CANADIAN FIRE ALARM ASSOCIATION · –Flaming foam test that achieves obscuration levels similar to the UL 217 flaming tests in a comparable time frame. • Potential Scenarios: –EN
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Production Ionization 142 133 35 6.28 (56.3 min.) 1.6
Production Photoelectric 172 150 70 5.47 (55.06 min.) 2.5
Typical Response to Test Fires
a. Measured in ANSI/UL 217/268, CAN/ULC-
S529/S531smoke box.
b. Measuring Ionization Chamber measurement in
ANSI/UL 217/268, CAN/ULC-S529/S531 smoke box.
a b
Ionization alarms respond quicker to flaming fires, while photoelectric alarms respond quicker to non-
flaming fires.
p/8
Living Room Fire
p/9
UL-FPRF Smoke Characterization Study
• Launched to fill gaps in previous technical studies and to answer questions raised in actual fire events - essentially a “back to basics” investigation. Reduced evacuation times, and questions regarding the quality of smoke.
• Focused on 26 common materials (and combinations) found in the home, in non-flaming (smoldering) and flaming fires.
• UL purchased state of the art particle size equipment and developed new protocols for measuring smoke.
• Study took 1 year to design, 2 years to complete and cost $700,000. The entire report (with graphs and plots) is more than 3,000 pages.
p/10
Objective and Scope
1. Develop smoke characterization analytical test
protocol using flaming and non-flaming modes of
combustion on selected residential materials.
2. “Fingerprint smoke” by developing smoke particle
size distribution data, chemical signatures and smoke
profiles for materials found in residential settings for
both flaming and non-flaming modes of combustion.
p/11
Objective and Scope
3. Provide data and analysis to the industry for several
possible initiatives:
A) Develop recommendations to the current residential smoke
alarm standards CAN/ULC-S531 (ANSI/UL 217).
B) Provide data to the industry for the development of new
smoke sensing technology.
C) Provide data to the materials and additives industry to
facilitate new smoke suppression technologies and
improved end products.
D) Provide education to the fire community.
p/12
Technical Plan
1. Characterize samples
– Material chemistry: FTIR-ATR
– Physical construction: Density, Size, etc.
– Thermal properties: DSC, TGA
2. Evaluate material specific combustion properties for effects of
material chemistry, physical construction, and combustion
mode
– Ignition time, Heat and Smoke release rates, Weight consumption
rate, Particle size and count distribution, Effluent gas: ASTM E1354
cone calorimeter coupled to particle and gas analyzers
3. Evaluate combustion properties for multi-component products
• Heat and Smoke release rates, Particle size and count distribution, Effluent gas: Intermediate-scale calorimeter coupled to particle and gas analyzers
4. Evaluate generated smoke and gases, alarm signal and response time in UL 217/268 Fire Test Room tests.
p/13
Smoke Characterization Project: Findings
• Residential materials showed dramatically different heat and smoke release and smoke particle size behavior with non-flaming and flaming fires.
– Synthetic materials (e.g. polyethylene, polyester, nylon, polyurethane) generate higher heat and smoke release rates than the natural materials (e.g. wood, cotton batting).
– Flaming fires produce smaller mean smoke particles, non-flaming fires produce larger mean smoke particles.
– Photoelectric alarms triggered earlier for low-energy non-flaming fires.
– Ionization alarms triggered earlier for flaming and high-energy non-flaming fires.
• Smoke particles aggregate over time and distance from origin of ignition.
• Smoke from low energy, non-flaming fires may stratify as it rises and not reach to the ceiling.
p/14
Smoke Characterization Project Sampling Method
N2
dilution
FTIR
Every 15 s
Smoke Particle
Every 67 s
Calorimeter
p/15
Smoke Characterization Project Smoke Particle Analyzer Data
PET Carpet
11
17
26
40
63
10
2
16
9
29
7
36
0
44
5
57
5
90
0 048
115182
249316
383450
517584
0.0E+00
2.6E+05
5.1E+05
7.7E+05
1.0E+06
1.3E+06
Pa
rticle
de
nsity
(1/c
c)
Particle Size (nm)
Time (s)
p/16
Smoke Characterization Project Key Findings - Gas Analysis
• Smoke Gas Effluent Composition - Gas effluent analysis
showed the dominant gas components were water vapor,
carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide.
Water CO2 CO
SO2 NO2 Methane
Ammonia Phenol SiF4
Formaldehyde HCN Propane
HCl HF Ethylene
Acrylonitrile Styrene
p/17
General Smoke Characteristics
Material Particle Size Particle Count Specific Extinction Area
(Microns) (m2/g) (Total Smoke Gen.
/weight loss)
Cooking Oil/Lard .08 2E+6 (2 Million) > .7
Douglas Fir .13 - .17 < .5E+5 < .35
Heptane/Toluene .19 - .30 1.72E+5 – 1.20E+6 < .35
Newspaper .17 - .18 < 1E+6 < .35
Polyurethane Foam .08 - .27 2E+6 (F) – 2.75E+6 (S) .08 (F) - .9 (S)
Ponderosa Pine .17 - .27 < 1.5E+5 < .35
Human Hair 50 – 100
During the various stages of a fire each material will generate unique particle sizes and count, and will
generate different quantities of smoke. The response of an alarm will vary based on the material, and how it
burns.
p/18
d, Particle Size
Rela
tive S
ign
al S
en
sit
ivit
yParticle Size Influence on Sensing Technology
Obscuration ~ d3
Scattering ~ d2
Ion ~ d
Physics of ionization technology is linearly
responsive to particle size.
Physics of light-based technologies are more
responsive to larger particles than smaller
particles.
p/19
Smoke Detector Performance Smoke movement
• Smoke Stratification - Non-flaming fires result in
changes in the smoke build up over time, such that
stratification of smoke below the ceiling occurs. This
time-dependent phenomenon results in less obscuration
at the ceiling than below the ceiling. This caused both