Where Drills Differ from Evacuations: A Case Study on Canadian Buildings

Max Kinateder*, Chunyun Ma, Steve Gwynne, Martyn Amos, Noureddine Benichou

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)
5 Downloads (Pure)


Planned egress drills are required by building codes around the world, and are commonly used to both train occupants and assess evacuation procedures. However, capturing the idea of a "successful" drill is often difficult. Data from both drills and unplanned evacuations are often incomplete and unreliable, which raises a key question: How well-matched are planned egress drills and unplanned evacuations in terms of their properties and outcomes? That is, are drills a good model of evacuation? In this paper, we compare 93 planned egress drills and 23 unplanned evacuations, which occurred in Canadian office buildings over a span of four years. Our two main findings are that (1) planned egress drills differ from unplanned evacuations in terms of frequency, timing, and outcome (e.g., reported total evacuation time), and (2) the reported number of occupants correlates with total evacuation time. These findings motivate a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the current approach to data reporting, and we highlight potential implications for (and limitations of) the current drill model.
Original languageEnglish
Article number105114
Number of pages10
JournalSafety Science
Early online date10 Dec 2020
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2021


Dive into the research topics of 'Where Drills Differ from Evacuations: A Case Study on Canadian Buildings'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this