A literature review of the state-of-art in fire protection of mid-rise wood buildings under construction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work was carried in support of NRC’s Mid-rise Wood Buildings (MRWB) program, whose objective is to improve the performance of mid-rise and tall wood buildings. The main objective of the work was to determine the scope for future research to develop new technologies to prevent, fight and mitigate the impacts of fire during construction. The work involved an extensive literature review and some discussions with potential stakeholders to understand their views, concerns and research needs. The literature review covered approximately 115 publications (including magazine and newspaper articles). The current literature clearly identifies the significant fire risks faced by wood buildings during the construction phase and there are numerous examples of fires that have occurred at wood building construction sites. The literature review revealed that the current state-of-the-art essentially encompasses the development and promotion of safe working practices and fire safety guidelines for mid-rise wood buildings under construction, which is being adequately addressed by many industry stakeholders. There is a lack of research and methods to address the critical areas of active and passive fire protection during construction. This is likely due to the fact that the acceptance of mid-rise and tall wood buildings has only happened recently and was largely based on the fact that the fire safety of finished buildings is assured by proven adequacy of their fire resistance design features, such as the encapsulation approach, and mandatory requirements for fire protection systems, such as sprinklers. Therefore, NRC can make a more valuable contribution in areas where its existing fire research expertise and unique test facilities can lead to the development of new knowledge to improve safety in mid-rise wood buildings under construction by undertaking research in the following areas identified by this study: 1. Characterization of construction site fires and evaluation of detection systems; 2. Evaluation and development of active fire protection systems/technologies applicable to construction sites; 3. Evaluation and development of passive fire protection systems/technologies applicable to construction sites; 4. Improvement of firefighting tactics using scientific knowledge of construction site fires and effective suppression technologies. The research can be undertaken in phases, with Phase 1 focusing on the characterization of mid-rise wood construction site fires, evaluation and development of fire detection and suppression systems. Subsequent phases of the project could address the evaluation and development of cost-effective passive protection systems and the improvement of firefighting tactics using the fire scenarios developed in Phase 1. Further details of the potential scope for research in the above areas are presented and discussed in this report.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".