首页> 外文会议>International conference on fire and materials >Fires due to Electric Arcing: Can 'Cause' Beads Be Distinguished from 'Victim' Beads by Physical or Chemical Testing?
【24h】

Fires due to Electric Arcing: Can 'Cause' Beads Be Distinguished from 'Victim' Beads by Physical or Chemical Testing?

机译:由于电弧指责的火灾:可以通过物理或化学测试将珠子与“受害者”珠子区分开来?

获取原文

摘要

A wide variety of physical or chemical testing methods have been proposed for differentiating between an electric arc bead that caused a fire, versus one that was caused by the fire itself. The methods all implicitly assume that there is some categorical difference between these two types of arc beads. A consideration of the room fire process leads to the conclusion that the thermal or chemical histories in these two cases cannot be claimed to be categorically different. Furthermore, most of the proposed methods only entail subjective, qualitative criteria for distinguishing between beads that did or did not start a fire. Finally, all of the methods have been based on studies where only a small number of specimens were tested; none of the methods have been successfully reproduced in laboratories other than the proponent's, while several have been shown explicitly not to be reproducible. Thus, despite the help to fire investigations that would be possible if a reliable method could be produced, it must be concluded that none of the proposed methods are promising.
机译:已经提出了各种物理或化学测试方法,用于区分导致火的电弧珠,而不是由火本身引起的。这些方法都隐含地假设这两种类型的弧形珠子之间存在一些分类差异。考虑房间消防过程的考虑导致了这两种情况下的热量或化学历史不能声称是小型不同的。此外,大多数提出的方法只需要在珠子之间区分或未开始火灾的主观定性标准。最后,所有方法都是基于研究的研究,其中只测试了少量标本;除了支持者之外的实验室中没有成功复制这些方法,而几个已被明确显示出来的不可重复。因此,尽管可以帮助灭火,但如果可以产生可靠的方法,则必须得出结论,因此没有一个提出的方法是有前途的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号