Fire Banner

Thursday, June 05, 2014

Fire Group Members Work to Better Understand Wildland Fires

By Eric Mueller


Every spring, prescribed burns are conducted in the forest of the Pine Barrens of New Jersey, United States. These operations have been carried out on an average of roughly 12000 acres per year over the past 10 years. Historically, fire is a natural occurrence in the Pine Barrens and is an integral part of maintaining the ecosystem. Such prescribed burns are also used as a type of ‘fuel treatment’ aimed at reducing the fuel loading, the quantity of vegetation biomass, in the forest. The intent is that, by managing the accumulation of fuel, accidental wildland fires will have a lower, more manageable intensity, thus reducing both the potential risks to the community and the costs of firefighting operations. This is particularly important in an area like New Jersey, which lies in the middle of the densely populated coastline of the Northeast United States.

In a three year project, researchers from the Fire Group, in collaboration with the United States Forest Service, Rochester Institute of Technology (U.S.), and Tomsk State University (Russia) are attempting to better understand the effectiveness of such fuel treatment, as well as general aspects of fire behaviour and firebrand generation. The approach involved experimental measurement of the fire during two high-intensity prescribed burns in the Pine Barrens. 

Members of the team from left to right: Chris Thomas, Mohamad El Houssami, Alex Filkov (Tomsk State Uni.), Denis Kasimov (Tomsk State Uni.), Albert Simeoni, Nick Skowronski (US Forest Service), Eric Mueller, Ross Galloway, Michal Krajcovic, Rory Hadden

 Fire behaviour in these experiments was measured in a number of ways, including temperatures within the flames and plume, total and radiant heat fluxes, and wind speed and direction - all at various locations throughout the burn block. A series of aerial images, taken from an IR camera mounted on an airplane, also provided a progression of the footprint of the fire. To relate this information to the pre-fire vegetation distribution and the consumption during the fire, measurements of fuel loading were made both before and after the burn. This was done through a combination of field sampling and aerial, georeferenced Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) measurements.

Earlier this year, our team of seven travelled to the United States to help set up instrumentation and observe the second of these two fires. Unfortunately, the late-winter weather in this region is quite chaotic. After two days under the snow, forcing us to stay in the lab to work on the experimental set up and survive on pizza and beer, part of the team had to fly back to Edinburgh. A reduced team was left to conduct the burn with our partners. 
 
Instrument preparations at the Pine Barrens field station

 To add an extra level of complexity when gambling on the weather, the IR aircraft must be ordered in advance and can’t be refunded. The experimental site was also located under the highly restricted airspace of a local bombing range and we are subject to their scheduling whims, making things even more difficult to organize. In the end, with the allowed season for burning quickly coming to a close, it was an enormous relief to finally manage a fire on the 11th of March – with ignition occurring just as a pair of fighter jets cleared the airspace.
 
Experimental prescribed fire on 11/3/14

As with any large scale experimental collaboration, it is nearly impossible to avoid a myriad of small complications which arise at the last minute. In this case, we were actually quite fortunate. With a combination of expertise from past experiences and good luck (not necessarily in that order), we ended up with a promising set of measurements from some rather exciting fire behaviour. Not to mention a number of smaller successes – the expensive FLIR camera did not melt (much to Michal’s relief), and we managed to survive an axe-wielding Rory without incident.

Pre- and post-fire conditions

 Such experiments are a somewhat rare opportunity, and it is a great asset to be able to draw from the impressive and varied expertise found in the Fire Group. Though the experimental aspect proposed at the outset of this project has come to a close, we are working to maintain a strong relationship with our collaborators in the U.S. It is our hope that this will be far from the last time the group is involved in such an undertaking. Beyond this, the results have already yielded a number of interesting questions which present and future researchers can investigate here in the laboratory. With the amount we have learned over the last two experiments, from both our successes and failures, we are excited by the prospect of what we can accomplish in the future. 

All photos copyright of Eric Mueller

Monday, May 26, 2014

#ed40fire – Where are we? How did we get here? Where are we going?



It was an honour to attend the 40th AnniversarySymposium & Celebration of Fire Safety Engineering at the University ofEdinburgh.  It had the feel of a family reunion, albeit a very large family.  We had the “kids” asking the annoying but pertinent “why?” questions to provoke their aunts and uncles; “mum” (i.e. Luke, Albert and the Redshirts) trying to keep everyone on track and on topic so that dinner wouldn’t be spoilt, and “dad” (Dougal) sitting in the midst of it all, with an unending smile, happy and proud to see all the family together, laughing at all the light-heated jesting going on.  

The familial spirit was present right from the start, where, after a warm welcome from Professor Drysdale, friend of the family, Dr John de Ris (FM Global) presented the 2014 IFE Rasbash Lecture, and was presented the Rasbash Medal by Dr Martin Shipp (BRE Global).  The title of the lecture – “Radiation and incomplete combustion of buoyant turbulent diffusion flames” – struck me with fear, however de Ris’ delivery of such a technical (and mathematically heavy) subject was second to none, and not only did I enjoy it, I learnt something from it.

IFE Rasbash Lecture - Dr. John De Ris
Philip Thomas Medal Lecture - Prof. Colin Bailey
Whilst the first day was kicked off by the Rasbash Lecture, the second was started by The Philip Thomas Lecture presented by Prof. Colin Bailey, who also received a medal for his efforts.  Professor Bailey discussed the future of structural fire engineering and highlighted the major differences between actual fires in actual buildings to the idealised fires and structural elements used in the accreditation process.  One of the key aspects highlighted was the economic and environmental benefits of design steel structures using catenary action to the floor plates; a mechanical process initially discovered due to a real fire in a real building and not seen previously under accreditation conditions. 

Unfortunately not everyone could receive a medal for their presentations, and past graduates and associates were invited to present their expert musings on the main tracks of the symposium – celebrating the 40 years of fire safety engineering at the University of Edinburgh and interrogating the questions: Where are we?; How did we get here?; and Where are we going?.  

The first session to attempt to answer these questions was firmly based in the design realm.; this is highly significant.  Fire engineers and designers apply the knowledge the academics create and feedback any problems and issues they find, thus driving research forward.  Without the practicing engineers, research would go on unguided and very slowly, if at all, so to all the engineers I say thank you (and to Angus Law for bringing this excellently to everyone’s attention with his talk). It was very fitting that this symposium started with a presentation highlighting current practice in design.

All of the presenters explained the history of their field excellently and I enjoyed hearing how we got to where we are in such diverse areas such as FSE education, tunnel fires (Ricky Carvel’s talk was a particular highlight of the symposium for me), and wildfires. I was proud to see how Edinburgh has been so involved in many of these scientific, technical, and practical developments. However, the things I found most exciting were all the problems challenges that were posed by the speakers.  A general consensus is that we are in a world that is changing ever more quickly: as populations we are living longer (and getting fatter, apparently); we want to build structures taller, more energy efficiently, and more optimised, all the while using novel materials (sorry Nico… PMMA ≠ Life); our ability to process and capture data is changing how we design and how precise we can be; and we are demanding more from our buildings. Our challenge is to keep up with the rest of the world.

Backer McKenzie - Tribute to Dr Frank Rushbrook CBE
Banquet - Surgeons' Hall, Edinburgh
This challenge was never more met than in the life and work of Dr Frank Rushbrook CBE who unfortunately passed away earlier this year.  It was a great privilege to hear from his close friend and neighbour, Backer McKenzie, about Frank’s life inside and out of fire engineering, and hearing about all of his charity work and support of local and national snooker events. Frank was a close friend of the fire safety engineering group and has always supported the work at Edinburgh, even in his passing.  The Frank Rushbrook Fund, set up in his memory aims to secure a world-leading student experience by facilitating global partnerships, teambuilding activities and travel scholarships.

The Frank Rushbrook Fund was announced at the banquet (“send money”) and it was a privilege to have some of Frank’s family joining in the celebrations of the group that he has so generously supported.   The three course meal was attended by our ever growing family, and we were all treated to tales of the early years by one of the first graduates, Craig Beyler.  This year the family might grow by more than 50 graduates, with the three different programs being taught at Edinburgh and the multitude of PhD students, many of whom were collared into wearing a red t-shirt for the symposium. It was also fantastic to have 20 of the original MSc graduates at the symposium, and to be included in this honoured and ever-growing family. 

Long may it continue.

40 years of Fire Safety Engineering at Edinburgh

All photos copyright of Liming Jiang

You can find the webpage of the event, with details and presentational material from all the talks on the fireseat.org web pages. 

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

6th International Symposium on Tunnel Safety and Security (ISTSS)

I attended the 6th International Symposium on Tunnel Safety and Security last week (Wed 12th to Friday 14th March 2014). The venue was the 'World Trade Centre' in Marseille, France. Despite the number in the title, this was actually the 7th in a series of tunnel safety conferences organised by SP, the Swedish National Testing and Research Institute, and the 5th of them that I'd attended. The conferences are held approximately every second year and the next will be in Canada in March 2016.

I attended the original "Catastrophic Fires" symposium  (2003, Borås) as well as the 3rd (2008, Stockholm), 4th (2010; Frankfurt) and 5th (2012; New York) ISTSS gatherings. This conference, like the last few, was attended by well over 200 delegates from all around the globe, although the majority this time came from European countries. In general I found the presentations, discussions and debates at this conference better and more engaging than at either of the last two.

At previous conferences, the topic of water spray systems for fire protection and suppression was considered to be a 'niche' area, sometimes relegated to the smaller parallel session. That was not the case this time, with the 'Fixed Fire Fighting Systems' (FFFS) session being in the main room on the first morning of the conference. The opening keynote address by Magnus Arvidson from SP proposed a new set of 'performance objectives' for a standard test of the capabilities of water spray systems for tunnels. Much of what he said paralleled my keynote presentation on "Mitigation of Tunnel Fires" from the NYC conference 2 years ago, but some of the objectives he discussed appeared (to me at least) to imply a bias in the standard against water mist systems. Other presentations on FFFS were a mixed bag containing details of some new tests I wasn't previously aware of, through to some doubtful claims about the capabilities of computational fluid dynamics models like FDS being able to accurately predict the suppression effects of sprinklers on vehicle fires.

The "Fire Dynamics" session had some interesting stuff in it too, perhaps the most worrying of which was the presentation by Norm Alvares where he showed how easy it is to ignite vehicle tyres, and how hard they are to extinguish with water sprays.

But for me, the highlight of day 1 was the demonstration smoke test in the nearby Prado-Carénage Tunnel. The test was a demonstration of the capabilities of their ventilation system, which was quite impressive. Despite a naturally windy location, the system is able to control ventilation in the tunnel, so that if there is a fire in the tunnel, the airflow can be reduced to zero at the fire location, while smoke is extracted on either side of that location.

On day 2 of the conference I spent most of the day in the 'Ventilation' session as I was chairing the session in the morning and speaking in the afternoon. I have a particularly biased view of this session as my paper "Rediscovering the Throttling Effect" was awarded 'best paper' at the conference dinner. A video of my presentation is given below.



The other papers in the session were generally interesting and contained a good mix of experimental and modelling studies. It is clear, however, that we are still as obsessed with 'backlayering' as we were over a decade ago. I caught the final few talks in the 'Risk Analysis' session, and these were also interesting, some of them daring to ask questions about ethical issues and the value of human lives.

Photo thanks to Mia Kumm, Mälardalen University
The conference dinner was a good end to day 2 and featured singing by members of the SP team as well as awards for the best poster, the best paper and the ISTSS 'Achievement Award' which was given to Dr Yajue Wu from Sheffield University. An after dinner speech was given by Arnold Dix where he commended, amongst other things, the papers that took seriously the ethical issues of fire and life safety in tunnels. He also urged the delegates to share knowledge, in particular with developing countries - a message which was well received, but only time will tell if its actually applied.

The final day seemed slightly muted compared to the previous two, although there were still some interesting debates following Peter Johnson's claim that suppression systems do not hinder egress in tunnels. In the other session, there were some good presentations on passive fire protection and structural issues, with the 'mobile furnace' presented by CETU and CSTB being an interesting innovation. Following lunch, the day closed with a few presentations of case studies, including the worlds longest undersea tunnel project in Norway.

And then it was over. All in all it was a good conference, in a good location with some interesting presentations. I'm not a great fan of 'networking lunches' and the poster session was not given the prominence it deserved, but aside from those two minor niggles, this was an enjoyable and well organised conference. I look forward to the next one in Canada...
Ricky Carvel

Thursday, March 06, 2014

Blog post 2.0 – An Edinburgh Postdoc’s IAFSS Experience

The IAFSS 11th international symposium was held this February in Christchurch, New Zealand.  The fact that the conference was held in Christchurch, not too long after the devastating earthquakes three years ago, which crippled the city and from which it is still only just starting to recover, is a testament to the Association and the organisers to stick with, and support, Christchurch and the University of Canterbury.  It was clear from Prof Charley Fleischmann’s opening address that the past few years have been tough for everyone in Christchurch and it was a privilege for me to be part of this conference, in this place.

As at most academic conferences, there were a variety of presenting styles for the technical and keynote talks, some of which were good and some that were on a spectrum between slightly confusing, to somewhat hard to follow, to downright incomprehensible.  In general the keynote addresses lucidly conveyed their messages, with clear and concise descriptions of what had been done, why it had been done, and why the varied audience attending the conference should be interested in the research outcomes; and in general, the better presentations contextualised and provided a history up to the point of the novel research being presented (as should be expected for a keynote address).  Particularly good exponents of this were structural engineer John Hare, who spoke on the immediate structural engineering problems that arose in the aftermath of the 2011 Christchurch earthquake, and Prof Bart Merci, who eloquently highlighted the need for more information on the appropriate allocation of computing resources used in research and consultancy to ensure appropriate use and development of computer models and programs in fire safety science and engineering applications.

Other highlights of the conference from my point of view were the presentations given by Dr Mike Spearpoint and Prof Jose Torero. Mike’s presentation on the probabilities of finding doors open (10% apparently), and Jose’s talk on the history and future of the compartment fire, respectively, were excellent.  Both presenters were confident and casual, and clearly explained the context, limitations, equations and methods used in their work. The slides were clear, uncluttered, and comprehensible in the short time that the audience had to look at them (unlike in some of the other technical and keynote presentations). And for the most part the peer-reviewed papers, posters (including a cartoon poster!), and images that were presented were of very good quality; providing topics leading to interesting debates. However not all the presentations were up to these standards and, as in previous IAFSS meetings, lack of clarity or an inability to place oneself in the place of the audience member was a serious problem for some presenters. 

As for the organisation of the conference – I was duly impressed with the programming of the various conference components, with complimentary areas of interest being separated into parallel sessions so that one would not have to choose between Paper X or Paper Y, but could happily see both; also the venues and the evening entertainment programme were very well chosen (particularly considering the post-earthquake destruction), allowing discussions and networking to easily take place between all the participants – of which there were about 250 in total with 15 having strong ties to the BRE centre at Edinburgh (see photo below). However there were no participants from Africa or from South America, which is clearly not due to any failing in the organisation of the conference but a reality which raises questions for the Association in general:  Is this a concern? Are there fire science research centres in these continents with sufficient funds to come to international conferences? If yes, why is IAFSS not sufficiently appealing to them? If no, how can IAFSS support and involve researchers, students, and practitioners from these continents in the progress of fire safety science?

The Membership Business Meeting reported that the Association is in very good financial health, membership is on the rise, and the new committee was announced. In light of the financial state of the association, it seemed a shame that two of the three recipients of the Best Thesis Awards did not attend the symposium to receive their award and accolades in person, even though there is apparently money set aside for students to attend. 

The membership meeting also highlighted, for me at least, a certain (and worrying) lack of transparency within the organization.  I found it odd, as a relatively new member, that I could vote for members to be appointed to the executive committee but not for the chairman (more appropriately chairperson), who will lead the executive committee and the Association for the next three years.  I found it odd that that there were no clear indications as to why there are 24 members to the committee or why these need to equally represent the three regions that the Association has (rather arbitrarily it seems) separated the world into.  It is also odd that, having looked at the bylaws of the association, the association could be run by the six officers (Chairman, 3 vice-chairmen, an honorary secretary, and an honorary treasurer) and two members of the committee, without the need for 16 additional committee members. 

However, for all my nit-picking at certain problems and concerns (which are intended to help the IAFSS to improve in the years to come), I thoroughly enjoyed the well organised conference; I learnt a good deal from, and enjoyed many of, the presentations; and I had the opportunity to build research contacts with several people.  I look forward to Lund in 2017!

Edinburgh and associates Copyright All rights reserved by IAFSS

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Dr Frank Rushbrook, CBE 1914-2014


Dr Rushbrook visiting the Rushbrook Fire Laboratory in 2011
It was with great sadness that we learned of the passing of Dr Frank Rushbrook, CBE on the 17th February 2014, aged 99. Frank was a true visionary who will forever be associated with the creation of the academic discipline of Fire Safety Engineering at Edinburgh and was a life-long friend and supporter of the group.

During his long and distinguished career in the Fire Service, with time spent in Edinburgh and London during the war, Frank rose to the rank of Firemaster of Edinburgh and South-East of Scotland Fire Brigade before retiring in 1970. The post-war years were a time of rapid technological change. Dr Rushbrook saw that there was a need for graduates skilled in Fire Safety Engineering to interact more positively with established engineering disciplines and architects to solve issues of fire safety in modern, increasingly large and complex buildings. From the early signs of change, Frank knew that education was key.

In the early 1970s, he convinced the University of Edinburgh to take a step into the unknown to establish a Department for Fire Engineering – a global first. Frank set about raising the funds to support the appointment of a professor and two lecturers. Under the leadership of Professor Rasbash (with the then Dr Drysdale and Dr Marchant) the team at Edinburgh developed the first postgraduate course in Fire Safety Engineering. The curriculum broke new ground and set academic standards for the subject. It was expanded into undergraduate and postgraduate courses as far afield as Worcester Polytechnic Institute in the USA and The University of Canterbury in New Zealand. With the success of the postgraduate programme, Frank stepped in again to help raise the funds to support a third lecturer and see the Department through some tough times. As always, when Frank stepped in, it was to guarantee that the programme became stronger.

This happened again in 2001 when Frank made a gift to the University to build the Rushbrook Fire Laboratory. This state-of-the-art fire research lab is unique to Edinburgh and cemented the research group’s position as one of the best in the world. It played a large part in attracting fellow visionary Prof Torero to lead the Fire Safety Engineering research and teaching at Edinburgh. The combination of these personalities lead to unprecedented growth in research and teaching activity at the University with large research projects and a new undergraduate course. Dr Rushbrook’s long career, foresight and philanthropy was acknowledged with an Honorary Doctorate conferred on him by the University in 2004.
Dr Rushbrook celebrating his 99th birthday with Prof Lygate (centre) and Prof Simeoni (right) in December 2013
On a personal level, I owe much to Dr Rushbrook. His company International Fire Investigators and Consultants Ltd sponsored my PhD allowing me an insight into the fascinating world of fire investigation. In 2012, Frank realized one more vision – to develop research and teaching in fire investigation. With a personal donation to the University, the Rushbrook Lectureship in Fire Investigation was established. I am honoured to be the first holder of the title and I could not have asked for a better mentor and visionary to launch me on my career.

Over the years, Frank would regularly visit the group to inspire and enlighten generations of students through his lectures, stories and vision. Four decades on, his legacy is not simply in creating a profession, it is more than that, it is ensuring it survived.

We had hoped Dr Rushbrook would join us as guest of honour at our 40th anniversary event later this year. Instead, it will be held in his memory.

Rory Hadden

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Prof Bisby speaks at Royal Academy of Engineering Research Forum 2013 - live tweets

More to follow...