...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Fire Protection Engineering >Arc Beads from Fires: Can 'Cause' Beads Be Distinguished from 'Victim' Beads by Physical or Chemical Testing?
【24h】

Arc Beads from Fires: Can 'Cause' Beads Be Distinguished from 'Victim' Beads by Physical or Chemical Testing?

机译:火灾中的电弧珠:可以通过物理或化学测试将“原因”珠子与“受害者”珠子区分开吗?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

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:已经提出了各种各样的物理或化学测试方法,以区分引起火灾的电弧珠和由火灾本身引起的电弧珠。这些方法都隐含地假设这两种类型的电弧珠之间存在一定的分类差异。考虑到房间着火的过程,得出的结论是,在这两种情况下的热历史或化学历史不能说是绝对不同的。此外,大多数提议的方法仅需要主观的,定性的标准来区分是否着火的珠子。最后,所有方法都基于仅对少量标本进行测试的研究。除支持者外,其他方法均未在实验室中成功复制,但已明确表明其中几种方法不可复制。因此,尽管如果可以产生一种可靠的方法,尽管有助进行火灾调查,但必须得出结论,所提出的方法都没有希望。

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