|
Version
IMO Test Cases
|
Programme version
These verification cases have been run using the FDS6 (version 6.5.3)
based version of the evacuation programme (Evac 2.5.2), GIT Revision:
FDS6.5.3-937-gee70904.
IMO Test Cases
Test cases defined by IMO
MSC/Circ.1238 (30 October 2007) 'Guidelines For Evacuation Analyses
for New and Existing Passenger Ships', Annex 3. Note, that the
figures on this page are just for illustrative purposes only. They
are not made with the latest version of the FDS+Evac, but they show
the geometry used in the test case calculations. All IMO test cases
are component and qualitative verification/validation test cases.
FDS+Evac is a stochastic evacuation modelling programme, where, e.g.,
the properties of the agents are generated using random distributions,
so each FDS+Evac run will produce a (little bit) different result.
Doing a quantitative validation would require that many FDS+Evac
simulations would be performed and their results analyzed, but for
these qualitative tests it is enough to perform just a single FDS+Evac
run for each of the test cases.
All IMO-test cases use the standard FDS+Evac human parameters
unless otherwise stated. In some cases, the IMO specified males of
30-50 years (Table 3.4. in MSC/Circ.1238, Annex 2) are used, which
specify walking speed on flat terrain:
Minimum walking velocity =
0.97 m/s
Maximum walking velocity = 1.62 m/s
Uniform
distribution
|
Test 1: Component testing
Maintaining set walking speed in a corridor.
fds file
Result file
|
|
Tests 2 and 3: Component testing
Maintaining set walking speed in stairs. (2: up, 3: down) 2 m
wide, 10 m long along the incline, 1.0m/s. Here, only case 2 is
presented, because in FDS+Evac the corridor/stairs algorithm is
exactly the same for going up or down the stairs. There are many
different ways to define stairs in FDS+Evac: a) using a 'CORR'
element, b) defining stairs as an incline 'EVSS' leading to a next
floor level, c) defining stairs as an incline 'EVSS' and the next
floor level is defined using a horizontal 'EVSS'.
Case a: fds file
Case b: fds file
Case c: fds file
Result file
|
|
Test 4: Component testing
Exit flow rate. Two different human parameter sets, Adult 1 and 2, are
used and the resulting human flows are compared. Adult 1 is the
standard 'Adult' defined in FDS+Evac, Adult 2 has L_NON_SP=0.3.
fds file (Adult 1)
fds file (Adult 2)
Results
|
|
Test 5: Component testing
Response time, uniform 10-100 s.
fds file
out file
Response time, LogNormal, IMO Circ.1238 Night and Day: The
geometry of the test case 9 is used, because there are more agents (1000).
fds file
Results
|
|
Test 6: Component testing
Rounding corners.
fds file
|
|
Test 7: Component testing
Demographics. Note that also the test case 9a results are used,
because there are 1000 agents compared to 50 in the test case 7.
The gender and age group dependent walking speeds given in the IMO
Annex 2 Table 3.4 are also tested.
Case 7, 50 agents:
fds file,
out file
IMO Annex 2 Table 3.4:
fds file,
out file
Results
|
|
Test 8: Qualitative verification
Counterflow between two rooms.
Case A: (fds file,
out file) Step
1, 0 at right (50.01 s)
Case B: (fds file,
out file) Step 2, 10 at
right (75.04 s)
Case C: (fds file,
out file) Step 2, 50 at
right (106.85 s)
Case D: (fds file,
out file) Step 2, 100 at
right (136.14 s)
|
|
Test 9: Qualitative verification
Exit flow from a large public room. The specific flow rates
(humans per metre per second) are calculated using times when 300th
and 700th persons exit the room.
Case A: (fds file) Step 1: All
doors open: 220.74 s, 1.19 1/m/s.
Case B: (fds file) Step 2: Doors
1 and 2 closed: 412.86 s, 1.23 1/m/s.
Case C: (fds file) Step 1: All
doors open: 171.32 s, 1.67 1/m/s, L_NON_SP=0.5
Case D: (fds file) Step 2:
Doors 1 and 2 closed: 322.85 s, 1.67 1/m/s, L_NON_SP=0.5
Results
|
|
Test 10: Qualitative verification
Exit route allocation.
fds file, thick walls
fds file B, thin walls
|
|
Test 11: Qualitative verification
Staircase
fds file
|
|
