Simulated smoke has been widely used in place of actual fire smoke during flight tests in the certification process for aircraft cargo compartment smoke detection systems. Previous research has identified several differences between actual and simulated smoke. However, few studies have determined the quantitative effects of these differences on the transport and detection properties of actual and simulated smoke. The current work compared actual and simulated smoke using a computational fluid dynamics method with numerical models for the two types of smoke developed in the Fire Dynamics Simulator of the National Institute of Standards and Technology and validated through experimental data. The transport and detection properties of actual and simulated smoke were then evaluated quantitatively in detail. The two types of smoke were compared under two conditions: (1) at the same smoke-generating quantity and (2) at the same smoke release rate. Result showed that during the early stage of smoke occurrence, the numerical values of light transmission at different monitoring points in simulated smoke are 10% to 20% lower than those in actual fire smoke. Simulated smoke from the smoke generator is easier to detect than actual fire smoke. Therefore, the equivalence between simulated smoke and actual fire smoke should be focused on in the airworthiness verification of aircraft cargo smoke detection.

中文翻译：

---

使用 CFD 方法比较实际和模拟烟​​雾在飞机货舱中的烟雾检测认证

在飞机货舱烟雾探测系统的认证过程中的飞行测试期间，模拟烟雾已被广泛用于代替实际火灾烟雾。先前的研究已经确定了实际烟雾和模拟烟雾之间的一些差异。然而，很少有研究确定这些差异对实际和模拟烟​​雾的传输和检测特性的定量影响。目前的工作使用计算流体动力学方法将实际烟雾和模拟烟雾与美国国家标准与技术研究所火灾动力学模拟器中开发的两种烟雾的数值模型进行了比较，并通过实验数据进行了验证。然后详细地定量评估实际和模拟烟​​雾的传输和检测特性。两种类型的烟雾在两种条件下进行比较：（1）相同的烟雾产生量和（2）相同的烟雾释放率。结果表明，在烟雾发生初期，模拟烟雾中不同监测点的透光数值比实际火灾烟雾低10%～20%。来自烟雾发生器的模拟烟雾比实际火灾烟雾更容易检测。因此，在飞机货物烟雾探测的适航性验证中，应重点关注模拟烟雾与实际火灾烟雾的等效性。模拟烟气中不同监测点的透光率数值比实际火灾烟气低10%～20%。来自烟雾发生器的模拟烟雾比实际火灾烟雾更容易检测。因此，在飞机货物烟雾探测的适航性验证中，应重点关注模拟烟雾与实际火灾烟雾的等效性。模拟烟气中不同监测点的透光率数值比实际火灾烟气低10%～20%。来自烟雾发生器的模拟烟雾比实际火灾烟雾更容易检测。因此，在飞机货物烟雾探测的适航性验证中，应重点关注模拟烟雾与实际火灾烟雾的等效性。