QUANTIFICATION OF THE RESILIENCE OF RAILWAY STATION … may 2018 quantification of the resilience of railway station in case of pyro-terrorism act –research project re(h)strain eric

www.efectis.com May 2018

QUANTIFICATION OF THE RESILIENCE OF RAILWAY STATION IN CASE

OF PYRO-TERRORISM ACT – RESEARCH PROJECT RE(H)STRAIN

Eric GUILLAUME, Anne THIRY-MULLER, Virginie DRÉAN, Renato MOLE-ANTONIAZZA,

Eddie FAURE, Gildas AUGUIN

../../Présentation-ppt/ANIMATIONS/STRUCTURE/Comportement au feu des structures - Parking.mpg

../../Présentation-ppt/ANIMATIONS/STRUCTURE/Comportement au feu des structures - Parking.mpg

May 2018www.efectis.com 2

RESEARCH PROJECT : RE(H)STRAIN

Resilience of the Franco-German High Speed Train Network

Franco-German project

Supported by the French National Agency for Research

(ANR) and by the German Federal Ministry for research

and education

Involving partners from universities, laboratories,

industries

3 years project (2015-2017) – ended december 2017


RESEARCH PROJECT : RE(H)STRAIN

LCPP & EFECTIS : WP 4

Objectives:Quantification of the

consequences of terrorist attack, on people, infrastructures & traffic

LCPP + Efectis TATP bomb followed by arson fire on a TGV located inside a station

Development of an engineering method for explosion and arson fire events

Most results of WP 4 are classified for safety reasons


CONSEQUENCES OF TERRORIST ATTACKS USING FIRE AND BOMB - METHODOLOGY

Small scale (first burning item)

Seats - numerical (Efectis)

Luggages – experimental (LCPP)

Medium scale (wagon)

Explosions and fires

Closed and broken windows

Evaluation of HRR and risk of propagation to adjacent cars

Large scale (train station)

Explosions and fires

Hot gases and smoke propagation

Thermal flux imparted to structures

Analysis of evacuation

www.efectis.com 5May 2018

TERRORIST ATTACK SCENARIOS.

BOMB ATTACK FOLLOWED BY AN ARSON FIRE IN A PASSENGER

COMPARTMENT


FIRE SCENARIOS

TATP bomb followed by an arson fire in a passenger wagon

Evaluation of the fire HRR

Depends on initial conditions:

Ventilation: glass and structure breakage after bomb explosion - linked

with the quantity of explosive

Fire source: first burning item - seat or luggage

Depends on fire development in the compartment and its eventual propagation

to adjacent cars


FIRST BURNING ITEMS

Small scale

2 source terms evaluated

Gasoline spread on a seat – numerically

Luggage, with and without gasoline – experimentally


FIRE DEVELOPMENT

Medium scale

Numerical analysis with FDS

Fire development in case of :

Seat initially burning

Luggage initially burning

For different conditions of ventilation

Glasses remaining, glass breakage, etc.

For different localisations of the first burning item

Bottom or top coach of a duplex passenger compartment

Middle of the coah or nearby entry for luggage


TRAIN IN THE STATION

Large scale

Fire simulations with FDS

Assessment of

Thermal conditions in the platform and station

Heat fluxes on structures


THERMAL CONDITIONS IN THE STATION:

CONSEQUENCES OF EXPLOSION FOLLOWED BY AN ARSON FIRE IN A

PASSENGER COMPARTMENT


RAILWAY STATION

Representative of a French station for High Speed Train

2 levels underground railway station

G.fl-1 : Concourse + shops

200 × 24 × 7,6 m

G.fl-2 : 2 platforms + 2 rails for TVG duplex

480 × 24 × 8 m

Rail : 9 m width

Platform: 9 m width

Bidirectionnal tunnel – section 60 m²

Bidirectionnal tunnel – section 60 m²


NUMERICAL MODELLING

FDS v6

In the station:

Smoke spread (optical density)

Thermal conditions

Toxicity (not presented here)

Acceptability criteria for passengers

Evacuation conditions

Safe Difficult Hard

Temperature (°C) < 40 40 ≤ x < 60 ≥ 60

Optical density (m-1) < 0.1 0.1 ≤ x < 0.2 ≥ 0.2


MAIN RESULTS

Hard conditions for passengers in at least one escape route

Stairs & platform < 5 min

Concourse < 7.5 min


COMPATIBILITY WITH EVACUATION:

CONSEQUENCES OF EXPLOSION FOLLOWED BY A FIRE IN A PASSENGER

COMPARTMENT


EVACUATION ANALYSIS

2 types of approaches evaluated

Determinist : French analytical model GA 23 (French fire regulation)

Evacuation time calculation without fire

Probabilistic : agent based model FDS+EVAC

Evacuation time calculation with fire

Lethality analysis

Exit selection analysis (fire related conditions)

t = 0 min

t = 6.5 min


ADVANCED CALCULATION : FDS+EVAC

2 terrorist attack scenarios

•Rucksack bomb

• Suitcase bomb

200 evacuation calculation for each

fire scenario and each set of parameters

total evacuation simulations = 3200 calculations with

FDS + EVAC

8 sets of parameters= behaviour, number of

agent, disabled…


ADVANCED CALCULATIONS: MAIN HYPOTHESIS

3 agent profiles

Adults, different levels of disability

3 types of behaviors

Leaders (optimize their evacuation, know the places, station staff)

Followers (don’t know the places, are lost, are shocked)

Standards (first seek out known issues, but may also follow others if

conditions are not conducive to known outcomes)

2 initial numbers of people in the station

Full = 4500 agents

Reduced = 50 % at R-1 and 100% at G.Fl-2 = 2772 agents

Unavailability of some area function of :

temperature or visibility (fire calculation results - FDS)

explosion (explosion calculation results - Autodyn)

Quick pre-movement time of agents (30 to 90 secondes)

Descending escalators neglected

Parametricstudy – 8 datasets

General hypothesis

for all scenarios


EVACUATION MAIN RESULTS

Few significant differences between the 8 evacuation datasets and the 2

attack scenarios (explosion / fire)

The impact of all input parameters tested is very limited

What is the most determining in terms of evacuation time is the evacuation of

the G.fl-2 and in particular the exit of the train

Important number of simulations needed to achieve convergence +

significance of dispersion of results?

Exit analysis shows that door selection has significant dispersion


EVACUATION MAIN RESULTS

Advanced calculation with FDS+EVAC

Mean evacuation time is +/-16 min

+/- 5 min for the train evacuation (doors opened at 3 min)

Simple analytical calculation

Mean evacuation time is 9.5 min

Difference due to :

Fire/explosion conditions not taken into account in the simple calculation

(exit selection, reduced walking speed)

Equal distribution of people on exits in simple calculation

Train evacuation is not included in simple calculation


CONCLUSION


SYNTHESIS

Multiscale analysis

With numerical and experimental evaluation of first burning items

New data for luggage fires in semi-confined environment (to be

published)

Advanced calculation with FDS+EVAC

Important number of calculations needed to achieve convergence

Development of specific tools for post treatment of results and

analysis

Need further exploration of FDS+EVAC


THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION, QUESTION?

Documents

QUANTIFICATION OF THE RESILIENCE OF RAILWAY STATION … may 2018 quantification of the resilience of railway station in case of pyro-terrorism act –research project re(h)strain eric