Fire risk analysis: general conceptual framework for describing models.

J R Hall; A Sekizawa

doi:10.1007/bf01039526

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10109449

Fire risk analysis: general conceptual framework for describing models.

J R Hall·A Sekizawa

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

A general conceptual framework has been developed as an aid to discussions of alternative approaches to fire risk analysis. The purpose is to show how each alternative seeks to address a few common concerns. Basic concepts and key elements--notably scenario structures, appropriate probability functions, and security and outcome measures--are defined and discussed, as are types of modeling approaches. A number of diverse examples are then presented using the framework to illustrate its value in making comparisons.

Explore related subjects

Fires Hospitals Japan Models, Statistical Models, Theoretical Risk Factors Risk Management United States Journal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

J R Hall, A Sekizawa. 1991. Fire risk analysis: general conceptual framework for describing models.. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01039526

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2004

Measurement and numerical analysis of flammability limits of halogenated hydrocarbons.

Flammability limits measurement was made for a number of halogenated compounds by the ASHRAE method. Most of compounds measured are the ones for which discrepancy was noted between the literature values and predicted values of flammability limits. As a result, it has been found that most of the newly obtained values of flammability limits are not in accordance with the literature values. Numerical analysis was carried out for a set of flammability limits data including the newly obtained ones using a modified analytical method based on F-number scheme. In this method, fitting procedure was done directly to flammability limits themselves instead of fitting to F-number. After the fitting process, the average relative deviation between the observed and calculated values is 9.3% for the lower limits and 14.6% for the upper limits.

Fires↗

PubMed2004

Wilderness survival.

This introduction to wilderness survival discusses basic survival rules and psychology, essential equipment, and selected survival skills, including shelter building, fire starting, water acquisition, signaling, and navigation. Among the litany of other survival topics in the literature, these skills are the most important. An effort has been made to concentrate on the skills and lessons that are simple, straightforward, and most easily used in a wilderness emergency. The purpose is to help readers to learn how to survive with the least amount of pain and the greatest possibility of success.

Fires↗

PubMed2004

Home study program. Can we build a safer OR?

PEOPLE WHO WORK in health care are among the brightest and most dedicated workers in the United States, but they are human, and humans make mistakes. HEALTH CARE FACILITIES are moving away from a culture of perfection and exploring how human factors predispose people to make certain types of errors. THIS ARTICLE discusses the types of errors being made and the organizations that are working to redesign the health care system to make it easier to do the job more safely and more difficult to make a mistake.

Fires↗