Fire Risk Analysis in Large Multi-Compartment Structures Using a Hybrid Multiscale Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors proposed a hybrid model by coupling a zone model, a CFD 1D model and a probabilistic network model, to simulate fire and smoke propagation in large multicompartment structures. The method is described in detail, and a proof of concept is developed and evaluated by applying the hybrid multiscale approach to fire scenarios in a four-story office building and a full-scale generic military corvette. The presented work is of good scientific soundness and would be of interest to the general reader, so I would recommend it for publication in Applied Sciences if my following comments can be addressed:

1. Please put the full name of “CFD” in the abstract.
2. In Page 3 equation 1, could the authors explain more how the formula of HRR equations are chosen. Is there any physics support for the power law with time?
3. The smoke concentration from 3D CFD in figure 13 and figure 16 are hard to read. Could the authors use a better colormap rather than the current black-yellow-green-blue one? Please also add some room number in the plots to better guide the readers.
4. In the smoke map shown in figure 14, why the smoke in floor D develops earlier than floor B and C?
5. In the conclusion, could the authors highlight what’s the advantages of their model compared to 3D CFD software?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors,

all in all the paper is worth reading and the method interesting. Main remarks:

1. A deeper explanation of the probability model is required. How are the values (mean value and stadard deviation) e.g for barrier failure determined? With which method (sample size,etc.)
2. SAFIR is a FE-model and not a CFD code as mentioned in several positions in the text => correction. Which cfd-model was used? reference is missing.
3. As geometry of the build is a decisive parameter for fire propagation in the drawings the dimensions (width, length, room are,...) should be added
4. The assumptions for fire load and HRR in Table 1 are very low compared to EN 1991-1-2. These low assumptions result in comparable low room temperatures and possibly slower fire spread. This should be corrected using realistic assumptions for office rooms, archives etc. according to EN 1991-1-2.                                               Detailed remarks can be found in the revised paper.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf