Wood crib fires are a significant concern for fire safety, as they involve complex combustion and smoke dispersion behaviours that pose challenges for both prevention and control. This study investigated the combustion characteristics and smoke dispersion of wood crib fires, focusing on the role of mechanical smoke exhaust and sprinkler systems in fire safety management. The results showed that mechanical smoke exhaust increased the pyrolysis rate of the wood crib, with flame height rising by approximately 8.3% compared to natural combustion. The smoke layer height was effectively controlled by the mechanical exhaust, stabilizing at approximately 2.5 m when the system was activated. When the sprinkler system was turned on, flame height and combustion intensity were suppressed. The maximum flame height was reduced to 50% of that observed during natural combustion. Smoke temperature distribution along the height direction decreased linearly. A height of 1.0 m was reached by the smoke layer, which had decreased significantly. When both systems were used together, flame height and temperature were reduced by 15.8% and 53.7%, respectively, compared to natural combustion. The smoke layer reached a height of 1.5 m. These findings offer insights and guidance for optimizing fire prevention and control in wood crib fires.
KimT. Modeling of wood crib fires using a detailed pyrolysis model. Therm Sci Eng Prog2024; 47: 102339.
4.
HuHWQiZYShiJJLiHJiJ. Experimental and numerical investigations on fire development in a timber-based compartment with identification of characteristic events. J Build Eng2024; 87: 109033.
5.
ZhaiCJGongJHZhouXDPengFYangLZ. Pyrolysis and spontaneous ignition of wood under time-dependent heat flux. J Anal Appl Pyrol2017; 125: 100–108.
6.
XuQGriffinGJJiangYPrestonCBicknellADBradburyGPWhiteN. Study of burning behavior of small scale wood crib with cone calorimeter. J Therm Anal Calorim2008; 91: 787–790.
7.
McAllisterSFinneyM. The effect of wind on burning rate of wood cribs. Fire Technol2016; 52: 1035–1050.
8.
XiYHDongXChowWK. Numerical simulation on temperature in wood crib fires. Thermal Science2021; 25: 2621–2636.
9.
ZhangSGNiXMZhaoMZhangRFZhangHP. Experimental study on the characteristics of wood crib fire in a confined space with different ventilation conditions. J Therm Anal Calorim2015; 120: 1383–1391.
10.
KebriyaeeSAMoghimanMNiazmandH. Empirical study on the influence of initial relative humidity on wood crib fire behavior in compartment under varied natural ventilation conditions. Fire Saf J2024; 148: 104229.
11.
LiZHHeYPZhangHWangJ. Combustion characteristics of n-heptane and wood crib fires at different altitudes. Proc Combust Inst2009; 32: 2481–2488.
12.
ZhangXCChenLJLyuBTangHWXuPLinJYZhangZYRenF. An experimental study on the evolution of flame height and extension length in tunnel fires with arched ceiling confined condition. Tunn Undergr Space Technol2024; 150: 105809.
13.
FuMQLiuRZhangY. Why do people make risky decisions during a fire evacuation? Study on the effect of smoke level, individual risk preference, and neighbor behavior. Saf. Sci2021; 140: 105245.
14.
LiangYChenYJBuRWLuoCZhouY. Visualization study on the effect of ambient wind on smoke layer height in chamber fires under natural smoke exhaust condition. J Wind Eng Ind Aerod2021; 208: 104458.
15.
ForrestBDiPaolaAIbrahimliVLakhaniAWeckmanE. Towards characterizing full-scale furniture fires in a two-storey house: gaseous species concentrations during a ventilation-limited fire. Fire Saf J2023; 141: 103963.
16.
MustafaBGZahariRZengYFMat KiahMHAndrewsGEPhylaktouHN. Pine Wood Crib Fires: Toxic Gas Emissions Using a 5m3 Compartment Fire. In: Makovicka OsvaldovaLMarkertFZelinkaS (eds) Wood & Fire Safety. WFS 2020. Cham: Springer, 2020, pp.137–143.
17.
ReinG. Smoldering combustion, SFPE Handb. Fire Prot, Eng.New York, NY: Springer, 2016, pp.581–603.
18.
LiJXLiYFLiJMLiXJHuangYB. Study on smoke control under mechanical exhaust strategy in a cross-type interchange subway station. Tunn Undergr Space Technol2021; 112: 103897.
19.
GaoZHCaiJJWangPLiuMGLiLJ. Smoke exhaust characteristics under stack effect of natural ventilation by shaft in high-altitude tunnel. Therm Sci Eng Prog2024; 48: 102397.
20.
LiuYLYangDGuoX. Theoretical model for predicting smoke back-layering length downstream of centralised ceiling exhaust vent in tunnel fires. Tunn Undergr Space Technol2023; 137: 105134.
21.
LiQLiSCWangZH. Research on smoke exhaust effect at different installation height of mechanical exhaust port in ring corridor of high-rise building. Procedia Eng2016; 135: 327–335.
22.
LiuYLYangD. Experimental study on synergistic effect of exhaust vent layout and exhaust rate on performance of ceiling central smoke extraction in road tunnel fires. Int J Therm Sci2023; 183: 107886.
23.
HuangLMaJYLiAGWuYQ. Scale modeling experiments of fire-induced smoke and extraction via mechanical ventilation in an underground hydropower plant. Sustain Cities Soc2019; 44: 536–549.
24.
TaoLLZengYHLiJYangGCFangYBJL. Study on the maximum temperature and temperature decay in single-side centralized smoke exhaust tunnel fires. Int J Therm Sci2022; 172: 107277.
25.
HimotoKSawadaYOhmiyaY. Quantifying fire resilience of buildings considering the impact of water damage accompanied by fire extinguishment. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2024; 243: 109858.
26.
AlimzhanovaMSpearpointMJomaasG. Fire safety assessment of sprinkler systems for car parks using the J-value methodology. Fire Saf J2022; 129: 103565.
27.
ChiuCKChuahYKShihYC. Visually activated sprinklers applied in atria to mitigate the interaction of water spray with the smoke layer. Case Stud Therm Eng2023; 51: 103517.
28.
BøeASHoxKMikalsenRFFriquinKL. Large-scale fire experiments in a cross-laminated timber compartment with an adjacent corridor – partly and fully protected with a water sprinkler system. Fire Saf J2024; 148: 104212.
29.
FrangiAFontanaM. Fire performance of timber structures under natural fire conditions. Fire Safety Science2005; 8: 279–290.
30.
LaiCMSuHCTsaiMJChenCJTzengCTLinTH. Influence of fire source locations on the actuation of wet-type sprinklers in an office fire. Build Environ2010; 45: 107–114.
31.
NoakiMDelichatsiosMAYamaguchiJOhmiyaY. Heat release rate of wooden cribs with water application for fire suppression. Fire Saf J2018; 95: 170–179.
32.
LiYZIngasonH. Model scale tunnel fire tests with automatic sprinkler. Fire Saf J2013; 61: 298–313.
33.
LiKYHuoRJiJRenBB. Experimental investigation on drag effect of sprinkler spray to adjacent horizontal natural smoke venting. J Hazard Mater2010; 174: 512–521.
34.
SunNNWangLMXuH. Study on mutual influence of water spray and natural smoke exhaust system in single chamber fire based on FDS simulation. AIP Conf Proc2018; 2036: 020002.
35.
GB51251-2017. Technical Standard for Smoke Management Systems in Buildings. The Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China (SAC), Beijing, 2017.
36.
GB 50084 - 2017. Code for design of sprinkler systems. Beijing: China Planning Press, 2017.
37.
NFPA92-2018. Standard for Smoke Control Systems. Technical Committee on Smoke Management System, The National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, Massachusetts, 2018.
38.
MoffatRJ. Describing the uncertainties in experimental results. Exp Therm Fluid Sci1988; 1: 3–17.
39.
ManzelloSLSuzukiSGollnerMJFernandez-PelloAC. Role of firebrand combustion in large outdoor fire spread. Prog Energy Combust Sci2020; 76: 100801.
40.
Fernandez-PelloAC. Wildland fire spot ignition by sparks and firebrands. Fire Saf J2017; 91: 2–10.
41.
LiuCXZhuGQYanBRHouGYAnC. Analysis of combustion characteristics of wood stack and absolute ethanol in fire extinguishing experiment. Case Stud Therm Eng2023; 52: 103608.
42.
YangLZGuoZFZhouYPFanWC. The influence of different external heating ways on pyrolysis and spontaneous ignition of some woods. J Anal Appl Pyrol2007; 78: 40–45.
43.
CrielaardRKuilenJWTerwelKRavenshorstGSteenbakkersP. Self-extinguishment of cross-laminated timber. Fire Saf J2019; 105: 244–260.
44.
YangLZChenXJZhouXDWangQAFanWC. Modeling pyrolysis of charring material in fire. Chin Sci Bull2002; 47: 425–429.
45.
RichterFJervisFXHuangXYReinG. Effect of oxygen on the burning rate of wood. Combust Flame2021; 234: 111591.
46.
Rinta-paavolaASukhomlinovDHostikkaS. Modelling charring and burning of Spruce and pine woods during pyrolysis, smoldering and flaming. Fire Technol2023; 59: 2751–2786.
47.
YangDHuLHHuoRJiangYQLiuSTangF. Experimental study on buoyant flow stratification induced by a fire in a horizontal channel. Appl Therm Eng2010; 30: 872–878.
48.
BuRWFanCGGuoZWZhouY. Energy distribution analysis on suppressing a shielded fire with water mist in a tunnel rescue station. Process Saf Environ Prot2022; 158: 409–417.
49.
ZhangPHTangXTianXLLiuCZhongMH. Experimental study on the interaction between fire and water mist in long and narrow spaces. Appl Therm Eng2016; 94: 706–714.
50.
MalukCLinnanBWongAHidalgoJPToreroJLAbecassis-EmpisCCowlardA. Energy distribution analysis in full-scale open floor plan enclosure fires. Fire Saf J2017; 91: 422–431.
51.
BullenML. The effect of a sprinkler on the stability of a smoke layer beneath a ceiling. Fire Technol1977; 13: 21–34.
52.
LiKYHuLHHuoRLiYZChenZBLiSCSunXQ. A mathematical model on interaction of smoke layer with sprinkler spray. Fire Saf J2009; 44: 96–105.
53.
TangZVierendeelsJFangZMerciB. Description and application of an analytical model to quantify downward smoke displacement caused by a water spray. Fire Saf J2013; 55: 50–60.
54.
GaoZHJiJFanCGLiLJSunJH. Determination of smoke layer interface height of medium scale tunnel fire scenarios. Tunn Undergr Space Technol2016; 56: 118–124.
55.
CooperLYHarkleroadMQuintiereJRinkinenW. An experimental study of upper hot layer stratification in full-scale multi-room fire scenarios. J Heat Transfer1982; 104: 741–749.
56.
RichardDPVytenisB. Analysis of large-scale fire test date. Fire Saf J1991; 17(5): 387–414.
57.
LeiWJZhangZZZhengZJTaiCMZhangLHZhaoSZ. Scaled experiment and numerical study on the effect of a novel makeup air system on smoke control in atrium fires. J Build Eng2024; 95: 110237.
