Emergency+evacuation

=Evaluating the efficiency of the DIS Fire evacuation procedure=

Materials: - Stopwatch - Thread (to measure length) - Runners - Blood Pressure machine - Measuring tape - Ground floor plan

4 possible ways that we are considering are listed below

The first route is from the art room to the safe location using the main stairs and it is a distance of 220m.

The second route is from the art room to the other stairs and this is a distance of 199m.

The third route is from the art room going through the other stairs and then going to the main entrance and it is 248m.

The fourth route is from the main stairs and going out but not from the main entrance and it is 235m. This is the longest route.

Error Propagation of the route: 1) Relative Percentage Error – Route 1 = 10.52% = 2.214 Therefore – Route 1 -> 220m ± 2.2m 2) Relative Percentage Error – Route 2 = 6.35% = 1.263 Therefore – Route 2 -> 199m ± 1.3m 3) Relative percentage error – Route 3 = 13.81% = 0.963 Therefore – Route 3 -> 253m ± 0.10m 4) Relative percentage error – Route 4 = 9.78% = 0.673 Therefore – Route 4 -> 141m ± 0.7m

The toxins produced during a fire. The more effective route will ensure that people will be evacuated before the toxins can diffuse through the air and harm individuals.

We are presuming the fire location is room 003 and it would be easier for the toxins to diffuse through the main hall as opposed to the fire exit as, the lack of doors in the main hall allows for faster diffusion of the toxins through the air.

Conclusion Route 1 is of a longer distance but it requires less time, because of the width and capacity of the stairs to accommodate more people. Also route 2, which seems to consume less time, contrary to belief takes longer due to the number of turns and lack of width. However route 2 has more obstacles in between which could help slow down if the intoxication of the air as opposed to route 1. However this balance out as route 1 allows for a quicker and more efficient escape. We decided to not take route 3 and route 4 into consideration as they were lengthier and as they could not help our cause were obsolete.

Evaluation of the first Route:


 * If we ran closer to the stairs, it would have taken us less time to leave the building faster and safer.
 * Instead of running, it would be safer for every individual to walk faster than normal which would not lead to extreme chaos.
 * Did not include the regular school procedures such as closing windows. Therefore, in the case of real fire, more time would be needed to evacuate.
 * We were also not surrounded by other people which gave us more time to leave the building.
 * If there were more people, our data would be more reliable.

Evaluation of the second Route:
 * Smaller distance, but required more time to go to the fire location.
 * The structure of the stairs makes it harder for people to evacuate faster.
 * The structure of the door from this route is easier to get out of, as opposed to the first one.
 * Smaller area; less space for people to pass by.