Investigation of building fire safety measures in building information modelling (BIM) environment

Abstract

In parallel with the advancement of building technology, Building Information Modelling (BIM) has gained prominence among stakeholders in the design and construction industries. BIM is becoming an increasingly effective tool in the field of fire safety, as it is in most design disciplines. In this study, an office building was modelled with Revit, one of the most extensively used BIM software, and its fire safety features were investigated utilising CYPEFIRE Design and FINEFIRE software operating in the BIM environment. The fire safety requirements of the office building are governed by the regulations outlined in Turkey’s Fire Protection Regulation and the pertinent standards. By the standards outlined in EN ISO 9241-11, a usability assessment was conducted to evaluate the dimensions of learnability, efficiency, memorability, errors, and satisfaction. The assessments revealed that the CYPEFIRE Design software provided 13 (52%) and the FINEFIRE software 10 (40%) compliance checks by the regulations and standards about the building’s 25 fire safety measures. In terms of usability parameters, the CYPEFIRE Design software is rated first for efficiency and error assessment, while the FINEFIRE software is rated first for learnability and memorability. The two software programs are distinct from one another and offer particular advantages in specific areas. The decisions made based on the data obtained from this software can examine the influence of fire safety measures on the entire structure and facilitate more effective management of the fire safety design process. In light of the prevailing circumstances, it seems inevitable that Building Information Modelling (BIM) technology will become more prevalent and comprehensive in the field of fire safety shortly.

Keywords

BIM building fire safety measures building information modelling fire safety

Introduction

The term BIM is an acronym for the words “Building Information Modelling”. BIM is a three-dimensional model-based method that facilitates more effective planning, design, construction, and management.¹ This technology, which facilitates communication between all relevant parties, offers significant potential for enhancing efficiency and reducing the duration of the process. As these potential benefits have become apparent, there has been a corresponding growth in demand for software solutions that can address the specific challenges faced by professionals in a range of other disciplines.

BIM is founded upon computer-aided design technology that originated in the 1960s.² It was not anticipated that it would be possible to replace the existing systems until the 1980s. It has brought significant benefits to users throughout time in various areas, including design, production, project planning, documentation, coordination, and management. Additionally, it has been used in other disciplines.³ This technology, which originated in two dimensions, has evolved continuously in response to the growing expectations and requirements of the user community, with three-dimensional models becoming increasingly sophisticated. This innovation had a particularly profound impact on the field of architecture. The capacity to visualise the intended item in three dimensions and to associate a multitude of characteristics with the building components has been acknowledged as aligning with the industry’s expectations, resulting in a rapid expansion of their utilisation. In conclusion, the dearth of three-dimensional design tools has recently propelled the BIM concept to the fore. The concept of Building Information Modelling (BIM) was first developed by architect Charles Eastman, who was studying computer science at Carnegie Mellon University at the time.⁴ Figure 1 illustrates the evolution of BIM over time.

Figure 1.

Timeline of BIM history (created by authors).

The growth in processing capabilities, the reduction in computer hardware costs, and the global connectivity afforded by the internet all contributed to the gradual acceptance of Building Information Modelling (BIM) in the early 2000s.⁵ Despite the aforementioned challenges, BIM remains a popular concept among construction professionals, who are yet to fully embrace its potential benefits in their projects. It has been incorporated into building information modelling (BIM) project processes, particularly by professionals in the fields of architecture and construction.⁶ Building information modelling (BIM) and simulation software are employed globally in the construction of buildings that are particularly resistant to disasters.

The statistical data provided by the Istanbul Fire Brigade indicates that 61,983 (approximately 56%) of the 110,729 fire cases that occurred in Istanbul between 2019 and 2022 were structural fires. Furthermore, the data reveals that, in the 4 years for which data was provided, there has been an increase in structural fire cases compared to the previous year.⁷ This is because the potential causes of fire are numerous and the importance of fire safety measures is not sufficiently acknowledged.^8,9 The consequence is an increase in the loss of life and a significant burden on the country’s economy.¹⁰ To mitigate the aforementioned risks, governments are implementing measures to enhance fire safety and minimise the consequences of fire in buildings. Additionally, they are promoting the utilisation of building information modelling (BIM) to assess the fire safety performance of buildings.¹¹ In comparison to other fields, the limited usage of the BIM system in fire safety engineering is a cause for concern. The objective of this study is twofold: firstly, to examine the extant literature on the subject of fire safety in the context of Building Information Modelling (BIM), and secondly, to analyse the methodologies and procedures employed in this field. An office building was modelled in Revit software, and the applicability and adequacy of fire safety measures were assessed using CYPEFIRE Design and FINEFIRE software, which are utilised for this purpose in several nations in the field of fire safety. The parameters for fire safety were developed by Turkey’s Regulation on Fire Protection, which was informed by the technical information presented in the relevant NFPA and European standards.

One such speciality, fire safety, is not currently represented at a higher level in building information modelling (BIM). This approach has been implemented in several nations and is being utilised by fire safety professionals.¹² Given the inherent possibility of fire occurring at any given moment, it is crucial to recognise that every structure carries a certain degree of fire risk. The impossibility of entirely avoiding fire formation underscores the vital importance of ‘Fire Safety’ as a discipline within the broader context of building design. This situation imposes significant responsibilities on all parties involved in the project, particularly architects and fire protection specialists. The aforementioned project actors assume active roles at each stage of the project, from the initial conceptualisation phase to the design, construction, and management phases. For these reasons, BIM and fire safety are principles that are mutually reinforcing. Several organisations are engaged in the process of developing standards and recommendations to enhance fire safety and optimise the interaction between BIM and other relevant technologies. BuildingSMART has furnished this fire safety technology with technical, political, and financial support, while the NIBS (National Institute of Building Sciences) has endeavoured to broaden the scope of IFC (Industry Foundation Classes) standards, thereby enhancing their national and international comprehensibility.¹³

In the initial stages of BIM implementation in the field of fire safety, distinct models of materials were assigned to specific companies. The sprinkler heads, fire installations, fire alarms, and other related items have all changed over time. It was employed as a platform for creating two-dimensional or three-dimensional material drawings. Consequently, for an extended period, the utilization of BIM was confined to particular system applications, rather than facilitating interaction with the building model. As the understanding of BIM technology grew, the separate models were merged with the structure and began to be actively applied through fire safety software. The technology allows for the accurate establishment of the necessary actions, the avoidance of unnecessary expenses, and the reduction of future operational costs. It is imperative that a fire safety professional conduct a review of the system to ascertain its accuracy and utility.

The advent of Building Information Modelling (BIM) has opened up significant opportunities for the more efficient implementation of fire safety practices on a global scale, within the context of the legal and regulatory frameworks that exist in different countries. In North America, the United States and Canada employ BIM for fire simulations in accordance with the legal regulations pertaining to buildings, particularly in educational institutions and wooden structures, as well as the integration with fire dynamic simulators (FDS).^14,15 In Europe, countries such as the UK and Germany are employing BIM in accordance with national fire safety regulations to develop fire safety strategies, particularly in the context of mixed-use and historic buildings.^16,17 In Asia, the rapid urbanisation in China and seismic challenges in Japan have prompted the adoption of BIM, which is integrated into traditional methods to create more effective fire safety conditions (including emergency response, training, suppression and evacuation systems, etc.).^18,19 The efficacy of BIM in the field of fire safety is contingent upon a number of factors, including the actions of regulatory bodies, advancements in technology and prevailing cultural attitudes. This underscores the significance of challenges such as data integration and the absence of standardisation.^20,21 Notwithstanding these challenges, building information modelling offers innovative opportunities in fire-safe design and promises to expand its impact as the technology develops, thus encouraging international collaboration and enabling safer buildings.^22,23

A review of the literature reveals a paucity of studies that integrate the concepts of fire safety and building information modelling (BIM). Wang et al. (2015) proposed a BIM model that incorporates modules for evacuation assessment, escape route planning, training, and equipment maintenance, thereby ensuring fire safety in buildings.²⁴ In 2020, Zhang developed a fire risk assessment system utilising a BIM model that considers fire occurrence, smoke spread, passive and active system criteria, such as escape routes affecting building users, emergency exit capacities, detection systems, and fire extinguishing equipment.²⁵ In a study conducted in China, Wang et al. identified deficiencies in the automatic code control system and proposed that these issues in fire safety can be addressed through the use of BIM.²⁶ The effectiveness of building information modelling (BIM) in the field of fire safety remains an area of uncertainty, largely due to the lack of clarity surrounding the optimal utilisation of BIM technology in fire safety applications, the disparate methodologies employed in this domain, and the limited number of studies conducted to date. How building information modelling software is utilised varies according to the institution and nation in question. This transition can be attributed to the evolving requirements of nations and the evolving working styles of specialists. This is achieved by coordinating models from several disciplines regularly and combining them into a single model using the relevant software. To identify the parameters within the BIM system, which is a multidisciplinary approach to working, it is first necessary to assess the extent to which different disciplines and project actors are affected by the modifications. Control variables can then be created based on the degree of effect. It is common practice to utilise models that accommodate an increase in both the quantity of data and the level of detail as a project progresses. These models are circulated among project stakeholders via databases. The consolidation of the building’s data into a single database enables all actors to manage and control different areas within the same model. This facilitates the fire safety specialist’s and other project stakeholders’ ability to ascertain issues such as the necessity of specific parameters at each stage of the project’s life cycle, how these criteria should be defined, and the degree of importance to be ascribed to variables by fire safety requirements.²⁷

Latest developments and basic theories about BIM and fire safety

Foundational theories

The integration of Building Information Modelling (BIM) and Fire Safety Engineering (FSE) fields enables engineers to simulate fire scenarios and analyse potential outcomes, thereby verifying the design’s adherence to fire safety standards. This integration enhances design efficiency and accuracy, resulting in structures that embody optimal safety standards. Performance-Based Design (PBD) employs the principles of BIM to transition from prescriptive codes to bespoke fire safety solutions, empowering engineers to formulate and deliver fire safety designs that align with the distinct requirements of individual buildings. PBD fosters ongoing innovation in safety strategy through the utilisation of simulations and real-time data analysis facilitated by BIM tools. The capacity of BIM technology to simulate various fire scenarios facilitates the evaluation of fire risks, the development of mitigation strategies, and their effective risk management.²⁸

Recent development

The advent of sophisticated tools for the maintenance of simulation in Building Information Modelling (BIM) platforms has enabled the emulation of fire spread and smoke movement. These tools facilitate rigorous safety planning and strengthen emergency response strategies by predicting how a fire can spread in a building environment.²⁹ The emergence of automated systems within BIM for checking fire safety code compliance has reduced incidents of human error and ensured that all safety measures comply with updated regulations, thus increasing the reliability of safety assessments during the design phase.³⁰ The present study adopted a similar approach. The integration of BIM with the Internet of Things (IoT) and smart technologies has the potential to provide buildings with real-time monitoring and control systems. Systems can respond dynamically in the event of a fire, thereby improving evacuation procedures and associated safety mechanisms.³¹ Furthermore, the capacity of BIM to perform detailed life-cycle analysis facilitates the maintenance, upgrading and retrofitting of fire safety systems, which play an important role in the long-term safety and sustainability of the building.^28,32 The utilisation of Building Information Modelling (BIM) in the formulation of comprehensive building layouts and safety plans has the potential to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of emergency responses, a critical aspect in the context of fire safety.³³

Challenges and future directions

The seamless integration of software platforms and systems in the BIM environment poses a significant challenge in this area. Research is ongoing in examining collaboration standards to facilitate more consistent and efficient data sharing between platforms.^34,35 The rapid advancement of BIM technologies requires continuous training and professional development for industry professionals to ensure that they are adequately equipped to effectively utilise these tools in fire safety planning.³¹

The integration of these fundamental theories with the most recent advancements presages a highly promising future for comprehensive and resilient fire safety strategies within the construction industry. Future directions may encompass the utilisation of AI-driven decision support systems, which could be integrated with BIM to achieve further enhancements in fire safety analysis and planning.

Methodology

Fire safety software, including CYPEFIRE Design and FINEFIRE, was employed to construct fire safety models for an office building, which was created in Revit. The specifications for the office building were developed by the relevant regulations and standards, and both architectural and fire safety models were created. The compliance of the legislation was evaluated using codes developed by the legislation and relevant standards, including passive and active fire safety measures. Once the criteria for the regulations and related standards had been established, the usability of the software in the field of fire safety was tested and evaluated. This was done by analysing and evaluating the models created by the preferred software within the scope of the studies carried out in the field of fire safety in the BIM environment. In defining the parameters for fire safety, consideration was given to the BIM software used in the creation of the model and the capabilities of that software. Figure 2 illustrates the study’s flowchart.

Figure 2.

Flow chart of the study.

The software employed facilitates fire safety design and implementation within the BIM environment. CYPEFIRE Design is a program designed to assist fire protection professionals in the process of designing and verifying fire safety requirements.³⁶ FINEFIRE is a calculation and design software for fire installations.³⁷ CYPEFIRE Design software is predominantly utilized for passive design criteria, whereas FINEFIRE software is employed for active design criteria.

The construction of the architectural model was undertaken using Revit software. Level of Detail (LOD) 200 encompasses data about the construction’s structural components, including columns, beams, floors, and fundamental structural elements, in addition to volumes and installation measurements. In the context of building information modelling methodology, the term ‘LOD’ (Level of Detail) is employed to indicate the level of detail of the model under examination. The LOD 200 expression pertains to the level at which the model elements are represented graphically as a general system, encompassing size, quantity, shape, location and orientation information.³⁸ The office building comprises a basement floor, a ground floor, two standard floors and an attic. The basement level contains a variety of facilities, including technical departments, employee dressing areas, warehouses, and offices. The upper floors, comprising the ground, first, and second floors, are primarily occupied by offices and conference rooms. The ground floor comprises gallery areas on the first and second floors, in addition to skylights on the roof. The façade measures 60 m in length and 25 m in width. The project has a floor area of 1420 m² and a total construction area of 5870 m². The building comprises five floors, with a floor height of 3.60 m. The height of the building is 14.40 m, while the height of the roof is 18.00 m. Figure 3 provides an illustrative preview of the Revit model.

Figure 3.

Screenshot of the office building model in Revit software.

By the established architectural model, discrete fire safety models were constructed within the designated software environment, as part of the study. The architectural model and fire safety models were developed using platforms that are part of the BIM system, which facilitated data sharing and software integration. The designs for passive and active fire safety measures are contingent upon the capabilities of the software in question. As the parameters for design and application on the Revit platform are directly transferred to the fire safety software, the verification and calculation modules can benefit from this information. Furthermore, any criteria that are not defined in the architectural model but may affect the fire safety design are added by the interface of each software while creating fire safety models.

To ensure compliance with existing legislation and standards in Turkey, the CYPEFIRE Design software has been updated to include the relevant rules regarding the issues that should be included in the project. The software’s general options can be divided into three categories: general settings, equipment catalogue, and controls. The aforementioned controls are discussed in greater detail under the following headings: zones, partitions, safe and risky places, escape routes, stairs, elevators, and building access. A variety of fire safety equipment, including fire extinguishers, fire cabinets, hydrants, pipelines, alarm buttons, alarm systems, detection systems, and fire alarm control panels, all have specifications.³⁶ Figure 4 illustrates the visual representation of the fire safety model developed in CYPEFIRE Design software.

Figure 4.

Screenshot of the fire safety model created in the CYPEFIRE design software.

The FINEFIRE software encompasses the entire range of fire safety parameters pertinent to the project, including the number of floors and heights, compartment boundaries, sprinkler system installation, and fire cabinets. Once all the variables inherent to the fire safety model have been identified, the software proceeds to calculate a series of standards, including NFPA 13, EN 12,845, AS 2118, BS 9251 and CEA 4001.³⁷ Figure 5 presents a screenshot of the FINEFIRE software fire safety model.

Figure 5.

Screenshot of the fire safety model created in the FINEFIRE software.

In the initial phase of the evaluation process, the pertinent standards outlined in both the EN and NFPA standards, with a particular focus on the Turkish regulation on fire protection, were subjected to scrutiny. In the evaluation of fire extinguishing systems modelled in the office building, the EN 12,845 and NFPA 13 standards were identified as the most appropriate. NFPA 13 addresses the design of sprinkler systems, the installation of such systems, and the components that comprise them.³⁹ EN 12,845, one of the standards applied in Europe, sets out the requirements for the design, installation and maintenance of sprinkler systems, to ensure the effective design and operation of sprinkler systems in buildings.⁴⁰ The potential of the software was taken into account when establishing the criteria. Table 1 lists the requirements that the model must fulfil in terms of fire safety measures in regulations and standards, based on the scope of the software used in the study.

Table 1.

Criteria that the model must meet for fire safety measures in regulations and standards.^39–41

P/A^a	Regulation and related standard	Item no	Criterion title	Explanation
P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 24/1	Fire compartments	Minimum fire resistance duration of fire compartment walls and floors are given in annex-3/B. Exit stairway enclosures, emergency elevators, vestibules 120 min, other building elements 60 min must be fire resistant
P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 24/6	Fire compartments	The maximum number of compartments required in the buildings is given in Annex-4. According to Annex-4, the maximum compartment area for office buildings is 8.000 m²
P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 32/1	Exit capacity and travel distance	The occupant load coefficient shall be based on the values specified in annex-5/a to be used in the required egress and panic calculations. According to annex-5/a, for offices, community centers and public libraries, 1 person per 10 m² of area
P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 32/3	Exit capacity and travel distance	The travel distance shall not exceed the values specified in annex-5/B according to the occupancy class. In office buildings, the common path of travel distance is 30 m and the travel distance is 75 m, in sprinklered buildings
P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 33/1	Number and width of escape	The width of an escape route is related to the total number of occupants on the floor; if the headcount per floor is between 50 and 500, the width of the escape route is calculated as not less than 100 cm, if it is between 501 and 2000 people, the width of the escape route is not less than 150 cm
P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 39/1-2	Emergency exit obligation	All buildings must have at least 2 exits provided and protected, unless otherwise specified. There must be at least 2 exits in high-risk places where 25 people are exceeded and, in every place, where 50 people are exceeded. If the number of people exceeds 500 people, there must be at least 3 exits, and if the number of people exceeds 1.000, there must be at least 4 exits
P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 41/6-7	Escape stair specifications	The headroom height on the stairs must be at least 210 cm above the step and the elevation difference between the landings must be at most 300 cm. In any escape stair, the tread height shall not be more than 175 mm and the tread width shall not be less than 250 mm
P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 41/8	Escape stair specifications	For stairs permitted to be used for escape, the minimum tread width at the well-hole line shall not be less than 100 mm in the dwellings and 125 mm in other buildings. Walls, balustrades or handrails shall be provided at both sides of each escape stair
P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 47/1	Doors on escape	The minimum clear width of doors on escape cannot be less than 80 cm and their height cannot be less than 200 cm. No sills are allowed for the doors on escape
P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 62/2	Lift specifications	Lift shaft and engine room are made of non-combustible material that is resistant to fire for at least 60 min
P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 147/3	Exit capacity and travel distance	Travel distance shall not be greater than the values given in Annex-14 according to the occupancy class. In office buildings, the common path of travel is 30 m and travel distance is 75 m, in sprinklered buildings
P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 148/1a	Number and width of escape	The total escape route width is found in centimetres by multiplying the total headcount per floor calculated according to annex-5/a by 0.5. For office buildings in annex-5/a, there is 1 person per 10 m² area
A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 24/5	Fire compartments	The periphery of atrium spaces having a surface area of less than 90 m² shall be surrounded with a smoke screen having a minimum height of 45 cm on each floor and the building shall be protected by a sprinkler system
A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 73/1	Emergency guidance	In buildings with more than one exit, emergency guide signs should be provided so that users can reach the exits easily. In the event of an emergency, emergency exit signs must be placed in order to display the locations of the exits to be used for evacuation and the planned exit route starting from each point in the building to the people inside of the building
A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 73/4-5	Emergency guidance	Guidance signs; as white on a green background, they include signs arranged to the relevant regulations and standards and the letters “EXIT” for exits to be used in normal times, and “EMERGENCY EXIT” for exits to be used in emergency situations. Maximum visibility distance should be provided so that the guide signs can be seen from every point and the height of the sign is not less than 15 cm; the distance should be equal to 100 times of the sign height for guide signs externally illuminated or illuminated from the sides, and 200 times the sign size height for emergency guidance units with backlit signs illuminated from inside. Guidance signs should be added as necessary for access from points further away from this distance. Guidance signs shall be placed at a height of 200-240 cm above the ground
A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 75/2	Detection and alarm system	Manual fire warning is initiated with fire alarm buttons. Fire alarm buttons are installed on fire escape routes. Fire alarm buttons must be placed in such a way that the horizontal access distance from any point on a floor to any fire alarm button on the same floor does not exceed 60 m. this distance can be reduced in places where there are disabled or elderly people. All fire alarm buttons must be visible and easily accessible. Fire alarm buttons are placed at a height of at least 110 cm and at most 130 cm above the ground
A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 92/3-4	Water tanks and water supplies	The required water tank volume should be designed to supply water at least 60 minutes for medium risk. The water tank volume of water extinguishing systems with a sprinkler system, fire cabinet and hydrant system can be calculated based on the data in annex-8/a table for preliminary calculation. When using the table, the height value is taken according to the sprinkler head located in the highest location in the system
A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 92/5	Water tanks and water supplies	The preliminary calculation of the water tank volume can be calculated by adding the water flow rate of the sprinkler system calculated according to annex-8/B, the water flow rate of the fire cabinet specified in annex-8/C and the hydrant flow rate if there is a hydrant system, and multiplying the 60-min period for medium risk class
A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 94/1-b-1,2	Fixed piping system and fire cabinets	It is obligatory to build fire cabinets in high-rise buildings and workshops, warehouses, accommodation, health, assembly and education buildings with a total indoor usage area of more than 1.000 m², in closed car parks with a total area of more than 600 m² and in boiler rooms with a thermal capacity of more than 350 kW. Fire cabinets should be arranged with a maximum distance of 30 m between them. It should be placed as close to the corridor exits and stairway landings as possible so that it can be seen easily
A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 96/2d	Sprinkler system	It is obligatory to install an automatic sprinkler system in multi-storey stores, shopping, trade and entertainment places with a total area of over 2.000 m²
A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 99/2	Portable fire extinguishers	It is necessary to have one piece of 6 kg dry chemical powder or equivalent gas fire extinguishers of the appropriate type, one for each 250 m² building construction area in medium risk class
A	NFPA 13	Article 11.1.4.2	Installation requirements	In combined systems where fire hydrant, fire cabinet and sprinkler installations are used together; the additional water requirement for the fire cabinet and hydrant should be added to the sprinkler system water requirement
A	TS EN 12845	Table 3	Design criteria for LH, OH and HHP	Water requirement in sprinkler systems using full cost piping system is determined according to density/area design criteria. The design density should not be less than 5 mm/min when the sprinkler in the area is operating
A	TS EN 12845	Table 19	Maximum coverage and spacing for sprinklers other than sidewall	The maximum protection area for the sprinklers should not exceed 12.1 m² and the distance between them should not exceed 4.6 m. the distance of the sprinklers to the wall should not exceed half of the maximum 4.6 m
A	TS EN 12845	Table 37a	Sprinklers types and K- factors for various hazard classes	In order for the sprinkler system design to provide appropriate protection, standard spray vertical type, pendent recessed type, semi-recessed type, concealed type, wall type sprinklers suitable for medium hazard class should be selected

^aPassive and Active Measures (P/A).

The present study is limited in scope to the criteria outlined in the aforementioned table. This is because the legal regulations and software in question, which fall outside the specified criteria between BYKHY, NFPA 13 and EN 12,845 principles, are unable to fulfil the requisite design and verification functions.

Results

The extent to which the software outputs and fire safety models were developed to fulfil the fire safety criteria has been established. Subsequently, the usability of BIM software was evaluated by applying usability parameters. Following implementation, the two BIM-based fire safety models were found to exhibit both similarities and differences. The two software programs differ in numerous aspects, including the means and scope of defining criteria for passive and active fire safety measures and the quantity and quality of documentation provided by the software.

The CYPEFIRE Design software generates three distinct categories of output documents. The software generates three types of output documents: “Checks, Projects, and Materials Schedule”. The “Controls” document delineates the procedures for inputting data into the software (zones, stairs, portable extinguishers in zones, fire cabinets, smoke detectors, detection systems, and alarm buttons) throughout the development of the fire safety project. The “Projects” document provides a detailed account of the controls employed, including zones, safe zones, risk zones, stairs, elevators, and escape routes, as well as the regulatory and standard-related considerations. The specifications and codes of the equipment are included in the material schedule. As illustrated in Figure 6, the CYPEFIRE Design software, which generates reports based on the control values entered by the user, displays green checkmarks “✔” for the values provided and red crosses “✗” for the values that cannot be provided.

Figure 6.

Control section provided by CYPEFIRE design software.

The document provides information on various aspects of the model, including the cover, acceptances, plumbing systems, legend, account sheet, fire pump calculation, water tank calculation, circuit drawing, column diagram, pressure loss of parts, circuit control, group results, discovery list, and technical specifications. This information is generated by the FINEFIRE software. The cover section includes information about the employer, project, location, date, and project manager. In contrast, the acceptance section incorporates the standard criteria selected during the utilisation of the software. The section dedicated to installation systems contains information such as the design density of the installation selected for the fire safety model, the maximum protection area of the sprinkler heads, and the K factor. A comparison of the data entered in the model and the values that should be given according to the standards can be made on the screen or by using the calculation reports provided when using the software. Figures 7 and 8 show selections from the FINEFIRE software report.

Figure 7.

Circuit options section provided by the FINEFIRE software.

Figure 8.

Sprinkler information section provided by the FINEFIRE software.

The CYPEFIRE Design software incorporates a range of passive fire safety measures, including the calculation of fire compartment size, the delineation of escape routes and the specification of escape stairs and passenger load. Additionally, it facilitates the management and control of active fire safety measures, such as the configuration of fire cabinets, the definition of detection and fire alarm systems, the selection of firefighting equipment and the definition of emergency guidance, all of which are based on user-defined rules. The FINEFIRE software enables the creation of drawings and calculations of active systems, particularly about fire safety measures such as fire compartments, fire cabinets, sprinkler systems, and so forth. The software automatically provides calculation algorithms that comply with the standards selected for FINEFIRE software.

The fire safety models developed using two separate tools have provided sufficient information about specific concerns to the extent of the software’s capabilities. However, they have been limited in their scope. To create these scenarios, compliance with the necessary regulations and standards was evaluated. The criteria for this evaluation are shown in Table 1. This enables the regulation and inspection of the software examined within the scope of the study. The results of this evaluation are documented in Table 2.

Table 2.

Conformity analysis of software according to fire safety measures in regulations and standards.

	Passive /active	Regulation and related standard	Item no	Conformity assessment
	Passive /active	Regulation and related standard	Item no	CYPEFIRE design	FINEFIRE
1	P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 24/1	−	−
2	P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 24/6	+	+
3	P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 32/1	+	−
4	P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 32/3	+	−
5	P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 33/1	+	−
6	P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 39/1-2	+	−
7	P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 41/6-7	−	−
8	P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 41/8	−	−
9	P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 47/1	−	−
10	P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 62/2	−	−
11	P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 147/3	+	−
12	P	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 148/1a	+	−
13	A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 24/5	−	+
14	A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 73/1	+	−
15	A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 73/4-5	+	−
16	A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 75/2	+	−
17	A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 92/3-4	−	+
18	A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 92/5	−	+
19	A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 94/1-b-1,2	+	+
20	A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 96/2d	+	+
21	A	Turkey’s regulation on fire protection	Article 99/2	+	−
22	A	NFPA 13	Article 11.1.4.2	−	+
23	A	EN 12845	Table 3	−	+
24	A	EN 12845	Table 19	−	+
25	A	EN 12845	Table 37a	−	+

A total of 25 criteria for passive and active fire safety measures are evaluated in this study, as illustrated in Table 2. The CYPEFIRE Design software is found to meet the criteria for passive fire safety measures, whereas the FINEFIRE software is observed to meet a greater number of the criteria for active fire safety measures. Both software programs used in the study are demonstrated to provide passive and active fire safety measures by the relevant regulations and requirements, as illustrated in Figure 9.

Figure 9.

Conformity assessment chart of the software according to fire safety measures in regulations and standards.

In the context of passive fire safety measures, a total of 12 criteria were taken into consideration. The CYPEFIRE Design software is capable of verifying seven out of the twelve criteria (58%), whereas the FINEFIRE software is only able to confirm the compliance of one criterion (0.8%). In the context of active fire safety measures, 13 criteria were considered. The CYPEFIRE Design software is capable of verifying 6 (46%) of the 13 criteria, whereas the FINEFIRE software can inspect 9 (69%). The CYPEFIRE Design software meets 13 of the 25 requirements (52%), while the FINEFIRE software meets 10 (40%). The percentage values are presented in Table 3.

Table 3.

The compliance percentage of the software according to fire safety measures in regulations and standards.

Software	Passive fire safety measures	Active fire safety measures	Fire safety measures
CYPEFIRE design	58%	46%	52%
FINEFIRE	0.8%	69%	40%

Following an examination of the software’s compliance with the relevant regulations and standards, an assessment was also conducted of its usability. The EN ISO 9241-11 standard is employed as a usability parameter. The ISO 9241-11 (2018) standard defines usability as “achieving the goals stated within the context of effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction of a system, product, or service by particular users, at a given degree of usage”.⁴² By the aforementioned definition, usability is associated with learnability, efficiency, memorability, the occurrence of errors, and satisfaction characteristics. The usability of the software was evaluated as an assessment technique within the context of the study, based on user comments. It should be noted that this subjective rating, as illustrated in Table 4, may vary from one individual to another.

Table 4.

Evaluation of software according to usability parameters.

Software	Usability parameters
Software	Learnability	Efficiency	Memorability	Errors	Satisfaction
CYPEFIRE design		+		+	+
FINEFIRE	+		+		+

In terms of the ease with which it can be learned, the FINEFIRE software is simpler and easier to understand than the CYPEFIRE Design software. In terms of efficiency, CYPEFIRE Design software outperforms FINEFIRE software due to the greater quantity of information it provides. The selection of FINEFIRE software was based on the premise that it offers a more intuitive and accessible interface, facilitating a more expedient learning curve. CYPEFIRE Design software was selected for use in this study due to its more explicit warnings regarding errors. The satisfaction parameter evaluated the software’s capacity to provide the intended benefit and the suitability of its capabilities. The two software programs demonstrated a satisfactory level of professional satisfaction with fire safety measures. Consequently, the evaluation of the CYPEFIRE Design software and the FINEFIRE software is deemed acceptable.

Conclusions

It is acknowledged that each building presents a certain level of fire risk and that it is not possible to eliminate this risk. Consequently, significant responsibilities are placed on all parties involved in the project, particularly architects and fire protection professionals in building design. All actors utilising BIM software can access the correct information at the appropriate time and interact on a common network. In light of these considerations, the deployment of BIM in the domain of fire safety and the comprehensive integration of multiple disciplines offers a range of advantages that facilitate the more efficient completion of the project. At present, there is a plethora of software that is tailored to the specific requirements of numerous disciplines within the BIM environment, with a particular focus on fire safety. The objective of the study was to evaluate the software utilized in the domain of fire safety within the context of Building Information Modelling (BIM) about its compliance with established standards and legislation, as well as its usability. To this end, an architectural model created in Revit software was employed as a reference, upon which fire safety models were developed using BIM software. This software is widely utilized in the field of fire safety in numerous countries, including the United Kingdom, where CYPEFIRE Design and FINEFIRE are prominent examples

The results of the analyses were used to assess compliance with the relevant standards and legislation about the 25 passive and active fire safety measures that an office building is required to provide. The software is only capable of regulating the 25 criteria that have been examined, which relate to passive and active fire safety measures, rules, and fundamental characteristics that a building must meet to comply with the given standards. Of the 25 criteria examined, 12 pertain to passive fire safety measures, while the remaining 13 relate to active fire safety measures. While the CYPEFIRE Design software offers seven criteria within the scope of passive fire safety measures, the FINEFIRE software provides only one of the 12 criteria. The software is capable of controlling and regulating six out of the 13 criteria within the scope of active fire safety measures, as demonstrated by the CYPEFIRE Design software, and nine out of the 13 criteria, as demonstrated by the FINEFIRE software. Upon examination within the context of the study’s 25 fire safety measures, the CYPEFIRE Design software was found to provide 13 (52%) standard and regulatory compliance checks, while the FINEFIRE software provided 10 (40%). In terms of usability, the criteria of learnability, efficiency, memorability, errors, and satisfaction were considered. In this regard, CYPEFIRE Design software demonstrated superior performance in terms of efficiency and error reduction, while FINEFIRE software exhibited a more favourable outcome in terms of learnability and memorability. The evaluation findings revealed that both software products have distinctive features and offer enhanced benefits in specific areas. However, both software products demonstrated optimal satisfaction levels.

In practice, there is a significant discrepancy in the implementation of fire safety regulations about the BIM system. In particular, the fact that the control mechanisms implemented by each country are different from one another makes it challenging to provide truly automatic control in the application of an international BIM software used in the field of fire safety to a local project. While there is a substantial body of literature on the topic of automatic code control, the number of studies that integrate BIM systems is relatively limited. Consequently, the implementation of fire safety and BIM applications is constrained. While the software permits the application of specific standards to the project, the transfer of the principles outlined in the Regulation on Fire Protection of Buildings (BYKHY) currently in force in our country to the software environment presents certain challenges. The aforementioned difficulties associated with the implementation of BIM applications by the principles outlined in the BYKHY Regulations on Fire Protection of Buildings can be overcome, thereby facilitating an innovative approach to the control of fire safety performance criteria in buildings. The utilisation of BIM in construction projects offers significant advantages in the establishment of fire safety performance requirements for buildings. These are the aforementioned:

• BIM can be employed for the analysis of fire safety performance in buildings. During the design phase, a variety of parameters can be subjected to analysis, including fire scenarios, fire spread, smoke control, evacuation times and structural durability.

• BIM can be employed to enhance the fire safety performance of buildings. A cost-benefit analysis can be conducted by comparing alternative options during the design phase, thus enabling the optimal system to be selected and the impact of modifications to be evaluated.

• BIM can be employed to visualise and subsequently document the fire safety performance of buildings. Consequently, the rationale behind design decisions, adherence to pertinent regulations (such as those outlined in standards and regulations), potential alternative solutions, and suggestions for enhancements can be articulated.

Integrating the fire safety element into the architectural design from the outset, utilising computer-aided Building Information Modelling (BIM) software, facilitates the formulation of optimal decisions at the design stage. It is evident that the decisions made with the data collected by these tools, which can examine the impact of passive and active fire safety measures on the entire structure, will contribute to the more efficient management of the fire safety process. The incorporation of fire safety measures into the BIM environment is a logical consequence of the fire safety evaluation. While the current generation of BIM software for fire safety does meet some requirements, it is evident that there are still limitations. A review of the findings from the study reveals that the utilisation of BIM in the domain of fire safety signifies a notable advancement. As with other design disciplines, BIM systems and fire safety measures will become increasingly comprehensive as all project stakeholders successfully exchange data and models throughout the project life cycle.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Safak Besiroglu

Nuri Serteser

References

Autodesk . Building information modeling. San Francisco, CA: Autodesk Building Industry Solutions. White Paper, 2002. https://www.laiserin.com/features/bim/autodesk_bim.pdf (accessed 21 August 2021).

Sun

Jiang

Skibniewski

, et al. A literature review of the factors limiting the application of BIM in the construction industry. Technol Econ Dev Econ 2017; 23(5): 764–779. DOI: 10.3846/20294913.2015.1087071.

Mitchell

. The design studio of the future. In: Mitchell (Der)

(ed). The electronic design studio: architectural knowledge and media in the computer era. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1990.

Ballard

. The last planner system of production control. Ph.D. Dissertation. Birmingham: The University of Birmingham, 2000. https://leanconstruction.org/uploads/wp/media/docs/ballard2000-dissertation.pdf (accessed 13 October 2024).

Holzer

. The BIM manager’s handbook: guidance for professionals in architecture. In Chapter 1: best practice BIM. Engineering, and construction. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2016. https://books.google.com/books?id=mqnQCwAAQBAJ&pgis=1 (accessed 21 December 2021).

Eastman

Teicholz

Sacks

, et al. BIM handbook: a guide to building information modeling for owners. In Managers, designers, engineers and contractors. 1st ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2008.

The Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Fire Department . The Istanbul metropolitan municipality fire department 2019–2022 period statistics. Istanbul: The Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Fire Department. 2023.

Bae

Cha

. A method on developing 3D/BIM-based real time fire disaster information management. Korean J Constr Eng Manage 2023; 24(2): 3–12.

Hassanain

Hafeez

Sanni-Anibire

. A ranking system for fire safety performance of student housing facilities. Saf Sci 2017; 92: 116–127. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2016.10.002.

10.

Amadeo

. Fire facts, damage, and effect on the economy. New York, NY: The Balance is Part of the Dotdash Publishing Family, 2019. https://www.thebalance.com/wildfires-economic-impact-4160764 (accessed 13 October 2024).

11.

Omidvari

Mansouri

Nouri

. A pattern of fire risk assessment and emergency management in educational center laboratories. Saf Sci 2015; 73: 34–42. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2014.11.003.

12.

NBS . National building specification international BIM report 2016. Blantyre: NBS. https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/nbs-international-bim-report-2016 (2016), accessed 17 October 2021.

13.

SFPE - Society of Fire Protection Engineers . Building information modeling and fire protection engineering, position statement. Gaithersburg, MD: SFPE - Society of Fire Protection Engineers, 2011. https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/sfpe.site-ym.com/resource/collection/4BF68F67-A493-4737-8E84-1247C90AF8D1/111023_SFPE_BIM_POSITION_STATEMENT_Final.pdf (accessed 13 June 2021).

14.

Liu

Wang

. Indoor fire simulation in low-rise teaching buildings based on BIM–FDS. Fire 2023; 6(5): 203. DOI: 10.3390/fire6050203.

15.

Kincelova

Boton

Blanchet

, et al. Fire safety in tall timber building: a BIM-based automated code-checking approach. Buildings 2020; 10(7): 121. DOI: 10.3390/buildings10070121.

16.

Fargnoli

Lombardi

. Building information modelling (BIM) to enhance occupational safety in construction activities: research trends emerging from one decade of studies. Buildings 2020; 10: 98.

17.

Rodrigues

Baptista

Pinto

. BIM approach in construction safety – a case study. Buildings 2021; 10(6): 98. DOI: 10.3390/buildings10060098.

18.

Liu

Hong

. Fire protection and evacuation analysis in underground interchange tunnels by integrating BIM and numerical simulation. Fire 2023; 6(4): 139. DOI: 10.3390/fire6040139.

19.

Wan

, et al. Integrating virtual reality and building information modeling for improving highway tunnel emergency response training. Buildings 2022; 12(10): 1523. DOI: 10.3390/buildings12101523.

20.

Feng

Wang

Fan

, et al. A BIM-based coordination support system for emergency response. IEEE Access 2021; 9: 68814–68825. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3077237.

21.

Rashidi Nasab

Malekitabar

Elzarka

, et al. Managing safety risks from overlapping construction activities: a BIM approach. Buildings 2023; 13(10): 2647. DOI: 10.3390/buildings13102647.

22.

Ahn

Kim

Park

, et al. Improving effectiveness of safety training at construction worksite using 3D BIM simulation. Adv Civ Eng 2020; 2020: 2473138. DOI: 10.1155/2020/2473138.

23.

Shams Abadi

Moniri Tokmehdash

Hosny

, et al. BIM-based Co-simulation of fire and occupants’ behavior for safe construction rehabilitation planning. Fire 2021; 4(4): 67. DOI: 10.3390/fire4040067.

24.

Wang

, et al. Applying building information modeling to support fire safety management. Autom ConStruct 2015; 59: 158–167. DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2015.02.001.

25.

Zhang

. Design and implementation of BIM-based fire risk assessment system. J Phys: Conf Ser 2020; 1584: 012064. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1584/1/012064.

26.

Wang

Liu

Cai

, et al. An automated fire code compliance checking jointly using building information models and natural language processing. Fire 2023; 6(9): 358–375. DOI: 10.3390/fire6090358.

27.

Beşiroğlu

. Investigation of building fire safety measures in BIM environment. (Master’s Thesis). Istanbul: Graduate School, Istanbul Technical University, 2022.

28.

Wang

Feng

, et al. Fire risk assessment for building operation and maintenance based on BIM technology. Build Environ 2021; 205: 108188.

29.

Sun

Turkan

. A BIM-based simulation framework for fire safety management and investigation of the critical factors affecting human evacuation performance. Adv Eng Inform 2020; 44: 101093.

30.

Gong

Tang

, et al. BIM-Integrated construction safety risk assessment at the design stage of building projects. Autom ConStruct 2021; 124: 103553.

31.

Chen

Hou

Zhang

, et al. Development of BIM, IoT and AR/VR technologies for fire safety and upskilling. Autom ConStruct 2021; 125: 103631.

32.

Chen

Lai

Lin

. BIM-based augmented reality inspection and maintenance of fire safety equipment. Autom ConStruct 2020; 110: 103041.

33.

. BIM-Based building fire emergency management: combining building users’ behavior decisions. Autom ConStruct 2020; 109: 102975.

34.

Zhou

Bao

Shu

, et al. BIM and ontology-based knowledge management for dam safety monitoring. Autom ConStruct 2023; 145: 104649.

35.

Kim

Lee

, et al. Framework of BIM-based quantitative evaluation for enhancing fire safety performance of buildings. J Manag Eng. 2024; 40.

36.

CYPEFIRE Design.

Software website. Alicante: CYPEFIRE Design, 2021. https://cypefire-design.en.cype.com/ (accessed 1 November 2021).

37.

FINEFIRE . Software website. Singapore: FINEFIRE, 2021. https://www.4msa.com/ (accessed 1 November 2021).

38.

Forum

BIM.

Level of development (LOD) specification part I & commentary for building information models and data

, 2023. https://bimforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/LOD-Spec-2023-Part-I-2024-02-27.pdf , (accessed 5 March 2024).

39.

NFPA 13 . Standard for the installation of sprinkler systems. Quincy, MA: NFPA, 2007.

40.

EN 12845. Fixed fire extinguishing systems - automatic sprinkler systems - design, installation and maintenance, 2020.

41.

Turkey’s Regulation on Fire

Protection.

Official Newspaper of the Republic of Turkey, No: 26735, 2007. (Amended: Official Newspaper, 09.07.2015, Issue: 2015/7401).

42.

ISO 9241-11. Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (Vdts) — part 11: guidance on usability, 2018. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-11:ed-2:v1:en, (accessed 21 December 2021).