120.55
ICV 2016
8
MNiSW
 
 

CFD simulation of the brattice barrier method for approaching underground mine fires

Vancho Adjiski 1  ,  
 
1
Faculty of Natural and Technical Sciences, Mining engineering, “Goce Delchev” University
Mining Science 2016;23:161–172
KEYWORDS:
TOPICS:
ABSTRACT:
Fires are the most feared hazard in underground mines. The problems associated with underground mine fires calls for special techniques and treatments in its prevention and fire fighting. Each mine fire presents unique conditions from the perspective of dealing with it. The purpose of this paper is to present Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulated fire scenarios on which is tested the brattice barrier method for approaching underground mine fires. With this experimental CFD model we can determine the effectiveness of this method. These simulations were performed to determine if we increase the air velocity into the roof with help of brattice barrier, will this remove the smoke and heat upstream of the fire so that firefighters can approach safely and extinguish the fire. We can also observe the explosive range of the particles and gases that travel upstream of the fire and are then forced back into the fire area by this brattice barrier method.
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR:
Vancho Adjiski   
Faculty of Natural and Technical Sciences, Mining engineering, “Goce Delchev” University, „Krste Misirkov“ No.10-A, 2000 Shtip, Macedonia
 
REFERENCES (15):
1. ADJISKI V., 2014. Possibilities for simulating the smoke rollback effect in underground mines using CFD software, GeoScience Engineering, Vol. 2014 (2), 8–18.
2. ADJISKI V., MIRAKOVSKI D., DESPODOV Z., MIJALKOVSKI S., 2015. Simulation and optimiza-tion of evacuation routes in case of fire in underground mines, Journal of Sustainable Mining, Vol.14 (3), 133–143.
3. BANERJEE S.C., 2001. Prevention and Combating Mine Fires, Taylor & Francis, 48-54.
4. CONTI R., CHASKO L., WIEHAGEN W., 2005. Fire Response Preparedness For Underground Mines, National Institute For Occupational Safety And Health-NIOSH, Pittsburgh Research Laboratory, Pittsburgh, PA, 34-42.
5. EDWARDS C.J., HWANG C.C., 1999. CFD analysis of mine fire smoke spread and reverse flow condi-tions, Proc. of 8th U.S. Mine Ventilation Symposium, University of Missouri-Rolla, 91-99.
6. EDWARDS C.J., FRANKS A.R., FRIEL F.G., YUAN L., 2006. Experimental and modeling investiga-tion of the effect of ventilation on smoke rollback in a mine entry, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Pittsburgh Research Laboratory, Pittsburgh, PA, 53-58.
7. Eisner H.S., Smith P.B. 1954. Convection Effect from Underground Fires – The Backing of Smoke Against Ventilation, SMRE RR 96.
8. HANSEN R., 2010. Design fires in underground mines, PhD thesis Mälardalen University, Sweden, 33–39.
9. KLOTE J., 2002. Principles of smoke management, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers Inc, 22–34.
10. MCPHERSON M.J., 1993. Subsurface Ventilation and Environmental Engineering, Chapman and Hall, 847-853.
11. MITCHELL D.W., 1996. Mine Fires Prevention, Detection, Fighting, (Intertec Publishing Inc, Chicago, IL), 19-28.
12. PyroSim User Manual, 2012. PyroSim Documentation (user manual of computer code), Thunderhead Engineering Consultants, Inc, Manhattan, KS, USA, 125–137.
13. RYAN M.W., 1996. The impact of airflow changes on the hazards of direct fighting of fires involving conveyor belting, International conference- Safety In Mines Research Institutes, Vol. 4, 53-68.
14. TOTTEN G., WESTBROOK S., SHAH R., 2003. Fuels and lubricants handbook: technology, properties, performance, and testing, 1 ASTM International, 63–71.
15. ZALOSH R., 2003. Industrial Fire Protection Engineering, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Worcester, WA, 32-41.
Copy url
Share
 
 
Sign up for email alerts
 
eISSN:2353-5423
ISSN:2300-9586