Course

Specifications
Valid as from the academic year 2016-2017

Advanced Fire Dynamics (E900305)

Course size (nominal values; actual values may depend on programme)

Credits 9.0 Study time 270 h Contact hrs 50.0 h
Course offerings and teaching methods in academic year 2018-2019
A (semester 2) English lecture 20.0 h
Lecturers in academic year 2018-2019
Johansson, Nils LUND01 lecturer-in-charge
Ingason, Haukur LUND01 co-lecturer
Nilsson, Daniel LUND01 co-lecturer
Svensson, Stefan LUND01 co-lecturer
van Hees, Patrick LUND01 co-lecturer
Offered in the following programmes in 2018-2019 crdts offering
International Master of Science in Fire Safety Engineering 9 A

Teaching languages
English
Keywords
Compartment fires, gas temperatures, vent flows, smoke filling, fire lab
Position of the course

Contents
•  Qualitative description of a fire sequence. Ignition, flame spreading. Various ways of
•  categorising a fire. The effect of the building on the fire.
•  Heat release rate. Mass burning rate and time-dependency of the heat release rate,
•  the order of magnitude of the heat release rate, the strengths and weaknesses of
•  various test methods, growth of alfa-t2, the effect of the enclosure on the heat
•  release rate, extraction of power curves.
•  Fire plumes and flames. Froude number, mean flame height, flame-height
•  correlations, various profiles in a plume, ideal plumes, strong and weak plumes,
•  plume correlations, ceiling jets, special issues to be considered in the design
•  process, quasi-stationary conditions, selecting a plume model.
•  Pressure profiles. Background on air-flow in buildings. Bernoulli's equation.
•  Computing pressure, rate and mass air-flow through openings.
•  Gas temperatures. Energy balance, rate of heat transfer, correlations for computing
•  gas temperatures. Fully-developed fires, ISO 834, temperature calculation.
•  Heat transfer. Conduction, convection, and radiation. Visibility factors, emissivity.
•  Smoke filling. Pressure build-up in the fire enclosure. Transient smoke filling models.
•  Stationary models for control of combustion gases. Various fire safety engineering
•  systems for handling and control of combustion gases. Continuity equations.
•  Combustion products. Equivalency ratios. Soot production. Visibility. How soot
•  particles are formed. CO, CO2.
•  Computer modelling. Two-zone models, sub-models for zone models. Model
•  constraints.
•  Fire lab. Enclosure fire dynamic experiment, validity and reliability of experiments.
Initial competences
Prerequisites: Mathematics, Calculus in One Variable. Recommended qualifications:
Thermodynamics and Fluid Mechanics, Basic Course.
Final competences

(Approved) 1
 The overriding aim of the course is that, after taking the course, the students will
understand the various stages that a fire in a building goes through. Furthermore, the
course is aimed at providing the students with a knowledge base concerning the
different methods and techniques applied in the analysis of a fire sequence, as well as
developing their ability to critically examine those methods in terms of practical
application. The course is also aimed at increasing the engineering-related ability to
construct and analyse models.
Knowledge and understanding
For a passing grade the student must:
•  be able to explain the effect of the enclosure on a fire sequence.
•  be able to explain the range of application of the models and the applicable
•  constraints for fire safety engineering computations.
•  be able to characterise the various stages of a fire sequence based on various
•  variables.
Skills and abilities
For a passing grade the student must:
•  be able to apply various manual computation models and computer models (2-zone
•  models) for calculating various variables in a compartment fire.
•  be able to calculate the value of various physical variables associated with a fire
•  sequence.
•  be able to analyse and interpret results from fire safety engineering experiments.
•  be able to judge the reasonableness of calculated results obtained from various
•  computational models.
•  be able to estimate data values for input into computational models where these are
•  lacking in the problem statement.
•  be able to design fire safety engineering systems for control and handling of
•  combustion gases.
•  be able to evaluate the effect the fire event can have on people occupying the
•  building.
•  be able to calculate the time before critical conditions are reached for fires in a
•  building.
•  be able to defend, orally and in writing, his/her choice of models and assumptions in
•  the analysis of fire sequences.
•  be able to present results from fire safety engineering experiments in a clear and
•  scientific manner.
•  be able to search for and apply information concerning fire evolution inside buildings
•  in scientific journals and manuals.
•  be able to plan and carry out fire safety engineering experiments.
Judgement and approach
For a passing grade the student must:
•  demonstrate a capacity to make judgements on the applicability of various
•  computation models to various types of problems.
•  demonstrate insight into the responsibilities of a fire engineer in choosing and
•  reporting parameters in such a way that the models are used properly.
Conditions for credit contract
This course unit cannot be taken via a credit contract
Conditions for exam contract
This course unit cannot be taken via an exam contract
Teaching methods
Group work, lecture, seminar, self-reliant study activities, seminar: coached exercises
Extra information on the teaching methods
The course and the lectures follow the chapters in the book Enclosure Fire Dynamics.
The problems given in the end of each chapter in the book are solved individually on
scheduled exercises and outside class.
Learning materials and price
Karlsson, B., Quintiere, J G: Enclosure Fire Dynamics. CRC Press, 1999. ISBN: 0-
8493-1300-7
Supplement papers
References
Karlsson, B., Quintiere, J G: Enclosure Fire Dynamics. CRC Press, 1999. ISBN: 0-
8493-1300-7
Course content-related study coaching

Evaluation methods
end-of-term evaluation and continuous assessment

(Approved) 2
Examination methods in case of periodic evaluation during the first examination period
Written examination, open book examination, assignment
Examination methods in case of periodic evaluation during the second examination period
Written examination, open book examination, assignment
Examination methods in case of permanent evaluation
Assignment, skills test
Possibilities of retake in case of permanent evaluation
examination during the second examination period is not possible
Extra information on the examination methods
The final certificate is based on a written examination (individual work), home
assignments (individual work), and laboratory work reports (group work), and requires
participation in compulsory seminars.
Calculation of the examination mark
Grades are based on exam results and extra points from the three assignments (max 1
point per assignment) and one lab report (between 0 and 3 points).

(Approved) 3
 Course
Specifications
Valid as from the academic year 2016-2017

Human Behaviour in Fire (E900306)

Course size (nominal values; actual values may depend on programme)

Credits 8.0 Study time 240 h Contact hrs 48.0 h
Course offerings and teaching methods in academic year 2018-2019
A (semester 2) English group work 17.5 h
Lecturers in academic year 2018-2019
Ronchi, Enrico LUND01 lecturer-in-charge
Offered in the following programmes in 2018-2019 crdts offering
International Master of Science in Fire Safety Engineering 8 A

Teaching languages
English
Keywords

Position of the course

The aim is that students should be able to understand and apply theories of human
behaviour in fire, both fire setting and evacuation behaviour, after completion of the
course. Student should furthermore recognize the importance of cultural and
demographic factors for evacuation. The aim of the course is also that students are
able to understand different egress modelling approaches and their limitations. In
addition, students should understand and be able to apply relevant guidelines and
regulations.
Contents
The course provides students with insight into theories of human behaviour in fires,
both fire setting and evacuation behaviour, and computer modelling of evacuation.
During the first part of the semester focus is placed on lectures and laboratory
exercises. The material from the lectures will be included in the exam, which is held
midway through the semester. During the second part of the semester the students
focus on their group assignment, which is presented to fellow students and teachers at
the final seminar.
Initial competences
Prerequisites: TO BE SPECIFIED LATER Admission Specifics: The number of
participants is limited to 40.
Final competences
Knowledge and Understanding
For a passing grade the student must:
•  be able to explain the various factors (psychological and environmental) that
•  influence fire setting behaviour
•  be able to explain RSET-models (simple stimuli-response models) that are commonly
•  user in guidelines and regulations
•  be able to describe different theories of human behaviour in fire (e.g. role-rule model,
•  affiliation, affordances and help in emergencies)
•  be able to state typical walking speeds for evacuation and explain how movement of
•  people is influenced by demographic factors (e.g. age and mobility)
•  be able to explain social influence and give examples of situations when social
•  influence will be particularly important
•  be able to explain the basic assumptions behind egress models (network, grid and
•  continuous models)
Skills and Abilities
For a passing grade the student must:

(Approved) 1
 •  apply RSET-models (simple stimuli-response models) to estimate the required safe
•  escape time
•  analyse a fire accident and relate the behaviour of occupants to theories of human
•  behaviour in fire
•  analyse exit design based on the theory of affordances
•  apply egress models to simulate movement of people during evacuation
•  analyse results from simulations with egress models and relate the results to the
•  assumptions of the model
•  select appropriate occupant behaviour scenarios for fire safety engineering design
•  communicate theories of human behaviour in fire to laymen and experts
•  communicate results from simulations with egress models to laymen and experts
•  (oral, written and graphic representation)
•  independently seek information (articles, reports, manuals, etc) about human
•  behaviour in fire
Judgement and approach
For a passing grade the student must:
•  adequately consider relevant scientific and ethical aspects of experiments with
•  human participants (evacuation experiments)
•  adequately consider relevant ethical aspects relating to analysis of evacuation with
•  egress models
Conditions for credit contract
This course unit cannot be taken via a credit contract
Conditions for exam contract
This course unit cannot be taken via an exam contract
Teaching methods
Group work, lecture, seminar, self-reliant study activities
Extra information on the teaching methods
Lectures
The lectures focus mainly on theories of human behaviour in fire, but also cover egress
models. In the first couple of lectures fire setting behaviour is looked at. Both
psychological and environmental factors are examined and special focus is placed on
fire setting by children. The following lectures focus on the evacuation process and
associated theories/models, rules and regulations as well as the effects of combustion
products, heat and radiation on humans. These lectures cover such areas as RSET-
models, the role-rule model, affiliation in emergencies, theory of affordances for exit
design, help in emergencies and social influence. Ethics in relation to experiments with
human participants (evacuation experiments) and ethical aspects of the use of egress
models is also briefly covered. The final set of lectures, which are closely linked to
laboratory exercises, focus on egress models and hand calculations.
Lab exercises
Laboratory exercises are performed both in the laboratory and with computers. There
are a total of four lab exercises in the course, namely one field experiment and three
computer labs. The exercises are:
i)        LAB1 – Evacuation experiment (field experiment)
ii)        LAB2 – Test of a grid-based egress model – STEPS (computer lab)
iii)        LAB3 – Test of continuous egress models – Simulex (computer lab)
iv)        LAB4 – Advanced egress modelling (computer lab)
In the first laboratory exercise (LAB1) you will perform an evacuation of a real building.
Before the lab, you will decide what aspects you want to measure and how to do the
measurements. This work will be performed by the entire class at a planning seminar.
Finally, data from LAB1 are then analysed and published in LUVIT.
The second laboratory exercise (LAB2) focuses on modelling of egress with a grid-
based model, e.g., STEPS. In the third laboratory exercise (LAB3) a continuous egress
model, namely Simulex, will be used. In the fourth and final lab (LAB4) you will test
more advanced egress modelling approaches in selected models (mainly STEPS).
Written reports are required for all laboratory exercises in the course.
Assignments
There is one individual assignment and one group assignment in the course. Both
assignments must be completed to get a passing grade. The two assignments are:
1)        Assignment 1 – Exit Design and the Theory of Affordances (individual report)
2)        Assignment 2 – Analysis of a Fire Incident (group report)
In the first assignment (Assignment 1) you will take a picture of an emergency exit and
analyse the design using the Theory of Affordances. A presentation about the Theory of
Affordances will be given in the course and you will also practice application of the
theory. Assignment 1 shall be summarised in an individual report (max 5 pages
including pictures).
In the second assignment (Assignment 2) you and your group members (ca 4-5
persons per group) will analyse a fire incident using the theories from the course. For
examples, theories about exit choice behaviour can be used to explain people’s choice
(Approved) 2
 of exit, etc. You and your group members shall choose a fire incident for your analysis.
Assignment 2 shall be summarised in a group report (max 20 pages excluding pictures)
where you describe the accidents and apply the theories. In the report you also need to
include a discussion and draw relevant conclusions. Your and your group members will
also present your assignment at a seminar (20 min presentation per group).
Seminars
Two literature seminars are included in the course. At the seminars we will meet in
smaller groups (ca 8 persons per group) and discuss a specific topic. Before the
seminar you will have read a selection of publications. The two topics that will be
discussed are ethics and ‘panic’. A passing grade requires that you actively take part in
both seminars, i.e., take part in the discussions. You must also have read the literature
carefully before each seminar. More information about the seminars can be found in
LUVIT.
Learning materials and price
Everything downloadable from LUVIT.
References
•  Canter, D, Breaux, J, & Sime, J: Fire and Human Behaviour , Domestic, Multiple
•  Occupancy, and Hospital Fires. John Whiley & Sons, Ltd., 1980.
•  Hartson, H R: Behaviour & Information Technology, Cognitive, physical, sensory, and
•  functional affordances in interaction design. 2003.
•  Helbing, D, & Molnár, P: Physical Review E, Social force model for pedestrian
•  dynamics. 1995.
•  Sime, J: Environment and Behaviour, Movement Towards the Familiar - Person and
•  Place Affiliation in a Fire Entrapment Setting. 1985.
•  In addition scientific papers within the area "Human behaviour in fire" are included.
Course content-related study coaching

Evaluation methods
end-of-term evaluation and continuous assessment
Examination methods in case of periodic evaluation during the first examination period
Written examination
Examination methods in case of periodic evaluation during the second examination period
Written examination
Examination methods in case of permanent evaluation
Oral examination, skills test
Possibilities of retake in case of permanent evaluation
examination during the second examination period is not possible
Extra information on the examination methods
Assessment: The final certificate is based on a written examination (individual work),
report/presentation (group work), report/presentation (individual work) and laboratory
reports (group and individual work).
Calculation of the examination mark
Grades are only based on exam results. You are required to do assignments and labs
to pass the course, but performance on these things do not influence the grade.

(Approved) 3
 Course
Specifications
Valid as from the academic year 2016-2017

Risk Assessment (E900304)

Course size (nominal values; actual values may depend on programme)

Credits 8.0 Study time 240 h Contact hrs 74.0 h
Course offerings in academic year 2018-2019
A (semester 2) English
Lecturers in academic year 2018-2019
Hassel, Henrik LUND01 lecturer-in-charge
Abrahamsson, Marcus LUND01 co-lecturer
Johansson, Jonas LUND01 co-lecturer
Månsson, Peter LUND01 co-lecturer
Svegrup, Linn LUND01 co-lecturer
Offered in the following programmes in 2018-2019 crdts offering
International Master of Science in Fire Safety Engineering 8 A

Teaching languages
English
Keywords
Risk Analysis, Risk Assessment, Risk Management, Uncertainty, Sensitivity, Methods
Position of the course
Introduction to risk assessment in a safety context (not only fire safety). Provide a
broad basis for performing and using risk assessments for risk related decisions
concerning safety issues.
Contents
The overriding elements in the course consist of: Introduction to the field of risk
assessment and management, the concept of risk, risk assessment methodology within
the field of fire safety engineering, uncertainty analysis, risk measures and risk
evaluation. During the course, a number of individual home assignments, as well as a
group project assignment, are to be completed. The project assignment contains
relevant issues associated to the engineering field. The project assignment is to be
reported in written form and also orally.
Initial competences
Calculus in Several Variables, Statistics with Decision Theory or equivalent.
Final competences
The aim of the course is that, in combination with earlier courses, the students gain the
capability of utilizing tools for risk assessment and how they can support decisions in
the area of risk management and especially in the area of fire safety engineering.
Furthermore, the course is aimed at providing a foundation for continuing studies in the
risk management field.
Knowledge and understanding
For a passing grade the student must:
•  be able to describe different perspectives of the concept of risk and be aware of the
•  implications of adopting the different perspecives in a risk management context.
•  be able to describe risk assessment methods, their areas of applicability, especially
•  in the area of fire safety engineering and their strengths and weaknesses.
•  be able to describe relevant risk measures, their limitations and strengths and how
•  they can be applied to evaluate risks.
•  be able to describe different types of uncertainty and how they can be addressed and
•  handled in a risk assessment context.

(Approved) 1
 •  be able to describe how input from risk assessments can be utilised as a basis for
•  decision-making and emergency preparedness planning.
•  demonstrate an understanding of various sources of information that can be used
•  and the challenges in using them as input to risk assessments.
Skills and abilities
For a passing grade the student must:
•  be able to utilize, the concepts, methods and tools used in risk assessment, in new
•  situations and in situations related to fire safety.
•  be able to evaluate the contents of existing risk assessments.
•  be able to report, both orally and in writing, and discuss the implications of a
•  performed risk assessment in a way understandable to persons with different
•  knowledge backgrounds.
•  be able to utilise material in scientific publications relevant for risk assessment.
•  be able to utilise methods and tools for basic decision problems concerning risks.
Judgement and approach
For a passing grade the student must:
•  be able to critically reflect on the benefits and limitations of risk assessments as an
•  input to decision-making.
•  be able to reflect upon ethical and subjective dimensions of risk assessments.
Conditions for credit contract
This course unit cannot be taken via a credit contract
Conditions for exam contract
This course unit cannot be taken via an exam contract
Teaching methods
Group work, lecture, seminar, self-reliant study activities
Extra information on the teaching methods
Lectures, individual assignment, project assignment, calculation seminars, literature
seminars
Learning materials and price
All material needed can be found digitally on the course web (for free).
References
•  Apostolakis, G. E. (2004). "How Useful is Quantitative Risk Assessment" Risk
•  Analysis 24(3): 515-520.
•  CCPS (2000b). "Chapter 4: Risk measures & 8.1 Case study". Guidelines for
•  Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis. New York, Center for Chemical
•  Process Safety, American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
•  Garrick, B. J. (1998), Technological stigmatism, Risk perception and Truth, Reliability
•  Engineering and System Safety, 59: 41-45.
•  Pidgeon, N. (1998). "Risk assessment, risk values and the social science
•  programme: why we do need risk perception research" Reliability Engineering &
•  System Safety 59: 5-15.
•  Slovic, P. (2001). "The Risk Game" Journal of Hazardous Materials 86: 17-24.
•  Tehler, H (2011). "A general framework for risk assessment", Department of Fire
•  Safety Engineering and Systems Safety, Lund University, Sweden.
•  Aven, T. (2012), ”The risk concept—historical and recent development trends”,
•  Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 99:33-44.
•  Kaplan, S. (1997). "The Words of Risk Analysis" Risk Analysis 17(4): 407-417.
•  Kaplan, S. and Garrick, B. J. (1981). "On The Quantitative Definition of Risk", Risk
•  Analysis 1(1): 11-27.
•  Kaplan, S., Haimes, Y. Y. and Garrick, B. J. (2001). "Fitting hierarchical holographic
•  modeling into the theory of scenario structuring and a resulting refinement to the
•  quantitative definition of risk" Risk Analysis 21(5): 807-819.
•  Renn, O. (1998), ”Three decades of risk research”, Reliability Engineering and
•  System Safety, 1(1): 49-71.
•  CCPS (1985). Hazards Evaluation Procedures: Ch. 4.4-4.7. New York, The Center
•  for Chemical Process Safety.
•  CCPS (2000a). "Chapter 3.2: Frequency modeling techniques & Appendix D: Minimal
•  cut set analysis". Guidelines for Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis. New
•  York, Center for Chemical Process Safety, American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
•  CCPS (2000b). "Chapter 4: Risk measures & 8.1 Case study". Guidelines for
•  Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis. New York, Center for Chemical
•  Process Safety, American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
•  Henrion, M. and Granger Morgan, M. (1990). Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with
•  Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis, Chapter 4. Cambridge,
•  Cambridge University Press. Preliminary risk analysis with a systems perspective
•  (2013), Department of Fire Safety Engineering and Systems Safety, Lund University,
•  Lund.
(Approved) 2
 •  CCPS (2000b). "Chapter 4: Risk measures & 8.1 Case study". Guidelines for
•  Chemical Process Quantitative Risk Analysis. New York, Center for Chemical
•  Process Safety, American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
•  Frank ,W. and Jones, D. (2010), Choosing appropriate quantitative safety risk criteria:
•  Applications from the new CCPS, Process Safety Progress 29(4): 293-298.
•  Hall Jr, J. R. (2008b). "Statistics". In SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering.
•  Dinenno, P. J., Drysdale, D., Beyler, C. L., Walton, W. D., Custer, R. L. P., Hall Jr, J.
•  R. and M., W. J. J. (eds.). Quincy, Society for Fire Protection Engineers.
•  Hall Jr, J. R. (2008). "Probability Concepts". SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection
•  Engineering. Dinenno, P. J., Drysdale, D., Beyler, C. L., Walton, W. D., Custer, R. L.
•  P., Hall Jr, J. R. and M., W. J. J. Quincy, Society for Fire Protection Engineers.
•  Evans, A. W. and Verlander, N. Q. (1997). "What Is Wrong with Criterion FN-Lines for
•  Judging the Tolerability of Risk" Risk Analysis 17(2): 157-168.
•  Hurley, M. J. and Rosenbaum, E. R. (2008). "Performance-Based Design". In SFPE
•  Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering. Dinenno, P. J., Drysdale, D., Beyler, C. L.,
•  Walton, W. D., Custer, R. L. P., Hall Jr, J. R. and M., W. J. J. (eds.). Quincy, Society
•  for Fire Protection Engineers. ISO (2009), ISO 31000 Risk Management – Principles
•  and Guidelines, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva. ISO (2011),
•  Fire Safety Engineering – Fire risk assessment, Part 1: General, ISO/FDIS 16732-1:
•  2011, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
•  Lauridsen, K., Christou, M., Amendola, A., Markert, F., Kozine, I.,Fiori, M. (2001a).
•  "Assessing the uncertainties in the process of risk analysis of chemical
•  establishments: part I". Towards a Safer World, European Conference On Safety and
•  Reliability, ESREL, Torino, Italy.
•  Lauridsen, K., Christou, M., Amendola, A., Markert, F., Kozine, I.,Fiori, M. (2001b).
•  "Assessing the uncertainties in the process of risk analysis of chemical
•  establishments: part II". Towards a Safer World, European Conference On Safety
•  and Reliability, ESREL, Torino, Italy.
•  Otway, H., von Winterfeldt, D. (1992). "Expert Judgement in Risk Analysis and
•  Management: Process, Context, and Pitfalls" Risk Analysis 12(1): 83-93. Paté-
•  Cornell, M. E. (1996). "Uncertainties in risk analysis: Six levels of uncertainty
•  treatment" Reliability Engineering & System Safety 54: 95-111.
•  SFPE (2006). Engineering Guide - Fire Risk Assessment. Bethesda, Society for Fire
•  Protection Engineers.
•  Slovic (1999), Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk-
•  Assessment Battlefield, Risk Analysis 19(4): 689-701.
Course content-related study coaching

Evaluation methods
end-of-term evaluation and continuous assessment
Examination methods in case of periodic evaluation during the first examination period
Oral examination
Examination methods in case of periodic evaluation during the second examination period
Oral examination
Examination methods in case of permanent evaluation
Skills test
Possibilities of retake in case of permanent evaluation
examination during the second examination period is not possible
Extra information on the examination methods
Extra information on the examination methods The examination of the course consists
of three parts. First, an individual paper is to be written. In the paper the students must
show an understanding of and an ability to summarize the most relevant parts of a
number of scientific papers. They should also be able to critically reflect upon the
material (see below for more details). Secondly, a written exam is to be completed. The
exam will assess the students’ ability to use various risk assessment methods and
techniques. Third, a project assignment, in terms of a large-scale risk assessment, is to
be completed where the students show an ability to apply and make a synthesis of the
knowledge gained during the course. In order to pass the course, the students must
pass each part of the examination (described above).
Calculation of the examination mark
20% project, 20% individual paper, 60% written exam.

(Approved) 3
 Course
Specifications
Valid as from the academic year 2017-2018

Simulation of Fires in Enclosures (E900525)

Course size (nominal values; actual values may depend on programme)

Credits 5.0 Study time 150 h Contact hrs 25.0 h
Course offerings in academic year 2018-2019
A (semester 2) English
Lecturers in academic year 2018-2019
Wahlqvist, Jonathan LUND01 lecturer-in-charge
Husted, Bjarne LUND01 co-lecturer
Rubini, Phil LUND01 co-lecturer
Offered in the following programmes in 2018-2019 crdts offering
International Master of Science in Fire Safety Engineering 5 A

Teaching languages
English
Keywords
CFD modelling, Navier Stokes, combustion, fire, numerical methods, soot, heat
transfer
Position of the course
The course is given in the EM programme, second semester. The course is designed to
provide basic knowledge of how the spread of fire and combustion gases is simulated
using ”Computational Fluid Dynamics” (CFD), in fire safety design and fire
investigations. It also provides an understanding of the limitations of the numerical and
physical models used, and an awareness of the most common sources of error.
Contents
· Introduction to CFD · Time and length-scales in fires · Turbulence models · Numerical
methods · Large eddy simulation (LES) · Combustion models · Radiation models · Soot
models · Heat transfer models · Creation and processing of CFD models · Common
errors and troubleshooting in CFD modelling
Initial competences
Prerequisites: Fire Dynamics.
Recommended qualifications: Fire Chemistry.
Final competences
1  Knowledge and understanding: be able to describe the physical models used for
1  conservation of mass, material, energy, and momentum.
2  Knowledge and understanding: be able to describe various numerical methods for
1  solving the equation sets.
3  Knowledge and understanding: be able to identify the limitations and most common
1  sources of error of the model components used.
4  Skills and abilities: be able to calculate the spread of combustion gases in various
1  enclosure configurations using CFD programs.
5  Skills and abilities: be able to assess calculated results against experimental data
6  Skills and abilities:be able to decide on how the uncertainty in a simulation can be
1  estimated on the basis of assumptions included in the physical and numerical
1  models used.
7  Skills and abilities:be able to understand and use professional terminology within the
1  field of fire evolution simulation using CFD
8  Skills and abilities:be able to report on, both orally and in writing, and discuss the
1  implications of the executed simulation of the spread of combustion gases in
1  association with fire safety design and fire investigations.

(Approved) 1
 9  Skills and abilities:be able to make use of material published in technical references
1  and user manuals for advanced simulation programs for combustion gas spreading.
10  Judgement and approach:demonstrate insight into the possibilities and limitations of
1  fire safety simulation methods, as well as their role in advanced building technical
1  project planning and in human responsibility for their use
11  Judgement and approach: demonstrate capability for identifying his/her own needs
1  for further knowledge and for on-going improvement of his/her own competence in
1  fire safety simulation.
Conditions for credit contract
This course unit cannot be taken via a credit contract
Conditions for exam contract
This course unit cannot be taken via an exam contract
Teaching methods
Lecture, self-reliant study activities
Extra information on the teaching methods
The lectures are split into two main blocks of two days each; one in the very first week
of the semester, the second in the end of March. Before the first block the students are
asked to do a simple introductory assignment to help them be able to run the needed
software once the actual assignments start. In between the two blocks the students
complete 3 assignments. The first 2 assignments are discussed and evaluated during a
computer lab, where 2 students and a teacher discuss the results of all simulations and
the applicability to the theory learned during lectures. The third assignment is discussed
in a similar fashion during another computer lab. After the second lecture block the
students are asked to complete a multiple-choice questionnaire to both test their skills,
but also to help them study for the exam.
Learning materials and price
Lecture notes, in English (free), available through e-learning portal.
User manuals for used software (FDS), in English (free), available through e-learning
portal.
Instructions for assignments, in English (free), available through e-learning portal.
References
Lecture notes
User manuals for FDS.
SFPE-handbook Chapter 3:8 "Modelling Enclosure Fires Using CFD" by G.Cox and S.
Kumar Carlsson, J.
Computational strategies in flame-spread modelling involving wooden surfaces,
Brandteknik, Report 1028 Lic. thesis Lund 2003, chapter 4-6.
Course content-related study coaching

Evaluation methods
end-of-term evaluation and continuous assessment
Examination methods in case of periodic evaluation during the first examination period
Written examination with open questions, written examination with multiple choice questions,
participation, assignment
Examination methods in case of periodic evaluation during the second examination period
Written examination with open questions, written examination with multiple choice questions,
participation, assignment
Examination methods in case of permanent evaluation
Written examination with multiple choice questions, participation, job performance assessment
Possibilities of retake in case of permanent evaluation
examination during the second examination period is not possible
Extra information on the examination methods
Assessment: Written individual examination and approved individual assignments
Calculation of the examination mark
Final mark 3, 4 and 5 is based on:
•  points for the written exam
•  3 grades: 3, 4, 5 corresponding with 50, 65 and 85 points
For overall approval the student must attend two seminars and have approved job
assignments.

(Approved) 2