11 25

SPTechnicalResearchInstituteofSweden
Numericalsimulationof Runehamar tunnelfiretests

Ying Zhen Li Haukur Ingason Anders Lnnermark
SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden
SPTunnelandUndergroundSafetyCentre
Introduction
Large tunnel fires: Complex combustion CFD: Limitations / Simplifications Runehamar tunnel fire tests: Valuable data Objective: Assesment of modelling Fire dynamics in large fires
Runehamar tunnelfiretests
Testsphotos
SPTechnicalResearchInstituteofSweden Fire(x=0) Topviewoftheinstrumentation West East
Mountain
1900 2300 2900
Fjord
1400
3300
Protection boards for safety
6000
500
Tarpulin
2900
3600
4500
Crosssection
100 mm gravel gravel

1100
asphalt
7100 9000
FDSMethod
Combustion: Mixture fraction model: Damkhler number Flammability limit: Simple correlation between YO 2 and Tg Virtual spark: If mixture fulfils the limit, combustion occurs. Radiation: 35 % of HRR released as radiation Thermal Boundary: Convection: Simple semi-empirical equations Radiation: Taylor expansion
Verificationofmodelling
FDS 5
Description: 8 m model scale tunnel (0.25m 0.25m), HRR=9.45 kW, uo=0.51 m/s, P=95590 Pa, steel walls, mesh size 0.075 D*.
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.20
0.20
0.20
vertical height (m)
vertical height (m)
vertical height (m)
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.10
tests data FDS
0.10
tests data FDS
0.10
tests dta
FDS
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
30
60
90
120
150
50
100
150
T ( C)
T ( C)
200
250
300
350
50
100
150
o
200
250
T ( C)
x=0.9m
x=0m
x=1.8m
Acomparison of gastemperatures (x=0.9m,0m,1.8m) SPTunnelandUndergroundSafetyCentre
Simulationscenario
Length: 700 m (100 m upstream)
250
Boundaries:
200
Runehamar T1
- inlet: 2 - 2.5 m/s
HRR curve:
Q (MW)
- Outlet: Ambient
150
100
Fire source: 3m 10m, 1m above

- average heat of combustion: 18.5 MJ/kg - soot production: 2.2 % - CO production: 0.88 %
50
0 0 10 20 30 40 50
t (min)
HRRcurveinT1
ResultsandDiscussion
Ceiling gas temperature
300
1500
1500
Simulation, -40 m Test data, -40 m

250
1200
1200
200
T ( C)
T ( C)
150
600
T ( C)
900
900
600
100
300
Simulation, 0 m Test data, 0 m
300
50
0 0 10 20 30 40
0 0 10 20 30 40
0 0 10 20 30 40
t (min)
t (min)
1500
1500
t (min)
1500
1200

1200
1200
T ( C)
T ( C)
600
600
T ( C)
900
900
900

300
300
600
300
0 0 10 20 30 40
0 0 10 20 30 40
0 0 10 20 30 40
t (min)
t (min)
t (min)
40mups.to70mdowns. SPTunnelandUndergroundSafetyCentre
Ceiling gas temperature

600 500 500 500

400 400
400
T ( C)
T ( C)
300
200 200 100
T ( C)
300
300
200
100
100
0 0 10 20 30 40
0 0 10 20 30 40
0 0 10 20 30 40
t (min)
t (min)
t (min)
150mto350m
Well correlation: 10m to 150m. Approx. 30% overestimation: 250m and 350m.
Radiation Incident heat flux

600
600
600
500
500
500
Heat flux (kW/m )
Heat flux (kW/m )
300
300
Heat flux (kW/m )
400
400
400
300
200
200
200
100
100
100
0 0 10 20 30 40
0 0 10 20 30 40
0 0 10 20 30 40
t (min)
300
t (min)
600
t (min)
250
500
Simulation, 20 m Test data, 20 m towards the fire
Heat flux (kW/m )
200
Heat flux (kW/m )
400
150
300
Max: 400 kW/m2
100
200
50
100
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0 0 10 20 30 40
t (min)
t (min)
Incidentheatfluxalongceiling(0to40m)
Radiation Net heat flux

50
40
Net heat flux (kW/m )
Simulation, 0m Simulation, 10m Simulation, 20m Simulation, 40m
30
Max: 40 kW/m2
20
10
-10 0 10 20 30 40
t (min)
Netheat flux absorbed by ceiling
Gas temperature at the measurement station

200
200
200
150
150
150
T ( C)
T ( C)
T ( C)
100
100
100
50
Simulation, 5.1 m Test data, 5.1 m
50
50
0 0 10 20 30 40
0 0 10 20 30 40
0 0 10 20 30 40
t (min)
t (min)
t (min)
200
200

150
150
T ( C)
100
100
50% Overestimation!
T ( C)
50
50
0 0 10 20 30 40
0 0 10 20 30 40
t (min)
t (min)
Gastemperaturesatdifferentheights
Gas velocity at the measurement station

7 6
7
7
Gas velocity (m/s)
Gas velocity (m/s)
5 4 3 2 1 0 0 10 20 30 40
5 4 3 2 1 0 0 10 20 30 40
Gas velocity (m/s)
5 4 3 2 1 0 0 10 20 30 40
t (min)
7 6
t (min)
7
t (min)
Gas velocity (m/s)
5 4 3 2 1 0 0 10 20 30 40
Gas velocity (m/s)
5 4 3 2 1 0 0 10 20 30 40
50 % Over/Under-estimation!
t (min)
t (min)
Gasvelocitiesatdifferentheights
Conclusion
Ceiling gas temperature: Overestimation at ups. and far-field downs.
Well correlation close to fire, i.e. 10 150m.
Gas temperature(far-field): Overestimation Gas velocity(far-field): Over/under-estimation Radiation

Incident heat flux: - Max 400 kW/m2 - Underestimation at 40 m downs. Net heat flux: - Max 40 kW/m2 at approx.10 m - Decrease with time
Thanksforyourattention!
Ying Zhen, Li Haukur, Ingason Anders, Lnnermark SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden Email: yingzhen.li@sp.se

11 25

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

11 25

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SPTechnicalResearchInstituteofSweden

Numericalsimulationof Runehamar tunnelfiretests

SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden

SPTechnicalResearchInstituteofSweden Fire(x=0) Topviewoftheinstrumentation West East

Protection boards for safety

100 mm gravel gravel

vertical height (m)

vertical height (m)

vertical height (m)

Acomparison of gastemperatures (x=0.9m,0m,1.8m) SPTunnelandUndergroundSafetyCentre

- inlet: 2 - 2.5 m/s

Fire source: 3m 10m, 1m above

Simulation, -40 m Test data, -40 m

Simulation, 0 m Test data, 0 m

Simulation, 10 m Test data, 10 m

Simulation, 40 m Test data, 40 m

Simulation, 70 m Test data, 70 m

Simulation, 20 m Test data, 20 m

Ceiling gas temperature

Simulation, 150 m Test data, 150 m

Simulation, 250 m Test data, 250 m

Simulation, 350 m Test data, 350 m

200 200 100

Radiation Incident heat flux

Simulation, 0 m Test data, 0 m

Simulation, 10 m Test data, 10 m

Simulation, 20 m Test data, 20 m

Heat flux (kW/m )

Heat flux (kW/m )

Heat flux (kW/m )

Simulation, 40 m Test data, 40 m

Simulation, 20 m Test data, 20 m towards the fire

Heat flux (kW/m )

Heat flux (kW/m )

Max: 400 kW/m2

Radiation Net heat flux

Net heat flux (kW/m )

Simulation, 0m Simulation, 10m Simulation, 20m Simulation, 40m

Netheat flux absorbed by ceiling

Gas temperature at the measurement station

Simulation, 5.1 m Test data, 5.1 m

Simulation, 4.0 m Test data, 4.0 m

Simulation, 2.9 m Test data, 2.9 m

Simulation, 1.8 m Test data, 1.8 m

Simulation, 0.7 m Test data, 0.7 m

Gas velocity at the measurement station

Simulation, 5.1 m Test data, 5.1 m

Simulation, 4.0 m Test data, 4.0 m

Simulation, 2.9 m Test data, 2.9 m

Gas velocity (m/s)

Gas velocity (m/s)

Gas velocity (m/s)

Simulation, 1.8 m Test data, 1.8 m

Simulation, 0.7 m Test data, 0.7 m

Gas velocity (m/s)

Gas velocity (m/s)

Gas temperature(far-field): Overestimation Gas velocity(far-field): Over/under-estimation Radiation

You might also like