4.5 Article

Smouldering Combustion in Loose-Fill Wood Fibre Thermal Insulation: An Experimental Study

Journal

FIRE TECHNOLOGY
Volume 54, Issue 6, Pages 1585-1608

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10694-018-0757-4

Keywords

Fire; Safety; Smouldering combustion; Wood fibre; Loose-fill thermal insulation

Funding

  1. Research Council of Norway [238329]
  2. EMRIS (Emerging Risks from Smoldering Fires) project

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A bench-scale experimental setup has been used to study the conditions necessary for smouldering ignition in four types of loose-fill wood fibre thermal insulation, and to study the development of the smouldering process. The products varied with regard to wood species, grain size and fire retardant chemical additives. The test material was placed in an insulated open top container and heated from below. Temperatures within the sample and mass loss were measured during the tests. Both the fibre size and the level of added fire retardant seem to influence the smouldering ignition. Two different types of smouldering were identified in this study. Materials undergoing smouldering Type 1 obtained maximum temperatures in the range 380 degrees C to 440 degrees C and a total mass loss of 40wt% to 50wt%. Materials undergoing smouldering Type 2 obtained maximum temperatures in the range 660 degrees C to 700 degrees C and a total mass loss of 80wt% to 90wt%. This implies that Type 2 smouldering involves secondary char oxidation, which represents a risk for transition to flaming combustion and thereby a considerable fire hazard. This has been an exploratory project and the results must therefore be considered as indicative. The findings may, however, have implications for fire safety in the practical use of loose-fill wood fibre insulation in buildings, and further experimental studies should be performed with this in mind to obtain more knowledge about the topic.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available