BFS 201127 With Amendments Up To BFS 201312

The Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and
Planning’s general recommendations on the analytical

design of a building’s fire protection, BBRAD
BFS 2011:27 with amendments up to BFS 2013:12
The following translation is for informative purposes only.

The legally binding text is found in the Boverket’s Code of Statutes (www.boverket.se).
1 Introduction
General recommendation
These are the general recommendations for
– Chapter 8, Article 9, and Chapter 10, Article 6 of the planning and building act (2010:900),
PBA,
– Chapter 3, Article 8 of the planning and building ordinance (2011:338), PBO, and
– Section 5 of The Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning’s Building
Regulations (2011:6) – mandatory provisions and general recommendations, BBR.
The general recommendations regarding the application of the mandatory provisions in the
abovementioned statutes indicate how someone can or should act in order to comply with the
requirements of the mandatory provisions
The general recommendations may also contain particular information for the purpose of
clarification or of an editorial nature.
The general recommendations are preceded by the words “General recommendation” and are
printed using smaller, indented text.
1.1 Scope
The general recommendations in this statute can be applied to verify analytical design pursuant to
BBR Section 5:112. Verification through analytical design includes the mandatory provisions that
are not met through prescriptive design. The verification should give particular attention to the
building’s fire protection in its overall perspective.
Applicable parts of this statute can be applied to verify the fire protection during alterations to
buildings pursuant to BBR Section 5:8.
Applicable parts of this statute can be applied to verify a building’s load-bearing capacity in
case of fire according to natural fire models or when deviating from the general recommendations
in Section C, Chapter 1.1.2 in The Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning’s
mandatory provisions and general recommendations (2011:10) on the application of European
construction standards (Eurocodes), EKS.
2 Design process
Analytical design should contain a description of the scope of the analysis, how it will be
undertaken, and what is considered satisfactory fire safety.
Analytical design for fire protection of buildings should include the following stages:
– Identification of the need for verification.
– Verification of satisfactory fire safety.
– Verification check.
Consolidated version (full text) 1 (14)

The Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning’s general recommendations on
the analytical design of a building’s fire protection, BBRAD
Consolidated version (full text)
2.1 Identification of need for verification

When identifying the need for verification the deviation from prescriptive design should be
clarified so that it is clear which parts of the building’s fire protection that are affected. Table 1 can
be used as a tool. Deviations from the general recommendations of BBR Section 5:2 should be
considered in relation to relevant requirements of BBR Section 5:3-5:7.
Any deviations from the general recommendations for load-bearing capacity in case of fire in
accordance with Section C, Chapter 1.1.2 in EKS should be identified.
Table 1 Matrix for identifying deviations from prescriptive design (PD)
Fire protection element Deviations from

prescriptive design
Deviation Addition
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
5:2 Fire resistance classes and
other conditions
5:3 Ability to escape in case of fire
5:4 Protection against the outbreak
of fire
5:5 Protection against the
development and spread of fire
and smoke in buildings
5:6 Protection against the spread of
fire between buildings
5:7 Possibility of rescue responses
Section Load-bearing capacity in case of
C, Ch. fire
1.1.2 in
EKS
2.2 Verification
The verification should include a hazard identification in order to identify relevant scenarios that
stress the building’s fire protection. These scenarios should be chosen based on the level of risk for
each scenario, i.e. the probability that the scenario occurs and consequence of the scenario.
The developer should demonstrate how the requirement in each mandatory provision is met
based on the intended use. Particular attention should be given to how the requirement can be
maintained during the building’s economically reasonable working life.
If several simultaneous alternative solutions are implemented, an assessment of the robustness
of the building’s overall fire protection should be undertaken. Additional scenarios should
therefore be considered, in addition to those presented in each section, in order to assess the
robustness of the building’s overall fire protection. The assessment can be a part of the sensitivity
analysis.
2.2.1 Verification through qualitative assessment

Limited deviations refers to a minor effect on the fire safety and that the uncertainties with the
chosen design are small. The starting point for qualitative assessment should be the hazard
identification that the analytical design is based upon.
Verification through qualitative assessment can be based upon logical reasoning, statistics,
proven solutions, testing, object specific tests, simple calculations, etc. Verification based on
previous experiences should be checked with regards to changes in risks and conditions over time.
2 (14) Consolidated version (full text)

2.2.2 Verification through scenario analysis

Verification through scenario analysis should be based on one or multiple scenarios that test the
building’s fire protection. Scenario selection should be based on the hazard identification while
allowing for varying conditions and stresses. Required fire scenarios should be identified and
justified so that they represent a worst credible stress. All design scenarios should comply with the
applicable acceptance criteria. Verification through scenario analysis can be based on the methods
and acceptance criteria that are specified in sections 3-5.
Verification through scenario analysis should include a sensitivity analysis to identify variables
with significant effect on the level of safety. Such variables should be chosen conservatively.
Variables that can be included in a sensitivity analysis include heat release rate, flame temperature,
occupant walking speed, and occupant distribution amongst exits. The variables specified in the
general recommendations in sections 3-5 are normally not required to be assessed in terms of
sensitivity.
The result of the sensitivity analysis should be included in an assessment to determine if the
proposed fire safety design is satisfactory.
2.2.3 Verification through quantitative risk analysis

Verification through quantitative risk analysis should be based on distributions of applicable
variables. The distributions of these variables should reflect the conditions that can be expected
during the building’s economically reasonable working life.
Verification through quantitative risk analysis should include a sensitivity analysis to identify
variables with significant effect on the level of safety. Such variables should be chosen
conservatively. An uncertainty analysis may be included in the sensitivity analysis to study such
variables in detail.
The result of the sensitivity analysis should be considered when assessing satisfactory fire
safety of the chosen design. Variables that can be included in a sensitivity analysis include heat
release rate, the reliability of technical systems, occupant walking speed, and occupant distribution
amongst exits.
The results of a quantitative risk analysis can for example be presented as individual risk or
societal risk.
2.3 Satisfactory fire safety
2.3.1 General
The fire protection can be verified through a comparison with the safety level given using
prescriptive design for a reference building. Alternatively, the fire protection design can be
verified using the acceptance criteria that are specified in these general recommendations.
The reference building should be an equivalent building meeting prescriptive design
requirements, e.g. in terms of building class, occupancy class, fire load, number of levels, and
number of occupants allowed in the building.
For a qualitative assessment, a comparison with a reference building according to prescriptive
design should constitute the level of satisfactory fire safety. A scenario analysis should consider
the acceptance criteria specified in these general recommendations when assessing a satisfactory
level of fire safety.
A quantitative risk analysis should consider either a reference building according to prescriptive
design or the acceptance criteria specified in these general recommendations when assessing a
satisfactory level of fire safety.

2.3.2 Building class Br0

The building design shall be verified against the performance requirements specified in BBR. The
fire protection should be evaluated in an overall assessment based on the risk profile of the
building.
For buildings with building class Br0, the general recommendations in BBR Section 5 can only
be used as a reference to a limited extent. Limited extent refers to, for example, fire protection
related only to separate rooms, fire compartments or components. At a minimum the fire
protection design should be equivalent to the corresponding building class, for example building
class Br1 for buildings with three or more storeys, or building class Br2 for buildings with a single
story and places of assembly in occupancy class 2B or 2C.
The acceptance criteria specified in these general recommendations can be used to determine a
satisfactory level of fire safety.
The following aspects should be given special consideration
– if external fire-fighting responses are not possible,
– if internal rescue responses can be complicated,
– if the anticipated consequence is great,
– if the evacuation process can be associated with significant difficulties.
3 Ability to escape in case of fire
3.1 Analysis method

Assessing the ability to escape in case of fire should be based upon a comparison of the evacuation
time and the time when untenable conditions occur. The evacuation time should include awareness
time, pre-movement time, and travel time. Appropriate occupant behaviour should be included
when choosing the conditions of the analysis, based on the actual occupancy and the scenarios in
the hazard identification. The risk assessment can therefore be used to identify so called
evacuation scenarios.
The hazard identification is expected to include that fires may occur in various locations in a
space, although not necessarily at the same time. . The analysis should also consider different
potential conditions for the evacuation, e.g. a high number of occupants with impaired mobility or
orientation capacity, or children.
The analysis should include effects of the design fire impacting the evacuation process. As an
example, the evacuation process should be affected by the failure of technical systems in required
fire scenario 3, and that the design fire location can cause varying occupant distributions amongst
the exits.
Analysis of evacuation from buildings should show that the available safe egress time is longer
than the evacuation time for all applicable scenarios.
Expected occupant behaviour should be considered for the actual occupancy.
The walking distance to the nearest escape route should not exceed 80 m.
3.2 Evacuation process
3.2.1 Occupant load

The verification of the ability to escape in case of fire should be based on the maximum number of
people likely to be in the premises. Table 5:333 in BBR can be used to estimate the maximum
number of people in a building if it is not known. Buildings intended to be used for multiple
purposes should, in addition to the main occupancy, also consider other relevant occupancies when
determining the occupant load.

The evacuation assessment should consider that some of the occupants may have impaired
mobility or orientation capacity. Public buildings should be designed based on the assumption that
one percent of the occupants might be people with impaired mobility or orientation capacity.
3.2.2 Awareness time

The awareness time for people that see a fire should not be less than 30 s. If the building is
provided with an evacuation alarm, the awareness time for people not able to see the fire can be
taken as the time when the evacuation alarm is activated.
If delayed activation of the evacuation alarm is used, it is expected that appropriately trained
personnel are available in the building. The time for delayed activation of the evacuation alarm
should be included in the awareness time unless otherwise demonstrated.
3.2.3 Pre-movement time

Table 2 Proposed pre-movement times for some occupancies
Occupancy Person sees the fire Pre-movement

time
Public, school, office, Yes 1 minute
shopping centre, shop
Shopping centre, no alarm No 4 minutes
Shopping centre, bells or No 3,5 minutes
sirens
Shopping centre, simple No 2 minutes
spoken announcement
Shopping centre, No 1 minute
informative spoken
announcement
Minor premises with No 1 minute
standard alarm in the
premises, small cinema,
shop, church
Hospital1, personnel No 2 minutes
available, bells or sirens
Hospital1, personnel No 1 minute
available, alarm and text
message
Night club, personnel2 No 1–1,5 minutes
Night club, customers2 No 3–5 minutes
1
Refers to hospital wards that are easily surveyable (simple corridor).
2
Depends on the type of alarm and the internal safety organisation.
Table 2 uses the terms simple spoken announcement and an informative spoken announcement.
For example, a simple spoken announcement refers to “A technical fault has occurred in the
building. Please exit the building.” An informative spoken announcement should inform people in
the building of the event and what actions they are expected to take.
3.2.4 Travel time

An assessment of the ability to escape in case of fire should contain an estimation of occupant
distribution within the building and amongst the exits.

Occupant walking speeds, for varying conditions, can be chosen from Tables 3 or 4. People
with impaired mobility or orientation capacity can be assumed to travel with the speeds and flows
specified in Tables 3 and 4 multiplied by 2/3.
Table 3 Walking speed and flow capacity for people moving independently of other
people
Connection Walking speed Minimum width Flow capacity

1
Horizontal 1,5 m/s 0,9 m

Ascending stair 0,6 m/s 0,9 m
Descending stair 0,75 m/s 0,9 m
2
3
Door - 0,8 m
1
Escape routes serving more than 150 occupants should have a minimum clear width of 1,20 m.
2
The flow should be calculated using the effective width of the stair, i.e. the total stair width reduced by
0,3 m. The specified value refers to stairs with an incline in the range 26°–32°.
3
The flow for doors that occupants are familiar with can be taken as 1,1 p/sm. For other situations 0,75
p/sm should be applied.
Table 4 Walking speed and flow capacity for high occupant load factors and people
moving in groups. High occupant load factors refer to no more than
2 occupants per m2
Connection Walking speed Minimum width Flow capacity

1
Horizontal 0,6 m/s 0,9 m 1,2 p/sm

Ascending stair 0,5 m/s 0,9 m
Descending stair 0,5 m/s 0,9 m 1 p/sm
2
3
Door - 0,8 m
1 Escape routes serving more than 150 occupants should have a minimum clear width of 1,20 m.
2 The flow should be calculated using the effective with of the stair, i.e. the total stair width reduced by
0,3 m. The specified flow refers to stairs with an incline of 26°–32°.
3 The flow for doors that occupants are familiar with can be taken as 1,1 p/sm. For other situations 0,75
p/sm should be applied.
Travel time (s) from a space can be calculated with the following equation
where l is the longest walking distance (m), v is the applicable walking speed (m/s), n is the
number of people passing through a door, b is the door width (m), and f is the flow capacity
through the door.
Short queuing times should be sought where there is a risk for high occupant load factors,
which can be relevant for occupancy classes 2B and 2C. The queuing time should be limited to no
more than eight minutes. Factors that affect the risk of personal injuries should be considered
when assessing the maximum allowable queuing time.
3.3 Required fire scenarios

The scenarios may be required to be repeated for various fire locations in complex buildings where
the worst credible fire location cannot be predicted. Examples of when this may be relevant are
buildings and spaces with varying ceiling heights, buildings with multiple open and connected
levels, and underground buildings with few openings to the outside. A hazard identification can
provide support for this work.

3.3.1 Required fire scenario 1

Fire scenario 1 is characterized by a severe fire progression with rapid growth rate and a high heat
release rate, a worst credible scenario. All technical fire protection systems can be assumed to
perform as intended by the design and the effects of these can be credited.
The fire progression should be modelled in accordance with the following conditions and
specifications:
– Fire progress (growth rate, maximum heat release rate and production of species) are chosen
pursuant to Tables 5 and 6.
– Automatic fire suppression systems can affect the design fire in accordance with the section
regarding Effects of automatic fire suppression systems.

If the building is not provided with a total coverage automatic fire and evacuation alarm, the
analysis should include fire scenario 2.
Fire scenario 2 is characterized by a fire in a normally unoccupied space adjacent to a space
with a large number of people. All technical fire protection systems can be assumed to perform as
intended by the design and the effects of these can be credited.
specifications:
pursuant to Tables 5 and 6.
regarding Effects of automatic fire suppression systems.

Fire scenario 3 is characterized by a fire progression that can be seen as a less severe stress on the
building’s fire protection, occurring simultaneously as each technical fire protection system is
rendered ineffective. The following technical fire protection systems should be rendered
ineffective one by one in required fire scenario 3:
– Automatic fire and evacuation alarms.
– Automatic fire suppression systems.
– Automatic smoke ventilation or any other system limiting the spread of fire and smoke.
– Lifts used for evacuation.
– Consequential failures should be considered if the event can disable multiple systems, e.g.
power failures or signal errors.
specifications:
in accordance with Tables 5 and 6.
regarding Effects of automatic fire suppression systems, except for when the fire suppression
system itself is rendered ineffective.
3.3.4 Fire progress

The heat release rate (kW) should be calculated in accordance with the equation below and can,
within the room of fire origin, be limited by the ventilation conditions.
Heat release rate = αt2
α – growth rate, kW/s2
t - time, s

Design values in the fire scenarios should not be less than those specified in Table 5 for the
early stages of the fire progression.
Table 5 Design fire growth rate, heat release rate, and heat of combustion for the
early stages of the fire progression
Occupancy Growth rate, Heat release Heat of

kW/s2 rate, MW combustion,
MJ/kg
Offices and 0,012 5,0 16
schools
Dwellings, 0,047 5,0 20
hotels and
healthcare
facilities
Places of 0,047 10,0 20
assembly
All occupancies According to row 2,0 20
for required fire 1–3
scenario 3
Design values for the fire scenarios should not be less than those specified in Table 6 for the
early stages of the fire progression. These characteristics are applicable if well ventilated
combustion can be expected.
Table 6 Design values for the production of soot and species for the early stages of
the fire progression
Occupancy Soot CO-production CO2-production

production
Fire scenarios 1 0,10 g/g 0,10 g/g 2,5 g/g
and 2
Fire scenario 3 0,06 g/g 0,06 g/g 2,5 g/g
The values in Table 6 for required fire scenario 3 can also be used for required fire scenarios 1
and 2 if an automatic water sprinkler system is not provided within the space.
If the combustion takes place under ventilation-controlled conditions, this should be considered
when selecting the values for production of soot, CO and CO2.
3.3.5 Effects of automatic fire suppression systems

The effects of an automatic fire suppression system can be applied as stated below. Other types of
fire suppression systems that are not mentioned below should be assessed specifically.
If the heat release rate is no more than 5,0 MW on activation of an automatic water sprinkler
system or residential sprinklers, the heat release rate can be reduced as follows:
– After sprinkler activation the heat release rate is kept constant for 1 minute.
– Thereafter the heat release rate is reduced to 1/3 of the heat release rate at the time of
sprinkler activation. This reduction takes place during the subsequent minute.
– The heat release rate is then kept constant at that level.
If the heat release rate exceeds 5,0 MW on sprinkler activation, the heat release rate should be
kept constant after sprinkler activation.
Gas extinguishing systems designed pursuant to applicable standards can be assumed to reduce
the heat release rate completely shortly after the extinguishing concentration has been reached.

3.4 Tenable conditions

Table 7 demonstrates acceptable levels of tenable conditions in case of fire for verification of safe
evacuation. Criteria 1 or 2 as well as 3-5 should be met to demonstrate acceptable levels. This
means that evacuation through smoke can be accepted in some cases. Visibility should be
calculated to exit signs, walls or equivalent features.
Table 7 Tenability condition levels for analysis of safe evacuation
Criteria Level
1. Smoke layer above floor level minimum 1,6 + (ceiling height (m) x
0,1)
2. Visibility, 2,0 m above floor level 10,0 m in spaces > 100 m2
5,0 m in spaces ≤ 100 m2. This
criteria can also be applied where
queuing occurs in the early stages at
the location where the queue is
formed.
3. Thermal radiation/radiant heat maximum 2,5 kW/m2, or a brief
2
dosage dosage of maximum 10 kW/m
combined with maximum 60 kJ/m2 in
addition to the energy from a thermal
radiation of 1 kW/m2
4. Temperature maximum 80 °C
5. Toxicity, 2,0 m above floor level Carbon monoxide concentration (CO)
< 2 000 ppm
Carbon dioxide concentration (CO2) <
5%
Oxygen concentration (O2) > 15 %
(BFS 2012:13).
3.5 Special situations
3.5.1 Evacuation lift

If an evacuation lift is installed in the building, the ability to escape and the lift design should be
verified through analytical design.
Evacuation lifts should be regarded as a complement to the stairs used for evacuation. To replace
a stair with evacuation via lifts the analysis should include factors such as prolonged evacuation
time and evacuation capacity.
Exit signs should be designed for the intended use of the evacuation lifts.
The following issues and factors should particularly be analysed:
– the building evacuation strategy and evacuation time (alternative escape routes and any
zoned evacuation),
– control systems, measures related to maintenance and that the system function is maintained
during the building’s economically reasonable working life,
– how the lift function is ensured during the time required for evacuation,
– requirements for accessibility,
– redundancy of systems vital for the lift function (such as power supply and incoming
signals),
– protection against fire and smoke for people evacuating while waiting for the lift, in the lift
and on the route from the lift to a place in the open,
– protection of the lift machinery against fire,
– impact from any water intrusion to the lift shaft,
– the risk of smoke- and thermal effects on sensitive components,

– possible effects of cold air temperature on sensitive components,

– control sequences at detection,
– means of communication (such as alarm buttons and emergency telephones),
– waiting times for people evacuating,
– possible behaviour of people evacuating or other people in the building that may lead to
delayed evacuation or unnecessary risk-taking,
– possibility to activate and control the lift function and how activation and control is handled.
4 Protection against the development and spread of fire and smoke in buildings
4.1 Verification of separation capability between fire compartments
4.1.1 Analysis method

In the analysis of separation capability for structural elements, the maximum temperature and the
maximum level of thermal radiation on the side not exposed to fire (the opposite side) should not
be higher than acceptable levels for all applicable scenarios
4.1.2 Required fire scenarios

Required fire scenarios should be identified and justified so that they represent a worst credible
stress of the building’s fire protection. The size of fire compartments, its openings, penetrations
and similar should be taken into consideration.
4.1.2.1 Design fire characteristics

Separation capability for fire compartment separating structural elements can be verified by
natural fire models pursuant to SS-EN 1991-1-2, Annex A. The design should be for a fully
developed fire unless otherwise demonstrated, also see Section C, chapter 1.1.2 in EKS. The
design fire load should be determined in accordance with The Swedish National Board of
Housing, Building and Planning’s general recommendations on fire load, BBRBE.
For separating structures that according to prescriptive design is designed in fire resistance class
EI 60 or higher, the separation capability should be decided for full fire progression, including the
decay phase. For lower fire resistance classes, part of full fire progression is applicable for the time
that the class number indicates, excluding the decay phase. For structural elements that according
to prescriptive design is designed in class EI 90 or higher, the design fire load should be increased
by 50 %. (BFS 2013:12).
4.1.2.2 Effects of automatic fire suppression systems

The effects of automatic fire suppression systems pursuant to BBR 5:252 can be taken into account
by reducing the design fire load to 60 % of its original value.
4.1.3 Acceptance criteria

When designing separating structures using natural fire models, the temperature on the side of the
structural element not exposed to fire should not be higher than 200 °C as an average or 240 °C at
any point.
Integrity (E) of separating structure should be designed in the same manner as corresponding
fire resistance class pursuant to BBR. The assessment of integrity should give particular
consideration that structural elements can be deformed or damaged in case of fire.

Fire resistance class EI can be exchanged for class E if the safety for people evacuating is high
and the probability of fire spread does not increase. The requirement is satisfied if doors, walls and
similar are arranged so that the distance to people evacuating or to combustible material is long
enough so that the thermal radiation does not exceed 2,5 kW/m2. Higher thermal radiation levels
can be acceptable if the time aspects for evacuation and ignition are taken into consideration.
4.2 Fire protection in ventilation systems
4.2.1 Analysis method

Analytical design of the fire protection in a building’s ventilation system can be implemented with
the following methods:
– Flow control in case of fire, where fans or fans in combination with other safety solutions are
used to limit the amount of smoke that spread to other fire compartments in the building.
– Pressure relief of the fire room activated at an early stage by e.g. an automatic fire alarm.
Activation should ensure that the fire room is depressurized so that the risk of fire and smoke
spread to other fire compartments is limited.
– Pressure relief of ventilation ducts activated in an early stage by e.g. an automatic fire alarm.
Activation should ensure that ventilation ducts are depressurized so that the risk of fire and smoke
spread to other fire compartments is limited. Pressure relief of ventilation ducts should not be
implemented for spaces in protection level 1.
Design using the methods above require verification by calculations or testing. Consideration
should be given to applicable pressure drops and buoyancy in vertical ducts due to smoke with
high temperature.
4.2.2 Required fire scenarios

stress of the building’s fire protection at different times during a fire progression. Required fire
scenarios should include various configurations of open and closed windows in the building
envelope and any interactions between air flows through different parts of the ventilation system,
e.g. cooker hoods.
4.2.2.1 Design fire characteristics

The fire growth, the geometry and the ventilation conditions of the fire room should be taken into
consideration when determining the fire progression and the fire flow.
– The fire growth rate should correspond to 0,047 kW/s2 in the early stages of the fire
progression unless otherwise demonstrated.
– The fire flow can be limited by a maximum pressure increase that can be assumed to be 1500
Pa unless otherwise demonstrated.
– In the early stages of fire progression, the design smoke temperature can be assumed to be a
maximum of 350°C.
– The smoke temperature in the later stages of fire progression, i.e. when flashover has
occurred, can be decided by natural fire models pursuant to SS-EN 1991-1-2, Annex A or
equivalent. The design fire load should be determined in accordance with The Swedish National
Board of Housing, Building and Planning’s general recommendations on fire load, BBRBE.
(BFS 2013:12).

4.2.2.2 Effects of automatic fire suppression systems

If the fire compartment is equipped with an automatic sprinkler system or residential sprinklers,
the smoke temperature can be assumed to be limited to the smoke temperature on sprinkler
activation.
4.2.3 Other conditions

Fans should be designed to deliver required flow at the applicable pressure differences and smoke
temperatures. Leakage through constructions, installations within the building and the building
envelope should be taken into consideration.
Pressure differences created by the ventilation system that may affect the possibility to open
doors during evacuation should be taken into consideration. This can also apply to individual
rooms within a fire compartment. Rules for doors are given in BBR Section 5:335.
4.2.4 Acceptance criteria for smoke spread in ventilation systems

Fire compartments containing escape routes or sleeping people, e.g. Vk3, Vk4, Vk5B and Vk5C,
should be assigned to protection level 1. Other fire compartments can be assigned to protection
level 2.
For fire compartments in protection level 1, acceptable limit of smoke spread should be 1 % of
the receiving fire compartment volume.
For fire compartments in protection level 2, acceptable limit of smoke spread should be 5 % of
the receiving fire compartment volume.
4.3 Special situations
4.3.1 Pressurisation of spaces

Pressurization can be used to provide protection against fire and smoke spread to spaces. SS-EN
12101-6 can be applied for verification of stair pressurization. As an alternative, the corresponding
method can be used to verify that pressurization of protected lobbies or other spaces provides
sufficient protection.
5 Protection against the spread of fire between buildings
5.1 Analysis method

Limitation of the risk of fire spread between buildings can e.g. be achieved if
– buildings are constructed at a sufficient distance from each other
– unprotected structural elements are limited in size,
– the ability to spread fire is limited for exposed surfaces, or
– the extent of fire is limited by fire resistant installations such as automatic fire suppression
systems.
In the analysis of the spread of fire between buildings, the maximum thermal radiation levels on
the exposed building should not be higher than acceptable levels for all applicable scenarios.

5.2 Required fire scenarios

stress of the building’s fire protection. The size of fire compartments, openings and placement of
adjacent buildings should be taken into consideration.
Emitted thermal radiation should be calculated for full fire progression in the fire compartment
that pose the highest risk for the spread of fire to adjacent building
5.2.1 Design fire characteristics

The design level of emitted thermal radiation from window areas can be based on a simplified
model with constant thermal radiation from the window areas pursuant to Table 8. The table is
valid provided that the façade material is designed in at least class A2-s1,d0 and is not expected to
emit any radiation.
Table 8 Thermal radiation levels for protection against the spread of fire between
buildings
Occupancy Thermal radiation level, kW/m2

Dwellings, offices, places of 84
assembly, open parking garages
Stores, industries, warehouses 168
SS-EN 1991-1-2 Annex B can be applied to determine fire progression and properties of flames
that burst out from windows. The design fire load should be determined in accordance with The
Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and Planning’s general recommendations on fire
load, BBRBE.
When deciding emitted thermal radiation, consideration should be given to whether the façade
can be expected to remain intact during the design fire progression. Surfaces that should be
included in the assessment are e.g. combustible façades, windows and other surfaces that can be
expected to emit thermal radiation. (BFS 2013:12).
5.2.2 Effects of automatic fire suppression systems

If the fire compartment is equipped with an automatic sprinkler system or residential sprinklers the
following reduction of the fire effects can be made
– emitted thermal radiation pursuant to Table 8 can be reduced by 50 % or
– the design fire load can be reduced to 60 % of its original value when applying SS-EN 1991-
1-2.
5.3 Acceptance criteria

Buildings should be designed so that the thermal radiation level towards adjacent building is below
15 kW/m2 for at least 30 minutes. Alternative levels of thermal radiation can be decided based on
the façade surface design and materials.

6 Documentation
6.1 Documentation
A description of buildings that are fully or partially designed using analytical design should be
reported in its entirety as a part of the fire protection documentation.
The documentation should at least contain the following parts
– deviations from prescriptive design,
– conducted hazard identification,
– design conditions and assumptions that the verification is based on,
– plans for operation and maintenance,
– description and justification of used methods and models,
– documentation of performed calculations to the extent that the calculation process can be
followed,
– deviations from the general recommendations in this statute and motives for these and
– conclusions based on the analytical verification.
6.2 Verification check

The inspection plan pursuant to Chapter 10, Article 6-8 of the planning and building act
(2010:900), PBA should contain the following check points:
– That all deviations from prescriptive design are verified.
– That design checks are carried out.
– That the design conditions are correct.
If calculations are used as a bases for scenario analysis or quantitative risk analysis, the
calculation accuracy should be confirmed by design check. Design check refers to control of
design conditions, building documents and calculations. This control should be undertaken by a
person not previously engaged in the project.
These general recommendations1 are effective from 1 January 2012.
These general recommendations2 are effective from 3 December 2012.
These general recommendations3 are effective from 1 July 2013.
1
BFS 2011:27.
2
BFS 2012:13.
3
BFS 2013:12.

BFS 201127 With Amendments Up To BFS 201312

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BFS 201127 With Amendments Up To BFS 201312

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Swedish National Board of Housing, Building and

Planning’s general recommendations on the analytical

The following translation is for informative purposes only.

Consolidated version (full text) 1 (14)

2.1 Identification of need for verification

Fire protection element Deviations from

2.2.1 Verification through qualitative assessment

2 (14) Consolidated version (full text)

2.2.2 Verification through scenario analysis

2.2.3 Verification through quantitative risk analysis

2.3 Satisfactory fire safety

Consolidated version (full text) 3 (14)

2.3.2 Building class Br0

3 Ability to escape in case of fire

3.1 Analysis method

3.2 Evacuation process

3.2.1 Occupant load

4 (14) Consolidated version (full text)

3.2.2 Awareness time

3.2.3 Pre-movement time

Occupancy Person sees the fire Pre-movement

3.2.4 Travel time

Consolidated version (full text) 5 (14)

Connection Walking speed Minimum width Flow capacity

Horizontal 1,5 m/s 0,9 m

Connection Walking speed Minimum width Flow capacity

Horizontal 0,6 m/s 0,9 m 1,2 p/sm

3.3 Required fire scenarios

6 (14) Consolidated version (full text)

3.3.1 Required fire scenario 1

3.3.2 Required fire scenario 2

3.3.3 Required fire scenario 3

3.3.4 Fire progress

Consolidated version (full text) 7 (14)

Occupancy Growth rate, Heat release Heat of

Occupancy Soot CO-production CO2-production

3.3.5 Effects of automatic fire suppression systems

8 (14) Consolidated version (full text)

3.4 Tenable conditions

3.5 Special situations

3.5.1 Evacuation lift

Consolidated version (full text) 9 (14)

– possible effects of cold air temperature on sensitive components,

4.1 Verification of separation capability between fire compartments

4.1.1 Analysis method

4.1.2 Required fire scenarios

4.1.2.1 Design fire characteristics

4.1.2.2 Effects of automatic fire suppression systems

4.1.3 Acceptance criteria

10 (14) Consolidated version (full text)

4.2 Fire protection in ventilation systems

4.2.1 Analysis method

4.2.2 Required fire scenarios

4.2.2.1 Design fire characteristics

Consolidated version (full text) 11 (14)

4.2.2.2 Effects of automatic fire suppression systems

4.2.3 Other conditions

4.2.4 Acceptance criteria for smoke spread in ventilation systems

4.3 Special situations

4.3.1 Pressurisation of spaces

5 Protection against the spread of fire between buildings

5.1 Analysis method