Application of Compressed Air Foam System in Extinguishing Oil Tank Fire and Middle Layer Effect

Fu, Xuecheng; Bao, Zhiming; Chen, Tao; Xia, Jianjun; Zhang, Xianzhong; Zhang, Jin; Hu, Yingnian

doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2012.08.220

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the tests with CAF, all products extinguished the fire and the extinction time with product F was shortened by 1:42 min:s (44%). The authors believe that this improvement is heavily affected by the change in the firefighting foam properties caused by smaller bubbles and a narrower size distribution, as has been shown to be the case with CAF [20,29,33]. Based on the current investigation, the effect of the increased expansion ratio cannot be excluded and may therefore interfere with the result.…”

Section: Authors' Contributionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…Bubble size and bubble size distribution has been discussed. Based on result shown in previous studies [20,29,33], CAF tend to have a narrower bubble size distribution and a smaller average size of the bubbles. These properties have been said to improve firefighting properties [20], which is supported by the current study.…”

Section: Summary Of Different Properties Potential Impact On the Fire...mentioning

confidence: 75%

“…No characterisation of bubble size distribution was made in the present study. This has been investigated in previous studies [20,29,33] with results indicating a lower mass median diameter and a narrower bubble size distribution for CAF compared to aspirated firefighting foam. Smaller bubbles and an a more even size distribution has in the previous studies been shown to contribute to improved drainage properties (i.e.…”

Section: Caf Vs Uni 86mentioning

confidence: 93%

“…With the flow rate of foam solution kept constant, the volume of generated firefighting foam differed between the (comparable) tests. This is of importance when evaluating the results, since both the distribution of bubble size [20,29,33] and the total volume of firefighting foam were varied simultaneously. However, the results from these tests are still considered to be of interest since the flow rate of foam solutions was kept constant.…”

Section: Caf Vs Uni 86mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Fire Test Performance of Eleven PFAS-Free Class B Firefighting Foams Varying Fuels, Admixture, Water Types and Foam Generation Techniques

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The firefighting performance of eleven PFAS-free firefighting foams was evaluated using different fuels (Jet A1, commercial heptane and diesel) and types of water (freshwater and synthetic sea water). Moreover, different firefighting foam generation techniques and application methods were evaluated. The firefighting foams were generated as aspirated foams or as compressed air foams (CAFs). The results for CAF showed a higher performance, with respect to extinction time and burn-back resistance, compared to the foam generated using a UNI 86 nozzle. The CAF was not optimised, indicating a further potential of this foam generation technique. The results indicate that the time to fire knockdown decreases with decreasing foam viscosity. The heat flux was shown to be small, although the entire fuel surface was involved in the fire. The tests showed a dependence on fuel type; different products performed differently depending on the fuel. Tests using sea water showed that addition of salt to the foam solution generally prolonged the extinction time, although for one of the firefighting foams a shorter extinction time was observed. Out of the eleven evaluated PFAS-free products there was no product that outperformed the rest. None of the products in the study met the fire test performance requirements in all the referenced standards. Instead, the products seem to have different niches where they perform best e.g., with different types of fuel or water.

show abstract

Section: Authors' Contributionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: Summary Of Different Properties Potential Impact On the Fire...mentioning

confidence: 75%

Section: Caf Vs Uni 86mentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Caf Vs Uni 86mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Fire Test Performance of Eleven PFAS-Free Class B Firefighting Foams Varying Fuels, Admixture, Water Types and Foam Generation Techniques

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The ability of CAF in extinguishing oil-tanker fire was confirmed. 14 The fire combustion characteristics of CAF and the effect of each fire-extinguishing agent were studied, 15 with CAF performing better than the conventional foam system. A comparative study of CAF and traditional foam on the suppression performance of Class A and Class B fires has also been conducted.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thermal characteristics of fire extinguishing agents in compartment fire suppression

Kim,

Park,

Park

et al. 2024

Science Progress

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water and foam have different fire-extinguishing mechanisms. Traditional foam and compressed air foam (CAF) have different bubble structures. These differences result in different thermal characteristics, which affect the extinguishing abilities during a fire. In this study, the differences in the thermal characteristics of three different extinguishing agents (water, traditional foam, and CAF) were investigated by suppressing a compartment fire. With an ignition source in the compartment (6 m × 3 m × 3 m), the agent was preferentially applied to the outside wall of the compartment. The effects of internal cooling and burnback resistance generated from the outer wall were evaluated. The performance of each agent in shielding firefighters from radiant heat while suppressing the fire inside the compartment was evaluated. When the outside wall of the compartment was covered with each of the agents, all agents were found to reduce the room temperature. When CAF was applied, the delay time until temperature re-rise was approximately 1.76–4.5 times longer than that when water was used. In addition, foaming agents exhibited a higher heat-shielding effect than water during the initial suppression. Thus, considering the thermal characteristics of these agents, fire suppression can be more effective if foam agents are used.

show abstract

Research on Key Parameters and Fire Extinguishing Effectiveness of Compressed Air Foam System Used for UHV Substation

Zhang,

Shang,

Zhang

et al. 2024

Fire Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Application of Compressed Air Foam System in Extinguishing Oil Tank Fire and Middle Layer Effect

Cited by 13 publications

References 1 publication

Fire Test Performance of Eleven PFAS-Free Class B Firefighting Foams Varying Fuels, Admixture, Water Types and Foam Generation Techniques

Fire Test Performance of Eleven PFAS-Free Class B Firefighting Foams Varying Fuels, Admixture, Water Types and Foam Generation Techniques

Thermal characteristics of fire extinguishing agents in compartment fire suppression

Research on Key Parameters and Fire Extinguishing Effectiveness of Compressed Air Foam System Used for UHV Substation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About