Comparative energy analysis from fire resistance tests on combustible versus noncombustible slabs
Comparative energy analysis from fire resistance tests on combustible versus noncombustible slabs
复制标题
可燃板与不可燃板耐火测试的能量比较分析
DOI：
10.1002/fam.2760
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
1.9
通讯作者：
Bartlett A
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bartlett A
一个多世纪以来，标准耐火测试一直用于结构建筑构件的设计。最初开发的目的是提供不可燃产品和构件的防火安全水平的比较措施，最近工程木结构的复兴提出了有关可燃结构构件标准耐火测试的适用性的重要问题。进行了三项标准防火地板测试（计划为 5.9 m × 3.9 m），一项在混凝土板上，两项在交叉层压木 (CLT) 板上进行，以探讨一些相关问题。在这些测试期间记录炉内的燃料消耗率，并确定由此提供的能量。在整个混凝土测试过程中记录到的外部燃料供应（来自供应到熔炉的天然气）约为 3 MW，而在整个 CLT 测试过程中约为 1.25 MW。采用二氧化碳发生量热法计算总放热量；在 CLT 测试期间，产生的值约为 1.75 MW（即，木材贡献了约 0.5 MW 的额外能量）。这表明，当测试样品不可燃时，需要更多的能量输入（约 1.25 MW）来加热系统。进行了另外一系列的六个大型隔间火灾实验（6 m × 4 m × 2.52 m），以进一步探索当外部燃料负载保持恒定并由更现实的隔间火灾动力学控制时可燃结构与不可燃结构的性能比较。对于燃料控制的情况，具有未受保护的 CLT 天花板的隔间的峰值温度比具有混凝土天花板的隔间高约 200°C，而对于通风控制的情况，具有 CLT 板天花板的隔间的燃烧持续时间增加了大约 15 分钟。讨论了可燃样本标准耐火测试的潜在影响。
Standard fire resistance tests have been used in the design of structural building elements for more than a century. Originally developed to provide comparative measures of the level of fire safety of noncombustible products and elements, the recent resurgence in engineered timber construction raises important questions regarding the suitability of standard fire resistance tests for combustible structural elements. Three standard fire resistance floor tests (5.9 m × 3.9 m in plan), one on a concrete slab and two on cross‐laminated timber (CLT) slabs, were undertaken to explore some of the relevant issues. The fuel consumption rate within the furnace was recorded during these tests, and the energy supplied from this was determined. An external fuel supply (from natural gas supplied to the furnace) equating to approximately 3 MW was recorded throughout the concrete test, whereas this was about 1.25 MW throughout the CLT tests. The total heat release rate was calculated using carbon dioxide generation calorimetry; this yielded values of approximately 1.75 MW during the CLT tests (ie, an additional energy contribution of approximately 0.5 MW from the timber). This demonstrates that considerably more energy input (by about 1.25 MW) was needed to heat the system when the test sample was noncombustible. A further series of six large‐scale compartment fire experiments (6 m × 4 m × 2.52 m) was undertaken to further explore comparative performance of combustible versus noncombustible construction when the external fuel load is kept constant and is governed by more realistic compartment fire dynamics. For a fuel‐controlled case, the peak temperatures in the compartment with an unprotected CLT ceiling were approximately 200°C higher than in the compartments with a concrete ceiling, whereas for a ventilation‐controlled case, the compartment with a CLT slab ceiling displayed a burning duration that increased by approximately 15 minutes. Potential implications for standard fire resistance testing of combustible specimens are discussed.
登录
查看更多内容
基于性能的节能建筑隔热材料防火安全设计方法
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Juan Hidalgo
通讯作者：
Juan Hidalgo
DOI：
--
发表时间：
1970
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
P. Thomas
通讯作者：
P. Thomas
自然火灾中可燃和不燃建筑的实验研究
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Xiao Li;Xia Zhang;G. Hadjisophocleous;Cameron McGregor
通讯作者：
Cameron McGregor
结构防火设计背景下木制品燃烧行为的评估
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2014
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Arne Inghelbrecht
通讯作者：
Arne Inghelbrecht
技术说明 - 标准耐火测试中木材的热暴露
影响因子：
3.1
作者：
J. Schmid;D. Brandon;N. Werther;Michael Klippel
通讯作者：
Michael Klippel