Horizontal cable trays fire in a well‐confined and mechanically ventilated enclosure using a two‐zone model

International audienceElectrical cable trays are used in large quantities in nuclear power plants (NPPs) and are one of the main potential sources of fire. A malfunction of electrical equipment due to thermal stress for instance may lead to the loss of important safety functions of the NPPs. The investigation of such fires in a confined and mechanically ventilated enclosure has been scarce up to now and has been investigated in the nuclear industry. In the scope of the OECD PRISME-2 project, the Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN) conducted more than a dozen of fire tests involving horizontal electrical cable trays burning either in open atmosphere under a calorimetric hood or inside mechanically ventilated compartments to investigate this topic. Calorimetric hood experiments in open atmosphere highlighted that the halogenated flame retardant cable tests had shorter ignition time, faster fire growth rate and higher peak of Heat Release Rate (HRR), compared with the mineral flame retardant cables tested. The influence of the enclosure on the fire behavior depends on the temperature of the surrounding gas of the cables, as well as on the oxygen content at the level of cables. The enclosure strongly impacts the pyrolysis of the fuel, decreasing the mass loss rate and the HRR of the fuel, affecting the fire duration. For tests performed at low ventilation level, combustion of unburned gases occurred due to a high production of pyrolysed gas in excess. A semi-empirical model of horizontal cable trays fires in a well-confined enclosure was developed. This model is partly based on the approach used in FLASH-CAT and on experimental findings from the IRSN cables fire tests. It was implemented in the two-zone model SYLVIA. The major features of the compartment fire experiments, such as characteristic HRR and fire duration, could then be reproduced with acceptable error, except for combustion of unburned gases, occurring in the upper part of the fire compartment. The development of such a semi-empirical model is a common practice in fire safety engineering concerned with complex solid fuels

Results of the Fontan Udenafil Exercise Longitudinal (FUEL) Trial.

Background: The Fontan operation creates a total cavopulmonary connection, a circulation in which the importance of pulmonary vascular resistance is magnified. Over time, this circulation leads to deterioration of cardiovascular efficiency associated with a decline in exercise performance. Rigorous clinical trials aimed at improving physiology and guiding pharmacotherapy are lacking. Methods: The FUEL trial (Fontan Udenafil Exercise Longitudinal) was a phase III clinical trial conducted at 30 centers. Participants were randomly assigned udenafil, 87.5 mg twice daily, or placebo in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in change in oxygen consumption at peak exercise. Secondary outcomes included between-group differences in changes in submaximal exercise at the ventilatory anaerobic threshold, the myocardial performance index, the natural log of the reactive hyperemia index, and serum brain-type natriuretic peptide. Results: Between 2017 and 2019, 30 clinical sites in North America and the Republic of Korea randomly assigned 400 participants with Fontan physiology. The mean age at randomization was 15.5±2 years; 60% of participants were male, and 81% were white. All 400 participants were included in the primary analysis with imputation of the 26-week end point for 21 participants with missing data (11 randomly assigned to udenafil and 10 to placebo). Among randomly assigned participants, peak oxygen consumption increased by 44±245 mL/min (2.8%) in the udenafil group and declined by 3.7±228 mL/min (-0.2%) in the placebo group (P=0.071). Analysis at ventilatory anaerobic threshold demonstrated improvements in the udenafil group versus the placebo group in oxygen consumption (+33±185 [3.2%] versus -9±193 [-0.9%] mL/min, P=0.012), ventilatory equivalents of carbon dioxide (-0.8 versus -0.06, P=0.014), and work rate (+3.8 versus +0.34 W, P=0.021). There was no difference in change of myocardial performance index, the natural log of the reactive hyperemia index, or serum brain-type natriuretic peptide level. Conclusions: In the FUEL trial, treatment with udenafil (87.5 mg twice daily) was not associated with an improvement in oxygen consumption at peak exercise but was associated with improvements in multiple measures of exercise performance at the ventilatory anaerobic threshold