as/nzs 1668.1:2015 - fpa australia · 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 0 200 400 600...
TRANSCRIPT
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
AS/NZS 1668.1:2015 – IS IT GOOD ENOUGH FOR PERFORMANCE-BASED SMOKE EXHAUST SYSTEM DESIGN?
M.C. HuiSenior Fire Engineer ConsultantBCA Logic Pty Ltd
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
WHY DO WE NEED TO PROVIDE A SMOKE EXHAUST SYSTEM?
• BCA Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions ask for it (optional).• Enhance life safety – to delay the time of onset of untenable
conditions.• Contents and property protection – to reduce damage of contents
and building fabric by heat and soot.
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
WHAT DO SMOKE EXHAUST SYSTEMS EXHAUST – A DUMB QUESTION?
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
TYPES OF FIRE PLUMES
Point source axisymmetric plume
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
TYPES OF FIRE PLUMES
Finite area axisymmetric plume Wall plume
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
TYPES OF FIRE PLUMES
Corner plume Line plume
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
TYPES OF FIRE PLUMES
Window plume Balcony spill plume
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
AS/NZS 1668.1:2015 SECTION 9 – HOT LAYER SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEMSHot layer smoke control systems shall comply with this Section and the relevant requirements of Sections 2, 3 and 4.The arrangement of hot layer smoke control systems shall comply with the following:a) Smoke shall be collected in a hot layer under and within bounding
construction.b) The collected smoke shall discharge directly to atmosphere.c) Uncontaminated make-up air shall be introduced at a level below the hot
layer.d) Central plant systems shall not use an atrium as part of a return air path
in fire mode.
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
AS/NZS 1668.1:2015 SECTION 9 – HOT LAYER SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEMS9.4.3 Exhaust air capacityThe required exhaust airflow rate shall be determined by the following:
(a) General cases – Figure 9.2(a); or(b) Atrium – Figure 9.2(b).
NOTE: Exhaust air capacity may also be calculated using the following equation:EAC = 2.6864Q + 0.1513*FP*SLH1.5
EAC = exhaust air capacity (m³/s)Q = fire size (refer Table 9.1)FP = fire perimeter, in metres (refer Table 9.1)SLH = height to underside of smoke layer, in metres
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
AS/NZS 1668.1:2015 SECTION 9 – HOT LAYER SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEMS
Figure 9.2(a) in AS/NZS 1668.1:2015 (identical to Figure 2 in Spec E2.2b of BCA)
Figure 9.2(b) in AS/NZS 1668.1:2015 (technically identical to Figure 3.4 in Spec G3.8 of BCA)
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
Table 9.1 Fire Size and Perimeter Data for Various Building Applications
AS/NZS 1668.1:2015 SECTION 9 – HOT LAYER SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEMS
The technical contents of Table 9.1 are exactly the same as that in Spec E2.2b & Spec G3.8 of BCA except the fire perimeter.
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
PLUME THEORIESLARGE FIRE PLUME (THOMAS ET AL. 1963)
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
PLUME THEORIESLARGE FIRE PLUME (NFPA 92 - 2012)
First derived in conjunction with NFPA204-1982 “Standard for Smoke and Heat Venting”.Limiting flame height z1:zl = 0.166Qc
2/5 (m)If the distance between base of fire and bottom of smoke layer z is ≤ z1:M = 0.032Qc
3/5z (kg/s)
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
PLUME THEORIESPOINT SOURCE AXISYMMETRIC (STRONG) PLUME
Thomas et al. (1963) based on Yokoi (1960) and Yih (1952):
M = 0.153ρc[Qcg/(ρcCpTo)]⅓z5/3
SI unit (Heskastad 1982) in NFPA92B (1991):
M = 0.071Qc⅓z5/3 + 0.0018Qc (kg/s) when z > zl
zl = 0.166Qc2/5 (m)
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
Total HRR (MW) 1.5 5 10 15Smoke exhaust rate (m³ s-1)(UK large fire plume) 18.6 41.1 61.4 81.8
Smoke exhaust rate (m³ s-1)(US large fire plume) 17.9 39.5 58.9 78.4
Smoke exhaust rate (m³ s-1)(point source axisymmetric strong plume)
18.5 36.2 57.0 76.2
Smoke exhaust rate (m³ s-1)(AS/NZS 1668.1:2015) 19.1 43.5 67.0 90.4
SMOKE EXHAUST RATES BY JOINT STANDARD AND PLUME THEORIES
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
HOT LAYER TEMPERATURES FROM PLUME THEORIES
Total HRR (MW) 1.5 5 10 15
Smoke layer temperature (°C)(UK large fire plume) 37 76 132 189
Smoke layer temperature (°C)(US large fire plume) 98 146 186 215
Smoke layer temperature (°C)(point source axisymmetric strong plume) 78 134 181 215
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:ZONE MODELLING – SETUP (CFAST 7.2.1)
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:ZONE MODELLING – RESULTS (CFAST 7.2.1)
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
HR
R (
kW
)
Time (s)
HRR-1.5 HRR-5
HRR-10 HRR-15
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
He
igh
t (m
)
Time (s)
HGT-1.5 HGT-5
HGT-10 HGT-15
Design0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Tem
pe
ratu
re (
°C)
Time (s)
TEMP-1.5 TEMP-5
TEMP-10 TEMP-15
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:ZONE MODELLING – RESULTS (CFAST 7.2.1)
Additional trial and error CFAST simulations indicate:
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:FIELD MODELLING – SETUP (FDS 6.5.3)
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:FIELD MODELLING – INPUT (FDS 6.5.3)
• Fuel – 50% wood and 50% flexible PU foam.• Soot yield one-third of that reported in the SFPE Handbook as FDS over-
predicts smoke concentration 2-5 times.• Fire bed perimeter per AS/NZS 1668.1:2015 – fire intensity of 667, 556, 625
and 600 kW/m².• Simulation duration approx. 10 minutes after fire reached peak HRR.• Grid cell size for fire mesh to capture entire plume – checked D*/δx for
optimum.• Fire mesh should be 0.05D* to 0.1D*, other meshes should not exceed 0.5D*.• Domain extension – one hydraulic diameter of make-up air inlet opening.
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:FIELD MODELLING – GRID INDEPENDENCE
Fire total heat release rate (MW)
Fire region grid cell size
(cm)
Bounding meshes grid
size (cm)
Simulation run scenario
ID
Total smoke exhaust
outlet area (m2)
Total make-up air inlet area (m2)
Total number of cells
CPU time (hours)
1.5
0.1 x 0.1 x 0.1 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 1.5-100 5.12(1.6 m x
0.8 m for each of 4 outlets)
15.36(2.4 m x
1.6 m for each of 4
inlets)
587,288 79.9
0.2 x 0.2 x 0.2 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 1.5-200 257,560 10.7
5
0.1 x 0.1 x 0.1 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 5-100 10.24(1.6 m x
1.6 m for each of 4 outlets)
33.28(5.2 m x
1.6 m for each of 4
inlets)
795,800 125.1
0.2 x 0.2 x 0.2 0.4 x 0.4 x 0.4 5-200 283,800 23.5
10
0.15 x 0.15 x 0.15
0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 10-150 14.4(3 m x 1.2 m for each of 4
outlets)
30.24(4.2 m x
1.8 m for each of 4
inlets)
292,336 40.3
0.3 x 0.3 x 0.3 0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 10-300 90,736 18.4
15
0.15 x 0.15 x 0.15
0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 15-150 23.04(2.4 m x 2.4 m for each of 4 outlets)
43.2(6 m x 1.8 m for each of 4
inlets)
356,848 92.3
0.3 x 0.3 x 0.3 0.6 x 0.6 x 0.6 15-300 97,904 6.3
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:FIELD MODELLING – GRID INDEPENDENCE
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:FIELD MODELLING – RESULTS (FDS 6.5.3)
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:FIELD MODELLING – RESULTS (FDS 6.5.3)
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:FIELD MODELLING – RESULTS (FDS 6.5.3)
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:FIELD MODELLING – RESULTS (FDS 6.5.3)
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:FIELD MODELLING – RESULTS (FDS 6.5.3)
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?
Fundamental principle �̇�𝐌𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨
�̇�𝐌𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐨𝐨
�̇�𝐌𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨 �̇�𝐌𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐨𝐨=
�̇�𝐌𝐢𝐢𝐞𝐞
= �̇�𝐌𝐢𝐢𝐞𝐞
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?
Experimental errors associated with derivation of the plume formulas – typically 20%.
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?
• CFAST is well know on overpredicting hot layer temperature – in some experiments deviation was 10 – 50% (NUREG 33%).
• FDS can also overpredict upper layer temperature – error up to 21%.
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?
• CFAST can overpredict smoke layer interface – due to mass flow rate across the interface not being accounted for in the model which could be up to 30% of exhaust rate.
• FDS was found in literature to overpredict smoke filling rate (12% to 40% error) in the earlier stage of fire development, followed by underprediction in the later stage (35% to 42% error).
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
NUMERICAL EXPERIMENTS:WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?
• Deduction: Having the capability to provide detailed spatial and temporal information on various parameters in an enclosure (CFD) does NOT necessarily equate to having higher accuracy and reliability in the simulation results, when compared to simpler techniques (zone modelling and empirical equations).
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
CONCLUSION
• AS/NZS 1668.1:2015 Section 9 reviewed: Not clear which plume type is intended to be covered by the prescribed high precision equation, no information on the technical basis of the proposed methodology, and no guidance on how to estimate hot layer temperature. Needs significant revision to be useful.
• Numerical experiments by CFAST (V7.2.1) – smoke filling rates unpredicted by 11 to 13%.
• Numerical experiments by FDS (V6.5.3) – smoke filling rates overpredicted by 60%.
• Additional research required to examine the predictive capabilities of FDS in mechanical exhaust scenarios.
All slides © Copyright FPA Australia
QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU