Advertisement

Fire Technology

, Volume 54, Issue 5, pp 1405–1442 | Cite as

Wind and Fire Coupled Modelling—Part I: Literature Review

  • Wojciech Węgrzyński
  • Tomasz Lipecki
Review Paper
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Fire Science Reviews

Abstract

Wind and fire phenomena can together be a devastating force, whether in the case of a building fire, release of smoke in an urban area or forest fire near an urban habitat. Most of the fire phenomena are influenced by the wind, usually for the worse. If we want to understand fires, we have to understand wind as well, and model it appropriately. This modelling is described by the discipline of Computational Wind Engineering, from which we are able to transfer invaluable knowledge to coupled wind-fire analyses. This two-part review is dedicated to such a transfer. In Part I, the authors describe the historical and most current instances of wind and fire coupled modelling, referred to as simple models, in situ measurements, wind tunnel experiments or numerical studies with CFD. The review is subdivided into six categories, namely flame behaviour in wind conditions, indoor flows, natural smoke ventilators, tunnel ventilation, wildfires and firebrand transport, and urban dispersion of smoke. Besides flame behaviour, all remaining topics are covered, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, with multiple references to valuable experimental and numerical studies. In Part II of the review, the authors describe the best practices of Computational Wind Engineering, that may be transferred to fire-oriented numerical studies. This part provides good practice guidelines, reference studies and a proposal for the optimisation of the simulation procedure for coupled wind and fire models.

Keywords

Wind Fire Computational wind engineering Fire safety engineering Computational fluid dynamics 

Abbreviations

ABL

Atmospheric boundary layer

CFD

Computational fluid dynamics

CWE

Computational wind engineering

FDS

Fire dynamics simulator

FSE

Fire safety engineering

LES

Large eddy simulation

NIST

National Institute of Standards and Technology

NSHEV

Natural smoke and heat exhaust ventilation

RANS

Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes

WUI

Wildland urban interface

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their gratitude to Michael J. Gollner and Ali Tohidi (University of Maryland) for their support in the preparation of the wildfire section of the paper, as well as to anonymous reviewers who provided very valuable insight for the paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Madrzykowski D, Kerber S, Madrzykowski D (2009) Fire fighting tactics under wind driven conditions: laboratory experiments. In: NIST technical note 1618. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MDGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Johansson N, Ekholm M (2018) Variation in results due to user effects in a simulation with FDS. Fire Technol 54(1):97–116.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-017-0674-y Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blocken B (2014) 50 years of computational wind engineering: past, present and future. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 129:69–102.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2014.03.008 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Franke J, Hellsten A, Schlünzen H, Carissimo B (2007) Best practice guideline for the CFD simulation of flows in the urban environment. COST Office BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pitts WM (1991) Wind effects on fires. Prog Energy Combust Sci 17:83–134.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0360-1285(91)90017-H Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rothermel RC (1972) A mathematical model for predicting fire spread in wildland fuels. In: USDA Forest Services Research Paper INT-115. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Odgen, Utah, Utah, USAGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tohidi A, Kaye NB (2017) Stochastic modeling of firebrand shower scenarios. Fire Saf J 91:91–102.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2017.04.039 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Caton SE, Hakes RSP, Gorham DJ, Zhou A, Gollner MJ (2017) Review of pathways for building fire spread in the wildland urban interface part I: exposure conditions. Fire Technol 53:429–473.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-016-0589-z Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yokoi S (1960) Study on the prevention of fire-spread caused by hot upward current. In: Report of the Building Research Institute No. 34Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hu L (2017) A review of physics and correlations of pool fire behaviour in wind and future challenges. Fire Saf J 91:41–55.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2017.05.008 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pitts WM (1989) Assessment of need for and design requirements of a wind tunnel facility to study fire effects of interest to DNA. National Institute of Standards and Technology, GaithersburgGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tohidi A, Kaye NB (2016) Highly buoyant bent-over plumes in a boundary layer. Atmos Environ 131:97–114.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.01.046 Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tohidi A, Gollner MJ, Xiao H (2018) Fire whirls. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 50:187–213.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-fluid-122316-045209 MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tang W, Gorham DJ, Finney MA, Mcallister S, Cohen J, Forthofer J, Gollner MJ (2017) An experimental study on the intermittent extension of flames in wind-driven fires. Fire Saf J 91:742–748.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2017.03.030 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thomas PH, Hinkley PL, Theobald CR, Simms DL (1963) Investigations into the flow of hot gases in roof venting. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Morgan J, Marchant EW (1975) Some effects of natural wind on vent operation in shopping malls. In: CIB symposium on the control of smoke movement in building fires, building research establishmentGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kandola BS (1978) Wind effects on buildings with varying leakage characteristics—wind-tunnel investigation. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 3:267–284.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(78)90033-8 Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kandola BS (1990) Effects of atmospheric wind on flows through natural convection roof vents. Fire Technol 26:106–120.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01040176 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marchant EW (1984) Effect of wind on smoke movement and smoke control systems. Fire Saf J 7:55–63.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0379-7112(84)90008-0 Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Than C-F (1992) Smoke venting by gravity roof ventilators under windy conditions. J Fire Prot Eng 4:1–4.  https://doi.org/10.1177/104239159200400101 Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kramer C, Gerhardt HJ (1976) Windkrfifte auf flachen und wenig geneigten Dachflfichen. In: Kramer C, Gerhardt HJ (eds) Dokumentation zum 2. Kolloquium uber Industriaerodynamik, AachenGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kramer C, Gerhardt HJ (1991) Wind pressures on roofs of very low and very large industrial buildings. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 38:285–295.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(91)90048-2 Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kramer C, Gerhardt HJ (1990) Wind effects on heat and smoke control of industrial buildings in case of a fire. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 36:499–508.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(90)90333-8 Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gerhardt HJ (1993) Comments on ‘Some effects of crosswind on ventilators’ by B.K. Ghosh. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 45(3):271–274.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(93)90097-8 Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gerhardt HJ, Kramer C (1990) Wind climate and smoke control in covered shopping malls. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 36:489–498.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(90)90332-7 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gerhardt HJ, Kruger O, Wacker J (1999) Small scale experiments to simulate the smoke extraction from large spaces. In: Larsen A, Larose G, Livesey F (eds) Wind engineering into 21st century. Balkema, Rotterdam, Copenhagen, pp 1927–1931Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kramer C, Gerhardt HJ (1993) Preface. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 45:v.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(93)90095-6 Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ingason H, Persson B (1995) Effects of wind on natural fire vents. In: BRANDFORSK Project 055-921; SP Report 1995:04. SP Swedish National Testing and Research Institute, Fire TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Poreh M, Trebukov S (2000) Wind effects on smoke motion in buildings. Fire Saf J 35:257–273.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-7112(00)00017-5 Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Meroney RN (2011) Wind effects on atria fires. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 99:443–447.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2010.11.003 Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Li Y, Delsante A (2001) Natural ventilation induced by combined wind and thermal forces. Build Environ 36:59–71.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1323(99)00070-0 Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Li M, Gao Z, Ji J, Li K, Sun J (2017) Wind effects on flame projection probability from a compartment with opposing openings. Fire Saf J 91:414–421.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2017.04.037 Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hu L, Hu K, Ren F, Sun X (2017) Facade flame height ejected from an opening of fire compartment under external wind. Fire Saf J 92:151–158.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2017.06.008 Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kerber S, Madrzykowski D (2009) Fire fighting tactics under wind driven conditions: 7-story building experiments. In: NIST technical note 1629. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MDGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Barowy A, Madrzykowski D (2012) Simulation of the dynamics of a wind-driven fire in a Ranch-Style House—TexasGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Weinschenk C, Beal C, Ezekoye OA (2011) Modeling fan-driven flows for firefighting tactics using simple analytical models and CFD. J Fire Prot Eng 21:85–114.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1042391510395694 Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Węgrzyński W, Krajewski G (2017) Influence of wind on natural smoke and heat exhaust system performance in fire conditions. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 164:44–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2017.01.014 Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Węgrzyński W, Krajewski G, Sulik P (2016) Case study 2—production and storage building (Poland). In: 11th conference on performance-based codes and fire safety design methods. SFPE, WarszawaGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Węgrzyński W, Krajewski G (2017) Combined wind engineering, smoke flow and evacuation analysis for a design of a natural smoke and heat ventilation system. Proc Eng 172:1243–1251.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.02.146 Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Krajewski G, Węgrzyński W (2018) Use of computational fluid dynamics in optimization of natural smoke ventilation from a historical shopping mall—case study. AIP Conf Proc 1922:110009.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5019112 Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Węgrzyński W, Krajewski G, Kimbar G (2018) A concept of external aerodynamic elements in improving the performance of natural smoke ventilation in wind conditions. AIP Conf Proc 1922:110006.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5019109 Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    McGrattan K, Hostikka S, McDermott R, Floyd J, Weinschenk C, Overholt K (2017) Fire dynamics simulator user’s guide, 6th edn. Natl Inst Stand Technol Spec Publ 1019, NIST, USA.  https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1019
  43. 43.
    Rehm RG, McGrattan K, Baum H, Simiu E, (1999) An efficient Large Eddy Simulation algorithm for computational wind engineering: application to surface pressure computations on a single building. In: NIST special publication vol 6371Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Król M (2016) Numerical studies on the wind effects on natural smoke venting of atria. Int J Vent 15:67–78.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14733315.2016.1173293 Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Król M, Król A (2017) Multi-criteria numerical analysis of factors influencing the efficiency of natural smoke venting of atria. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 170:149–161.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2017.08.012 Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Li H, Fan C, Wang J (2014) Effects of wind and adjacent high rise on natural smoke extraction in an atrium with pitched roof. APCBEE Procedia, 9:296–301.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcbee.2014.01.053 Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Chow WK, Han SS, Gao Y, Li SS (2007) Performance evaluation on natural smoke venting system in a large cargo hall. In: Proceedings of the 7th Asia-Oceania symposium on fire science and technology, Hong Kong, 20–22 September 2007, paper 31E, p 31EGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Chow WK, Liu P, Zou GW (2007) Wind effect on smoke exhaust systems in a Large Cargo Hall with two compartments. Cairns, Australia, pp 1415–1422Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Stacy D (2016) Analysis of wind in an FDS simulation. In: SFPE North America conf. and Expo. SFPE, DenverGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Mowrer FW (2009) Driving forces for smoke movement and management. Fire Technol 45:147–162.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-008-0077-1 Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Zhang CF, Chen SY, Chow WK (2014) Wind effects on the smoke spread of high-rise buildings. In: The 2014 world congress on advances in civil, environmental, and material research (ACEM14), Busan, KoreaGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Panindre P, Mousavi NSSS, Kumar S (2017) Positive pressure ventilation for fighting wind-driven high-rise fires: simulation-based analysis and optimization. Fire Saf J 87:57–64.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2016.11.005 Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Moosavi L, Mahyuddin N, Ab Ghafar N, Azzam Ismail M (2014) Thermal performance of atria: an overview of natural ventilation effective designs. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 34:654–670.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.02.035 Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Lo SM, Chen D, Yuen KK, Lu W (2002) A numerical study of external smoke spread in designated refuge floor. Build Environ 37:257–268.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1323(01)00026-9 Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Chow WK, Li J (2010) Numerical simulations on wind-induced aerodynamics for tall buildings with refuge floors. In: The fifth international symposium on computational wind engineering (CWE2010), Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Cheng CCK, Lam KM, Yuen RKK, Lo SM, Liang J (2007) A study of natural ventilation in a refuge floor. Build Environ 42:3322–3332.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.08.031 Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Cheng CCK, Lam KM, Demirbilek FN (2008) Effects of building wall arrangements on wind-induced ventilation through the refuge floor of a tall building. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 96:656–664.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2008.01.009 Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Chen HXX, Liu NAA, Chow WKK (2011) Wind tunnel tests on compartment fires with crossflow ventilation. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 99:1025–1035.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2011.07.006 Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Chen H, Liu N, Chow WK (2009) Wind effects on smoke motion and temperature of ventilation-controlled fire in a two-vent compartment. Build Environ 44:2521–2526.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.04.008 Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Yi L, Gao Y, Niu JLL, Yang SJJ (2013) Study on effect of wind on natural smoke exhaust of enclosure fire with a two-layer zone model. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 119:28–38.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2013.05.005 Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Huang H, Ooka R, Liu N, Zhang L, Deng Z, Kato S (2009) Experimental study of fire growth in a reduced-scale compartment under different approaching external wind conditions. Fire Saf J 44:311–321.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2008.07.005 Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Klote JH (216) Smoke control. In: SFPE handbook of fire protection engineering. Springer, New York, NY, pp 1785–1823Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Klote JH, Milke JA, Turnbull PG, Kashef A, Ferreira MJ (2012) Handbook of smoke control engineering. ASHRAEGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Klote JH (1995) Design of smoke control systems for elevator fire evacuation including wind effects. In: 2nd symposium, American society of mechanical engineers. BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    CEN (2015) prEN 12101-2 smoke and heat control systems part 2: specification for natural smoke and heat exhaust ventilatorsGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Prahl J, Emmons HW (1975) Fire induced flow through an opening. Combust Flame 25:369–385.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-2180(75)90109-1 Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    DIN 18232-3:1984-09 (1984) Baulicher Brandschutz im Industriebau—Rauch-und Wärmeabzugsanlagen—Rauchabzüge, PrüfungenGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Kramer C, Gerhardt HJ, Bösch H, Meessen H (1983) Entersuchungen Ober die aerodynamische Wirksamkeit von RauchabSgen. Schadenprisma 12Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    BS 7346-1:1990 (1990) Components for smoke and heat control systems. Specification for natural smoke and heat exhaust ventilatorsGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Gerhardt HJ (1993) Extended summary of ‘Der VdS-Ringversuch. Die überprüfung des Prüfstandseinflusses auf die aerodynamische Wirksamkeit von RA’ (The VdS-round-robin test. Testing-station-specific influences on the aerodynamic performance of smoke ventilators) by H. Meessen. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 45(3):309–312.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(93)90101-S Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Ghosh BK (1993) Some effects of crosswind on ventilators. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 45:247–270.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(93)90096-7 Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Kramer C, Gerhardt HJ (1993) Aerodynamic efficiency of smoke ventilators—comparison of measurements on full scale and model ventilators. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 45:313–323.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(93)90102-T Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Simon J (1993) Extended summary of smoke ventilators: an approach for the determination of their performances and some results. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 45:339.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(93)90102-T Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Simon J (1993) Methode d’essai aérodynamique et analyse des paramètres géometriques modifiant les performances des exutoires. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 45:325–338.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(93)90103-U Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    CEN (2003) EN 12101-2:2003 smoke and heat control systems. Specification for natural smoke and heat exhaust ventilatorsGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    UE (2011) Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of The European Parliament and the Council of 9th March 2011 laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products and repealing Council Directive 89/106/EEC, pp 5–43Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    NFPA (2015) NFPA 204 Standard for smoke and heat ventingGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    McGuire JH (1967) Smoke movement in buildings. Fire Technol 3:163–174.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02601782 Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Morgan HP, Hansell GO (1988) Atrium building smoke flows. Fire Saf J 13:221–224.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0379-7112(88)90018-5 Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Law M (1986) A note on smoke plumes from fires in multi-level shopping malls. Fire Saf J 10:197–202Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    CEN (2005) CEN/TR 12101-5:2005 smoke and heat control systems. Guidelines on functional recommendations and calculation methods for smoke and heat exhaust ventilation systemsGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    DIN (2007) DIN 18232 Teil 2. Baulicher Brandschutz im Industriebau. Rauch- und Warmeabzugsaniagen. Rauchabzuge. Bemessung, Anforderungen und EinbauGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    VDI (2006) VDI 6019 Blatt 1 Ingenieurverfahren zur Bemessung der Rauchableitung aus Gebäuden Brandverläufe, Überprüfung der WirksamkeitGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Klote JH, Milke JA (2002) Principles of smoke management, American society of heating. Refrigerating and Air-conditioning Engineers Inc., AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Carvel R, Marlair G (2005) A history of fire incidents in tunnels. In: The handbook of tunnel fire safety. Thomas Telford Publishing, pp 1–41Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Madsen H (2000) Fire in the seljestad tunnel (Norway). In: Colombo AG (ed) NEDIES Project: lessons learnt from tunnel accidents, pp 15–18Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Nilsen A, Lindvik PA, Log T (2001) Full-scale fire testing in sub sea public road tunnels. In: Proceedings of the 9th international Interflam conference, Edinburgh, Scotland, pp 913–924Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Yang SC, Chuah YK (2017) A study of wind effects on smoke extraction strategies in vehicle tunnels. Tunn Undergr Sp Technol 67:8–26.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2017.04.011 Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Sztarbała G (2012) Oddziaływanie wiatru na przepływ powietrza w tunelu w warunkach pożaru. Instytut Techniki BudowlanejGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Sztarbała G, Lipecki T, Bęc J (2013) Wind influence on air flow inside road tunnels. In: 6th European and African conference on wind engineering, Cambridge, pp 1–9Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Bęc J, Lipecki T, Błazik-Borowa E (2011) Research on wind structure in the wind tunnel of wind engineering laboratory of Cracow University of Technology. J Phys Conf Ser 318:72003.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/318/7/072003 Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Wang HY (2012) Numerical and theoretical evaluations of the propagation of smoke and fire in a full-scale tunnel. Fire Saf J 49:10–21.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2011.12.012 Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Fletcher DF, Kent JH, Apte VB, Green AR (1994) Numerical simulations of smoke movement from a pool fire in a ventilated tunnel. Fire Saf J 23:305–325.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0379-7112(94)90033-7 Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Gannouni S, Ben Maad R (2016) Numerical analysis of smoke dispersion against the wind in a tunnel fire. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 158:61–68.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2016.09.009 Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Suban A, Petelin S, Vidmar P (2015) Effect of gusty wind on road tunnel safety. Stroj Vestnik/J Mech Eng 61:421–431.  https://doi.org/10.5545/sv-jme.2015.2433 Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Tanaka F, Kawabata N, Ura F (2016) Effects of a transverse external wind on natural ventilation during fires in shallow urban road tunnels with roof openings. Fire Saf J 79:20–36.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2015.11.004 Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Tanaka F, Kawabata N, Ura F (2017) Smoke spreading characteristics during a fire in a shallow urban road tunnel with roof openings under a longitudinal external wind blowing. Fire Saf J 90:156–168.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2017.03.005 Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Król M, Król A, Koper P, Wrona P (2017) Full scale measurements of the operation of fire ventilation in a road tunnel. Tunn Undergr Sp Technol 70:204–213.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2017.07.016 Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    van der Heijden MGM, Loomans MGLC, Lemaire AD, Hensen JLM (2013) Fire safety assessment of semi-open car parks based on validated CFD simulations. Build Simul 6:385–394.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-013-0118-7 Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Road and Transportation Research Association (2006) Regulations for the equipment and operation of road tunnels. RABTGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    RVS 09.02.31 tunnel ventilation—basic principles (2008)Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    ASTRA 13001 (2008) Ventilation des tunnels routiers. Choix du systeme, dimensionnement et equipementGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Höpperger B, Croll J (2016) How to compute relevant meteorological portal differemces. In: Tunnel safety and ventilation conference, 25–26 April 2016, Graz, Austria, pp 149–156Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    PIARC Technical Committee 3.3 Road Tunnel Operation (2008) Road tunnels: a guide to optimising the air quality impact upon the environmentGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Yousaf R, Gehrig S, Buchmann R (2014) Evaluating smoke recirculation potential at the portal of a swiss road tunnel in case of a fire. In: 7th international conference on tunnel safety and ventilation, pp 118–125Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Baumann HO (1979) Air recirculation between tunnel portals. In: 3rd int. symposium on the aerodynamics and ventilation of vehicle tunnels, SheffieldGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Mell WE, Manzello SL, Maranghides A, Butry D, Rehm RG (2010) The wildland-urban interface fire problem—current approaches and research needs. Int J Wildl Fire 19:238–251.  https://doi.org/10.1071/WF07131 Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Hakes RSP, Caton SE, Gorham DJ, Gollner MJ (2017) A review of pathways for building fire spread in the wildland urban interface part II: response of components and systems and mitigation strategies in the United States. Fire Technol 53:475–515.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-016-0601-7 Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Rothermel RC, Anderson HE (1966) Fire spread characteristics determined in the laboratory. In: U.S. Forest Service Research Paper INT-30Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Anderson HE (1968) Fire spread and flame shape. Fire Technol 4:51–58.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02588606 Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Weise DR, Biging GS (1994) Effects of wind velocity and slope on flame properties. Can J For Res 26:1849–1858.  https://doi.org/10.1139/x26-210 Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Sugawa O, Momita D, Takahashi W (1997) Flow behavior of ejected fire flame/plume from an opening effected by external side wind. In: Fire safety science-proceedings of the fifth international symposium, International Association for Fire Safety Science, Melbourne, Australia, pp 249–260Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Manzello SL (2014) Enabling the investigation of structure vulnerabilities to wind-Driven firebrand showers in wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) fires. In: Fire safety science-proceedings of the eleventh international symposium. International Association for Fire Safety Science, Christchurch, New Zealand, pp 83–96Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Manzello SL, Suzuki S (2014) Exposing decking assemblies to continuous wind-driven firebrand showers. In: Fire safety science-proceedings of the eleventh international symposium. International Association for Fire Safety Science, Christchurch, New Zealand, pp 1339–1352Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Suzuki S, Manzello SL, Kagiya K, Suzuki J, Hayashi Y (2015) Ignition of mulch beds exposed to continuous wind-driven firebrand showers. Fire Technol 51:905–922.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-014-0425-2 Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Lozano J, Tachajapong W, Pan H, Swanson A, Kelley C, Princevac M, Mahalingam S (2008) Experimental investigation of the velocity field in a controlled wind-aided propagating fire using particle image velocimetry. In: Fire safety science–proceedings of the ninth international symposium. International Association for Fire Safety Science, Karlsruhe, Germany, pp 255–266Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Kwok KCS, He Y, Douglas GB (2010) Wind impacts on fire spread and structural failure during bushfire in complex terrain. In: 9th UK conference on wind engineering, Bristol, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    He Y, Kwok KCS, Douglas GB, Razali IM (2011) Numerical investigation of bushfire-wind interaction and its impact on building structure. In: Fire safety science-proceedings of the tenth international symposium, University of Canterbury, New Zealand, pp 1449–1462Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Kwok K, He K, Razali I, Douglas G (2011) Bushfire-induced winds and their impacts on buildings. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on wind engineering. Multi-Science Publishing, Amsterdam, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Mell W, Jenkins MA, Gould J, Cheney P (2007) A physics-based approach to modelling grassland fires. Int J Wildl Fire 16:1–22.  https://doi.org/10.1071/WF06002 Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Mell W, Maranghides A, McDermott R, Manzello SL (2009) Numerical simulation and experiments of burning douglas fir trees. Combust Flame 156:2023–2041.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.combustflame.2009.06.015 Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    McGrattan K, Hostikka S, McDermott R, Floyd J, Weinschenk C, Overholt K (2015) Fire dynamics simulator technical reference guide. Volume 3: validation, 6th edn. NIST Special Publication 1018-3Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Meroney RN (2007) Numerical prediction of fire propagation in idealized wildland and urban canopies numerical prediction of fire propagation in idealized wildland and urban canopies. In: 12 international conference on wind engineering, Cairns, Australia, pp 1295–1302Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Morvan D (2015) Numerical study of the behaviour of a surface fire propagating through a firebreak built in a Mediterranean shrub layer. Fire Saf J 71:34–48.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2014.11.012 Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    Pérez Y, Pastor E, Àgueda A, Planas E (2011) Effect of wind and slope when scaling the forest fires rate of spread of laboratory experiments. Fire Technol 47:475–489.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-010-0168-7 Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Porterie B, Morvan D, Loraud JC, Larini M (1999) Cross wind effects on fire propagation through heterogeneous media. In: Fire safety science-proceedings of the sixth international symposium. International Association for Fire Safety Science, University of Poitiers, France, pp 707–716Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Trelles J, Pagni PJ (1997) Fire-induced winds in the 20 October 1991 Oakland Hills Fire. In: Hasemi Y (ed) IRE safety science-proceedings of the fifth international symposium. International Association for Fire Safety Science, Melbourne, Australia, pp 911–922Google Scholar
  128. 128.
    Forthofer JM, Butler BW, Wagenbrenner NS (2014) A comparison of three approaches for simulating fine-scale surface winds in support of wildland fire management. Part I. Model formulation and comparison against measurements. Int J Wildl Fire 23:969–981.  https://doi.org/10.1071/WF12089 Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    Forthofer JM, Butler BW, Mchugh CW, Finney MA, Bradshaw LS, Stratton RD, Shannon KS, Wagenbrenner NS (2014) A comparison of three approaches for simulating fine-scale surface winds in support of wildland fire management. Part II. An exploratory study of the effect of simulated winds on fire growth simulations. Int J Wildl Fire 23:982–994.  https://doi.org/10.1071/WF12090 Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Koo E, Linn RR, Pagni PJ, Edminster CB (2012) Modelling firebrand transport in wildfires using HIGRAD/FIRETEC. Int J Wildl Fire 21:396–417.  https://doi.org/10.1071/WF09146 Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Maranghides A, McNamara D, Mell W, Trook J, Toman B (2013) A case study of a community affected by the Witch and Guejito fires: report #2—evaluating the effects of hazard mitigation actions on structure ignitions. Gaithersburg, MDGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Koo E, Pagni PJ, Linn RR (2007) Using FIRETEC to describe firebrand behavior in wildfires. In: The tenth international symposium of fire and materials. Interscience Communications, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Song J, Huang X, Liu N, Li H, Zhang L (2016) The wind effect on the transport and burning of firebrands. Fire Technol 53:1555–1568.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-017-0647-1 Google Scholar
  134. 134.
    Tarifa CS, del Notario PP, Moreno FG (1965) On the flight paths and lifetimes of burning particles of wood. Symp Combust 10:1021–1037.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0082-0784(65)80244-2 Google Scholar
  135. 135.
    Tarifa CS, del Notario PP, Moreno FG, Villa A (1967) Transport and combustion of firebrands, final report of grants FG-SP-11 and FG-SP-146. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Madrid, SpainGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Albini F (1981) Spot fire distance from isolated sources-extensions of a predictive model. In: Research Note INT-RN-309. USDA Forest Service, intermountain forest and range experiment station, Ogden, UTGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Albini F (1983) Transport of firebrands by line thermals. Combust Sci Technol 32:277–288.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00102208308923662 Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Tohidi A, Kaye NB (2017) Aerodynamic characterization of rod-like debris with application to firebrand transport. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 168:297–311.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2017.06.019 Google Scholar
  139. 139.
    Kim Y-D, Hayashi Y, Tri C YJ, Baek SJ (2009) A numerical study on travel distances of firebrands by wind. In: 7th Asia-Pacific conference on wind engineering, APCWE-VII, Taipei, TaiwanGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Tohidi A, Kaye NB (2017) Comprehensive wind tunnel experiments of lofting and downwind transport of non-combusting rod-like model firebrands during firebrand shower scenarios. Fire Saf J 90:95–111.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2017.04.032 Google Scholar
  141. 141.
    Koo E, Pagni PJ, Weise DR, Woycheese JP (2010) Firebrands and spotting ignition in large-scale fires. Int J Wildl Fire 19:818.  https://doi.org/10.1071/WF07119 Google Scholar
  142. 142.
    Church CR, Snow JT, Dessens J (1980) Intense atmospheric vortices associated with a 1000 MW fire. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 61:682–694.  https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1980)061%3C0682:IAVAWA%3E2.0.CO;2 Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    Rodden RM, John FI, Laurino R (1965) Exploratory analysis of fire storms. In: Report prepared for the Office of Civil Defense, Contract N228-(62479)65419. Stanford Research InstituteGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Carrier GF, Fendell FE, Feldman PS (1985) Firestorms. J. Heat Transf 107:19.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3247379 Google Scholar
  145. 145.
    Morton BR (1970) The physics of fire whirls. Fire Res Abstr Rev 12:1–19Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    Countryman CM (1971) Fire whirls…why, when, and where. USDA For. Serv.Google Scholar
  147. 147.
    Soma S, Saito K (1991) Reconstruction of fire whirls using scale models. Combust Flame 86:269–284.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-2180(91)90107-M Google Scholar
  148. 148.
    Zhou K, Liu N, Yuan X (2016) Effect of wind on fire whirl over a line fire. Fire Technol 52:865–875.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-015-0507-9 Google Scholar
  149. 149.
    Moon K, Duff TJ, Tolhurst KG (2014) Sub-canopy forest winds: Understanding wind profiles for fire behaviour simulation. Fire Saf J (in press).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2016.02.005
  150. 150.
    Rios O, Jahn W, Rein G (2014) Forecasting wind-driven wildfires using an inverse modelling approach. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 14:1491–1503.  https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-14-1491-2014 Google Scholar
  151. 151.
    Lautenberger C (2013) Wildland fire modeling with an Eulerian level set method and automated calibration. Fire Saf J 62:289–298.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.firesaf.2013.08.014 Google Scholar
  152. 152.
    Coen JL, Schroeder W (2013) Use of spatially refined satellite remote sensing fire detection data to initialize and evaluate coupled weather-wildfire growth model simulations. Geophys Res Lett 40:5536–5541.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL057868 Google Scholar
  153. 153.
    Finney M (2004) FARSITE: fire area simulator-model development and evaluation. Odgen, UtahGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Tolhurst K, Shields B, Chong D (2008) Phoenix: development and application of a bushfire risk management tool. Aust J Emerg Manag 23:47–54Google Scholar
  155. 155.
    Prieto Herráez D, Asensio Sevilla MI, Ferragut Canals L, Cascón Barbero JM, Morillo Rodríguez A (2017) A GIS-based fire spread simulator integrating a simplified physical wildland fire model and a wind field model. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 31:2142–2163.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13658816.2017.1334889 Google Scholar
  156. 156.
    Wagenbrenner NS, Forthofer JM, Lamb BK, Shannon KS, Butler BW (2016) Downscaling surface wind predictions from numerical weather prediction models in complex terrain with WindNinja. Atmos Chem Phys 16:5229–5241.  https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-16-5229-2016 Google Scholar
  157. 157.
    Pimont F, Dupuy JL, Linn RR, Parsons R, Martin-StPaul N (2017) Representativeness of wind measurements in fire experiments: lessons learned from large-eddy simulations in a homogeneous forest. Agric For Meteorol 232:479–488.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2016.10.002 Google Scholar
  158. 158.
    Li XX, Liu CH, Leung DYC, Lam KM (2006) Recent progress in CFD modelling of wind field and pollutant transport in street canyons. Atmos Environ 40(29):5640–5658.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.04.055 Google Scholar
  159. 159.
    Xuan W (1999) Wind-induced dispersion of building exhaust in an urban environment: a full-scale and wind-tunnel study. Concordia University, MontrealGoogle Scholar
  160. 160.
    Lateb M, Meroney RN, Yataghene M, Fellouah H, Saleh F, Boufadel MC (2016) On the use of numerical modelling for near-field pollutant dispersion in urban environments—a review. Environ Pollut 208:271–283.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2015.07.039 Google Scholar
  161. 161.
    Meroney R, Ohba R, Leitl B, Kondo H, Grawe D, Tominaga Y (2016) Review of CFD guidelines for dispersion modeling. Fluids 1:14.  https://doi.org/10.3390/fluids1020014 Google Scholar
  162. 162.
    Blocken B, Vervoort R, van Hooff T (2016) Reduction of outdoor particulate matter concentrations by local removal in semi-enclosed parking garages: a preliminary case study for Eindhoven city center. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 159:80–98.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2016.10.008 Google Scholar
  163. 163.
    Luo K, Yu HJ, Dai Z, Fang MM, Fan J (2016) CFD simulations of flow and dust dispersion in a realistic urban area. Eng Appl Comput Fluid Mech 10:229–243.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19942060.2016.1150205 Google Scholar
  164. 164.
    Evans DD, Mulholland GW, Gross D, Baum H, Saito K (1988) Burning, smoke production and smoke dispersion from oil spill combustion. In: Arctic and marine oilspill program (AMOP) technical seminar 11th Proceedings, June 7–9, 1988, Ontario, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  165. 165.
    LaBelle RP, Galt JA, Tennyson EJ, McGrattan K (1994) 1993 spill off tampa bay, a candidate for burning? In: Environment Canada. Arctic and marine oil spill program (AMOP) technical seminar, 17th proceedings. Volume 1, June 8–10, 1994, Vancouver, British Columbia, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Vancouver, Canada, pp 635–649Google Scholar
  166. 166.
    McGrattan KB, Baum HR, Rehm RG (1996) Numerical simulation of smoke plumes from large oil fires. Atmos Environ 30:4125–4136.  https://doi.org/10.1016/1352-2310(96)00151-3 Google Scholar
  167. 167.
    Trelles J, Mcgrattan K, Baum H (1999) Smoke transport by sheared winds. Combust Theory Model 3:323–341zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  168. 168.
    Yamada T (1998) Smoke plume trajectory from in-situ burning of crude oil in Tomakomai. National Research Institute of Fire and Disaster, JapanGoogle Scholar
  169. 169.
    McGrattan K, Hostikka S, McDermott R, Floyd J, Weinschenk C, Overholt K (2017) Sixth edition fire dynamics simulator technical reference guide. Volume 1: mathematical model, pp 1–147.  https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1018-1
  170. 170.
    Chang CH, Meroney RN (2003) Concentration and flow distributions in urban street canyons: wind tunnel and computational data. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 91:1141–1154.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(03)00056-4 Google Scholar
  171. 171.
    Hu LH, Fong NK, Yang LZ, Chow WK, Li YZ, Huo R (2007) Modeling fire-induced smoke spread and carbon monoxide transportation in a long channel: fire dynamics simulator comparisons with measured data. J Hazard Mater 140:293–298.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.08.075 Google Scholar
  172. 172.
    Mouilleau Y, Champassith A (2009) CFD simulations of atmospheric gas dispersion using the fire dynamics simulator (FDS). J Loss Prev Process Ind 22:316–323.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2008.11.009 Google Scholar
  173. 173.
    Moon K, Hwang J-M, Kim B-G, Lee C, Choi J (2014) Large-eddy simulation of turbulent flow and dispersion over a complex urban street canyon. Environ Fluid Mech 14:1381–1403.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10652-013-9331-2 Google Scholar
  174. 174.
    Brzozowska L (2014) Modelling the propagation of smoke from a tanker fire in a built-up area. Sci Total Environ 472:901–911.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.11.130 Google Scholar
  175. 175.
    Nozu T, Tamura T (2012) LES of turbulent wind and gas dispersion in a city. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 104–106:492–499.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2012.02.024 Google Scholar
  176. 176.
    Kashi E, Mirzaei F, Mirzaei F (2015) Analysis of gas dispersion and ventilation within a comprehensive CAD model of an offshore platform via computational fluid dynamics. J Loss Prev Process Ind 36:125–133.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2015.05.019 Google Scholar
  177. 177.
    Shiraishi Y, Kato S, Murakami S, Kim S, Ooka R (1999) Numerical analysis of thermal plume caused by large-scale fire in urban area. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 81:261–271.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6105(99)00022-7 Google Scholar
  178. 178.
    Kandola BS, Marchant EW (1980) Wind induced movement of smoke within and around buildings—a wind tunnel investigation. In: Wind engineering, Elsevier, pp 1109–1125Google Scholar
  179. 179.
    Breeze G (1996) Assessment of effluent concentrations from wind tunnel smoke studies using visual criteria. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 60:189–194.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(96)00033-5 Google Scholar
  180. 180.
    Lee B (2016) A method of smoke dispersion modeling of exhausted tunnel fire smoke in urban areas. In: Fire and evacuation modeling technical conference (FEMTC), Torremolinos, SpainGoogle Scholar
  181. 181.
    Milford A, Coles A (2017) Considerations and risk contextfor smoke dispersion from emergency ventilation systems in urban settings. In: SFPE middle east conference, Dubai, UAEGoogle Scholar
  182. 182.
    Hu LH, Huo R, Yang D (2009) Large eddy simulation of fire-induced buoyancy driven plume dispersion in an urban street canyon under perpendicular wind flow. J Hazard Mater 166:394–406.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.11.105 Google Scholar
  183. 183.
    Zhang X, Hu L, Tang F, Wang Q (2013) Large eddy simulation of fire smoke re-circulation in urban street canyons of different aspect ratios. Procedia Eng 62:1007–1014.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.08.155 Google Scholar
  184. 184.
    Pesic DJ, Blagojevic MDJ, Zivkovic NV (2014) Simulation of wind-driven dispersion of fire pollutants in a street canyon using FDS. Environ Sci Pollut Res 21:1270–1284.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-013-1999-9 Google Scholar
  185. 185.
    Pesic DJ, Zigar DN, Anghel I, Glisovic SM (2016) Large Eddy simulation of wind flow impact on fire-induced indoor and outdoor air pollution in an idealized street canyon. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 155:89–99.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2016.05.005 Google Scholar
  186. 186.
    Ai ZT, Mak CM (2017) CFD simulation of flow in a long street canyon under a perpendicular wind direction: evaluation of three computational settings. Build Environ 114:293–306.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.12.032 Google Scholar
  187. 187.
    He L, Hang J, Wang X, Lin B, Li X, Lan G (2017) Numerical investigations of flow and passive pollutant exposure in high-rise deep street canyons with various street aspect ratios and viaduct settings. Sci Total Environ 584–585:189–206.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.138 Google Scholar
  188. 188.
    Lovreglio R, Ronchi E, Maragkos G, Beji T, Merci B (2016) An integrated dynamic approach for the impact of a toxic gas dispersion hazard: coupling human behaviour and dispersion modelling. J Hazard Mater 318:758–771.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.06.015 Google Scholar
  189. 189.
    Rakai A (2015) Environmental release simulations based on the Navier–Stokes equations. In: Fire Protection Workshop CERTGoogle Scholar
  190. 190.
    Rakai A (2014) (Wind and) Smog in the city—towards operational modelling of flow and dispersion in urban areas with computational fluid dynamics (CFD). PhD Thesis, Budapest University of Technology and EconomicsGoogle Scholar
  191. 191.
    Schatzmann M, Leitl B (2011) Issues with validation of urban flow and dispersion CFD models. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 99:169–186 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2011.01.005 Google Scholar
  192. 192.
    Al-Khalidy NH (2017) Utilising a combination of computational fluid dynamics and standard air quality simulation. Int J Mech 11:210–217Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fire Research DepartmentBuilding Research Institute (ITB)WarsawPoland
  2. 2.Faculty of Civil Engineering and ArchitectureLublin University of TechnologyLublinPoland

Personalised recommendations