Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 49 (2015) 268–278

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tust

Experimental study on heat exhaust coefficient of transversal smoke

extraction system in tunnel under fire
Liang Yi a,b,⇑, Ran Wei a, Jinzhi Peng a, Tianxiao Ni a, Zhisheng Xu a, Dexing Wu c
a
Institute of Disaster Prevention Science and Safety Technology, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410075, China
b
State Key Laboratory of Fire Science, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, Anhui 230026, China
c
Zhejiang Provincial Institute of Communications Planning, Design and Research, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310006, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Heat exhaust coefficient of transversal smoke extraction system in tunnel under fire is studied by exper-
Received 30 June 2014 imental means with a 1:10 model tunnel using Froude scaling. Heat exhaust coefficient is defined as the
Received in revised form 26 April 2015 proportion of the heat exhausted by individual exhaust inlet, smoke duct and exhaust fans in total heat
Accepted 8 May 2015
released by the fire in the tunnel, respectively. Results of a series of fire tests in a model tunnel are pre-
Available online 25 May 2015
sented. Heat exhaust coefficient of single exhaust inlet and the smoke duct are strongly influenced by the
configuration of the exhaust inlets. Heat exhaust coefficient of the exhaust fans varies in the range of 13–
Keywords:
20% and is smaller than the heat exhaust coefficient of the smoke duct which varies from 17% to 83% and
Tunnel fire
Transversal smoke extraction system
tends to be about 35% with the increase of the total area of the exhaust inlets. Activating small number of
Heat exhaust coefficient the exhaust inlets is beneficial for enhancing the heat exhaust coefficient of the smoke duct. The heat
Exhaust inlet exhaust coefficient of the smoke duct and exhaust fans is high when the exhaust inlets are set close to
Smoke duct the fire. Due to the cooling effect of the solid boundaries on the smoke while traveling in the tunnel
and smoke duct, the heat exhaust coefficient of the exhaust fans in unilateral exhaust mode is slightly
smaller than that in bilateral exhaust mode.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction system is required to be installed in tunnels longer than 1.5 km

Following the great advancement of national economy and
transportation system, a lot of tunnels have been built in China,
including railway tunnels, road tunnels and subway tunnels. Due
to special structural characteristics which are different from com-
mon buildings, heat and smoke are hard to be exhausted out effec-
tively in tunnels under fire. Tunnel fires frequently cause severe
casualty and structure damage (Ingason and Wickstrom, 2006),
for example, Mont Blanc tunnel (Italy and France, 1999), Sait
Gotthard Tunnel (Switzerland, 2001), Daegu subway (Korea,
2003) and so on. Exhaust of smoke and heat is a key point for tun-
nel safety design (Hu et al., 2008; Hua et al., 2011; Weng et al.,
2014). Heat and smoke generated by the fire in a tunnel should
be exhausted out by the extraction system as soon as possible to
reduce the injury to occupants and damage to structure caused
by the flame and smoke. In China, mechanical smoke extraction
⇑ Corresponding author at: Institute of Disaster Prevention Science and Safety
Technology, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410075, China. Tel./fax:
+86 731 82656625.
E-mail address: yiliang@mail.csu.edu.cn (L. Yi).
(Ministry of Transport of PR China, 2000).
Mode of smoke extraction system in tunnel can be longitudinal
or transversal. Longitudinal smoke extraction system (or longitudi-
nal ventilation system) is a simple and effective system which cost
relatively low, and has been widely applied in tunnels especially in
one-way road tunnel. Lots of studies on longitudinal smoke extrac-
tion system can be found in the literatures (Barbato et al., 2014;
Chen et al., 2013; Gonzalez et al., 2014; Hu et al., 2010,2013,
2014; Huang et al., 2011; Ingason and Li, 2010; Lee et al., 2010;
Li et al., 2010; Oka and Atkinson, 1995; Wu and Bakar, 2000; Yi
et al., 2013; Zhong et al., 2013) including temperature distribution,
back layering and critical velocity and so on.
In transversal smoke extraction system, smoke is drawn into a
special channel or duct which is separated from the traffic space
and then exhausted out. Transversal smoke extraction system
can provide a smaller contamination area than that by longitudinal
ventilation system in case of fire. Though the cost of transversal
smoke extraction system is higher than that of longitudinal venti-
lation system, more and more tunnels have been designed with
transversal ventilation and extraction system. Studies on transver-
sal smoke extraction system can be found in the literatures
(Ballesteros-Tajadura et al., 2006; Choi et al., 2005; Colella et al.,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2015.05.002
0886-7798/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 L. Yi et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 49 (2015) 268–278 269

Nomenclature

Ad cross-sectional area of the smoke duct (m2) gh heat exhaust coefficient (dimensionless)
Af cross-sectional area of the fan duct (m2) gh,d heat exhaust coefficient of the smoke duct (dimension-
Ai area of the exhaust inlet (m2) less)
Cd flow coefficient (dimensionless) gh,f heat exhaust coefficient of the exhaust fans (dimension-
cp specific heat at constant pressure (kJ/kg K) less)
Fr Froude number (dimensionless) gh,i heat exhaust coefficient of individual exhaust inlet
K coefficient of Pitot tube (dimensionless) (dimensionless)
l length (m) q density (kg/m3)
DP pressure difference(Pa)
Q_ total heat release rate of the fire (kW) Subscripts
Q_ e heat exhaust rate (kW) d smoke duct
Q_ e;d heat exhaust rate of the smoke duct (kW) e exhaust
Q_ e;f heat exhaust rate of the exhaust fans (kW) f fan
V_ e volume flux of the exhaust fan (m3/s) i exhaust inlet, number
u, v velocity (m/s) m model tunnel
Q_ e;f heat exhaust rate of the exhaust fans (kW) p physical tunnel
DT temperature rise of the smoke (K) s smoke

2010; Fan et al., 2013; Li and Chow, 2003; Lin and Chuah, 2008; Lu
et al., 2013; Ni et al., 2010; Porizek et al., 2007; Rie et al., 2005;
Vauquelin and Megret, 2002; Vidmar et al., 2012). Experimental
study (Choi et al., 2005; Ni et al., 2010; Porizek et al., 2007;
Vauquelin and Megret, 2002) and numerical simulation
(Ballesteros-Tajadura et al., 2006; Colella et al., 2010; Li and
Chow, 2003; Lin and Chuah, 2008; Lu et al., 2013; Rie et al.,
2005; Vidmar et al., 2012) with both isothermal and thermal mod-
els were carried out to study the performance of different transver-
sal smoke extraction systems of tunnels. Vauquelin and Megret
(2002) conducted experiments in a 1:20th tunnel to investigate
the influence of fire source and outlets on the exhaust coefficient.
Choi et al. (2005) studied the spread of smoke with different con-
figurations of fire size, fire location, and airflow rates of supply and
exhaust in a model tunnel. Ballesteros-Tajadura et al. (2006) con-
cerned about the influence of slope to the performance of
semi-transversal ventilation by CFD means using FLUENT. Lin
and Chuah (2008) studied the critical velocity, smoke spread and
visibility in a simulated tunnel with transversal extraction system.
Exhaust efficiency of transversal smoke extraction system is a
key point concerned by researchers and engineers (Ji et al., 2010;
Vauquelin, 2008), and it is affected by many factors (Harish and
Venkatasubbaiah, 2014), e.g. configuration of exhaust inlets (num-
ber, separation, area, position), smoke duct (size, position), exhaust
mode (unilateral, bilateral), combined with longitudinal ventila-
tion or not, and so on. Definitions of exhaust efficiency were pro-
posed to evaluate exhaust performance of a smoke extraction
system of a tunnel. For example, heat exhaust coefficient is defined
as the ratio of the heat exhausted to the heat generated by the fire.
Smoke exhaust coefficient is defined as the ratio of the mass flow
rate of exhausted smoke to the mass flow rate of smoke generated
by the fire. Besides, the area of contaminated region and the height
of smoke layer interface can also be used to measure the exhaust
performance.
Heat exhaust coefficient is an important parameter assessing
the performance of exhaust system and is determined by the heat
transfer and mass flow in the tunnel. In this paper, the heat
exhaust coefficient of transversal smoke extraction system of tun-
nel will be studied by experimental means with a 1:10
reduced-scale model tunnel using Froude scaling (Yi et al., 2013).
Heat exhaust coefficient of each exhaust inlet in a multi-point
transversal smoke extraction system will be discussed based on
the experiment results. Dependence of the heat exhaust coefficient
of the smoke duct and exhaust fans on the configuration of exhaust
inlets will be studied as well.
2. Heat exhaust coefficient of transversal smoke extraction
system of tunnel
A transversal smoke extraction system of tunnel commonly
includes a smoke duct, several exhaust fans and exhaust inlets,
as shown in Fig. 1.
Heat exhaust coefficient is defined as the ratio of the exhaust
rate of heat to the release rate of heat of the fire,
gh ¼ Q_ e =Q_ ð1Þ
where Q_ e is the heat exhaust rate of the extraction system, kW; Q_ is
the total heat release rate of the fire source, kW.
Further, heat exhaust coefficient can be defined for a single
exhaust inlet, the smoke duct and exhaust fans, respectively.
Heat exhaust coefficient of a single exhaust inlet (or individual
heat exhaust coefficient), gh,i, is the proportion of the heat
exhausted through an exhaust inlet in the total heat released by
the fire,
gh;i ¼ Q_ e;i =Q_ ð2Þ
where Q_ e;i is the heat exhaust rate of the exhaust inlet i, kW.
Heat exhaust coefficient of the smoke duct, gh,d, is the propor-
tion of the heat exhausted into the smoke duct in the total heat
released by the fire, which can be regarded as the sum of individual
heat exhaust coefficient:
,
X X
gh;d ¼ Q_ e;d =Q_ ¼ Q_ e;i Q_ ¼ gh;i ð3Þ
i i
where Q_ e;d is the rate of heat exhausted into the smoke duct, kW.
Heat exhaust coefficient of the exhaust fans, gh,f, is the propor-
tion of the heat exhausted by the exhausted fans in the total heat
released by the fire.
gh;f ¼ Q_ e;f =Q_ ð4Þ
Since there is heat loss to the solid boundaries while smoke is
traveling in the smoke duct, heat exhaust coefficient of the exhaust
fans, gh,f, is consequently less than heat exhaust coefficient of the
smoke duct, gh,d.
270 L. Yi et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 49 (2015) 268–278

Fig. 1. Schematic of smoke flow in tunnel transversal extraction system.

 5=2
Heat exhaust rate can be computed using the excessive V_ m lm
enthalpy of the gas at the flow section over the ambient ¼ ð11Þ
V_ p lp
temperature,

Q_ e;i ¼ cp qs;i ui Ai DT i ð5Þ Tm

¼1 ð12Þ
Tp
X X
Q_ e;d ¼ Q_ e;i ¼ cp qs;i ui Ai DT i ð6Þ
 5=2
i i
Q_ m lm
¼ ð13Þ
Q_ e;f ¼ cp qs;f uf Af DT f ð7Þ Q_ p lp

The model tunnel is 52.5 m long with cross-sectional area of

where cp is the mean specific heat of gas at constant pressure over
the specified range of temperature, kJ/kg K; Ai is the area of the
exhaust inlet i, m2; Af is the cross-sectional area of fan duct, m2; u
is the average velocity of gas at the flow section, m/s; q is the den-
sity of gas, kg/m3. From Eq. (5), it indicates that the individual heat
exhaust coefficient depends not only on the exhaust rate of the
exhaust inlet, but also on the status of the smoke at the exhaust
inlet.
Due to different configurations of the transversal smoke extrac-
tion system with multiple exhaust inlets activated in case of fire,
velocity, temperature and density of smoke at each exhaust inlet
vary correspondingly. Therefore, heat exhaust coefficient depends
on the combining conditions of the fire, exhaust inlets, smoke duct
and exhaust fans.
3. Experimental configurations
A 1:10 reduced-scale model tunnel based on Froude scaling law
with transversal smoke extraction system was built to investigate
the performance of transversal smoke extraction system in tunnel
under fire. Froude number is the ratio of inertia forces to gravita-
tional force (Quintiere, 1989).
u2m u2p
Fr ¼ ¼ ð8Þ
glm glp
where g is the gravitational acceleration, m/s2; u is velocity, m/s; l is
length, m; Subscript m and p refer to model and full scale tunnel,
respectively. The relationships based on Froude scaling between
_ temperature (T), heat release
time (t), velocity (u), volume flux (V),
rate of the fire (Q_ ) and scale (lm/lp) are described as follow
(Quintiere, 1989):
 1=2
tm lm
¼ ð9Þ
tp lp
 1=2
um lm
¼ ð10Þ
up lp
about 0.65 m2. A smoke duct is situated at the top part of the
model tunnel with cross-sectional area of about 0.09 m2, as shown
in Fig. 2a. The model tunnel is made up of 21 segments of equal
size which was labeled as L10, L9, . . ., L2, L1, Fire, R1, R2, . . ., R9,
R10, respectively, as shown in Fig. 2b. All segments are constructed
using cold rolled sheet steel.
Two centrifugal exhaust fans with adjustable flux (controlled by
inverters) are installed at the each end of the smoke duct. Total
exhaust rate up to 1.0 m3/s can be provided by each fan.
Unilateral or bilateral exhaust modes are optional in the experi-
ments. Under unilateral exhaust, only one exhaust fan is activated,
the flow rate of the fan is adjusted to 0.38 m3/s (corresponding
exhaust rate for full scale tunnel is about 120 m3/s). Under bilateral
exhaust, both exhaust fans are switched on, the flow rate of each
fan is adjusted to 0.19 m3/s (corresponding exhaust rate for full
scale tunnel is about 60 m3/s). Flow rates of the fans are calibrated
by multipoint measurement at the calibration section of the duct
downstream the fan using hot-wire anemometer before fire tests.
Flow velocity at 9 points on the calibration section are measured
and averaged to obtain the average flow velocity across the calibra-
tion section, as shown in Fig. 2c. The volumetric flow rate of
exhaust is the product of the average velocity and the area of the
duct. Correlation between the flow rate of the exhaust fan and fre-
quency of the inverter can thus be drawn by multiple calibrations.
Uncertainty of the flow rate of the exhaust fan depends on the pre-
cision of the anemometer which is provided less than 5%.
Rectangular exhaust inlets are situated in the center of the hori-
zontal clapboard between the smoke duct and traffic space of each
segment. Area of each exhaust inlet can be adjusted from 0 to 0.1 m2.
Pool fire with methanol as the fuel was used in all the experi-
ments and fire source was located at the center of the floor of
the ‘‘Fire segment’’.
30 Tests were conducted as listed in Table 1. Experiments were
carried out during 5 days, ambient temperature of each test was
about 18 °C.
Among the tests addressed in the following, configuration of the
exhaust inlets are different in each test case. When the total area of
the opened exhaust inlets is bigger, the friction losses are lower.
 L. Yi et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 49 (2015) 268–278 271

temperature and pressure

measuring points

smoke duct
smoke inlet

700
623

560
R550

(a) Cross section of the model tunnel (unit: mm)

Fan 1 Fan 2

52.50 m
(b) Segments of the model tunnel

67 133 133 67

Calibration section

50
1500

100
1200

300

100
50
Centrifugal fan
400

(c) Calibration of exhaust rate of the fan (unit: mm)

Pitot tube Pitot tube

ρs,i,vi Smoke flow
Smoke flow Exhaust ρs,i+1,vi+1
Smoke duct
ρi ui

Traffic space
Segment i-1 Segment i Segment i+1

Thermocouple

(d) Velocity measuring arrangement in smoke duct and smoke inlet

Fig. 2. Experimental arrangement.

When pressure losses of the facility decrease it is expected that the
volume flow rate increase according to the characteristic curve of
the fan. However, it is found during the calibration of the exhaust
rate at ambient temperature that the exhaust rate of the fan varies
little under same inverter frequency and different configuration of
exhaust inlets (For example, for the configuration of the exhaust
inlets in T10 and T13, the area of the exhaust inlet increased
220%, the calibrated exhaust rate of the exhaust fan with same
inverter frequency varies less than 8%). It might be mainly ascribed
to the leakage of the smoke duct at the other exhaust inlets.
Distribution of temperature and velocity in the model tunnel
were measured in the experiments. K type thermocouples were
used to measure the temperature of gas in the tunnel. The diame-
ter of the thermocouples is 0.5 mm and the uncertainty of
measurement is ±0.5 °C. Flow velocity was obtained from temper-
ature data and pressure difference data measured by differential
manometer and Pitot tube using the equation:
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
v¼K 2DP=q ð14Þ
272 L. Yi et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 49 (2015) 268–278

Table 1
Conditions of each test.

Test Exhaust fans and exhaust rate Segments with opened exhaust inlets in Area of each exhaust inlet (Ae,i) Total area of the opened exhaust inlets
no. ðV_ e Þ experiment (m2) (m2)

T01 Fan2 (0.38 m3/s) L6, L5, L4, L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6 0.025 0.30
T02 L5, L3, L1, R1, R3, R5 0.025 0.15
T03 L5, L3, L1, R1, R3, R5 0.040 0.24
T04 L6, L3, R3, R6 0.060 0.24
T05 L4, Fire, R4 0.080 0.24
T06 Fan1 (0.19 m3/s); Fan2 L6, L5, L4, L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6 0.025 0.30
(0.19 m3/s)
T07 L6, L5, L4, L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6 0.040 0.48
T08 L6, L5, L4, L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6 0.060 0.72
T09 L6, L5, L4, L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6 0.080 0.96
T10 L4, L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3, R4 0.025 0.20
T11 L4, L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3, R4 0.040 0.32
T12 L4, L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3, R4 0.060 0.48
T13 L4, L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3, R4 0.080 0.64
T14 L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3 0.025 0.15
T15 L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3 0.040 0.24
T16 L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3 0.060 0.36
T17 L3, L2, L1, R1, R2, R3 0.080 0.48
T18 L2, L1, R1, R2 0.025 0.10
T19 L2, L1, R1, R2 0.040 0.16
T20 L2, L1, R1, R2 0.060 0.24
T21 L2, L1, R1, R2 0.080 0.32
T22 L6, L4, L2, R2, R4, R6 0.025 0.15
T23 L6, L4, L2, R2, R4, R6 0.040 0.24
T24 L6, L4, L2, R2, R4, R6 0.060 0.36
T25 L6, L4, L2, R2, R4, R6 0.080 0.48
T26 L6, L3, R3, R6 0.040 0.16
T27 L6, L3, R3, R6 0.060 0.24
T28 L6, L3, R3, R6 0.080 0.32
T29 L4, Fire, R4 0.060 0.18
T30 L4, Fire, R4 0.080 0.24

where K is the coefficient of Pitot tube; DP is the measured pressure
difference, Pa; q is the density of the gas, kg/m3. The coefficients of
Pitot tubes are 1.003–1.005, and the uncertainty of v measured by
the Pitot tube and differential manometer is within 5% according
to the manual.
51 Thermocouples were mounted about 1 cm beneath the clip-
board between the smoke duct and traffic space with interval of
1 m. Due to strong turbulence of the merge flow at the exhaust
inlet, it is difficult to measure the velocity of gas through the
exhaust inlet directly. Pitot tubes were mounted at each joint of
two adjacent segments to get the local velocity in the smoke duct.
Velocity through the exhaust inlet was then deduced from its adja-
cent velocity data in the smoke duct. As shown in Fig. 2d, calculat-
ing expression of the velocity through the exhaust inlet is
 
C d qs;iþ1 v iþ1  qs;i v i Ad
ui ¼
qi Ai
where Cd is the flow coefficient(dimensionless); Ad is the
cross-sectional area of the smoke duct, m2; q is the density of gas,
kg/m3, which can be calculated with the state equation and local
temperature.
Flow in the smoke duct downstream the last exhaust inlet (No.
n) is selected for analysis to determine the dimensionless flow
coefficient, Cd,
_e
m qf V_ f
Cd ¼ ¼ ð16Þ
qs;nþ1 v nþ1 Ad qs;nþ1 v nþ1 Ad
where m _ e and V_ f are the mass and volume flow rate of the exhaust
fan, respectively.
2 Thermocouples were mounted at the center of the fan duct
0.5 m upstream to each fan to obtain the temperature of the smoke
before exhaust.
Fire was burned for more than 15 min in each test. All smoke
was drawn into the smoke duct and no smoke was observed flow
out from the openings of the model tunnel in all the tests.
Heat release rate of the fire was calibrated by measuring the
mass loss rate of the fuel while burning in the tunnel. In all exper-
iments air was made up from both side of the fire by natural
means, velocity of the makeup air flow was estimated less than
0.3 m/s, deflection of the fire by wind was observed not obvious
and influence of the wind on the heat release rate of the fire is
neglected. Because of the consumption of oxygen for the combus-
tion of methanol is relatively low and the flow velocity of fans in
the experiments is far more sufficient to reach complete combus-
tion. Hence, the combustion coefficient of the burning is consid-
ered as 1. The heat release rate of the pool fire in each test was
consequently calibrated at 90 ± 8 kW.
Fans were activated at about 30 s after ignition in each test,
ð15Þ
temperature and velocity data in the tunnel during the time inter-
val from 300 s to 600 s after ignition were averaged and listed in
Table 2. Heat exhaust coefficient of each exhaust inlet, the smoke
duct and exhaust fans in each test were calculated and listed in
Table 2.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Heat exhaust coefficient of single exhaust inlet
Heat exhaust coefficient of a single exhaust inlet (or individual
heat exhaust coefficient), gh,i, depends on both temperature and
flow velocity of the gas across the exhaust inlet. It is indicated form
Eqs. (2) and (5) that gh,i is positive correlated with the temperature
and flow velocity.
Temperature of the gas at the exhaust inlet decreases along
with the increase of the separation between the exhaust inlet
 L. Yi et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 49 (2015) 268–278 273

Table 2
Results of each test.

Test no. Velocitya (ui), temperatureb (Ti), heat exhaust coefficient of each smoke inlet (gh,i) and of smoke duct (gh,d)
Inlet L6 L5 L4 L3 L2 L1 Fire R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
T01 ui (m/s) 0.03 0.01 0.24 0.28 0.35 0.71 – 1.05 1.39 1.93 2.74 4.69 6.12
Ti (°C) 24.51 44.36 109.86 194.63 215.29 316.47 – 264.38 179.80 213.98 95.43 72.75 59.45
gh,i (%) 0.01 0.01 0.57 1.02 1.40 3.52 – 4.73 4.90 7.64 5.67 7.32 7.52
gh,d (%) 44.29
Tf (°C) 38.62
gh,f (%) 9.90
T02 ui (m/s) – 0.78 – 1.21 – 1.61 – 2.61 – 3.80 – 5.87 –
Ti (°C) – 63.00 – 109.00 – 223.95 – 321.34 – 173.00 – 89.00 –
gh,i (%) – 1.04 – 2.85 – 6.56 – 13.14 – 13.01 – 11.35 –
gh,d (%) 47.94
Tf (°C) 42.43
gh,f (%) 11.59
T03 ui (m/s) – 0.10 – 0.19 – 1.58 – 1.57 – 2.72 – 5.03 –
Ti (°C) – 67.00 – 133.80 – 251.86 – 304.28 – 171.00 – 92.43 –
gh,i (%) – 0.23 – 0.83 – 11.13 – 12.29 – 14.79 – 15.74 –
gh,d (%) 55.02
Tf (°C) 40.12
gh,f (%) 10.57
T04 ui (m/s) 0.39 – – 0.82 – – – – – 2.15 – – 4.37
Ti (°C) 24.63 – – 237.50 – – – – – 165.00 – – 56.58
gh,i (%) 0.21 – – 8.36 – – – – – 17.07 – – 12.11
gh,d (%) 37.74
Tf (°C) 38.95
gh,f (%) 10.05
T05 ui (m/s) – – 0.45 – – – 2.40 – – – 3.13 – –
Ti (°C) – – 26.34 – – – 600.25 – – – 80.52 – –
gh,i (%) – – 0.39 – – – 50.53 – – – 17.48 – –
gh,d (%) 68.39
Tf (°C) 39.53
gh,f (%) 10.31
T06 ui (m/s) 2.98 2.21 1.70 1.19 0.82 0.86 – 0.88 0.88 1.20 1.74 2.24 3.04
Ti (°C) 29.95 84.00 122.03 152.50 203.32 264.27 – 300.92 204.35 184.50 123.21 89.00 26.81
gh,i (%) 1.16 4.03 4.42 3.70 3.15 3.87 – 4.27 3.37 4.30 4.56 4.33 0.88
gh,d (%) 42.05
Tf (°C) 47.26
gh,f (%) 13.67
T07 ui (m/s) 2.42 1.30 0.75 0.32 0.40 0.47 0.42 0.38 0.30 0.70 1.25 2.55
Ti (°C) 25.40 66.00 93.84 147.50 181.62 213.67 – 243.02 149.89 169.00 118.34 79.00 28.99
gh,i (%) 0.95 2.91 2.45 1.57 2.30 2.97 – 2.91 1.87 1.64 2.81 3.40 1.46
gh,d (%) 27.23
Tf (°C) 47.02
gh,f (%) 13.57
T08 ui (m/s) 2.25 1.09 0.37 0.18 0.33 0.40 – 0.40 0.40 0.13 0.37 1.00 2.19
Ti (°C) 25.69 66.00 115.40 147.50 197.40 252.30 – 285.65 190.98 169.00 135.92 79.00 29.33
gh,i (%) 1.37 3.66 2.21 1.29 2.97 4.27 – 4.48 3.54 1.07 2.52 4.08 1.94
gh,d (%) 33.41
Tf (°C) 47.56
gh,f (%) 13.80
T09 ui (m/s) 1.92 0.68 0.06 0.07 0.14 0.41 – 0.46 0.18 0.11 0.07 0.60 1.77
Ti (°C) 27.57 94.00 113.19 158.24 194.09 267.61 – 234.74 188.39 182.00 134.93 116.50 28.20
gh,i (%) 1.93 4.46 0.47 0.68 1.62 5.94 – 6.17 2.14 1.22 0.60 4.82 1.89
gh,d (%) 31.94
47.44
gh,f (%) 13.75
T10 ui (m/s) – – 3.27 2.34 1.90 1.74 1.74 1.99 2.30 3.31 – –
Ti (°C) – – 28.31 139.00 217.80 288.49 – 322.10 183.66 156.00 27.78 – –
gh,i (%) – – 1.10 6.77 7.62 8.24 – 8.76 7.12 7.28 1.06 – –
gh,d (%) 47.96
Tf (°C) 47.75
gh,f (%) 13.88
T11 ui (m/s) – – 2.72 1.28 0.67 0.69 0.67 0.65 1.19 2.68 – –
Ti (°C) – – 28.55 145.00 212.59 249.15 – 271.24 170.07 182.00 33.73 – –
gh,i (%) – – 1.50 6.15 4.24 4.81 – 4.92 3.49 6.78 2.16 – –
gh,d (%) 34.05
Tf (°C) 48.63
gh,f (%) 14.25

(continued on next page)

274 L. Yi et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 49 (2015) 268–278

Table 2 (continued)

Test no. Velocitya (ui), temperatureb (Ti), heat exhaust coefficient of each smoke inlet (gh,i) and of smoke duct (gh,d)
Inlet L6 L5 L4 L3 L2 L1 Fire R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
T12 ui (m/s) – – 2.19 1.12 0.39 0.65 0.37 0.36 1.15 1.99 – –
Ti (°C) – – 28.04 150.32 201.06 249.07 – 238.75 178.20 175.00 30.26 – –
gh,i (%) – – 1.73 8.24 3.52 6.75 – 3.77 3.00 9.51 1.90 – –
gh,d (%) 38.43
Tf (°C) 48.44
gh,f (%) 14.17
T13 ui (m/s) – – 1.58 0.65 0.18 0.71 0.52 0.37 0.81 1.66 – –
Ti (°C) – – 32.32 148.00 193.34 244.00 – 227.20 185.91 184.00 36.03 – –
gh,i (%) – – 2.33 6.37 2.14 9.72 – 6.92 4.27 9.31 3.06 – –
gh,d (%) 44.13
Tf (°C) 48.49
gh,f (%) 14.19
T14 ui (m/s) – – – 3.64 3.02 2.37 – 2.36 2.86 3.68 – – –
Ti (°C) – – – 116.50 203.74 282.40 – 302.80 152.43 103.50 – – –
gh,i (%) – – – 9.07 11.58 11.10 – 11.48 8.90 8.24 – – –
gh,d (%) 60.38
Tf (°C) 48.49
gh,f (%) 14.19
T15 ui (m/s) – – – 2.75 1.62 1.20 – 1.25 1.63 2.85 – – –
Ti (°C) – – – 109.50 189.43 221.29 – 247.91 148.31 127.00 – – –
gh,i (%) – – – 10.36 9.48 7.81 – 8.67 7.96 12.23 – – –
gh,d (%) 56.52
Tf (°C) 50.04
gh,f (%) 14.84
T16 ui (m/s) – – – 2.31 1.22 0.77 – 0.74 1.24 2.28 – – –
Ti (°C) – – – 117.32 190.97 234.11 – 243.26 159.44 106.50 – – –
gh,i (%) – – – 13.10 10.79 7.75 – 7.60 9.59 12.59 – – –
gh,d (%) 61.42
Tf (°C) 49.18
gh,f (%) 14.48
T17 ui (m/s) – – – 1.86 0.54 0.41 – 0.42 0.60 1.69 – – –
Ti (°C) – – – 106.00 173.65 202.27 – 188.69 139.12 97.50 – – –
gh,i (%) – – – 13.61 5.98 5.06 – 4.87 5.54 11.40 – – –
gh,d (%) 46.47
Tf (°C) 48.77
gh,f (%) 14.31
T18 ui (m/s) – – – – 5.14 4.08 – 4.01 4.98 – – – –
Ti (°C) – – – – 150.61 255.10 – 218.41 135.59 – – – –
gh,i (%) – – – – 15.86 18.06 – 16.12 14.13 – – – –
gh,d (%) 64.17
Tf (°C) 48.37
gh,f (%) 14.14
T19 ui (m/s) – – – – 3.17 2.68 – 2.68 3.22 – – – –
Ti (°C) – – – – 122.37 219.08 – 230.10 130.02 – – – –
gh,i (%) – – – – 13.20 17.28 – 17.78 14.11 – – – –
gh,d (%) 62.37
Tf (°C) 48.27
gh,f (%) 14.10
T20 ui (m/s) – – – – 2.36 1.50 – 1.50 2.38 – – – –
Ti (°C) – – – – 101.76 191.35 – 160.57 97.17 – – – –
gh,i (%) – – – – 12.47 13.23 – 11.63 12.04 – – – –
gh,d (%) 49.38
Tf (°C) 48.01
gh,f (%) 13.99
T21 ui (m/s) – – – – 1.98 1.03 – 1.09 1.86 – – – –
Ti (°C) – – – – 132.81 204.36 – 207.77 125.74 – – – –
gh,i (%) – – – – 17.63 12.69 – 13.58 15.82 – – – –
gh,d (%) 59.72
Tf (°C) 48.13
gh,f (%) 14.04
T22 ui (m/s) – 3.77 – 2.94 – 2.60 – 2.60 – 3.02 – 3.73 –
Ti (°C) – 69.85 – 130.50 – 220.08 – 248.38 – 158.09 – 78.33 –
gh,i (%) – 5.62 – 8.09 – 10.49 – 11.31 – 9.66 – 6.31 –
gh,d (%) 51.47
Tf (°C) 48.53
gh,f (%) 14.21
 L. Yi et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 49 (2015) 268–278 275

Table 2 (continued)

Test no. Velocitya (ui), temperatureb (Ti), heat exhaust coefficient of each smoke inlet (gh,i) and of smoke duct (gh,d)
Inlet L6 L5 L4 L3 L2 L1 Fire R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
T23 ui (m/s) – 3.02 – 1.62 – 1.50 – 1.44 – 1.73 – 2.72 –
Ti (°C) – 72.98 – 129.21 – 231.04 – 301.02 – 177.44 – 81.83 –
gh,i (%) – 7.57 – 7.04 – 10.01 – 11.16 – 9.65 – 7.72 –
gh,d (%) 53.16
Tf (°C) 48.41
gh,f (%) 14.16
T24 ui (m/s) – 2.40 – 0.90 – 0.86 – 0.82 – 0.89 – 2.17 –
Ti (°C) – 75.07 – 139.35 – 246.44 – 194.40 – 186.22 – 83.46 –
gh,i (%) – 9.32 – 6.29 – 8.91 – 7.28 – 7.67 – 9.41 –
gh,d (%) 48.89
Tf (°C) 48.79
gh,f (%) 14.32
T25 ui (m/s) – 1.85 – 0.87 – 0.76 – 0.63 – 0.68 – 1.86 –
Ti (°C) – 64.08 – 152.65 – 235.23 – 207.94 – 188.35 – 82.32 –
gh,i (%) – 7.99 – 8.71 – 10.27 – 7.80 – 7.95 – 10.63 –
gh,d (%) 53.35
Tf (°C) 48.58
gh,f (%) 14.23
T26 ui (m/s) 3.27 – – 1.87 – – – – – 2.11 – – 3.34
Ti (°C) 25.18 – – 156.35 – – – – – 190.57 – – 25.50
gh,i (%) 1.24 – – 9.50 – – – – – 12.38 – – 1.32
gh,d (%) 24.44
Tf (°C) 46.69
gh,f (%) 13.43
T27 ui (m/s) 2.66 – – 0.89 – – – – – 1.07 – – 2.42
Ti (°C) 24.85 – – 173.60 – – – – – 229.41 – – 25.04
gh,i (%) 1.45 – – 7.30 – – – – – 10.61 – – 1.35
gh,d (%) 20.7
Tf (°C) 46.22
gh,f (%) 13.23
T28 ui (m/s) 2.04 – – 0.60 – – – – – 0.67 – – 1.93
Ti (°C) 24.32 – – 177.69 – – – – – 191.37 – – 25.45
gh,i (%) 1.37 – – 6.75 – – – – – 7.86 – – 1.52
gh,d (%) 17.49
Tf (°C) 46.53
gh,f (%) 13.36
T29 ui (m/s) – – 2.00 – – – 3.54 – – – 2.13 – –
Ti (°C) – – 87.20 – – – 676.12 – – – 86.66 – –
gh,i (%) – – 9.10 – – – 57.98 – – – 9.61 – –
gh,d (%) 76.68
Tf (°C) 46.50
gh,f (%) 13.35
T30 ui (m/s) – – 1.74 – – – 2.85 – – – 1.70 – –
Ti (°C) – – 87.77 – – – 682.63 – – – 87.12 – –
gh,i (%) – – 10.59 – – – 62.56 – – – 10.30 – –
gh,d (%) 83.44
Tf (°C) 46.79
gh,f (%) 13.47
a
The velocity is measured by Pitot tubes using the Eqs. (11) and (12).
b
The uncertainty of temperature measured by thermocouples is ±0.5 °C.

and the fire. In the cases with bilateral extraction, temperature of
the smoke declines symmetrically about the fire source. In the
cases with unilateral extraction, temperature of the smoke in the
segments on the same side with the exhaust fan is slightly higher
than that on the other side of the exhaust fan.
Flow velocity across the exhaust inlet is high while the exhaust
inlet is close to the exhaust fan. As the design exhaust rate of the
exhaust fans is constant, the flow velocity at the exhaust inlet
decreases along with the increase of the number of exhaust inlets
and the area of each exhaust inlet.
It is observed from Fig. 3 and Table 2 that gh,i is nearly symmet-
rically distributed in bilateral exhaust mode. In unilateral exhaust
mode, gh,i of the exhaust inlets on the side of the exhaust fan is big-
ger than that on the other side. High heat exhaust coefficient will
be obtained with large exhaust rate and high temperature of the
smoke at the exhaust inlet. However, high temperature of the
smoke and large exhaust rate for the exhaust inlet is frequently
contradictive upon the operation of the exhaust system: inlet with
large exhaust rate is close to the exhaust fan but commonly far
from the fire which will result in low temperature of the smoke,
inlet close to the fire but often far from the exhaust fan which will
bring about small exhaust rate. Therefore, the position where max-
imum gh,i occurs is relevant to the configuration of the exhaust
inlets. In unilateral exhaust mode, maximum gh,i occurs at the
exhaust inlet near the fire when less than 4 exhaust inlets are acti-
vated, and at the exhaust inlet close to the exhaust fan when more
than 4 exhaust inlets are activated during the extraction. In bilat-
eral exhaust mode, along with the decrease of the number of the
exhaust inlets, the position where the maximum gh,i occurs tends
to move toward the exhaust inlets near the exhaust fans from near
the fire, and then moves back to the exhaust inlets near the fire
when the number of the exhaust inlets falls below 4.
276 L. Yi et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 49 (2015) 268–278

of each exhaust inlet, velocity across each exhaust inlet decreases,

16 2
12*0.025m (T01) and distribution of the exhaust rate of each exhaust inlet varies
2
14 12*0.025m (T06) since the local pressure loss at each exhaust inlet decreases, and
2
6*0.040m (T03)
2 thus gh,d varies.
12 6*0.040m (T15)
Variation of gh,d over the total area (or number) of the exhaust
10 inlets with same individual area and interval is shown in Fig. 5. It is
indicated that gh,d decreases along with the increase of the total
8 area of the exhaust inlets. gh,d depends on the heat loss of the
ηh,i (%)

6
4 and heat loss of the smoke in the traffic space increase when the
2
0 exhaust inlet under different distribution of exhaust inlet. It can
L6 L5 L4 L3 L2 L1 Fire R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6
position
Fig. 3. Individual heat exhaust coefficient of each exhaust inlet.
To exhaust smoke and heat out of the traffic space of the tunnel
as soon as possible after catching fire, smoke should be exhaust
through the exhaust inlets near the fire. Therefore, heat exhaust
coefficient of the exhaust inlets next to the fire is of great concern.
From Fig. 3 and Table 2, it is indicated that along with the increase
of the number and total area of the exhaust inlets, gh,i of the
exhaust inlets next to the fire decreases, more heat might be trans-
ferred to the traffic space as the smoke propagates in the tunnel.
4.2. Heat exhaust coefficient of the smoke duct
From Table 2, heat exhaust coefficient of the smoke duct (gh,d)
in the tests is observed varies from 17% to 83% and was strongly
affected by the configuration of the exhaust inlets.
smoke in the tunnel before entering the smoke duct. With same
individual area and interval of the exhaust inlets, traveling distance
number of the activated inlets increases, which results in a low gh,d.
Fig. 6 shows the variation of gh,d with the individual area of the
also be found that gh,d decreases slightly with the increase of the
individual area of exhaust inlet. In test T18–T21, the average dis-
tance of the exhaust inlets from the fire is 1.5 times of the length
of a segment of the model tunnel, and 2, 4, and 4.5 times in T14–
T17, T22–T25 and T26–T28, respectively. With the increase of the
average distance from the fire, traveling length of the smoke flows
in the traffic space before entering the smoke duct and heat loss of
the smoke increase and thus gh,d decreases. When the average dis-
tance of the exhaust inlets from the fire is greater than 4 times of
the length of a segment, gh,d decreases significantly.
70
0.025m2/inlet(T06/10/14/18)
0.040m2/inlet(T07/11/15/19)
60
0.060m2/inlet(T08/12/16/20)
0.080m2/inlet(T09/13/17/21)
50
ηh,d (%)

Variation of gh,d over the size of the exhaust inlet under same
number and interval of the exhaust inlets is shown in Fig. 4 in 40
groups. gh,d is the sum of the heat exhaust coefficient of each
exhaust inlet, and its value depends on the temperature and veloc-
ity of the smoke across each exhaust inlet which are influenced by 30
the opening degree of the exhaust inlets. Therefore, the correlation
between gh,d and the size of the exhaust inlet might be complex
and hard to deduce theoretically, though the measured exhaust 20
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
rate of the fan varies little due to the area of the exhaust openings
Total area of the exhaust inlets (m2)
varies. It is observed from Fig. 4 that gh,d slightly decreases with the
increase of the size of each inlet. Along with the increase of the size Fig. 5. Variation of gh,d over total area of the exhaust inlets.

80 80
12inlets(T06-T09) 6 inlets(T14-T17)
8 inlets(T10-T13) 6 inlets(T22-T25)
70 70 4 inlets(T18-T21)
6 inlets(T14-T17) 4 inlets(T26-T28)
4 inlets(T18-T21)
60
60

50
ηh,d (%)

ηh,d (%)

50

40
40

30
30
20
20
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
2 2
Area of each exhaust inlet (m ) Area of each exhaust inlet (m )

Fig. 4. Variation of gh,d over the area of each inlet. Fig. 6. Variation of gh,d with different distribution of the exhaust inlets.
 L. Yi et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 49 (2015) 268–278
In tunnel with transversal extraction system, high heat exhaust
coefficient is beneficial to the evacuation of personnel and vehicles
in the tunnel from being injured by the smoke under fire. As
demonstrated by the experiment results of this study, high gh,d
can be obtained in the cases activating small number of the
exhaust inlets with small individual area and small average dis-
tance from the fire. It indicates that the exhaust inlets should be
intensively installed along the smoke duct since the position of fire
source is random. However, intensively distributed exhaust inlets
will result in a high cost of installation and significant gas leakage
through the deactivated exhaust inlets. In addition, to avoid the
velocity across the exhaust inlet exceeding the ‘‘plugholing’’ veloc-
ity (Ji et al., 2012) which might decrease the exhaust coefficient
significantly, total and single area of the activated exhaust inlets
should not be too small. According to the requirement of design
of road tunnel in China (Ministry of Transport of PR China, 2004),
horizontal connecting channels for passengers are required in dou-
ble tube tunnels with interval of 250 m. Therefore, transversal
smoke extraction system of the tunnel should be able to control
the spread of the smoke within 250 m of the fire source in the tun-
nel to reduce the effect of smoke on evacuation of passengers. For
this reason, a feasible scheme for design and operation of the
transversal smoke extraction system can be proposed: exhaust
inlets are designed with interval of 50–100 meters and minimum
size which can avoid the occurrence of plugholing (deduced from
the exhaust rate, number and positions of the activated exhaust
inlets and critical velocity of plugholing) and activated within
250 m of the fire source when exhausting. Generally speaking, con-
figuration of the exhaust inlets should be the optimal scheme con-
sidering both exhaust coefficiency and cost.
4.3. Heat exhaust coefficient of the exhaust fans
Heat exhaust coefficient of the exhaust fans was calculated and
listed in Table 2 based on the exhaust rate (Exhaust rate of the fans
in each test are taken as 0.38 m3/s) and temperature data upstream
to the fans in the fan duct.
Considering transient variation of smoke temperature in the fan
duct, heat exhaust coefficient of the exhaust fans can be calculated
with integration of time:
R t2
t1
cp qf ðtÞV_ f DT f ðtÞdt
gh;f ¼ R t2 _  100%
t1
Q dt
Heat exhaust coefficient of exhaust fans were calculated within
the time period from 300 s to 600 s after ignition for each test case
and listed in Table 2. In most cases, due to well heat transfer con-
dition of the boundaries of the model tunnel, gh,f was observed in
the range of 10–15%.
gh,f varies in a small range and is smaller than gh,d as shown in
Fig. 7. gh,f in the cases with unilateral exhaust was slightly smaller
than that with bilateral exhaust. The possible cause is that in bilat-
eral exhaust cases, velocity in the smoke duct is smaller than that
in unilateral exhaust cases, thus convective heat transfer coeffi-
cient and heat loss of the smoke to solid boundaries is smaller.
It can also be observed from Table 2 that the exhaust rate of the
fans increases when there is a fire occurs in the model tunnel.
Based on the velocity and temperature data at each exhaust inlet,
total mass flow rate of the gas through the opened exhaust inlets
can be calculated between 0.29 and 0.56 kg/s. The total mass flow
rate of the gas through the opened exhaust inlets is found increase
along with the increase of total area of the exhaust inlets when
activating same number of the exhaust inlets. The mass exhaust
rate of the exhaust fans should be larger than the total mass flow
rate of the gas through the opened exhaust inlets due to leakage
at the closed exhaust inlets. When a fire occurs in the tunnel,
277
15.0
14.5 unilateral(T01/04/05)
bilateral (T06/27/30)
14.0
13.5
13.0
12.5
ηh,f (%)
12.0
11.5
11.0
10.5
10.0
9.5
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Area of each exhaust inlet (m2)
Fig. 7. Variation of gh,d under different exhaust mode.
density of the gas in the tunnel is lower and friction losses
decreases and thus the volume flow rate of the fans increases.
For the exhaust rate of the fans were calibrated at ambient temper-
ature and we did not calibrate the exhaust rate in each test under
fire, if taking 0.51 m3/s as the average volume flow rate of the fans
under fire (to satisfy the requirement that the corresponding mass
flow rate of the fans is larger than the total mass flow rate of the
gas through the opened exhaust inlets), the volume flow rate of
the fans results in a maximum value of about 35% increase. The
leakage of the smoke duct is estimated even up to 45% of the
exhaust rate in the cases with small exhaust area and large average
distance from the fan, e.g. T02, T14, T18 and T29. Eventually, after
modifying the exhaust rate of the fans considering the effect of
both gas density and leakage, gh,f in Table 2 should be increased
about 35%.
5. Conclusions
Heat exhaust coefficient of tunnel transversal smoke extraction
system was discussed by experimental means with a model tunnel
in this paper. Heat exhaust coefficient of individual exhaust inlet,
ð17Þ the smoke duct and exhaust fans were studied respectively.
Individual heat exhaust coefficient is positive correlated with
the temperature and flow velocity at the exhaust inlet.
Commonly, minimum individual heat exhaust coefficient occurs
at the farthest exhaust inlet from the fire or from the exhaust
fan. Along with the increase of the number and total area of the
exhaust inlets, gh,i of the exhaust inlets next to the fire decreases.
Heat exhaust coefficient of the smoke duct, gh,d, varied from 17%
to 83% and is strongly affected by the configuration of exhaust
inlets. Along with the increase of the size of each exhaust inlet,
gh,d slightly decreases. Similarly, gh,d decreases along with the
increase of the total area of the exhaust inlets and average distance
of the exhaust inlets from the fire because traveling distance and
heat loss of the smoke in the traffic space increase.
Due to well heat transfer condition, heat exhaust coefficient of
the exhaust fans was observed in the range of 13–20% and smaller
than the heat exhaust coefficient of the smoke duct. Heat exhaust
coefficient of the exhaust fan in the cases with unilateral exhaust
was slightly smaller than that with bilateral exhaust due to differ-
ent convective heat loss of the smoke to the solid boundaries of the
tunnel.
High heat exhaust coefficient of the smoke duct is beneficial to
the evacuation of personnel and vehicles in the traffic space. From
the experiment results of this study, high gh,d can be obtained in
278 L. Yi et al. / Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 49 (2015) 268–278
the extraction activating small number of the exhaust inlets near
the fire. However, after taking the flow velocity across the exhaust
inlet, region of smoke spread and the cost of extraction system,
configuration of the exhaust inlets should be an optimal scheme
overall considering the above issues with a proper object of smoke
control.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by the National Nature Foundation of
China under Grant No. 51406241, the Open Fund of State Key
Laboratory of Fire Science under Grant No. HZ2011-KF01 and
Zhejiang Province Science and Technology Plan Project under
Grant No. 2008C1304122.
References
Ballesteros-Tajadura, R., Santolaria-Morros, C., Blanco-Marigorta, E., 2006. Influence
of the slope in the ventilation semi-transversal system of an urban tunnel.
Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Technol. 21 (1), 21–28.
Barbato, L., Cascetta, F., Musto, M., Rotondo, G., 2014. Fire safety investigation for
road tunnel ventilation systems – an overview. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Technol. 43,
253–265.
Chen, L.F., Hu, L.H., Tang, W., Yi, L., 2013. Studies on buoyancy driven two-
directional smoke flow layering length with combination of point extraction
and longitudinal ventilation in tunnel fires. Fire Saf. J. 59, 94–101.
Choi, J.S., Kim, M.B., Choi, D.H., 2005. Experimental investigation on smoke
propagation in a transversely ventilated tunnel. J. Fire Sci. 23 (6), 469–483.
Colella, F., Rein, G., Carvel, R., Reszka, P., Torero, J.L., 2010. Analysis of the ventilation
systems in the Dartford tunnels using a multi-scale modelling approach. Tunn.
Undergr. Sp. Technol. 25, 423–432.
Fan, C.G., Ji, J., Gao, Z.H., Sun, J.H., 2013. Experimental study on transverse smoke
temperature distribution in road tunnel fires. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Technol. 37,
89–95.
Gonzalez, M.L., Galdo Vega, M., Fernandez Oro, J.M., Blanco Marigorta, E., 2014.
Numerical modeling of the piston effect in longitudinal ventilation systems for
subway tunnels. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Technol. 40, 22–37.
Harish, R., Venkatasubbaiah, K., 2014. Effects of buoyancy induced roof ventilation
systems for smoke removal in tunnel fires. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Technol. 42, 195–
205.
Hu, L.H., Peng, W., Huo, R., 2008. Critical wind velocity for arresting upwind gas and
smoke dispersion induced by near-wall fire in a road tunnel. J. Hazard. Mater.
150 (1), 68–75.
Hu, L.H., Tang, F., Yang, D., Liu, S., Huo, R., 2010. Longitudinal distributions of CO
concentration and difference with temperature field in a tunnel fire smoke flow.
Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 53 (13–14), 2844–2855.
Hu, L.H., Tang, W., Chen, L.F., Yi, L., 2013. A non-dimensional global correlation of
maximum gas temperature beneath ceiling with different blockage–fire
distance in a longitudinal ventilated tunnel. Appl. Therm. Eng. 56 (1–2), 77–82.
Hu, L.H., Chen, L.F., Tang, W., 2014. A global model on temperature profile of
buoyant ceiling gas flow in a channel with combining mass and heat loss due to
ceiling extraction and longitudinal forced air flow. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 79,
885–892.
Hua, G.Y., Wang, W., Zhao, Y.H., Li, L., 2011. A study of an optimal smoke control
strategy for an Urban Traffic Link Tunnel fire. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Technol. 26 (2),
336–344.
Huang, Y., Gong, X., Peng, Y., Lin, X., Kim, C., 2011. Effects of the ventilation duct
arrangement and duct geometry on ventilation performance in a subway
tunnel. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Technol. 26 (6), 725–733.
Ingason, H., Li, Y.Z., 2010. Model scale tunnel fire tests with longitudinal ventilation.
Fire Saf. J. 45 (6–8), 371–384.
Ingason, H., Wickstrom, U., 2006. The international FORUM of fire research
directors: a position paper on future actions for improving road tunnel fire
safety. Fire Saf. J. 41 (2), 111–114.
Ji, J., Li, K., Zhong, W., Huo, R., 2010. Experimental investigation on influence of
smoke venting velocity and vent height on mechanical smoke exhaust
efficiency. J. Hazard. Mater. 177 (1–3), 209–215.
Ji, J., Gao, Z.H., Fan, C.G., Zhong, W., Sun, J.H., 2012. A study of the effect of plug-
holing and boundary layer separation on natural ventilation with vertical shaft
in urban road tunnel fires. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 55 (21–22), 6032–6041.
Lee, E.J., Oh, C.B., Oh, K.C., Yoo, Y.H., Shin, H.J., 2010. Performance of the smoke
extraction system for fires in the Busan–Geoje immersed tunnel. Tunn. Undergr.
Sp. Technol. 25, 600–606.
Li, S.M., Chow, W.K., 2003. Numerical studies on performance evaluation of tunnel
ventilation safety systems. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Technol. 18, 435–452.
Li, Y.Z., Lei, B., Ingason, H., 2010. Study of critical velocity and backlayering length in
longitudinally ventilated tunnel fires. Fire Saf. J. 45 (6–8), 361–370.
Lin, C.J., Chuah, Y.K., 2008. A study on long tunnel smoke extraction strategies by
numerical simulation. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Technol. 23, 522–530.
Lu, Y.Y., Liu, F., Li, G., Liao, S.J., 2013. Study on smoke movement with semi-
transverse smoke extraction in subway tunnel fire. Hydraulic Engineering, 2012
SREE Conference, pp. 195–199.
Ministry of Transport of PR China, 2000. JTJ 026.1-1999 Specifications for Design of
Ventilation and Lighting of Highway Tunnel.
Ministry of Transport of PR China, 2004. JTG D70-2004 Code for Design of Road
Tunnel.
Ni, T.X., Xu, Z.S., Wu, D.X., 2010. Model experimental study on the heat exhaust
efficiency in the central smoke exhaust mode with independent smoke duct in
extra-long highway tunnel. Progr. Saf. Sci. Technol., 746–751, vol VIII, PTS A and
B 8 (A, B).
Oka, Y., Atkinson, G.T., 1995. Control of smoke flow in tunnel fires. Fire Saf. J. 25 (4),
305–322.
Porizek, J., Hanfova, M., Sajtar, L., 2007. Fire test in the Mrazovka tunnel and its
impact on the ventilation control systems in tunnels Mrazovka and Blanka.
Underground Space – 4th Dimension Metropolises 1–3, 1727–1732.
Quintiere, J.G., 1989. Scaling applications in fire research. Fire Saf. J. 15.1 (1), 3–29.
Rie, D.H., Kim, H.T., Yoo, J.O., Shin, H.J., Yoon, S.W., 2005. Comparison of two
different smoke extraction schemes of transversely ventilated tunnel fire. Progr.
Saf. Sci. Technol., 928–935, vol V, PTS A and B 5 (A–B).
Vauquelin, O., 2008. Experimental simulations of fire-induced smoke control in
tunnels using an ‘‘air–helium reduced scale model’’: principle, limitations,
results and future. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Technol. 23, 171–178.
Vauquelin, O., Megret, O., 2002. Smoke extraction experiments in case of fire in a
tunnel. Fire Saf. J. 37, 525–533.
Vidmar, P., Petelin, S., Luin, B., 2012. Upgrade of a transverse ventilation system in a
bi-directional tunnel. Therm. Sci. 16 (4), 1067–1080.
Weng, M.C., Yu, L.X., Liu, F., Nielsen, P.V., 2014. Full-scale experiment and CFD
simulation on smoke movement and smoke control in a metro tunnel with one
opening portal. Tun. Undergr. Sp. Technol. 42, 96–104.
Wu, Y., Bakar, M., 2000. Control of smoke flow in tunnel fires using longitudinal
ventilation systems – a study of the critical velocity. Fire Saf. J. 35 (4), 363–390.
Yi, L., Niu, J.L., Xu, Z.S., Wu, D.X., 2013. Experimental studies on smoke movement in
a model tunnel with longitudinal ventilation. Tunn. Undergr. Sp. Technol. 35,
135–141.
Zhong, W., Lv, J., Li, Z., Liang, T., 2013. A study of bifurcation flow of fire smoke in
tunnel with longitudinal ventilation. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 67, 829–835.