Fire Dynamics Simulator (Version 2) -- Technical Reference Guide | NIST
Impact in
Classified as
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w87925820 →Countries where authors are citing Fire Dynamics Simulator (Version 2) -- Technical Reference Guide | NIST
This map shows the geographic impact of Fire Dynamics Simulator (Version 2) -- Technical Reference Guide | NIST. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Fire Dynamics Simulator (Version 2) -- Technical Reference Guide | NIST with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Fire Dynamics Simulator (Version 2) -- Technical Reference Guide | NIST more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Fire Dynamics Simulator (Version 2) -- Technical Reference Guide | NIST
This network shows the impact of Fire Dynamics Simulator (Version 2) -- Technical Reference Guide | NIST. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Fire Dynamics Simulator (Version 2) -- Technical Reference Guide | NIST.
About Fire Dynamics Simulator (Version 2) -- Technical Reference Guide | NIST
This paper, published in 2001, received 383 indexed citations . Written by Kevin B. McGrattan, Howard R. Baum, Ronald G. Rehm, Anthony Hamins, Glenn P. Forney, Jason Floyd and Simo Hostikka covering the research area of Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality (350 citations), Ocean Engineering (193 citations), Aerospace Engineering (118 citations), Global and Planetary Change (98 citations) and Environmental Engineering (81 citations).
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w87925820.