Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Engine Nacelle Halon Replacement, FAA, WJ Hughes Technical Center Point of Contact :Doug Ingerson Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Engine Nacelle Halon Replacement, FAA, WJ Hughes Technical Center Point of Contact :Doug Ingerson Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration."— Presentation transcript:

1 Engine Nacelle Halon Replacement, FAA, WJ Hughes Technical Center Point of Contact :Doug Ingerson Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center Fire Safety Branch, AAR-440 Bldg 205 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA tel:609-485-4945 fax:609-485-7074 email:Douglas.A.Ingerson@faa.gov web page:http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/ International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

2 Major Topics for Review : brief overview revision to minimum performance standard for engine/apu (mpse) foundation test plans and results near term plans International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

3 BRIEF OVERVIEW >April - July 2002, Testing #Encountered difficulty with hot surface ignition (HSI) during initial MPSE tests #Ran series of tests and observed HSI behavior - determined phenomena is unreliable #Reviewed a sample of reported HSI behaviors #Results indicated current version of the MPSE was faulted by HSI unreliability #Ran 100+ plus tests to find a way to circumvent HSI unreliability >23 & 24 July 2002, Task Group Meeting #Convened and discussed issues involving MPSE and HSI #Agreed MPSE required revision #Conceived method to track Halon 1301 suppression performance using HSI reliably #Formulated rough revision of MPSE (revision 3) #Planned foundation testing to resolve potentially complicating issues >August 2002 - Present #Produced a crude flowchart of MPSE revision 3 #Partially completed the foundation testing International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

4 REVISION OF THE MPSE >Evaluating the Basis for the Agent Comparison in the MPSE #MPSE process will have error in results due to environmental behaviors observed to date - conservatism is required, yet error must be minimized where possible #Experienced/reported difficulty with reliable HSI behavior would lead to greater expected error in final results #Equivalence method must represent the associated application in a reliable manner #Equivalence method relies on the occurrence of HSI as it is a threat in this application #Testing during : iApril - June 2002; the continually operating electrodes (COE) or a tube array of particular geometry reliably reignited JP-8 iJune - July 2002; primary ignition difficulty with low volatility fuel (oil) in the spray fire scenario - suspected impact on HSI behavior using the COE alone iJuly - August 2002; a combination of the COE and the tube array provided reliable HSI behavior for any fuel type evaluated International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

5 REVISION OF THE MPSE >The Significant Change to the MPSE #Former version of the MPSE ireliance upon the definition of a “robust” fire iequivalence process required finding a minimum of 3 robust fires ithe robust fire was a mixture of test conditions that would be extinguished by Halon 1301 for a portion of a fixed number of duplicate tests (80-90%) ia successful quantity of the replacement candidate was to repeat Halon 1301 behavior against the same conditions iHSI in this geometry is an imprecise behavior and was “buried” in the robust fire #Version 3 of the MPSE irobust fire eliminated ichanged performance measure to “Reignition Time Delay” - the time between fire extinguishment and reignition which is based on a video review of the test i“Reignition Time Delay” (RTD) is based on a minimum of 5 tests at like condition ia successful quantity of a replacement candidate will be required to repeat or exceed the RTD for Halon 1301 at the same test conditions iHSI is provided for with intentional secondary ignition sources International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

6 REVISION OF THE MPSE >Items of Concern for MPSE revision 3 #Concerns are included for consideration in MPSE revision 3 to improve on the body of work to date #Concerns are reasoned as impacts on the credibility of the final results icompartment ventilation conditions iagent storage, release, and distribution isufficient severity of the fire threat ivariation in the RTD must be observed and understood #Concerns will be addressed with foundation testing and review of others’ work #Retain portions of previous MPSE revision to minimize loss of time International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

7 REVISION OF THE MPSE >Spray Fire Zone Configuration, MPSE revision 3 FUEL NOZZLES 2” TALL FLAME STABILIZATION RIB TUBE ARRAY AIRFLOW FWD UP CORE Section A-A AIRFLOW SURFACE TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT POINT FWD UP Section A-A International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

8 REVISION OF THE MPSE >Spray Fire Zone Configuration, MPSE revision 3 AIRFLOW FWD UP FUEL NOZZLES 2” TALL FLAME STABILIZATION RIB TUBE ARRAY CORE ELECTRODES sta 502 sta 510 International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

9

10

11

12 REVISION OF THE MPSE >Process Overview #Parameter for comparing agent suppression performances is RTD; not robust fire #RTD is the duration of time between fire extinguishment and reignition #RTD requires a test fixture which includes RELIABLE secondary ignition sources # Primarily, a single RTD will represent a group of duplicate agent suppression tests #Basis for success : RTD Halon 1301  RTD Candidate replacement #Testing will account for representative : iventilation conditions iagent storage and discharge considerations ifuels types in a nacelle/APU ifire scenarios #Process will allow for rational test planning itest against the most challenging condition(s) irun verification tests against conditions not explicitly evaluated iattempting to separate fire suppression and agent distribution performances International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

13 REVISION OF THE MPSE >Process Overview (continued) FIND CERTIFICATION DISTRIBUTION FOR HALON 1301 IN SIMULATOR SELECT FIRE CONDITIONS IN SIMULATOR RUN SPECIFIED NUMBER OF FIRE EXTINGUISHMENT TESTS CALCULATE RTD FOR HALON 1301 FIRE EXTINGUISHMENT TESTS RUN FIRE EXTINGUISHMENT TESTS CALCULATE RTD FOR REPLACEMENT CANDIDATE CHANGE TO REPLACEMENT CANDIDATE CONTINUE START END CHARACTERIZE DISTRIBUTION OF THE REPLACEMENT CANDIDATE IS RTD ACCEPTABLE ? ALTER QUANTITY OF REPLACEMENT CANDIDATE SELECT VENTILATION CONDITIONS IN SIMULATOR NO YES International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

14 FOUNDATION TESTING >Test Results - Purpose and General Comments #Testing to : ianswer questions conceived during initial discussions of MPSE revision 3 iprovide data to observe behaviors and uncover issues not initially recognized #Focused on previously stated concerns #List of issues to be addressed by this testing iverify the fire threats are sufficiently severe iminimize/understand varying RTD behavior ?fuel type - observe/compare combustion behaviors ?agent discharge - consistent preburn or tube array temperature ?material changes in the tube array - determine its life span iexplore residual fire scenario - determine : ?which fuel types can burn in this configuration ?the significance of HSI phenomena ?the effect of the orientation of the pan geometry on fire intensity International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

15 FOUNDATION TESTING >Test Results (continued) - Spray Fire Zone Orientation AIRFLOW FWD UP TUBE ARRAY STA 527 STA 510 STA 518 STA 532 International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

16

17 FOUNDATION TESTING >Test Results (continued) - Varying RTD/Decision to Release Agent #Run a series of spray fire tests and evaluate resulting RTDs #Purposes : idetermine if RTD variation can be better controlled by releasing the agent after : ?a consistent preburn duration expires ?a consistent temperature in the tube array is attained iuse results to refine MPSE version 3 #Current test procedure relies on preburn duration #Control of the test article changed for the trials involving tube array temperature #Conditions : iair flow  2.2 lbm/s @ 100°F iJP-8  0.25 gpm iagent  HFC-125 @ 5.2 lbm iFixed preburn duration  45 seconds iFixed tube array temperature  1440°F International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

18

19 FOUNDATION TESTING >Test Results (continued) - Varying RTD/Fuel-Spray Fire Intensity #Ran spray fire tests and recorded temperature profiles #Purposes : iobserve fire behaviors icompare energy signature for each fuel type/ventilation condition iuse data in refining MPSE revision 3 #Thermocouples spaced longitudinally in the flame path to provide representative picture of combustion behavior #Each individual test condition was repeated 3 times #Fixture cooled down to near ambient condition between tests #Test conditions : ifuels : JP-8, oil (Mobil Jet Oil II), & hydraulic fluid (Skydrol LD-4) ifuel flow rates : 0.25 gpm +/- 0.03gpm iventilation conditions : 2.2 lbm/s@100°F & 1.0 lbm/s@300°F ino fire suppression agent released International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

20 FOUNDATION TESTING >Test Results (continued) - Varying RTD/Fuel-Spray Fire Intensity #Created averaged temperature profile from data for each set of 3 tests i8 thermocouples, sta 453, 4” (102 mm) & 8” (204 mm) above core, 2@01:30, 04:30, 07:30, & 10:30 i1 thermocouple buried in tube array, approximately sta 510 (“515”), 12:00 i1 thermocouple mounted on door exterior, sta 514, 11:30 i2 thermocouples, sta 518, 4” & 8” above core, 12:00 i4 thermocouples, sta 532, 4” & 8” above core, 2@01:00, 11:00 i6 thermocouples, sta 551 upper, 4” & 8” above core, 2@01:30, 10:30, 12:00 #Calculated a relative “heat” production reference to compare combustion intensity icalculated areas under the averaged temperature traces from 30 to 80 seconds isummed all areas for thermocouples affected by fire (sta’s 510, 514, 518, 532, 551) isubtracted area for sta 453 thermocouples to remove “heat” present in air stream International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

21

22

23

24

25

26

27 FOUNDATION TESTING >Test Results (continued) - Residual Fire Investigation/Fuel Ignition #Ran pool fire tests and recorded temperature profiles #Purposes idetermine which fuels can be ignited in the residual fire scenario iuse data to refine MPSE revision 3 #Fixture geometry : imaster fuel pan in the simulator filled to make a water bath ismaller stainless steel fuel pan located in the water bath #Test conditions : ifuels : JP-8, oil (Mobil Jet Oil II), & hydraulic fluid (Skydrol LD-4) ifuel quantity : 0.47 gallon (1” deep puddle) in 10.5” x 10.3” x 1.5” deep pan ifuel temperature prior to test : 150°F+ (by thermocouple submerged in fuel) iignition exposure : 10 - 30 seconds intermittently for 3 minutes iventilation conditions : 2.2 lbm/s@100°F & 1.0 lbm/s@300°F ino fire suppression agent released International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

28 FOUNDATION TESTING >Test Results (continued) - Residual Fire Orientation AIRFLOW FWD UP These assemblies not present during testing STA 502 MASTER FUEL PAN CH 4 NOZZLE & ELECTRODES (shown out of position) INSERT FOR FUEL PAN  STA 527 CORE International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

29

30 FOUNDATION TESTING >Test Results - Conclusions #Fire intensity iclean simulator cross section was an insufficient threat isecondary ignition elements required to maintain sufficient threat #Varying RTD ino significant difference noted between releasing agent based on consistent preburn or tube array temperature ifuel types have varying energy signatures - expect impact on RTD to be noticeable iJP-8 worst case for 2.2 lbm/s air flow@100°F ioil selected as worst case for 1.0 lbm/s air flow@300°F itube array has a life span of 10 fire tests ivariation in environmental conditions observed as a noticeable impact #Residual fire scenario iJP8 was the only fuel ignited - oil and hydraulic fluid were not iremaining tests are incomplete International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA

31 NEAR TERM PLANS >Complete foundation testing #Determine the impact/relevance of HSI on the residual fire scenario #Determine the impact of altering the fuel surface geometry in the residual fire scenario on combustion intensity #Ultimately, need to “bench-mark” Halon 1301 in this scenario in some manner >Finalize MPSE revision 3 #Discuss/resolve issues iincorporate results of foundation testing completed to date iagent - storage/distribution criteria ifinal process - need to methodically evaluate replacement candidates without excessive test counts #Commit process to paper >Complete Testing for the replacement candidates by Jun 2003 International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Atlantic City, NJ USA 30-31 October 2002 Federal Aviation Administration WJ Hughes Technical Center, Fire Safety Section, AAR-440 Atlantic City Int'l Airport, NJ 08405 USA


Download ppt "Engine Nacelle Halon Replacement, FAA, WJ Hughes Technical Center Point of Contact :Doug Ingerson Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google