首页> 外文期刊>Industrial fire journal >In Defence Of Sprinklers
【24h】

In Defence Of Sprinklers

机译:捍卫喷头

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Lack of understanding of the manner in which the systems operate is one of the chief reasons such myths continue to influence architects and designers when they argue against installing them. The classic misrepresentation statement on sprinklers, or in this case the absence of them, has to be the UK Government Minister who stated after the Windsor Castle fire in 1992; "Thank God there were no sprinklers, the damage would have been far worse if there had been." It is difficult to imagine how he thought this might be so. After all, with sprinklers, at worst, the discharge would have been a few thousands of litres of water. Without them the Royal Berkshire Fire Service had to pump several million litres into the building - a great deal of which is still in the walls and substructures.
机译:缺乏对系统运行方式的理解是导致这些神话继续影响建筑师和设计师反对安装的神话的主要原因之一。关于洒水喷头,或者在这种情况下没有喷水喷头,经典的虚假陈述必须是英国政府部长,他在1992年温莎城堡大火后发表讲话; “感谢上帝,没有洒水器,如果有洒水器,其破坏将更加严重。”很难想象他怎么会这么认为。毕竟,使用洒水器,最糟糕的是排放的水将达到数千升。没有他们,皇家伯克郡消防局不得不向建筑物中注入数百万升的水-其中很大一部分仍留在墙壁和下部结构中。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Industrial fire journal》 |2009年第74期|30-32|共3页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

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