Next Article in Journal
Assessment of Periodontium Temperature Changes under Orthodontic Force by Using Objective and Automatic Classifier
Next Article in Special Issue
Effects of Discharge Area and Atomizing Gas Type in Full Cone Twin-Fluid Atomizer on Extinguishing Performance of Heptane Pool Fire under Two Heat Release Rate Conditions in an Enclosed Chamber
Previous Article in Journal
Collective Memory: Transposing Pavlov’s Experiment to Robot Swarms
Previous Article in Special Issue
Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analyses of Human and Organizational Risks in Fire Safety Systems for High-Rise Residential Buildings with Probabilistic T-H-O-Risk Methodology

Fire Safety Risk Analysis of Conventional Submarines

BMT Defence and Security Australia, 99 King Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
DST Group, 506 Lorimer Street, Fishermans Bend, Melbourne, Victoria 3207, Australia
Institute for Sustainable Industries and Liveable Cities, Victoria University, Melbourne, Victoria 3030, Australia
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Current affiliation: BAE Systems Australia, Edinburgh 5111, Australia.
Academic Editors: Cheol-Hong Hwang and Antonella D’Alessandro
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11(6), 2631;
Received: 6 January 2021 / Revised: 10 March 2021 / Accepted: 11 March 2021 / Published: 16 March 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advanced Analysis and Technology in Fire Science and Engineering)
Conventional (diesel-electric) submarines can provide improved stealth compared to nuclear submarines once submerged. This is because nuclear submarines are generally larger and are required to operate their nuclear reactors at all times, unlike diesel-electric submarines which are generally smaller and can run exclusively on batteries when submerged which generally requires fewer moving parts. These characteristics normally result in a smaller acoustic, thermal and magnetic signature which afford diesel-electric submarines greater stealth when submerged. However, the current underwater range and endurance is limited by the energy storage or generation for submerged operation. The application of emerging energy storage technology seeks to address this limitation and provide significant tactical and operational advantages to the conventional submarine operator. From a fire safety perspective, the potential addition of technologies such as rechargeable lithium-ion batteries, Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) systems and increasingly sophisticated electronic equipment dramatically changes the risk space in an already challenging and unforgiving underwater environment. This study reviews the functions, failure modes and maturity of emerging technologies that have serious submarine fire safety implications. A semi-quantitative assessment of the fire risk associated with potential large future conventional submarine design options for batteries and AIP is provided. This assessment concludes that lithium-ion batteries pose the greatest challenge with regard to integration into conventional submarines without compromising reliability or safety. View Full-Text
Keywords: submarine; lithium-ion battery; design; fire; risk; thermal runaway; modelling submarine; lithium-ion battery; design; fire; risk; thermal runaway; modelling
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Depetro, A.; Gamble, G.; Moinuddin, K. Fire Safety Risk Analysis of Conventional Submarines. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2631.

AMA Style

Depetro A, Gamble G, Moinuddin K. Fire Safety Risk Analysis of Conventional Submarines. Applied Sciences. 2021; 11(6):2631.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Depetro, Aidan, Grant Gamble, and Khalid Moinuddin. 2021. "Fire Safety Risk Analysis of Conventional Submarines" Applied Sciences 11, no. 6: 2631.

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Back to TopTop