under
fire, Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 42, pp. 143-158.
[11] Kondur, V.K.R., Harmathy, T.Z. (2002). Properties of building materials, Chapter 10, SFPE
rd
Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, 3 Edition, National Fire Protection Association,
Quincy, Massachusetts.
[12] Insulation Shop Ltd. (2018).Thermal properties of Versapanel. Retrieved January 20, 2018 from
https://www.insulationshop.co/18mm_versapanel_cement_bonded_particle_board.html .