416
Table1.Firesonboardcommercialshipscausingfatalities
andmaterialdamages:period2015‐2020
________________________________________________
Year TextFiresonboardall Firesonboard
commercialships containerships
________________________________________________
2015 117
2016 127
2017 72
2018 42
2019 40
2020 21
________________________________________________
Therefore, the relevance of the potential
consequencesonfiresonboardthistypologyofships
is self‐explaining, as well as the potential benefits
achievable by effective technological solutions for
preventionfiresandmitigationoftheireffects.
All these concepts received reinforcement and
validationbytheveryrecent(March2023)issueof
the
CARGOSAFE Report, commissioned by European
MaritimeSafetyAgency(EMSA)[4],withthegoalto
identifycost‐effectivemeasuresforreducingthe risk
of cargo fires on new‐builds and existing
containerships, which will represent a milestone for
thefutureresearchactivitiesinthisfield.
2 FIRETYPOLOGIESANDCAUSES
There are many possible typologies and sources of
shipboardfires.Theinvestigationsarenormallyable
to identify with sufficient level of details the causes
generatingthefiresandtoconsolidateprogressivelya
knowledge on them. The classification of fires
includes:
Accidental: in which the proven cause does not
involve any
deliberate human act to ignite or
spreadthefire;
Natural:eventssuchaslightning,wind,etc.,which
donotinvolveanydirecthumanintervention;
Incendiary:deliberatelysetundercircumstancesin
which the individuals know that the fire should
notbeset;
Undetermined:whentheproofofthe
causeisstill
missing.
Approximately 60‐70% of fires share a common
scenario,based on theoutflowofcombustibleliquid
andcontactwithahotsurface,developsrapidlyand
reachtemperaturesof700–1000°C[5].Accordingtoa
moresystematicanalysis,thesourceofignitioncanbe
at or very near the
point of origin of the fire.
Nevertheless, such evidence may be missing due to
heavydamagesordestructionbythefireitself[6].An
effective source of ignition requires sufficient
temperature, energy and contact time with the first
fuel ignited to raise it to its ignition temperature.
Therefore, the ignition
process involves generation,
transmission and heating and the investigations
focusesontheidentificationofheat‐producingdevice,
substancesorcircumstancesthatcouldhaveresulted
inignition.Exampleareshipsandcargoesmaterials,
electrical items (e.g. circuits, equipment and fuses,
lightbulbs,fixtures),enginerooms(e.g.oiltransfers),
welding and burning, charging
batteries,
housekeeping, friction (e.g. during grinding),
refrigeration (e.g. in compressors), smoking,
flammableandliquidsandgases(e.g.CNGandLPG),
open flames and sparks,as wellaslow temperature
ignition(e.g.withwood)andlightning.
These elements reflect themselves into the ship
designphase,wherethehazardsevaluationbasedon
theIMOGuidelines[7],whichderivefromthe basic
principles of IMO Convention SOLAS [8] and
MARPOL[9].
Inparticular,theSOLASConventionatChapterII‐
2 deals with fire protection, fire detection and fire
extinction, where the focus is on applicable
requirements depending on ship type and, more
interestingly for
our purposes, it fixed fire safety
objectivesandfunctionalrequirements.
The established fire safety objectives are
specificallythefollowing:
1. Preventtheoccurrenceoffireandexplosion;
2. Reducetherisktolifecausedbyfire;
3. Reduce the risk of damage caused by fire to the
ship,itscargo
andtheenvironment;
4. Contain,controlandsuppressfireandexplosionin
thecompartmentoforigin;
5. Provide adequate and readily accessible means of
escapeforpassengersandcrew.
Meanwhile the functional requirements for the
constructionoftheshipare:
1. Division of the ship into main vertical and
horizontal zones
by thermal and structural
boundaries;
2. Separation of accommodation spaces from the
remainder of the ship by thermal and structural
boundaries;
3. Restricteduseofcombustiblematerials;
4. Detectionofanyfireinthezoneoforigin;
5. Containmentandextinctionofanyfireinthespace
oforigin;
6.
Protection of means of escape andaccess forfire‐
fighting;
7. Readyavailabilityoffire‐extinguishingappliances;
8. Minimizationofpossibilityofignitionofflammable
cargovapours.
In this context, the Guidelines on alternative
design and arrangements for fire safety outline the
methodologyfortheengineeringanalysisrequiredby
SOLAS regulation
II‐2/17 Alter‐native design and
arrangementsapplyingtospecificfiresafetysystems,
designs or arrangements requiring approval of
technically justified deviations from the prescriptive
requirementsofSOLASchapterII‐2.
Additionalrecommendationsforthepreventionof
firesarepartoftheInternationalConventionforSafe
Containers (CSC) [10] and
for the mitigation of fire
consequences are part of the Emergency Response
Procedures for Ships Carrying Dangerous Goods
(EMSGuide)[11].
In general, the following conditions and features
areaffectingthedesignrequirements:
1. Pre‐fire situation (ship, compartment, fuel load,
environmentalconditions);
2. Ignitionsources(temperature,energy,time,areaof
contactwithpotentialfuels);
3. Initial fuels (solid, liquid, gas, vapour or spray
state,density,heatreleasepower);
4. Secondaryfuels(proximitytoinitialfuels,amount
anddistribution);
5. Extension potential (beyond compartment,
structure,areas);