Simulation and Assessment of Fire Evacuation Modes for Long Underwater Vehicle Tunnels

  • Yong Xu
  • Shaoming LiaoEmail author
  • Mengbo Liu


The objective of this study is to propose a new method to evaluate the performance of different evacuation modes, and to find a rational evacuation mode for long underwater vehicle tunnels. In this study, a combined evacuation model (TPES) incorporating both a traffic flow module and a crowd evacuation module is proposed to simulate the integrated crowd evacuation with the effects of traffic flow, and the model is partially validated by a field evacuation test and a verified model Simulex. A vehicle tunnel was modeled to simulate fire-related traffic congestion and passenger evacuation, and then the evacuation performance index Im of three evacuation modes in different fire situations were calculated. The results revealed that the hybrid evacuation mode performs best among the three modes, with Im superior to other two modes by up to 26%. The transversal evacuation passage mode performs better than the longitudinal mode under the same conditions. However, the transversal and longitudinal modes can be equivalent when the passage spacing difference is within a range of 150–200 m. The critical spacing of the evacuation passage in a simple evacuation process lies in between 100 m and 350 m at confidence level of 90% for the transversal evacuation mode.


Underwater vehicle tunnel Evacuation passage mode Stochastic simulation Critical spacing 



The financial support from the National Basic Research Program Project (No. 2015CB057806) and Research Projects (Nos. 16DZ1200202, 17DZ1203804) from Shanghai Committee of Science and Technology are gratefully appreciated.


  1. 1.
    Zhao JW, Peng FL, Wang TQ, Zhang XY, Jiang BN (2016) Advances in master planning of urban underground space (UUS) in China. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 55:290–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Peng J, Peng FL (2018) A GIS-based evaluation method of underground space resources for urban spatial planning: part 1 methodology. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 74:82–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Peng J, Peng FL (2018) A GIS-based evaluation method of underground space resources for urban spatial planning: part 2 application. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 77:142–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yao C-P (2008) Risk-based design research of escape channels in Shanghai Yangtze River Tunnel. Doctoral dissertation, Tongji University, ShanghaiGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shanghai Construction and Communications Commission (2008) Road Tunnel Design Code. 2008-07-01Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yamada N, Ota Y (1999) Safety systems for the Trans-Tokyo Bay Highway tunnel project. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 14(1):3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gwynne S, Galea ER, Owen M, Lawrence PJ, Filippidis L (1999) A review of the methodologies used in evacuation modelling. Fire Mater 23(6):383–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yang GS, Peng LM, Zhang JH, An YL (2006) Simulation of people’s evacuation in tunnel fire. J Cent South Univ Technol 13(3):307–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ronchi E, Colonna P, Capote J, Alvear D, Berloco N, Cuesta A (2012) The evaluation of different evacuation models for assessing road tunnel safety analysis. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 30:74–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Caliendo C, Ciambelli P, De Guglielmo ML, Meo MG, Russo P (2012) Simulation of people evacuation in the event of a road tunnel fire. Proc Soc Behav Sci 53:178–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Valasek L, Glasa J (2013) Simulation of the course of evacuation in tunnel fire conditions by FDS + Evac. In: Proceedings of the 2013 international conference on applied mathematics and computational methods in engineering, pp 288–295Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Boer LC (2002). Behaviour by motorists on evacuation of a tunnel. Rapport TNO Human FactorsGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Norén A, Winér J (2003) Modelling crowd evacuation from road and train tunnels-data and design for faster evacuations. LUTVDG/TVBB–5127–SEGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zhang Y-C, Xiang Y, He C, et al (2016) Experimental study on pedestrian behavior and traffic capacity of cross passage in highway tunnel. J Southwest Jiaotiong Univ 4:615–620Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Papageorgiou M, Schmidt G (1984) Freeway traffic modelling and control. In: Control in transportation systems, pp 195–202Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yu L, Shi Z K (2007) Density waves in traffic flow model with relative velocity. Eur Phys J B 57(1):115–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Canter D, Breaux J, Sime J (1980) Domestic, multiple occupancy and hospital fires. In: Canter D (ed) Fires and Human Behaviour, chap 8. John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp 117–136Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sime JD (1985) Movement toward the familiar: person and place affiliation in a fire entrapment setting. Environ Behav 17(6):697–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nilsson D, Johansson A (2009) Social influence during the initial phase of a fire evacuation—analysis of evacuation experiments in a cinema theatre. Fire Saf J 44(1):71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fridolf K, Nilsson D, Frantzich H (2013) Fire evacuation in underground transportation systems: a review of accidents and empirical research. Fire Technol 49(2):451–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gehandler J (2015) Road tunnel fire safety and risk: a review. Fire Sci Rev 4(1):2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Burstedde C, Klauck K, Schadschneider A, & Zittartz J (2001) Simulation of pedestrian dynamics using a two-dimensional cellular automaton. Phys A Stat Mech Appl 295(3):507–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Varas A, Cornejo MD, Mainemer D, Toledo B, Rogan J, Munoz V, Valdivia JA (2007) Cellular automaton model for evacuation process with obstacles. Phys A Stat Mech Appl 382(2):631–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ezaki T, Yanagisawa D, Ohtsuka K, Nishinari K (2012) Simulation of space acquisition process of pedestrians using proxemic floor field model. Phys A Stat Mech Appl 391(1):291–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wolfram S (2002) A new kind of science, vol 5. Wolfram Media, ChampaignzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nagel K, Schreckenberg M (1992) A cellular automaton model for freeway traffic. J Phys I 2(12):2221–2229Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nagel K, Paczuski M (1995) Emergent traffic jams. Phys Rev E 51(4): 2909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Takayasu M, Takayasu H (1993) 1/f noise in a traffic model. Fractals 1(04):860–866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Benjamin SC, Johnson NF, Hui PM (1996) Cellular automata models of traffic flow along a highway containing a junction. J Phys A Math Gen 29(12):3119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Helbing D, Molnar P (1995) Social force model for pedestrian dynamics. Phys Rev E 51(5):4282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Helbing D, Molnar P (1998) Self-organization phenomena in pedestrian crowds. arXiv preprint arXiv:cond-mat/9806152
  32. 32.
    Helbing D, Johansson A (2009) Pedestrian, crowd and evacuation dynamics. In: Meyers RA (ed) Encyclopedia of complexity and systems science. Springer, New York, pp 6476–6495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kuligowski ED, Peacock RD, Hoskins BL (2005) A review of building evacuation models. US Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology, GaithersburgCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ronchi E, Kuligowski ED, Reneke PA, Peacock RD, Nilsson D (2013) The process of verification and validation of building fire evacuation models. US Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology, GaithersburgCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Guide, S. U. 6.0 (2012) Integrated environmental solutions limitedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Li W-P, Xu Y, Liao S-M (2012) Discussion and modification of RSET calculation method in road tunnel fire. China Saf Sci J 22(9):43–50Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Xiang Y, Cao Y-L, Chen S-M, et al (2015) Research on the equivalent spacing for horizontal and vertical evacuation channel of underwater road tunnel. In: Proceedings of the 2015 international symposium on fire engineering technology. Science and Technology Information Bureau of Ministry of Public SecurityGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cao Y-L (2016) Research on experiment for vertical evacuation of underwater highway tunnel with large cross-section. Master’s thesis, Southwest Jiao Tong UniversityGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zhang X, Xu Z-S, Ni T-X, et al (2011) Research on evacuation mode of underwater highway tunnel during fire. In: Proceedings of 2011 annual meeting of science and technology of China Fire Protection AssociationGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Xu Y, Liao S-M, Li W-P, et al (2012) Risk assessment on escape distance in road tunnel fire. China Civ Eng J 45(12):155–161Google Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Geotechnical EngineeringTongji UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Changzhou Institute of Engineering TechnologyChangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations