Extended field of application (EXAP) for reaction-to

Transcription

Extended field of application (EXAP) for
reaction-to-fire Euro-classification of optical
fibre cables
SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden
Richard Johansson, Johan Post, Michael Försth
SP Report 2015:32
Extended field of application (EXAP) for
reaction-to-fire Euro-classification of
optical fibre cables
Richard Johansson, Johan Post, Michael Försth
3
Abstract
Extended field of application (EXAP) for reaction-to-fire
Euro-classification of optical fibre cables
Reaction-to-fire tests for 66 optical fibre cables from different cable families were
analysed with the purpose of proposing rules for extended field of application (EXAP).
Four different candidates for EXAP rules were tested. These candidates were all based on
the already existing EXAP rules for power cables, CLC/TS 50576, which was proposed
in the CEMAC II project. It was found that the highest confidence was achieved by using
EXAP rules where safety margin are added to the tested cables, which is identical to the
procedure in CLC/TS 50576, and where the number descriptor n in the expression for the
cable parameter χ is given by the number of so called units. The number of units replaces
the number of conductors used in the expression for χ in the EXAP for power cables. A
unit is defined as a combustible tubular item which may contain one or several fibres,
excluding the fibres themselves or the outer jacket of the cable.
The proposed EXAP rules, where safety margins are used and where χ is described in
terms of number of units, gives a high confidence. Only 2% of the possible EXAP
applications within the set of cables gives an erroneous non-conservative indication of
Euroclass (B2ca, Cca, Dca, or Eca).
Key words: EXAP, CPR, reaction to fire, optical fibre cables
SP Sveriges Tekniska Forskningsinstitut
SP Report 2015:32
ISBN 978-91-88001-61-0
ISSN 0284-5172
Borås 2015
4
Contents
Abstract
3
Contents
4
Preface
5
1
Introduction
6
2
Background
7
2.1
Reaction-to-fire classification of cables
2.2
EXAP for power cables: The concepts of safety margin sm and
cable parameter 
7
3
Cable test data available for this study
15
4
Method
16
5
Results
19
5.1
 with n = number of optical fibres
5.2
 with n = number of units
5.3
Summary of results and comparison with results from CEMAC II
project (power cables)
10
19
21
23
6
Conclusions
24
7
References
25
8
Appendix: Proposal for EXAP-rules for optical fibre
cables 26
8.1
8.2
8.3
Definition of a product family for EXAP
EXAP with safety margin
Flaming droplets/particles
26
26
27
9
Appendix: Cable data
28
10
Appendix: Detailed analysis
37
10.1
χ calculated based on number of optical fibers, without using safety
margin sm
10.2
χ calculated based on number of optical fibers, using safety margin
sm
10.3
χ calculated based on number of units, without using safety margin
sm
10.4
χ calculated based on number of units, using safety margin sm
37
40
43
46
5
Preface
This project was ordered by Europacable who also selected the cables and supplied all
cable data and test data included in the analysis. All analyses were performed by SP.
6
1
Introduction
The Construction Products Directive, CPD (89/106/EEC - CPD) [1], came into force in
1988 and has basically been aiming at creating a common market for construction
products by producing documents on a European level that can be used for a common
declaration of the properties of the products, verified through the CE-mark. A CE-mark is
valid in more than 30 countries [2]. The Construction Products Regulation, CPR,
(305/2011/EU - CPR) [3] replaced the CPD in July 1, 2013. The CPR intends to further
clarify the concepts and the use of CE marking. Some procedures are simplified in order
to reduce costs, in particular for small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). The CPR is
also increasing the credibility and reliability of the system by imposing stricter
designation criteria to bodies involved in the assessment and the verification of
construction products. A very important change is that CE-marking now becomes
mandatory. This is expected to speed up the use of the CE-mark. Another implication
may be that national voluntary marking systems become less important.
In order to perform CE-marking, a so called harmonized product standard is needed in
addition to the test and classification standards mentioned above. There are more than
400 harmonized EN standards which are cited in the Official Journal, the European
official newspaper. The product standard describing construction of cable families is
termed EN 50575. One plausible scenario is that this product standard becomes published
in the Official Journal during fall 2015. This would mean that CE marking can start by
fall 2015 and will be obligatory by fall 2016 (assuming the minimum default one year
transition time).
The number of cables to be tested described by the product standard is very large and
testing of each cable would be excessively costly. Therefore, so called extended
application of test results, EXAP, should be made available. An EXAP allows a family of
products to be classified to a certain reaction to fire class without testing all of the
individual members of the family. The CEMAC II project [4, 5] included extensive
testing of cables on the market. Using these data as the technical basis EXAP procedures
could be developed for power cables. These rules where published in September 2014 as
a formal document termed CLC/TS 50576 [6]. However, no EXAP procedures for optical
cables or copper communication cables were developed as a result of the CEMAC II
project. This report aims to analyse new test data for optical fibre cables and to propose
EXAP procedures for such cables. The approach taken is to follow the procedures for
power cables to the largest extent possible in order to achieve consistency within the
regulatory framework. The most important requirement is however to deliver a
technically sound proposal.
7
2
Background
In this section a short background is given on the reaction-to-fire classification of cables
within the CPR. Section 2.1 outlines the classification system. A more complete
description can be found in reference [2]. Section 2.2 explain some specific features
regarding the existing EXAP for power cables. These features, the safety margin sm and
the cable parameter , will be important in the analysis and argumentation in this report.
More information can be found in the CEMAC II report [4], from where the content of
Section 2.2 has been abridged.
2.1
Reaction-to-fire classification of cables
Interpretation of test results into Euroclasses is described in the new revision of the
classification standard EN 13501. Details are found in a European Commission Decision
[7]. This revision contain a new section, called EN 13501-6 [8], which describe
classification of cables, in addition to the already existing classification of linings,
floorings, and pipe insulation. The classification is based on heat release and flame
spread, smoke production, burning droplets, and acidity. EN 13501-6 describes seven
heat release and flame spread classes of cables which are called Aca, B1ca, B2ca, Cca, Dca,
Eca and Fca. The performances of the different heat release and flame spread classes can
approximately be described as:
Class Aca. Level of highest performance corresponding to products that practically cannot
burn, i.e. ceramic products.
Class B1ca. Products that are combustible but show no or very little burning when
exposed to both the reference scenario experiments and the classification test procedure
EN 50399 (30 kW flame source).
Class B2ca and Class Cca. Products that do not give a continuous flame spread when
exposed to the 40-100 kW ignition source in the horizontal reference scenario, that do not
give a continuous flame spread, show a limited fire growth rate and limited heat release
rate when tested according to EN 50399 (20,5 kW flame source).
Class Dca. Products that show a fire performance approximately like that of wood when
tested in the reference scenarios. When tested according to EN 50399 (20,5 kW flame
source) the products show a continuous flame spread, a moderate fire growth rate, and a
moderate heat release rate.
Class Eca. Products where a small flame attack is not causing large flame spread.
Classes B1ca, B2ca, Cca, Dca, and Eca are based on tests according to EN 50399 [9] but also
require results from the small scale ignitability and flame spread test EN 60332-1-2 [10].
Class Aca requires testing according to EN ISO 1716 [11], however this is a rare class.
Smoke production is classified in the smoke classes s1a, s1b, s1, s2, and s3. Testing
according to standard EN 61034-2 [12] is required if compliance with the best smoke
classes, s1a and s1b, is sought. The other smoke classes are based on results from the EN
50399 test.
Burning droplets are classified into classes d0, d1, and d2. These classes are based on
results from the EN 50399 test.
8
Acidity is classified in the acidity classes a1, a2, and a3. Testing according to standard
EN 50267-2-3 [13] is required for classification of acidity.
The classification system from EN 13501-6 is summarized in Table 1 below.
The EXAP document CLC/TS 50576 [6], which is only applicable to power cables, is
only valid for classes B2ca, Cca, Dca, smoke classes s1, s2, and s3, and droplet classes d0,
d1, and d2. This is also the scope for the EXAP proposal for optical fibre cables to be
drafted in this report.
9
Table 1. Classes of reaction to fire performance for electric cables [8].
Class
Test method(s)
Classification criteria
Additional classification
Aca
B1ca
EN ISO 1716
EN 50399 (30 kW
flame source)
Smoke production (2,5) and
Flaming droplets/particles (3) and
Acidity (4, 7)
and
PCS ≤ 2,0 MJ/kg (1)
FS ≤ 1.75 m and
THR1200s ≤ 10 MJ and
Peak HRR ≤ 20 kW and
FIGRA ≤ 120 Ws-1
EN 60332-1-2
H ≤ 425 mm
B2ca
Cca
Dca
EN 50399 (20,5 kW flame FS ≤ 1.5 m and
source)
and
Peak HRR ≤ 30 kW and
FIGRA ≤ 150 Ws-1
Flaming droplets/particles (3) and
Acidity (4, 7)
EN 60332-1-2
H ≤ 425 mm
EN 50399 (20,5 kW flame FS ≤ 2.0 m and
source)
Peak HRR ≤ 60 kW; and
FIGRA ≤ 300 Ws-1
Flaming droplets/particles (3)
and Acidity (4, 7)
EN 60332-1-2
H ≤ 425 mm
EN
and 50399 (20,5 kW flame THR1200s ≤ 70 MJ; and
source)
Peak HRR ≤ 400 kW; and
FIGRA ≤ 1300 Ws-1
and
EN 60332-1-2
H ≤ 425 mm
Flaming droplets/particles (3)
and Acidity (4, 7)
H≤ 425 mm
Eca
EN 60332-1-2
Fca
No performance determined
(1) For the product as a whole, excluding metallic materials, and for any external component (i.e.
sheath) of the product.
(2) s1 = TSP1200 ≤ 50 m2 and Peak SPR ≤ 0.25 m2/s
s1a = s1 and transmittance in accordance with EN 61034-2 ≥ 80%
s1b = s1 and transmittance in accordance with EN 61034-2 ≥ 60% < 80%
s2 = TSP1200 ≤ 400 m2 and Peak SPR ≤ 1.5 m2/s
s3 = not s1 or s2
(3) d0 = No flaming droplets/particles within 1200 s; d1 = No flaming droplets/ particles persisting
longer than 10 s within 1200 s; d2 = not d0 or d1.
(4) EN 50267-2-3: a1 = conductivity < 2.5 µS/mm and pH > 4,3; a2 = conductivity < 10 µS/mm and pH
> 4.3; a3 = not a1 or a2. No declaration = No Performance Determined.
(5) The smoke class declared for class B1ca cables must originate from the test according to EN 50399
(30 kW flame source)
(6) The smoke class declared for class B2ca, Cca, Dca cables must originate from the test according to EN
50399 (20,5 kW flame source)
(7) Measuring the hazardous properties of gases developed in the event of fire, which compromise the
ability of the persons exposed to them to take effective action to accomplish escape, and not describing
the toxicity of these gases.
10
2.2
EXAP for power cables: The concepts of safety
margin sm and cable parameter 
In the CEMAC II project it was found that cables have a more complex fire behaviour
than many other products that are more homogeneous products, such as mineral wool for
example [14]. This is illustrated in the theoretical example in Figure 1 where the general
trend is that THR decreases with increasing diameter, d, but where the fourth cable makes
a sudden jump and breaks the monotonically1 decreasing trend. It is clear that if the
second and fifth cable would be tested and classification for all intermediate diameters
would be based only on the worst tested result, i.e. the result for the second cable,
classification would be too generous since the fourth cable, which belongs to class Dca
according to its THR value, would actually be classified as class Cca according the EXAP.
35
30
THR [MJ]
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
outer diameter [mm]
Figure 1
THR as a function of outer diameter. Theoretical example.
For this reason a safety margin needs to be added to the worst result for the two tested
cables. The magnitude of the safety margin will depend on how large the deviations from
monotonicity are. This is described by
 class   max  sm
Equation 1
where
class
is the value used for classification according to respective classification
parameter (peak HRR, THR, FIGRA, FS, peak SPR, and TSP),
max
is the maximum, that is worst, test result of the tests that forms the basis of
the EXAP, and
1
A monotonic function is a function that is always increasing or always decreasing. Constant
plateaus are also allowed. In other words the slope does not change sign.
11
sm
is the safety margin required for the particular classification parameter.
Taking Figure 1 as an example the deviation from monotonicity occurs between the third
and the fourth cable. THR for the third cable is 28 MJ and THR for the fourth cable is 31
MJ. The required safety margin in this example, sm, would therefore be 3 MJ. With such
a safety margin the EXAP would never, for this particular cable type, allow a too
generous classification of any non-tested cable included in the EXAP.
Still, some cables exhibit a behaviour that would require such large safety margins that
every application of the EXAP rules would result in class Eca, see Figure 2 for example.
90
80
70
THR [MJ]
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
outer diameter [mm]
Figure 2
THR as a function of outer diameter for cable group seven in CEMAC.
The non-monotonic behaviour shows that the fire behaviour has little or non correlation
with the outer diameter. This non monotonic behaviour remains also with other
fundamental cable parameters as x-axis [4]. In order to obtain a smoother graph it is
necessary to shift the outlier to one edge of the data set. It has been found that this can be
successfully done by introducing the following parameter:

c
Vcombust
d2
Equation 2
with
d
[m]
Vcombust [m2]
c
[]
2
Outer diameter.
Non-metallic2 volume per meter ladder.
Number of conductors in one cable.
In the CEMAC II project Vcombust was defined as the non-metallic volume per meter ladder. For
optical fiber cables, where typically no metals exist, Vcombust will instead be defined as the volume
of combustible material per meter ladder, see Equation 9 and Section 8.2.
12
Using  on the x-axis the graph transforms into Figure 3. The outlier is no longer an
outlier since it is found on the right edge of the data set. Therefore it will never be an
intermediate and non-tested cable in an EXAP. For any EXAP where this cable is
included it will be one of the tested boundary cables upon which the EXAP is based. The
high THR will therefore be reflected in max in Equation 1.
Using Equation 1 and Equation 2 it was found that safety margins according to Table 2
gave a very high confidence in the EXAP rules for power cables [4]. These correspond to
10% of the class limit for classes B2, C and D, and to 20% of the class limit for the
smoke classes s1 and s2, see also Table 1.
Table 2
Safety margins vsm.
Peak HRR [kW]
THR [MJ]
FIGRA [Ws-1]
Flame spread
[m]
Peak SPR [m2s-1]
TSP [m2]
B2ca
3
1.5
15
0.15
Cca
6
3
30
0.2
Dca
40
7
130
s1
s2
0.05
10
0.3
80
90
80
70
THR [MJ]
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80

Figure 3
THR as a function of  for cable group seven.
A phenomenological explanation to why  can describe THR is given below. The
quotient c/d2 relates to the density of conductors in a cross section of the cable. When the
flame hits a cable with a high conductor density the conductors can separate and air be
entrained into the cable. This increases the oxygen supply, and thereby the intensity, of
the combustion. Once the conductors have separated they can be viewed as separate
cables with smaller diameter than the original cable. This speeds up the heating and
therefore also the flame propagation along the cable. Multiplying the conductor density
13
c/d2 by the amount of combustible volume of the ladder gives an estimate of how much
material is combusted in total, which is an estimation of THR. Another contributing
factor to increased flammability for cables with a high value of  is that, for a given
diameter, the ratio of insulation material to sheathing material increases with increased
number of conductors, that is with increased . The insulation typically consists of a
rather flammable material such as polyethylene while the protective sheathing consists of
a more flame retardant material. Therefore, when the relative amount of insulation
material increases the flammability of the cable also increases.
Using  as x-axis also gives a reasonably monotonic behaviour for most other
classification parameters and cable types [4]. A plausible explanation of this is given
below.
From the FIPEC project, reference [15] p 150, it was concluded that for a majority of
cables the most severe test is obtained by spacing the cables with a distance in the order
of magnitude of their diameter. The mounting procedure suggested by the FIPEC project
has been implemented in standard EN 50399 [9] and these procedures were used in the
large scale tests performed within the CEMAC project. Since, typically, the cables are
distributed over a width of  300 mm on the ladder and since the spacing between cables
is  d the following relation applies:
Nd  ( N  1)d  300 mm
Equation 3
where Nd is the total width of the cables on the ladder and (N-1)d is the total width of the
void spacing. Approximating N-1 by N gives:
N
150mm
d
Equation 4
The combustible volume per meter cable, vcombust, has been found to be approximately
proportional to the cross section of the cable, that is to d2:
vcombust ~ d 2
Equation 5
The amount of combustible volume per meter ladder is therefore:
Vcombust  Nvcombust ~ Nd 2
Equation 6
and, from Equation 4:
Vcombust ~ Nd 2 
150 2
d ~d
d
Equation 7
14
Inserting Equation 7 in Equation 2 gives the approximation:

c
c
c
Vcombust ~ 2 d 
2
d
d
d
Equation 8
The approximate Equation 8 in essence explains why  describes fire performance of
different cable types in general. It is well known that combustion is more intense for
cables with small diameter than for cables with large diameter. In other words
combustion is more intense for large  than for small . This is easily understood by
making an analogy to matches and timber logs where the former is much easier to ignite.
The exception is cable types which are completely combusted, such as Group 9 in the
CEMAC project. In this case the relation is the opposite but  still describes the fire
performance in a fairly monotonic way, although with a different sign of the derivative.
Furthermore the flame spread is, in general, facilitated if the number of conductors, c, is
increased for a given diameter. The explanation of this is manifold but in essence more
conductors mean a more porous cable in which the conductors more easy separate and
where chimney effects is facilitated. A cable in which the conductors separate can be seen
as several cables with smaller diameter, and therefore with more intense combustion
according to the discussion above. As already mentioned above another reason for the
increased flammability for cables with many conductors is that, for a given diameter, the
ratio of flammable insulation material, typically polyethylene, to sheathing material
increases with increased number of conductors.
15
3
Cable test data available for this study
Cable selection was entirely performed by Europacable. Cable testing was performed by
laboratories belonging to Europacable members or by research laboratories. The
laboratories performing the tests were accredited according to ISO17025, except one out
of five laboratories. All laboratories participated in the CENELEC round robin which was
undertaken in the initial phase of the CEMAC II project. SP takes no responsibility
regarding the representativity of the selected cables, nor for the quality of the performed
tests. A detailed description of all families are presented in the appendix in Section 9. A
summary of the cable families are given in Table 3.
Table 3 Summary of cables included in the analysis of this report.
Diameter
Units1
(min-max)
[mm]
1
5
5.7 – 7.9
12
2
3
5.7 – 7.9
12
3
2
6.1 – 7.3
12
4
5
5.3 – 7.8
12
5
3
7.0 – 7.5
1
6
3
10.3 – 10.8
1
7
3
7.7 – 8.1
1
8
11
6.5 – 8.8
8
9
11
5.1 – 7.8
8
10
8
6.7 – 13.5
1-35
11
3
10.0 – 10.2
6
12
4
5.1 – 11.5
1 - 12
13
2
7.2 – 11.1
2 - 12
14
3
5.1 – 11.1
1 - 12
1
The concept of unit is described in the beginning of Section 4.
Family
Number of
cables
Total account of fibers
4 - 24
4 - 24
12- 24
4 - 24
4 - 24
2 - 24
4 - 24
2 - 24
4 - 24
8 - 264
12 - 72
12 - 144
24 - 144
12 - 144
16
4
Method
Optical fibre cables cannot be characterized by the number of electrical conductors as
defined in Equation 2 [4, 6]. Instead, the number of conductors must be replaced by
another descriptor. From a functional point of view this descriptor could be the number of
optical fibres. However, the fibres themselves are not combustible, and their coating
contribute with negligible amounts of combustible materials, unless they are jacketed.
Therefore the choice of number of fibres as a descriptor is not obvious since the purpose
of including such a descriptor into the cable parameter was to describe the appearance
of new highly combustible elements when the outer jacket was destroyed [4].
In this report two different number descriptors have been used for the cable parameter.
The first is the number of optical fibres, as discussed above. The second is the number of
combustible tubular units. This is similar to the number of tubes according to the optical
cable nomenclature, but the number of units and tubes are not always identical. For
example, a tight buffered fibre cable does not have any tube(s), whereas each buffered
fibre is considered as a unit. A unit is defined as a combustible tubular item which may
contain one or several fibres. The optical fibre with an outer diameter of approximately
250 µm is not considered a unit, nor is the outer jacket of the cable. A tubular item is not
considered a unit if it contains other units. Examples of units can be; tight buffered fibre,
microbundle, flextube, unitube and loose tube. The number of tubes attempt to describe
the same feature as the number of tubular insulations around the conductors in a power
cable. See appendix in Section 9 for definition of units for the different families within
this study.
The cable parameter χ is defined according to Equation 9, where the number descriptor n
can be either the number of optical fibres or the number of units, as discussed above.

n
Vcombust
d2
Equation 9
with
d
[m]
Vcombust [m2]
n
[]
Outer diameter.
Combustible3 volume per meter ladder.
Number of optical fibres or units in one cable.
This section describes the method used to quantify the confidence of a potential EXAP
rule. This quantification allows a comparison of difference potential EXAP rules. Section
5 shows the results using the outlined quantification method. In this report four different
potential EXAP rules for optical fibre cables are investigated and compared:




3
calculating  based on number of optical fibres, and not using the safety margin νsm
calculating  based on number of optical fibres, and using the safety margin νsm
calculating  based on number of units, and not using the safety margin νsm
calculating  based on number of units, and using the safety margin νsm
In the CEMAC II project Vcombust was defined as the non-metallic volume per meter ladder. For
optical fiber cables, where typically no metals exist, Vcombust will instead be defined as the volume
of combustible material per meter ladder.
17
Table 4 shows the analysis for cable family 1 where the tested EXAP rule is to use the
number of optical fibres as the number descriptor n in Equation 9, and without using the
safety margins given in Table 2. The five cables in the family are arranged in increasing
χ-order (using n = number of optical fibres). The first column gives the name of the cable.
The second contains the cable parameter χ. Column 3-8 contain the specific classification
for the parameters flame spread, peak heat release rate, total heat release, peak smoke
production rate, and total smoke production, respectively. The classifications are made
based on the classification criteria in Table 1. Column 9 shows the total class, which is
the worst result from columns 3 (FS) to 6 (FIGRA). Column 10 shows the total smoke
class, which is the worst result from columns 7 (pSPR) and 8 (TSP). Column 11 finally
shows the reported droplet class.
As an example it can be seen in Table 4 that for THR there are three pairwise
combinations that would give a non-conservative EXAP estimation for Product 4. In
other words this EXAP approach would, for the THR parameter, estimate Product 4 as a
cable with class Dca for 3 combinations. These 3 combinations are considered as EXAP
errors and are indicated on the second last row. For 5 cables, such as in this example,
there are in total 6 pairwise combinations with at least one intermediate cable. The error
rate is the percentage of errors in relation to the total possible number of combinations,
that is 3/6 = 50% in this example. If the THR class for Product 5 would have been Eca
instead of Dca there would have been no EXAP errors for THR. The reason for this is
that from the pairwise combinations it is the worst case that is used for the classification.
If Product 5 would have been class Eca the EXAP applications involving Product 5
would not have allowed Product 4 to erroneously be EXAP classificed as Dca.
Table 4. Example of confidence analysis. Family 1 with n=number of optical fibres, and
without using sm
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Product 4
Product 5
Errors (No)
Error rate %
6
Class
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Dca
Dca
Dca
Eca
Dca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d1
d0
d1
0
0
3
50
0
0
2
33
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
53
142
173
277
320
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Eca
Dca
(W/s)
Cca
Cca
Dca
Dca
Cca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
0
0
0
0
3
50
2
33
0
0
Table 5 shows a similar analysis as in Table 4, but with the safety margin included. The
upper table is identical to Table 4. The lower table contain classifications based on the
test results plus the safety margin as defined in Table 2. The tested pairwise combinations
now contains classifications with an added safety margin, making the system more robust
to misclassifications of intermediate cables. Notice that the investigation whether
intermediate cables become non-conservatively classified or not should be based on the
original classification, from the upper table. This is the reason why red arrows have been
drawing from the upper table to the corresponding intermediate positions in the lower
table. In this example the result was that adding safety margins reduced FIGRA errors
from 2 to 0 since Product 5 obtains class Dca instead of Cca using the safety margins.
Therefore, for FIGRA, no pairwise combinations are possible that result in a nonconservative classification (e.g. Dca cable classified as Cca) of the intermediate cables.
The number of total classifications did not change, for this particular case.
18
All analyses are presented in the appendix in Section 0.
Table 5. Example of confidence analysis. Family 1 with n=number of optical fibres, and
using sm
Combinations
6
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Product 4
Product 5
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Product 4
Product 5
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Dca
Dca
Dca
Eca
Dca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d1
d0
d1
0
0
3
50
0
0
2
33
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
53
142
173
277
320
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Eca
Dca
(W/s)
Cca
Cca
Dca
Dca
Cca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
0
0
0
0
3
50
2
33
0
0
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Combinations
Class
χ
6
Class
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Dca
Dca
Dca
Eca
Dca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d1
d0
d1
0
0
3
50
0
0
2
33
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
53
142
173
277
320
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Eca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Cca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
0
0
0
0
3
50
0
0
0
0
19
5
Results
Table 6 to Table 9 shows the number of classification errors for all families and for all
four tested EXAP procedures. Table 6 shows the result for an EXAP procedure where the
number descriptor n is given by the number of optical fibres, and where no safety margin
is used.
Table 7 shows a similar analysis but where the safety margins of Table 2 are used. The
families and parameters where the number of errors differs between the analyses without
and with safety margins are highlighted in yellow. It can be seen that the safety margins
reduced the number of errors at six positions.
Table 8 shows the analysis where the number descriptor n is given by the number of
units, and where no safety margin is used. The positions where the number of errors
differs as compared to the case where n is the number of optical fibres are indicated in
turquoise. This is the case at 13 positions and the difference can be both positive and
negative. Table 9 finally shows the result when n is the number of units and when safety
margins are used. Differences are highlighted with respect to the results in Table 6 to
Table 8.
5.1
 with n = number of optical fibres
Table 6. Number of classification errors with n=number of optical fibres, and without using
sm.
TSP
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
0
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
6
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
6
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Droplet
class
pSPR
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
2
10
0
2
0
Main
class
Smoke
class
FIGRA
No.
comb.
6
1
0
6
1
1
1
45
15
21
1
3
0
1
THR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
No.
cables
5
3
2
5
3
3
3
11
7
8
3
4
2
3
pHRR
Fam.
FS
Errors
2
0
3
0
0
0
0
8
6
0
0
0
20
Table 7. Number of classification errors with n=number of optical fibres, and using sm. The
numbers that differs as compared to Table 6 are marked in yellow.
TSP
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
1
0
3
3
0
0
0
0
8
8
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Droplet
class
pSPR
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
4
0
2
0
Main
class
Smoke
class
FIGRA
No.
comb.
6
1
0
6
1
1
1
45
15
21
1
3
0
1
THR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
No.
cables
5
3
2
5
3
3
3
11
7
8
3
4
2
3
pHRR
Fam.
FS
Errors
2
0
3
0
0
0
0
8
6
0
0
0
21
5.2
 with n = number of units
Table 8. Number of classification errors with n=number of tubes, and without using sm. The
numbers that differs as compared to Table 6 (n=number of optical fibres) are marked in
turquoise.
TSP
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
8
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
0
0
0
0
0
Droplet
class
pSPR
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
2
6
0
2
0
Main
class
Smoke
class
FIGRA
No.
comb.
6
1
0
6
1
1
1
45
15
21
1
3
0
1
THR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
No.
cables
5
3
2
5
3
3
3
11
7
8
3
4
2
3
pHRR
Fam.
FS
Errors
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
8
5
0
0
0
22
Table 9. Number of classification errors with n=number of tubes, and using sm. The
numbers that differs as compared to Table 8 (without using sm) are marked in yellow. The
numbers that differs as compared to Table 7 (n=number of optical fibres, using sm) are
marked in turquoise. The numbers that differs as compared to both Table 7 and Table 8 are
marked in green.
TSP
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
8
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
0
0
0
0
0
Droplet
class
pSPR
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
3
0
2
0
Main
class
Smoke
class
FIGRA
No.
comb.
6
1
0
6
1
1
1
45
15
21
1
3
0
1
THR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
No.
cables
5
3
2
5
3
3
3
11
7
8
3
4
2
3
pHRR
Fam.
FS
Errors
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
8
5
0
0
0
23
5.3
Summary of results and comparison with results
from CEMAC II project (power cables)
The four rows in Table 10 show the condensed results for all families for Table 6 to Table
9, respectively. The EXAP procedure where n in Equation 9 is given by number of units
in the cables, and where the safety margin is used, gives the best result with 2 main class
errors out of a total of 103 combinations. The same EXAP procedure gives as many as 21
smoke class errors, and 16 droplet class errors. The high number of smoke class errors is
entirely due to one cable in cable family 8.
Table 10. Summary of results for the number of errors. The total number of combinations is
103.
10
8
8
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
21
13
6
4
2
Droplet
class
25
28
17
16
Main
class
Smoke
class
17
9
10
10
TSP
23
15
19
14
pSPR
no
yes
no
yes
FIGRA
OF
OF
units
units
THR
sm
pHRR
n
FS
Error
0
0
21a
21 a
21
19
16
16
a
These 21 errors are all due to one single cable in family 8 with TSP=52.3 m2, yielding an s2-class due to the
class limit 50 m2 between s1 and s2 classes. All other cables in family 9 have class s1. The cable in question
had highest  using n = number of optical fibres, whereas the cable had an intermediate  using n = number
of units.
The total number of combinations in Table 10 is 103. Since this is close to 100 the
number of errors in the table can also be approximated by the error rate in percent. This
can be compared with the error rate in Table 11 for the EXAP for power cables as
reported in the CEMAC II report. While the maximum error rate for an individual
parameter for the EXAP for power cables is 2%, it is 16% for the EXAP with fewest
main class errors for optical fibre cables (n = number of units and using sm).
a
Not analysed.
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
0
0
0
0
1
1
3
2
4
2
Droplet
class
THR
1
1
Main
class
Smoke
class
pHRR
Errors
Error rate [%]
FS
Table 11. Summary of results for the number of errors and error rate in the CEMAC II
project. The total number of combinations was 166.
a
a
a
a
a
a
24
6
Conclusions
Four different approaches for EXAP procedures for optical fibre cables have been
investigated. The test set consisted of 66 different cables split into 14 families. An
analysis method for quantifying the confidence of an EXAP procedure was defined and
tested on the four different EXAP approaches.
Using an EXAP procedure where the cable parameter χ is described in terms of units in
the cables, and using the same system with safety margin as for the EXAP for power
cables, only two main class classification errors occurred out of a total of 103 pairwise
EXAP combinations. The number of smoke class errors for this EXAP procedure was as
high as 21, but all these errors where due to one single cable. The number of droplet class
errors for this EXAP procedure was 16.
As compared to the other different EXAP procedures this procedure, with χ described in
terms of units in the cables and using a safety margin sm, is considered to be the best
alternative.
The confidence of the proposed EXAP for optical fibre cables is considered as
acceptable, with only 2% main class error rate.
25
7
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
References
Council Directive 89/106/EEC of 21 December 1988 on the approximation of
laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to
construction products OJ No L 40 of 11 February 1989, E. Union, Editor. 1988.
Försth, M., et al. Status summary of cable reaction to fire reguations in Europs.
in 62nd International Cable - Connectivity Symposium. 2013. Charlotte, NC,
USA.
Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of
9 March 2011 laying down harmonized conditions for the marketing of
construction products and repealing Council Directive 89/106/EEC, OJ L 88 of 4
April 2011, E. Union, Editor. 2011.
Journeaux, T., et al., CEMAC - CE-marking of cables, SP Report 2010_27. 2010,
SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden: Borås.
Sundström, B., et al. Prediction of fire classification of cables, extended
application of test data. in Interflam. 2010.
CENELEC, CLC/TS 50576 Electric cables - Extended application of test results.
2014.
COMMISSION DECISION of 27 October 2006 amending Decision 2000/147/EC
implementing Council Directive 89/106/EEC as regards the classification of the
reaction-to-fire performance of construction products (2006/751/EC), E. Union,
Editor. 2006.
CENELEC, EN 13501-6:2014 Fire classification of construction products and
building elements – Part 6: Classification using data from reaction to fire tests
on electric cables. 2014, CENELEC.
CENELEC, EN 50399, Common test methods for cables under fire conditions Heat release and smoke production measurements on cables during flame spread
test - Test apparatus, procedures, results. 2011, CENELEC.
EN 60332-1-2Tests on electric and optical fibre cables under fire conditions Part 1-2: Test for vertical flame propagation for a single insulated wire or cable
- Procedure for 1 kW pre-mixed flame. 2004, CENELEC.
EN ISO 1716 Reaction to fire tests for products - Determination of the gross heat
of combustion (calorific value) (ISO 1716:2010). 2010, CENELEC.
EN 61034-2 Measurement of smoke density of cables burning under defined
conditions - Part 2: Test procedure and requirements. 2005, CENELEC.
EN 50267-2-3 Common test methods for cables under fire conditions - Tests on
gases evolved during combustion of materials from cables - Part 2-3: Procedures
- Determination of degree of acidity of gases for cables by determination of the
weighted average of pH and conductivity. 1998, CENELEC.
Fire testing and classification protocol for mineral wool products, F.s.g.o.n.b.f.t.
CPD, Editor. 2003.
Grayson, S., et al., FIPEC, Fire Performance of Electric Cables - new test
methods and measurement techniques. 2000.
26
8
Appendix: Proposal for EXAP-rules for
optical fibre cables
The EXAP is applicable to classification into the classes B2ca, Cca and Dca, the smoke
classes s1, s2 and s3, and the droplet classes d0, d1 and d2. The EXAP is not applicable
to cables with a diameter < 5 mm.
8.1
Definition of a product family for EXAP
For the purposes of applying these EXAP rules, a cable family should be defined as
follows:
A family of cables is a specific range of products of the same general construction and
varying only in number of optical fibres and number of units. The specific family shall be
produced by the same manufacturer using the same materials and the same design rules
based on national or international standards, and/or company standards.
The following properties are considered to have a negligible influence on the fire
behaviour and therefore differences in these properties only do not necessarily imply that
cables belong to different families:





Fibre glass type
Fibre type (single mode or monomode)
Fibre colour
Outer jacket colour
Printing
The full constructional and material details for the family shall be submitted to the
certification body prior to the EXAP being applied.
8.2
EXAP with safety margin
An EXAP is based on two tests. The parameter  is used as independent cable parameter.
 is defined as:

n
Vcombust
d2
where
d
[m]
Vcombust [m2]
n
[]
Outer diameter.
Combustible volume per meter ladder.
Number of units in one cable.
A unit is defined as a combustible tubular item which may contain one or several fibres.
The optical fibre with an outer diameter of approximately 250 µm is not considered a
unit, nor is the outer jacket of the cable. A tubular item is not considered a unit if it
contains other units. Examples of units can be; tight buffered fibre, microbundle,
flextube, unitube and loose tube. The number of tubes attempt to describe the same
feature as the number of tubular insulations around the conductors in a power cable.
27
All cables within the same family with a value of the cable parameter between the lowest
and highest value of the cable parameters of the tested cables are included in the EXAP.
Classification is based on the maximum measured value plus a safety margin:
 class   max   sm
where
class
is the value used for classification according to respective classification
parameter (peak HRR, THR, FIGRA, FS, peak SPR, and TSP),
max
is the maximum, that is the worst, test results of the tests that forms the
basis of the EXAP, and
sm
is the safety margin required for the particular classification parameter.
The safety margins for the different classes and classification parameters are given in
Table 12.
Table 12
Safety margins vsm.
Peak HRR [kW]
THR [MJ]
FIGRA [Ws-1]
Flame spread
[m]
Peak SPR [m2s-1]
TSP [m2]
8.3
B2ca
3
1.5
15
0.15
Cca
6
3
30
0.2
Dca
40
7
130
S1
S2
0.05
10
0.3
80
Flaming droplets/particles
For flaming droplets/particles the cables within the cable parameter range for the EXAP
are classified according to the worst result for the tested cables within this range.
28
9
Appendix: Cable data
The information in this section was supplied by Europacable.
Cable selection and description
The optical fiber cable product family selected for the test program was made ensuring
that they are representative for the European market. Only LSZH materials are used as
sheathing compound. The emphasis was put on the fact that it was also necessary to have
a wide range of burning behaviors to avoid a bias on the final analysis. For the selection
of the different product families the following logics has been applied.
- Grouping has been made on principal design methods covering the typical range
of fibre counts per family.
- Fibre types and fibre colours (i.e. various types of glass for single mode or
multimode fibres) are considered to be irrelevant for the fire performance of the
cable.
- Outer jacket colours and various printing can be neglected for fire performance.
- Families have been designed in a way that the principal material types (or even
compound) remain unchanged when increasing the number the number of fibres
leading to bigger diameters.
The cable product are given below :
29
Product family 1 - 4
Distribution tight buffer cable

Definition:
This cable is designed with 900µm buffered structure for easy direct connectorization. It
is a dry design for risers and horizontal deployment and may be installed in duct by
pulling.
Unit definition: an optical fiber of approximately 250 µm surrounded by a thermoplastic
buffered material of approximately 900 µm in outer diameter.
-
 Material List:
Rigid central strength element made of glass fiber reinforced plastic
Optical fiber ø 250 µm sheathed up to ø 900 µm
Glass or Aramid yarns as reinforcement
Outer sheath, Low Smoke Halogen Free Flame Retardant material

Design:

Cable product family:
Family
Cables
1
2
3
4
5
3
2
5
Diameter
(min-max)
[mm]
5.7 – 7.9
5.7 – 7.9
6.1 – 7.3
5.3 – 7.8
Units
12
12
12
12
4 – 24
4 – 24
12- 24
4 – 24
30
Product family 5 - 7
Central Loose Tube cable, jelly filled
 Definition:
Cylindar cable with one central loose tube which contains n optical fibers. The fiber count
reaches from n = 2 up to n = 24 fibers.
The loose tube is filled with jelly. Around the loose tube are placed glass roving tension
elements and this cable core is protected by a low smoke zero halogen (LSOH) fire
retardant sheath.
Unit definition: optical fibers, each approximately 250 µm, surrounded by filling
compound and a loose tube made of thermoplastic material.
 Material List:
- OF: Optical Fiber with outer diameter of 250µm
- Colored loose tube with jelly filling
- glass yarns tension elements
- swelling yarns
- Colored Halogen free thermoplastic sheath of the cable

Design:

Family
Cables
5
3
Diameter
(min-max)
[mm]
7.0 – 7.5
Units
1
4 - 24
31
Central Loose Tube cable, jelly filled, with circuit and insulation integrity 90 min
 Definition:
The loose tube is filled with jelly. Around the loose tube are placed a non metallic tape
and additional glass roving tension elements and this cable core is protected by a low
smoke zero halogen (LSOH) fire retardant sheath.
compound and a central loose tube made of thermoplastic material.
 Material List:
- flame barrier tape
- two Polyester ripcords

Design:

Family
Cables
6
3
Diameter
(min-max)
[mm]
10,3 – 10,8
Units
1
2 - 24
32
Central Loose Tube cable, jelly filled
 Definition:
The loose tube is filled with jelly. Around the loose tube are placed glass roving tension
elements and this cable core is protected by a low smoke zero halogen (LSOH) fire
retardant sheath.
compound and a central loose tube made of thermoplastic material.
 Material List:
- swelling yarns

Design:

Family
Cables
7
3
Diameter
(min-max)
[mm]
7,7 – 8,1
Units
1
4 - 24
33
 Product family 8 - 9
Indoor distribution or mini break-out cable with buffered fibres (2 – 24) and fire resistant
outer jacket
 Definition:
Circular cable with strength members of glass or aramid yarns under the jacket covering
the buffered 2-24 fibres.
This distribution or mini-break-out cable can be used for many indoor applications. The
cable features buffered fibres. Typical cable applications include: LAN and WAN
backbones, central office interconnections, backbones in data centres among others. The
cable features glass yarns for ease of installation and is suited for installation in ducts and
on trays. The cable features a resistant FireRes® sheathing.
Unit definition: an optical fiber of approximately 250 µm surrounded by a thermoplastic
buffered material of approximately 900 µm in outer diameter.
 Material List:
- Colored Halogen Free thermoplastic buffer (typically 900µm)
- glass yarn or aramid yarn as strength members
- UV stabilized and Colored Halogen free thermoplastic sheath of the cable

Design:
-

Buffered fibre
Strength member (glass/aramid yarn)
LSZH outer jacket
Family
Cables
8
9
11
11
Diameter
(min-max)
[mm]
6.5 – 8.8
5.1 – 7.8
Units
8
8
2 - 24
4 - 24
34

Product family 10 -
Compact Tube® premise distribution riser cable for permanent accessibility.

Definition:
Cylindar cable with rigid strength members into the sheath made up of n Compact Tube®
(unit from 2 to 12 fibres).
This cable product family has been designed to allow permanent accessibility to fibers
through the sheath for splicing with customer cables.
The cable, protected by a low smoke zero halogen (LSOH) fire retardant sheath,
comprises micro modules (called Compact Tube®). Each micro module contains 2 to 12
fibers protected by an easily strippable thermoplastic skin (easy strip technology).
Unit definition: optical fibers, each approximately 250 µm, surrounded by a finger
peelable sheath made of thermoplastic material, called compact tube or micromodule.
This micromodule can be jelly filled, dry watertight.

Material List:
- Colored Halogen Free thermoplastic sheath of OF unit
- 2 FRP strength members
- UV stabilized and Colored Halogen free thermoplastic sheath of the cable

Design:

Family
Cables
10
8
Diameter
(min-max)
[mm]
6.7 – 13.5
Units
1 - 35
8 – 264
35
 Product family 11 - 14
Loose Tube Indoor Cable up to 72 fibers
 Definition:
The loose tube cable construction, by isolating the fibers from installations and
environmental rigors, provides stable and highly reliable transmission parameters.
The SZ stranded construction further reduces installation and environmental influences
on the transmission parameters and allows mid-span access.
The cables can be installed in conduits and shafts inside buildings.
compound and a loose tube made of thermoplastic material.
 Material List:
A. FRNC/LSZH™ jacket
B. Buffer tube, gel-filled with 12 fibers
C. Fiber, 250 µm
D. Dielectric central member
E. Ripcord

Design:

Family
Cables
11
3
Diameter
(min-max)
[mm]
10.0 – 10.2
Units
6
12 – 72
36

Definition:
This cable family is designed with highly flexible subunits for EDGE application. The
fiber range is defined from 12f up to 144f. Aramid yarns inside the cable guaranty the
required tensile load. A flame retardant, low smoke jacket will provide the appropriate
fire performance.
Unit definition: optical fibers, each approximately 250µm, some aramid yarns,
surrounded by a thin , flexible tube made of flame retardant thermoplastic material.
 Material List:
A. FRNC/LSZH™ jacket
B. Subunits with 12 fibers
C. Fiber, 250 µm
D. Aramid yarns as strength elements

Design:

Family
Cables
12
13
14
4
2
3
Diameter
(min-max)
[mm]
5.1 – 11.5
7.2 – 11.1
5.1 – 11.1
Units
1 - 12
2 - 12
1 - 12
12 - 144
24 - 144
12 - 144
37
10
Appendix: Detailed analysis
10.1
χ calculated based on number of optical fibers,
without using safety margin sm
Family 1
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Product 4
Product 5
6
Class
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Dca
Dca
Dca
Eca
Dca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d1
d0
d1
0
0
0
0
3
50
0
0
2
33
Class
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
2
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
53
142
173
277
320
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Eca
Dca
(W/s)
Cca
Cca
Dca
Dca
Cca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
0
0
0
0
3
50
2
33
THR
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 2
Combinations
1
χ
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
()
53
143
268
FS
pHRR
2
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m /s)
s1
s1
s1
(m )
s1
s1
s1
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Class
FS
(m)
Dca
Cca
pHRR
(kW)
Cca
Cca
THR
(MJ)
Cca
Cca
FIGRA
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
pSPR
(m2/s)
s1
s1
TSP
(m2)
s1
s1
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
Dca
Cca
s1
s1
d1
d1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Class
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
()
68
102
148
228
272
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d1
d0
d0
d0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
50
Class
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
()
52
156
282
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Eca
(m2/s)
s2
s2
s2
(m2)
s2
s2
s2
Dca
Dca
Eca
s2
s2
s2
d2
d2
d1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 3
Combinations
0
X
Product 1
Product 2
173
320
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 4
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Product 4
Product 5
6
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 5
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
1
38
Family 6
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
1
Class
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(m2)
s2
s1
s2
Dca
Dca
Dca
s2
s1
s2
d2
d0
d2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Class
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s2
s2
s2
Dca
Dca
Dca
s2
s2
s2
d1
d1
d2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Class
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(m)
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
(kW)
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s2
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s2
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
9
20
0
0
8
18
8
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Class
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
()
69
69
144
176
176
292
292
(m)
Dca
Dca
B2ca
Cca
Dca
Cca
Dca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Dca
Cca
Cca
(MJ)
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Dca
Cca
Cca
(W/s)
Cca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Dca
Dca
Cca
Cca
Dca
Cca
Dca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
d1
d2
d0
d0
2
13
8
53
8
53
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
13
0
0
8
53
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
13
76
142
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Cca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
()
116
173
428
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
0
0
χ
()
18
18
82
83
124
124
152
167
169
226
226
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 7
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
1
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 8
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 4
Product 3
Product 7
Product 8
Product 9
Product 6
Product 5
Product 10
Product 11
45
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 9
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Product 4
Product 5
Product 6
Product 7
Errors (No)
Error rate %
15
39
Family 10
Combinations
Product 3
Product 5
Product 2
Product 1
Product 4
Product 8
Product 7
Product 6
21
Class
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d2
d1
d2
d1
d2
d1
d2
d1
0
0
0
0
6
29
0
0
6
29
Class
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
2
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
87
125
350
383
580
657
804
1539
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
10
48
8
38
6
29
0
0
FS
pHRR
THR
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 11
Combinations
1
χ
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
()
167
505
989
2
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Eca
Eca
Eca
(W/s)
Cca
Cca
Dca
(m /s)
s2
s2
s2
(m )
s2
s2
s2
Eca
Eca
Eca
s2
s2
s2
d2
d2
d2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Class
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
()
616
741
1288
1378
(m)
Cca
Dca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
Cca
Dca
B2ca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s1
d1
d1
d1
d2
2
67
1
33
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
67
0
0
0
0
Class
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
()
576
1364
(m)
Dca
Cca
(kW)
Cca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
Dca
Cca
s1
s1
d0
d0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Class
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
()
623
739
740
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
s1
s1
s1
d1
d1
d0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 12
Combinations
Product 2
Product 1
Product 4
Product 3
3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 13
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
0
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 14
Combinations
Product 2
Product 1
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
1
40
10.2
χ calculated based on number of optical fibers,
using safety margin sm
Family 1
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Product 4
Product 5
6
Class
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Dca
Dca
Dca
Eca
Dca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d1
d0
d1
0
0
3
50
0
0
2
33
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
53
142
173
277
320
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Eca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Cca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
0
0
0
0
3
50
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
53
143
268
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
0
0
0
0
3
300
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
FS
(m)
Dca
Dca
pHRR
(kW)
Cca
Cca
THR
(MJ)
Cca
Cca
FIGRA
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
pSPR
(m2/s)
s1
s1
TSP
(m2)
s1
s1
Dca
Dca
s1
s1
d1
d1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
68
102
148
228
272
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
(kW)
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d1
d0
d0
d0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
50
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
52
156
282
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Eca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Eca
(m2/s)
s2
s2
s2
(m2)
s2
s2
s2
Dca
Dca
Eca
s2
s2
s2
d2
d2
d1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 2
Combinations
1
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Smoke class Droplet class
Family 3
Combinations
0
Class
X
Product 1
Product 2
173
320
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 4
Combinations
6
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Product 4
Product 5
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 5
Combinations
1
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
41
Family 6
Combinations
1
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
13
76
142
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Cca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s2
s1
s2
Dca
Dca
Dca
s2
s1
s2
d0
d0
d2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
116
173
428
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s2
s2
s2
Dca
Dca
Dca
s2
s2
s2
d1
d1
d2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
18
18
82
83
124
124
152
167
169
226
226
(m)
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
(kW)
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s2
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s2
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
9
20
0
0
8
18
8
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
69
69
144
176
176
292
292
(m)
Dca
Dca
B2ca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Dca
Cca
Cca
(MJ)
Cca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Dca
Cca
Cca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Dca
Dca
Cca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
d1
d2
d0
d0
0
0
8
53
8
53
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
53
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 7
Combinations
1
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 8
Combinations
45
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Product 4
Product 3
Product 7
Product 8
Product 9
Product 6
Product 5
Product 10
Product 11
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 9
Combinations
15
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Product 4
Product 5
Product 6
Product 7
Errors (No)
Error rate %
42
Family 10
Combinations
21
Class
Product 3
Product 5
Product 2
Product 1
Product 4
Product 8
Product 7
Product 6
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
87
125
350
383
580
657
804
1539
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
(W/s)
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Cca
B2Ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d2
d1
d2
d1
d2
d1
d2
d1
4
19
0
0
6
29
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
5
0
0
6
29
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
167
505
989
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Eca
Eca
Eca
(W/s)
Dca
Cca
Dca
(m2/s)
s2
s2
s2
(m2)
s2
s2
s2
Eca
Eca
Eca
s2
s2
s2
d2
d2
d2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
616
741
1288
1378
(m)
Cca
Dca
B2ca
Cca
(kW)
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
(W/s)
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
Cca
Dca
Cca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s1
d1
d1
d1
d2
2
67
1
33
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
67
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
576
1364
(m)
Dca
Cca
(kW)
Cca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
Cca
(W/s)
Cca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
Dca
Cca
s1
s1
d0
d0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
623
739
740
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
s1
s1
s1
d1
d1
d0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 11
Combinations
1
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 12
Combinations
3
Class
Product 2
Product 1
Product 4
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 13
Combinations
0
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 14
Combinations
1
Class
Product 2
Product 1
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
43
10.3
χ calculated based on number of units, without
using safety margin sm
Family 1
Combinations
Product 4
Product 2
Product 1
Product 5
Product 3
6
Class
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Eca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
d1
d1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Class
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
134
143
159
160
173
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Eca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Dca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 2
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
1
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
159
142
134
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Class
FS
(m)
Dca
Cca
pHRR
(kW)
Cca
Cca
THR
(MJ)
Cca
Cca
FIGRA
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
pSPR
(m2/s)
s1
s1
TSP
(m2)
s1
s1
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
Dca
Cca
s1
s1
d1
d1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Class
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
()
136
148
152
153
205
(m)
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
d1
d0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
50
Class
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
()
13
12.9
11.7
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Eca
(m2/s)
s2
s2
s2
(m2)
s2
s2
s2
Dca
Dca
Eca
s2
s2
s2
d2
d2
d1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 3
Combinations
0
X
Product 1
Product 2
173
160
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 4
Combinations
Product 5
Product 3
Product 4
Product 2
Product 1
6
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 5
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
1
44
Family 6
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
1
Class
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(m2)
s2
s1
s2
Dca
Dca
Dca
s2
s1
s2
d0
d0
d2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Class
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s2
s2
s2
Dca
Dca
Dca
s2
s2
s2
d1
d1
d2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Class
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(m)
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s2
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s2
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
9
20
1
2
8
18
8
18
0
0
21
47
0
0
21
47
0
0
Class
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
2
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
6.3
6.3
5.9
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Cca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
()
14
15
16
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
0
0
χ
()
71
71
75
75
76
82
82
109
110
112
113
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 7
Combinations
Product 2
Product 1
Product 3
1
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 8
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
Product 10
Product 11
Product 9
Product 7
Product 8
Product 4
Product 3
Product 6
Product 5
45
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 9
Combinations
15
χ
Product 3
Product 6
Product 7
Product 4
Product 5
Product 1
Product 2
Errors (No)
Error rate %
()
71
71
75
75
76
82
82
2
(m)
B2ca
Cca
Dca
Cca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Dca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
B2ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
Dca
Cca
Cca
(W/s)
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
(m /s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m )
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Cca
Cca
Dca
Cca
Dca
Dca
Dca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
d1
d2
d0
d0
2
13
8
53
9
60
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
13
0
0
8
53
45
Family 10
Combinations
21
Class
FS
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
pHRR
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
THR
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
FIGRA
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
pSPR
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
TSP
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d1
d2
d2
d2
d1
d1
d2
d1
6
57
0
0
0
29
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
0
0
5
29
Class
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
()
82.4
83.7
84.1
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Eca
Eca
Eca
(W/s)
Dca
Cca
Cca
(m2/s)
s2
s2
s2
(m2)
s2
s2
s2
Eca
Eca
Eca
s2
s2
s2
d2
d2
d2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Class
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
()
51
62
107
115
(m)
Cca
Dca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
Cca
Dca
B2ca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s1
d1
d1
d1
d2
2
67
1
33
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
67
0
0
0
0
Class
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
()
48
114
(m)
Dca
Cca
(kW)
Cca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
Dca
Cca
s1
s1
d0
d0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Class
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
2
X
Product 5
Product 3
Product 4
Product 7
Product 8
Product 6
Product 2
Product 1
10
44
48
67
110
128
175
192
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 11
Combinations
Product 3
Product 1
Product 2
1
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 12
Combinations
Product 2
Product 1
Product 4
Product 3
3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 13
Combinations
Product 1
Product 2
0
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 14
Combinations
1
χ
Product 2
Product 1
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
()
52
62
113
2
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m /s)
s1
s1
s1
(m )
s1
s1
s1
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
s1
s1
s1
d1
d1
d0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
46
10.4
χ calculated based on number of units, using
safety margin sm
Family 1
Combinations
Product 4
Product 2
Product 1
Product 5
Product 3
6
Class
Smoke
class
Droplet
class
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Eca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
d1
d1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
134
143
159
160
173
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Eca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Cca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
159
142
134
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
FS
(m)
Dca
Dca
pHRR
(kW)
Cca
Cca
THR
(MJ)
Cca
Cca
FIGRA
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
pSPR
(m2/s)
s1
s1
TSP
(m2)
s1
s1
Dca
Dca
s1
s1
d1
d1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
136
148
152
153
205
(m)
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
(MJ)
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
d1
d0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
50
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
2
Errors
Error rate
Family 2
Combinations
1
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 3
Combinations
0
Class
X
Product 1
Product 2
173
160
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 4
Combinations
6
Class
Product 5
Product 3
Product 4
Product 2
Product 1
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 5
Combinations
1
Class
χ
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
()
13
12.9
11.7
2
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Eca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Eca
(m /s)
s2
s2
s2
(m )
s2
s2
s2
Dca
Dca
Eca
s2
s2
s2
d2
d2
d1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
47
Family 6
Combinations
1
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Product 3
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
6.3
6.3
5.9
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Cca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s2
s1
s2
Dca
Dca
Dca
s2
s1
s2
d0
d0
d2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
14
15
16
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s2
s2
s2
Dca
Dca
Dca
s2
s2
s2
d1
d1
d2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
71
71
75
75
76
82
82
109
110
112
113
(m)
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s2
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s2
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
d0
9
20
1
2
8
18
8
18
0
0
21
47
0
0
21
47
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
71
71
75
75
76
82
82
(m)
B2ca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Dca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Dca
Cca
Cca
(W/s)
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Dca
Dca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
Cca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
Dca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d0
d0
d0
d1
d2
d0
d0
0
0
8
53
8
53
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
53
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 7
Combinations
1
Class
Product 2
Product 1
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 8
Combinations
45
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Product 10
Product 11
Product 9
Product 7
Product 8
Product 4
Product 3
Product 6
Product 5
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 9
Combinations
15
Class
Product 3
Product 6
Product 7
Product 4
Product 5
Product 1
Product 2
Errors (No)
Error rate %
48
Family 10
Combinations
21
Class
X
Product 5
Product 3
Product 4
Product 7
Product 8
Product 6
Product 2
Product 1
FS
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
B2ca
pHRR
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
THR
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
FIGRA
(W/s)
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
pSPR
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
TSP
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
B2Ca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
s1
d1
d2
d2
d2
d1
d1
d2
d1
3
57
0
0
0
29
0
29
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
5
29
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
82.4
83.7
84.1
(m)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(kW)
Dca
Dca
Dca
(MJ)
Eca
Eca
Eca
(W/s)
Dca
Dca
Cca
(m2/s)
s2
s2
s2
(m2)
s2
s2
s2
Eca
Eca
Eca
s2
s2
s2
d2
d2
d2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
51
62
107
115
(m)
Cca
Dca
B2ca
Cca
(kW)
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
Cca
Cca
Cca
(W/s)
B2ca
Cca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
s1
Cca
Dca
Cca
Cca
s1
s1
s1
s1
d1
d1
d1
d2
2
67
1
33
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
67
0
0
0
0
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
48
114
(m)
Dca
Cca
(kW)
Cca
Cca
(MJ)
B2ca
Cca
(W/s)
Cca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
Dca
Cca
s1
s1
d0
d0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
χ
FS
pHRR
THR
FIGRA
pSPR
TSP
()
52
62
113
(m)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(kW)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(MJ)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(W/s)
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
(m2/s)
s1
s1
s1
(m2)
s1
s1
s1
B2ca
B2ca
B2ca
s1
s1
s1
d1
d1
d0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
44
48
67
110
128
175
192
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 11
Combinations
1
Class
Product 3
Product 1
Product 2
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 12
Combinations
3
Class
Product 2
Product 1
Product 4
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 13
Combinations
0
Class
Product 1
Product 2
Errors (No)
Error rate %
Family 14
Combinations
1
Class
Product 2
Product 1
Product 3
Errors (No)
Error rate %
SP
SP Sveriges
TechnicalTekniska
ResearchForskningsinstitut
Institute of Sweden
Vi
innovation
värdeskapande
teknikutveckling.
Genom technology.
att vi har
Ourarbetar
work is med
concentrated
on och
innovation
and the development
of value-adding
Sveriges
bredastemost
och mest
kvalificerade
resurserresources
för tekniskfor
utvärdering,
Using Sweden's
extensive
and advanced
technical mätteknik,
evaluation,
forskning
och
utveckling
har
vi
stor
betydelse
för
näringslivets
konkurrenskraft
och
measurement technology, research and development, we make an important contribution
to
hållbara
utveckling.
Vår
forskning
sker
i
nära
samarbete
med
universitet
och
the competitiveness and sustainable development of industry. Research is carried out in close
högskolor
våra and
cirka
10000 of
kunder
finns to
alltthefrån
nytänkande
småföretag
conjunction och
with bland
universities
institutes
technology,
benefit
of a customer
base of
till
internationella
koncerner
.
about 10000 organisations, ranging from start-up companies developing new technologies or
new ideas to international groups.
Box 857, SE-501 15 BORÅS, SWEDEN
SP Report 2015:32
Telephone: +46 10 516 50 00, Telefax: +46 33 13 55 02
ISBN 978-91-88001-61-0
E-mail: [email protected], Internet: www.sp.se
ISSN 0284-5172
www.sp.se
More information about publications published by SP: www.sp.se/publ

Extended field of application (EXAP) for reaction-to

Transcription

Similar documents

fire safety facts holiday fires master

THE INDUSTRY`S MOST POWERFUL FAMILY OF

2016 – January

CaroMont Care Advocates

Summer Newsletter JUNE 2016

program evaluation - Cornerstone Crossroads Academy

Handout - Searca

CCA Newsletter - Controlled Chaos Arms

2013 – October - Cherryland Community Association