臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

長隧道為公路隧道中最具危險之隧道型式，因其密閉性、長距離及因車禍事故所引起的堵車，造成救護人員及消防人員無法及時抵達火災事故現場、火災溫度及隧道固體結構溫度快速上升，可能危害隧道用路人安全及隧道結構損壞。
近年來國內公路長隧道興建，例如雪山隧道、蘇花改觀音、谷風、中仁、仁水隧道，因仁水隧道為國內唯一單孔雙向的長隧道，具有大量用路人以及無法預測之濃煙層流向，對於隧道消防安全有之確保扔有未知。本研究以火災動態模擬軟體(FDS)對於仁水隧道進行火災模擬，探討隧道內之消防安全之系統(通風、排煙、水霧)合併後對隧道內火災影響，設計火源有1.一台滿載可燃貨物之大貨車 2.兩輛大客車及五輛小客車追撞起火，兩者最大熱釋放率皆達100 MW，並且分析兩種火災情境 (1)自由燃燒情境及(2)通風排煙水霧系統皆作動情境。設定隧道內車輛造成初始風速為2.5 m/s，於偵測火災後60秒內同時開啟噴流式風機、軸流式風機(排煙系統)，使濃煙經由火源上游一處風門及火源下游兩處風門吸入排煙管道，再透過軸流式風機將濃煙排出，總和排煙量達360 m3/s；因仁水隧道為單孔雙向，大量用路人則須更多時間避難，故水霧系統於偵測火災後300秒內開啟(一般為180秒)。本研究模擬設置溫度、CO濃度、可視度及輻射熱測點再以火災性能驗證基準指標為標準進行量測分析。模擬結果顯示仁水隧道「通風、排煙及水霧系統」皆開啟之狀況下，將抑制隧道火災風險，降低溫度、CO濃度及熱通量，並將濃煙局限於所開啟之3個風門之間。因此3個風門間之可視度較低，但逃生人員可以低姿態並藉由隧道內避難指示燈向避難連絡道及人行聯絡道逃生；因此通風排煙及水霧系統可為撤離人員提供相較於安全的環境、提高消防員的安全性及避免火勢蔓延並保護隧道結構。
關鍵字:單孔雙向、隧道火災、水霧系統、FDS

Long tunnel fire is dangerous because of the characteristics of confined space, long distance for evacuation, traffic jam and high temperature. It is consequently not easy for fire fighters and emergency rescue teams to approach the fire sites. Additionally, the concrete may be damaged due to the heat from fire.

Recently, more and more long road tunnels were built in Taiwan, such as Xueshan, Guanyin, Gufeng, Zhongren and Renshui tunnels. The Renshui tunnel is the only bi-directional one. The risk of life safety of bi-directional tunnels is still unknown, because the fire scenario, smoke movement and evacuation strategy for bi-dimensional tunnels are different from those for one-dimensional tunnels. Furthermore, the combined effect of fire-fighting, ventilation, smoke exhaust and water sprays systems on the Renshui tunnel needs more discussion, and were evaluated by FDS in this study.
Two fire scenarios were assumed: a large truck with combustible cargo and two buses chased with five cars. The maximum heat release rate for both fire scenarios was 100 MW. The effects of with/without the water sprays, ventilation and smoke exhaust systems were compared. The initial ventilation velocity of tunnel was 2.5 m/s. Additionally, the jet fan and the smoke exhaust were actuated at 60 s after detecting the fire and the time to actuate the water mist system was 300 s. According to the fire performance criteria standard, the temperature, CO concentration, visibility and radiation heat flux were measured. The simulated results show that the smoke was confined between three dampers, and the temperature, CO concentration and radiation heat flux were decreased under the operation of the combined water sprays, ventilation and smoke exhaust system. The visibility between three dampers was low, but the tunnel users could escape with low body position and follow the evacuee light to the refuge connection tunnel. Therefore, the combined water sprays, ventilation and smoke exhaust system can provide a fire safety environment for evacuees and fire-fighters and prevent flame spread and protect the structure of tunnels.
Keyword: bi-directional, tunnel fire, water spray, smoke exhaust, FDS

摘要 i
Abstract ii
圖目錄 viii
表目錄 xvi
第一章、緒論 1
1.1 研究動機與目的 1
1.2 研究方法與步驟 4
1.3 研究內容 5
第二章、文獻回顧 6
2.1 雙向隧道通風、排煙設備設置與啟動模式 6
2.2隧道水霧系統 9
2.2.1 水霧系統放水區劃 10
2.2.2 水霧系統放水時機 11
2.3 隧道內火災臨界風速 13
2.4 通風及水霧情境下數值模擬隧道火災 14
2.5熱、CO、濃煙對人體的危害 15
2.6 用路人避難所需之時間(Treq) 17
2.7 電腦數值模擬軟體 19
第三章、火災電腦模擬設計與方法 21
3.1 模擬情境 21
3.2 隧道模型說 26
3.2.1 通風、排煙系統之初始設定與邊界條件 28
3.2.2 水霧系統之設置 31
3.3 火源設定 32
3.3.1 一輛大貨車火災 34
3.3.2 兩輛大客車及五輛小客車火災 36
3.3.3 火源位置 39
3.4 隧道內堵車情境 40
3.4.1 火災發生於仁水隧道1+931處 41
3.5 測點設置位置 43
3.6 網格尺寸分析 46
第四章、模擬結果與分析 49
4.1一輛大貨車火災情境模擬(自由燃燒情境) 49
4.1.1 隧道模擬歷時分析 50
4.1.2 用路人避難安全性驗證 55
4.1.3 消防救援可及性 74
4.1.4 隧道結構完整性 76
4.1.5 火勢延燒 77
4.2一輛大貨車火災情境模擬(通風排煙水霧情境) 79
4.2.1 隧道模擬歷時分析 80
4.2.2 用路人避難安全性驗證 81
4.2.3 消防救援可及性 98
4.2.4 隧道結構完整性 100
4.2.5 火勢延燒 101
4.3 兩輛大客車及五輛小客車火災情境模擬(自由燃燒情境) 103
4.3.1 隧道模擬歷時分析 104
4.3.2 用路人避難安全性驗證 110
4.3.3 消防救援可及性 131
4.3.4 隧道結構完整性 133
4.3.5 火勢延燒 134
4.4 兩輛大客車及五輛小客車火災情境模擬(通風排煙水霧情境) 136
4.4.1 隧道模擬歷時分析 137
4.4.2 用路人避難安全性驗證 142
4.4.3 消防救援可及性 158
4.4.4 隧道結構完整性 160
4.4.5 火勢延燒 161
第五章、結論與建議 163
參考文獻 170

1.沈子勝、簡賢文等人，2010，公路隧道消防安全設備設置規範，交通部。
2.交通部交通部公路總局蘇花公路改善工程處，2010，
3.H. Ingason, 2003, Fire development in catastrophic tunnel fires (CTF), in:Proceedings of International Symposium on Catastrophic TunnelFires (CTF), 20–21 November 2003, Boras, Sweden,: 31–47.
4.T.K Fannelöp, 1994. Fluid Mechanics for Industrial Safety and Environmental Protection. Industrial Safety Series,
5.C. Lvyi ,, Z. Wei , C. Xin, P. Liwei , L. Guangxuan, 2009. “Experimental study of water mist fire suppression in tunnels under longitudinal ventilation” Building and Environment , 446– 455.
6.X.K. Xiao, K.Q. Kuang , T.S. Liang, H.D. Tang, G.X. Liao , K.K.R. Yuan , 2011,“Study on flame expansion phenomenon in pool fire extinguished by water mist”, Procedia Engineering, :550–559.
7.A.N. Beard, R.O. Carvel (Eds.), 2005. The Handbook of Tunnel Fire Safety, Thomas Telford Publishing, London.
8.B. Alan, C. Richard 2004. The handbook of tunnel fire safety. Thomas Telford；3-198.
9.Standard for road tunnels, bridges, and other limited access highways. NFPA502, 2008 Editor.
10.內政部營建署，1989，『建築技術規則與各類場所消防安全備設置標準』。
11.Y. Wu and M. Z. A. Bakar, 2000, “Control of smoke flow in tunnel fires using longitudinal ventilation systems—a study of the critical velocity,” Fire Safety Journal, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 363-90.
12.H. Ingason, A. Lönnermark, and Y.Z. Li, 2012. Model of ventilation flows during large tunnel fires. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 30:64-73.
13.Y.Z, Li., B. Lei, and H. Ingason, 2010. Study of critical velocity and backlayering length in longitudinally ventilated tunnel fires. Fire Safety Journal, 45:361-370.
14.A. Heselden, 1976. "Studies of fire and smoke behavior relevant to tunnels", 2nd Int Symp on Aerodynamics and Ventilation of Vehicle Tunnels, Cambridge, :23-25 .
15.L. Zhigang , D. Carpenter , K. K. Andrew, “Cooling characteristics of hot oil pool by water mist” during fire suppression ,Fire Safety Journal,:269-281.
16.H. Ingason, 2008. “Model scale tunnel tests with water spray” Fire Safety Journal 43 :512–528.
17.H. Ingason, Z.L. Ying, 2013. “Model scale tunnel fire tests with automatic sprinkler” Fire Safety Journal 61 :298–313.
18.G. Heskestad, 2003.Extinction of gas and liquid pool fires with water sprays, Fire Safety Journal38:301–317.
19.R. J. Mawhinney , G. G. Back, 2007. The SFPE handbook of fire protection engineering:4-413.
20.B. Alan ,C. Richard, 2004. The handbook of tunnel fire safety. Thomas Telford:202-218.
21.Engineering Guidance for Water Based Fire Fighting Systems for the Protection of Tunnels and Subsurface Facilities, 2007. ” Work Package 2 of the Research Project UPTUN of the European Commission :9-22,”
22.Steven Ernst, Mabendra Patel et., 2006. ”Underground Transportation Systems in Europe : Safety, Operations, and Emergency Response ”:21-24.
23.日本道路協會，道路隧道緊急用設施設置基準暨其解說，平成13年10月。(台灣能美譯)
24.簡賢文，2014，蘇花改長隧道火災安全防護設施設備之設計原則。
25.李伊平，2013，公路隧道火災煙控CFD模擬之研究，桃園創新技術學院。
26.H Ingason and A Lonnermark, 2003, “Large-scale Fire Tests in the Runehamar tunnel – Heat release rate (HRR),” Proceedings of the International Symposium on Catastrophic Tunnel Fires, P. 81-92.
27.台灣中興工程顧問股份有限公司，2018，『台9線蘇花公路南澳和平段段機電工程補充施工說明書』。
28.台灣中興工程顧問股份有限公司，2018，『台9線蘇花公路南澳和平段段機電工程細部設計圖』。
29.簡賢文、蔡匡忠、許文勝、沈子勝、李伊平、何三平，2015，『雪山隧道南下26K交通事故火燒車事件火災境況分析及避難救援策略』。
30.陳建忠、黃進興，2009，『建築物火災避難弱者需求分析之研究』，內政部建築研究所。
31.簡賢文等人，2016，公路隧道搶救訓練教材，內政部消防署。
32.簡賢文、李伊平，2009，『由國內長隧道現有消防機制探討國道公路長隧道消防救援最適模式暨效益評估計畫』。
33.Y-P Lee and K-C Tsai, “Effect of vehicular blockage on critical ventilation velocity and tunnel fire behavior in longitudinally ventilated tunnels”, Fire Safety Journal, Volume 53, P. 35–42, 2012.