The document discusses new Swedish building regulations focusing on performance-based fire safety design, outlining mandatory provisions and general recommendations for both new constructions and alterations. It emphasizes the importance of analytical design procedures to ensure adequate fire protection while addressing potential deviations and assessing risks associated with fire spread between buildings. Additionally, it highlights the varying regulatory practices in Europe, the need for harmonization in fire safety engineering, and the pursuit of a balance between flexibility in design and societal risk control.

1. New Swedish building regulations and a
framework for fire safety engineering
Caroline Cronsioe, The National board of building,
housing and planning
Michael Strömgren, SP Fire technology
David Tonegran, Tyréns
Henrik Bjelland, University of Stavanger

2. Content
 The Swedish concept for
performance-based design
 New buildings vs. Alteration
 Analytical design procedures
 European possibilities

3. Swedish regulatory hierarcy
General
recommendations
for analytical design

4. Example, hierarcy
Protection against the spread of fire between buildings
Mandatory provisions (Operative requirements)
Buildings shall be designed with adequate protection against fire spread between buildings.
General recommendation (Prescriptive design or acceptable solution)
Adequate protection is achieved if buildings are constructed at a distance of
more than 8 m. /…/
General recommendation (Analytical design)
Limiting the risk of fire spread between buildings can be achieved, for example, by:
- buildings being erected at a suitable distance from each other,
- restricting the size of unprotected building components,
- restricting the fire susceptibility of exposed surfaces, or General
- restricting the extent of the fire with fire safety installations such as an automatic fire recommendations
for analytical design
suppression system.
For analysis of fire spread between buildings, the maximum radiation levels on the exposed
building should not exceed acceptable levels for all relevant scenarios.

5. Foto: Otto Ryding

6. Fire regulations
Alterations of buildings
If deviations from the
mandatory provisions are
made (step 2 and 3), the
design shall be verified
Main rule with analytical design
1. Buildings shall comply Not always possible to fulfill
with the fire protection Every building has its unique problems and solutions
regulations for new All buildings, built yesterday or those built in the 15th
buildings century
Analytical design is possible to use
2. The mandatory When building a new building you always need to
provisions may be fulfill the mandatory provisions
satisfied in a other way if When altering a building is not always possible to
the corresponding safety fulfill the mandatory provisions
level is still achieved For a few buildings this 2nd step is still not enough
3. Deviations from the
safety level may be made
if there are exceptional
circumstances

7. Analytical design procedures
 Required for certain buildings and when
deviating from prescriptive regulations
 Possible for both new and altered
buildings
 General process
 Identifying deviations from
prescriptive code
 Verifying the tradeoffs
 Review & documentation

8. Verification procedures
 Verifying operational requirements
 Comparative analysis (prescriptive solutions)
 Design criteria for certain scenarios
 Verification methods
 Qualitative assessment (limited use)
 Scenario based analysis
 Quantitative risk analysis
 Robustness assessment, sensitivity and uncertainty
analysis may be required

9. Example: Verifying means of escape by
scenario analysis
 Three design scenarios with various design
fires (for RSET)
 Recommended minimum values: 5 and
10 MW
 Robustness: 2 MW
 Effect of sprinklers
 Design conditions for ASET
 Pre-movement time
 Travel time
 Design criteria
 For example, 80C Temperature, 5 m
visibility etc.

10. Status of FSE in Europe
 Most countries use prescriptive
regulations as a base for FSE
 Competence levels among
practitions vary
 Regulatory support and methods
for FSE is lacking
 However, complex buildings
deviating from prescriptive
regulations are built any way

11. Challenges for Europe
 Need for FSE tools and harmonisation
 Account must be taken for differences in
 Legal and regulatory structures
 Review & control processes
 Competence levels among practitioners
 Work is going on in European
standardization and in SFPE Europe

12. Conclusions
 Balance between flexibility and societal risk control
 Need for risk calibration and risk criteria – these
should be set nationally…
 … and the risk level of prescriptive regulations is a
good start
 European countries should adopt a common method
and approach to FSE