ASTM E1355-12(2018)
(Guide)Standard Guide for Evaluating the Predictive Capability of Deterministic Fire Models
Standard Guide for Evaluating the Predictive Capability of Deterministic Fire Models
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The process of model evaluation is critical to establishing both the acceptable uses and limitations of fire models. It is not possible to evaluate a model in total; instead, this guide is intended to provide a methodology for evaluating the predictive capabilities for a specific use. Validation for one application or scenario does not imply validation for different scenarios. Several alternatives are provided for performing the evaluation process including: comparison of predictions against standard fire tests, full-scale fire experiments, field experience, published literature, or previously evaluated models.
5.2 The use of fire models currently extends beyond the fire research laboratory and into the engineering, fire service and legal communities. Sufficient evaluation of fire models is necessary to ensure that those using the models can judge the adequacy of the scientific and technical basis for the models, select models appropriate for a desired use, and understand the level of confidence which can be placed on the results predicted by the models. Adequate evaluation will help prevent the unintentional misuse of fire models.
5.3 This guide is intended to be used in conjunction with other guides under development by Committee E05. It is intended for use by:
5.3.1 Model Developers—To document the usefulness of a particular calculation method perhaps for specific applications. Part of model development includes identification of precision and limits of applicability, and independent testing.
5.3.2 Model Users—To assure themselves that they are using an appropriate model for an application and that it provides adequate accuracy.
5.3.3 Developers of Model Performance Codes—To be sure that they are incorporating valid calculation procedures into codes.
5.3.4 Approving Officials—To ensure that the results of calculations using mathematical models stating conformance to this guide, cited in a submission, show clearly that the model is used withi...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides a methodology for evaluating the predictive capabilities of a fire model for a specific use. The intent is to cover the whole range of deterministic numerical models which might be used in evaluating the effects of fires in and on structures.
1.2 The methodology is presented in terms of four areas of evaluation:
1.2.1 Defining the model and scenarios for which the evaluation is to be conducted,
1.2.2 Verifying the appropriateness of the theoretical basis and assumptions used in the model,
1.2.3 Verifying the mathematical and numerical robustness of the model, and
1.2.4 Quantifying the uncertainty and accuracy of the model results in predicting of the course of events in similar fire scenarios.
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.4 This fire standard cannot be used to provide quantitative measures.
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
General Information
Buy Standard
Standards Content (Sample)
NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or withdrawn.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information
Designation: E1355 − 12 (Reapproved 2018) An American National Standard
Standard Guide for
Evaluating the Predictive Capability of Deterministic Fire
Models
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E1355; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope E603 Guide for Room Fire Experiments
E1591 Guide for Obtaining Data for Fire Growth Models
1.1 This guide provides a methodology for evaluating the
2.2 International Standards Organization Standards:
predictive capabilities of a fire model for a specific use. The
ISO/IEC Guide 98 (2008) Uncertainty of measurement –
intent is to cover the whole range of deterministic numerical
Part 3: Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measure-
models which might be used in evaluating the effects of fires in
ment
and on structures.
ISO 13943 (2008) Fire safety – Vocabulary
1.2 The methodology is presented in terms of four areas of
ISO 16730 (2008) Fire safety engineering – Assessment,
evaluation:
verification and validation of calculation methods
1.2.1 Defining the model and scenarios for which the
evaluation is to be conducted,
3. Terminology
1.2.2 Verifying the appropriateness of the theoretical basis
3.1 Definitions:For definitions of terms used in this guide
and assumptions used in the model,
and associated with fire issues, refer to terminology contained
1.2.3 Verifying the mathematical and numerical robustness
in Terminology E176 and ISO 13943. In case of conflict, the
of the model, and
definitions given in Terminology E176 shall prevail.
1.2.4 Quantifying the uncertainty and accuracy of the model
3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
results in predicting of the course of events in similar fire
3.2.1 model evaluation—the process of quantifying the
scenarios.
accuracy of chosen results from a model when applied for a
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the
specific use.
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
3.2.2 model validation—the process of determining the
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
degree to which a calculation method is an accurate represen-
priate safety, health, and environmental practices and deter-
tation of the real world from the perspective of the intended
mine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
uses of the calculation method.
1.4 This fire standard cannot be used to provide quantitative
3.2.2.1 Discussion—The fundamental strategy of validation
measures.
is the identification and quantification of error and uncertainty
1.5 This international standard was developed in accor-
in the conceptual and computational models with respect to
dance with internationally recognized principles on standard-
intended uses.
ization established in the Decision on Principles for the
3.2.3 model verification—the process of determining that
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom-
mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical the implementation of a calculation method accurately repre-
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee. sents the developer’s conceptual description of the calculation
method and the solution to the calculation method.
2. Referenced Documents
3.2.3.1 Discussion—The fundamental strategy of verifica-
2.1 ASTM Standards:
tion of computational models is the identification and quanti-
E176 Terminology of Fire Standards
fication of error in the computational model and its solution.
3.2.4 The precision of a model refers to the deterministic
This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E05 on Fire Standards
capability of a model and its repeatability.
and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E05.33 on Fire Safety Engineering.
3.2.5 The accuracy refers to how well the model replicates
Current edition approved July 1, 2018. Published August 2018. Originally
approved in 1990. Last previous edition approved in 2012 as E1355 – 12. DOI:
the evolution of an actual fire.
10.1520/E1355-12R18.
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on Available from American National Standards Institute, 11 West 42nd Street,
the ASTM website. 13th Floor, New York, NY 10036.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
E1355 − 12 (2018)
4. Summary of Guide 5.5 The emphasis of this guide is numerical models of fire
evolution.
4.1 A recommended process for evaluating the predictive
5.5.1 The precision of a model refers to the deterministic
capability of fire models is described. This process includes a
capability of a model and its repeatability.
brief description of the model and the scenarios for which
5.5.2 The accuracy of a model refers to how well the model
evaluation is sought. Then, methodologies for conducting an
replicates the evolution of an actual fire.
analysis to quantify the sensitivity of model predictions to
various uncertain factors are presented, and several alternatives
6. General Methodology
for evaluating the accuracy of the predictions of the model are
provided. Historically, numerical accuracy has been concerned 6.1 The methodology is presented in terms of four areas of
with time step size and errors. A more complete evaluation
evaluation:
must include spatial discretization. Finally, guidance is given 6.1.1 Defining the model and scenarios for which the
concerning the relevant documentation required to summarize
evaluation is to be conducted,
the evaluation process. 6.1.2 Assessing the appropriateness of the theoretical basis
and assumptions used in the model,
5. Significance and Use 6.1.3 Assessing the mathematical and numerical robustness
of the model, and
5.1 The process of model evaluation is critical to establish-
6.1.4 Quantifying the uncertainty and accuracy of the model
ing both the acceptable uses and limitations of fire models. It is
results in predicting the course of events in similar fire
not possible to evaluate a model in total; instead, this guide is
scenarios.
intended to provide a methodology for evaluating the predic-
6.1.5 This general methodology is also consistent with the
tive capabilities for a specific use. Validation for one applica-
methodology presented in ISO 16730, Fire safety engineering
tion or scenario does not imply validation for different sce-
– Assessment, verification and validation of calculation
narios. Several alternatives are provided for performing the
methods, which is a potentially useful resource which can be
evaluation process including: comparison of predictions
used with ASTM E1355.
against standard fire tests, full-scale fire experiments, field
experience, published literature, or previously evaluated mod- 6.2 Model and Scenario Documentation:
els. 6.2.1 Model Documentation—Sufficient documentation of
calculation models, including computer software, is absolutely
5.2 The use of fire models currently extends beyond the fire
necessary to assess the adequacy of the scientific and technical
research laboratory and into the engineering, fire service and
basis of the models, and the accuracy of computational
legal communities. Sufficient evaluation of fire models is
procedures. Also, adequate documentation will help prevent
necessary to ensure that those using the models can judge the
the unintentional misuse of fire models. Guidance on the
adequacy of the scientific and technical basis for the models,
documentation of computer-based fire models is provided in
select models appropriate for a desired use, and understand the
Section 7.
level of confidence which can be placed on the results
6.2.2 Scenario Documentation—Provide a complete de-
predicted by the models. Adequate evaluation will help prevent
scription of the scenarios or phenomena of interest in the
the unintentional misuse of fire models.
evaluation to facilitate appropriate application of the model, to
5.3 This guide is intended to be used in conjunction with
aid in developing realistic inputs for the model, and to develop
other guides under development by Committee E05. It is
criteria for judging the results of the evaluation. Details
intended for use by:
applicable to evaluation of the predictive capability of fire
5.3.1 Model Developers—To document the usefulness of a
models are provided in 7.2.
particular calculation method perhaps for specific applications.
6.3 Theoretical Basis and Assumptions in the Model—An
Part of model development includes identification of precision
independent review of the underlying physics and chemistry
and limits of applicability, and independent testing.
inherent in a model ensures appropriate application of submod-
5.3.2 Model Users—To assure themselves that they are
els which have been combined to produce the overall model.
using an appropriate model for an application and that it
Details applicable to evaluation of the predictive capability of
provides adequate accuracy.
fire models are provided in Section 8.
5.3.3 Developers of Model Performance Codes—To be sure
that they are incorporating valid calculation procedures into 6.4 Mathematical and Numerical Robustness—The com-
codes. puter implementation of the model should be checked to ensure
5.3.4 Approving Offıcials—To ensure that the results of such implementation matches the stated documentation. De-
calculations using mathematical models stating conformance to tails applicable to evaluation of the predictive capability of fire
this guide, cited in a submission, show clearly that the model models are provided in Section 9. Along with 6.3, this
is used within its applicable limits and has an acceptable level constitutes verification of the model.
of accuracy.
6.5 Quantifying the Uncertainty and Accuracy of the Model:
5.3.5 Educators—To demonstrate the application and ac-
6.5.1 Model Uncertainty—Even deterministic models rely
ceptability of calculation methods being taught.
on inputs often based on experimental measurements, empiri-
5.4 This guide is not meant to describe an acceptance testing cal correlations, or estimates made by engineering judgment.
procedure. Uncertainties in the model inputs can lead to corresponding
E1355 − 12 (2018)
uncertainties in the model outputs. Sensitivity analysis is used 7.1.3.2 Describe the total fire problem environment. Gen-
to quantify these uncertainties in the model outputs based upon eral block or flow diagrams may be included here.
known or estimated uncertainties in model inputs. Guidance
7.1.3.3 Include any desirable background information, such
for obtaining input data for fire models is provided by Guide
as feasibility studies or justification statements.
E1591. Details of sensitivity analysis applicable to evaluation
7.1.4 Theoretical Foundation:
of the predictive capability of fire models are provided in
7.1.4.1 Describe the theoretical basis of the phenomenon
Section 10.
and the physical laws on which the model is based.
6.5.2 Experimental Uncertainty—In general, the result of
7.1.4.2 Present the governing equations and the mathemati-
measurement is only the result of an approximation or estimate
cal model employed.
of the specific quantity subject to measurement, and thus the
7.1.4.3 Identify the major assumptions on which the fire
result is complete only when accompanied by a quantitative
model is based and any simplifying assumptions.
statement of uncertainty. Guidance for conducting full-scale
7.1.4.4 Provide results of any independent review of the
compartment tests is provided by Guide E603. Guidance for
theoretical basis of the model. This guide recommends a
determining the uncertainty in measurements is provided in the
review by one or more recognized experts fully conversant
ISO Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement.
with the chemistry and physics of fire phenomena but not
6.5.3 Model Evaluation—Obtaining accurate estimates of
involved with the production of the model.
fire behavior using predictive fire models involves insuring
7.1.5 Mathematical Foundation:
correct model inputs appropriate to the scenarios to be
7.1.5.1 Describe the mathematical techniques, procedures,
modeled, correct selection of a model appropriate to the
and computational algorithms employed to obtain numerical
scenarios to be modeled, correct calculations by the model
solutions.
chosen, and correct interpretation of the results of the model
7.1.5.2 Provide references to the algorithms and numerical
calculation. Evaluation of a specific scenario with different
techniques.
levels of knowledge of the expected results of the calculation
7.1.5.3 Present the mathematical equations in conventional
addresses these multiple sources of potential error. Details
terminology and show how they are implemented in the code.
applicable to evaluation of the predictive capability of fire
7.1.5.4 Discuss the precision of the results obtained by
models are provided in Section 11.
important algorithms and any known dependence on the
7. Model and Scenario Definition
particular computer facility.
7.1 Model Documentation—Provides details of the model
7.1.5.5 For iterative solutions, discuss the use and interpre-
evaluated in sufficient detail such that the user of the evaluation
tation of convergence tests, and recommend a range of values
could independently repeat the evaluation. The following
for convergence criteria. For probabilistic solutions, discuss the
information should be provided: precision of the results having a statistical variance.
7.1.1 Program Identification:
7.1.5.6 Identify the limitations of the model based on the
7.1.1.1 Provide the name of the program or model, a
algorithms and numerical techniques.
descriptive title, and any information necessary to define the
7.1.5.7 Provide results of any analyses that have been
version uniquely.
performed on the mathematical and numerical robustness of
7.1.1.2 Define the basic processing tasks performed, and
the model. Analytical tests, code checking, and numerical tests
describe the methods and procedures employed. A schematic
are among the analyses listed in this guide that are appropriate
display of the flow of the calculations is useful.
for this purpose.
7.1.1.3 Identify the computer(s) on which the program has
7.1.6 Program Description:
been executed successfully and any required peripherals,
7.1.6.1 Describe the program.
includin
...
This document is not an ASTM standard and is intended only to provide the user of an ASTM standard an indication of what changes have been made to the previous version. Because
it may not be technically possible to adequately depict all changes accurately, ASTM recommends that users consult prior editions as appropriate. In all cases only the current version
of the standard as published by ASTM is to be considered the official document.
Designation: E1355 − 12 E1355 − 12 (Reapproved 2018) An American National Standard
Standard Guide for
Evaluating the Predictive Capability of Deterministic Fire
Models
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E1355; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope
1.1 This guide provides a methodology for evaluating the predictive capabilities of a fire model for a specific use. The intent
is to cover the whole range of deterministic numerical models which might be used in evaluating the effects of fires in and on
structures.
1.2 The methodology is presented in terms of four areas of evaluation:
1.2.1 Defining the model and scenarios for which the evaluation is to be conducted,
1.2.2 Verifying the appropriateness of the theoretical basis and assumptions used in the model,
1.2.3 Verifying the mathematical and numerical robustness of the model, and
1.2.4 Quantifying the uncertainty and accuracy of the model results in predicting of the course of events in similar fire scenarios.
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility
of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety safety, health, and healthenvironmental practices and determine the
applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.4 This fire standard cannot be used to provide quantitative measures.
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization
established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued
by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
2. Referenced Documents
2.1 ASTM Standards:
E176 Terminology of Fire Standards
E603 Guide for Room Fire Experiments
E1591 Guide for Obtaining Data for Fire Growth Models
2.2 International Standards Organization Standards:
ISO/IEC Guide 98 (2008) Uncertainty of measurement – Part 3: Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement
ISO 13943 (2008) Fire safety – Vocabulary
ISO 16730 (2008) Fire safety engineering – Assessment, verification and validation of calculation methods
3. Terminology
3.1 Definitions:For definitions of terms used in this guide and associated with fire issues, refer to terminology contained in
Terminology E176 and ISO 13943. In case of conflict, the definitions given in Terminology E176 shall prevail.
3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
3.2.1 model evaluation—the process of quantifying the accuracy of chosen results from a model when applied for a specific use.
3.2.2 model validation—the process of determining the degree to which a calculation method is an accurate representation of
the real world from the perspective of the intended uses of the calculation method.
3.2.2.1 Discussion—
This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E05 on Fire Standards and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E05.33 on Fire Safety Engineering.
Current edition approved April 1, 2012July 1, 2018. Published April 2012August 2018. Originally approved in 1990. Last previous edition approved in 20112012 as
E1355 – 11.E1355 – 12. DOI: 10.1520/E1355-12.10.1520/E1355-12R18.
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM Standards
volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on the ASTM website.
Available from American National Standards Institute, 11 West 42nd Street, 13th Floor, New York, NY 10036.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
E1355 − 12 (2018)
The fundamental strategy of validation is the identification and quantification of error and uncertainty in the conceptual and
computational models with respect to intended uses.
3.2.3 model verification—the process of determining that the implementation of a calculation method accurately represents the
developer’s conceptual description of the calculation method and the solution to the calculation method.
3.2.3.1 Discussion—
The fundamental strategy of verification of computational models is the identification and quantification of error in the
computational model and its solution.
3.2.4 The precision of a model refers to the deterministic capability of a model and its repeatability.
3.2.5 The accuracy refers to how well the model replicates the evolution of an actual fire.
4. Summary of Guide
4.1 A recommended process for evaluating the predictive capability of fire models is described. This process includes a brief
description of the model and the scenarios for which evaluation is sought. Then, methodologies for conducting an analysis to
quantify the sensitivity of model predictions to various uncertain factors are presented, and several alternatives for evaluating the
accuracy of the predictions of the model are provided. Historically, numerical accuracy has been concerned with time step size and
errors. A more complete evaluation must include spatial discretization. Finally, guidance is given concerning the relevant
documentation required to summarize the evaluation process.
5. Significance and Use
5.1 The process of model evaluation is critical to establishing both the acceptable uses and limitations of fire models. It is not
possible to evaluate a model in total; instead, this guide is intended to provide a methodology for evaluating the predictive
capabilities for a specific use. Validation for one application or scenario does not imply validation for different scenarios. Several
alternatives are provided for performing the evaluation process including: comparison of predictions against standard fire tests,
full-scale fire experiments, field experience, published literature, or previously evaluated models.
5.2 The use of fire models currently extends beyond the fire research laboratory and into the engineering, fire service and legal
communities. Sufficient evaluation of fire models is necessary to ensure that those using the models can judge the adequacy of the
scientific and technical basis for the models, select models appropriate for a desired use, and understand the level of confidence
which can be placed on the results predicted by the models. Adequate evaluation will help prevent the unintentional misuse of fire
models.
5.3 This guide is intended to be used in conjunction with other guides under development by Committee E05. It is intended for
use by:
5.3.1 Model Developers—To document the usefulness of a particular calculation method perhaps for specific applications. Part
of model development includes identification of precision and limits of applicability, and independent testing.
5.3.2 Model Users—To assure themselves that they are using an appropriate model for an application and that it provides
adequate accuracy.
5.3.3 Developers of Model Performance Codes—To be sure that they are incorporating valid calculation procedures into codes.
5.3.4 Approving Offıcials—To ensure that the results of calculations using mathematical models stating conformance to this
guide, cited in a submission, show clearly that the model is used within its applicable limits and has an acceptable level of accuracy.
5.3.5 Educators—To demonstrate the application and acceptability of calculation methods being taught.
5.4 This guide is not meant to describe an acceptance testing procedure.
5.5 The emphasis of this guide is numerical models of fire evolution.
5.5.1 The precision of a model refers to the deterministic capability of a model and its repeatability.
5.5.2 The accuracy of a model refers to how well the model replicates the evolution of an actual fire.
6. General Methodology
6.1 The methodology is presented in terms of four areas of evaluation:
6.1.1 Defining the model and scenarios for which the evaluation is to be conducted,
6.1.2 Assessing the appropriateness of the theoretical basis and assumptions used in the model,
6.1.3 Assessing the mathematical and numerical robustness of the model, and
6.1.4 Quantifying the uncertainty and accuracy of the model results in predicting the course of events in similar fire scenarios.
6.1.5 This general methodology is also consistent with the methodology presented in ISO 16730, Fire safety engineering –
Assessment, verification and validation of calculation methods, which is a potentially useful resource which can be used with
ASTM E1355.
6.2 Model and Scenario Documentation:
E1355 − 12 (2018)
6.2.1 Model Documentation—Sufficient documentation of calculation models, including computer software, is absolutely
necessary to assess the adequacy of the scientific and technical basis of the models, and the accuracy of computational procedures.
Also, adequate documentation will help prevent the unintentional misuse of fire models. Guidance on the documentation of
computer-based fire models is provided in Section 7.
6.2.2 Scenario Documentation—Provide a complete description of the scenarios or phenomena of interest in the evaluation to
facilitate appropriate application of the model, to aid in developing realistic inputs for the model, and to develop criteria for judging
the results of the evaluation. Details applicable to evaluation of the predictive capability of fire models are provided in 7.2.
6.3 Theoretical Basis and Assumptions in the Model—An independent review of the underlying physics and chemistry inherent
in a model ensures appropriate application of submodels which have been combined to produce the overall model. Details
applicable to evaluation of the predictive capability of fire models are provided in Section 8.
6.4 Mathematical and Numerical Robustness—The computer implementation of the model should be checked to ensure such
implementation matches the stated documentation. Details applicable to evaluation of the predictive capability of fire models are
provided in Section 9. Along with 6.3, this constitutes verification of the model.
6.5 Quantifying the Uncertainty and Accuracy of the Model:
6.5.1 Model Uncertainty—Even deterministic models rely on inputs often based on experimental measurements, empirical
correlations, or estimates made by engineering judgment. Uncertainties in the model inputs can lead to corresponding uncertainties
in the model outputs. Sensitivity analysis is used to quantify these uncertainties in the model outputs based upon known or
estimated uncertainties in model inputs. Guidance for obtaining input data for fire models is provided by Guide E1591. Details of
sensitivity analysis applicable to evaluation of the predictive capability of fire models are provided in Section 10.
6.5.2 Experimental Uncertainty—In general, the result of measurement is only the result of an approximation or estimate of the
specific quantity subject to measurement, and thus the result is complete only when accompanied by a quantitative statement of
uncertainty. Guidance for conducting full-scale compartment tests is provided by Guide E603. Guidance for determining the
uncertainty in measurements is provided in the ISO Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement.
6.5.3 Model Evaluation—Obtaining accurate estimates of fire behavior using predictive fire models involves insuring correct
model inputs appropriate to the scenarios to be modeled, correct selection of a model appropriate to the scenarios to be modeled,
correct calculations by the model chosen, and correct interpretation of the results of the model calculation. Evaluation of a specific
scenario with different levels of knowledge of the expected results of the calculation addresses these multiple sources of potential
error. Details applicable to evaluation of the predictive capability of fire models are provided in Section 11.
7. Model and Scenario Definition
7.1 Model Documentation—Provides details of the model evaluated in sufficient detail such that the user of the evaluation could
independently repeat the evaluation. The following information should be provided:
7.1.1 Program Identification:
7.1.1.1 Provide the name of the program or model, a descriptive title, and any information necessary to define the version
uniquely.
7.1.1.2 Define the basic processing tasks performed, and describe the methods and procedures employed. A schematic display
of the flow of the calculations is useful.
7.1.1.3 Identify the computer(s) on which the program has been executed successfully and any required peripherals, including
memory requirements and tapes.
7.1.1.4 Identify the programming languages and versions in use.
7.1.1.5 Identify the software operating system and versions in use, including library routines.
7.1.1.6 Describe any relationships to other models.
7.1.1.7 Describe the history of the model’s development and the names and addresses of the individual(s) and organizations(s)
responsible.
7.1.1.8 Provide instructions for obtaining more detailed information about the model from the individual(s) responsible for
maintenance of the model.
7.1.2 References—List the publications and other reference materials directly related to the fire model or software.
7.1.3 Problem or Function Identification:
7.1.3.1 Define the fire problem modeled or function performed by the program, for example, calculation of fire growth, smoke
spread, people movement, etc.
7.1.3.2 Describe the total fire problem environment. General block or flow diagrams may be included here.
7.1.3.3 Include any desirable background information, such as feasibility studies or justification statements.
7.1.4 Theoretical Foundation:
7.1.4.1 Describe the theoretical basis of the phenomenon and the physical laws on which the model is based.
7.1.4.2 Present the governing equations and the mathematical model employed.
7.1.4.3 Identify the major assumptions on which the fire model is based and any simplifying assumptions.
E1355 − 12 (2018)
7.1.4.4 Provide results of any independent review of the theoretical basis of the model. This guide recommends a review by one
or more recognized experts fully conversant with the chemistry and physics of fire phenomena but not involved with the produ
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.