Fire Evacuation in a Large Railway Interchange Station

  • C. Y. Ku
  • W. K. ChowEmail author
  • T. K. Yue
Conference paper


Large railway interchange stations with complex geometry are common in contemporary integrated railway networks. Fire evacuation is commonly designed using the timeline analysis in comparing Available Safe Egress Time (ASET) and Required Safe Egress Time (RSET) with agreed scenarios. Smoke management systems are required to achieve longer ASET. Egress time analysis will be evaluated in this paper for a typical large railway interchange. The fire environment was simulated using fire dynamics simulator (FDS), a software based on computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Design fires of 2, 2.5, 5, 10, 25 and 50 MW were used in estimating ASET. Egress simulations by the software SIMULEX were conducted to predict the RSET under passenger loadings of 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 m2/person. The results show that the ASET in most of the cases with higher fire size and with higher passenger loading are less than the RSET. Consequently, the passengers are unsafe in the event of fire evacuation. Therefore, a larger safety margin, defined as the difference between ASET and RSET, should be provided. In the case of low safety margin in some existing stations, fire safety management and procedures on handling fire incidents have to be reformulated properly and carefully.


Fire modeling Evacuation CFD Smoke management Performance-based design 



The work described in this paper was supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region for the Theme-Based Research Scheme Project “Safety, Reliability, and Disruption Management of High Speed Rail and Metro Systems” (T32-101/15-R) with account number 3-RBAC.


  1. 1.
    Chow, W. K. (2015). Performance-based approach to determining fire safety provisions for buildings in the Asia-Oceania regions. Building and Environment - Fifty Year Anniversary for Building and Environment, 91, 127–137.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buildings Department. (1998). Practice note APP-87. Hong Kong: Buildings Department.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buildings Department. (2012). Code of Practice for Fire Safety in Buildings 2011, Buildings Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    South China Morning Post. (2017). MTR firebomb attack at height of rush hour, p. A1, 11 February 2017.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chow, W. K., Qu, L., & Pang, E. C. L. (2011). Incidents on fire and ventilation provision in subway systems in Hong Kong. International Journal on Engineering Performance-Based Fire Codes, 10(3), 41–47.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chow, W. K., & Qu, L. (2014). Fire hazard assessment for a green railway station. Fire and Materials, 38, 451–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ku, C. Y., Fong, N. K., Chow, W. K. (2013). Parameters in development of the railway station evacuation strategy. In: 11th International Symposium on Building and Urban Environmental Engineering BUEE2013, December 11–14, 2013, Taipei, Taiwan.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chow, W. K. (2002). Ventilation of enclosed train compartments in Hong Kong. Applied Energy, 71(3), 161–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McGrattan, K., Klein, B., Hostikka, S., Floyd, J. (2010). Fire Dynamics Simulator (Version 5) User’s Guide. NIST Special Publication 1019-5. National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chow, W. K. (2011). Timeline Analysis with ASET and RSET, 9 September 2011. Department of Building Services Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.
  11. 11.
    Fong, N. K., & Ma, C. Y. (2004). Research on evacuation design: Railway station as an example. International Journal on Engineering Performance-Based Fire Codes, 6(4), 188–196.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lo, S. M., Fang, Z., Lin, P., & Zhi, G. S. (2004). An evacuation model: The SGEM package. Fire Safety Journal, 39, 169–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Integrated Environmental Solutions Limited (IES). (2015). SIMULEX user guide: Evacuation modelling software. Integrated Environmental Solutions Inc.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kowloon-Canton Railway Corporation (KCRC). (2007). Fire Safety Strategy Reports, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ho, M. K., Ku, C. Y., Chow, W. K. (2016). Evacuation hazards in crowded subway stations. In: 4th International High Performance Buildings Conference at Purdue, July 11–14, 2016, Illinois, USA.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    National Fire Protection Association. (2012). NFPA 92 Standard for Smoke Control Systems, Quincy, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ip, A. K. Y., Luo, M. C. (2005). Smoke control in pedestrian subway. In: Proceedings of the Hubei—Hong Kong Joint Symposium 2005 (pp. 70–79), June 30–July 3, 2005, Wuhan, Hubei, China.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Stahl, F. I. (1982). Time-based capabilities of occupants to escape fires in public buildings: A review of code provisions and technical literature. Washington, DC, USA: National Bureau of Standards.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ng, C. M. Y., & Chow, W. K. (2006). A brief review on the time line concept in evacuation. International Journal on Architectural Science, 7(1), 1–13.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tubbs, J. S., & Meacham, B. J. (2007). Egress design solutions: A guide to evacuation and crowd management planning. USA: Wiley.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hinks, A. J. (1985). Predicting danger levels to life—The deciding factors. Fire, 77(964), 21–24.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers. (2010). CIBSE Guide E: Fire Safety Engineering. London, UK: CIBSE.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shields, T. J., Silcock, G. W., & Dunlop, K. E. (1992). A methodology for the determination of code equivalency with respect to the provision of means of escape. Fire Safety Journal, 19(4), 267–278. Scholar
  24. 24.
    International Organization for Standardization. (2009). ISO/TR 16738:2009 Fire-Safety Engineering—Technical Information on Methods for Evaluating Behaviour and Movement of People, ISO, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Babrauskas, V., Fleming, J. M., & Russell, B. D. (2010). RSET/ASET, a flawed concept for fire safety assessment. Fire and Materials, 34, 341–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chow, W. K. (2011). Six points to note in applying timeline analysis in performance-based design for fire safety provisions in the far east. International Journal on Engineering Performance-Based Fire Codes, 10(1), 1–5.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chow, W. K. (2013). Letter to the editor: Comment on ‘RSET/ASET, a flawed concept for fire safety assessment’. Fire and Materials, 37, 257–258. In V. Babrauskas, J. M. Fleming, & B. D. Russell (Eds.), Fire and materials (Vol. 34, pp. 341–355) (2010).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chow, W. K. (1999). A preliminary discussion on engineering performance-based fire codes in the Hong Kong special administrative region. International Journal on Engineering Performance-Based Fire Codes, 1(1), 1–10.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chow, W. K., Fong, N. K. (2012). Common mistakes made in using CFD in FEA Projects, CPD Lecture. 21 April 2012, Department of Building Services Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Qu, L., & Chow, W. K. (2012). Platform screen doors on emergency evacuation in underground railway stations. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 30, 1–9. Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chow, W. K., & Yin, R. (2004). A new model on simulating smoke transport with computational fluid dynamics. Building and Environment, 39(6), 611–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fire Services Department. (2013). Guidelines on Formulation of Fire Safety Requirements for New Railway Infrastructures. Fire Services Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Milke, J. A. (2000). Evaluating the smoke hazard from fires in large spaces. International Journal on Engineering Performance-Based Fire Codes, 2(3), 94–103.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Roh, J. S., Ryou, H. S., Park, W. H., & Jang, Y. J. (2009). CFD simulation and assessment of life safety in a subway train fire. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 24(4), 447–453. Scholar
  35. 35.
    Shi, S. L., Lu, W. Z., Chow, W. K., & Huo, R. (2007). An investigation on spill plume development and natural filling in large full-scale atrium under retail shop fire. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 50(3), 513–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chow, W. K., & Chan, M. Y. (2003). Field measurement on transient carbon monoxide levels in vehicular tunnels. Building and Environment, 38(2), 227–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Thauvoye, C., Zhao, B., Klein, J., Fontana, M. (2008). Fire load survey and statistical analysis. In: Fire Safety Science—Proceedings of the Ninth International Symposium (pp. 991–1002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Chow, W. K., Wong, K. Y., & Chung, W. Y. (2010). Longitudinal ventilation for smoke control in a tilted tunnel by scale modeling. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 25(2), 122–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jiang, C. S., Yuan, F., & Chow, W. K. (2010). Effect of varying two key parameters in simulating evacuation for subway stations in China. Safety Science, 48(4), 445–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lui, G. C. H., & Chow, W. K. (2000). A demonstration on working out fire safety management schemes for existing karaoke establishments in Hong Kong. International Journal on Engineering Performance-Based Fire Codes, 2(3), 104–123.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sime, J. D. (1986). Perceived time available: The margin of safety in fires. In: Fire Safety Science—Proceedings of First International Symposium, Hemisphere, Washington DC, USA (pp. 561–570).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Poon, S. L. (2014). A dynamic approach to ASET/RSET assessment in performance based design. Procedia Engineering, 71, 173–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    He, Yaping. (2010). Linking safety factor and failure probability for fire safety engineering. Journal of Fire Protection Engineering, 20(3), 199–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Building Services Engineering, Research Centre for Fire EngineeringThe Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations