Abstract
The Japanese road tunnel smoke ventilation method, which takes the longitudinal ventilation system as the mainstream, is a great difference with the European point extraction ventilation method. Even in the fire safety assessment, there is a very different concept between the two, that is, Japan focuses on maintaining a safe evacuation environment, while Europe concerns with eliminating fatal accidents. This paper taking these differences into account, assuming longitudinal ventilation (zero-flow-control) and point extraction ventilation system are applied to the same size tunnel individually, then assessed the number of smoke-exposed evacuees by the Japanese method, the other is to assess the injury degree of the evacuees based on the European’s, in order to compare the fire safety of the two smoke ventilation systems. As the results show, in the case of longitudinal ventilation (zero-flow-control) could maintain a safe evacuation environment probably with a small gradient, but it may lead to injury risk if the gradient increases and evacuation delayed. In the case of the point extraction system, except for the gradient of 0%, many evacuees could be surrounded by smoke, however, the evacuees injured incident almost not occurred.
