BFS 201127 With Amendments Up To BFS 201312
BFS 201127 With Amendments Up To BFS 201312
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
General recommendation
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
General recommendation
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.
2.2 Verification
General recommendation
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.
2.3.1 General
General recommendation
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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
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
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.
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).
4 Protection against the development and spread of fire and smoke in buildings
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.
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).
6 Documentation
6.1 Documentation
General recommendation
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.
1
BFS 2011:27.
2
BFS 2012:13.
3
BFS 2013:12.