{"title":"将表面负荷和浓度作为结构火灾后评估烟尘采样数据的指标进行概率评估","authors":"R. Christopher Spicer","doi":"10.1007/s10694-024-01592-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Surface sampling and laboratory analysis for soot/combustion particulates was conducted following a fire at an education/research facility in the southwest United States. This provided a bank of data by which to probabilistically evaluate the behavior of soot loading (counts/mm<sup>2</sup>) and relative soot concentration (percent ratio; %R) as useful metrics for quantifying differences in soot impact across a building. Surface tape sampling and analysis via light microscopy were conducted via industry standard protocols, and resulting data from various building zones were selected to construct various comparisons. The performance of counts/mm<sup>2</sup> and %R as metrics to identify differences in soot impact for each comparison was assessed by comparing inference generated by traditional Student’s <i>t</i> test, Mann Whitney <i>U</i> rank comparison (MW), and the directly calculated axiomatic probability associated with difference in detection (pΔf<sub>d</sub>). The fourteen (14) comparisons in which a significant difference was inferred via pΔf<sub>d</sub> was similarly indicated via Student’s <i>t</i> and/or MW in only four (4) instances. Further, approximately one half of the comparisons generated different inference via pΔf<sub>d</sub> for counts/mm<sup>2</sup> and %R, with the former demonstrating better discriminatory ability. In broad view, the heuristic concept of comparing numerical “soot levels” (e.g., average) by either metric was not generally suitable for the distribution of the data. In contrast, pΔf<sub>d</sub> avoids the statistical bias imposed by traditional statistical inference, and ultimately the efficacy of post fire comparative surface sampling is as dependent upon the metric and inference model utilized as it is on the sampling and laboratory analytical protocols.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":558,"journal":{"name":"Fire Technology","volume":"60 5","pages":"3649 - 3670"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10694-024-01592-y.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Probabilistic Evaluation of Surface Loading and Concentration as Metrics for Post Structural Fire Assessment Soot Sampling Data\",\"authors\":\"R. Christopher Spicer\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10694-024-01592-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Surface sampling and laboratory analysis for soot/combustion particulates was conducted following a fire at an education/research facility in the southwest United States. This provided a bank of data by which to probabilistically evaluate the behavior of soot loading (counts/mm<sup>2</sup>) and relative soot concentration (percent ratio; %R) as useful metrics for quantifying differences in soot impact across a building. Surface tape sampling and analysis via light microscopy were conducted via industry standard protocols, and resulting data from various building zones were selected to construct various comparisons. The performance of counts/mm<sup>2</sup> and %R as metrics to identify differences in soot impact for each comparison was assessed by comparing inference generated by traditional Student’s <i>t</i> test, Mann Whitney <i>U</i> rank comparison (MW), and the directly calculated axiomatic probability associated with difference in detection (pΔf<sub>d</sub>). The fourteen (14) comparisons in which a significant difference was inferred via pΔf<sub>d</sub> was similarly indicated via Student’s <i>t</i> and/or MW in only four (4) instances. Further, approximately one half of the comparisons generated different inference via pΔf<sub>d</sub> for counts/mm<sup>2</sup> and %R, with the former demonstrating better discriminatory ability. In broad view, the heuristic concept of comparing numerical “soot levels” (e.g., average) by either metric was not generally suitable for the distribution of the data. In contrast, pΔf<sub>d</sub> avoids the statistical bias imposed by traditional statistical inference, and ultimately the efficacy of post fire comparative surface sampling is as dependent upon the metric and inference model utilized as it is on the sampling and laboratory analytical protocols.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":558,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fire Technology\",\"volume\":\"60 5\",\"pages\":\"3649 - 3670\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10694-024-01592-y.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fire Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10694-024-01592-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fire Technology","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10694-024-01592-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
美国西南部的一个教育/研究机构发生火灾后,对烟尘/燃烧微粒进行了表面采样和实验室分析。这为从概率角度评估烟尘负荷(计数/平方毫米)和相对烟尘浓度(百分比率;%R)的行为提供了大量数据,这些数据是量化建筑物内烟尘影响差异的有用指标。表面胶带取样和光学显微镜分析都是按照行业标准协议进行的,并从不同建筑区域选取结果数据进行各种比较。通过比较传统的学生 t 检验、曼-惠特尼 U 秩比较 (MW) 和直接计算出的与检测差异相关的公理概率 (pΔfd),评估了计数/平方毫米和%R 作为识别每种比较中烟尘影响差异的指标的性能。通过 pΔfd 推断出显著差异的 14 项比较中,只有 4 项通过学生 t 和/或 MW 进行了类似的比较。此外,约有一半的比较通过 pΔfd 对计数/平方毫米和%R 产生了不同的推断,前者显示出更好的判别能力。从广义上讲,通过任一指标对数字 "烟尘水平"(如平均值)进行比较的启发式概念一般不适合数据的分布。相比之下,pΔfd 避免了传统统计推断带来的统计偏差,最终,火灾后比较表面取样的有效性取决于所使用的指标和推断模型,也取决于取样和实验室分析规程。
A Probabilistic Evaluation of Surface Loading and Concentration as Metrics for Post Structural Fire Assessment Soot Sampling Data
Surface sampling and laboratory analysis for soot/combustion particulates was conducted following a fire at an education/research facility in the southwest United States. This provided a bank of data by which to probabilistically evaluate the behavior of soot loading (counts/mm2) and relative soot concentration (percent ratio; %R) as useful metrics for quantifying differences in soot impact across a building. Surface tape sampling and analysis via light microscopy were conducted via industry standard protocols, and resulting data from various building zones were selected to construct various comparisons. The performance of counts/mm2 and %R as metrics to identify differences in soot impact for each comparison was assessed by comparing inference generated by traditional Student’s t test, Mann Whitney U rank comparison (MW), and the directly calculated axiomatic probability associated with difference in detection (pΔfd). The fourteen (14) comparisons in which a significant difference was inferred via pΔfd was similarly indicated via Student’s t and/or MW in only four (4) instances. Further, approximately one half of the comparisons generated different inference via pΔfd for counts/mm2 and %R, with the former demonstrating better discriminatory ability. In broad view, the heuristic concept of comparing numerical “soot levels” (e.g., average) by either metric was not generally suitable for the distribution of the data. In contrast, pΔfd avoids the statistical bias imposed by traditional statistical inference, and ultimately the efficacy of post fire comparative surface sampling is as dependent upon the metric and inference model utilized as it is on the sampling and laboratory analytical protocols.
期刊介绍:
Fire Technology publishes original contributions, both theoretical and empirical, that contribute to the solution of problems in fire safety science and engineering. It is the leading journal in the field, publishing applied research dealing with the full range of actual and potential fire hazards facing humans and the environment. It covers the entire domain of fire safety science and engineering problems relevant in industrial, operational, cultural, and environmental applications, including modeling, testing, detection, suppression, human behavior, wildfires, structures, and risk analysis.
The aim of Fire Technology is to push forward the frontiers of knowledge and technology by encouraging interdisciplinary communication of significant technical developments in fire protection and subjects of scientific interest to the fire protection community at large.
It is published in conjunction with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and the Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE). The mission of NFPA is to help save lives and reduce loss with information, knowledge, and passion. The mission of SFPE is advancing the science and practice of fire protection engineering internationally.