C o n s t r u c t i o n Te c h n o l o g y U p d a t e N o .

4 8

Considerations in the Design

of Smoke Management
Systems for Atriums
by G.D. Lougheed
This Update discusses the use of an engineered approach to the design of smoke
management systems for atrium buildings, based on the principles of smoke
management in atriums outlined in Construction Technology Update No. 47.
Engineered smoke management systems
often play a role in extending the use of an
atrium space by demonstrating that the basic

Figure 1. Smoke production in an atrium1

requirements of the applicable building and

fire codes can be met or in providing additional protection for occupants and property.
Typically, this involves the use of mechanical
exhaust systems to limit the accumulation
of smoke in the atrium and its migration
into evacuation routes and communicating
spaces.2
Some model codes in the United States
and other countries have introduced
requirements for smoke management
systems based on the design criteria found
in engineering design guides such as
NFPA 92B (published by the National Fire
Protection Association), Guide for Smoke
Management Systems in Malls, Atria and
Large Areas. These guides include atrium
smoke management considerations and
design criteria.[1,2,3]
Atrium smoke management design is
based on the principles used in multi-zone
fire models: The fire produces hot gases,
which rise above the fire, forming a plume.
As this plume rises, it entrains air, increasing
its diameter and mass flow rate (rate of smoke
build-up) with elevation an expanding
cone. At the ceiling, the hot gases form a
layer of smoke (see Figure 1). As smoke
accumulates, the layer thickens and
descends, and can ultimately fill the atrium
(resulting in reduced visibility and increased
distribution of gases to other areas of the

Design Criteria

Figure 2. The smoke management system must maintain the base

of the smoke layer above the design height.

building). The plume, the smoke layer, and

the ambient or cold layer of air not entrained
by the rising plume constitute three separate
zones within the room (see Figure 1).
Equations based on experimental data
have been developed for estimating the
properties of the smoke plume, the thickness
of the smoke layer and its average properties
such as temperature, gas concentrations
and smoke optical density. The balance of
mass and energy among the three zones in
the atrium is also reflected in the design
equations. These empirical equations form
the basis for smoke management system
design using the engineering design
guides.[1,2,3]

Design Process
The basic steps in designing an atrium
smoke exhaust system are as follows:
1. Design criteria. Determine the specific
design objectives that must be met by the
smoke management system and develop
suitable criteria.
2. Design fire. Determine the size and
location of the fire(s) for use in the
calculation of smoke production.
3. Mechanical exhaust considerations.
Determine whether the design criteria
can be met by allowing smoke to fill the
atrium space without provision for smoke
exhaust. If this is not the case, calculate
the requirements of the mechanical exhaust
system that can meet the design criteria.
The various approaches used in codes and
engineering guides for each of these steps
are summarized in the following sections.

Engineered atrium smoke management

systems are typically designed to meet one
of the objectives of the NBC, which is to
protect human life. For design purposes,
the area of the building that must be kept
smoke free is established, usually by assuming
that the base of the smoke layer should
remain above a pre-determined height (i.e,
the design height, which is measured from
the floor of the atrium) for a specified period
of time. Two examples of design criteria for
meeting this objective are as follows:
The smoke management system must be
able to maintain the base of the smoke
layer above the highest unprotected
opening to adjoining spaces, or
The smoke management system must be
able to maintain the base of the smoke layer
at 1.8-3 m above the highest floor level in
the atrium used for exit purposes for at least
20 minutes following ignition (Figure 2).
Another possible design approach is to
ensure that building occupants are not subjected to untenable conditions. However,
most engineers are reluctant to design
systems that could expose occupants to any
smoke at all, even if that exposure is not
lethal. Engineering guides such as NFPA 92B
include methods for calculating smoke
parameters, which can be used in a hazard
analysis for the design of a system based on
tenability criteria.[1]

Design Fire (Size and Location)

The design fire selected for smoke management design calculations must be representative of the most realistic, or expected, fire
that is likely to occur in the atrium based on
the specific design of the building and its use,
which together determine the materials used
to construct the building and those contained
in it. The degree of interconnection or
openness between the atrium, or atriums, and
the adjacent spaces is also a critical factor
in the design of the system. An open or
partially open atrium requires more complex
fire protection than a closed atrium to limit
smoke movement and protect evacuation
routes the greater the interconnectedness,
the greater the possibility of smoke spread.
An underlying assumption in the selection of a design fire, or fire scenario, is that
it is sufficiently large, with little probability
of a larger fire occurring, thus ensuring an
acceptable level of safety as stipulated by
the applicable building code or authority
having jurisdiction.

Fire Size
The size of the design fire depends on the
expected amount of combustible material
(fuel loading) in the atrium, which in turn
depends on the occupancy a commercial
occupancy, for example, is assumed to have
a heavier fuel loading per unit floor area
than an office building. (Some examples of
design fires [4] are shown in Table 1, p. 4.)
In general, the size and rate of growth of
design fires are based on the analysis of fire
statistics for a specific type of occupancy or
from experiments on the combustible materials (fuels) typically found in the occupancy.
The location of the fire in the atrium also
has a significant impact on fire size and rate
of growth (see Fire Location below).
The major fire parameters
to be considered are
Heat release rate is a meathe heat release rate and
sure of the size of the fire.
the resulting smoke mass
The higher the heat release
flow rate. Over the years,
rate, the bigger the fire.
various design fires repreSmoke mass flow rate is
senting different fire
the rate at which the volscenarios, with specified
ume/mass of the smoke
heat release rates, have
increases in the smoke layer
been developed. Smoke
(the rate of smoke build-up).
mass flow rates are based
on estimated heat release
rates for use in the design of a smoke
exhaust system.[1,2,3] For complex atrium
designs, numerical fire models may be
required to assess the ability of the smoke
management system to meet design objectives (see Numerical Modelling for Smoke
Management Design below).[5]
Fire Location
There are two main locations for design
fires:
on the atrium floor
in a communicating space.
Algebraic equations for estimating the
smoke mass flow for each of these locations
are provided in the design guides.[1,2,3]
When the fire is on the atrium floor, the
plume of hot gases rises to the ceiling of the
atrium, continually entraining air from the
surroundings, thus increasing the volume of
smoke. In high atriums, the amount of air
entrained in the plume can be significant
and can have a major impact on the requirements of the smoke venting system.
In principle, an atrium fire could be
located anywhere on the floor near a
wall or in a corner. In both cases, the adjacent walls limit air entrainment into the
plume. For most design applications, it is

Construction Technology Update No. 48

generally assumed that the fire will be in

the centre of the atrium where the smoke
plume will be symmetrical about the central
axis and will entrain air on all sides, producing the greatest volume of smoke the
worst-case scenario (see Figure 1).
Algebraic equations are also available for
estimating the smoke mass flow rates for fires
located in communicating spaces. This
includes smoke flow through an opening,
such as a window, located in the wall of an
atrium. It also includes smoke flow from a
connecting space that accumulates under a
balcony before entering the atrium. The
latter situation is known as a balcony spill
plume, which can result in considerable air
entrainment into the smoke flow, leading to
high smoke production even for small fires.

Design Approaches Based on Fire

Size and Growth
One of the most commonly used approaches
to the design of atrium smoke management
systems assumes a steady-state design fire
(Table 1, p. 4) i.e., the fire is always the
same (largest predicted) size. A system
designed to deal with this fire will also be
able to handle the fire as it grows.[1,2,3]
Steady-state design fires, with their simple
algebraic equations, are relatively easy to use
to estimate smoke parameters, including
smoke mass flow rate based on the size of
the fire (heat release rate). However, because
this approach assumes the largest possible
fire from the time of ignition, there is a large
factor of safety resulting in a higher cost.
Maximum heat release rates for some
products are given in NFPA 92B.[1] For
example, the peak heat release rate from a
plastic trash bag filled with paper is
120-350 kW and from a small (6.5-7.4 kg)
dry Christmas tree it is 500-650 kW.
A second approach, which uses a fire
that grows over time to model actual growth,
can result in design criteria that are less
onerous. Frequently, the fire growth is
assumed to be proportional to time squared
(t2). There are four basic classifications for
fire development, or growth rate: slow,
medium, fast and ultra-fast. However, as in
the case of fire size, fire development is
dependent on a number of factors; thus,
there is a range of possible fire growth
rates. The designer selects the design fire
growth rate that most closely represents
what is likely to occur for the occupancy
and expected fuel loads, and designs the
system to provide adequate performance.
3

Table 1. Steady-state design fires for atriums.[4]

Fuel loading
Low (minimum fire for fuel-restricted atrium)
Typical (minimum fire for atrium
with combustibles)
High (large fires)

Design fire
(MW)
2
5
25

In this approach, the maximum fire size must

be stated, the assumption being that the fire
will only grow to a certain size because
sprinklers are present to control the fire.
A third approach for determining the
appropriate design fire uses information
obtained from full-scale fire tests in which
the fuel load corresponding to a specific
occupancy has been recreated. These data
can be used by designers to predict the
consequences of the same fire (fuel load) in
buildings of different geometries. This
approach is useful when the anticipated
fuel load is expected to be very similar to
that used in the test arrangement.
At present, real fire test data are not
readily available for use in the design of
smoke management systems. Existing
databases are quite limited, although there
are some data in design guides such as
NFPA 92B, which is probably the most
widely used tool.[1] Results for both sprinklered and non-sprinklered fire scenarios
can be found in the literature.

Determining the Need for

Mechanical Exhaust
When the quantity and rate of smoke production have been determined using design
equations as described above, a decision
can be made about whether a mechanical
exhaust system is required.
Smoke Management without Mechanical
Exhaust
Engineering equations can be used to
estimate the rate at which smoke will fill an
atrium for a given design fire.[1] Some
atriums have a large enough volume to
allow smoke to accumulate above the
design height for a specified period of time,
permitting occupants to evacuate safely.
If occupants can respond and evacuate
before the atrium fills with smoke, further
smoke management measures to limit
smoke accumulation may not be required.
An atrium that is only partially open to the
adjoining building, for example, may not
require a mechanical exhaust system
because the smoke can be contained above
the opening (see Figure 2).

Smoke Management with Mechanical

Exhaust
When it is deemed that there is insufficient
time for occupants to respond and evacuate
before the smoke layer descends below the
design height, a mechanical exhaust system
can be used.
Typically, the mechanical exhaust system
is designed to maintain the smoke above
the design height for a specified design fire.
By assuming a fire size and a height for the
smoke layer, algebraic equations provided
in the engineering design guides can be
used to estimate the mass flow rate of
smoke into the smoke layer above the design
height.[1] In order to maintain the smoke
layer at or above the design height, the fan
for the smoke exhaust system must have
the capacity to remove a sufficient quantity
of smoke from the smoke layer (see Figure 3).
This means that system designers must
carefully consider phenomena that might
compromise the effectiveness of the smoke
exhaust system, such as plugholing and
ceiling jets.
Plugholing. The possibility of fresh air
from below the smoke layer being pulled
into the exhaust inlets must be considered
for designs in which the distance between
the design height and the exhaust inlets is
limited. This phenomenon in which the
exhaust is made up not only of smoke but
also of air from inside the atrium is known
as plugholing. With plugholing, some of
the capacity of the exhaust system is
expended in removing air rather than smoke.
This diminished efficiency of the system
needs to be considered when determining
the design height and the fan capacity
(see Figure 4).
In a recently completed ASHRAE-sponsored research project, IRC fire researchers
used full-scale physical model studies combined with numerical modelling to investigate this issue.[6,7,8] They found that a
design approach similar to one used in the
United Kingdom to prevent plugholing in
gravity venting systems (open vents, no
fans) could also be applied to an atrium
mechanical smoke exhaust system. Design
methods for addressing plugholing are provided in the 2000 edition of NFPA 92B.[1]
The main approach used to minimize
plugholing involves providing multiple
inlets for the exhaust system in order to
reduce the amount of exhaust that has to
pass through a single inlet.

Construction Technology Update No. 48

Ceiling jet. In addition to addressing the

plugholing phenomenon, NFPA 92B also
recommends that the smoke layer depth
below the exhaust inlets be sufficient to
accommodate the smoke flow once the smoke
reaches the atrium ceiling (see Figure 5,
p. 6).[1] At this point, the smoke flows outwards to the walls. This flow is known as
the ceiling jet. At the wall, the smoke flow
will be redirected back into the atrium.
Fire-protection engineers have generally
assumed that the smoke flow at the ceiling
occupies between 10 and 20% of the height
of the atrium, which was recently confirmed by IRC experimental work.[9] This
type of smoke flow limits the depth of the
smoke layer that can be accommodated
using a mechanical exhaust system and
therefore needs to be considered when
determining the design height.[1]

Numerical Modelling for Smoke

Management Design

Figure 3. The smoke exhaust system must have adequate

capacity to remove a suffiecient quantity of smoke from the
smoke layer.

While empirical equations are sufficient for

design purposes in many applications,
numerical fire models are required for more
complex problems. Many zone fire models
(numerical models based on the different
zones in an atrium, as shown in Figure 1)
can take into account exhaust from the
smoke layer, and can therefore be used to
simulate atrium smoke management systems.
However, before using such a model, the
designer should determine whether it has
been verified for the heights typical of those
found in the atrium under consideration.
Some modern buildings with multiple
atriums and interconnected communicating
spaces, or with very large open spaces, are
too complex to be adequately represented
by the available empirical equations and/or
zone models. For these buildings, more
extensive numerical modelling is warranted.
Designers of smoke management systems
often use Computational Fluid Dynamic
(CFD) models for this task because they
allow for a detailed examination of smoke
flow in a building.

Summary
The design of a smoke management system
for an atrium building depends on the use
and the design of the building, both of
which affect the size of the fire and its rate
of growth, and hence the ability of occupants to evacuate. Various approaches or
tools are available for the design of these
Figure 4. The plugholing phenomenon

Figure 5. Ceiling jet smoke flow pattern

systems, from empirical equations for

simpler buildings to numerical modelling
for more complex ones.[1,2,3] The use of
smoke management systems provides
options for extending the use of the atrium
while maintaining safe egress routes.
However, in applying these systems, the
designer must take into consideration
factors that limit system effectiveness, such
as plugholing and ceiling jets.

References
1. NFPA 92B, Guide for smoke management
systems in malls, atria, and large areas.
National Fire Protection Association,
Quincy, MA, 2000.
2. Klote, J.H. and Milke, J.A. Design of
smoke management systems. American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and
Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA,
1992.
3. Morgan, H.P., Ghosh, B.K., Garrad, G.,
Pamlitschka, R., De Smedt, J.-C. and
Schoonbaert, L.R. Design methodologies
for smoke and heat exhaust ventilation.
BRE 368, Construction Research
Communication Ltd, London, UK, 1999.

4. Fire and smoke management, heating,

ventilating and air-conditioning
applications handbook. American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and
Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA,
1999.
5. Milke, J.A. Using models to support
smoke management system design. Fire
Protection Engineering, Number 7, 2000,
pp. 17-23.
6. Lougheed, G.D. and Hadjisophocleous,
G.V. Investigation of atrium smoke exhaust
effectiveness. ASHRAE Transactions,
Volume 103, 1997, pp. 519-533.
7. Hadjisophocleous, G.V., Lougheed, G.D.
and Cao, S. Numerical study of the
effectiveness of atrium smoke exhaust
systems. ASHRAE Transactions,
Volume 105, 1999, pp. 699-715.
8. Lougheed, G.D, Hadjisophocleous, G.V.,
McCartney, C. and Taber, B.C. Large-scale
physical model studies for an atrium smoke
exhaust system. ASHRAE Transactions,
Volume 105, 1999, pp. 676-698.
9. Lougheed, G.D. and Hadjisophocleous,
G.V. The smoke hazard from a fire in
high spaces. ASHRAE Transactions,
Volume 107, 2001, pp. 720-729.

Footnotes
1. Although the figures show a raised roof system, this
is not a requirement of the National Building Code
of Canada 1995.
2. Communicating spaces refers to those spaces in a
building with an open pathway to the atrium such
that smoke movement between the spaces and the
atrium is unimpeded. This includes spaces that
open directly into the atrium as well as those that
connect through passageways.

Dr. G.D. Lougheed is a senior research officer

in the Fire Risk Management Program of the
National Research Councils Institute for Research
in Construction.

2000
National Research Council of Canada
December 2000
ISSN 1206-1220

Construction Technology Updates is a series of technical articles containing

practical information distilled from recent construction research.
For more information, contact Institute for Research in Construction,
National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa K1A 0R6
Telephone: (613) 993-2607; Facsimile: (613) 952-7673; Internet: http://www.nrc.ca/irc