• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文会议>Proceedings of the fire and materials 2015 conference >CHALLENGES IN ESTABLISHING DESIGN FIRES FOR PASSENGER RAIL VEHICLES
【24h】

CHALLENGES IN ESTABLISHING DESIGN FIRES FOR PASSENGER RAIL VEHICLES

机译：建立客运车辆的设计火灾所面临的挑战

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Large-scale fire testing and fire development modeling suggest that for “small” ignition sourcesrnwith heat release rates less than those in the range of 200 kW to 300 kW, fire development tornflashover is unlikely to occur in a rail vehicle constructed from NFPA 130-compliant materials. Thisrnrange also accounts for the majority of interior rail vehicle fires. To date, no passenger rail carrnmeeting the NFPA 130 mandated materials requirements has been involved in an accidental postrnflashover fire other than when large amounts of external fuels are added as from a railcar-truckrncollision. However, large scale testing suggests that ignition sources greater than ～200 to ～300 kWrnwhen sustained long enough to ignite the ceiling and upper walls of such a car may result in rapidlyrnpropagating fire spread, with flashover occurring in less than 5 minutes and peak heat release ratesrnexceeding 30 MW, even with NFPA 130-compliant materials. The fire scenario this representsrnconstitutes a low probability high impact event that would most likely be the result of a maliciousrnarson attack using flammable liquids.rnNFPA 130 provides little guidance as to how the designer should go about determining which vehiclernfire scenarios should be considered (undercar fire, on-board luggage fire, nuisance arson, maliciousrnarson), nor does it provide guidance on how fire growth rates and heat release rates should bernquantified for such particular scenarios selected for analysis. With most decisions regarding designrnfires left to the owner, designer, and authority having jurisdiction, a seemingly inconsistent widernrange of fire growth rates and peak heat release rates have been and are still used around the world forrndesign of associated station and tunnel ventilation facilities for individual rail systems. This paperrnreviews the design fires that have been used in various rail passenger transportation projects in the USrnand internationally as well as the fire testing and modeling analyses on which these design fires havernbeen based. A risk informed performance-based design approach is suggested as one potentialrnapproach for addressing the uncertainty associated with design fire selection
机译：大规模的火灾测试和火灾发展模型表明，对于放热率低于200 kW至300 kW范围内的“小型”点火源，在符合NFPA 130的轨道车辆中不太可能发生火灾发展飞弧材料。这个范围也占了内部铁路车辆起火的大部分。迄今为止，没有发生满足NFPA 130强制性材料要求的客运铁路事故，而没有发生意外事故，除非是从铁路货车与卡车碰撞中添加大量外部燃料。但是，大规模测试表明，如果持续持续足够长的时间点燃该汽车的天花板和上壁，大于200〜300 kWrn的点火源可能会导致迅速蔓延的火势蔓延，在不到5分钟的时间内会发生闪络并释放出峰值热量即使使用符合NFPA 130的材料，其最大功率也将超过30 MW。火灾场景代表着低概率高影响事件，很可能是使用易燃液体进行的恶意纵火袭击的结果.NFPA 130对于设计人员应如何确定应考虑的车辆火灾场景提供了很少的指导（车底着火，机载行李着火，令人讨厌的纵火，恶意纵火），也未提供有关如何为此类特定场景进行分析如何量化火灾增长率和放热率的指南。由于大多数关于设计火灾的决定留给拥有人，设计者和主管部门管辖，因此，在世界范围内，火势增长率和峰值放热率的范围看似不一致，而且至今仍在使用。关于各个铁路的相关车站和隧道通风设施的设计系统。本文回顾了在美国和国际上各种铁路客运项目中使用过的设计火灾以及这些设计火灾所基于的火灾测试和建模分析。建议使用基于风险的基于性能的设计方法作为解决与设计火灾选择相关的不确定性的一种潜在方法

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号