下载文档原格式
上消所消防机器人研究团队佚名【期刊名称】《机器人技术与应用》【年(卷),期】2014(000)003【总页数】2页(P38-39)【正文语种】中文一、公安部上海消防研究所公安部上海消防研究所（简称“上消所”）成立于1965年，是公安部直属的技术警察单位，国家级社会公益型科研机构。
公安部上海消防研究所(金山基地效果图)上消所主要从事消防基础理论与管理、消防装备与技术、灾害事故预防与控制技术、消防执勤训练技术、火灾物证鉴定技术、产品检验装置与技术和工程消防技术的研究工作，是国际标准化组织ISO/TC21/SC2和ISO/TC21/SC14的国内技术归口单位，也是“国家级汽车新产品定型鉴定试验和汽车产品质量监督检验机构”、“国家级科技成果检测鉴定检验机构”等组织的挂靠和依托单位。
2013年，依托公安部上海消防研究所成立了消防应急救援装备公安部重点实验室。
截至2012年底，上消所共完成科研项目660项、标准规范300余项；获得专利150余项。
其中，有270余项成果分别获国家、部（省）、局级的科学技术奖，包括：国家发明及科技进步奖14项，（省）部级科技进步奖260项。
二、消防机器人研究团队1995年，上消所成立消防机器人研究团队，并研制成功了我国第一台消防机器人，从而开始进入消防机器人研究领域。
经过近20年的发展，机器人团队取得了一系列的研究成果，多项成果成功实现产业化，配备到消防部队投入实战应用。
消防机器人应用技术研究成果和产业化推广，显著提高了我国消防部队灭火救援的实战能力和技术水平；带动了国内众多企业、院校和科研单位共同参与消防机器人的研究和开发，促进了机器人领域的技术发展。
同时，研究成果也直接推动了GA892.1-2010《消防机器人第1部分：通用技术条件》、GA892.2《消防机器人第2部分：灭火机器人》（报批）、GA892.3《消防机器人第1部分：排烟机器人》（报批）、建标152-2011《城市消防站建设标准》、GA622-2013《特勤消防队（站）装备配备标准》、GB19156《消防炮通用技术条件》（报批）、GB19157《远控消防炮系统通用技术条件》（报批）等7项国家/行业标准规范的制、修订。
外文文献原稿和译文原稿Multiple single-chip microcomputer approach tofire detection and monitoring systemA.J. AI-Khalili, MSc, PhDD. AI-Khalili, MSc, PhDM.S. Khassem, MScIndexing term : Hazards, Design, Plant condition monitoringAbstract: A complete system for fire detection and alarm monitoring has been proposed for complex plants. The system uses multiple single chip architecture attached to a party line. The control algorithm is based on a two-level hierarchy of decision making, thus the complexity is distributed. A complete circuit diagram is given for the local and the central station with requirements for the software structure. The design is kept in general form such that it can be adapted to a multitude of plant configurations. It is particularly shown how new developments in technology, especially CMOS single chip devices, are incorporated in the system design to reduce the complexity of the overall hardware, e.g. by decomposing the system such that lower levels of hierarchy are able to have some autonomy in decision making, and thus a more complex decision is solved in a simple distributed method.1 Detection and alarm devicesA basic fire detection system consists of two parts, detection and annunciation. An automatic detection device, such as a heat, smoke or flame detector, ultraviolet or infrared detectors or flame flicker, is based on detectingthe byproduct of a combustion. Smoke detectors, of both ionization and optical types, are the most commonly useddetector devices. When a typical detector of this type enters the alarm state its current consumption increasesfrom the pA to the mA range (say, from a mere 15pA in the dormant mode to 60 mA) in the active mode. Inmany detectors the detector output voltage is well defined under various operating conditions, such as thosegiven in Table 1. The more sensitive thedetector, the more susceptible it is to false alarms.In order to control the detector precisely, either of the following methods is used: a coincidence technique can be built into the detector, or a filtering technique such that a logic circuit becomes active only if x alarms are detected within a time period T. The detection technique depends greatly on the location and plant being protected; smoke detectors are used for sleeping areas, infrared or ultraviolet radiation are used when flammable liquids are being handled, heat detectors are used for fire suppression or extinguishing systems. In general, life and property protection have different approaches.Alarm devices, apart from the usual audible or visible alarms, may incorporate solid state sound reproduction and emergency voice communication or printers that record time, date, location and other information required by the standard code of practice for fire protection for complex plants. Heaviside [4] has an excellentreview of all types of detectors and extinguisher systems.1.1 Control philosophy and division of labourOur control philosophy is implemented hierarchically. Three levels of system hierarchy are implemented, with two levels of decision making. There is no communication between equipment on the same level. Interaction between levels occurs by upwards transfer of information regarding the status of the subsystems and downwards transfer of commands. This is shown in Fig. 1 where at level 1 is the central station microcomputer and is the ultimate decision maker (when not in manual mode). At level 2 are the local controllers, which reside in the local stations. At level 3 are the actual detectors and actuators.A manual mode of operation is provided at all levels.Information regarding the status of all detectors is transmitted on a per area basis to the local controllers. Their information is condensed and transmitted upward to the central microcomputer. Transfer of status is always unidirectional and upwards. Transfer of commands is always unidirectional and downwards, with expansion at the local control level. This approach preserves the strict rules of the hierarchy for exact monitoring detection and alarm systems associated with high risk plants.classification of the two layers of controls is based upon layers of decision making, with respect to the facts that(a) When the decision time comes, the making and implementation of a decision cannot be postponed(b) The decisions have uncertainty(c) It will isolate local decisions (e.g. locally we might have an alarm although there may be a fault with the system)2 General hardwareI :Fig. 2 depicts our design in the simplest of forms. The system uses an open party line approach with four conductor cables going in a loop shared by all the remote devices and the control panel. This approach is simple in concept and is economically feasible. However, one major disadvantage is the dependency on a single cable for power and signaling. In cases where reliability is of extreme importance,two or even three cables taking differentroutes throughout the system may be connected in parallel. Fig. 3 gives the driver circuitry required to derive an expandable bus. This design takes advantage of recent advances in the single chip microcomputer technology to reduce the interface between the central station and the local stations.2. 1CentralcontroltaskAcentral unit provides acentralized point tomonitor and controlthe system activities. In the system to be described the central control unit serves a fivefold purpose.(i) It receives information from the local stations and operates the alarms and other output devices.(ii) It notifies the operator in case of system malfunction.(iii) It provides an overall system control manual and automatic.(iu) It provides a system test point of local stations and itself.(u) It provides a central point for observation, learning and adaptation.2.2 Local stationsThe local stations can take local decisions regarding recognition of a risk situation, and act independently on local affairs. In this technique we depend on ‘load-type coordination’, e.g. the lower level units recognize the existence of other decision units on the same level; the central or the top level provides the lower units with a model of the relationship between its action and the response of the system.It is evident that a powerful machine is required at this stage so that all the required functions can be implemented. The availability of the new generation of microchips makes this architecture a feasible solution.A single chip microcomputer was chosen over discrete digital and analogue devices to interface to the field devices and to the central microcomputer. This is the main reason that previously this approach was not feasible.In selecting the microcomputer for the local stations, the criterion was the requirement for a chip which contains the most integration of the analogue and digital ports required for the interface and the utilization of CMOS technology owing to remoteness of the local stations. The choice was the Motorola 68HC11A4, for the following reasons:(a) It is CMOS technology; this reduces power consumption.(b) It has a UART on board; this facilitates serial communication.(e) It has an a/d converter on board; this eliminates an external A/D.(d) It has 4K of ROM, 256 bytes of RAM, 512 bytes of EERROM with 40 1/0 lines and a 16 bit timer; this satisfied all our memory and 1/0 requirements at the local station side.3 System implementationThe local station: Fig. 3 is the block diagram of the circuit used to utilize the MC68HCllA4 as a remote fire detecting circuit while Fig. 4 illustrates the same circuit in an expanded form. It can be seen that the single microcontroller can be used to monitor more than one detector, thus reducing system cost.The loop power supply, which is usually between 28 and 26 V, is further regulated by a 5 V 100 mA monolithic low power voltage regulator to supply power to the microcontroller. The onboard oscillator,coupled with anexternal crystalof 2.4576 MHz,supplies themicrocontrollerwith its timingsignal which isdividedinternally by fourto yield a processor frequency of 614.4 kHz, which is an even multiple of the RS 232 [7] baud rate generator. In this Section the term ‘supervised input or output’ will be used to mean that the function in question is monitored for open- and short-circuit conditions in addition to its other normal functions. More information can be found in Reference 9.4 Main loop5 ConclusionThis paper describes the development of a large scale fire detection and alarm system using multi-single chip microcomputers. The architecture used is a two-level hierarchy of decision making. This architecture is made possible by the new CMOS microcontrollers which represent a high packing density at a low power consumption yet are powerful in data processing and thus in decision making. Each local station could make an autonomous decision if the higher level of hierarchy allows it to do so. It has been tried to keep the system design in general format so it can be adapted to varying situations. A prototype of the described system has been built and tested [10]. The control part of the central station is implemented with a development card based on MC 68000 microprocessor (MEX 68KECB, by Motorola), which has a built-in monitor called Tutor. The application programs were developed using the features provided by this monitor. The local stations’ controllers were designed using the MC 68705R3, single-chip microcontroller.7 References1 ‘Fire protection guidelines for nuclear power plants’, US NRC Regulatory Guide 1.1202 BAGCHI, C.N.: ‘A multi-level distributed microprocessor system for a nuclear power plant fire protection system controls, monitoring, and communication’, IEEE Trans., 19823 PUCILL, P.M.: ‘Fire hazard protection, detection and monitoring systems’, Sea. Con, 2,Proceedings of Symposium on ADV in offshore and terminal measurement and control systems, Brighton, England, March 1979, pp. 353-3634 HEAVISID, L.: ‘Offshore fire and explosion detection and fixed fire’. Offshore Technological Conference, 12th Annual Proceedings, Houston, Texas, May 1980, pp. 509-5225 CELLENTANI, E.N., and HUMPHREY, W.Y.: ‘Coordinated detect ion/communication approach to fire protection’, Specify: Eng.,6 ‘Motorola Microprocessors Data Manual’ (Motorola Semiconductor Products, Austin, Texas, USA)7 Electronic Industries Association : ‘Interface between data terminal equipment and data communic ation equipment employing serial binary data interchange’ (EIA Standard RS-232, Washington, DC, 1969)8 MESAROVIC, M.D., MACKO, D., TAKAHARA, Y.: ‘Theory of hierarchical multilevel systems’ (Academic Press, 1970)9 KASSEM, M.: ‘Fire alarm systems’, MSc. th esis, Dept. of Elec. & Comp. Eng., Concordia University, Montreal, Canada, 198510 LIE, P., and KOTAMARTI, U.: ‘The design of a fire alarm system using microprocessors’, C481 Project, Dept. of Elec. and Comp. Eng., Concordia University, Montreal, Canada, 1986译文基于单片机的火灾探测和监控系统A.J. AI-Khalili, MSc, PhDD. AI-Khalili, MSc, PhDM.S. Khassem, MSc关键词：危险，设计，设备状态监测摘要：火灾探测及报警监控已成为一个复杂而完整的体系。
Available online at The 5th Conference on Performance-based Fire and Fire Protection EngineeringChallenges of Fire Fighting in Fire Engineered Built EnvironmentY C Wang a,∗, J Marsden b , M Kelly caUniversity of Manchester, UK b Formerly Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service, UKc Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service, UK AbstractPerformance based fire engineering design, as opposed to the traditional approach of satisfying highly prescriptive rules, is increasingly being taken up by clients and their professional advisers, including architects and engineers, because the performance based design approach can be used to offer a more attractive design through cost saving and greater design flexibility. However, fire engineering solutions make different assumptions on fire services intervention and are based on a number of engineering and management assumptions. These assumptions have implications on activities of the fire authority, in particular, fire fighting activities and these should, at the design stage, be addressed by the fire engineering design team. It is also important that the fire authority works closely with the fire engineering design team so that the fire engineering assumptions are not invalidated by fire service intervention. This paper identifies a number of challenges facing both the fire engineering design team and the fire authority and discusses how some of the challenges may be tackled.© 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Keywords: fire engineering; fire fighting; roles of fire authority; fire strategy1.IntroductionAchieving fire safety in the built environment requires contributions from a number of organisations. During the design stage, professional designers such as architects and engineers, in consultation with the fire authority (FA), develop a fire strategy to satisfy the regulatory and business requirements of fire safety. During the operation stage, the building should be maintained and operated by the owner in accordance with the fire safety strategy, audited by the FA. Should fire break out in a building, the fire and rescue service (FRS) of the FA is called upon to fight the fire.For a building that is designed according to “deemed to satisfy” prescriptive rules, the above procedure is easily followed. Although there are some interactions between the FA and the fire safety design team at the design stage and between the FA and the building owner during the operation stage, the action of one organisation is essentially separated from those of the others. For example, Figure 1 illustrates the relationship (or lack of) between the ∗ Corresponding author.E-mail address: yong.wang@1877–7058 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd.doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2011.04.699Procedia Engineering 11 (2011) 583–592Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.584Y C Wang et al. / Procedia Engineering 11 (2011) 583–592different parts of the prescriptive approach, based on the Approved Documents part B (ADB 2000) to the Building Regulations of England and Wales. Within this document consideration is given to fire fighter access (B5) in which facilities such as fire fighting lifts, access to the perimeter to the building, the provision of wet or dry risers and the provision of fire fighting water in or close to the building. These features have been based on a prescriptive design and it has been simply assumed that the prescriptive approach to fire fighter safety will suffice in the case of engineered buildings. It can of course be argued that the facilities afforded to fire fighters in both prescriptive and engineered designs are deemed to satisfy, but given the increase of height of buildings, the use of modern building materials and greater travel distances, greater emphasis should be given to fire fighter access within performance designs.Figure 1: Components of prescriptive rules and lack of links between themThe traditional approach of following the prescriptive rules has proved to be able to limit fire risk to an acceptably low level, as evidenced by the relatively small amount of fire caused fatality and loss, compared to other causes such as road accidents. However, within the context of performance based fire engineering approach, the current practice will most certainly not be effective. Since the FA is the constant presence that links the different stages of fire safety activity of a building, interactions between the FA and other organisations, and between fire fighting activities and other actions, should be critically examined. This is the objective of this paper which aims to initiate a discussion on how to most effectively utilise the FA. Performance based (fire engineered) design solutions are considered to offer more flexible and cost-effective fire safety designs than the prescriptive approach. The use of performance based approach is inevitable which makes this discussion imperative.2.FA’s Interactions with Fire Engineering Design and Their RolesThe FA’s roles are three-fold, as follows(i)Statutory consultation: to ensure that the regulatory requirements (Building Regulations 2000) are compliedwith. This can be achieved by use of an Approved Document (ADB) or by the use of a performance design.Fire fighter access in the case of prescriptive design is clearly detailed within the design code but it is not clear or considered in the case of a performance based design. Within these cases it should be the FA, who assess the level of safety for fire fighting, who make their recommendations to the controlling body.(ii)Legal enforcement: to ensure that the building owner maintain and operate the building according to the fire design strategy;(iii)Fire fighting and rescue in the event of fire.Y C Wang et al. / Procedia Engineering 11 (2011) 583–592585 Within the prescriptive framework, the roles of the FA are clear. Since there is no alternative solution to the first two activities, the activity of fire fighting has no influence on the first two activities. The corollary is that fire fighting is independent of the other two activities so that there is no need to make any special provisions for fighting fire in any specific building (other than that given in the prescriptive approach). Because there is no link between fire safety provisions (other than fire fighting) and actual performance of the building and building occupants in fire, there is low confidence in the ability of fire safety provisions to minimise the effects of fire. Thus, fire fighting is considered essential to remedy any shortcomings that may exist in the fire safety provisions.In performance based fire engineering solutions, the FA’ roles should be critically examined. In fact, the need for the FA to exist can be questioned. From the point of view of enforcing fire regulations (to be referred to as legal roles), such a question would be considered preposterous. This will be discussed below. But the question arises when considering the more important issue of whether the FA activities, particularly fire fighting, provide enhancements to fire safety (to be referred to as rational roles).2.1 Legal roles of the FA in fire engineering solutionsIn England and Wales, the FA is a statutory consultation body. This means that the FA has to be consulted over the fire design strategy on fire fighting access and facilities. The FA may also raise issues that it considers appropriate. The FA is not the approval body and does not have the power to approve or reject the fire design strategy. This power rests with the Building Control Office (BCO). However, should the FA raise any issue over the fire safety strategy, there is no alternative but for the BCO to ensure that these issues are satisfactorily addressed by the fire design team. Otherwise, the BCO would be liable to future responsibilities should the issues identified by the FA, but not addressed by the fire design team, result in adverse consequences later. The BCO will not want to risk this. Knowing this arrangement, the fire safety design team has no alternative but to address the issues raised by the FA because otherwise the fire safety strategy would not be approved by the BCO.The FA can only raise issues that it has the competency to do so. Therefore, although such an arrangement would always benefit the fire safety provisions, the extent of this benefit will depend on the expertise available within the particular FA. Not every FA has the ability to ask the appropriate questions.As far as fire fighting is concerned, the British Standard for fire engineering, PD 7974 “Application of fire safety engineering principles to the design of buildings”, Part 5 “Fire service intervention” states:In the design of a building, it should be assumed that fire service operations do not contribute to the safe evacuation of occupants. Rescue by the fire service can provide an additional factor of safety, but this should not be taken into account in any design calculation of probable risk to the building or occupants.However, the first concern of the fire service is to ensure that all persons are evacuated safely (or, in a building subject to phased evacuation, can safely remain in the building). Therefore, the fire service attack on the fire should normally be assumed to begin only after all the occupants are in a place of safety.An analysis of fire service response is, therefore, likely to be of most benefit when considering what additional fire protection measures may be appropriate for the protection of property.Put simply, if a fire engineered building performs as designed, there is no requirement for fire fighting as far as public safety is concerned. Since ensuring public safety is the primary reason for the existence of FA, the above statements imply that the FA’s existence is of marginal benefit to a fire engineered building. Clearly, the public will demand the FA to fight fires regardless whether a building is designed following the prescriptive approach or the fire engineered approach. But to base one’s existence on the public’s lack of knowledge in fire engineering cannot be considered a sufficiently robust reason. This analysis is predicated on the fire engineering solution being truly based on the assumption that safe evacuation of occupants without fire service operations is explicitly checked.Therefore, the legal roles of the FA are not in any dispute, but they have little rational value.2.2 Rational roles of the FAThis paper is not in any way to advocate relieving some of duties of the FA. Far from it, this paper intends to identify more robust and positive reasons to justify the FA activities. It is only through clear understanding of the roles of the FA that more effective means of fulfilling these roles can be devised to enhance the services of the FA.Statutory consultation586Y C Wang et al. / Procedia Engineering 11 (2011) 583–592As mentioned in the last section, the FA is a statutory body that can raise issues with the fire design strategy. In order for the FA to make the most use of this position to enhance the fire design strategy, it is important that the FA has good knowledge of different aspects of fire engineering solutions so as to enable them to thoroughly examine the fire design strategy, to question the design based upon the resources, equipment, demographics and any other limitations the fire authority may have that may have an influence on the design due to height, size, location and complexity of the building. In particular, the FA should possess sound understanding of the scientific and engineering principles of fire engineering solutions to question the design concepts and assumptions and to judge the correctness of the design solutions. Only with such deep knowledge will the FA be able to decide whether their concerns on the fire design strategy have been adequately resolved. To meet this new demand on the FA, the Greater Manchester Fire Rescue and Services (GMFRS) has developed a Fire Engineering unit with fully trained operational fire engineers who deal exclusively with complex performance solutions. They work closely with the Fire Engineering Design team to develop fire safety design strategy.For example, the GMFRS, as the responsible local FA, has been able to provide indispensible service to the Fire Engineering Design team to assist the team to develop the fire strategy for the Media City (figure 2). The Media City project is a £500 million building project that is currently under construction in Salford Quays, Greater Manchester, as part of the BBC’s relocating some of its activities outside London. Among many issues raised, one was about fire fighting access and adequate supplies of water to the whole site. The following recommendations were made to ensure that the design strategy incorporated a degree of robustness and resilience into the design.(i)Open water pump sites on at the water’s edge(ii) A ring main with Hydrants surrounding the site(iii) All buildings to be sprinkleredFigure 2: Media City, Salford Quays, UKY C Wang et al. / Procedia Engineering 11 (2011) 583–592587 GMFRS also advised the Design Team to take into consideration the physiological effects upon the fire fighters when attending fires within the building including the fire fighting actions when using powered smoke extraction systems within escape corridors.Legal EnforcementA fire engineered solution has two outputs:(i) the fire strategy, explaining the functional requirements of fire safety and quantitative demonstration using fundamental engineering principles how these requirements are satisfied;(ii) the management/operation manual detailing how the building owner should manage and operate the building so that the assumptions adopted in the fire design strategy are not compromised.Once a building is occupied and in use, the FA takes on the co-ordinating role as they have the enforcement role conferred by The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order. Again the FA should have thorough knowledge and understanding of the engineering concepts and assumptions of the fire strategy so that they can guide the building Owners in their management and operation of the building under normal use. For example, if the fire engineered solution to a shop specifies descending smoke curtains for smoke control, it is important for the FA to convey the fire engineered design intention to the Owners so that they do not obscure the space below the smoke curtains and also maintain fire engineering systems.Fire FightingAmong the three main roles of the FA, fire fighting will be the most affected. As previously explained (section 2.1), in a fire engineered building, safe occupant evacuation is not reliant on fire fighting and rescue. With this assumption, the main reason for employing fire fighting in a fire engineered building is to control the fire and minimise fire damage to the construction. This is a radical departure from the traditional emphasis of fire fighting where rescue of strangled occupants is the most important objective of fire fighting. There is an argument that if the purpose of fire fighting is not occupant rescue but property protection, then the cost of fire fighting should be borne by the building Owners and their insurance companies through the employment of private fire fighters. But it may also be argued that the notion of a publicly funded fire service in emergency fire fighting is deeply ingrained within the psyche of the public and it would be emotionally indefensible not to deploy the fire fighting service even though the purpose of fire fighting is to primarily benefit the building owners. Furthermore, sometimes the beneficiary will be more than just the building owners and their insurance company. Large amounts of resources are consumed to construct a building and its facilities. Saving as much as possible is in the best interest of the society in general. In some cases where employment is concerned, the local society associated with the building in fire would also benefit greatly if fire fighting helps to prevent the building activities from closing down and losing business.Accepting that there will always be the need for fire fighting in fire engineered buildings, it is important that the fire fighting activities should consider the specific nature of the building. For example, GMFRS has the Operations/Fire Safety interface in which the fire engineering section enters into dialogue with the operations section to develop effective fire fighting plans. For the aforementioned Media City, due to the nature of the buildings, access is difficult for standard fire appliances and consideration has been given procuring smaller vehicles bespoke to Media City.It is also important to recognise that changes have to be made to accommodate departures of fire safety provisions in fire engineered solutions from prescriptive solutions. First, as the emphasis of fire fighting changes from occupant rescue to property protection, this should be reflected in the practice of fire fighting in fire engineered buildings. Second, as the fire scenario in a fire engineered solution has not explicitly considered fire fighting, the consequence of fire fighting should be carefully considered so that it does not bring about adverse effects. These will be further expanded in the following section.3. Implications and challenges of fire fighting in fire engineered built environmentAs explained above, in a fire engineered solution, the emphasis of fire fighting (property and business protection) is different from the traditional role of fire fighting and rescue. Also many assumptions will have been made in a fire engineered solution. These will have wide implications and may necessitate some changes in the practice of fire fighting and fire engineering solutions.3.1.Rescue activities and fire service resource allocation in fire fighting588Y C Wang et al. / Procedia Engineering 11 (2011) 583–592Since it is assumed that occupant evacuation in a fire engineered solution does not depend on fire service intervention, then there is no need for the rescue activity. It is of course never possible to discount the possibility that rescue is necessary even for a fire engineered building, but it must be reasonable to accept that the risk of someone getting trapped within a fire engineered building is very low. In any case, fire service resource allocation should be carefully considered so that the fire fighting team does not automatically engage in futile and unnecessary rescue activities. Since the main objective of fire fighting in a fire engineered building is to protect property, then it is probably best leaving the fire to burn out when the probability of saving the building through fire fighting is very slim. For example, figure 3 shows a timber structure in fire. The chance of saving the building is probably not even worth considering.Figure 3: A timber structure in fireIt is unfortunate, but practical, that at present, the scope of fire engineered solutions can range widely, from employing an alternative solution to tweak a small part of an otherwise prescriptive design, to a solution that starts from first principles of fire behaviour and occupants response. The argument in the previous paragraph is predicated on the evacuation design to be fire engineered, to demonstrate that occupants can evacuate safely under different credible fire scenarios (Available Safe Escape Time > Required Safety Escape Time). Should means of escape design be still based on prescriptive rules, e.g. limiting travel distance but other aspects are fire engineered (e.g. structural fire protection), then the traditional function of fire service intervention (fire fighting and rescue) will still apply.3.2.Adverse effects of fire fightingWhilst the intention of fire fighting, which is to minimise fire damage, is never in doubt, fire fighting may in some cases not bring about the desired effects and the consequence of fire fighting may even be worse than leaving the fire to naturally die out.For example, figure 4 illustrates the intended smoke movement in a fire engineered solution. Sufficient smoke venting results in a stabilising smoke layer above the occupants to enable them to evacuate. Fire fighting using water may increase the smoke density and drag down the smoke layer, impeding evacuation.Y C Wang et al. / Procedia Engineering 11 (2011) 583–592589 Figure 4: A fire engineered smoke control systemIn structural fire engineering, the use of innovative materials can be justified based on their performance under the design fire scenario. In most cases, this does not cause any problem. But water damage from fire fighting may worsen the material performance. For example, if a steel structure is protected by intumescent coating, then water jet from fire fighting may destroy the intumescent char, resulting in the loss of effectiveness of the fire protection material. Concrete spalling is primarily a result of high moisture inside the concrete. Water from fire fighting may increase the water content in concrete and cause more extensive spalling. Traditionally, assessment of structural behaviour is based on single elements without any restraint in the longitudinal direction of the member. Reduction in temperature is always considered to be beneficial. But structural members in real structures are subject to restraints and cooling may introduce tensile stress and result in structural fracture. For example, figure 5 shows a fractured connection during cooling (not as a result of fire fighting). Accelerated cooling due to fire fighting may result in more extensive fracture. Ideally, under these circumstances, the fire fighters should direct their water jet away from the loadbearing structural components. But this is on the assumption that the fire fighters can differentiate the loadbearing and non-load bearing members of a construction.Figure 5: Fracture of connection during cooling, Cardington fire test (Newman et al 2006)3.3.Structural fire resistance of non-evacuation routeWhen the emphasis of fire service intervention is on occupant rescue, rather than property protection, the structure that does not form part of the escape route does not require fire resistance. However, this should be reconsidered in some cases if saving the structure becomes the overriding objective of fire service intervention.For example, in the UK, steel portal frames are ubiquitous and account for over 90% of single storey industrial structures. Because of the low number of occupants in portal frame structures, there is no requirement of fire resistance for portal frame structures (within the UK a roof is not classed as an element of structure). Each portal of a portal frame is essentially one structural element. If its fire resistance is low because there is no requirement for it to have fire resistance, then its collapse is total (Figure 6) and can happen within a short time, leaving the fire fighters with little time to escape. Therefore, if fire fighting is essential in a new portal frame, safety of the fire fighters should be considered. This may mean that even portal frames not within boundary condition should be designed to remain standing in fire so as to enable the fire fighters to fight and put out the fire.590Y C Wang et al. / Procedia Engineering 11 (2011) 583–592Figure 6: A collapsed portal frame structure3.4.Contribution of fire fighting to fire engineering solutionsAs mentioned in section 2.1, the fire engineering assumption is that fire fighting should not be relied upon to help occupant evacuation. Although this is understandable because it can be difficult to accurately and reliably predict the fire brigade arriving time, there is no reason why it would not be possible to improve the predictability and reliability of fire brigade arrival time. Should this happen, it would be possible to incorporate fire fighting within a fire engineered solution. This is different from the provision of fire fighting access and facilities to the fire brigade. It is about positively taking advantage of the fire brigade putting out or controlling the fire on the time line of the fire. In fact, under the Natural Fire Safety Concept in Eurocode 1, it is possible to take advantage of fire brigade proximity to reduce the required fire resistance rating of a structure.3.5.Effectiveness of fire fightingPerformance based design should not be just restricted to the safety of occupants of the building escaping in the case of fire, but the design team should consider safety applications in their entirety and include the safety of fire fighters and other rescue services entering the building after the occupants have escaped. It is highly likely that conditions will be untenable in the area surrounding the fire such that additional protection will be required such as breathing apparatus and protective clothing.It is therefore important that in the planning or concept stage that the design team consider all aspects of the performance solution and in order to achieve this all stakeholders, including the fire and rescue service, should be present. The fire strategy developed should not just confine its content for the means of escape phases when it is most likely that the fire will in its early stages. This strategy should include an analysis of the conditions at the time that fire fighters will be entering the building to extinguish the fire, such parameters such as temperature, fire size and visibility should be considered.Marsden (2009) identified a number of issues that should be tackled by the fire engineering design team to enable the fire fighters to effective fight fire. Such issues include:(i)Buildings with tightly sealed, highly insulating façade (e.g. Figure 7). In such a building, it will be difficult forthe fire to vent. If the façade is opened by fire fighters, there would be greater chance of back draft and flashover and greater fire spread within the building.Y C Wang et al. / Procedia Engineering 11 (2011) 583–592591Figure 7: Behaviour of fire in buildings with sealed façade(ii)Fire engineering features. The actions and safety of attending fire fighters can be greatly affected by the fire engineered features that are installed within a particular building design. For example smoke control systems have the ability to maintain conditions such they are tenable in the means of escape phase for the occupants, but in the case of the fire and rescue service the conditions may have deteriorated such that the smoke control system is overwhelmed by the fire growth thus resulting in the possible smoke logging of the fire floor which will result in reduced visibility, tenability and increased temperatures.(iii)Construction stage fire (e.g. Figure 8). The design of complex and tall buildings is such that in the construction phase, important features such as compartmentation, protected escape stairs, fire protection to structure, fire fighting features and smoke control systems may not be installed. The lack of these features is such that if a fire starts its spread throughout the building may be unrestricted resulting in premature collapse and limited fire fighter actions on arrival. It is important within fire engineered strategies that the construction phase is adequately risk assessed as it may be a only at the later stages of construction that fire fighting features such as those described above are installed.Figure 8: Lack of firefighting provisions in buildings under construction(iv)Physical limits of fire fighting. Physiological effects upon fire fighters need to be considered because the effects of heat and fire fighting operations can have a marked effect upon the physical performance of fire fighters such that the fire conditions are such that fire fighters will succumb to these effects and may not be able to effectively reach the fire. This consideration may invalidate some of the fire engineering solutions. For example, in the case of residential developments, single staircase designs are being proposed with corridor lengths exceeding 15m and mechanical smoke systems, instead of the prescriptive approach of 7.5m with natural ventilation. The result of this is that firefighters have to traverse longer distances to carry out operations.。
2023年《消防科学与技术》期刊
佚名
【期刊名称】《消防科学与技术》
【年(卷),期】2022(41)12
【摘要】创刊于1982年的《消防科学与技术》是由应急管理部主管、应急管理部天津消防研究所主办的消防安全学术性期刊。
始终坚持服务消防中心工作,聚焦科研主攻方向,密切追踪国内外消防科技发展前沿,已成为广大消防科技工作者和消防救援队伍学习掌握消防新技术成果、开展交流研讨的重要学术阵地。
【总页数】1页(PF0003)
【正文语种】中文
【中图分类】D63
【相关文献】
1.2010版中国科技期刊引证报告(核心版)公布《消防科学与技术》期刊统计指标
2.《消防科学与技术》杂志近期被国际重要期刊数据库收录情况
3.《消防科学与技术》入编2014版《中文核心期刊要目总览》
4.2009版中国科技期刊引证报告(核心版)公布《消防科学与技术》期刊统计指标
5.中国消防协会《消防科学与技术》杂志推荐的两篇论文荣获“第六届中国科协期刊优秀学术论文”三等奖
因版权原因，仅展示原文概要，查看原文内容请购买。
应急管理刊物名录
应急管理领域的期刊涵盖了多种与灾害预防、应对和恢复相关的研究主题，旨在提升社会对于各种紧急情况的准备和响应能力。
以下是一些应急管理领域内的重要刊物：
1.《中国安全科学学报》：报道安全科学、安全管理、安全技术等方
面的研究成果。
2.《中国安全生产科学技术》：关注安全生产科学技术的创新和应
用。
3.《中国减灾》：专注于灾害风险减少的理论与实践。
4.《自然灾害学报》：涉及自然灾害的监测、预警、防治和评估等研
究内容。
5.《防灾减灾工程学报》：聚焦于防灾减灾工程技术的研究与发展。
6.《消防科学与技术》：研究消防理论、技术和装备的研发及应用。
7.《应急管理》：探讨应急管理理论、政策、法律及案例分析。
在投稿之前，建议作者详细查阅各期刊的具体投稿要求和审稿流程，以确保文章符合期刊的标准和范围。
同时，由于应急管理是一个多学科交叉的领域，相关研究也可能发表在其他领域的期刊上，如公共管理、环境科学、地理学等。
因此，研究者在选择期刊时也应考虑这些因素。
国内火灾方面的相关期刊（按学术水平排名）1、燃烧科学与技术（EI核心期刊）本刊是我国燃烧专业领域的学术性期刊，1995年创刊，经有关部门批准，本刊于2002年起改为双月刊。
第二年就被EI、CA等国内外多家著名检索机构收录，在全国和天津市科技期刊评比中多次被评为优秀期刊及获奖，并在2001年入选全国期刊方阵双效期刊。
2004年在全国高校科技期刊评比中荣获优秀编辑出版质量奖。
成为燃烧行业的知名学术期刊，在国际上影响也不断扩大，2004年己发表111篇论文，其中基金项目资助论文占总数的83%，EI compendex数据库收录率达到98%。
2、工程热物理学报（EI非核心期刊）本刊为专业技术性刊物。
主要刊登工程热力学与动力装置、热机气动热力学、传热传质学、燃烧学、热物理测量学、热效率装置、综合利用能源、代用燃料等方面的科技论文、研究简报、重要学术动态等。
主要读者对象为工程热物理专业科技人员及相关高校师生。
3、暖通空调（曾经的EI核心期刊）本刊始终以“新颖、实用、准确、精练”为办刊方针，以提高全行业素质、推动全行业技术交流与发展为宗旨，及时报道国家有关建筑节能和环境保护的重大技术政策，建筑环境与设备工程中供暖、通风、空调、制冷及洁净技术方面的研究成果、学术论文、先进技术、工程总结、设计经验、设备开发与运行管理以及行业学术活动与设备市场信息。
本刊是中国建筑科学类核心期刊，中国科技论文与引文数据库统计分析数据源刊，中国科学引文数据库来源期刊，中国学术期刊综合评价数据库统计源期刊，中国核心期刊（遴选）数据库收录期刊，中国期刊全文数据库收录期刊。
本刊发行对象：从事建筑环境与设备工程中供暖、通风、空调、制冷、洁净等相关领域的工程设计、科研教学、施工安装、设备制造、运行管理的专业技术人员、管理人员、院校师生、房地产开发商和业主，以及对暖通空调制冷技术感兴趣的各界朋友。
4、火灾科学本刊是中科院主管、中国科学技术大学主办的亚澳火灾科学技术学会的会刊，宗旨是认识火灾发生和发展的机理，并发展火灾防治技术。
火灾自动报警系统毕业论文中英文资料外文翻译文献nal electronic fire alarm system relies on sensors to automatically detect a fire and trigger an alarm。
which can alert people on the scene or notify the authorities through a special electric cable。
Over the years。
the development of alarm devices has led to a wide range of ns for different ns。
particularly in the civil domain.One popular type of alarm system is the infrared alarm。
which has gained n due to its ability to detect fires without us infrared signals。
making it more secure。
Infrared sensors can be classified into two types: light survey and hot survey。
based on their n mechanisms.To improve the effectiveness of fire alarm systems。
many modern devices also incorporate advanced technologies such as wireless n。
remote monitoring。
and intelligent analysis。
These features enable faster response times and more accurate n。
