透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.81.97.37
  • 學位論文

海龍替代滅火藥劑選用評估之研究

The Study of the Appraisal Selects on Halon Agent Substitution

指導教授 : 張寬勇

摘要


臺北都會區大眾捷運系統於70年代開始規劃設計淡水線及木柵線時,於廠站內設置重要電氣設備之場所,例如車站機電設備區、牽引動力配電區、低壓配電室、通訊號誌室、控制電驛室及儲油室等空間防護面積,雖然未達法定樓地板面積,依法規可免設系統性自動滅火設備;惟考量捷運系統對於都會區公共運輸重要性,如因火災而造成設備損毀導致系統癱瘓無法營運,所衍生的社會成本將無從估計,因此當時捷運總顧問就前述重要電氣設備之場所消防安全設備,評估選用當時被廣為採用的海龍1301滅火藥劑,保護該等場所與營運相關的重要設備。 海龍滅火藥劑被國內外消防界公認是高效率、低毒性、低導電性而且潔淨的理想滅火藥劑,因對大氣臭氧層的嚴重破壞影響到全球生態環境,遭蒙特婁議定書(The Montreal Protocal)列管,海龍滅火藥劑雖然禁止使用,可是不適用水系或泡沫等會產生水損或造成防護區污染場所之消防防護,勢必尋求使用海龍替代滅火藥劑。 海龍替代滅火藥劑選用,設計者評估基準考量或有不同,或偏好某特定產品,或迎合業主需求,較偏向主觀考量,所決定海龍替代滅火藥劑,是否為最佳選擇?本研究藉由專家問卷調查,以幾何平均數值來篩選評估次項目準則,再以AHP層級分析評估海龍替代滅火藥劑對人體安全、環境保護、成本效益、滅火效能、及法令規定等主項目、次項目之準則權重與準則特徵值及一致性檢定分析,建立一評分標準表,最後以建立的海龍替代滅火藥劑次項目評分標準表實例證FK-5-1-12、HFC-227ea、HFC-23及IG-541等4種常用海龍替代滅火藥劑,求得其評選分數,決定海龍替代滅火藥劑選用優先順序。

並列摘要


When planned and designed the Muzha and Danshul lines of Taipei Metro Systems in 70s, many of electrical equipments/devices were installed in related stations and maintenance depot, such as Facility power substation, traction power substation, low voltage distribution room, communication & signal control room, traffic control room, fuel storage area etc. In according with related regulation that the dimension of those area are not met the minimum requirement of auto fire extinguishing system, so there is not required to install auto fire extinguishing system. For further consideration, the metro system is most important of public traffic system in Taipei city, if the metro system shutdown caused by fire, the affection and lost will be a disaster and un-estimation. Therefore, the general consultant had decided to install the auto fire extinguishing system in each facility, and the Halon 1301 detergent was evaluated and selected for auto fire extinguishing system to protect the MRT system operation smoothly and safely. The Halon agent has been recognized by fire fighting operations worldwide what is most efficiency, low toxicity, low Electrical conductivity and clean agent for fire extinguishing. However it’s restricted to use by Montreal Protocol, since the Halon is an Ozone Depleting Chemical what has caused the Ecological Environment damaging seriously. Due to water pollution’s consideration that the Halon is prohibited for use in water based and foam fire extinguishers in many places, Therefore, the substitution of Halon has to be identified in this situation. The designer may have different consideration and evaluation for Halon’s substitution decision, some designer may like specific product from his stand point of view, some are requested by customer, the determination of substitute agent may be or may not be the best solution? This study of Halon’s substitution is using customized questionnaires, and designated in human health affections, Ecological Environment protection, cost effectively, function and regulatory requirement etc. The secondary items were screened and evaluated per average value of geometry, follow on by using AHP level analysis to evaluate the Criterion and character index, conformity analysis in major and secondary items, consequently, the table of evaluation weighing index was established. Four types of popular substitute clean agents in country (FK-5-1-12, HFC-227ea, HFC-23 and IG-541) was verified by methods of this study.

參考文獻


[27] Robert M. Gagnon,”Design of Special Hazard Fire Protection Systrms”,tyco。
[26] NFPA 2001 Standard on Clean Agent Fire Extinguishing Systems 2004 Edition。
[28] Thermal Decomposition Considerations with 3M™ Novec™ 1230 Fire Protection Fluid,Technical Brief。
[29] Philip J. DiNenno, Gary M Taylor, Halon and Halon Replacement Agents and Systems, 20th Edition Fire Protection Handbook, NFPA。
[1] 日本,「惰性氣體滅火設備之基準」及「鹵化烷滅火設備之基準」,消防法施行規則,平成13年3月29日(2001)。

延伸閱讀