JP4968653B2 - Fire risk evaluation system and fire risk evaluation method - Google Patents

Description

【００３３】
表１には、リスク評価の条件設定項目が示されている。この条件設定項目は、大分類と中分類に区分される。また、大分類は、建物条件、室条件、空間構成条件、防火対策条件、環境条件に区分されている。大分類の建物条件には、中分類として「建物階数、延べ床面積、構造種別、階高、竣工年、建物想定使用年数、建物再調達価格、躯体・仕上げ・設備の再調達価格比、出火率算出における放火の有無、単位面積・期間当たり休業損害コスト」の項目が設定されている。
【００３４】
大分類の室条件に対する中分類として、「室用途、室幅、室奥行、天井高さ、室階数、スパンドレル高さ、外部開口幅、外部開口高さ、火災室想定の有無、内装の種別、壁体の材質、感知器・排煙設備の種類、スプリンクラー設備の有無、ヘッド間隔」の項目が設定されている。また、大分類の空間構成条件に対する中分類として、「隣接する室の開口幅、開口高さ、開口扉の防火性能、開口の閉鎖機構、壁体の耐火時間」の項目が設定されている。
【００３５】
大分類の防火対策条件に対する中分類として、「各種防火設備の設置状況、防災センター設置階数、防火管理者数（昼間、夜間）、近隣消防署との距離、防火設備の更新間隔、年間点検費用、基本保険料率」の項目が設定されている。また、大分類の環境条件に対する中分類として、「外気温度、室内温度」の項目が設定されている。このように、表１には、リスク評価の条件設定項目が詳細に示されているので、表１の条件設定を行なうことにより精度良く火災リスクを評価することができる。
【００３６】
次に、図１のライフサイクルリスク評価モデルに関して、各サブ評価モデルについて説明する。条件設定（Ｘ）は、表１の大分類にあるように、建物、室、空間構成、防火対策、環境のそれぞれの条件を設定する。このような処理は、サーバに必要な項目を入力して表１のテーブルを作成し、ハードディスクなどの適宜の記憶手段に記憶させておくことにより行なわれる。
【００３７】
（Ａ）火災シナリオ評価モデルは、火災シナリオの設定（Ａａ）と、火災発生頻度の算出（Ａｂ）によるモデル化を行なうものである。（Ｂ）火災リスク評価モデルは、フエイズ毎の焼損・煙損・水損面積の算出（Ｂａ）を行なう。この処理は、建物損失コストと発生頻度の算出（Ｂｂ）、収容物損失コストと発生頻度の算出（Ｂｃ）、休業損失コストと発生頻度の算出（Ｂｄ）を含むものである。
【００３８】
（Ｃ）防火対策コスト評価モデルは、対策イニシャルコストの算出（Ｃａ）、対策ランニングコストの算出（Ｃｂ）を行なう。（Ｄ）ライフサイクルリスク評価モデルでは、（Ｂ）火災リスク評価モデルに基づきライフサイクル損失コストの算出（Ｄａ）を行なう。また、（Ｃ）防火対策コスト評価モデルに基づきライフサイクル防火対策コストの算出（Ｄｂ）を行なう。前記のコスト（Ｄａ）、（Ｄｂ）により損失コストの対策コスト超過確率を算出する（Ｄｃ）。
【００３９】
次に、（Ａ）火災シナリオ評価モデルについて、さらに説明する。火災シナリオの評価は、▲１▼各室での出火率、および、▲２▼火災発生時に起こり得る事象の発生確率を算出し、▲１▼と▲２▼の積により、各室で火災が発生した場合の対象期間内でのシナリオの発生頻度を定量化する。各室での出火率を算定する際には、過去の火災統計等に基づき、室用途毎での単位面積当たり年当たり平均出火回数を設定する。そして、例えば室用途、床面積をパラメータとして、室単位の年当たり平均出火回数を算出する。
【００４０】
火災発生後に起こり得る事象の発生確率は，火災の拡大を室単位で段階的に拡大していく火災フェイズの概念に基づきモデル化し、フェイズ毎に関連する防火対策、および非常時の対応行動の作動成否を条件として与える。このようにして、フェイズ毎に事象の発生確率を実態に即して算出する。
【００４１】
次に、（Ｂ）火災リスク評価モデルについて説明する。火災リスク評価モデルは、火災シナリオモデルで設定した火災フェイズに対して、建物内のある室で出火した場合の損害面積を算出する。このような処理を、出火室として想定される全ての室に対して繰り返す。このようにして、最終的には、▲１▼火災により発生する建物損害、▲２▼室内の収容物の物的損害、▲３▼火災後の事業中断による休業損害のリスクを、損失コストを共通の指標として算出する。
【００４２】
次に、前記損害面積の算出について説明する。火災による損害発生の要因としては、主に、▲１▼延焼拡大に伴う焼損、▲２▼煙伝播に伴う煙損、▲３▼消火に伴う水損が挙げられる。本実施形態の火災リスク評価モデルにおいては、これら３つの要因による損害を、設定した火災フェイズ毎に各々面積に換算する。
【００４３】
図３は、火災フェイズ毎の損害面積算出方法を示す説明図である。図３により本実施形態における損害面積算出の基本的な考え方を説明する。図３において、（ａ）欄にはフェイズ１〜６、（ｂ）欄には各フェイズの火災の状態、（ｃ）欄には焼損面積算出方法、（ｄ）欄には煙損面積算出方法、（ｅ）欄には水損面積算出方法をそれぞれ記載している。
【００４４】
（ｃ）欄の焼損面積の算出方法について説明する。フェイズ１、２では、火災室内で火災の成長に伴い、損害面積が同心円状に拡がると仮定した。フェイズ４は、火災シナリオ評価モデルから得られるフェイズの限界時間、消防隊の到着時間のいずれか短い時間内に、火災階で燃え拡がる室の範囲を壁の耐火時間をもとに算出する。フェイズ５、６では、外部開口を介した噴出火炎による非火災階への上階延焼を対象とする。フェイズ６では対策が全て奏功しないことから、火災階より上の階全てを焼損面積の算定対象とした。
【００４５】
次に、（ｄ）欄の煙損面積算出方法について説明する。フェイズ１〜３は、焼損範囲と火災室の扉の開閉条件を考慮して算出する。またフェイズ４〜６では、階段室やエレベータシャフト等の竪穴区画の隙間を介して上層階へ煙が伝播するものとした。
【００４６】
次に、（ｅ）欄の水損面積算出方法について説明する。フェイズ２では、スプリンクラー設備がある場合は、危険側の条件としてヘッド４個が同時に作動した場合を想定した。スプリンクラー設備がない場合は，屋内消火栓を用いて消火した場合を想定し，火災統計による焼損面積と水損面積の回帰式を用いた。フェイズ３〜６は，火災階での水損が下階に影響を与えるものとし、火災階の水損面積と同じ面積を２〜３階加えている。図３に示されているように、焼損面積、煙損面積、水損面積の算出の際には、火災室の床面積（Ａ_Ｆ）、Ｋ階の床面積｛Ａ_Ｆ（Ｋ）｝、火災室を起点とした耐火時間が所定時間以内の床面積Ａ（ｉ）などのファクターが使用されている。これらの損害面積の演算は、サーバの制御部により行なわれる。
【００４７】
図３により算出した損害面積を基にして、損失コストを算出する。焼損、煙損、水損の各々の損害が、躯体、仕上げ、設備に与える影響を考慮した上で、建物の再調達価格と、躯体、仕上げ、設備の再調達価格比に基づき、損失コストに換算する。各々の損失コストの換算方法の例を式１に示す。式１は、（１）〜（３）の３式からなるものである。
【００４８】
【数１】

【００４９】
式１において、Ｌc１：躯体損失コスト（円）、Ｌｃ２：仕上げ損失コスト（円）、a：躯体の損害割合調整率、Ｃ：建物再調達価格（円）、Ｒ_１、Ｒ_２、Ｒ_３：躯体、仕上げ、設備の再調達価格比、Ｄ_１ｉ、Ｄ_２ｉ、Ｄ_３ｉ：i階における焼損、煙損、水損面積（ｍ^２）、Ａ_ｉ：i階における床面積、Ａ_{ｔｏｔａｌ}：延べ床面積（ｍ^２）とする。
【００５０】
式１により建物の直接損失コスト（Ｂｂ）を算出する。すなわち、シナリオ毎の焼損、煙損、水損の各損害面積の算出結果を、建物の直接損失に換算する。次に、収容物の損失コストを算出する。収容物の損失コスト（Ｂｃ）は、室用途をパラメータとして、単位面積当たりの平均収容物コストを設定する。その上で、室単位での損害面積算出結果を用いて、収容物の物的な損失コストに換算する。
【００５１】
次に事業中断による休業損失コスト（Ｂｄ）を算出する。休業損失コストは、損害面積の規模に応じて想定される建物補修期間を事業中断期間と仮定し、単位面積・期間当たり平均休業コストとの積により損失コストに換算する。単位面積・期間当たり平均休業コストは建物の業態により大きく異なるが、事務所については建物賃料を基準として設定する。
【００５２】
（Ｃ）防火対策コスト評価モデルについては、防火設備のイニシャルコスト（初期投資コスト）、および防火対策に係わる建物使用段階でのランニングコスト（維持管理コスト）を対象として、竣工後の経過年数に対する投資コストを評価する。ここで、イニシャルコスト評価モデル（Ｃａ）は、建築物の用途、規模をもとに防火対策の仕様と設置数を算出する。そして、予め設定した防火設備の機器数当たり（または設置対象床面積当たり）の単価データを用いて、建築物の建設時に設置される防火対策の初期投資コストを算出する。
【００５３】
ランニングコスト評価モデル（Ｃｂ）は、建築物の使用段階で防火対策に関連して必要とされる維持管理コストを算出する。評価の対象は、▲１▼防火管理者の人件費、▲２▼防火設備の更新費、▲３▼防火設備の保守定期点検費、▲４▼火災保険料である。防火設備の更新費は、設備更新間隔をもとに更新費用を積み立てる方式で、各年の更新費用を算出する。
【００５４】
（Ｄ）ライフサイクルリスク評価モデルは、（Ｂ）で算出した火災に伴う損失コストと、（Ｃ）で算出した防火対策コストを評価する。すなわち、建築物の竣工後の経過年数をパラメータとして比較し、建物のライフサイクルを通じて想定される火災リスクに対する防火対策の投資効果を評価する。
【００５５】
ライフサイクルに対するコスト評価では、一般的には建物や収容物の減価償却や物価変動の影響を考慮する必要があるが、本実施形態のモデルでは、建物、収容物の再調達価格を基本として評価を行なう。図４は、ライフサイクルリスクとコストの評価の概念を示す説明図である。図４は横軸に建物の竣工後の経過期間を設定し、縦軸に損失/防火対策コストを設定している。
【００５６】
図４を参照して、（Ｉａ）は防火対策コスト、（Ｉｂ）は損失コスト期待値、（Ｉｃ）は損失コスト分布、（Ｉｄ）は損失コストの超過確率を示している。図４においては、竣工後の経過期間に対して、火災による損失分布と対策投資コストを比較し、火災損失コストが対策投資コストを超過する確率を算出する。このような処理を行なうことにより、損失の超過確率を指標とした対策の投資効果の定量化が可能となる。
【００５７】
以上の実施形態では、ライフサイクルの観点から、建築物の火災リスクと防火対策コストを評価するモデルについて説明した。図１のサブモデル（Ａ）〜（Ｄ）は、サーバに必要項目が入力され、記憶手段に記憶されることにより設定されている。また、前記した必要な演算やサブモデル間の処理などは、ＣＰＵなどのサーバの制御部により行われる。なお、図４のような特性図をＣＰＵの演算結果として表示部に表示させることもできる。
【００５８】
図５〜図８は、図１をさらに詳しく展開した実施形態の例を示す説明図である。この実施形態においては、（Ａ）火災シナリオ設定モデル、（Ｂ）火災発生頻度評価モデル、（Ｃ）建物損害リスク評価モデル、（Ｄ）収容物損害リスク評価モデル、（Ｅ）休業損害リスク評価モデル、（Ｆ）防火対策イニシャルコスト評価モデル、（Ｇ）防火対策ランニングコスト評価モデル、(Ｈ)ライフサイクルコスト評価モデルの各サブモデルが設定されている。
【００５９】
図５の（Ａ）火災シナリオ設定モデルにおいては、対象とする建物に設置される防火対策の種類および作動確率、防火管理者数、消防署との距離等の条件をもとに、建物内の各室において発生する火災の発生条件をシナリオとしてモデル化している。そして、火災が発生した場合の防火対策成否の組み合わせ、シナリオ毎の生起確率を算出する。
【００６０】
具体的には、環境条件Ａｐ、建物条件Ａｑ、室条件Ａｒ、防火対策条件Ａｓを設定する。また、防火対策作動信頼性データベースＡｔと前記各条件Ａｐ〜Ａｓにより、火災シナリオの設定Ａｕを行なう。次に、火災シナリオの設定Ａｕに基づき、フェイズ限界時間、感知器作動時間、消防隊消火開始時間、火災継続時間の各パラメータＡｖを設定する。また、防火対策の作動成否の組み合わせと事象の生起確率Ａｗを設定する。
【００６１】
（Ｂ）火災発生頻度評価モデルにおいては、建物内の各室の用途、床面積をもとに、室毎の年当たり平均出火回数を算出する。具体的には、建物条件Ｂｐ、室条件Ｂｑと、室用途別出火率データベースＢｓにより、火災発生頻度の算出Ｂｒを行なう。これより、年当たり平均出火回数の算出Ｂｔを行なう。
【００６２】
（Ｃ）建物損害リスク評価モデルは、火災シナリオモデルで設定したシナリオ毎の防火対策等の条件に対して、火災により発生する建物の焼損面積、煙損面積、水損面積を算出する。さらに、各々の損害面積を建物再調達価格に対する損害コスト比に換算する。具体的には、建物条件Ｃｐ、室条件Ｃｑからフエイズ毎の焼損面積の算出Ｃｓを行なう。また、フェイズ毎の煙損面積の算出Ｃｒ、フェイズ毎の水損面積の算出Ｃｔを行なう。次に、シナリオ毎の煙損面積Ｃｕ、シナリオ毎の焼損面積Ｃｖ、シナリオ毎の水損面積Ｃｗに基づいて、建物損害コストの算出Ｃｘを行い、年当たりの建物損害コストと発生頻度の算出Ｃｙを行なう。
【００６３】
（Ｄ）収容物損害リスク評価モデルは、火災シナリオモデルで設定したシナリオ毎の防火対策の条件に対し、火災による当該建物の被害に伴い発生する建物内部の什器、書類、商品等の収容物の物的な損害発生頻度と損害コストを算出する。具体的には、建物条件Ｄｐ、室条件Ｄｑ、収容物コストデータベースＤｓに基づいて、各階平均収納物コストの算出Ｄｒを行なう。次に、収容物損害コストＤｔの算出を行い、収容物損害コストＤｔに基づいて年当たりの収容物損害コストと発生頻度Ｄｕを算出する。
【００６４】
（Ｅ）休業損害リスク評価モデルは、火災シナリオモデルで設定したシナリオ毎の防火対策等の条件に対して、火災による当該建物の被害に伴い発生する事業所の事業中断期間（建物補修期間）を算出する。また、事業中断に伴う損害コストを算出する。具体的には、建物条件Ｅｐから建物補修期間Ｅｑを算出する。次に、休業損害コストＥｒの算出を行なう。休業損害コストＥｒに基づいて年当たりの休業損害コストと発生頻度Ｅｓを算出する。
【００６５】
これらの（Ｃ）建物損害リスク評価モデルの年当たりの建物損害コストと発生頻度、（Ｄ）収容物損害リスク評価モデルの年当たりの収容物損害コストと発生頻度、および （Ｅ）休業損害リスク評価モデルの休業損害コストと発生頻度は、図８に示したライフサイクルコスト評価モデルで使用される。
【００６６】
（Ｆ）防火対策イニシャルコスト評価モデルは、建築物の用途、規模、竣工年をもとに、法令上必要とされる防火対策の仕様と設置数を算出する。そして、算出した防火対策の条件に基づき、建築物の建設時に設置される防火対策の初期投資コストを算出する。具体的には、建物条件Ｆａ、防火対策条件Ｆｂと、防火設備イニシャルコストデータベースＦｄに基づいて、対策イニシャルコストの算出Ｆｃを行なう。また、対策イニシャルコストにより防火対策イニシャルコストの算出Ｆｅを行なう。
【００６７】
(Ｇ)防火対策ランニングコスト評価モデルにおいては、建築物の使用段階で防火対策に関連して必要とされる維持管理のコスト（防火管理者の人件費、防火設備の保守定期点検、設備更新費、火災保険料等）を算出する。具体的には、建物条件Ｇａから建物管理条件Ｇｅを設定する。建物管理条件Ｇｅと防災管理人件費データベースＧｈから、防火管理者人件費の算出Ｇｐを行なう。また、建物条件Ｇｂと保守点検用データベースＧｉから防火対策保守点検費の算出Ｇｒを行なう。
【００６８】
建物条件Ｇｃ、防火設備条件Ｇｆ、耐用年数データベースＧｊ、防火設備イニシャルコストデータベースＧｍより、防火設備更新費の算出Ｇｓを行なう。また、建物条件Ｇｄ、室条件Ｇｇ、防火設備条件Ｇｋ、保険料率データベースＧｌ、消火設備割引率データベースＧｎより、火災保険料の算出Ｇｔを行なう。
【００６９】
これらの防火管理者人件費、防火対策保守点検費、防火設備更新費、火災保険料コストに基づいて、対策ランニングコストの算出Ｇｕを行なう。また、防火対策ランニングコストの算出Ｇｖを行なう。前記防火対策イニシャルコストと、防火対策ランニングコストは、ライフサイクルコスト評価モデルＧｗの処理で使用される。
【００７０】
(Ｈ)ライフサイクルコスト評価モデルにおいては、上記（Ｂ）〜（Ｄ）で算出した火災に伴う損害コストと、（Ｅ）〜（Ｆ）で算出した防火対策のコストを、建築物の竣工後の経過年数をパラメータとして比較する。そして、建物のライフサイクルで想定される火災リスクに対する防火対策の投資効果を評価する。具体的には、火災リスク評価モデルよリの算出結果Ｃｚと、防火対策コスト評価モデルよリの算出結果Ｇｗを利用する。火災リスク評価モデルよリの算出結果Ｃｚを利用して、建物使用条件Ｈａとライフサイクル損害コストの算出Ｈｂより、竣工後の経過年数に対する損害コストの算出Ｈｅを行なう。
【００７１】
また、防火対策コスト評価モデルよリの算出結果Ｇｗを利用して、ライフサイクル防火対策コストの算出Ｈｃを行なう。次に、ライフサイクル防火対策コストＨｃと建物条件Ｈｄから、竣工後の経過年数に対する防火対策コストの算出Ｈｇを行なう。前記竣工後の経過年数に対する損害コストと、竣工後の経過年数に対する防火対策コストから、損害コスト、対策コストの比較評価Ｈｆを行い、防火対策の費用対効果の算出Ｈｈを行なう。
【００７２】
このように、図５〜図８の例では、（Ａ）火災シナリオ設定モデル、（Ｂ）火災発生頻度評価モデル、（Ｃ）建物損害リスク評価モデル、（Ｄ）収容物損害リスク評価モデル、（Ｅ）休業損害リスク評価モデル、（Ｆ）防火対策イニシャルコスト評価モデル、（Ｇ）防火対策ランニングコスト評価モデル、(Ｈ)ライフサイクルコスト評価モデルの各サブモデルが設定されている。このように、多様な形態でサブモデルを設定しているので、精度良くライフサイクルに対応した火災リスクの評価を行なうことができる。
【００７３】
図９は、ライフサイクル火災リスクの評価結果例を示す特性図である。図９（ａ）は防火対策のグレードが高い場合、図９（ｂ）は防火対策のグレードが低い場合を示している。（ａ）と（ｂ）を比較すると、（ａ）は（ｂ）よりも防火対策のイニシャルコストとランニングコストが高くなっており、損害コストの累計が（ｂ）よりも低額となっている。すなわち、防火対策のグレードが高い場合には、火災による累計の損害コストが低くなることを裏付けている。なお、図９の特性図は、制御部で演算した結果をグラフ化して、適宜の表示部で表示させることが可能である。
【００７４】
以上の実施形態においては、建築物のライフサイクルの観点から火災リスクと防火対策の投資コストを定量的に評価するモデルの概要について説明した。次に、火災シナリオのモデル化に関して説明する。火災シナリオの設定にあたっては、火災の拡大を火災フェイズとして区分し、発生事象を整理している。火災フェイズは、段階的な火災の拡大状況を、建築の空間構成、および実施すべき防火対策と対応させるために用いる概念である。各フェイズに必要な防火対策を割り当て、フェイズが限界状態に達するまでに、対策が実施できる確率を計算し、シナリオの発生確率を求める。火災フェイズは、表２のように設定した。
【００７５】
【表２】

【００７６】
表２において、フェイズの名称としてフェイズ１〜フェイズ６を設定している。そして、各フェイズ毎に火災の状態、火災の進展防止のための防火対策（関連する主な設備、人的対応）を対応させている。フェイズ１は初期拡大段階、フェイズ２は出火室内拡大段階、フェイズ３は出火室内盛期火災段階、フェイズ４は出火階延焼段階、フェイズ５は非出火階延焼段階、フェイズ６は全対策が不奏功の状態である。
【００７７】
火災の進展防止のための防火対策として、関連する主な設備は、フェイズ１では消火器、フェイズ２では屋内消火栓、スプリンクラー、排煙設備である。また、フェイズ３では防火戸である。次に、防火対策の人的対応は、フェイズ１では初期消火、フェイズ２では初期消火と排煙機起動、フェイズ３では防火区画の形成、フェイズ４、フェイズ５では消防隊の消火をそれぞれ行なう。
【００７８】
次に、火災シナリオを用いて、シナリオ発生確率と各シナリオにおける被害の大きさを対応づけを行なう。シナリオは、自火報設備の作動有無によって大きく２つに区分し、このフェイズの進展と合わせる形で整理する。設定したシナリオを表３に示す。
【００７９】
【表３】

【００８０】
表３には、シナリオ番号１−１〜７に対応させて、自火報の作動の有無、シナリオが想定している状態、損害面積算出に用いるフェイズを設定している。シナリオ番号１−１と１−２では自火報は作動せず、シナリオ番号２〜７では自火報が作動するものと設定した。
【００８１】
シナリオが想定している状態として、シナリオ番号１−１ではスプリンクラーは作動せず、損害面積算出に用いるフェイズはフェイズ６である。また、シナリオ番号１−２ではスプリンクラーが作動し、損害面積算出に用いるフェイズはフェイズ４である。次に、自火報が作動した場合はシナリオ番号２〜７に、フェイズ１〜６をそれぞれ対応させている。
【００８２】
シナリオ番号２（フェイズ１）でシナリオが想定している状態は、初期拡大段階で対策が奏功した状態である。以下、シナリオ番号３（フェイズ２）では、出火室内拡大段階で対策奏功、シナリオ番号４（フェイズ３）では、出火室内盛期火災段階で対策奏功、シナリオ番号５（フェイズ４）では、出火階延焼段階で対策奏功、シナリオ番号６（フェイズ５）では、非出火階へ延焼する段階で対策奏功、シナリオ番号６（フェイズ６）では、対策がすべて不奏功である。
【００８３】
表３のシナリオにおいて、シナリオ発生確率を算出するために用いた主なパラメーターは次の項目である。（1）建物・防火対策条件。この項目には、建物竣工年、防火対策についての調査年、防火管理者数（昼・夜〉、防災センター設置階、防火対策設備の有無と種類、防火設備更新期間、消防署との距離、消防隊進入階が含まれている。
【００８４】
（２）出火室条件。この項目には、火災階、火災室用途・大きさ（幅・奥行・高さ）、内装種別、開口の大きさ（幅・高さ）、壁体の種類、区画構成材の種類が含まれている。（3）環境条件。この項目は、周辺空気の温度・外気温度を対象とする。パラメーターには、これら（１）〜（３）の項目を網羅しているので、シナリオ発生確率の算出の際に、火災発生時に起こり得る事象を総合的に反映させることができる。
【００８５】
さらに、各シナリオの発生確率は、上記各パラメータの値や、各種データベース（室用途別火災荷重、壁体の種類別熱慣性、室用途別火災成長パラメータ、設置後の経過年毎の防火設備作動確率、管理者人数別対応行動時間実施確率等）、および防火設備の更新期間をふまえて算出している。このため、高い精度でシナリオの発生確率を算出することができる。なお、シナリオ1−１〜シナリオ7までの発生確率の合計は1となる。
【００８６】
次に、火災シナリオに用いる防火対策の作動確率に関して説明する。建物は、設置後の経過年数に応じて防火対策の信頼性が低下する傾向があることが知られている。そこで、表４に示すように防火対策の作動信頼性の数値を設定した。ここでは防火設備更新期間を一律２０年とした例を示す。なお、実際には、経過年数に応じて一律に作動確率が低下するわけではなく、建物の維持管理状況によりばらつきが大きくなる。
【００８７】
【表４】

【００８８】
表４には、防火対策の種類と経過年数に対応させて作動確率の数値を設定している。防火対策の種類として、自火報（煙感知器、熱感知器）、消火器、屋内消火栓、スプリンクラー設備、排煙設備（自然排煙、機械排煙）、防火戸（常時閉鎖、随時閉鎖、シャッター）、不燃扉、非常用電源設備を設定している。また、経過年数は、０〜６年、７〜１３年、１４〜１９年に区分している。表４より、防火対策の手段は、建物の建築後の経過年数が１４年〜１９年経過後には、１０〜２０％程度作動確率が低下している。
【００８９】
次に、室用途別の出火率の設定方法の例を説明する。当該出火率は「建物内で発生する小火（ボヤ）を含む火災の単位面積当り年間出火回数（単位：回／ｍ^２・年）」と定義する。隣接建物からの類焼火災などは対象外とする。本評価モデルで用いた室用途別出火率（単位面積当り年間出火回数）の一例を表５と表６に示す。
【００９０】
【表５】

【００９１】
【表６】

【００９２】
表５には、室用途別出火率（出火原因に放火を含むケース）を示している。また、表６には、室用途別出火率（出火原因に放火を含まないケース）を示している。表５、表６においては、事務室、食堂・厨房、給湯室、機械室の対象個所毎に、小規模建物の出火率と、大規模建物の出火率を設定している。なお、小規模建物は床面積が３０００ｍ^２以下の建物、大規模建物は床面積が３０００ｍ^２を超える建物を対象としている。
【００９３】
平年の火災統計では火災原因に占める放火の割合が高く、室用途により放火が全火災原因に占める割合は異なる。このため、表５、表６に示した室用途のうち、事務室では火災原因に占める放火の割合をもとに放火を含むか否かで異なる値を設定した。また、出火率は建物規模によってもばらつきが大きい傾向があるため、表５、表６では建物規模により異なる値を設定した。
【００９４】
次に、他の実施形態として、構築したライフサイクル火災リスク評価モデルをある仮想の事務所ビルに適用し，ケーススタディを行なう例について説明する。
【００９５】
このケーススタディの概要について説明する。ケーススタディに用いた建物の平面図を図１０に示している。ケーススタディに用いた建物は、１０階建ての事務所ビルを想定した。１階は図１０（ｂ）に示すように飲食店舗とエントランスホール、建物管理室，機械室から構成される。２〜１０階は図１０（ａ）に示すように、主に事務室、給湯室からなるものとする。
【００９６】
ケーススタディの設定条件を表７（８）〜９（１０）に示す。ここでは、事務室、給湯室、飲食店舗、機械室からの出火を想定し、全ての階（計３２室）を対象として損失コストとその発生確率を算出した。また、防火対策の条件の違いが評価結果に与える影響を検討するため、スプリンクラー設備が設置されている場合と、スプリンクラー設備が設置されていない場合の２ケースについて検討を行なった。
【００９７】
【表７】

【００９８】
表７には、建物条件の主な設定値が示されている。建物条件の項目として、建物階数、基準階床面積、延べ床面積、構造種別、階高、建物想定使用年数、建物再調達価格、再調達価格構成比（躯体、仕上げ、設備）、出火率算出における放火の有無、単位面積当たりの収容物コスト、単位面積当たり期間当たり休業コストを設定する。これら各項目の設定値は、仮に想定して設定したものである。
【００９９】
【表８】

【０１００】
表８には、出火を想定する室の主な設定値を示している。項目の欄には、火災成長率（ｋＷ/ｍ^２）、火災荷重（ｋｇ/ｍ^２）、天井高さ（ｍ）、外部開口高さ（ｍ）を設定する。また、出火を想定する対象室は、事務室、給湯室、飲食店舗、機械室としている。これら各項目の設定値も、仮に想定して設定したものである。
【０１０１】
【表９】

【０１０２】
表９には、防火対策条件の設備の設定が示されている。項目の欄には、設置する主な消火設備、防火設備の更新間隔、防火設備の作動確率、年間点検費用、消防署からの距離、管理室要員数を設定する。また、設置する主な消火設備として、自動火災報知器、屋内消火栓設備、スプリンクラー設備、連結送水管、非常用照明設備、排煙設備（機械式）、蓄電池設備、非常用エレベータ（１台）が挙げられている。ここで、防火設備の作動確率については、公知資料に基づく値を適宜設定する。
【０１０３】
【表１０】

【０１０４】
表１０は、防火対策コストの算出結果の例を示している。項目の欄には、防火対策イニシャルコストの建物再調達価格比と、防火対策ランニングコストの１年当たり建物再調達価格比を設定している。それぞれの項目に対応させて、設定条件としてスプリンクラーの有無により前記価格比を設定している。
【０１０５】
本実施形態においては、建物や収容物のコストは建築工事原価分析情報などの公知の資料に基づき設定した。休業損失は，実際には企業の業態や経営状況により設定方法が異なる。ここでは、単位面積当たりの賃料をもとに休業損失を算出することとしている。そして、損害面積をもとに修復に要する工期を求め、その日数に単位面積当たりの休業コスト単価を乗算して休業損失を算出した。
【０１０６】
次に、本実施形態におけるケーススタディの結果について説明する。図１１は、 竣工後の経過年数に対する防火対策コスト（イニシャルコストとランニングコストを含む）と、総損失コスト期待値（建物，収容物，休業損失の合計）の推移を示す特性図である。図１１（ａ）はスプリンクラー設備設置の場合、図１１（ｂ）はスプリンクラー設備未設置の場合である。
【０１０７】
防火対策コストの算出結果は前記表１０に示されている。図１１では、建物再調達価格に対するコスト比を指標として用いた。総損失コスト期待値と防火対策コストを比較した場合、対策コストの方が総損失コスト期待値を大きく上回っている。この傾向は、スプリンクラー設備の有無に関わらず同じである。但し、防火対策コスト(Ｂ)に対する総損失コスト期待値（Ａ）の割合（Ａ/Ｂ）は、年数が経るにつれて高くなっており、スプリンクラー設備が設置されていない方が、その割合は高くなっている。
【０１０８】
図１２は、図１１の特性（Ａ）の総損失コスト期待値のうち、建物損失、収容物損失、休業損失が占める割合を示す特性図である。各損失コストの割合は，竣工後の経過年数によらずほぼ一定で，うち建物損失が約５０％，収容物損失が約３０％，休業損失が約２０％を占めている。
【０１０９】
一般的な事務所の場合、建物損失コストと同程度の収容物損失、休業墳失コストが発生する可能性があることがわかる。このように、図１２を参照すると、火災リスクを評価する際には、建物損失コストと同じ比率で収容物損失と休業墳失コストについても重視する必要があることを示している。
【０１１０】
図１３は、竣工後の経過期間内での建物損失コスト、総損失コストの超過発生頻度を示す特性図である。図１３（ａ）はスプリンクラー設備設置の場合、図１３（ｂ）はスプリンクラー設備未設置の場合である。ここで、図１３と図１１の損失コスト期待値とを比較する。６０年間の損失期待値は、建物再調達価格の約５％程度（図１１）であるのに対し、総損失コストの分布は、最大で１５０％程度（図１３）まで拡がっている。このように、図１３を参照すると、出火の発生確率は小さくても、損失が防火対策コストを上回る危険性があることがわかる。
【０１１１】
図１４は、図１１の防火対策コストと、図１３の損失コスト分布をもとに，損失コストが防火対策コストを超過する火災の発生頻度を算出した結果を示す特性図である。図１４（ａ）はスプリンクラー設備設置の場合、図１４（ｂ）はスプリンクラー設備未設置の場合である。総損失コストが防火対策コストを上回る頻度は、竣工後、年を経る毎に増加している。
【０１１２】
これに対して、建物損失コストが防火対策コストを上回る頻度は、３５〜４０年後を境として減少しており、特にスプリンクラー設備が設置されている場合その影響は大きい。これは、竣工後の経過年数に対する防火対策のランニングコストの増加が建物損失コストの増加を上回っていることを意味している。このような指標を用いることで、ランニングコストを含めた防火対策の効果を定量化することができる。なお、図１１〜図１４の特性図は、適宜の表示部で表示させることができる。
【０１１３】
【発明の効果】
以上の説明から明らかなように、本発明によれば、建築物のライフサイクルに対応した、火災リスク評価を行うことができる。その際に、火災リスクを定量的に表示することにより、リスク低減対策の具体的な効果が把握しやすいという利点がある。また、建物の防火設備等のハード面での防火対策に加え、防火管理等のソフト面での防火対策がリスク低減に与える効果を把握できるため、建物所有者にとって，バランスのとれた火災リスクマネジメントが可能となる。さらに、建物の火災に対する性能を総合的に評価することにより，設計段階での合理的な火災安全設計が可能となる。
【０１１４】
また、本発明においては、建築物の竣工後の経過期間に対して、火災による損失分布と対策投資コストを比較し、火災損失コストが対策投資コストを超過する確率を算出することができる。このような処理を行なうことにより、損失の超過確率を指標とした対策の投資効果の定量化が可能となる。
【０１１５】
また、本発明においては、火災による総損失コストおよび防火対策コストの評価を、防火設備の設置の有無で行なうことができる。このため、火災による総損失コストおよび防火対策コストの評価を防火設備の設置の有無で対比判断して、火災リスクを回避するための長期的なコストマネジメントを策定することが可能となる。
【図面の簡単な説明】
【図１】 火災リスク評価モデルの全体構成を示す説明図である。
【図２】 損害規模算出の概念を示す説明図である。
【図３】 火災フェイズ毎の損害面積算出方法を示す説明図である。
【図４】 ライフサイクルリスクとコストの評価の概念を示す説明図である。
【図５】 他の実施形態を示す説明図である。
【図６】 他の実施形態を示す説明図である。
【図７】 他の実施形態を示す説明図である。
【図８】 他の実施形態を示す説明図である。
【図９】 ライフサイクル火災リスクの評価結果例を示す特性図である。
【図１０】 建物の平面図である。
【図１１】 竣工後の経過年数に対する防火対策コストと総損失コスト期待値の推移を示す特性図である。
【図１２】 図１１の特性（Ａ）の総損失コスト期待値のうち、建物損失、収容物損失、休業損失が占める割合を示す特性図である。
【図１３】 竣工後の経過期間内での建物損失コスト、総損失コストの超過発生頻度を示す特性図である。
【図１４】 損失コストが防火対策コストを超過する火災の発生頻度を算出した結果を示す特性図である。
【符号の説明】
１・・・対象とする建物、２・・・損害範囲の室、３・・・出火室。[0001]
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a fire risk evaluation system and a fire risk evaluation method corresponding to the life cycle of a building.
[0002]
[Prior art]
Conventionally, when quantifying the fire risk of a building, it is common to perform the quantification on the condition that a fire has occurred at a certain point. For example, in Patent Document 1, the control unit refers to a building information data file, a fire level extinguishing rule file, and the like to calculate the occurrence probability for each fire scale in consideration of factors such as fire prevention equipment and human response. Are listed. And it is described that the fire risk of a building is evaluated by grasping the scale of the fire as the fire duration and the burnout area.
[0003]
[Patent Document 1]
JP 2002-117363 A
[0004]
[Problems to be solved by the invention]
However, in the past, risks throughout the entire period of use from the completion of the building to the rebuilding were not considered. For this reason, there is a problem that it is difficult to quantitatively grasp the investment effect of the initial cost and running cost of fire prevention measures such as fire prevention equipment, evacuation equipment and fire prevention management for the fire risk of each building.
[0005]
In addition, there are cases where a building's business activities are greatly affected by damage to expensive containment in the building or the inability to use the building for a long period of time. Indirect damages, such as the risk of damage to containment and the risk of damage due to business interruptions due to fire, are important factors in corporate risk management. Nevertheless, in the conventional risk assessment technology, direct damage to the structure, equipment, interior, etc. of the building was the center of the evaluation index.
[0006]
For this reason, there has been a problem that indirect damages such as the risk of damage to containment and the risk of damage due to business interruption due to fire are not evaluated with the same index from the viewpoint of the life cycle of the building. That is, there has been a problem that a comprehensive fire risk evaluation system from the viewpoint of the life cycle of a building has not been established.
[0007]
  In order to achieve such an object, the fire risk assessment system of the present invention provides:
  An input means for inputting condition settings for building risk assessment;
  Storage means for storing condition settings input to the input means;
  Based on the condition settings stored in the storage means, sub-models of a fire scenario evaluation model, a fire risk evaluation model, a fire prevention measure cost evaluation model, and a life cycle risk evaluation model are set.Calculate and compare costs using each modelControl means,
  The control means includes
  Means for setting a fire phase that can occur in the event of a fire based on the condition setting, using the fire scenario evaluation model;
  Means for calculating a total loss cost based on the fire phase set in the fire scenario evaluation model using the fire risk evaluation model;
  Using the fire prevention cost evaluation model, calculating the initial cost and the running cost of the fire prevention based on the condition setting, and means that the sum as the fire prevention cost,
  Using the life cycle risk assessment model, the elapsed time after completion of the building as a parameter, the total loss cost and fire prevention cost in the life cycleComparisonAnd means for performing
  When calculating the running cost of the fire prevention measures, the operation probability of the fire prevention equipment is changed according to the elapsed years,
  The fire prevention cost and the total loss cost of the life cycle due to fireCompareIt is characterized by that.
[0008]
  In order to achieve such an object, the fire risk assessment system of the present invention provides:
  Set conditions for building risk assessmentinputDoinputMeans,
  Storage means for storing condition settings input to the input means;,
  Based on the condition setting stored in the storage means,Fire scenario evaluation modelWhenFire risk assessment modelWhen, Fire prevention cost evaluation modelWhenWith life cycle risk assessment modeleachSub modelControl means to setAnd
  The control means includes
  Means for setting a fire phase that can occur in the event of a fire based on the condition setting using the fire scenario evaluation model;
  Means for calculating a total loss cost based on the fire phase set in the fire scenario evaluation model using the fire risk evaluation model;
  Using the fire prevention cost evaluation model, calculate the initial cost and running cost of fire prevention measures based on the condition settings.And the total is the fire prevention costMeans to
  Using the life cycle risk assessment model, the life cycle after completion of the building as a parameterInA means for evaluating the total loss cost and the fire prevention cost,
  When calculating the running cost of the fire prevention measures, the operation probability of the fire prevention equipment is changed according to the elapsed years,
  Comparing the fire prevention cost and the total loss cost of the life cycle due to fire, the fire prevention cost is optimized.It is characterized by that.
[0009]
In addition, the present invention is characterized by having means for quantifying the occurrence frequency of the fire scenario within the target period from the occurrence probability and the fire rate of the fire phase using the fire scenario evaluation model.
[0010]
Further, the present invention is characterized by having means for calculating a fire occurrence frequency together with a total loss cost associated with a fire using the fire risk evaluation model.
[0011]
In addition, the present invention is characterized by having means for evaluating the life cycle risk and the respective costs from the repurchasing price of the building and the accommodation using the life cycle risk evaluation model.
[0012]
In addition, the present invention is characterized by comprising means for extracting and modeling fire risk fluctuation factors due to secular change after completion of the target building.
[0013]
Further, the present invention is characterized in that the fire risk fluctuation factor is a factor accompanying a change in a usage pattern of the building.
[0014]
In addition, the present invention is characterized in that the fire risk variation factor is a factor associated with performance deterioration of various devices installed in the building.
[0015]
Further, the present invention is characterized in that the evaluation of the total loss cost and the fire prevention cost is performed based on whether or not a fire prevention facility is installed.
[0016]
  The fire risk evaluation method of the present invention includes:
  The building conditions of the building to be evaluated, the room conditions, the room composition conditions, the fire prevention countermeasure conditions, and the stage of setting the environmental conditions in advance,
  For all rooms that are expected to catch fire in the building, a fire scenario is set to calculate the fire rate for each room and the probability of an event that can occur,
  Calculating the damage area for the set fire scenario, calculating the cost and frequency of occurrence of building damage, containment damage, lost-time damage based on the damage area in each room;
  Calculating initial cost and running cost of fire prevention measures,
  Calculating a loss cost and a fire prevention cost in the life cycle of the building;
  Calculate loss costs and countermeasure costs for the number of years that have passed since the completion of the building, and calculate the excess probability of loss costs.calculateStage and
It is characterized by comprising.
[0017]
  The fire risk evaluation system of the present invention is
  An input means for inputting condition settings for building risk assessment;
  Storage means for storing condition settings input to the input means;
  Based on the condition settings stored in the storage means, a fire scenario setting model of a building to be evaluated, a fire occurrence frequency evaluation model, a building damage risk evaluation model, a containment damage risk evaluation model, and lost time loss Control means to set each sub-model of the risk evaluation model, fire prevention initial cost evaluation model, fire prevention running cost evaluation model, and life cycle cost evaluation model,
  The control means is based on the submodels,
  Means for calculating the damage scale of the building to be evaluated;
  Means for calculating fire prevention cost,
  By comparing the calculated damage scale and fire prevention cost, the change in damage scale and countermeasure cost with respect to the number of years since the completion of the building was calculated and the results of both were compared.And a means for performing.
[0018]
  The fire risk evaluation method of the present invention is
  Based on conditions such as the type of fire prevention measures installed in the target building and the probability of operation, modeling the fire conditions that occur in each room in the building as a scenario,
  A stage for calculating the combination of success or failure of fire prevention measures in the event of a fire and the probability of occurrence for each scenario;
  Based on the use of each room in the building and the floor area, calculating the average number of fires per year per room;
  For the conditions such as fire prevention measures for each of the set scenarios, the step of calculating the burning area of the building caused by the fire, the smoke loss area, and the water loss area,
  Converting each damaged area into a damage cost ratio with respect to a building replacement cost;
  Calculating the physical damage occurrence frequency and damage cost of the containment inside the building caused by the damage of the building due to the fire against the fire prevention measure condition for each set scenario,
  Calculating the business interruption period of the business establishment caused by the damage of the building due to the fire for the conditions such as fire prevention measures for each set scenario, and calculating the cost of damage due to the business interruption;
  Calculate the initial investment cost of fire prevention measures installed at the time of construction of the building based on the stage of calculating the specifications and number of fire prevention measures required by the law of the building and the calculated fire prevention measures And the stage of
  Calculating the cost of maintenance required in connection with fire prevention measures at the use stage of the building;
  Each damage cost, initial investment cost and maintenance cost for fire prevention measures, with the number of years since the completion of the building as a parameterCompareA stage.
[0019]
The present invention also assumes that a room in the building to be evaluated is a fire room, and a scenario that can occur when a fire occurs in the room. Categorizing on the basis of parameters such as presence / absence, and calculating the probability of scenario occurrence; calculating the damage scale for each set scenario for each type of damage, and converting the damage scale using cost as an index; In the case where a fire breaks out from any room in the building based on the result of repeating the calculation of the probability of occurrence of the scenario and the conversion using the cost of damage scale as an index for all the rooms in the building And calculating the distribution of damage scale.
[0020]
Thus, in the present invention, the relationship between the fire risk and the investment cost of fire prevention measures is evaluated from the viewpoint of the life cycle of the building. Here, the fire risk corresponding to the life cycle of the building is defined from the viewpoint of “how much loss will occur within the period from the completion of the building to the rebuilding”. In the present invention, it is possible to quantify the risk reduction effect by various fire prevention measures by evaluating the fire risk with respect to different fire prevention measures conditions.
[0021]
Moreover, in this invention, the loss by a fire is evaluated including not only the direct damage (including a containment) of a building but the indirect damage by a business interruption. The relationship between these fire risks and the investment cost of fire prevention measures is analyzed and quantified in detail. For this reason, comprehensive fire risk evaluation from the life cycle of the building can be performed.
[0022]
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
As described above, the fire risk evaluation system of the present invention is characterized in that the relationship between the fire risk and the investment cost of fire prevention measures is evaluated from the viewpoint of the life cycle of the building. Specifically, based on the space shape, usage, size, number of people in the building, fire prevention measures, and the number of years since the completion of construction, the expected fire risk during the period of use from the completion of the building to the rebuilding ( The cost of direct damage to buildings and containment, the cost of indirect damage due to business interruption and the probability of occurrence), and the investment cost of fire prevention measures required during the period of use of the building. In the specification of the present invention, the term “building” or “building” is used as a fire risk evaluation object, but both are expressed as synonyms of the same concept.
[0023]
In the present invention, the fire risk of a building is defined in terms of “how much loss is likely to occur during the life cycle from the completion of the building to the rebuilding”, and the loss and excess due to fire. Quantifies the probability relationship. At the same time, the cost of fire prevention measures required from the completion of the building to the rebuilding is quantified, and the loss distribution by fire and the fire prevention cost are analyzed to clarify the relationship between them. By performing such evaluation for various conditions of fire prevention measures, it is possible to quantify the risk reduction effect by various fire prevention measures.
[0024]
In addition to direct loss of buildings such as fire spread, smoke propagation, and water leaks due to fire extinguishing, losses due to fire include loss of items such as furniture and goods, loss of time off due to business interruption, and loss of life of residents. Exists. In the present invention, not only the direct loss of the building but also the loss of stored items and the loss of lost work time, excluding the loss of human life, are subject to evaluation.
[0025]
The fire risk evaluation system according to the present invention mainly processes three types of parts: (1) calculation of damage scale, (2) calculation of fire prevention cost, and (3) evaluation of investment effect of fire prevention countermeasure on damage scale. Is to do. The outline of the calculation of damage scale is as follows.
[0026]
(1) A room in a building is assumed to be a fire room. (2) The scenarios that can occur when a fire occurs in the room are categorized based on parameters such as the progress of the fire and the presence or absence of fire prevention measures, and the probability of occurrence of the scenario is calculated. (3) The damage scale for each set scenario is calculated for each type of damage (direct damage, indirect damage). The damage scale is ultimately converted using the cost as an index. (4) Repeat steps (1) to (3) for all rooms in the building. (5) From the above results, calculate the distribution of damage scale when a fire breaks out from any room in the building.
[0027]
The fire prevention cost is based on the life cycle of the building from the completion of the building to the rebuilding. (1) Initial cost of fire prevention at the time of completion (initial investment cost), (2) Fire prevention running at the building use stage Two costs (maintenance costs) are targeted. The running cost of fire prevention measures includes renewal costs for fire prevention equipment, maintenance and inspection costs, fire management personnel costs, and fire insurance premiums.
[0028]
In the evaluation of the investment effect of fire prevention measures against the scale of damage caused by fire, the change in the damage scale and the countermeasure cost with respect to the number of years after the completion of the building is calculated by comparing the calculated damage scale with the fire prevention cost. Then, by comparing the results of both, the investment effect of fire prevention measures against the expected damage scale is evaluated.
[0029]
FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram showing the concept of damage scale calculation according to the present invention. In FIG. 2, 1 is a target building, 2 is a damaged area (Aij) room, and 3 is a fire room (Fi). The damage scale Aij and the occurrence probability pij are calculated for each scenario ij, and this process is repeated for all the rooms up to the damage scale AiN and the occurrence probability piN of the scenario iN.
[0030]
The fire risk evaluation model of the embodiment according to the present invention includes (A) a fire scenario evaluation model, (B) a fire risk evaluation model, (C) a fire prevention cost evaluation model, and (D) a life cycle risk evaluation model. Consists of FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram showing the overall configuration of such a fire risk evaluation model. Each of these evaluation models and various calculation means described later are provided in a server that is appropriately installed.
[0031]
The fire risk assessment according to FIG. 1 is performed as follows. (1) The building conditions, room conditions, room composition conditions, fire prevention measures conditions, and environmental conditions of the building to be evaluated are set in advance. Table 1 shows an example of a list of risk assessment condition setting items. (2) The fire rate for each room and the probability of an event that can occur are calculated for all rooms that are expected to catch fire in the building using the fire scenario evaluation model. (3) Calculate the damage area using the fire risk assessment model for the fire scenario set in the previous section. Next, the cost and frequency of building damage, containment damage, and lost time damage are calculated based on the damage area in each room. (4) The initial cost and the running cost of the fire prevention measures are calculated by the fire prevention measure cost evaluation model. (5) Using the life cycle risk evaluation model, calculate the loss cost and countermeasure cost for the number of years that have passed since the building was completed, and evaluate the excess probability of loss cost.
[0032]
[Table 1]

[0033]
Table 1 shows risk setting condition setting items. This condition setting item is divided into a large classification and a medium classification. The major classification is divided into building conditions, room conditions, space composition conditions, fire prevention measures conditions, and environmental conditions. Major building conditions include the following categories: “Building Floors, Total Floor Areas, Structural Types, Floor Heights, Completion Years, Estimated Use Years of Buildings, Building Repurchase Prices, Ratio of Housing / Finishing / Equipment Repurchases, Fires In the rate calculation, items such as the presence or absence of arson, cost of lost time per unit area and period are set.
[0034]
As a medium classification for the room conditions of the large classification, `` room usage, room width, room depth, ceiling height, number of floors, spandrel height, external opening width, external opening height, presence or absence of fire room assumption, interior type, “Wall material, type of detector / smoke exhaust equipment, presence / absence of sprinkler equipment, head spacing” are set. In addition, items of “opening width of adjacent rooms, opening height, fire prevention performance of the opening door, opening closing mechanism, fire resistance time of the wall” are set as the middle classification for the large space configuration conditions.
[0035]
As a middle classification for the fire prevention measures conditions of the large classification, “installation status of various fire prevention equipment, the number of floors where the disaster prevention center is installed, the number of fire management managers (daytime, nighttime), the distance to the nearby fire station, the renewal interval of fireproof equipment, annual inspection costs, The item “Basic insurance rate” is set. In addition, items of “outside air temperature, room temperature” are set as a medium classification for the large environmental conditions. Thus, since the risk setting condition setting items are shown in detail in Table 1, the fire risk can be accurately evaluated by setting the conditions in Table 1.
[0036]
Next, each sub-evaluation model will be described with respect to the life cycle risk evaluation model of FIG. Condition setting (X) sets each condition of a building, a room, a space configuration, fire prevention measures, and the environment as in the broad classification of Table 1. Such processing is performed by inputting necessary items to the server to create the table in Table 1 and storing it in an appropriate storage means such as a hard disk.
[0037]
(A) The fire scenario evaluation model is modeled by setting a fire scenario (Aa) and calculating the fire occurrence frequency (Ab). (B) The fire risk evaluation model calculates (Ba) the area of burning, smoke, and water damage for each phase. This processing includes building loss cost and occurrence frequency calculation (Bb), containment loss cost and occurrence frequency calculation (Bc), and lost time loss cost and occurrence frequency calculation (Bd).
[0038]
(C) The fire prevention countermeasure cost evaluation model calculates a countermeasure initial cost (Ca) and a countermeasure running cost (Cb). In the (D) life cycle risk evaluation model, the life cycle loss cost is calculated (Da) based on the (B) fire risk evaluation model. Further, (C) Life cycle fire prevention cost is calculated (Db) based on the fire prevention cost evaluation model. The countermeasure cost excess probability of the loss cost is calculated from the costs (Da) and (Db) (Dc).
[0039]
Next, (A) the fire scenario evaluation model will be further described. The fire scenario is evaluated by (1) calculating the fire rate in each room and (2) the probability of occurrence of an event that can occur when a fire breaks out. Quantifies the frequency of occurrence of scenarios within the target period when they occur. When calculating the fire rate in each room, the average number of fires per unit area per year for each room use is set based on past fire statistics. Then, for example, the average number of fires per year for each room is calculated using the room usage and floor area as parameters.
[0040]
The probability of an event that can occur after a fire occurs is modeled based on the concept of a fire phase in which the expansion of the fire is expanded step by step, and the fire prevention measures related to each phase and the action of emergency response actions are modeled. Give success or failure as a condition. In this way, the occurrence probability of the event is calculated for each phase according to the actual situation.
[0041]
Next, (B) a fire risk evaluation model will be described. The fire risk assessment model calculates the damage area when a fire breaks out in a room in the building for the fire phase set in the fire scenario model. Such a process is repeated with respect to all the rooms assumed as the fire chambers. In this way, in the end, (1) building damage caused by fire, (2) physical damage to the contents in the room, (3) risk of lost time due to business interruption after fire, loss cost Calculate as a common indicator.
[0042]
Next, calculation of the damaged area will be described. Causes of fire damage include (1) burnout due to the spread of fire, (2) smoke loss due to smoke propagation, and (3) water loss due to fire extinguishing. In the fire risk evaluation model of this embodiment, the damage due to these three factors is converted into an area for each set fire phase.
[0043]
FIG. 3 is an explanatory diagram showing a damage area calculation method for each fire phase. With reference to FIG. 3, the basic concept of the damage area calculation in this embodiment will be described. In FIG. 3, (a) column shows phases 1-6, (b) column shows the fire status of each phase, (c) column burns area calculation method, (d) column smoke loss area calculation method , (E) column describes the water loss area calculation method.
[0044]
A method for calculating the burnout area in the column (c) will be described. In Phases 1 and 2, it was assumed that the damage area expanded concentrically as the fire grew in the fire room. Phase 4 calculates the range of the room that spreads on the fire floor within the shortest of the phase limit time obtained from the fire scenario evaluation model and the arrival time of the fire brigade, based on the fire resistance time of the wall. In Phases 5 and 6, the upper floor fire spread to the non-fire floor due to the erupting flame through the external opening is targeted. Since all measures were not successful in Phase 6, all floors above the fire floor were subject to burnout area calculation.
[0045]
Next, the smoke loss area calculation method in the column (d) will be described. Phases 1 to 3 are calculated in consideration of the burnout range and the opening / closing conditions of the door of the fire room. In Phases 4 to 6, smoke is propagated to the upper floors through gaps in the pit compartments such as the staircase and the elevator shaft.
[0046]
Next, the water loss area calculation method in the column (e) will be described. In phase 2, when there is a sprinkler facility, it is assumed that four heads operate simultaneously as a dangerous condition. When there was no sprinkler equipment, we assumed that the fire extinguisher was extinguished using an indoor fire hydrant, and used a regression formula for the burned area and water damaged area based on fire statistics. In Phases 3 to 6, water loss on the fire floor affects the lower floor, and the same area as the water loss area on the fire floor is added to the second to third floors. As shown in FIG. 3, when calculating the burned area, smoke area, and water area, the floor area of the fire room (A_F), K floor area {A_F(K)}, a factor such as a floor area A (i) having a fireproof time starting from a fire room within a predetermined time is used. The calculation of these damaged areas is performed by the control unit of the server.
[0047]
Based on the damage area calculated according to FIG. 3, the loss cost is calculated. Considering the impact of each of burnout, smoke, and water damage on the enclosure, finish, and equipment, the loss cost is calculated based on the replacement cost of the building and the ratio of the procurement price of the enclosure, finish, and equipment. Convert. An example of a conversion method for each loss cost is shown in Formula 1. Formula 1 consists of three formulas (1) to (3).
[0048]
[Expression 1]

[0049]
In Equation 1, Lc1: Housing loss cost (yen), Lc2: Finishing loss cost (yen), a: Damage rate adjustment rate of the housing, C: Building replacement cost (yen), R_1,R_2,R₃: Housing, finishing, ratio of equipment procurement, D_1i, D_2i, D_3i: Burning, smoke, and water damage area (m²), A_i: Floor area on floor i, A_total: Total floor area (m²).
[0050]
The direct loss cost (Bb) of the building is calculated using Equation 1. That is, the calculation result of each damaged area of burning, smoke, and water for each scenario is converted into a direct building loss. Next, the loss cost of the contents is calculated. The loss cost (Bc) of the stored item sets an average stored item cost per unit area with the room application as a parameter. Then, using the result of calculating the damage area in each room, it is converted into the physical loss cost of the contents.
[0051]
Next, the lost time loss cost (Bd) due to business interruption is calculated. Lost time lost cost is converted to lost cost by multiplying the average lost cost per unit area and period, assuming the building repair period assumed according to the size of the damaged area as the business interruption period. The average leave cost per unit area and period varies greatly depending on the type of building, but the office rent is set based on the building rent.
[0052]
(C) With regard to the fire prevention cost evaluation model, the initial cost (initial investment cost) of the fire prevention equipment and the running cost (maintenance management cost) at the building use stage related to fire prevention measures are invested in the elapsed years after completion. Assess costs. Here, the initial cost evaluation model (Ca) calculates the specifications of fire prevention measures and the number of installations based on the use and scale of the building. And the initial investment cost of the fire prevention measure installed at the time of construction of a building is calculated using the unit price data per apparatus number (or per installation floor area) set in advance.
[0053]
The running cost evaluation model (Cb) calculates a maintenance cost required in connection with fire prevention measures at the use stage of the building. The targets of the evaluation are (1) personnel costs for fire prevention managers, (2) renewal costs for fire prevention equipment, (3) regular maintenance costs for fire prevention equipment, and (4) fire insurance premiums. The renewal cost of fire prevention equipment is calculated by accumulating the renewal cost based on the renewal interval, and the renewal cost for each year is calculated.
[0054]
(D) The life cycle risk evaluation model evaluates the loss cost associated with the fire calculated in (B) and the fire prevention cost calculated in (C). In other words, the elapsed years after completion of the building are compared as a parameter, and the investment effect of fire prevention measures against the fire risk assumed throughout the life cycle of the building is evaluated.
[0055]
In the cost evaluation for the life cycle, it is generally necessary to consider the effects of depreciation of buildings and containment and price fluctuations, but in the model of this embodiment, the evaluation is based on the replacement procurement price of buildings and containment. To do. FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram showing the concept of life cycle risk and cost evaluation. In Fig. 4, the elapsed time after the completion of the building is set on the horizontal axis, and the loss / fire prevention cost is set on the vertical axis.
[0056]
Referring to FIG. 4, (Ia) represents fire prevention cost, (Ib) represents expected loss cost, (Ic) represents loss cost distribution, and (Id) represents excess probability of loss cost. In FIG. 4, the loss distribution due to fire and the countermeasure investment cost are compared with the elapsed period after completion, and the probability that the fire loss cost exceeds the countermeasure investment cost is calculated. By performing such processing, it is possible to quantify the investment effect of the measure using the excess probability of loss as an index.
[0057]
In the above embodiment, the model which evaluates the fire risk and fire prevention countermeasure cost of a building was demonstrated from the viewpoint of the life cycle. The submodels (A) to (D) in FIG. 1 are set by inputting necessary items to the server and storing them in the storage means. In addition, the necessary calculations and processing between submodels are performed by a control unit of a server such as a CPU. Note that a characteristic diagram as shown in FIG. 4 can be displayed on the display unit as a calculation result of the CPU.
[0058]
5-8 is explanatory drawing which shows the example of embodiment which developed FIG. 1 further in detail. In this embodiment, (A) Fire scenario setting model, (B) Fire occurrence frequency evaluation model, (C) Building damage risk evaluation model, (D) Containment damage risk evaluation model, (E) Lost time loss risk evaluation model (F) Fire prevention countermeasure initial cost evaluation model, (G) Fire prevention countermeasure running cost evaluation model, and (H) Life cycle cost evaluation model are set.
[0059]
In the (A) fire scenario setting model in FIG. 5, each type of fire prevention measures in the building is determined based on conditions such as the type of fire prevention measures installed in the target building and the probability of operation, the number of fire prevention managers, and the distance to the fire station. The fire conditions that occur in the room are modeled as scenarios. Then, the combination of success or failure of fire prevention measures when a fire occurs and the occurrence probability for each scenario are calculated.
[0060]
Specifically, the environmental condition Ap, the building condition Aq, the room condition Ar, and the fire prevention measure condition As are set. Further, a fire scenario setting Au is performed based on the fire prevention countermeasure operation reliability database At and the above conditions Ap to As. Next, based on the fire scenario setting Au, parameters Av for the phase limit time, the sensor operation time, the fire brigade fire extinguishing start time, and the fire duration time are set. Also, the combination of success or failure of fire prevention measures and the occurrence probability Aw of the event are set.
[0061]
(B) In the fire occurrence frequency evaluation model, the average number of fires per year for each room is calculated based on the use and floor area of each room in the building. Specifically, the fire occurrence frequency calculation Br is performed based on the building condition Bp, the room condition Bq, and the fire rate database Bs classified by room usage. From this, calculation Bt of the average number of fires per year is performed.
[0062]
(C) The building damage risk assessment model calculates the fire damage area, smoke loss area, and water damage area of a building caused by a fire for conditions such as fire prevention measures for each scenario set in the fire scenario model. Furthermore, each damaged area is converted into a ratio of the damaged cost to the building replacement cost. Specifically, a burnout area Cs for each phase is calculated from the building condition Cp and the room condition Cq. Further, calculation Cr for smoke loss area for each phase and calculation Ct for water loss area for each phase are performed. Next, based on the smoke loss area Cu for each scenario, the burnout area Cv for each scenario, and the water loss area Cw for each scenario, a building damage cost calculation Cx is performed to calculate the building damage cost and occurrence frequency per year. To do.
[0063]
(D) Containment damage risk assessment model is based on the conditions of fire prevention measures for each scenario set in the fire scenario model. Calculate the frequency of physical damage and the cost of damage. Specifically, the calculation Dr of the average stored item cost for each floor is performed based on the building condition Dp, the room condition Dq, and the stored item cost database Ds. Next, the containment damage cost Dt is calculated, and the containment damage cost and occurrence frequency Du per year are calculated based on the containment damage cost Dt.
[0064]
(E) The lost time loss risk evaluation model is based on the business interruption period (building repair period) of the establishment that occurs due to damage to the building due to fire against the conditions such as fire prevention measures for each scenario set in the fire scenario model. calculate. In addition, the cost of damage due to business interruption is calculated. Specifically, the building repair period Eq is calculated from the building condition Ep. Next, the lost loss cost Er is calculated. Based on the lost time loss cost Er, the lost time lost cost per year and the occurrence frequency Es are calculated.
[0065]
(C) Building damage cost and occurrence frequency per year of the building damage risk assessment model, (D) Containment damage cost and occurrence frequency per year of the containment damage risk assessment model, and (E) Loss-of-business loss risk assessment The lost time loss cost and occurrence frequency of the model are used in the life cycle cost evaluation model shown in FIG.
[0066]
(F) The initial cost evaluation model for fire prevention measures calculates the specifications and the number of fire prevention measures required by law based on the use, scale, and completion year of the building. Then, based on the calculated fire prevention measure condition, the initial investment cost of the fire prevention measure installed at the time of building construction is calculated. Specifically, a countermeasure initial cost calculation Fc is performed based on the building condition Fa, the fire prevention countermeasure condition Fb, and the fire prevention equipment initial cost database Fd. Further, the calculated Fe of the fire prevention countermeasure initial cost is performed based on the countermeasure initial cost.
[0067]
(G) In the running cost evaluation model for fire prevention measures, maintenance costs required for fire prevention measures at the stage of use of the building (personnel expenses for fire prevention managers, periodic inspections for maintenance of fire prevention equipment, equipment renewal costs) Fire insurance premiums). Specifically, the building management condition Ge is set from the building condition Ga. A fire prevention manager labor cost Gp is calculated from the building management condition Ge and the disaster management labor cost database Gh. Further, a fire prevention measure maintenance inspection cost Gr is calculated from the building condition Gb and the maintenance inspection database Gi.
[0068]
From the building condition Gc, the fire prevention equipment condition Gf, the service life database Gj, and the fire prevention equipment initial cost database Gm, a fire prevention equipment renewal cost calculation Gs is performed. Also, fire insurance premium calculation Gt is performed from building condition Gd, room condition Gg, fire prevention equipment condition Gk, insurance premium rate database Gl, and fire extinguishing equipment discount rate database Gn.
[0069]
Based on these fire prevention manager labor costs, fire prevention measure maintenance and inspection costs, fire prevention equipment renewal costs, and fire insurance premium costs, the calculation running cost of countermeasures is calculated. Also, a fire prevention measure running cost calculation Gv is performed. The fire prevention measure initial cost and the fire prevention measure running cost are used in the processing of the life cycle cost evaluation model Gw.
[0070]
(H) In the life cycle cost evaluation model, the damage cost associated with the fire calculated in (B) to (D) above and the cost of fire prevention measures calculated in (E) to (F) after completion of the building Are compared as parameters. Then, evaluate the investment effect of fire prevention measures against the fire risk assumed in the life cycle of the building. Specifically, the calculation result Cz based on the fire risk evaluation model and the calculation result Gw based on the fire prevention cost evaluation model are used. Using the calculation result Cz of the fire risk evaluation model, the damage cost is calculated He for the elapsed years after the completion from the building use condition Ha and the life cycle damage cost calculation Hb.
[0071]
Further, the calculation Hc of the life cycle fire prevention countermeasure cost is performed using the calculation result Gw of the fire prevention countermeasure cost evaluation model. Next, the calculation Hg of the fire prevention cost for the elapsed years after completion is performed from the life cycle fire prevention cost Hc and the building condition Hd. From the damage cost for the elapsed years after the completion and the fire prevention cost for the elapsed years after the completion, a comparative evaluation Hf of the damage cost and the countermeasure costs is performed, and the cost effectiveness of the fire prevention measures is calculated Hh.
[0072]
Thus, in the examples of FIGS. 5 to 8, (A) fire scenario setting model, (B) fire occurrence frequency evaluation model, (C) building damage risk evaluation model, (D) containment damage risk evaluation model, ( The sub-models of E) Lost time loss risk evaluation model, (F) Fire prevention countermeasure initial cost evaluation model, (G) Fire prevention countermeasure running cost evaluation model, and (H) Life cycle cost evaluation model are set. In this way, since the sub-model is set in various forms, it is possible to accurately evaluate the fire risk corresponding to the life cycle.
[0073]
FIG. 9 is a characteristic diagram showing an example of an evaluation result of life cycle fire risk. FIG. 9A shows a case where the grade of fire prevention measures is high, and FIG. 9B shows a case where the grade of fire prevention measures is low. Comparing (a) and (b), (a) has higher initial costs and running costs for fire prevention measures than (b), and the total damage cost is lower than (b). In other words, when the grade of fire prevention measures is high, it confirms that the total cost of damage due to fire is low. In addition, the characteristic diagram of FIG. 9 can be graphed with the result calculated by the control unit and displayed on an appropriate display unit.
[0074]
In the above embodiment, the outline of the model for quantitatively evaluating the fire risk and the investment cost of fire prevention measures from the viewpoint of the life cycle of the building has been described. Next, fire modeling will be described. In setting up a fire scenario, the expansion of the fire is classified as a fire phase, and the occurrence events are organized. The fire phase is a concept used to match the staged expansion of fire with the spatial structure of the building and the fire prevention measures to be implemented. Allocate necessary fire prevention measures for each phase, calculate the probability that the measures can be implemented before the phase reaches the limit state, and determine the probability of occurrence of the scenario. The fire phase was set as shown in Table 2.
[0075]
[Table 2]

[0076]
In Table 2, Phase 1 to Phase 6 are set as phase names. In each phase, fire conditions and fire prevention measures (related main equipment, human response) for preventing the progress of the fire are made to correspond. Phase 1 is the initial expansion stage, Phase 2 is the expansion stage in the fire chamber, Phase 3 is the high fire stage in the fire chamber, Phase 4 is the fire floor spreading stage, Phase 5 is the non-fire floor spreading stage, and Phase 6 is unsuccessful in all measures It is a state.
[0077]
As fire prevention measures to prevent the progress of fire, the main equipments involved are fire extinguishers in Phase 1 and indoor fire hydrants, sprinklers, and smoke exhaust equipment in Phase 2. In Phase 3, it is a fire door. Next, the human countermeasures for fire prevention measures are initial fire extinguishment in Phase 1, initial fire extinguishing and smoke evacuator activation in Phase 2, fire prevention zone formation in Phase 3, and fire fighting fire extinguishing in Phase 4 and Phase 5, respectively.
[0078]
Next, using the fire scenario, the scenario occurrence probability and the magnitude of damage in each scenario are associated. Scenarios are roughly divided into two categories depending on whether or not the self-reporting equipment is operating, and are arranged in accordance with the progress of this phase. Table 3 shows the set scenarios.
[0079]
[Table 3]

[0080]
In Table 3, in correspondence with the scenario numbers 1-1 to 7, the presence / absence of the operation of the self-fire report, the state assumed by the scenario, and the phase used for calculating the damaged area are set. Scenario numbers 1-1 and 1-2 are set so that the self-report is not activated, and scenario numbers 2 to 7 are set so that the self-report is activated.
[0081]
As a state assumed by the scenario, in scenario number 1-1, the sprinkler does not operate, and the phase used for calculating the damaged area is phase 6. In scenario number 1-2, the sprinkler operates and the phase used to calculate the damage area is phase 4. Next, when the self-report is activated, the phases 1 to 6 are associated with the scenario numbers 2 to 7, respectively.
[0082]
The state assumed by the scenario in scenario number 2 (phase 1) is a state in which the countermeasure has been successful in the initial expansion stage. In Scenario No. 3 (Phase 2), the response was successful in the expansion stage of the fire chamber. In Scenario No. 4 (Phase 3), the response was successful in the fire phase of the fire chamber. In Scenario No. 5 (Phase 4), the fire floor spread. Successful countermeasures in the stage, scenario number 6 (phase 5), successful countermeasures in the stage of spreading to the non-fire floor, and in the scenario number 6 (phase 6), all the countermeasures were unsuccessful.
[0083]
In the scenario of Table 3, the main parameters used to calculate the scenario occurrence probability are the following items. (1) Building / fire prevention measures conditions. This item includes the completion year of the building, the year of investigation on fire prevention measures, the number of fire prevention managers (day and night), the floor where the disaster prevention center is installed, the presence and type of fire prevention equipment, the period of renewal of fire prevention equipment, the distance from the fire department, The unit entry floor is included.
[0084]
(2) Fire room conditions. This item includes fire floor, fire room use / size (width / depth / height), interior type, opening size (width / height), wall type, and compartment component type. ing. (3) Environmental conditions. This item covers ambient air temperature and outside air temperature. Since the parameters cover these items (1) to (3), it is possible to comprehensively reflect events that can occur when a fire occurs when calculating the scenario occurrence probability.
[0085]
Furthermore, the probability of occurrence of each scenario depends on the values of the above parameters and various databases (fire load by room use, thermal inertia by wall type, fire growth parameter by room use, fire prevention equipment operation for each year since installation) This is calculated based on the probability, probability of implementation of action time according to the number of managers, and the renewal period of the fire prevention equipment. For this reason, it is possible to calculate the occurrence probability of the scenario with high accuracy. The total probability of occurrence from scenario 1-1 to scenario 7 is 1.
[0086]
Next, the operation probability of fire prevention measures used in the fire scenario will be described. Buildings are known to have a tendency to reduce the reliability of fire protection measures according to the number of years that have passed since installation. Therefore, as shown in Table 4, the numerical value of the operation reliability of fire prevention measures was set. Here, an example is shown in which the fire protection equipment renewal period is uniformly 20 years. Actually, the operation probability does not decrease uniformly according to the elapsed years, but the variation increases depending on the maintenance status of the building.
[0087]
[Table 4]

[0088]
In Table 4, the numerical values of the operation probabilities are set corresponding to the types of fire prevention measures and the elapsed years. Types of fire protection measures include self-reports (smoke detectors, heat detectors), fire extinguishers, indoor fire hydrants, sprinkler equipment, smoke exhaust equipment (natural smoke, mechanical smoke), fire doors (normally closed, closed at any time, Shutter), non-combustible door, and emergency power supply equipment. Moreover, the elapsed years are divided into 0-6 years, 7-13 years, and 14-19 years. From Table 4, as for the means of fire prevention measures, the operation probability is reduced by about 10 to 20% after 14 to 19 years have elapsed since the construction of the building.
[0089]
Next, an example of a method for setting the fire rate by room usage will be described. The fire rate is “the number of fires per unit area per year of fire including small fires that occur in the building (unit: times / m²・ Year) ”. Exposed fires from adjacent buildings are excluded. Tables 5 and 6 show an example of the fire rate by room usage (number of annual fires per unit area) used in this evaluation model.
[0090]
[Table 5]

[0091]
[Table 6]

[0092]
Table 5 shows the fire rate by room usage (cases where fire is included in the cause of fire). Table 6 shows fire rates by room use (cases in which the cause of fire does not include arson). In Tables 5 and 6, the fire rate of small buildings and the fire rate of large buildings are set for each target location in the office, dining room / kitchen, hot water supply room, and machine room. Small buildings have a floor area of 3000m.²The following buildings and large buildings have a floor area of 3000m²Intended for buildings that exceed.
[0093]
In the average fire statistics, the ratio of arson to the cause of fire is high, and the ratio of arson to all causes of fire varies depending on the room usage. For this reason, among the room uses shown in Tables 5 and 6, in the office room, different values were set depending on whether or not to include arson based on the ratio of arson to the cause of fire. In addition, since the fire rate tends to vary greatly depending on the building size, Tables 5 and 6 set different values depending on the building size.
[0094]
Next, as another embodiment, an example will be described in which the constructed life cycle fire risk evaluation model is applied to a virtual office building and a case study is performed.
[0095]
An outline of this case study will be described. A plan view of the building used for the case study is shown in FIG. The building used for the case study was assumed to be a 10-story office building. As shown in FIG. 10B, the first floor includes a restaurant, an entrance hall, a building management room, and a machine room. As shown in FIG. 10A, the 2nd to 10th floors mainly consist of an office room and a hot water supply room.
[0096]
Case study setting conditions are shown in Tables 7 (8) to 9 (10). Here, assuming a fire from the office, hot water supply room, restaurant, and machine room, loss costs and occurrence probability were calculated for all floors (32 rooms in total). In addition, in order to examine the effect of differences in fire prevention conditions on the evaluation results, two cases were examined: when sprinkler equipment was installed and when no sprinkler equipment was installed.
[0097]
[Table 7]

[0098]
Table 7 shows main setting values of the building conditions. As building condition items, the number of building floors, standard floor area, total floor area, structure type, floor height, expected building age, building replacement cost, ratio of replacement procurement price (frame, finish, equipment), fire rate calculation Set whether there is arson fire, containment cost per unit area, or holiday cost per unit area. The setting values of these items are set assuming them.
[0099]
[Table 8]

[0100]
Table 8 shows the main setting values of the room assuming fire. In the item column, fire growth rate (kW / m²), Fire load (kg / m²), Ceiling height (m), and external opening height (m). The target rooms that are supposed to catch fire are an office room, a hot water supply room, a restaurant, and a machine room. The setting values of these items are also set assuming.
[0101]
[Table 9]

[0102]
Table 9 shows the equipment settings for the fire prevention measures. In the column of items, set the main fire extinguishing equipment to be installed, the renewal interval of the fire prevention equipment, the operation probability of the fire prevention equipment, the annual inspection cost, the distance from the fire department, and the number of management room personnel. The main fire extinguishing equipment to be installed is an automatic fire alarm, indoor fire hydrant equipment, sprinkler equipment, connected water pipe, emergency lighting equipment, smoke exhaust equipment (mechanical), storage battery equipment, and emergency elevator (1 unit). Are listed. Here, about the operation probability of fire prevention equipment, the value based on a well-known document is set suitably.
[0103]
[Table 10]

[0104]
Table 10 shows an example of the calculation result of the fire prevention cost. In the item column, the ratio of the building replacement cost of fire prevention initial cost and the ratio of the building replacement cost per year of fire prevention running cost are set. Corresponding to each item, the price ratio is set according to the presence or absence of a sprinkler as a setting condition.
[0105]
In this embodiment, the cost of the building or the accommodation is set based on publicly known materials such as building construction cost analysis information. The method of setting lost time actually varies depending on the company's business conditions and business conditions. Here, the loss of lost work is calculated based on the rent per unit area. Based on the damaged area, the work period required for restoration was obtained, and the lost time was calculated by multiplying the number of days by the lost cost unit cost per unit area.
[0106]
Next, the result of the case study in this embodiment will be described. FIG. 11 is a characteristic diagram showing the transition of fire prevention cost (including initial cost and running cost) and expected total loss cost (total of building, containment, and lost time) with respect to the number of years since completion. FIG. 11A shows the case where the sprinkler equipment is installed, and FIG. 11B shows the case where the sprinkler equipment is not installed.
[0107]
  The calculation result of fire prevention cost is shown in the table above.10Is shown in In FIG. 11, the cost ratio to the building replacement cost is used as an index. When the expected value of total loss cost is compared with the cost of fire prevention measures, the measure cost is significantly higher than the expected value of total loss cost. This tendency is the same regardless of the presence or absence of sprinkler equipment. However, the ratio (A / B) of the expected total loss cost (A) to the fire prevention cost (B) is higher as the years pass, and the ratio is higher when the sprinkler equipment is not installed. ing.
[0108]
FIG. 12 is a characteristic diagram showing the proportion of building loss, containment loss, and lost time among the total loss cost expectation value of characteristic (A) in FIG. The ratio of each loss cost is almost constant regardless of the number of years that have passed since the completion of the project, including about 50% building loss, about 30% containment loss, and about 20% lost time loss.
[0109]
In the case of a general office, it can be seen that there is a possibility that the loss of stored items and the cost of lost work time may occur at the same level as the building loss cost. Thus, referring to FIG. 12, when evaluating the fire risk, it is shown that it is necessary to place importance on the loss of stored items and the lost time loss cost at the same ratio as the building loss cost.
[0110]
FIG. 13 is a characteristic diagram showing the frequency of excess building loss costs and total loss costs within the elapsed period after completion. FIG. 13A shows the case where the sprinkler equipment is installed, and FIG. 13B shows the case where the sprinkler equipment is not installed. Here, the expected loss cost values of FIG. 13 and FIG. 11 are compared. The expected loss for 60 years is about 5% of the building replacement cost (Fig. 11), while the total loss cost distribution has expanded to about 150% (Fig. 13) at the maximum. Thus, referring to FIG. 13, it can be seen that even if the probability of occurrence of a fire is small, there is a risk that the loss exceeds the fire prevention cost.
[0111]
FIG. 14 is a characteristic diagram showing the result of calculating the frequency of fires whose loss cost exceeds the fire prevention cost based on the fire prevention cost of FIG. 11 and the loss cost distribution of FIG. FIG. 14A shows the case where the sprinkler equipment is installed, and FIG. 14B shows the case where the sprinkler equipment is not installed. The frequency with which the total loss cost exceeds the fire prevention cost increases every year after completion.
[0112]
On the other hand, the frequency at which the building loss cost exceeds the fire prevention cost is decreasing after 35 to 40 years, and particularly when a sprinkler facility is installed. This means that the increase in running costs for fire prevention measures over the number of years since completion exceeds the increase in building loss costs. By using such an index, the effects of fire prevention measures including running costs can be quantified. The characteristic diagrams of FIGS. 11 to 14 can be displayed on an appropriate display unit.
[0113]
【The invention's effect】
As is clear from the above description, according to the present invention, it is possible to perform a fire risk evaluation corresponding to the life cycle of a building. In that case, by displaying the fire risk quantitatively, there is an advantage that it is easy to grasp the specific effect of the risk reduction measures. Moreover, in addition to hardware fire prevention measures such as building fire prevention facilities, it is possible to grasp the effects of software fire prevention measures such as fire prevention management on risk reduction, so that the building owner has a balanced fire risk management. Is possible. Furthermore, a comprehensive fire safety design at the design stage is possible by comprehensively evaluating the performance of buildings against fire.
[0114]
Moreover, in this invention, the loss distribution by a fire and countermeasure investment cost can be compared with the elapsed period after completion of a building, and the probability that a fire loss cost will exceed a countermeasure investment cost is computable. By performing such processing, it is possible to quantify the investment effect of the measure using the excess probability of loss as an index.
[0115]
In the present invention, the total loss cost due to fire and the fire prevention cost can be evaluated based on the presence or absence of fire prevention equipment. For this reason, it becomes possible to formulate long-term cost management for avoiding the risk of fire by comparing the evaluation of the total loss cost due to fire and the cost of fire prevention measures with or without the installation of fire prevention equipment.
[Brief description of the drawings]
FIG. 1 is an explanatory diagram showing the overall configuration of a fire risk evaluation model.
FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram showing a concept of damage scale calculation.
FIG. 3 is an explanatory diagram showing a damage area calculation method for each fire phase.
FIG. 4 is an explanatory diagram showing a concept of life cycle risk and cost evaluation.
FIG. 5 is an explanatory diagram showing another embodiment.
FIG. 6 is an explanatory diagram showing another embodiment.
FIG. 7 is an explanatory diagram showing another embodiment.
FIG. 8 is an explanatory diagram showing another embodiment.
FIG. 9 is a characteristic diagram showing an example of an evaluation result of a life cycle fire risk.
FIG. 10 is a plan view of a building.
FIG. 11 is a characteristic diagram showing the transition of the fire prevention cost and the total loss cost expectation value with respect to the number of years since completion.
FIG. 12 is a characteristic diagram showing the proportion of building loss, containment loss, and lost time among the total loss cost expectation value of characteristic (A) in FIG.
FIG. 13 is a characteristic diagram showing the frequency of excess building loss costs and total loss costs within the elapsed period after completion.
FIG. 14 is a characteristic diagram showing the result of calculating the frequency of fires where the loss cost exceeds the fire prevention cost.
[Explanation of symbols]
1 ... Target building, 2 ... Damaged room, 3 ... Fire room.

Claims (8)

An input means for inputting condition settings for building risk assessment;
Storage means for storing condition settings input to the input means;
Based on the condition settings stored in the storage means, sub-models of a fire scenario evaluation model, a fire risk evaluation model, a fire prevention cost evaluation model, and a life cycle risk evaluation model are set and the respective models are used. Control means for calculating and comparing costs ,
The control means includes
Means for setting a fire phase that can occur in the event of a fire based on the condition setting, using the fire scenario evaluation model;
Means for calculating a total loss cost based on the fire phase set in the fire scenario evaluation model using the fire risk evaluation model;
Using the fire prevention cost evaluation model, calculating the initial cost and the running cost of the fire prevention based on the condition setting, and means that the sum as the fire prevention cost,
Using the life cycle risk assessment model, with the elapsed years after completion of the building as a parameter, the means for comparing the total loss cost and fire prevention cost in the life cycle,
When calculating the running cost of the fire prevention measures, the operation probability of the fire prevention equipment is changed according to the elapsed years,
A fire risk evaluation system for comparing the fire prevention cost and the total loss cost of a life cycle due to a fire. The fire risk evaluation according to claim 1, further comprising means for quantifying the occurrence frequency of a fire scenario within a target period from the occurrence probability and the fire rate of the fire phase using the fire scenario evaluation model. system. The fire risk evaluation system according to claim 1, further comprising means for calculating a fire occurrence frequency together with a total loss cost associated with a fire using the fire risk evaluation model. 2. The fire risk evaluation system according to claim 1, further comprising means for evaluating each cost in the life cycle based on a repurchasing price of the building and the accommodation using the life cycle risk evaluation model. 3. . The building conditions of the building to be evaluated, the room conditions, the room composition conditions, the fire prevention countermeasure conditions, and the stage of setting the environmental conditions in advance,
For all rooms that are expected to catch fire in the building, a fire scenario is set to calculate the fire rate for each room and the probability of an event that can occur,
Calculating the damage area for the set fire scenario, calculating the cost and frequency of occurrence of building damage, containment damage, lost-time damage based on the damage area in each room;
Calculating initial cost and running cost of fire prevention measures,
Calculating a loss cost and a fire prevention cost in the life cycle of the building;
A fire risk evaluation method comprising: calculating a loss cost and a countermeasure cost with respect to the number of years after the completion of a building, and calculating an excess probability of the loss cost. An input means for inputting condition settings for building risk assessment;
Storage means for storing condition settings input to the input means;
Based on the condition settings stored in the storage means, a fire scenario setting model of a building to be evaluated, a fire occurrence frequency evaluation model, a building damage risk evaluation model, a containment damage risk evaluation model, and lost time loss Control means to set each sub-model of the risk evaluation model, fire prevention initial cost evaluation model, fire prevention running cost evaluation model, and life cycle cost evaluation model,
The control means is based on the submodels,
Means for calculating the damage scale of the building to be evaluated;
Means for calculating fire prevention cost,
A fire comprising a means for calculating a change in damage scale and a countermeasure cost with respect to the number of years after the completion of the building by comparing the calculated damage scale with a fire prevention cost and comparing the results of both. Risk assessment system. Based on conditions such as the type of fire prevention measures installed in the target building and the probability of operation, modeling the fire conditions that occur in each room in the building as a scenario,
A stage for calculating the combination of success or failure of fire prevention measures in the event of a fire and the probability of occurrence for each scenario;
Based on the use of each room in the building and the floor area, calculating the average number of fires per year per room;
For the conditions such as fire prevention measures for each of the set scenarios, the step of calculating the burning area of the building caused by the fire, the smoke loss area, and the water loss area,
Converting each damaged area into a damage cost ratio with respect to a building replacement cost;
Calculating the physical damage occurrence frequency and damage cost of the containment inside the building caused by the damage of the building due to the fire against the fire prevention measure condition for each set scenario,
Calculating the business interruption period of the business establishment caused by the damage of the building due to the fire for the conditions such as fire prevention measures for each set scenario, and calculating the cost of damage due to the business interruption;
Calculate the initial investment cost of fire prevention measures installed at the time of construction of the building based on the stage of calculating the specifications and number of fire prevention measures required by the law of the building and the calculated fire prevention measures And the stage of
Calculating the cost of maintenance required in connection with fire prevention measures at the use stage of the building;
A fire risk evaluation method comprising: comparing each damage cost with an initial investment cost and a maintenance management cost for fire prevention measures using the elapsed years after completion of the building as a parameter. Assuming a room in the building to be evaluated as a fire room;
A scenario that can occur when a fire occurs in the room is categorized based on parameters such as the progress of the fire, the presence or absence of fire prevention measures, and calculating the probability of occurrence of the scenario;
Calculating a damage scale for each set scenario for each type of damage, and converting the damage scale using cost as an index;
Repeating the calculation of the probability of occurrence of a scenario and conversion using the cost of damage scale as an index for all rooms in the building;
8. The fire risk evaluation method according to claim 7, further comprising a step of calculating a distribution of damage scale when a fire breaks out from any room in the building based on the repetition result.

Images