COURSE NEWS
Delegates attending the PPEM course May 2000
PPFM AND PPEM PROVE TO BE VERY SUCCESSFUL
SUMMARY OF PPFM QUESTIONNAIRES
SUMMARY OF PPEM QUESTIONNAIRES
PHOTOS FROM PREVIOUS SHORT COURSES
PPFM AND PPEM PROVE TO BE VERY SUCCESSFUL
FSEG run two short courses for the fire protection industry entitled,
(a) Principles and Practice of Fire modelling (PPFM),
(b) Principles and Practice of Evacuation modelling (PPEM),
From 1997-2000 these courses have been run four times, attracting some 130 safety professionals. The courses have attracted participants from all over the world including, Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hong Kong, Iceland, Indonesia, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Republic of Ireland, Singapore, Sweden, USA as well as the UK. Those attending were drawn from the Aviation Industry, Nuclear Industry, Oil Industry, Horse Racing Industry, Fire Brigades, Fire Inspectrate, Building Control Inspectors, Police, Fire Safety Consultancies and Academia.
Notable quotations from delegates include:
"An excellent course. It has exceeded my expectations on learning outcomes
by a very large margin."
"I have been on a large number of courses over the years and feel this
has been one of the most enjoyable and most certainly the most professionally
run."
"Lecture material was presented on a level which was easily understood."
"All lectures were exceptionally informative."
"These (laboratory sessions) were an essential element of the course."
"Fantastic assistance from University staff on all problem areas."
"Varied and interesting topics."
The main lecturers on the PPFM course were Prof E Galea and Dr M Patel of FSEG with assistance in laboratory sessions from Dr F Jia, Mr J Ewer, Mr G Wang, Mr A Grandison and Mr N Mawhinney who are research staff from FSEG. Several guest lecturers also participated in the course, they were, Dr Andrew Gardiner from Arups, Mr Mick Green from Buro Happold, Dr Ian Jones from AEA Technology and Mr Geof Cox from FRS. In addition to seminar sessions describing the principles of fire modelling, participants had extensive hands-on laboratory sessions in which they explored the practice of zone modelling using the CROOM and OROOM zone models developed by FSEG and field modelling using the HEAT2D and SMARTFIRE field models also developed by FSEG. Participants received copies of the CROOM, OROOM and HEAT2D computer models as well as a comprehensive set of lecture notes.
The main lecturers on the PPEM course were Prof E Galea, Dr S Gwynne and Mr L. Filippidis of FSEG with assistance in laboratory sessions from members of the EXODUS development team. Several guest lecturers also participated in the course, they were, Prof Helen Muir from Cranfield University, Mr Jonathan Sime from Surrey University, Dr David Purser from FRS and HMI David Berry from the UK Home Office. Demonstrations of various evacuation models where provided by Mr D Kay of AEA Technology (EGRESS), Mr N Hoffmann of Halcrow Fox (PEDROUTE) and Dr J Frasier-Mitchell of FRS (CRISP). In addition to seminar sessions describing the principles of human behaviour and evacuation modelling, participants had extensive hands-on laboratory sessions in which they explored the practice of evacuation modelling using the buildingEXODUS evacuation model developed by FSEG. Participants received copies of the buildingEXODUS movie player allowing them to play-back and interact with models developed on the course. In addition participants received a comprehensive set of lecture notes.
SUMMARY OF PPFM QUESTIONNAIRES FROM PREVIOUS COURSES
87% of the participants returned questionnaires and the following is a summary of their responses.
1) Your Organisation:
Government/Local Authority : 40%
Consultancy : 27%
Research : 13%
Academic : 7%
Industry : 13%
2) Would you recommend course? 93% of delegates would recommend course.
3) How would you rate the core lectures (score 1 - 10, 10 being highest positive response). Results represent average of all responses.
Relevance to you : 8.5
Delivery : 9.2
Visual aids : 8.8
How would you rate the printed notes (score 1 - 10, 10 being highest positive response). Results represent average of all responses.
Quality : 8.6
Relevance to you : 8.4
4) How would you rate the laboratory sessions (score 1 - 10, 10 being highest positive response). Results represent average of all responses.
Content : 9.1
Duration : 8.2
Equipment : 9.1
Supervision : 8.9
5) How would you rate the Kings Hill Facilities (score 1 - 10, 10 being highest positive response). Results represent average of all responses.
Quality of facilities : 8.4
Quality of catering : 6.5
Helpfulness of staff : 9.1
Accessibility and convenience : 8.4
SUMMARY OF PPEM QUESTIONNAIRES FROM PREVIOUS COURSES
57% of the participants returned questionnaires and the following is a summary of their responses.
1) Your Organisation:
Government/Local Authority : 47%
Consultancy : 35%
Research : 0%
Academic : 6%
Industry : 12%
2) Would you recommend course? 100% of delegates would recommend course.
3) How would you rate the core lectures (score 1 - 10, 10 being highest positive response). Results represent average of all responses.
Relevance to you : 9.1
Delivery : 9.0
Visual aids : 8.6
How would you rate the printed notes (score 1 - 10, 10 being highest positive response). Results represent average of all responses.
Quality : 9.8
Relevance to you : 9.1
4) How would you rate the laboratory sessions (score 1 - 10, 10 being highest positive response). Results represent average of all responses.
Content : 9.4
Duration : 9.0
Equipment : 8.3
Supervision : 8.9
5) How would you rate the Kings Hill Facilities (score 1 - 10, 10 being highest positive response). Results represent average of all responses.
Quality of facilities : 9.0
Quality of catering : 8.8
Helpfulness of staff : 9.4
Accessibility and convenience : 8.6
WHAT THE PARTICIPANTS SAY
PPFM COURSE
a) Lectures
"An excellent course. It has exceeded my expectations on learning outcomes
by a very large margin."
"I have been on a large number of courses over the years and feel this has been one of the most enjoyable and most certainly the most professionally run."
"Met objectives."
"All lectures were relevant."
"Lecture material was presented on a level which was easily understood."
"A very good/useful course."
b) Laboratory sessions:
"These were an essential element of the course."
"The demonstrators were very informative and willing to advise and discuss matters."
"Excellent."
"Handy university staff (able) to answer all queries. Good!!"
PPEM COURSE
a) Lectures
"Lecture notes and reading materials given to us are good, lectures
are clear."
"Excellent Course."
"All lectures were exceptionally informative."
b) Laboratory sessions:
"Very helpful staff at all times."
"Fantastic assistance from University staff on all problem areas."
"Excellent help from staff."