Simulation of a Room Fire: Comparison between Zone Model and Hand Calculation – Capstone Project Example

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper " Simulation of a Room Fire: Comparison between Zone Model and Hand Calculation" is a great example of a capstone project on technology. 1.1 Introduction The fire growth and its subsequent effects in the enclosure are influenced by some factors such as fuel size, the geometry of the enclosure, size and location of ventilation, and the materials which used in constructing the room. During a fire, some incidents such as being caught by a flashover occur because of unfamiliarity with fire growth and the effect of ventilation. For this reason, it is helpful to have some strategy to predict fire development in the enclosed environment.

Two-zone models are usually used to predict fire development in the enclosure to help fire safety engineers determine the right safety method for a specific building. CFAST and Hand Calculation method is useful in predicting different fire-related events in the room. A program running on a computer, CFAST can calculate fire conditions such as temperature for lower and upper zones in the enclosure by specifying the room size, ceiling height, and side vents. Similarly, hand calculation such as the method introduced by McCaffrey can determine the flame height, mass flow rates, temperature, velocities, and other fire growth-related values.

However, hand calculation is more complex than CFAST because it requires good knowledge of mathematical equations. Two-zone model predictions help us to protect our property from fire and save a lot of lives. In this study, the accuracy of predictions using the popular methods of predicting enclosure fire will be examined and compared against each other. The following sections discuss many topics relevant to enclosure fire development and many ways in which we can predict a room fire. 1.2 Aims and Objectives In general, the aim is generally to study how a room fire can be predicted using simulation software and hand calculation.

Secondly, to understand the different aspects of fire development in the enclosure and the difference between simulated results and experimental data. The objectives of this study are: 1. Determine the most applicable model for room fire simulation 2. Determined the strength of different models 3. Learn from theoretical evidence and ideas in fire development literature 4. Assess and choose the most applicable way to room fire simulation. 1.3 Research Questions The study will answer the following research questions: a.

What are enclosure fire, development models? b. What is the most appropriate model real room fire simulation? c. How reliable is this model compared to actual laboratory experiments? d. What will affect the reliability of this model? e. Is experimental data more accurate than predictions? 1.4 Research Methodology The study investigated different published works regarding fire development simulation and from these works collected some idea how the fire development in the enclosure is predicted. Through a literature review, understanding of different events occurring in-room fire development was realized including the effects of vents, room size, and geometry.

The study made some comparisons between the results of the CFAST and McCaffrey hand calculation method to experimental data and the results of other experiments on enclosure fire. The comparison of two fire development models is important, so CFAST was installed and configured in a desktop computer. Input data from a Dalmarock experimental compartment were entered and the results were recorded. Similarly, relevant data from the experimental compartment were used to do McCaffrey hand calculation.

The result of the two-zone models was then analyzed and compared. The following sections discuss many topics relevant to enclosure fire development and many ways in which we can predict a room fire. 1.2 Aims and Objectives In general, the aim is generally to study how a room fire can be predicted using simulation software and hand calculation. Secondly, to understand the different aspects of fire development in the enclosure and the difference between simulated results and experimental data.

References

Barham R. (1996), Fire engineering and emergency planning, UK: Taylor & Francis

Daeid N. (2004), Fire Investigation, US: CRC Press

Dembsey N., Pagni P., & Williamson R., (1995), Compartment Fire Experiments:

Comparison with Models, Fire Safety Journal 25 (1995), pp. 187-227

Elsevier Science Limited.

EPRI, (2007), Verification & Validation of Selected Fire Models for Nuclear Power Plant Applications: Volume 5: CFAST, US: Electric Power Research Institute

EPRI, (2007), Verification & Validation of Selected Fire Models for Nuclear Power

Plant Applications: Volume 3: Fire Dynamic Tools, Electric US: Power Research

Institute

Grand A. & Wilkie C. (2000), Fire retardancy of polymeric materials. US: CRC Press

Goddard W. & Melville S. (2004). Research Methodology: An Introduction, UK: Juta and Company Ltd

Grimvall G., Holmgreen A., Jacobson P., and Thedeen T., (2009). Risks in Technological Systems, Germany: Springer

Harmathy T. (1985), Fire safety, science, and engineering: a symposium, US: ASTM International

Hasib R., Kumar R., Shashi, & Kumar Surendra, (2007), Simulation of an Experimental Compartment Fire by CFD, Building and Environment Journal 42 (2007), Elsevier, pp. 3149-3160

He Y. & Beck V. (1997), Smoke Spread Experiment in a Multi-storey Building and

Computer Modelling, Fire Safety Journal 28 (1997), Elsevier Science Limited, pp.

139-164

Karlsson B. & Quintierre J. (2000). Enclosure fire dynamics. US: CRC Press

Kashef A., Gao L. & Benichou N. (2006), Application of Numerical Techniques to Study fire growth and smoke movement in an Atrium, Canada: National Research Council

Poon L. (2002), 4th International Conference on Performance-Based Codes and Fire Safety Design Methods: Proceedings, March 20-22, 2002, Melbourne, Australia, Australia: DEStech Publications

Quintierre J. (1998). Principles of fire behavior. US: Cengage Learning

Rasbash D., & Ramachandran G. (2004)

, Evaluation of fire safety, US: John Wiley and Sons

Theitart R. (2001), Doing Management Research: A Comprehensive Guide, UK: SAGE

Walton W. & Thomas P., (1995), Estimating Temperatures in Compartment Fires, SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, US: NFPA.

Wang Y. (2002), Steel and composite structures: behavior and design for fire safety, US: Taylor & Francis

Wilkie C. & Morgan A. (2009), Fire Retardancy of Polymeric Materials, UK: CRC Press

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us