中日高层住宅火灾疏散模式比较研究OACHSSCD

The incidence of high-rise residential fires in China has increased in recent years,and the increase in building height has intensified evacuation difficulties.Accordingly,research on fire prevention in residual buildings has shifted to Japan's high-efficiency safe evacuation systems.Unlike China's centralised evacuation model,which primarily relies on staircases,a multi-path evacuation strategy incorporating staircases,balconies,and emergency elevators has been developed in Japan in response to frequent earthquake-induced secondary fires.Significant differences exist between the two countries in norm logic,path diversity,and strategies for extreme scenarios.For a systematic comparison of high-rise residential building evacuation systems in China and Japan,this study has reviewed the core requirements for evacuation methods,path configuration,and walking distance,based on the development context of their fire codes and current regulations,to propose an improved direction.In addition,the pathways of staircases,emergency ladders on balconies,and other pathways in typical high-rise and super high-rise residential buildings were classified and analysed,thus enabling a comparison of the connectivity and effectiveness of the evacuation systems in both countries under normal and extreme conditions. The study indicates that the Chinese code is predicated on height.The code emphasises height classification while establishing a relatively centralised evacuation system that incorporates scissor staircases,smoke-proof stairwells,and shared front rooms.However,overlapping pathways and pocket walkways frequently occur in certain residences,resulting in only one-way evacuation routes for some occupants.This situation becomes particularly perilous when the fire's point of origin is near the residence's entrance.Although China's code mandates the installation of fire elevators,these are primarily designed for fire rescue purposes.Present evacuation regulations mainly focus on elderly care facilities,lacking institutionalised alternative evacuation routes for general housing. Japan's evacuation strategy prioritises route diversity and adaptability in extreme situations.Based on staircase evacuation,it establishes a multi-directional and decentralised evacuation network that incorporates balcony evacuation ladders,emergency elevators,and temporary evacuation areas for individuals with mobility challenges.The code designates the deepest point of the room as the starting point for calculating evacuation distance and encourages buildings to minimise bottleneck pathways by restricting overlapping distances.The balcony evacuation paths are allowed to replace some staircase evacuation routes when the floor plan fails to meet evacuation requirements.In typical cases,most occupants have 2～4 available escape routes,which significantly improve the escape guarantee when corridors are blocked. The comparative analysis shows that people in both China and Japan can escape quickly through staircases at the beginning of a fire.However,as the fire progresses and corridors fail,Japanese homes exhibit greater connectivity and flexibility.Conceptually,China emphasises the centralised layout and system reliability,controlling smoke through antechambers and pressurised air supply.In contrast,Japan emphasises decentralised pathways to avoid single-point failures and increase minimum escape capability.Such differences reflect the institutional choices formed by varying disaster types,urban configurations,and firefighting education.The study concludes that Japan's experience offers valuable insights for China,particularly regarding multi-path evacuation,elevator-assisted evacuation,and sheltering for individuals with mobility challenges.In the future,China shall explore the feasibility of reducing bagged walkways,dispersing building stairs and elevators,incorporating alternative routes,and studying elevator evacuation strategies in the context of an aging population.Meanwhile,policy trends such as the"elimination of common areas"are anticipated to create additional design spaces for multi-path evacuation systems. However,this study chose only a few cases,which means it cannot offer many references.Moreover,the comparison of evacuation pathways is mainly based on plane analysis,without simulation of people's behaviours and quantitative verification of the multi-path system.Future research could deepen the verification by combining numerical simulation and performance-based analysis to provide more robust support for the optimisation of high-rise residential evacuation systems in China.