A Prediction Model for Smoke Spread Path in High Rise Building Fires Based on Graph Theory

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper presents an interesting new method for predicting smoke spread in buildings. The theory could be better described, and the model predictions further validated (only 1 scenario is used), which questions the validity of the model. Was it luck or was the model adequate? Further validation is strongly needed.

Some comments:

- line 64: to my knowledge, a 6-storey building is not considered as "high-rise" in China. Please review throughout the paper.

- figure2: is such floor configuration acceptable in China given there is only 1 exit?

- line 186: you previously mentioned 6-storey and here you say 13. Is it 6 or 13 ?

- Table 1: one of the parameters is in Chinese. Please translate to English.

 

Paper is well-written.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The article  “A Prediction Model for Smoke Spread Path in High-Rise Building Fires Based on Graph Theory” presents a graph-based model for predicting smoke propagation paths in high-rise buildings.

Generally, the article is quite interesting and presents significant trends in smoke research and verification methods. However, the authors don’t explain exactly how to use a graph theory-based model and how to create it. There is also no information about boundary and initial conditions taken for the presented analyses.

Smoke propagation in a high-rise building depends mostly on internal leakages and smoke control systems installed. The presented model probably doesn’t take into account these elements. At this technical level, the model seems to be unuseful in engineering practice.

The research presentation is unclear for a reader, and technical English nomenclature requires extensive corrections.

Author Response

Please see the attachmen

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper presents a methodology consisting in a graph-based model for predicting smoke propagation paths in high-rise building fires. The topic in interesting, but the authors should better underline the novelties of the work both in the abstract and in the conclusions, which are very poor. Other comments in the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Moderate editing of the english should be implemented.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I accept the provided corrections, but before the final publication, I suggest changing the form of presentation of the simulation results for their comparison. Their actual presentation in tables makes it very hard t compare them for the reader.  

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

No further comments. Thanks for implementing the revisions.

Author Response

Thank you for the valuable suggestion.