Kostreva, M.
and Lancaster, L.
(1998),
Comparison of Two Methodologies in HAZARD I Fire Egress Analysis., Fire Technology, , -1, [online], https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=916972
(Accessed October 20, 2025)
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock (
) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.
Comparison of Two Methodologies in HAZARD I Fire Egress Analysis.
Published
Author(s)
M M. Kostreva, L C. Lancaster
Abstract
Within the framework of HAZARD I, fire egress analysis is performed using the EXITT program. Yet another way to analyze fire egress employs newly developed multiple objective dynamic programming. This paper compares these two approaches by applying them to a model fire of moderate power in a residential building. The findings demonstrate that multiple objective dynamic programming can compute all the paths EXITT finds, but EXITT can't find all the paths multiple objective programming can. Some trade-offs inherent in choosing among the computed egress paths are discussed, and the features of the two fire egress methods are contrasted.Citation
Fire Technology
Publisher Info
, -1
Pub Type
Book Chapters
Download Paper
Keywords
egress, computer programs, fire models, residential buildings, algorithms, optical density, carbon monoxide
Citation
Issues
If you have any questions about this publication or are having problems accessing it, please contact [email protected].
Created September 30, 1998, Updated February 17, 2017