1 / 31

SIMULATION OF CRITICAL EVACUATION CONDITIONS FOR FIRE SCENARIOS INVOLVING CABLES AND COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT CABLES

SIMULATION OF CRITICAL EVACUATION CONDITIONS FOR FIRE SCENARIOS INVOLVING CABLES AND COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT CABLES. Patrick van Hees & Daniel Nilsson Lund University – Department of Fire Safety Engineering and Systems Safety. Outline. Background and Scope Choice of building Fire modelling

amergin
Télécharger la présentation

SIMULATION OF CRITICAL EVACUATION CONDITIONS FOR FIRE SCENARIOS INVOLVING CABLES AND COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT CABLES

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. SIMULATION OF CRITICAL EVACUATION CONDITIONS FOR FIRE SCENARIOS INVOLVING CABLES AND COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT CABLES Patrick van Hees & Daniel Nilsson Lund University – Department of Fire Safety Engineering and Systems Safety

  2. Outline • Background and Scope • Choice of building • Fire modelling • Evacuation modelling • Tenability assessment • Conclusions • Future research

  3. Background • Is a cable fire dangerous in a realistic building environment? • Is cable A better then cable B? • Suitable methods for assessment?

  4. Prescriptive rules Example: Exit must be 1 m wide Performance based rules Example: Everyone must be able to evacuate before conditions become critical Background

  5. Prescriptive rules Example: Only cables of class X are allowed in evacuation routes Performance based rules Example: A specific cable is allowed in evacuation paths if safety can be demonstrated Background

  6. Background • Fire Safety Engineering (FSE) methods

  7. Scope • Develop feasible technique using FSE • Compare 2 cables with the technique

  8. Layout of the procedure

  9. Choice of the building • Requirements • a public building • a realistic building - FSE possible • existence of fire risk related to cables • data available – evacuation or fire • possible exposure to gases

  10. Choice of the building

  11. Choice of the building

  12. Fire scenario • Possible locations • Cable cabinet – under balcony • Cables in appliances - kitchen • Vertical cable tray – in atrium

  13. Fire scenario • Possible locations:

  14. Fire scenario • Choice fire position: • Vertical cable tray – in atrium • from pre-simulations

  15. Fire scenario • Design fire • Data from cable tests – prEN 50399 • 2 cables - Euroclass D • Cable I • Cable M • FIGRA value => growth rate up to 0.5 MW

  16. Fire scenario • Design fire • Product yields from fire tests • Cable I – carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, soot • Cable M – carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, soot, acrolein, formic aldehyde, hydrogen chloride

  17. Fire scenario • Design fire

  18. Fire modelling • Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)

  19. Fire modelling • FDS 5 software – • parallel version on cluster

  20. Fire modelling

  21. Evacuation scenario • Evacuation experiment – input data • Time to start (pre-movement) • Exit choice • Flow on stairs

  22. Evacuation scenario • Evacuation experiment – input data

  23. Evacuation scenario • Evacuation scenarios – 6 scenarios • Number and location of occupants • Exit choice • One scenario selected for tenability assessment (based on 450 occupants)

  24. Evacuation modelling • Simulex software

  25. Tenability assessment • FED and FEC – ISO TS 13571 • FED – accumulated dose • FEC – momentary concentration • Combination of results • FDS – Fire simulations • Simulex – Evacuation simulations • Matlab – FED and FEC calculations

  26. Tenability assessment Based on 450 occupants

  27. Conclusions • Feasibility of the method was demonstrated in this case study • Cable M worse than Cable I • for this case study

  28. Future Research • Develop method further • Compare cables with other characteristics • Test method for other buildings and cases • Sensitivity of input data from fire tests • Extend to other materials/products

  29. Acknowledgments • Report available at www.brand.lth.se/publikationer • Video available at http://safety-during-fire.com/library.html

  30. www.brand.lth.se/english

More Related