1.4 Design scenarios: NCC Performance Requirements

This Verification Method presents specific design scenarios that must be considered in order to demonstrate that the fire safety aspects of a building design comply with the fire safety Performance Requirements set out in Table 1.1.

The design scenarios specified in Section 2 are summarised in Table 1.1.

Design scenarios

Performance Requirements ^{Note 1}

Outcome required ^{Note 3}

Typical method or solution

BE

Fire blocks evacuation route (2.1).

[A fire blocks an evacuation route]

CP1, CP2, CP3, CP8, DP4, DP5, DP6, DP7 ^{Note 2}, EP1.4, EP2.1, EP2.2, EP4.1, EP4.2, EP4.3

Demonstrate that the level of safety is at least equivalent to the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.

Demonstrate that a viable evacuation route (or multiple evacuation route where necessary) has been provided for building occupants.

UT

Fire in a normally unoccupied room threatens occupants of other rooms (2.2).

[A fire starts in a normally unoccupied room and can potentially endanger a large number of occupants in another room]

CP1, CP2, CP3, CP8, DP4, DP5, EP1.4, EP2.1, EP2.2, EP4.1, EP4.2, EP4.3

Demonstrate that the level of safety is at least equivalent to the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.

ASET / RSET analysis or provide separating construction or fire suppression complying with a specified Standard.

Solutions might include the use of separating elements or fire suppression to confine the fire to the room of origin.

CS

Fire starts in concealed space (2.3).

[A fire starts in a concealed space that can facilitate fire spread and potentially endanger a large number of people in a room]

CP1, CP2, CP3, CP6, CP8, DP4, DP5, DP6, EP1.4, EP2.1, EP2.2, EP4.1, EP4.2, EP4.3

Demonstrate that fire spread via concealed spaces will not endanger occupants; and

Demonstrate that the level of safety is at least equivalent to the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.

Solutions might include providing separating construction or fire suppression or automatic detection complying with a specified Standard.

SF

Smouldering fire (2.4).

[A fire is smouldering in close proximity to a sleeping area]

CP2, CP3, CP8, DP4, DP5, DP6, EP1.1, EP1.2, EP1.3, EP1.4, EP2.1, EP2.2, EP4.1, EP4.2, EP4.3

Demonstrate that the level of safety is at least equivalent to the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.

Solutions might include providing automatic detection and alarm system complying with a recognised Standard.

HS

Horizontal fire spread (2.5).

[A fully developed fire in a building exposes the external wall of a neighbouring building]

CP2

Demonstrate that the risk of fire spread between buildings is not greater than buildings complying with the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.

CV1, CV2.

VS

Vertical fire spread involving cladding or arrangement of openings in walls (2.6).

[A fire source exposes a wall and leads to significant vertical fire spread]

CP2, CP4, CP7, CP8, EP2.2

Demonstrate that the building’s external cladding / facade and arrangement of openings in the building do not increase the risk to life resulting from a fire beyond that for a similar building complying with the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.

CV3.

IS

Fire spread involving internal finishes (2.7).

[Interior surfaces are exposed to a growing fire that potentially endangers occupants].

CP2, CP4, DP4, DP5, DP6, EP1.1, EP1.4, EP2.1, EP2.2, EP4.1, EP4.2, EP4.3

Maintain tenable conditions to allow time for evacuation of occupants and to facilitate fire brigade intervention; and

Demonstrate that the level of safety is at least equivalent to the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.

ASET / RSET analysis or equivalent growth and species production rates.

FI

Fire brigade intervention (2.8).

[Consider fire brigade intervention]

CP1, CP2, CP5, CP7, CP9, DP5, EP1.3, EP1.6, EP2.2, EP3.2

Demonstrate consideration of potential fire brigade intervention; and

Demonstrate that the level of safety is at least equivalent to the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.

Facilitate fire brigade intervention to the degree necessary.

UF

Unexpected Catastrophic Failure (2.9).

[A building must not unexpectedly collapse during a fire event]

CP1, CP2, CP9

Demonstrate that the building, its critical elements and the fire safety system provide sufficient robustness such that unexpected catastrophic failure is unlikely; and

Demonstrate that the level of safety is at least equivalent to the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.

Undertake review or risk assessment of critical elements within a building to determine unexpected catastrophic failure is unlikely.

CF

Challenging fire (2.10).

[Worst credible fire]

CP1, CP2, CP3, CP8, DP4, DP5, DP6, EP1.1, EP1.2, EP1.3, EP1.4, EP2.1, EP2.2, EP4.1, EP4.2, EP4.3

Demonstrate that the level of safety is at least equivalent to the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.

ASET / RSET analysis.

RC

Robustness check (2.11).

[Failure of a critical part of the fire safety systems will not result in the design not meeting the Objectives of the BCA]

CP1, CP2, CP3, CP8, DP4, DP5, DP7 ^{Note 2}, EP1.1, EP1.2, EP1.3, EP1.4, EP2.1, EP2.2, EP4.1, EP4.2, EP4.3

Demonstrate that if a key component of the fire safety system fails, the design is sufficiently robust that a disproportionate spread of fire does not occur (e.g. ASET/ RSET for the remaining floors or fire compartments is satisfied); and

Demonstrate that the level of safety is at least equivalent to the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.

Modified ASET / RSET analysis.

SS

Structural Stability and other properties (2.12).

[Building does not present risk to other properties in a fire event]

CP1, CP5

Demonstrate that the building does not present an unacceptable risk to other property due to collapse or barrier failure resulting from a fire; and

Demonstrate that the level of safety is at least equivalent to the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.

Undertake analysis of structure and fire safety systems.

Notes to Table 1.1 :