Design of A Modern Subway Ventilation System
Design of A Modern Subway Ventilation System
Design of A Modern Subway Ventilation System
T
Below: Fig 1 - End of station ventilation fans with independent blast shafts
his paper presents in a very general format, results of a parametric study that was undertaken on the relative effects of a number of parameters that can often be inuenced in the early design stage of a project. Awareness of the relative benets of each, and judicious combination of these at the design stage, can help signicantly in arriving at an engineering solution that is both economic and sustainable. Many variables interrelate to determine the aerothermodynamic performance and therefore comfort of a subway system. Some of these can be manipulated to create an inherently better passenger environment. This parameter alteration will have performance and operational cost implications. Therefore investigation of the effect of any alteration is required to produce an optimal, cost effective and sustainable solution.
Parameter
Deep sink temperature Ambient design temperature Maximum train speed Tunnel nominal diameter Tunnel cross sectional area Train cross sectional area Vent shaft cross sectional area Station entrance area-total Tunnel configuration
Base value
12C 30C 90km/hr 5.5m 20m2 10.8m2 32.5m2 15m2 Twin bore tunnels
48
5.0 4.0 Temperature change (C) 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Tunnel Platform
15
35
40
ambient, air exchange with ambient is generally benecial for the tunnels, but not the stations. Station depth is usually dictated by tunnel alignment and geotechnical considerations. Deeper stations means longer blast shafts with a greater aerodynamic resistance. This reduces the airow through the shafts and increases the volume of air re-circulated each time the ow direction changes. As a result, if other parameters remain the same, temperatures are typically about 2C warmer on relatively deep platforms (30m-40m) than a shallow cut and cover type station. The station layout has an impact on the tunnel/station environment. Congurations featuring one, two and three exits from the upper mezzanine to street level were modelled. The base design features two 7.5m2 (CSA) stairwells. The impact on temperature is shown in gure 3. Equivalent results would be achieved through alteration of exit area rather than number, however exit size is often determined by factors such as expected passenger volume and real estate considerations. It should be noted that the simulation was based on a warm summers day with passive ventilation. If the
NOVEMBER 2004 Tunnels & Tunnelling International
Track prole affects train -1.0 braking and propulsion -2.0 heat production and -3.0 therefore system -4.0 temperatures. Ideally, station -5.0 3 exits Base case 1 exit approaches should be at (2 exits) an upgrade, reducing heat load due to braking. To minimise acceleration, station exit tunnels should be Above: Fig 3 - Effect of downgrade utilising the train potential energy to full number of station exits on advantage. For maximum benet drivers must coast tunnel and station environment trains into stations. The base case model has random alignment variations along the track way, typical of a subway tunnel. The track gradients on this model were altered to produce three additional proles the humped, well and at. All other parameters were kept constant. Simulation results show that, compared to the base case, platform temperatures expected in a naturally ventilated system will be about 3C cooler for the humped case, 1C warmer for a at alignment and 4C warmer for a well station. Clearly the humped alignment will result in a better station environment. Lower traction power demands would also be Left: Fig 2 - Effect of station blast area on expected. It should be noted that large tunnel gradients can system temperatures affect the ventilation system in other ways. Increased critical velocities and buoyancy forces will require increased ventilation capacity to drive smoke downgrade in the event of a re. Drainage installation and operational costs may also increase. Reducing the kinetic energy of the trains will result in a drop in traction power required for propulsion as well as a reduction in the heat generated during braking while approaching stations. This can be achieved by reducing either the train mass or speed. While reducing the mass of the stock has clear benets in terms of power consumption and heat generation several other factors must be considered. The benets of using lighter materials, such as plastics and polymers, are often outweighed by the increased re load when compared to metal. However, the mass of the train stock (per passenger carried) varies widely between different subway systems around the world, indicating efciency gains are still possible. The effects of train speed on system temperatures REFERENCES are complex. Reducing the speed of the trains decreases the amount of kinetic energy converted to 1. US Department of heat each time a train brakes. It also reduces the Transportation, Research piston effect of the trains and therefore the volume of and Special Programs Administration, 1997. Suboutside air entering and cooling the system. way Environmental Design Additionally, depending on the type of signalling Handbook Volume II: Subsystem used, reducing the maximum train speed may way Environment Simulation Computer Program, affect the passenger capacity of the line. Therefore Version 4, Part 1, Users train speed limits cannot realistically be set by Manual. ventilation design requirements. 2. C W Pope, D G New-
man & G Matschke, 2000. The Factors Affecting Draught Relief and Air Temperature in an Underground Metro System, 10th ISAVVT, Boston, USA, BHRG, Publication 43.
49
Above: Fig 4 - Typical under platform and over track exhaust and supply system in stations
traditional refrigeration cycles may be suitable. Alternatives include geothermal, river, sea or groundwater cooling or evaporative cooling. Where signicant volumes of groundwater inltrate the tunnel lining, this water can be used to cool stations or tunnels before it is pumped into a sewer.
Apart from those parameters that are dictated by other system requirements and therefore beyond the control of the ventilation design engineer, there are specic design steps that he/she can take to inuence the tunnel and station conditions. Extracting high-grade heat at source is the most efcient way of preventing train heat loads from entering the station environment. Depending on the exact location of a car braking system and/or onboard air-conditioning units, this can be achieved by mechanical extract via an Under Platform Exhaust (UPE) or an Over Track Exhaust (OTE) system (gure 4). The OTE is also necessary for removing smoke at platform ceiling, above the train, and that is what normally drives the size of the OTE ducts. If air conditioning is used, it is usually benecial to ensure that the station remains at neutral or slightly positive pressure. Hence the extract airow must be balanced with fresh supply air from outside to reduce inltration from the tunnel environment. An appropriate extract ow rate per meter of platform length can reduce overall station temperatures by about 10C[2]. Tunnel ventilation fans, normally used during Below: Fig 5 - Airow split congested and emergency modes, can also replace without jetfans the fans for UPE/OTE. This functional sharing of fan plants restricts the location of the fan plant at either Bottom: Fig 6 - Airow end of the station box, as shown in gure 1, but results split with jet fans (two in substantial savings in space, capital and life cycle pairs) costs. If this integrated fan plant design is chosen, the tunnel ventilation shafts should be inclined away from the station box Supply air Exhaust air towards the tunnel, so as to improve the proportion Station Station of air entering the incident 80% 20% 20% 80% Train tunnel, and thus minimise the fan plant room size. This inclination can be implemented either in plan or in elevation, but it will Supply air Exhaust air impact the architectural layout of the ancillary Station Station 50% 50% 50% 50% areas signicantly, and Train should therefore be implemented early in the
% useful flow
1000
5000
6000
cooling benet must be weighed against the cost of running the fans.
Conclusions
Outside air is needed to control temperatures within a subway system, to provide patrons with fresh air to breathe and, in an emergency, control the ow of smoke and allow the safe escape of passengers. In some cases, mechanical cooling of stations may be required to achieve the desired conditions throughout the year. Typically, the capacity of the tunnel ventilation system is determined by re emergency mode requirements. However, the need for mechanical ventilation to control temperatures and supply outside air for patrons can be reduced by careful design of the ventilation system and other system-wide parameters. This sustainable approach to ventilation design of subway systems reduces both the impact of the system on the environment, as well as capital and T & T running costs.
Tunnels & Tunnelling International NOVEMBER 2004
50
DRIVEN SOLUTIONS
Arup has worked with the operators, owners and users of underground structures to improve the quality of subway design and engineering for many years. Our understanding of the technological and business issues facilitate a one-stop consulting firm, linking Arups 7000 experts across 32 countries to address the following areas: Tunnel aerodynamics & ventilation Environmental impact Fire & safety Risk management Human factors For more information:
www.britishtunnelling.org