2018
DOI: 10.1007/s10973-018-7556-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessing the fire risk of electrical cables using a cone calorimeter

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
19
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
19
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…On the other hand, when compared with the results of scientific works of Walters et al [24], Karlsson and Quintiere [25] and Tsiamis et al [27], the investigated electrical cables (as a whole) showed significantly lower effective heat of combustion (fire risk in terms of released heat), as most of synthetic polymers. For comparison, the results of the scientific work of Martinka et al [31] (for similar electrical cables) showed that the average heat of combustion of outer sheath is 16.5 ± 0.3 MJ/kg, the average heat of combustion of bedding is 7.4 ± 0.2 MJ/kg and the average heat of combustion of insulation is 16.9 ± 0.5 MJ/kg.…”
Section: Results and Discussion On Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, when compared with the results of scientific works of Walters et al [24], Karlsson and Quintiere [25] and Tsiamis et al [27], the investigated electrical cables (as a whole) showed significantly lower effective heat of combustion (fire risk in terms of released heat), as most of synthetic polymers. For comparison, the results of the scientific work of Martinka et al [31] (for similar electrical cables) showed that the average heat of combustion of outer sheath is 16.5 ± 0.3 MJ/kg, the average heat of combustion of bedding is 7.4 ± 0.2 MJ/kg and the average heat of combustion of insulation is 16.9 ± 0.5 MJ/kg.…”
Section: Results and Discussion On Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Monte Carlo simulation and CFAST are used to estimate the failure probability of redundant cables in a cable tunnel fire and failure and smoke filling probabilities in an electronics room during an electronics cabinet fire [14]. Finally, the heat release rate and toxicity of combustion products, smoke yield, and flashover category assess the effect of the mutual spacing between the cables and thermal conductivity of cable materials on fire risk [15]. Van Weyenberge et al [16] used smoke spread, evacuation, and consequence model to determine final consequences, and the final risk was given by the expected number of fatalities, individual risk, and societal risk.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, recent catastrophic events and present legislations clearly highlight the potential danger related to fire events, as well as the environmental and toxicological risks associated with some of the most commonly used flame-retardant chemicals. Particular fire risk is associated with electrical cables as they contain several polymeric parts (insulation, bedding, sheath) constituting fuel sources (for fire start and spread) as a consequence of arcing, excessive ohmic heating (without arcing) and external heating [1,2]. Ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) and EVA blends with polyethylene (EVA-PE) are among the most widely used polymers for insulation and sheathing of electric cables.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%