Experimental and Modeling Uncertainty Considerations for Determining the First Item Ignited in a Compartment Using a Bayesian Method

IF 0.5 Q4 ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification Pub Date : 2021-10-21 DOI:10.1115/1.4052796
J. Cabrera, R. Moser, O. Ezekoye
{"title":"Experimental and Modeling Uncertainty Considerations for Determining the First Item Ignited in a Compartment Using a Bayesian Method","authors":"J. Cabrera, R. Moser, O. Ezekoye","doi":"10.1115/1.4052796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Fire scene reconstruction and determining the fire evolution (i.e. item-to-item ignition events) using the post-fire compartment is an extremely difficult task because of the time-integrated nature of the observed damages. Bayesian methods are ideal for making inferences amongst hypotheses given observations and are able to naturally incorporate uncertainties.\n A Bayesian methodology for determining probabilities to items that may have initiated the fire in a compartment from damage signatures is developed. Exercise of this methodology requires uncertainty quantification of these damage signatures. A simple compartment configuration was used to quantify the uncertainty in damage predictions by Fire Dynamics Simulator (FDS), and a compartment evolution program, JT-risk as compared to experimentally derived damage signatures. Surrogate sensors spaced within the compartment use heat flux data collected over the course of the simulations to inform damage models. Experimental repeatability showed up to 4% uncertainty in damage signatures between replicates . Uncertainties for FDS and JT-risk ranged from 12% up to 32% when compared to experimental damages.\n Separately, the evolution physics of a simple three fuel package problem with surrogate damage sensors were characterized in a compartment using experimental data, FDS, and JT-risk predictions. An simple ignition model was used for each of the fuel packages. The Bayesian methodology was exercised using the damage signatures collected, cycling through each of the three fuel packages, and combined with the previously quantified uncertainties. Only reconstruction using experimental data was able to confidently predict the true hypothesis from the three scenarios.","PeriodicalId":52254,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Verification, Validation and Uncertainty Quantification","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4052796","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Fire scene reconstruction and determining the fire evolution (i.e. item-to-item ignition events) using the post-fire compartment is an extremely difficult task because of the time-integrated nature of the observed damages. Bayesian methods are ideal for making inferences amongst hypotheses given observations and are able to naturally incorporate uncertainties. A Bayesian methodology for determining probabilities to items that may have initiated the fire in a compartment from damage signatures is developed. Exercise of this methodology requires uncertainty quantification of these damage signatures. A simple compartment configuration was used to quantify the uncertainty in damage predictions by Fire Dynamics Simulator (FDS), and a compartment evolution program, JT-risk as compared to experimentally derived damage signatures. Surrogate sensors spaced within the compartment use heat flux data collected over the course of the simulations to inform damage models. Experimental repeatability showed up to 4% uncertainty in damage signatures between replicates . Uncertainties for FDS and JT-risk ranged from 12% up to 32% when compared to experimental damages. Separately, the evolution physics of a simple three fuel package problem with surrogate damage sensors were characterized in a compartment using experimental data, FDS, and JT-risk predictions. An simple ignition model was used for each of the fuel packages. The Bayesian methodology was exercised using the damage signatures collected, cycling through each of the three fuel packages, and combined with the previously quantified uncertainties. Only reconstruction using experimental data was able to confidently predict the true hypothesis from the three scenarios.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用贝叶斯方法确定舱室中点燃的第一件物品的实验和建模不确定性考虑
由于观察到的损害具有时间集成性,使用火灾后隔间重建火灾现场并确定火灾演变(即物品到物品的点火事件)是一项极其困难的任务。贝叶斯方法是在给定观测的假设之间进行推断的理想方法,并且能够自然地纳入不确定性。开发了一种贝叶斯方法,用于根据损坏特征确定可能引起隔间火灾的物品的概率。运用这种方法需要对这些损害特征进行不确定性量化。通过火焰动力学模拟器(FDS),使用一个简单的隔室结构来量化损伤预测的不确定性,并与实验得出的损伤特征进行了比较。间隔在舱内的替代传感器使用模拟过程中收集的热通量数据来为损伤模型提供信息。实验可重复性表明,重复之间的损伤特征不确定性高达4%。与实验损伤相比,FDS和jt风险的不确定性从12%到32%不等。另外,利用实验数据、FDS和jt风险预测,对一个具有替代损伤传感器的简单三燃料包问题的演化物理特性进行了表征。每个燃料包都采用了简单的点火模型。贝叶斯方法使用收集到的损伤特征,循环遍历三种燃料包,并结合先前量化的不确定性。只有利用实验数据进行重建,才能自信地从这三种情况中预测出真实的假设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
16.70%
发文量
12
期刊最新文献
Automatic Ground-Truth Image Labeling for Deep Neural Network Training and Evaluation Using Industrial Robotics and Motion Capture Using Responsive Feedback in Scaling a Gender Norms-Shifting Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health Intervention in the Democratic Republic of Congo. A Solution Verification Study For Urans Simulations of Flow Over a 5:1 Rectangular Cylinder Using Grid Convergence Index And Least Squares Procedures Strategies for Computational Fluid Dynamics Validation Experiments On the Verification of Finite Element Determinations of Stress Concentration Factors for Handbooks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1