Flores-Herrera et al 2017a - Revision history

Rimni at 12:30, 28 April 2020

2020-04-28T12:30:59Z

Show changes

Rimni at 10:56, 28 April 2020

2020-04-28T10:56:38Z

Rimni at 10:53, 28 April 2020

2020-04-28T10:53:22Z

Rimni at 10:52, 28 April 2020

2020-04-28T10:52:10Z

Rimni at 10:50, 28 April 2020

2020-04-28T10:50:40Z

Show changes

Rimni at 10:41, 28 April 2020

2020-04-28T10:41:49Z

Rimni at 10:41, 28 April 2020

2020-04-28T10:41:20Z

Rimni at 10:33, 28 April 2020

2020-04-28T10:33:19Z

Rimni at 10:13, 28 April 2020

2020-04-28T10:13:56Z

Rimni at 10:12, 28 April 2020

2020-04-28T10:12:20Z

@@ Line 362: / Line 362: @@
 For the FDS meshing, the total number of rectangular cells was 2,474,693, a simplified view of the resulting brick mesh is shown in Figure 6 (a) isometric view and a close view in Figure 6 (b).
-{| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: 65%;"
+{| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: 55%;"
 |-
 |  style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:review_Flores-Herrera_et_al_2017a-image8-c.png|408px]]

@@ Line 362: / Line 362: @@
 For the FDS meshing, the total number of rectangular cells was 2,474,693, a simplified view of the resulting brick mesh is shown in Figure 6 (a) isometric view and a close view in Figure 6 (b).
-{| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
+{| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: 65%;"
 |-
 |  style="padding:10px;"|  [[Image:review_Flores-Herrera_et_al_2017a-image8-c.png|408px]]

@@ Line 273: / Line 273: @@
 | style="text-align: center;" | <math>{a}_{x}=-\frac{1}{{2\Delta }_{x}}\frac{\partial \Psi }{\partial y}-\frac{1}{Re{\Delta x}^{2}}\, ,\, {a}_{y}=</math><math>\frac{1}{{2\Delta }_{y}}\frac{\partial \Psi }{\partial x}-\frac{1}{Re{\Delta y}^{2}},\, {\, c}_{x}=</math><math>\frac{1}{{2\Delta }_{x}}\frac{\partial \Psi }{\partial y}-\frac{1}{Re{\Delta x}^{2}}</math>
 |-
-| style="text-align: center;" |<math>{c}_{y}=-\frac{1}{{2\Delta }_{y}}\frac{\partial \Psi }{\partial x}-\frac{1}{Re{\Delta y}^{2}},\, b=</math><math>\frac{1}{\Delta t}+\frac{2}{Re\Delta {x}^{2}}+\frac{2}{Re\Delta {y}^{2}}</math>
+| style="text-align: center;padding-top:15px;" |<math>{c}_{y}=-\frac{1}{{2\Delta }_{y}}\frac{\partial \Psi }{\partial x}-\frac{1}{Re{\Delta y}^{2}},\, b=</math><math>\frac{1}{\Delta t}+\frac{2}{Re\Delta {x}^{2}}+\frac{2}{Re\Delta {y}^{2}}</math>
 |}
 | style="width: 5px;text-align: right;white-space: nowrap;"|(14)

@@ Line 94: / Line 94: @@
 During the backlayering effect, the ventilation conditions are not suitable to transport the smoke to a desired direction or exit. The critical velocity has become in one of the prime criteria for the designing of ventilation systems, especially in tunnel section [15]. In this study, the Kennedy model (Equations (1) up to (3)) were used to calculate the critical velocity in the subterranean scenario, where the value of the critical velocity is determined as a solution of the three equations of the Kennedy model [16-19].
-{| style="width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;"
+{| class="formulaSCP" style="width: 100%; text-align: left;"
 |-
+|

@@ Line 96: / Line 96: @@
 {| style="width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;"
 |-
-|  style="text-align: center;"| <math>{V}_{c}={K}_{1}{K}_{2}{\left. \frac{gHQ}{{P}_{\infty }{C}_{p}{AT}_{F}}\right. }^{\frac{1}{3}}</math>
-|  style="text-align: right;"|(1)
+{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;"
 |-
-|  style="text-align: center;"| <math>{T}_{F}=\left. \frac{Q}{{P}_{\infty }{C}_{p}{AV}_{c}}\right. +{T}_{\infty }</math>
+| style="text-align: center;" |  <math>{V}_{c}={K}_{1}{K}_{2}{\left. \frac{gHQ}{{P}_{\infty }{C}_{p}{AT}_{F}}\right. }^{\frac{1}{3}}</math>
-|  style="text-align: right;"|(2)
+|}
 |-
 |  style="text-align: center;"| <math>{K}_{1}={F}_{r}^{-1/3}</math>
-|  style="text-align: right;"|(3)
+{| style="text-align: left; margin:auto;width: 100%;"
 |}

@@ Line 107: / Line 107: @@
-For the model, ''K''<sub>1</sub>= 0.605 is a dimensionless constant value given by Equation (3), the Froude number considered for the calculation takes a value of 4.5 according to [20-22] and ''K''<sub>2</sub>=1 is a dimensionless slope factor; the average burning temperature was ''T''<sub>F</sub>=369.34 °K (96.2°C) which resulting values corresponds to the ones presented in [23]. The 5MW fire source was considered according with [24,25], and the remaining values considered for the critical velocity calculation are shown in Table 2 [26].
+For the model, <math>K_1= 0.605</math> is a dimensionless constant value given by Equation (3), the Froude number considered for the calculation takes a value of 4.5 according to [20-22] and <math>K_2=1</math> is a dimensionless slope factor; the average burning temperature was <math>T_F=369.34</math>°K (96.2°C) which resulting values corresponds to the ones presented in [23]. The 5MW fire source was considered according with [24,25], and the remaining values considered for the critical velocity calculation are shown in Table 2 [26].
 <div class="center" style="width: auto; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;font-size:75%;">
@@ Line 158: / Line 158: @@
-The vorticity - stream function ( <math display="inline">\omega ,\, \varphi</math> ) equations were discretized using the finite differences method where each node is used to describe the computer dominion (Equations (6) and (7)) [27]:
+The vorticity - stream function (<math display="inline">\omega ,\, \varphi</math>) equations were discretized using the finite differences method where each node is used to describe the computer dominion (Equations (6) and (7)) [27]:
 {| style="width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;"
@@ Line 173: / Line 173: @@
-Here, ''U'' and ''V'' corresponds to the velocities in the ''x'' and ''y'' directions (Equation (8)):
+Here, ''U'' and ''V'' corresponds to the velocities in the <math>x</math>  and <math>y</math>  directions (Equation (8)):
 {| style="width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;"
@@ Line 234: / Line 234: @@
-The model was constructed by considering a rectangular shape with 50 divisions in width and 275 divisions in length representing the top view of the passenger platform, the discretization was defined by considering a regular mesh with an equivalent <math display="inline">{\Delta }_{x}</math> and <math display="inline">{\Delta }_{y}</math> of 0.2m. This value was obtained by considering a physical real dimension of 10.5m for the width and 58m for the length of the model and used for the analysis of case 1. On the other hand, the resulting Reynolds number was in this case 4.898 x 10<sup>-5</sup>.
+The model was constructed by considering a rectangular shape with 50 divisions in width and 275 divisions in length representing the top view of the passenger platform, the discretization was defined by considering a regular mesh with an equivalent <math display="inline">{\Delta }_{x}</math> and <math display="inline">{\Delta }_{y}</math> of 0.2m. This value was obtained by considering a physical real dimension of 10.5m for the width and 58m for the length of the model and used for the analysis of case 1. On the other hand, the resulting Reynolds number was in this case <math> 4.898 \times 10{-5}</math> .
 ===3.2. Boundary conditions in the theoretical model implemented in Fortran===
-Figure 2 a) shows the distribution of boundary conditions in the 2D model (case 1). The resulting mesh arrangement is shown in Figure 2 (b). The figure represents the top view of an idealized duct; the ''control area'', it is represented by a horizontal layer crossing along the center of the passenger platform. The location of each boundary condition is applied on each side by considering the Thom formulation and an idealized velocity profile [28].
+Figure 2 (a) shows the distribution of boundary conditions in the 2D model (case 1). The resulting mesh arrangement is shown in Figure 2 (b). The figure represents the top view of an idealized duct; the ''control area'', it is represented by a horizontal layer crossing along the center of the passenger platform. The location of each boundary condition is applied on each side by considering the Thom formulation and an idealized velocity profile [28].
 {| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
@@ Line 295: / Line 295: @@
 |-
 |  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;text-align:center;"|Air density
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;text-align:center;"|1.164 kg/m<sup>3</sup>
+|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;text-align:center;"|1.164 kg/m<math>^3</math>
 |-
 |  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;text-align:center;text-align:center;"|Dynamic viscosity
@@ Line 585: / Line 585: @@
 <div class="auto" style="width: auto; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;font-size: 85%;">
-[1] Qiming Li, Yongliang Deng, Cong Liu, Qingtian Zeng, Ying Lu, Modeling and analysis of subway fire emergency response: An empirical study, Safety Science 84 (2016) 171–180, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.12.003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.12.003] 0925-7535
+[1] Li Q., Deng Y., Liu C., Zeng Q., Lu Y. Modeling and analysis of subway fire emergency response: An empirical study. Safety Science, 84:171–180, 2016.
-[2] Ran Gao, Angui Li, Ying Zhang, Na Luo, How domes improve fire safety in subway stations, Safety Science 80 (2015) 94–104, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.07.015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.07.015] 0925-7535
+[2] Gao R., Li A., Zhang Y., Luo N. How domes improve fire safety in subway stations. Safety Science, 80:94–104, 2015.
-[3] Kai Kang, A smoke model and its application for smoke management in an underground mass transit station, Fire Safety Journal 42 (2007) 218–231, doi:10.1016/j.firesaf.2006.10.003
+[3] Kang K. A smoke model and its application for smoke management in an underground mass transit station. Fire Safety Journal, 42:218–231, 2007.
-[4] Manabu Tsukahara, Yusuke Koshiba, Hideo Ohtani, Effectiveness of downward evacuation in a large-scale subway fire using Fire Dynamics Simulator, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 26 (2011) 573–581, doi:10.1016/j.tust.2011.02.002
+[4] Tsukahara M., Koshiba Y., Ohtani H. Effectiveness of downward evacuation in a large-scale subway fire using Fire Dynamics Simulator. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 26:573–581, 2011.
-[5] Na Luo, Angui Li, Ran Gao, Zhenguo Tian, Zhipei Hu, Smoke confinement utilizing the USME ventilation mode for subway station fire, Safety Science 70 (2014) 202–210, [http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.06.002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2014.06.002] 0925-7535
+[5] Luo N., Li A., Gao R., Tian Z., Hu Z. Smoke confinement utilizing the USME ventilation mode for subway station fire. Safety Science 70:202–210, 2014.
-[6] Wang Zhilei, Hua Min, Xu Dayong, Pan Xuhai, Simulation research on human evacuation in subway with a single point fire scenario, Procedia Engineering 84 ( 2014 ) 595 – 602, doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2014.10.472
+[6] Zhilei W., Min H., Dayong X., Xuhai P. Simulation research on human evacuation in subway with a single point fire scenario. Procedia Engineering, 84:595–602, 2014.
-[7] Jae Seong Roh, Hong Sun Ryou, Won Hee Park, Yong Jun Jang, CFD simulation and assessment of life safety in a subway train fire, Tunneling and Underground Space Technology 24 (2009) 447–453, doi:10.1016/j.tust.2008.12.003
+[7] Roh J.S., Ryou H.S., Park W.H., Jang Y.J. CFD simulation and assessment of life safety in a subway train fire. Tunneling and Underground Space Technology, 24:447–453, 2009.
 [8] Jing-Hong Wang, Wen-yu Yan, You-ran Zhi, Jun-cheng Jiang, Investigation of the panic psychology and behaviors of evacuation crowds in subway emergencies, Procedia Engineering 135 ( 2016 ) 128 – 137, doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.01.091

@@ Line 548: / Line 548: @@
 |  style="text-align: center;vertical-align: top;font-size:75%;"|(b)
 |- style="text-align: center; font-size: 75%;"
-| colspan="2" style="padding:10px;"|'''Figure 20'''. Top view of the comparison of smoke displacement between a) the scaled scenario and b) the FDS simulation when the equilibrium flow pattern was achieved
+| colspan="2" style="padding:10px;"|'''Figure 20'''. Top view of the comparison of smoke displacement between (a) the scaled scenario and (b) the FDS simulation when the equilibrium flow pattern was achieved
 |}
@@ Line 566: / Line 566: @@
-Several differences with respect a real scenario can be observed also. For example, in a real fire source, the temperature of hot gases can maintain the smoke plume close to the ceiling for a longer distance than the one observed in picture 21 a). The smoke displacement on the bottom stairs is another important difference. According to the fire source location, there exist the possibility of the passengers to use this bottom stairs to evacuate towards the opposite side of the platform. In the experiment the presence of smoke was observed there creating a dangerous situation in which passengers taking the bottom stairs could be facing the presence of smoke on top and bottom sides of this particular route as observed in the simulations.
+Several differences with respect a real scenario can be observed also. For example, in a real fire source, the temperature of hot gases can maintain the smoke plume close to the ceiling for a longer distance than the one observed in picture 21 (a). The smoke displacement on the bottom stairs is another important difference. According to the fire source location, there exist the possibility of the passengers to use this bottom stairs to evacuate towards the opposite side of the platform. In the experiment the presence of smoke was observed there creating a dangerous situation in which passengers taking the bottom stairs could be facing the presence of smoke on top and bottom sides of this particular route as observed in the simulations.
 ==7. Discussion==

@@ Line 540: / Line 540: @@
 In Figure 20 (a) a top view of the smoke movement was captured when the fans were switched on. This is compared with the result obtained in the FDS simulation in Figure 20 (b). Similar displacement of the smoke was observed in both scenarios showing that the smoke leaves out in the same ventilation duct despite of the differences appreciated between the scaled model and the simulation.
-{| style="width: 100%;margin: 1em auto 0.1em auto;border-collapse: collapse;"
+{| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
 |-
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;text-align: center;width: 50%;"| [[Image:review_Flores-Herrera_et_al_2017a-image34.png|300px]]
+|  style="text-align: center;padding:10px;"|[[Image:review_Flores-Herrera_et_al_2017a-image34.png|300px]]
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;text-align: center;width: 49%;"| [[Image:review_Flores-Herrera_et_al_2017a-image35.png|350x350px]]
+|  style="text-align: center;padding:10px;"| [[Image:review_Flores-Herrera_et_al_2017a-image35.png|350x350px]]
 |-
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;text-align: center;vertical-align: top;font-size:75%;"|(a)
+|  style="text-align: center;vertical-align: top;font-size:75%;"|(a)
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;text-align: center;vertical-align: top;font-size:75%;"|(b)
+|  style="text-align: center;vertical-align: top;font-size:75%;"|(b)
 |}
 Figure 21 shows a lateral close view in the smoke emission zone in two different cases, a) when the fans are turned off and b) when the fans are turned on.
-{| style="width: 100%;margin: 1em auto 0.1em auto;border-collapse: collapse;"
+{| style="text-align: center; border: 1px solid #BBB; margin: 1em auto; width: auto;max-width: auto;"
 |-
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;text-align: center;width: 49%;"| [[Image:review_Flores-Herrera_et_al_2017a-image36-c.png|288px]]
+|  style="text-align: center;padding:10px;"| [[Image:review_Flores-Herrera_et_al_2017a-image36-c.png|288px]]
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;vertical-align: top;text-align: center;width: 49%;"| [[Image:review_Flores-Herrera_et_al_2017a-image37.png|276px]]
+|  style="text-align: center;padding:10px;"| [[Image:review_Flores-Herrera_et_al_2017a-image37.png|276px]]
 |-
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;text-align: center;vertical-align: top;font-size:75%;"|(a)
+|  style="text-align: center;vertical-align: top;font-size:75%;"|(a)
-|  style="border: 1pt solid black;text-align: center;vertical-align: top;font-size:75%;"|(b)
+|  style="text-align: center;vertical-align: top;font-size:75%;"|(b)
 |}