1.1 这是制定铁路运输车辆火灾危险性评估的指南。它旨在帮助专业人员，包括消防安全工程师，在设计期间或之后评估铁路运输车辆的消防安全（另请参阅 1.6 )。本指南本身不是火灾危险性评估，也没有提供验收标准；因此，它不能用于监管。 1.2 危险评估是一个过程，一旦发生了规定的事件，就可以估计在规定的情况下可能发生的火灾的潜在严重程度。 危险评估没有涉及火灾发生的可能性。危险评估的前提是点火已经发生，与特定的场景一致，并且可以可靠地估计场景的潜在结果。 1.3 与一致 1.2 ，本指南提供了评估特定铁路乘客设计与基于该行业目前广泛使用的传统适用火灾测试响应特性方法开发的设计相比，是否提供了同等或更高水平的消防安全的方法。 这种方法通常以规定性测试方法为基础。以下是此类规定性测试列表的示例:联邦铁路管理局（FRA）的要求( 表X1.1 )，FRA的前指南，NFPA 130的要求( 表X3.1 )，以及美国联邦交通管理局（FTA）的推荐做法。选择性使用本指南中的部分方法以及 表X1.1 （或任何其他测试）不符合本指南或表格的消防安全目标。 本指南应全部用于制定铁路运输车辆的火灾危险性评估或帮助设计此类车辆。 1.4 本指南包括并应用公认的、明确定义的消防安全工程技术和方法，这些技术和方法符合现有的、传统的规范性规范和标准以及世界各地正在制定的基于性能的消防规范和标准。 1.5 本指南通过评估铁路运输车辆中使用的特定产品、组件、系统或整体设计的比较火灾危险性，提供了减轻铁路运输车辆火灾潜在损害的推荐方法。 这种方法可能包括改变轨道交通车辆结构中涉及的材料、部件、产品、组件或系统，或改变车辆的设计特征，包括现有自动启动消防安全装置的数量和位置（见 4.4.4 了解更多细节）。 1.6 除其他外，本指南旨在帮助处理与以下领域相关问题的人员。 1.6.1 轨道交通车辆的设计和规范。 1.6.2 轨道运输车辆制造。 1.6.3 为铁路运输车辆提供组件、子组件和部件材料。 1.6.4 铁路运输车辆的运营。 1.6.5 为铁路运输车辆的所有乘客提供安全的环境。 1.7 本指南中提供的技术基于轨道交通车辆设计、施工和火灾场景方面的具体假设。这些技术可用于定量测量特定火灾条件下的火灾危险，包括特定材料、产品或组件。 这种评估不能用来预测实际火灾的危害，实际火灾涉及的条件或车辆设计，而不是分析中假设的情况。特别是，火灾危险可能会受到车辆预期使用模式的影响。 1.8 本指南可用于分析在定义的特定火灾场景下指定的车辆的估计火灾性能。在这种情况下，事故将在车内或车外发生，点火源可能涉及车辆设备和其他来源。第节详细描述了将要使用的火灾场景 5.3 。 1.8.1 引发条件比分析中假设的更严重的火灾可能比使用本指南中提供的技术计算的火灾更严重。因此，必须将严重的火灾情况视为一系列火灾场景的一部分。 1.9 该消防标准不能用于提供定量措施。 1.10 本国际标准是根据世界贸易组织技术性贸易壁垒委员会发布的《关于制定国际标准、指南和建议的原则的决定》中确立的国际公认的标准化原则制定的。 ===意义和用途====== 4.1 本指南旨在供从事铁路运输车辆和铁路运输车辆内产品火灾危险性评估开发的人员使用。 4.2 本指南提供了有关制定火灾危险性评估方法的信息，但尚未制定固定程序。数据的可用性、适当的测试程序、适当的火灾模型或科学知识的进步方面的任何限制都将对火灾危险性评估程序产生重大限制。 4.3 根据本指南制定的火灾危险性评估必须规定确定火灾危险性措施所需的所有步骤，负责当局可以有意义地设定安全阈值或通过/不通过标准。优选的是，这样的练习具有来自各种来源的输入。 4.4 结果:使用和应用。 根据本指南制定的火灾危险性评估应能够评估考虑用于某一轨道交通车辆的新产品，并得出 4.4.1– 4.4.4 。 4.4.1 新产品比当前使用的产品更安全。 就预测的防火性能而言，新产品比已投入使用的产品更安全。在这种情况下，从消防安全的角度来看，新产品是可取的。 4.4.2 新产品的安全性等同于当前使用的产品。 新产品和已投入使用的产品的预测消防安全性没有区别。在这种情况下，从消防安全的角度来看，使用新产品既没有优点也没有缺点。 4.4.3 新产品安全性低于当前使用的产品。 就预测的防火性能而言，新产品的安全性不如已投入使用的产品。在这种情况下，直接替代产品会提供较低的安全水平，从消防安全的角度来看，新产品是不可取的，不应在没有进行其他补偿性更改的情况下使用。 4.4.3.1 新产品与目前使用的产品在安全性上不同。 就预测的防火性能而言，一种不太安全的新产品仍然可以被接受，前提是它是轨道交通车辆完整、全面的消防安全设计的一部分。 车辆的重新设计应包括其他功能，如使用替代布局或增加自动消防系统的使用，这些功能可明显为整个设计带来相同或更好的安全性。在这种情况下，必须进行更深入的火灾危险评估，以确保整个设计达到安全目标，并且新产品只能作为更大的批准设计的一部分被接受。 4.4.4 与既定用途的产品相比，新产品可能具有一些安全优势和一些安全劣势。 这种结果的一个例子可能是烟雾遮蔽度增加，热量释放减少。在这种情况下，必须进行更深入的火灾危险评估，以确保利大于弊，由此产生的总体安全水平不低于传统方法提供的安全水平（见 表X1.1 和 附录X1 )。 4.5 根据中描述的分析 4.4 ，根据本指南制定的火灾危险性评估将得出关于所研究新产品可取性的结论。评估结果必须导致设计至少与被替换的设计一样安全。

1.1 This is a guide to developing fire hazard assessments for rail transportation vehicles. It has been written to assist professionals, including fire safety engineers, who wish to assess the fire safety of rail transportation vehicles, during or after their design (see also 1.6 ). This guide is not in itself a fire hazard assessment nor does it provide acceptance criteria; thus, it cannot be used for regulation. 1.2 Hazard assessment is a process that results in an estimate of the potential severity of the fires that can develop under defined scenarios, once defined incidents have occurred. Hazard assessment does not address the likelihood of a fire occurring. Hazard assessment is based on the premise that an ignition has occurred, consistent with a specified scenario, and that potential outcomes of the scenario can be reliably estimated. 1.3 Consistent with 1.2 , this guide provides methods to evaluate whether particular rail passenger designs provide an equal or greater level of fire safety when compared to designs developed based on the traditional applicable fire-test-response characteristic approaches currently widely used in this industry. Such approaches have typically been based on prescriptive test methodologies. The following are examples of such lists of prescriptive tests: the requirements by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) ( Table X1.1 ), the former guidelines of the FRA, the requirements of NFPA 130 ( Table X3.1 ), and the recommended practices of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Selective use of parts of the methodology in this guide and of individual fire-test-response characteristics from Table X1.1 (or any other set of tests) does not satisfy the fire safety objectives of this guide or of the table. This guide shall be used in its entirety to develop a fire hazard assessment for rail transportation vehicles or to aid in the design of such vehicles. 1.4 This guide includes and applies accepted and clearly defined fire safety engineering techniques and methods consistent with both existing, traditional prescriptive codes and standards and performance based fire codes and standards under development throughout the world. 1.5 This guide provides recommended methods to mitigate potential damage from fires in rail transportation vehicles, by assessing the comparative fire hazard of particular products, assemblies, systems or overall designs intended for use in rail transportation vehicles. Such methods could include changes to the materials, components, products, assemblies, or systems involved in the construction of the rail transportation vehicle or changes in the design features of the vehicle, including the number and location of automatically activated fire safety devices present (see 4.4.4 for further details). 1.6 This guide is intended, among other things, to be of assistance to personnel addressing issues associated with the following areas. 1.6.1 Design and specification of rail transportation vehicles. 1.6.2 Fabrication of rail transportation vehicles. 1.6.3 Supply of assemblies, subassemblies, and component materials, for use in rail transportation vehicles. 1.6.4 Operation of rail transportation vehicles. 1.6.5 Provision of a safe environment for all occupants of a rail transportation vehicle. 1.7 The techniques provided in this guide are based on specific assumptions in terms of rail transportation vehicle designs, construction and fire scenarios. These techniques can be used to provide a quantitative measure of the fire hazards from a specified set of fire conditions, involving specific materials, products, or assemblies. Such an assessment cannot be relied upon to predict the hazard of actual fires, which involve conditions, or vehicle designs, other than those assumed in the analysis. In particular, the fire hazard may be affected by the anticipated use pattern of the vehicle. 1.8 This guide can be used to analyze the estimated fire performance of the vehicle specified under defined specific fire scenarios. Under such scenarios, incidents will begin either inside or outside a vehicle, and ignition sources can involve vehicle equipment as well as other sources. The fire scenarios to be used are described in detail in Section 5.3 . 1.8.1 Fires with more severe initiating conditions than those assumed in an analysis may pose more severe fire hazard than that calculated using the techniques provided in this guide. For this reason severe fire conditions must be considered as part of an array of fire scenarios. 1.9 This fire standard cannot be used to provide quantitative measures. 1.10 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee. ====== Significance And Use ====== 4.1 This guide is intended for use by those undertaking the development of fire hazard assessments for rail transportation vehicles and products contained within rail transportation vehicles. 4.2 This guide provides information on an approach to develop a fire hazard assessment, but fixed procedures are not established. Any limitations in the availability of data, of appropriate test procedures, of adequate fire models, or in the advancement of scientific knowledge, will place significant constraints upon the procedure for the assessment of fire hazard. 4.3 A fire hazard assessment developed following this guide must specify all steps required to determine fire hazard measures for which safety thresholds or pass/fail criteria can be meaningfully set by responsible authorities. It is preferred that such exercises have input from various sources. 4.4 Outcomes: Use and Application. A fire hazard assessment developed as a result of using this guide should be able to assess a new product being considered for use in a certain rail transportation vehicle and reach one of the conclusions listed in 4.4.1 – 4.4.4 . 4.4.1 New Product Safer than Product Currently in Use. The new product is safer, in terms of predicted fire performance, than the one in established use. In this case, the new product is desirable, from the point of view of fire safety. 4.4.2 New Product Equivalent in Safety to Product Currently in Use. There is no difference between the predicted fire safety of the new product and of the one in established use. In this case, use of the new product provides neither advantage nor disadvantage, from the point of view of fire safety. 4.4.3 New Product Less Safe than Product Currently in Use. The new product is less safe, in terms of predicted fire performance, than the one in established use. In this case, a direct substitution of products would provide a lower level of safety and the new product would be undesirable, and should not be used, from the point of view of fire safety, without other compensatory changes being made. 4.4.3.1 New Product Different in Safety to Product Currently in Use. A new product that is less safe, in terms of predicted fire performance, can nevertheless be made acceptable if, and only if, it is part of a complete, comprehensive, fire safety design for the rail transportation vehicle. Such redesign of the vehicle should include other features such as use of an alternative layout or increased use of automatic fire protection systems, that demonstrably produce the same or better safety for the complete design. In such cases, a more in-depth fire hazard assessment would have to be conducted to ensure that the entire design achieves the safety goals, and the new product would be acceptable only as part of the larger, approved design. 4.4.4 The new product could offer some safety advantages and some safety disadvantages over the item in established use. An example of such an outcome could be increased smoke obscuration with decreased heat release. In such cases, a more in-depth fire hazard assessment would have to be conducted to ensure that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, and the resulting overall level of safety is no less than that provided by the traditional approach (see Table X1.1 and Appendix X1 ). 4.5 Following the analysis described in 4.4 , a fire hazard assessment developed following this guide would reach a conclusion regarding the desirability of the new product studied. It is essential for the results of the assessment to lead to a design that is at least as safe as the one being replaced.