Report of tests on the smoke-control system of the Canadian Grain Commission Building, Winnipeg

(1)

Publisher’s version / Version de l'éditeur:

Vous avez des questions? Nous pouvons vous aider. Pour communiquer directement avec un auteur, consultez la première page de la revue dans laquelle son article a été publié afin de trouver ses coordonnées. Si vous n’arrivez pas à les repérer, communiquez avec nous à PublicationsArchive-ArchivesPublications@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca.

Questions? Contact the NRC Publications Archive team at

PublicationsArchive-ArchivesPublications@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca. If you wish to email the authors directly, please see the first page of the publication for their contact information.

https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/droits

L’accès à ce site Web et l’utilisation de son contenu sont assujettis aux conditions présentées dans le site

LISEZ CES CONDITIONS ATTENTIVEMENT AVANT D’UTILISER CE SITE WEB.

Internal Report (National Research Council of Canada. Division of Building

Research), 1974-01-01

READ THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE USING THIS WEBSITE. https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/copyright

NRC Publications Archive Record / Notice des Archives des publications du CNRC :

https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/view/object/?id=a900e192-9728-4050-beaa-90916c18fe90 https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/voir/objet/?id=a900e192-9728-4050-beaa-90916c18fe90

Archives des publications du CNRC

For the publisher’s version, please access the DOI link below./ Pour consulter la version de l’éditeur, utilisez le lien DOI ci-dessous.

https://doi.org/10.4224/20386720

Access and use of this website and the material on it are subject to the Terms and Conditions set forth at

Report of tests on the smoke-control system of the Canadian Grain

Commission Building, Winnipeg

(2)

DIVISION OF BUILDING RESEARCH

REPORT OF TESTS ON THE SMOKE-CONTROL SYSTEM

OF THE CANADIAN GRAIN COMMISSION BUILDING, WINNIPEG

by

G. T. Tamura, J. H. McGuire and C. Y. Shaw

ANALYZED

Internal Report No. 409 of the

Division of Building Research

OTTAWA

(3)

OF THE CANADIAN GRAIN COMMISSION BUILDING, WINNIPEG by

PREFACE

The Division has been studying the factors affecting the migration of smoke through multi-storey buildings for the past several years and has developed a number of approaches to the control of smoke in the event

of fire. Buildings incorporating these and other concepts are now being

constructed and it is of great value to be able to determine how they

per-form. This report presents the results of one such series of tests that

were made on the Canadian Grain Commission Building in Winnipeg. The

Division is very appreciative of the opportunity to participate in the tests conducted by the Department of Public Works and the Dominion Fire

Com-missioner's Office. The Division also greatly appreciates the cooperation

received during the tests from members of the Winnipeg Fire Department, Smith Carter and Partners, and Poole Construction.

The results of these and other similar tests will provide design and application data that can only be obtained from direct experience. This kind of information is needed as a basis for rational building code regulations and for the design of systems that will meet the code require-ments.

This report is a private record of what was done and the results that were obtained; the information will ultimately be published in a form that better suits the needs of designers and code officials.

Ottawa

February 1974

N. B. Hutcheon Director

(4)

OF THE CANADIAN GRAIN COMMISSION BUILDING, WINNIPEG by

From 22 to 25 January 1973 a series of tests was conducted to evaluate the smoke-control system of the Canadian Grain Commission

Building in Winnipeg. Construction of the building was not yet completed

but was sufficiently advanced to permit testing of the smoke-control system.

Smoke tests were conducted jointly by personnel from the Depart-ment of Public Works, including the Dominion Fire Commissioner's Office, and the Division of Building Research of the National Research Council of

Canada. In addition, the DBR!NRC personnel made pressure

measure-ments during the tests. Members of the Winnipeg Fire Department assisted

by observing and recording smoke levels in various parts of the building

during the smoke tests. Members of Smith Carter and Partners

(Con-sulting Firm) and Poole Construction (General Contractor) also assisted by operating and maintaining the mechanical and electrical systems during the tests.

To evaluate the performance of the smoke -control system, tests were conducted under three basic modes of operation:

(1) all air -handling systems shut down;

(2) air -handling systems in normal operation; and

(3) smoke-control system in operation.

Tests with smoke candles were conducted during the afternoon and evening of 23 January and tests involving extensive pressure measurements without smoke candles were conducted during the evenings of 24 and 25 January. The results of the tests are given in this report.

DESCRIPTION OF BUILDING

The Canadian Grain Commis sio n Building consists of 16 storeys

above ground and one basement; the top of the main roof is 215 ft above

grade (Fig. I}, Floors 2 to 10 are office floors and floors 11 and 13 to 16

are laboratory floors. The typical floor height is 12 ft. Floor 12 is the

(5)

are 108 ft by 108 ft for floors 1 to 12 and 122 ft by 122 ft for floors 13 to 16.

The windows are glazed with sealed double glazing units. The various

service shafts are contained in the centre core of the building. A typical

layout of the centre core area showing the location of shafts and vestibule arrangements is given in Fig. 2.

Air -conditioning System

The air -conditioning units are located on the 12th floor. There

are separate systems for the floors above and below this mechanical floor. The air flow capacities of the various systems are as follows.

Office floors including main floor and basement Perimeter air supply to induction units, Interior Supply,

Return Air, Laboratory floors

Interior supply,

Perimeter heated with radiation units, Return Air.

Washroom exhaust, Fume hood exhaust

Floor 16, 2 fans, 1, 400 cfm 15, 6 fans, 7, 500 cfrn 14, 9 fans, 6, 000 cfm 13, 5 fans, 3, 500 cfm 38,370 cfrn 57,000 cfrn 62,240 cfrn 62,000 cfrn 35,000 cfrn 12,100dm

(6)

Sm::>ke-control System

The operation of the smoke -c ont r ol system is shown in Fig. 3 This system can be activated either by a smoke and temperature detector

or a pull alarm. The smoke detectors are located inside the branch ducts

of the return air shafts. The interior supply and washroom exhaust air

systems are shut down when the smoke-control system is in operation. The perimeter supply air system s erving the floors below the 12th floor

continues to operate with 100 per cent outside air. The exhaust fans

located at the top of the two return air shafts are operated with the dampers

to the return air fans closed. Also, the dampers inside the return shafts

at the 12th mechanical floor and at the inlet of the exhaust fans, which are normally closed, are opened so that the fans at the top of the return shafts

exhaust air from all floor spaces. The capacity of each exhaust fan is

20, 500 cfrn with a total exhaust of 41, 000 cfrn ,

The annunciator panels for pull alarms, temperature and smoke

detectors are located in a room in the core of the first floor. The centre

for communication systems, which consists of loudspeakers and handsets, is also located in the same room.

DESCRIPTION OF TESTS

The smoke tests were conducted with the 2nd floor designated

as the fire floor. Five 5-minute smoke candles were distributed in the

office area of this floor. The rated capacity of each smoke candle, as

stated by the manufacturer, is 100, 000 cu ft.

Smoke observers were stationed on floors, 1, 3, 6, 9, 11, 12,

13 and 15. They were instructed to watch for and record smoke in the

elevator and stair vestibules, two stair shafts, two washrooms and floor

spaces. The floor spaces were roughly divided into four segments.

Observation sheets indicating the areas to be observed were handed to the

observers; a sample is shown in Fig. 4.

The observers were instructed to record smoke levels as none,

light, or heavy. The demarcation between light and heavy for smoke in

the vestibule and floor areas was based on 30 -ft visibility; light if it was

more than 30 ft and heavy if it was less than 30 ft. The distance of 30 £t

was arbitrary and was based on the length of the elevator vestibule. To

(7)

at-

by 11 -in. red paper was placed at one end of the vestibule. A paper

target, 1 by 2 in.. , with white lettering on red background was placed on

the wall of the stair shaft opposite the stair door. The distanc e to the

target from the stair door was 17 ft , and this distance was used as the

criterion to judge whether smoke in the stair shaft was light Or heavy.

No targets were placed in other areas. The observers were instructed

to record observations at 10-minute intervals after the last smoke candle

was ignited. The only exception was in the elevator lobby where actual

times were to be recorded when smoke was first noticed and when

visibility was less than 30 ft. During the smoke tests, pressure m

ea-aur ernent s were made only on the 2nd floor.

Smoke tests were conducted under the following test conditions (also give in Table I).

Test No. 1

all air-handling systems shut down

all stair doors and entrance doors at grade level open Test No.2

smoke -control system in operation

all stair doors and entrance doors at grade level open 55% of the laboratory fume hood exhaust fans in operation Test No.3

smoke-control system in operation

all stair doors and entrance doors at grade level clos ed 55% of the laboratory fume hood exhaust fans in operation Test No.4

normal operation of air-handling systems

all stair doors and entrance doors at grade level closed 55% of the laboratory fume hood exhaust fans in operation

(8)

Test No.5

smoke -contr ol system in operation

doors to stairs at bottom and to outside open all laboratory fum e exhaust fans off.

Tests Nos. 1 to 5 were conducted to assess the characteristics of smoke movement with the air -handling systems off, the air -handling systems in normal operation, and with the smoke-control system in

operation. In addition. the tests were designed to permit evaluation of

the effect of bottom venting of stair shafts. This was accomplished by

opening all entrance doors except the revolving doors and both stair

doors at the first floor. As all doors of the 3-car elevator shaft were

open at the first floor during all tests, this shaft was also vented at the

bottom. The doors of the 2 -c a r elevator shaft, however, remained

closed during the tests.

Tests 2 to 4 were conducted with approximately 55 per cent of

the laboratory hood exhaust fans in operation. This was intended to

represent normal fan operation in the laboratories. Test No. 5 was

conducted with the smoke-control system in operation and with the laboratory fume hood exhaust fans shut down.

These tests were run consecutively. Between tests the one

stair shaft was bottom vented and the other vented at the top with doors of both stair shafts open on the 2nd floor to clear smoke from this floor.

In addition, the smoke -control system was operated to assist in clearing

smoke from the building. The time between tests was approximately

one -half hour.

Supplementary pressure measurements were made on floors 1,

2. 3, 6, 9. 11, 12. 13 and 15 in the evenings following the smoke tests.

Pressure differences were measured across elevator and stair doors

and the various vestibule doors. Pressure differences were also

mea-sured between the east stair shaft and outside at floors 1 and 16. The test conditions for the pressure measurements are as follows (also given in Table II).

(9)

Test No.1

all air -handling systems shut down

west stair door and entranc e doors at grade level open Test No. la

west stair door and entrance doors at grade level open stair door of the west stair shaft open on the 16th floor Test No. Ib

all air -handling system s shut down

all stair doors and entrance doors at grade level closed Test No. lc

all stair doors and entrance doors at grade level closed all vestibule doors open

Test No.2

west stair door and entrance doors at grade level open 55% of laboratory fume hood exhaust fans in operation Test No.3

all stair doors and entrance doors at grade level closed 55% of laboratory fume hood exhaust fans in operation

(10)

Test No. 3a

all stair doors and entrance doors at grade level closed all laboratory fume hood exhaust fans off

Test No. 3b

smoke -control system in operation

all stair doors and entrance doors at grade level closed laboratory fume hood exhaust fans off

fire dampers inside return air ducts on the 2nd floor closed Test No.4

normal operation of air -handling systems

all stair doors and entrance doors at grade level closed 55% of laboratory fume hood exhaust fans in operation Test No. 4a

normal operation of air-handling systems

west stair door and entrance doors at grade level open 55% of laboratory fume hood exhaust fans in operation.

The nurnb e r s for the pressure tests correspond with those of

the smoke tests. Tests additional to the smoke tests are designated by

a letter. Test No. 3a with the laboratory fume hood exhaust fans off is

identical to test No. 5 of the smoke test except that stair doors and

en-trance doors at grade level are closed. For all of the tests, all elevator

doors of the 3-car elevator shaft were open at grade level and those of the 2 -car elevator shaft were c l o s ed as they were for the smoke tests.

(11)

Pressure differences across various doors were measured with

strain -gauge diaphragm -type pressure transduc ers. The instruments

were zeroed and calibrated before each reading. The s ens itivity of the

instruments is approximately 0.002 in. of water.

The rate of flow of exhaust air through the return air ducts at

floors 2, 10 and 15 were measured during test No.3 with the

smoke-control system in operation. Also, the rate of flow into the stair shaft

that was bottom vented (west stair shaft) during test No. 1 was measured. The flow rates were determined using a hot wire anemometer to obtain the air -velocity pattern acros s the openings.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Smoke Tests

The results of the smoke tests are given in Table III recording smoke observations at 10, 20 and 30 minutes after ignition of smoke

candles. Outside temperature was 30° F with a wind speed of approximately

15 to 20 mph. For all of the tests, smoke concentrations were recorded

as either none or light except on the floor in which the smoke candles were

ignited. Smoke concentrations in the vestibules on the 2nd floor (fire

floor) for tests with the air -conditioning system in normal operation or with the smoke -control system in operation (tests Nos. 2 to 5) were heavy

in 3 to 4 minutes. With the air-handling systems shut down and with both

stair doors and entrance doors at grade level open (test No.1), the elevator vestibule of the 2nd floor remained clear of smoke during the test.

Figures 5 to 9 show a visualization of smoke patterns in the building recorded 20 minutes after ignition of smoke candles for Tests

1 to 5. Pressure differentials across the separations of the centre core

of the 2nd floor are also shown.

Test No.1 (Fig. 5). - With the air -handling systems shut down and the

stair and entrance doors at grade level open, pressure-difference readings indicate that the direction of flow is from the stair shafts and the 3 -car elevator shafts into the vestibules; and from the vestibules into the 2 -car

elevator shaft and into the floor spaces of the 2nd storey. Smoke was

thus effectively prevented from entering the vestibules on the 2nd floor.

(12)

the 15th floor space and stairwell vestibule. As no air handling system was in operation, smoke movement was caused mainly by stack action with the smoke probably moving upward through the vertical air ducts of the air -handling systems to the upper floor spaces.

Test No.2 {Fig. 6}. - The smoke control system was put into operation

during this test with the stair and entrance doors open at grade level.

Al-though the stairs and the 3 -car elevator shafts were bottom vented as in test No.1, floor space pressures were higher than the vestibule pressures.

This caus ed the vestibules to be smoke logged in a few minutes. Bottom

venting of stair shafts, however, maintained the two stair shafts smoke

free. Smoke was observed on all the floors where smoke observers were

stationed except the 3rd and 9th floors. Smoke probably migrated to the

upper floors through the 2 -car elevator shaft and through the vertical risers of the interior air supply systems.

During the test, 20 minutes after ignition of smoke candles, it

was discovered that the dampers inside the return air shafts were closed,

preventing exhaust of smoke from all floor spaces. This was rectified

and the test continued for another 10 minutes. No change in the smoke

concentration in the vestibule of the 2nd floor and other ar eas was notic ed during this period.

Test No.3 (Fig. 7). - This test was similar to test No. 2 except that the

stair and ent r anr e doors at grade level were closed. Smoke contamination

of the vestibules were as rapid as in Test 2. Pressure readings

indicated that, with no bottom venting, the direction of smoke flow was from the vestibules into both stair shafts and into the 2-car elevator shaft.

Some smoke may have entered the 3 -car elevator shaft as well. Light

smoke was observed in the west stair shaft at several floors and in the

east stair shaft at the 6th floor only. Pressure readings indicated

that the potential for smoke flow into the west stair shaft was much greater

than into the east stair shaft. Light smoke was observed on the same floors

as in test No. 2 but the area of smoke contamination on these floors seemed greater.

Test No.4 (Fig. 8). - For this test, the air-conditioning system was

operated normally with the stair and entrance doors at grade level clos ed.

During the test, the washroom exhaust systems were operated. Pressure

(13)

shafts was greater for this test than for the previous tests with the

smoke-control system in operation. Light smoke was observed in both stair shafts

and in all floors where smoke observers were stationed with the exception

of the 3rd floor. It was expected that smoke would be circulated throughout

the building because the air -handling systems was operating; lack of smoke

on the 3rd floor could not be explained. Although the smoke that permeated

throughout the ground floor was light, with visibility greater than 120 ft. the concentration was high enough to cause minor irritation of nasal and throat pas sages.

Test No.5 (Fig. 9). - Tests Nos. 2 to 4 were conducted with 55 per cent

of the fans of the laboratory fume hood exhausts operating. During this

test all fume hood fans were shut down; the smoke-control system was

operating. The stair and entrance doors at grade level were open. The

test was conducted to check the effect of the fume hood exhausts on smoke

migration. This test should, therefore, be compared with test No. 2

(Fig. 6). It was assumed that with the fume hood exhaust fans operating,

the extent of smoke contamination in the laboratory floors would be greater

than with them not operating. No such conclusion can be drawn however

from comparison of the smoke patterns of tests Nos. 2 and 5.

Smoke tests, although very limited in scope, did provide

informa-tion on the extent of smoke contaminainforma-tion of the building. The observers

were to record only smoke density; the classification of smoke density based on visibility was kept to a minimum as it is subject to the judgement

of each observer and to the existing lighting. Smoke classification of

heavy (less than 30-ft visibility) was attained in the vestibules

of the 2nd floor for most smoke tests in a few minutes. It was found that

at a smoke density of 30 -ft visibility, the atmosphere was such that it resulted in severe irritation to the respiratory system making it difficult to remain in the vestibules for any length of time.

Pres sure Measurements

Pressure measurements during the smoke tests were confined to

the 2nd floor. To obtain a more comprehensive picture of the air-flow

pattern in the building for the various test conditions, subsequent pressure measurements were conducted across the various doors to the centre core

of floors Nos. 1, 2. 3, 6, 9, 11, 12. 13 and 15. When the test condition

called for venting of the ground floor, only one of the two stair shafts was bottom vented; during the smoke tests both stair shafts were bottom vented.

(14)

The pressure differences between the stair shaft which was not bottom vented (east stairwell) and the outside were measured at the 1 st and the

16th floor level. These measurements were made to determine the building

pressures relative to outside pressures. The outside conditions during

pressure measurements were temperatures of 36 to 410 _{F and wind speeds}

of 10 to 15 mph.

Tests Nos. 1, la, Ib, lc - all air-handling systems shut down.

Pressure and £low patterns for test No, 1, with the entrance doors open and with the door of the west stair shaft and doors of the 3 -c a r elevator

shaft at grade level open, are given in Fig. 10. Figure 11 shows the

rela-tive positions of the inside and outside pressure lines. The direction of

£low for the bottom vented shafts is from the shaft to the vestibule for the

whole height of the building. For the shafts that are not bottom vented

{east stair shaft and 2 -c a r elevator shaft} the neutral planes ar e located at about the 10th floor level with flow into the shafts at the floors below the

neutral zone and £low out of the shafts above it. The direction is generally

from the vestibules to the £loor spaces. This indicates that bottom venting

of shafts during cold weather assists in maintaining the centre COre smoke-free in the case of a fire in the office spaces, as was demonstrated during

the smoke test. The measured rate of air flow into the east stair shaft at

grade level was 4,800 cfm. The smoke that was present in the upper floor

spaces during the smoke test, probably reached those areas through the vertical air ducts of the air handling systems.

Test No. la was conducted with the stair doors of the west stairwell

at the 16th floor and at grade level open. Pressure-difference readings

across the stair doors, given in Fig. 12, indicate a decrease in the pressure

differences with the 16th floor stair door open. This was probably caused

by an increase in the £low rate in the stair shaft resulting in an increase

in pressure losses and hence a reduction in the stair shaft pressures. This

apparently caused a reversal in the direction of flow across the stair door

of the 9th floor. Such occurrences can be expected for other doors if

additional stair doors are also open.

Figure 13 shows the pressure and £low pattern with the

entrance and all stair and vestibule doors closed {Test l b}, Pressure

differentials across the various interior doors are generally less than

0.005 in. of water. From the pressure readings it would appear that

the resistance to £low inside the building is low relative to that of

(15)

systems were shut down and the vertical air ducts provided interconnection

between various floor spaces. Almost all of the total stack pressure

di£ferenc e is exerted, therefore, ac r o s s the exterior walls.

Although the pressure-difference readings are low, they are

high enough to indicate the air -flow pattern within the building. It is seen

from Fig. 13 that the neutral planes of the elevator and west stairwell

shafts are located at about the 12th floor level. The neutral plane of the

east stair shaft is located at the 9th floor. Figure 14 gives the relative

positions of the inside and outside pressure lines. The intersection of

the two pressure lines is the location of the neutral plane of the exterior

walls. In this case, it occurs at the 13th floor level. The relatively high

level of the neutral plane (85 per cent of the building height) is probably due to the numerous fume hood vents of the laboratory floors from the 11th to the 16th floor, which provide openings to the exterior at the top of the

building. With all vestibule doors open (Test l c] the general air -flow

pattern was similar to that of Test 1b with the doors closed, as shown in Fig. 15.

Tests Nos. 2, 3, 3a, 3b, - smoke-control system in operation

Test No. 2 was conducted with the smoke-control system In operation and the entrance doors and the door of the west stair shaft at

grade level open. Also, 55 per cent of the laboratory fume hood exhaust

fans were operated. The results of the test are shown in Figs. 16 and 17.

The flow directions through the doors of the bottom vented shafts (west stairwell and 3 -car elevator shaft) are from the shafts to the vestibules as

in test No. 1 with the air -handling systems of£. For test No. 1 with all

air -handling systems off the direction of flow was from the vestibule to the office spaces for all floors, whereas for test No. 2 the direction of flow was from the office spaces to the vestibules below the 10th floor. With bottom venting the adverse pressure differences were reduced as a

result of increase in the centre COre pressures. This increase was not

sufficient to raise the vestibule pressures above office-space pressures. This is consistent with the observation during the smoke tests, when smoke migrated from the office spaces into the vestibules of the 2nd floor, into the 2 -car elevator shaft (not bottom vented) and thenc e to upper floor s.

Test No. 3 was similar to test No. 2 except that the entrance doors and the door of the west stair shaft at grade level were closed during the test.

(16)

The air -flow pattern and the pressure-difference readings are given

in Fig. 18. The neutral planes of the east stair shaft and both elevator

shafts are located at about the 10th floor level. Also the neutral plane

of the west stair shaft is located at the 12th floor level. The direction of

flow below the neutral planes is from the office spaces into the vestibules

and into all vertical shafts. The reverse is true for floors above the

neutral plane. It is evident that the smoke -control system does not alter

the general flow pattern caused by stack action. Smoke can, therefore,

migrate from a fire floor at a low level into the vestibules and vertical shafts and into upper floors. as was demonstrated during the smoke test.

The plot of the various pressures for this test is given in Fig. 19. Except for the laboratory floors. the smoke-control system appears to cause little change in the value of the building pressures relative to outside as compared with those of Fig. 14 with the air -handling system off (test

No. l b), Pressure differentials across the various doors are, however,

significantly greater indicating greater upward flow rates with the

smoke-control system operating. The pressures in the floor areas of the

labora-tory floors are much less than those outside at the same level. This was

probably caused by the operation of a nurnb e r of exhaust fans on these floors.

Figure 20 shows the pressure and flow pattern with all the fume

hood exhaust fans shut down (test No. 3a). The general flow pattern is

about the same as with the exhaust fans operating. Comparing the two

cases. the pressure-difference readings across the various doors are somewhat higher at lower floors and significantly higher at upper floors. Some increase in the rate of smoke migration can therefore be expected

with the exhaust fans operating. Figure 21 shows that, with the laboratory

exhaust fume hood fans off, the building pressures are higher than with

the exhaust fans operating (Fig. 19). The operation of the exhaust fans

apparently caused a reduction in pressures throughout the building as

well as in the laboratory floors. If windows broke on a fire floor at low

level. the pressures in the office area would increase and approach those of outside at the same level resulting in greater pressure differentials and hence greater flow rates across the separations of the centre core

and into the vertical shafts. The amount of increase in the flow rates

would be much greater with the laboratory exhaust fans in operation as

can be deduced from Figs. 19 and 21. It is for this reason that it is

(17)

During test No.3, the rate of flow through the return air

branch ducts operating as part of the smoke exhaust system were measured

on floors 2, 8 and 15. They are as follows:

Floor 2 Floor 8 Floor 15 1380 cfm 636 cfm 511 cfm

The total rated capacity of the smoke exhaust fans is 41, 000 cfm

or approximately 2500 cfm per floor (1. 5 air changes per hour). The

measured flow rates are much less.

For test No. 3b the fire dampers inside the return air branch

ducts on the second floor were closed. The results of the pressure

mea-surements on this floor are given in Fig. 22 and can be compared with

those of Fig. 20. With no exhaust of air from the 2nd floor the pressure

differentials across the various doors of the centre core increased in-dicating an increase in the flow rates of air or smoke in case of a fire into the vestibules and into the vertical shafts as expected.

Tests Nos. 4 and 4a - air-handling systems in normal operation

The air flow and pressure pattern for test No. 4 with the entrance

and the west stair door at grade level closed and with 55 per cent of the

laboratory fume hood exhaust fans in operation are given in Fig. 23. The

neutral plane of the vertical shafts are located at about the l Oth floor level with flow into the shafts below this level and flow out of the shafts above

this level. In the event of a fire in a lower floor, smoke is likely to

migrate to upper floors through the vertical shafts as well as throughout

the building via the air-handling system. This was verified during

the smoke test.

The various building pressures are plotted in Fig. 24. This

figure shows that with the air -handling systems in normal operation the building is pressurized, as all of the building pressures, at all levels,

are shown to be above outside pressures. The direction of air flow is,

therefore, from the office spaces to outs ide through the exterior walls

for the full height of the building. A comparison of office pressures for

(18)

appears to be much lower than in other floors. This may be part of the reason why no smoke was detected on this floor during the smoke test. The air -conditioning system was not fully balanced at the time of the tests.

The pressure and flow pattern for test No. 4a with the entrance

doors and the stair door of the west stair shaft open are given in Fig. 2S.

The general pattern of flow is similar to test No.4. As shown in Fig. 26,

the building pressures are lower than those for test No. 4 but still above

outside pressures at all levels. If a smoke test were conducted under the

conditions of Test 4a, contamination of the vestibules of the 2nd floor and

smoke flow into the vertical shafts would be expected, i. e., bottom venting

of shafts would not have assisted in maintaining the vestibules and the vertical shafts smoke -free as was the cas e for the test with air -handling

systems shut down. Outside temperature at the time of the tests was

about 39° F. With outside temperature less than 0° F, when the building

pressures at low levels are expected to be below outside pressures, bottom venting with the air -handling systems in normal operation would be of some benefit in maintaining the shafts smoke -free.

SUMMARY

To evaluate the performance of the smoke-control system of the Canadian Grain Commission Building two series of tests were

conducted: firstly, with smoke candles ignited on the 2nd floor and smoke

observers on various floors; and, secondly, without smoke but with

ex-tensive pressure measurements conducted throughout the building. These

tests are limited in scope as the various effects of fire temperature were

not duplicated. Smoke tests provided a visual indication of the pattern of

smoke migration. Contamination of some areas other than the fire floor

occurred within lO minutes after ignition of smoke candles. The pres sure

measurements provided a comprehensive picture of the air -flow patterns from which the pattern of smoke flow can be deduced along with the changes in the rate of air Or smoke flow across the interior separations under

various test c oridito ns , Smoke tests complemented the pressure tests as

press ure measurements along the various paths of smoke flow, in some instances, are difficult to make and, in other instances, the need for such

measurements had not been anticipated. The results of the tests provided

sufficient information to assist in drawing some conclusions as to the relative performance of the smoke-control syste m,

The conclusions are as follows:

(19)

systems in normal operation. Under this condition, smoke was recirculated throughout the building through the air ducts as

expected. Also the rates of smoke flow into the vestibules and

vertical shafts on the 2nd floor were higher than with the smoke control system in operation Or with the air -handling systems shut down.

2. The smoke control system was not effective in preventing smoke

spread from the fire floor through the elevator and stair shafts

to upper floors. Closing the fire dampers in the branch duct of

the exhaust system, intended to protect the return air shaft, caused an increase in the flow rate into the vestibules and

vertical shafts on the second floor. Under this condition, the

air is exhausted from all floors except the fire floor resulting in an increase in pressure on this floor relative to other floors.

3. The least amount of smoke spread was obtained with the

air-handling systems shut down and with the elevator and stair shafts

bottom vented. With bottom venting, the vestibule pressures

were increased above those in the office spaces, preventing

smoke transfer into the vestibules and vertical shafts. Smoke

spread to upper floors probably through the vertical air ducts of the air -handling systems.

4. Bottom venting by opening the stair and entrance doors at grade

level as sisted in maintaining the bottom vented shafts smoke free with the air -handling systems shut down and also with the

smoke-control system operating. For the latter case, however, the

increase in the vestibule pressures on the 2nd floor was not suf-ficient to prevent smoke flow into the vestibules and into the shafts

that were not bottom vented. With the air -conditioning system in

normal operation, pressure measurements indicate that at all levels the building is pressurized above outside pressures, and bottom venting would not be effective therefore in preventing smoke flow into the vestibules and both the bottom vented and non -vented shafts.

5. With the air -handling systems shut down and the vertical shafts

bottom vented, it was demonstrated that the smoke spread from

the 2nd floor to upper floors was not extensive. Bottom venting

(20)

as long as the temperature out sid e is much lower than inside.

Similar results can a l s0 be achieved by mechanical pres

suriza-tion of the centre core area. This approach is preferable as it

would be effective for both surnm e r and winter conditions.

6. Test results indicate that the existing smoke -control system

is not effective. It may be improved by modifiying the system

to permit pressurization of the centre COre area by diverting all of the perimeter suppl yair to the elevator and stair shafts at

the mechanical floor. The supply air to these shafts will then be

distributed to the various vestibule spaces through crackage

openings of the doors of the vertical shafts resulting in pressures in the centre core area higher than those in the office spaces.

Further tests are required to verify the effectiveness of these modifications.

The existing smoke exhaust system can be operated together with

the pres surization system of the centre core area. In the cas e of a closure

of fire dampers in the branch ducts of the exhaust system, smoke can be expected to migrate from the fire floor to upper floor spaces through the

vertical ducts of the air -handling systems that are shut down. Although

in this event some smoke contamination of office spaces can be expected, the centre core area would be maintained tenable permitting total

evacua-tion of the building. Smoke contamination of the upper floor spaces through

the vertical air ducts can be minimized by arranging all branch dampers of the smoke exhaust system to close except for those on the fire floor. This arrangement can also assist in increasing the rate of smoke exhaust at the fire floor.

AC KNOW LEDGMENT

The authors wish to acknowledge the contribution made by

R. G. Evans who assisted in setting up and carrying out the field tests and

(21)

Test No.

Condition 1 2 3 4 5

Air handling systems shut down x

Air handling systems in normal operation x

Smoke Control System in operation x x x

All stair and entrance doors at grade open x x x

All stair and entrance doors at grade closed x x

550/0 of lab exhaust fans on x x x

All lab exhaust fans off x x

For all tests

Note: elevator doors of the 3 -car elevator shaft at grade level open

(22)

Test No.

Condition 1 la Ib lc 2 3 3a 3b 4 4a

Air handling systems shut down x x x x

Air handling systems in normal operation x x

Smoke control system in operation x x x x

West stair and entrance doors at grade

x x x x

open All stair and entrance doors at grade

x x x x x x

closed

55% of lab exhaust fans on x x x x

All lab exhaust fans off x x x x x x

All vestibule doors open x

Door s of west stair shaft at 16th floor

x open

Fire dampers of return ducts on 2nd

x floor closed

For all tests

Note: elevator doors of the 3 -car elevator shaft at grade level open

(23)

...1 TIME, MINU TES ...1 TIME, MINU TES

"1 ｾ

AREA > 10 20 30 AREA > I 0 20 3 0

ｾ .:

...1 TES T TEST TEST ...1 TES T TEST TEST

I 2 3 4 5 I 2 3 4 5 I 2 3 4 ; I 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 N L L L N N L L L L L 1 N N N N N N N N N N N 3 N N N N N N N N N N :-l N 3 N N L N N N N L N N N N L OFFICE 6 N L L L N N L L L N L L WEST 6 N N L L N N N L L N N L SPACE 9 N N N L L N N N L L N N N STAIRWELL 9 N N L L N N N L L N L N L 11 L L L N L L L L L L L L L 11 N L L L N N L L L N L I'; L 12 L L L L L L L L L L L L 12 N N L L N N N L L N N L 13 N N L N N N L L N N N L L I 3 N N L L N N N L L N L N L 15 L L L N L L L L N L L L L I 5 N N L N N N L L L N N L 1 N N N N N

I

N N N N N N I 3 N N N N N N N N N N N N 3 N N N N N N N N N N N N N i ELEVATOR 6 _i N L N L N N L L L N L L MEN'S 6 N N N L N N N N L N N N N VESTIBULE 9 N N N L L N N N L L N N N WASHROOM 9 N N N N N N N N N N N N N 11 N L L L L N L L L L L L L 11 N N N N N N N N N N1 _N _N _N 12 N N N N N N N N N N N N N 12 N L N N N N L L N

""

N N L , I 13 N L L L L N L L L N N L L 13 N N L N N N L L N N L L L i 15 N N L L N N L L L N N L 15 L N L L N L N L L L L N L 1 1 i 3 N N N N N N N N N N N N N 3 N N N N N N N N N N N N N STAIRWELL 6 N N N L N N L L L N L L 6 N N N L N N N N L N N N N VESTIBULE , _WOMEN'S ') N N N L L N N N L L 'N N ｾ WASHROOM 9 N N N N L N N N L L N N N II N N N N L N N L L N N N L II N N L N N N N L N N N L L 1 2 1 2 N N N N N N N N N K N i': N I 3 N N L L N N N L L N ! L I'; L I 3 N N L N N N L L N N N L L 1 5 L N L L L N L L L !L I'; L 1 5 L N L L N L N L L LI L N L 1 N N L N N N N L N N I'; 3 N N L N N N N N N N i': N N 6 N N L N N N N L L I'; N L N 1\:0 SMOKE EAST

STAIRWELL 9 I\: N N L N N N N L I\: N N N L LICH 1 SMOKE

11 N N N L N N N I\: L N N N N

1 2 N N N N N N N N N N N N

1 3 N N N N N N N I\: N N N N N

I 5 I\: N L N N N L L N N L

(24)

(25)

ｬ［ｲｳＷＵｾ

1/

v

1/

v

₁₆

_tJ

_ｾ

Ｚｾｬｲ｜ｲ｜

1/ 1/

ｲ｜ｬｲ｜ｦ｜ｾ

V ｾ ' /

0

/ / / / / / / / 7 7 7 7 7

0

1/ 1/ _V 1/

ｾｾ

ｾ［

LI 1/

K>

b

1/ 1/ _1/ 1/

K

19

V V L..-V 7 I 7 / / / .II1 _11/ ;n -rT7 / / / r / /

ｾ

"T

_<

I

_>

I ( 7 7 7 7 1 / 1 1 • r / 1 rv 7 . 1 / 1 7 / 1/

-;

ｾｾ

_{ｾｾ}

ｾｌＯ

1/ 1/ 1/ 1/ _1/ V f - - -_1/ Iv

----ｾ

ｾ Iv _ｾＯＭｉ _{/ / / / / / / / / / /} ₇ _/ _/ _eL

----V LI LI i/

'\

LI _1/ 1/ 1/ _LI 1/ 1/ 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 / / / / / / / / / / / / 7 7 / / /

FIGURE

2 CENTRE CORE PLAN

(26)

SUPPLY FROM PERIMETER INDUCTION U

'<,

r:f'

/

'-llj;

_ｾｾｾ

ｉｾ

r

ｾ

..

".

-f

-I,.

--

_ir

ｾ I-'" ｾ '

---"

f---»:

'-/'

,

"---'

f' "-.#

V

"'

"---

jf

....

t-

"-/ "'I'-

'-NIT S _/' ,.... "I'-

"-"

f""

...

I-

"-/ ｾ ...

"-I.¥

....

-=-ＭＬＮｾＭＭ I--

V:---,

/

MOTORIZED DAMPERS NORMALLY CLOSED MOTORIZED DAMPERS NORMALLY CLOSED

RETURN AIR SHAFTS

FIGURE 3

OPERATION OF SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEM

(27)

SMOKE BOMBS MIN. ACTUAL TIME FLOOR NO.2 WALL REGISTER ... .... CEILING REGISTER MEN WOMEN ELEVATORS .'.'.ｾ ; . ' . ELEVATORS ...•. STWL. NO.2 EAST STWL. NO.1 WEST 30' - -__ 30'

FIGURE

4 SAMPLE SMOKE OBSERVATION SHEET

(28)

ｾＰ

u.J > 8 w ...J V) V) cc ex: _...J 0 0 ...J l - I - u.J <t: <t: _3: > > ｾ u.J u.r ...J ...J _<t: L.U u.J I -cc cr; V ) <t: <t: I -U U V ) <t: ...J ...J

3:

o: <t: l -V ) l -V)

3:

u.J ...J ::J <0 l -V) u.J > N M u.J

"'"

PERIMETER

1\

<,

"

VESTI- PERIMETER

SPACE BULE SPACE

ｾ

t----t - -

ｾ

;

-\

W;;

_/

'""--ｾ

I - -

W///A

I I I ' I I

r

-Ｎｯｬｾ

r

-ｾｏｾｏ

xx X X X Y 013 _{ＰＱＶｎｦｾ}

-

ｾ

_1\

-xxxxx

Ｎｾ

.023 .060

r

7 4 5 16 10 13 14

(2)

0)

CD

crt)

e

OOBSERVATIONS MADE AT THESE LEVELS

SMOKE DENSITY

m

HEAVY

ｾ

LIGHT

0

NONE

PRESSURE, INCHES OF WATER

TEST CONDITIONS

- ALL AIR HANDLING SYSTEMS SHUTDOWN

- BOTTOM VENTING ALL VERTICAL SHAFTS EXCEPT 2 C.I\R SHAFT

FIGURE 5

SMOKE OBSERVATIONS FOR TEST NO.1 AT 20 MINUTES

(29)

« f-Vl f-V) -r LU I I Vl Vl C>:: C>:: 0 0 f- f-« « > > LU LU ...J ...J UJ UJ C>:: C>:: « « v v f-V)

3:

...J ...J yJ z: LLJ 0": ...J « ｾ f-co Vl f-V) LU >

ｾ

PER!METER ""-

_"'-

/ VESTI- PERIMETER

SPACE _/ BULE SPACE

""""-ｗｾｾ

ｾ

'i

ｾ

t/;

ｾ

_ｾ

V;

ｗＣＣｾ

Ｇ＼Ｐ［Ｏ､ｾ

V

'/

ｖＯｾ

/

ｗｾ

ｾ

ｖＯＣｾ

t%

_'/:

I

-ｾ

t/

ｾ

-ｗＯＣｾ

ｾ

ｖｾ

ｾ

_'/

ｾ

0 ｾ

t/

_ｾＯＯｾ

ｾ

v.r--v;

ｾｸ

IX"

ｲＺ＼ｾ

ｾ｀

_ｾ xxx

_....

ｴ＾ｩｬＮＱＸｾ

ｾ

1\

ｾｉｸ x">?<-X

ｗＣｾ

ＯＯｾ

ＰＲＱＵｗＯＣｾ

7 5 14 4 10

(2)

0)

(0

16

e

(0

©

(8

ｾＰ

LJ.J > 8 LJ.J ｾ

ｏｏｂｓｅｒｖａｔｉｏｾｾｓ

MADE AT THESE LEVELS

SMOKE DENSITY

m

HEAVY

ｾ

LIGHT

D

NONE

TEST CONDITIONS

- SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEM IN OPERATION

- BOTTOM VENTING ALL VERTICAL SHAFTS EXCEPT 2 CAR SHAFT

- 55% OF LAB. EXHAUST FANS IN OPERATION

FIGURE 6

SV1UKE OBSERVATIONS FUR TEST NO.2 AT 20V1INUTES

(30)

V) V) ｾ n< tx: ....J ....J

°

ｾ W I-- I-- W 5: <{ <{ _5: cc _> _> ｾ w _w _W ....J <{ ....J ....J <{ :J ... w W I--a> V) V) ;:: I-- cc ce: <{ <{ I--V) V) _V) w w U U _<{ > 5: N M w 16

e

14 10

ｾＰ

w > 8 w ｾ 7

(0

5 4

CD

0

OOBSERVATIGf'.JS MADE AT THESE LEVELS

SMOKE DENSITY

m

HEAVY

ｾ

LIGHT

D

NONE

PRESSURE, INCHES OF WATER TEST CONDITIONS

- SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEM IN OPERATION - NOB 0 TT 0 M V E N T I I'JG

FIGURE 7

SMOKE OBSERVATIONS FUR

u s r

W,. 3 AT 20 MINUTES

(31)

Ll.J ....J :::> CO f-Vl Ll.J > 16 PERIMETER SPACE

@

14

§

12 M 11 10

... 0

Ll.J > 8 w ... 7

0

5 4

CD

0

....J ....J Ll.J ｾ

""

Vl Vl "" _"" 0 0 f- f-« « > > Ll.J Ll.J ....J ....J Ll.J Ll.J ex: "" « « v v N M « f-Vl f-Vl « Ll.J PERIMETER SPACE

OOBSERVATIONS MADE AT THESE LEVELS

SMOKE DENSITY

m

HEAVY

ｾ

LIGHT

D

NONE

TEST CONDITIONS

- NORMAL OPERATION OF AIR HANDLING SYSTEMS

- NO BOTTOM VENTING

FIGURE 8

SMGKE OBSERVATIONS FJR rEST N\)o 4 AT 20 MINUTES

(32)

o

OBSERVATIONS MADE AT THESE LEVELS

SMOKE

ｄｅｎｓｉｔｙｾ

HEAVY

ｾ

LIGHT

D

NONE

Vl Vl cc

""

...J 0 0 ...J l - I - UJ <! <! _3: > > ｾ UJ UJ ...J ...J _<! UJ UJ I

-""

tx: Vl <! <! I -U U V> <! N UJ ...J ::J en l -V> UJ >

ｾ

UJ PERIMETER

_\

"-i ' / VESTI- PERIMETER

SPACE / BULE SPACE

ｗＯＯＯＯｾ

/

_ｾ

ｖｾ

_V

_/

:(

_ｾ

ｾ

_ｾｾ

V

_ｾ

_{ｗＯＯＯＯｾ}

ｾ

t

-V//////

ｾ

I - -

I

t'l#///

_ｾ

_ｗｾ

ｾｾ

_ｾ

ｲＯＯＯＯｾ

ｾ

ＧｬＯＯＯｾ

ｾ

vl0

ｾ

'/

ｾ

ｾｾ

ｾ

ｾＯＯｭ

ｾ

t

-C;

t

-ｾ

t

-ｾ

t

-ｾ

I

-ｾ

_ｾ

ｾ

f9

_ｒｓｾ

_ｾ

ｾ

X'xxN//'

ｸｸｸＩｃＮＮｾ NO NO OBSERVATION OBSERVATION 4 7 5 10 14 16 TEST CONDITIONS

- BOTTOM VENTING OF ALL VERTICAL SHAFTS EXCEPT 2 CAR SHAFT - ALL LAB. FUME EXHAUST FANS OFF

FIGURE 9

SMOKE OBSERVATIONS FOR TEST NO.5 AT 20 MINUTES

(33)

16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 -' w > 8 w -' 7 6 5 4 3 2 I I VI VI -' C<: '" -' -' ₀ ₀ _{- '} W l - I- w 3': -<{ -<{ _3': ｾ > > ｾ -<{ W LU -' -' <! I- _LU _LU I-VI VI '" C<: I- _-<{ _-<{ ,-VI _VI LU U U -<{ 3': N M LU I -.010 .010 .028

--

ｾ "" I - -

ｾｾ

0{2

ｾ

020 OOB ｾ .008 .010 .022

-- 1"\. -

...

ｾ I - -

ｾｉＨ

I i

-\

.015 ｾＷ .000 .008

_{ｐＲｾ｡Ｎ}

/

- - - _, I ... _I -Ｎｾ 030022 015 .012 j02J.014

--.,1

Ｑ｜ｾ

id'

I- - - ---014 1 pOB

I

?26

.000 ｾｉ .000 ｾｾＮｾｉｾ .000 001

-

r--t?04

-0()3 I

-I

I -.000 _｟ｾｉｾ 002 _ｾｉ .000 /1- _ｾ _I" -.020

111

ｾｾ .002 003 _.OJ.!. _ｾＶ _.003

--

'"\

--

r--'"

l"- 1 -002 040 003 _0t; 0/7 006 003

--"10..1""'--

ｲＭｾ f - 1

-I

040 _ｩｬｏｾ 016 3 0 035 I 1 -0-' 1--' ｌｕｾ 0 " , ;n-I--<{

::JI-0::

_a.._VI <l-<{ w

--.130

----

.085 PRESSURE, ｉｾｊｃｈｅｓ OF WATER TEST ｃｃｾｕｉｔｉｏｎｓ

- ALL AIR HAN!)LIt'JG SYSTEMS SHUT DOWN

- WEST STAIRWELL ANO 3 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT BOTTOM VENTED

FIGURE 10

PRESSURE DIFFEKENCE AND AIR FLOW PATTERN FOR TEST

(34)

o ELEVATOR VESTIBULE

o OFFICE SPACE

Ii 3 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT • 2 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT

• WEST STAIRWELL EAST STAIRWELL

15 PRESSURE DIFFERENCE SCALE

! I 0 0.10 0.20 13 II'JCH OF WATER Vl _12M 0:: 0 0 ₁₀ -' LL. I - ₈ I

o

-UJ 6 I 4 2 PRESSURE TEST CONDITIONS

- ALL AIR HANDLING SYSTEMS SHUT DOWN - WEST STAIRWELL AND 3 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT

BOTTOM VENTED

FIGURE

11 PRESSURE PATTERN FOR TEST NO.1

(35)

16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 -' w > 8 w -' 7 6 5 4 3 2 J: J: V") Vl -'

_"'"

_"'" _-' -' ₀ 0 -' W _I-- I--W 3: <{ <{ _3: ｾ > > ｾ <{ UJ UJ -' -' <{ I-- W w I--V") V") I--

"'"

V") -c <{

I--3

u u Vl<{ N (") w

---"\

-.004

r--- 1-

r---/

\

14?9

r---ｾｾ

r---.005

I

-.002 ＭＢＧｾ

-

r

-

1-.bli

r---ＱｾＰＧｩＲ

ｾ

ｾＶ

-I

TEST CONDITIONS

- ALL AIR HANDLING SYSTEMS SHUT DOWN

- WEST STAIRWELL AND 3 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT BOTTOM VENTED - WEST STAIR DOOR AT 16th FLOOR OPEN

FIGURE 12

PRESSURE OIFFERENCE ANu AIR FLOW PATTERN FOR

TEST NO. lA

(Canadian Grain Commission Building)

(36)

:r: :r: VI VI -' _""

_""

_-' -' 0 0 -' LU l - I - LU 3 <l: <l: ₃ ｾ > >

_""

<l: LU W --' -' <l: I - u.J LU I -VI _a:: VI "" I -<l: -c I -VI _VI W U u 3 N (V) <l:LU -' -' ｾ a:: LU -o<! - I -VI V'l 1-1-::::lV'l ｏｾ o..W <30 I -.044

--o

-ｾｯ

000 .002 .000 .000 ｾ -

"-'"

601

....-

004

i

_r

-ｾ

Ｎｾｏｪｾ

_.003 _",

-...

05 ＮｾＲ

\

cpO .0 4 .000

ｾＧ

' , " " -001 .002 .000 .003

/

ｾ

.002'oooB

_{- t -} _{r - -}

nOD

-r-.002 .002

-.-I

.002 ,...-- I .000 ＮｾＵ .000 ＮｾｾｾＳ .000 .001 - I - ｾ

--

....-I

r -.002 _ｾｉ

ＭｾＧ

.000

ｾ

ＮＰｾＲＱＭ .000

-

r - ,...--.001 .0 2 .000 .000 .000 000 .001

-

..

ｾ

....-

J l-r-.001 .003 .000 .000 _ｾｉ .000 .002 - J I

I

ｾ

--ｪＮＹｾ

.o?O

_ｾｾ

.16 16 15 14 13 12 1 1 10 9 -' W > 8 W -' 7 6 5 4 3 2

- ALL AIR HANDLING SYSTEMS SHUT DOWN - NO BOTTOM VENTING OF VERTICAL SHAFTS

FIGURE 13

PRESSURE DIFFERENCE AND AIR FLOW PATTERN FOR

(37)

PRESSURE DIFFERENCE SCALE 13 12M 10 8 6 4 2

o

, , 0.10 0.20 INCH OF WATER PRESSURE ｾ TEST CONDITIONS

- ALL AIR HANDLING SYSTEMS SHUT DOWN - NO BOTTOM VENTING OF VERTICAL SHAFTS

FIGURE

14 PRESSURE PATTERN FOR TEST NO. 18

(38)

I I ...J VI VI _...J ....J

""

w ...J ₀ ₀ ...J _3: ...J w

f-

_f- _w

""

3: _-c _4: w -3: 04: ｾ > > ｾ - f-4: w w VI VI ...J ...J _4:

5f-f- w w f-VI VI 0<

""

f-4: 4: f-VI _ｾｷ w U U VI 3: N M 4:w <10_ｾｾ .030

-

a

ｾ

ＱＭＮｾＲ

_-.b64

-

f-.003 .008 I I _ｾ I .000 .0 I .000 .000 I ｾ I

\

_ｾｾ

.O?O .000

/

ｾ I

.b

3 .000

k

-

_ｾ

ｾＲ

ｾ ' 1 ＮｾＴ .0 2 _ｾＳ .000

-

f -ｾ I -｟ＮｾＲ｟ＮｾＬ .000 .000 f t t

-ＭＳｾ

.090 .000 .000

ｾｯ

I 002 DOO _.070 " I

H

ｾ

.O?O

_I''l--

00" _.16 16 15 14 13 12 1 1 10 9 ...J w > 8 w ...J 7 6 5 4 3 2

- ALL AIR HANDLING SYSTEMS SHUT DOWN - NO BOTTOM VENTING OF VERTICAL SHAFTS - ALL VESTIBULE DOORS OPEN

FIGURE 15

PRESSURE ulFFERENCE AND AIR FLOW PATTERN FOR

TEST NO.

lC

(39)

..J - I W 3: e<: :r: Vl e<: o ｾ 4: > W - I W e<: 4: U N -' -' W 3: e<: ..J -' w 3: e<: W -ｯｾＭｾ V') V') ｾｾ ::lll') ｏｾ c.. W <30 ｾ 16

-15

-

,067 .060 14

/

I

ｾ

°lZ

_{1-1---"""""""}

ｾ

I -. 0 1 2 ? ) 0 - lll-"-""'T""--t- 1---1-... .016 1_{00 2} 7 6 5 10 13 1 1 .049 . 0 4 8 1 0 0 lr- ＭｴＭＭＫｾＮ｜ 1-,- 'II.., ｟ｾ

1--_"'"

ＡＮｲｊｬｬＭｾＭＫＭＭ［Ｍ "" 12 \ .021 081 .004 .035 0 3 9 0151.ｾ '""""" ＭｴＭ｟Ｋ｟ｾ - ｾ L.- ｾＶｲ , -.050 . 0 044 022 ＮＰＶｾ .022

1---+1--""

..,

ｾｾ I "j\ » - I ｸＭｾ 1-- ...

ＭｯｦｐｉｳｾＰＰｴ］

Ｎｏｬｾ

I

ｐｾｩｾｾ

ｾ

.003 ＮｾＰＳｾ

_'?$O

ｾｉＧＰＭＲＮ［ＢｾｾＭＭＭＮＮＮＮＺＺＺＺＺＺＺｲＺＺＺＨＢ I - - - t - - t - - - i ..J 9 W > 8 W ..J 4 3 2 I -ｾ ... .008 - ' 6 j026 ｾｉＭＭＭＭＭｾｾｲ - ", ｉＭＭＭｾ｟ 003 018 .014

P)9

. 0 0 4 .10 7 __.014 1- --+1--11 x ｾＮＮＬＮＮｾ t---l

,ofs

j$.C""--

.005

ｰｴｾＳ

-PRESSURE, INCHES OF WATER TEST CONDITIONS

- WEST STAIRWElL AND 3 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT BOTTOM VENTED - 55% OF LAB EXHAUST FANS IN OPERATION

FIGURE 16

PRESSURE UIFFERENCE ANU AIR FLOW PATTERN FOR

TEST NO.2

(40)

o

ELEVATOR VESTIBULE

o

OFFICE SPACE

li 3 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT

• 2 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT

• WEST STAIRWELL EAST STAIRWELL

, , ,

o

0.10 0:20

INCH OF WATER PRESSURE DIFFERENCE SCALE

15 0 0 1 3 0 12M 0 10 8 6 4 2 PRESSURE ｾ TEST CONDITIONS

- WEST STAIRWELL AND 3 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT BOTTOM VENTED

- 55% OF LAB EXHAUST FANS IN OPERATION

FIGURE

17 PRESSURE PATTERN FOR TEST NO.2

(41)

I I ....J Vl Vl ....J ....J e.:: e.:: _....J W 3 ....J ₀ ₀ _....J W l - I - UJ e.:: 3 <l: -c ₃ W<l: !: _> _> _!: C l l --c W W <l: VjVl ....J ....J I - W W l - I I -Vl _Vl ::JVl l - e.::_-c e.::_-c _I- 0;1) Vl _Vl W U U _<l: Q. O 3 N ("') W <]1-.044

o

r -.051 .044 .095 -1--",

--"\ r - -

r-.

..

-,

045

i

06

1

025_{r - -} .032

ＮｾＴ

ｾＴｊｅｅＭ

_r-,

.066

...

ｾ［ｾ

\

ＮＰＰｾｾＱＲ .000 t - - '-

/

.010 22 022 .036 .005 I

.qo _

.,." I-r-.003

WI

.000 001 bl5 .001

--

_ｾｏｬ

-f-"4

..

t

--

_jOl2 1

--

_ｾＹＧｾＰＷ .011 .006

.?)'Z

.006 .021

--

-

Ｍｾ _---:

-

'

r

-E;9

ＮｾＷ .012

_ｾｏｾ

.024 ＮＰｾＴ .004 Ｍｾ

_r---=

_ｾＭＭ

- rr -.017ｾＳ .011 .015 .009 004 .024

-

--

ｾ _r---ｾ I

-El!.

ｾｉ

.021

ｾ

ｾＵ

ｰｾＮｾ

--ｾｅ

-'4

r - - - ＮＰｾＮｯＱＵ I Ｍｾ .21 16 15 14 13 12 1 1 10 9 ....J W > 8 W ....J 7 6 5 4 3 2

- SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEM IN OPERATION - NO BOTTOM VENTING OF VERTICAL SHAFTS - 55% OF LAB. EXHAUST FANS IN OPERATION

FIGURE 18

PRESSURE DIFFERNCE AND AIR FLOW PATTERN FOR TEST

(42)

o

ELEVATOR VESTIBULE

o

OFFICE SPACE

tJ. 3CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT

• WEST STAIRWELL

PRESSURE DIFFERENCE SCALE

0.10 0.20 INCH OF WATER_,

o

EAST STAIRWELL

• o

o

6 2 4 8 12M 15 13 10 PRESSURE ｾ TEST CONDITIONS

- SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEM IN OPERATION - NO BOTTOM VENTING OF VERTICAL SHAFTS - 55% OF LAB EXHAUST FANS IN OPERATION

FIGURE

19 PRESSURE PATTERN FOR TEST NO.3

(43)

J: V') a.:

o

I

-ｾ

w ..J w a.:

«

u N J: V') a.:

o

I -ｾ_W ..J w a.: -c u M ..J ..J w ｾ a.:

s

V') l-V') -c w ..J ..J W ｾ

W«

O l -i n V ' ) 1-1-ｾｖＧＩｏｾ 0.. 0 < I I

-

--.140

/

r

.024 ＬｏｾＴ .004 - - I ....I-f---+- -1 I -,_028 ＬｾＶ .010 1.0,,97 row- ｉＭＭｲＭＭＭｾＭＢｉｾｾ r-' 9 7 6 8 14 16 15 11 I -.016 .016 .030 Ｍｾ

" ...----t---r

'"'\"

ｾｾ r.A...

·-+

-;-

-1 .013 .006 .006

ＱＭＭＭｾＮＰＲＱ

I---13 ｾ .013 Ｎｾ

ＱｲＭ｜ＭＭＭＭＭＺＮＰ］ＭｩＩｃＱｾｾＹＭｦｾＱｉＮｾ

Ｎｾｾｾ

do91 - - -...._{0( 41-}'"

ＮＭＰＱＰＭＭＭＭＭｾ

1 2 --r...OO3 I = " : - - - I ]I ; -O

r

l'ｾＬｾｯ 0 00!4 0·2ｾｾｾ 007

ｾＮｯｯｓＧｾﾷ

I

ｾＩＮｉＧ

:...-

·1.('...·...

---1

.005 .005

I

＿ＲｾＱＭＭＭＭＭＮｾＰＰｾＶ

r

ＰｾＳ .004 ..ｾＸｦＭＭＮｾＸＮＰｾｬＭＮＺ｟｟ｾＰＱｾＱＭＭＭＭＭｴＱＭＭＭＭＭＢＢＢＢＢＧＱＭＭＮＭｉｾｾ - ｾ I'""

r---::: -

""

10 ..J W > W ..J 5 4 3 2 .04 ＮＰＳｾ .011 - 1 -t - - - -t - - -t

Oil

.040 .023 J---1.--....f.

l--e

ｾｩ

.125ｾ

- SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEM IN OPERATION - NO BOTTOM VENTING OF VERTICAL SHAFTS - ALL LAB. EXHAUST FANS OFF

FIGURE

20 .

PRESSURE DIFFERENCE ANIJ AIR FLOW PATTERN FOR

TEST NO. 3A

(44)

15 13 12M 10 8 6 2

o

ELEVATOR VESTIBULE

o

OFFICE SPACE

ｾ 3 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT

• WEST STAIRWELL

PRESSURE DIFFERENCE SCALE

, , ,

o

0.10 0.20 INCH OF WATER PRESSURE • EAST STAIRWELL TEST CONDitiONS

- SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEM IN OPERATION - NO BOTTOM VENTING OF VERTICAL SHAFTS - ALL LA B. EX H A US T FAN S 0 F F

FIGURE

21 PRESSURE PATTERN FOR TEST NO. 3A

(45)

« ... V'> ... V'> w 3 « « I I V'> V'>

""

0 0 ... ... « « > > W W ｾｾ W w e<: e<: « « u u --' --' w 3 e<: « ... V'> ... V'> « w ｾｾｾ c.:: w

-0«

_-

_... V'> V'>

5ti;

0« Q.,W <30_... 16 15 14 13 12 1 1 10 9 ｾ W > 8 W ｾ 7 6 5 4 3 2 t---- I""--

t----\

t---- r--- t---- r--- t---- I""--.016 Ｎｾｅ

ｾＭｾＱ］Ｍ

.011 .OQ6.048

---

'-ｾ J

- SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEM IN OPERATION - NO BOTTOM VENTING OF VERTICAL SHAFTS - ALL LAB. EXHAUST FANS OFF

- FIRE DAMPERS OF RETURN DUCTS AT 2nd FLOOR CLOSED

FIGURE 22

PRESSURE lJlFFERENCE AND AIR FLOW PATTERN FOR

TEST NO. 38

(46)

I I

'"

...J 0:: 0:: _...J ...J ₀ ₀ _...J W _t- _t- _w ｾ -c <{ _ｾ !:!: > > !:!: <{ ...Jw w...J _-c ｾ _w w ｾ VI _VI 0:: a::: I - _-c _-c _I -Vl VI w U U _<{ ｾ N M w ...J ...J w ｾ a::: w -･ｾ VI VI

5:;:;

o<{ "-w <l0 I -.310

-o

t o -.017 .026 .047

--

..

I -t- ...

_ｾ

_I"

--.034 .014I - - .012 04 .020 .0 3 I -

o

5 ｾ

_"-

1-.

...

_{" " ' - -}

.

_ｾ

"A--\

.035 .b43 .012 ,019 .017 .044 .050

I

-r-

Ｍｾ

I:-L

1"-,.,"'--

I 1 -.070 055 ,051 ,036 .080 .038

Ｍｾｩｯｕ

.

r-

- - I ..*-r-015 .0131-- .017

I

_;072 I I -.008 ｾｾ 009 .0 8 _ｾＴＲ

.q;

.022

----

...

-

ｾ "

l

-I

t o -,045 ［ｾ 022 ｾＱＳ .045 .030 .000 - ' - _Ｍｾｾ

-r

"lI

-

--.045 .003 ＮＰＰＲＰＰｾｾｏｏ _-..021 003

--

l:r

7---(

-.021 .075 .052 .033 .022 ＮＰｾＵ .076

--

1,-

ｉＧｾ

"-.

f- _J

-ｾｏｾ

ｾＸ

ｾｏ

.045 ,10

--16 15 14 13 12 1 1 10

....

9 w

>

8

""

....

7 6 5 .4 3 2

- NORMAL OPERATION OF AIR HANDLING SYSTEMS - NO BOTTOM VENTING OF VERTICAL SHAFTS - 55% OF LAB. EXHAUST FANS IN OPERATION

FIGURE

23 PRESSURE lJl FFERENCE ANu AI R FLOW PATTERN FOR

TEST NO.4

(47)

a

ELEVATOR VESTIBULE

o

OFFICE SPACE

6 3 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT A 2 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT • WEST STAIRWELL

PRESSURE DIFFERENCE SCALE 15 1 3 12M 10 8 6 4 2

o

,

.

0.10 0.20 INCH OF WATER

o.

o •

EAST STAIRWELL • 0

o

PRESSURE .. TEST CONDITIONS

- NORMAL OPERATION OF AIR HANDLING SYSTEMS - NO BOTTOM VENTING OF VERTICAL SHAFTS

- 55% Of LAB. EXHAUST FANS IN OPERATION

FIGURE

24 PRESSURE PATTERN FOR TEST NO.4

(48)

::r: ::r: VI VI ...J <>< <>< _...J ...J ₀ ₀ _...J W _f- _f- _w ｾ _ｾ -c ｾｾ

>

_ｾ -c w W ...J ...J -c f- w w f-VI _VI <>< <>< f- _-c

<

f-VI _VI ｾ U U _-c N M w .310

-5

- t---.018 .025 .036 - r - ｾ

I-t-ＮｾＵ

_t---

ｾｉｏ

_I:

t -.049 .024 t---.016 029 .046

-r-

Ia.. ｾｾ ...

_ｾ

_.t·-

I

-\

b4<

.'

I

-I

.030 . .012 .018 .013 .050.0 6 ｟ｾＢＱｾｉｾ

l '

ｾ I

.-

-ＮｏｉＴＮＰＶｾＴＰ

ｾ

.031 .085.030 - r - _ｾｉＮ｟ｾ "

r---I

.016 .015 .013 .078 I

r---ｏｏＡ｟ｾＹｾ

f:

(}7

ｰｾ

.020

-I

.071 .0 4 ｾＹ

_ｾ＿ｒｊ

.065 Ｎｾｏ .001

-+-

r

-- --

- r---::

I

-

...-ｾﾷ｣ｲ

ｾ

ｾｾｌ

.006 0Cl7 ｾ

-e

28

ｾ

ｾｦｊＵｾ

ｾｾ

ｾＶ

ｬｯｯｾ .004 ｾ

-ｾ

ｾＰＮＰＵＰ

Ｇｉｾ .07 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 ...J W

>

_w 8 ...J 7 6 5 4 3 2

- WEST STAIR SHAFT AND 3 CAR ElEVATOR SHAFT BOTTOM VENTED - 55% OF LAB. EXHAUST FANS IN OPERATION

FIGURE

25 PRESSURE ulFFERENCE ANu AIR FLOW PATTERN FOR

TEST NO. 4A

(49)

6 PRESSURE DIFFERENCE SCALE 15 13 12M 10 8 -4 2

a

ELEVATOR VESTIBULE o OFFICE SPACE

6 3 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT

• WEST STAIRWELL

o

0.10 0.20 INCH OF WATER PRESSURE 011

oti

EAST STAIRWELL • 0 TEST CONDITIONS

- WEST STAIR SHAFT AND 3 CAR ELEVATOR SHAFT BOTTOM VENTED

FIGURE

26 PRESSURE PATTERN FOR TEST NO. 4A

Report of tests on the smoke-control system of the Canadian Grain Commission Building, Winnipeg

Publisher’s version / Version de l'éditeur:

Internal Report (National Research Council of Canada. Division of Building

Research), 1974-01-01

Archives des publications du CNRC