Fourth International Symposium on Tunnel Safety and Security, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, March 17-19, 2010

Optimization of Smoke Management System in Short

Transportation Tunnels
Michael Belinsky, Dmitry Dveyrin and David Katoshevski*
Israel Railways Ltd.
*Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheba, ISRAEL

ABSTRACT
Efficiency of smoke management system in short (up to 300 m) tunnels was evaluated by CFD
simulation of typical two-way railway tunnel using FDS5 software developed by NIST, USA. In the
framework of the present study we identified the worst-case scenario for fire accident in short tunnel;
determined HRR curve development versus time; designated parameters for fire simulation depending
on flammable materials; provided sensitivity analysis of a numerical solution optimizing the mesh size
close to the fire source and in the other areas of researched tunnel; proposed different alternative smoke
evacuation methods as follows: (1) natural, (2) non-mechanical with chimneys (cut-and-cover tunnels
only), (3) non-mechanical with improved portals geometry, (4) non-mechanical with division of the
tunnel volume by top and bottom spaces, and (5) mechanical using jet fans; optimized and performed
feasibility study for each of these methods. Our analysis demonstrates that non-mechanical ventilation
with chimneys would be the most cost-effective, while the best smoke management may be achieved
by tunnel space division. Improving portal geometry allows significant increase of the time period
satisfying appropriate standards tenable criteria requirements.
KEYWORDS: short tunnels, tunnel fires, railway tunnels, smoke management, smoke evacuation
GENERAL
Construction of underground structures in the world is rapidly increasing. While there're significant
advantages of saving space and lack of direct impact on the environment, transport moving in tunnels
is exposed to higher risk in the case of accident inside the tunnel. Majority of transportation tunnels
dont exceed 300 m in length short tunnels.
The present study is focused on short railway transportation tunnels. Railway tunnels have lower
probability of fire incident than automotive tunnels; however the consequences of such an incident
would be rather severe due to large number of people potentially exposed to fire hazard. For 60-300 m
long tunnels relevant standards [1] require engineering analysis to be performed in order to estimate
whether non-mechanical (natural) ventilation is sufficient to provide tenable criteria for self evacuation
of passengers and train crew and if not, to evaluate efficiency of proposed mechanical ventilation
system.
In the view of growing number of short tunnels it is extremely useful having a number of pre-modelled
cases for different length, inclination and cross-section tunnels exposed to various weather conditions
in terms of wind velocity, temperature and humidity, for different kinds of vehicles allowed to enter the
tunnel. This should allow the railway companies to develop internal standards and requirements for
short tunnels and significantly decrease engineering and supervision expenses. The present research
represents a first step in the development of such a systematic approach and provides better
understanding of the risk associated with fire hazard in short tunnels and of different methods for its
mitigation.
Fire Dynamic Simulator (FDS 5) CFD model of fire-driven fluid flow developed by NIST, USA has
been used for the performance of this study.

545

Fourth International Symposium on Tunnel Safety and Security, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, March 17-19, 2010

SIMULATIONS SETUP AND DESCRIPTION

For preliminary evaluation of smoke movement in short tunnels we considered a simple rectangular
cross-section horizontal (not inclined) tunnel with length of 300 m. Cross-sectional size of the model
was considered based on typical design for two-way railway tunnels: width 12 m and height 8 m
including evacuation paths of 1.1 m width from both sides. The model is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1

Tunnel geometry model.

The model parameters were considered based on following assumptions: (1) no wind conditions; (2)
temperature 20 OC; (3) humidity 40 %; (4) soot yield value of 0.1 corresponding to soot yield of
polyurethane foams [2]; (5) CO yield of 0.1; (6) fire detection system reaction time 300 sec (for the
purpose of initiation of mechanical ventilation system) [3]; (7) diesel locomotive operated train is
subject to fire.
Fire scenario considered for CFD simulations would be the fire originated in locomotive and further
expanded to nearby car within 5 minutes [4]. We assume fast growing heat release rate (HRR), which
increases proportionally to the time square to maximum of 30 MW HRR for locomotive and medium
growing HRR to maximum of 24 MW for passenger wagon. Thus, total heat release rate reaches 54
MW within 15 minutes after the fire event start as it is presented in Figure 2.

Figure 2

HRR development.

Sensitivity study performed for different combinations of computational cells size demonstrate that
special attention should be paid for the fire origin area and for portals zone where fine grid is required
for reliable numerical solution. Based on the sensitivity study results we consider square grid of
10x10x10 cm in these areas while in the rest of model we use square grid of 20x20x20 cm. It should
be mentioned that use of rectangular grid has negative impact on the numerical solution.
We have performed a set of numerical simulations for different methods of smoke management: (1)
natural ventilation through the tunnel portals; (2) non-mechanical ventilation with 4x4 m cross-section
546

Fourth International Symposium on Tunnel Safety and Security, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, March 17-19, 2010

chimneys installed each 60 m along the tunnel; (3) non-mechanical ventilation with addition of
separated upper volume with height of 3 m on the top of the tunnel connected to the tunnel by 12x25 m
normally closed vents equipped by automatic damper system, which open above the fire origin
following the fire detection system signal; (4) mechanical ventilation using jet fans installed each 100
m along the tunnel. We have also checked the influence of the portals geometry on the natural
ventilation performance.
Simulation results have been further analyzed from the cost-performance point of view.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Smoke layer development for the case of tunnel natural ventilation is presented in Figure 3.

Figure 3

Smoke movement development natural ventilation.

It is clearly indicated that for the given tunnel geometry and chosen fire scenario, natural ventilation
would not be sufficient to provide tenable condition for successful people evacuation. Additional
simulations with hydraulically improved portal geometry demonstrate that the evacuation time period
may be increased by at least 200 sec. Nonetheless it would not be sufficient for the given tunnel such a
solution might be useful for shorter tunnels under different conditions.
Figure 4 represent numerical results for smoke movement for the case of ventilation through chimneys.

Figure 4

Smoke movement development non-mechanical ventilation with chimneys.

The smoke is efficiently removed from the tunnel through number of chimneys, however the
contaminated area is quite big compared to the tunnel size. The cost of such a construction become
negligible for cut-and-cover tunnels.
Results for the smoke management system based on the tunnel volume division are shown in Figure 5.
547

Fourth International Symposium on Tunnel Safety and Security, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, March 17-19, 2010

Figure 5

Smoke movement development non-mechanical ventilation with tunnel volume division.

This method demonstrates perfect smoke evacuation capacity and comparatively small area occupied
by smoke during the fire event. However this is costly solution not always applicable due to space
requirements.
Smoke evacuation using automatically initiated jet fans presented in Figure 6 seems not to be efficient
for short tunnels under simulation conditions. Failure of this classic method may be explained by long
time required for the ventilation system initiation compared to the smoke generation rate.

Figure 6

Smoke movement development mechanical ventilation using jet fans.

CONCLUSIONS
1. Natural ventilation may not be sufficient for short tunnels to comply with the standards
requirements.
2. Changing portals geometry increases efficiency of the natural tunnel ventilation.
3. Smoke removal through regularly installed chimneys represents the most cost-effective ventilation
method for cut-and cover tunnels.
4. The most efficient smoke evacuation may be achieved dividing the tunnel space by two volumes.
5. Jet fans installation in short tunnels may be insufficient to maintain tenable conditions during the
people evacuation period.
REFERENCE LIST
1.
2.
3.
4.

548

NFPA 130
SFPE Handbook Fire Protection Engineering, 2003
ITC Conference Basel 2-4 December 2002, Tests on Fire Detection and Sprinkler, Ir. J.W.
Huijben Bouwdienst Rijkswaterstaat Centre for Tunnel safety
Train fires Special Topic Report, 2001, Controller, Safety Strategy & Risk Railway Safety
Evergreen House