Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31752413›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2019

Modeling Indoor Relative Humidity and Wood Moisture Content as a Proxy for Wooden Home Fire Risk.

Torgrim Log

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Torgrim LogDepartment of Safety, Chemistry and Biomedical Laboratory Sciences, Fire Disaster Research Group, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, 5528 Haugesund, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-6326-4412

Funding

Norges Forskningsråd 298993
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Severe wooden home conflagrations have previously been linked to the combination of very dry indoor climate in inhabited buildings during winter time, resulting in rapid fire development and strong winds spreading the fire to neighboring structures. Knowledge about how ambient conditions increase the fire risk associated with dry indoor conditions is, however, lacking. In the present work, the moisture content of indoor wooden home wall panels was modeled based on ambient temperature and relative humidity recorded at meteorological stations as the climatic boundary conditions. The model comprises an air change rate based on ambient and indoor (22 °C) temperatures, indoor moisture sources and wood panel moisture sorption processes; it was tested on four selected homes in Norway during the winter of 2015/2016. The results were compared to values recorded by indoor relative humidity sensors in the homes, which ranged from naturally ventilated early 1900s homes to a modern home with balanced ventilation. The modeled indoor relative humidity levels during cold weather agreed well with recorded values to within 3% relative humidity (RH) root mean square deviation, and thus provided reliable information about expected wood panel moisture content. This information was used to assess historic single home fire risk represented by an estimated time to flashover during the studied period. Based on the modelling, it can be concluded that three days in Haugesund, Norway, in January 2016 were associated with very high conflagration risk due to dry indoor wooden materials and strong winds. In the future, the presented methodology may possibly be based on weather forecasts to predict increased conflagration risk a few days ahead. This could then enable proactive emergency responses for improved fire disaster risk management.

Indexed as

conflagration riskdry woodfire riskmodelingrelative humidity

Identifiers

PMID31752413
PMCPMC6891677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.