Tim Marker Laboratory & Full Scale Testing of Non Traditional Lightweight Aircraft Seats FAA Technical Center.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Conduction Conceptests
Advertisements

HVAC523 Heat Sources.
Federal Aviation Administration Radiant Panel Updates 2014 June Materials Meeting Switzerland Materials Working Group Michael Burns, FAA Tech Center June,
International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Meeting
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Meeting Test Results for Proposed Cargo.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Meeting Development of a New Flammability.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Developing an In-flight Fire Condition.
Federal Aviation Administration Evacuation Slide Test Method: Round Robin 3 Results 0 Evacuation Slide Test Method: Comparison Test Results Federal Aviation.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Meeting Task Group Session on Revised.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Meeting Discussion on Format of New Test.
Surrogate Testing and Proposed Certification Procedures for Altered Interior Surfaces Tim Marker FAA Technical Center.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Meeting Task Group Session on Revised.
Task 3.4. Validation of horizontal solutions Fire and mechanical characterization.
Cabin Component Design Features Fire Properties of Corefiller, Adhesive, „Ditch and Pot“ March 2009 Presented by Ingo WEICHERT TBCEE12.
Tim Marker Testing of Pre-ox PAN Calibration Materials FAA Technical Center.
Process Specification Guidelines FAA/NASA Workshop 6 August 2002.
RESTRAINT OF LEATHER SEAT CUSHIONS DURING APPENDIX F SEAT CUSHION (FIRE BLOCK) TESTING COLOGNE UPDATE.
Federal Aviation Administration 0 Intermixing of Cells in Nickel-Cadmium Batteries for Aircraft Usage May 11, Intermixing of Cells in Nickel-Cadmium.
COMPOSITE MATERIAL FIRE FIGHTING
Presented to: International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group By: Date: April 2-3, 2008 Federal Aviation Administration Next-Generation Oil.
Seat Cushion Testing Methods Fire Test FAA Hand Book Regulation Lab A Lab F Lab B Lab G Lab C Lab D Lab E.
RANKING FLAMMABILITY OF AIRCRAFT MATERIALS USING MICROSCALE COMBUSTION CALORIMETRY Richard E. Lyon and Richard N. Walters* Fire Safety Branch AAR-440 FAA.
INTERNATIONAL AIRCRAFT MATERIALS FIRE TEST WORKING GROUP ROUND ROBIN TEST III DATA ANALYSIS Khang D. Tran, Ph.D., Sr. Scientist The Mexmil Company, Santa.
Presented to: International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group, Atlantic City By: Rich Lyon, AJP-6320 Date: October 21, 2009 Federal Aviation Administration.
APPROVED TRAINING MANUAL’S LESSON PLANS AND COURSEWARE STAR MARIANAS AIR, INC. Recurrent – Flight Crew Part III – Aircraft Ground Training Section 2 –
International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Meeting
Full Scale Battery Fire Test Plan
Federal Aviation Administration Burnthrough Update International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Meeting June 17, 2009 Köln, Germany.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Meeting Task Group Session on New Flammability.
Presented to: International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group, Atlantic City, NJ By: Robert Ian Ochs Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 Federal Aviation.
Federal Aviation Administration 0 Composite Wing Tank Flammability April 2-3, Composite and Aluminum Wing Tank Flammability Comparison Testing Steve.
Federal Aviation Administration Status of Research & Testing to Replace Halon Extinguishing Agents in Civil Aviation Fire Safety Team FAA Wm. J. Hughes.
Presented to: International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group – Köln, Germany By: Robert Ian Ochs Date: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 Federal Aviation.
PRIVÉ ET CONFIDENTIEL © Bombardier Inc. ou ses filiales. Tous droits réservés. SMART TESTING BOMBARDIER THOUGHTS FAA Bombardier Workshop Montreal
A culvert representing the fuselage of an airplane was positioned 1 m downwind of the fuel pan (Figs. 2 and 3). The culvert had a nominal diameter of 2.7.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration In-Flight Burn- Through Tests Aluminum vs. composite materials Aircraft Systems Fire Working Grp.
Engineering Analysis of NFPA 285 Tested Assemblies
Toulouse Aeronautical Test Centre (CEAT)
Develop Epoxy Grout Pourback Guidance and Test Method to Eliminate Thermal/Shrinkage Cracking at Post- Tensioning Anchorages Project Manager Rick Vallier.
ENGR 211 Bridge Design Project
Background Numerous FAR’s mandate fire protection in aircraft powerplant fire zones Parts 23, 25, 27, 29, 33… FAR Part 1 Section 1.1 – Definitions and.
Tim Marker Discussion of Burner Heat Flux Mapping for Proposed Insulation Burnthrough Test Standard FAA Technical Center.
Federal Aviation Administration Halon 1211 Stratification/ Localization in Aircraft Louise Speitel Fire Safety Branch FAA Wm. J. Hughes Technical Center.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Update Handbook Chapters IAMFT WG, Cologne,
Federal Aviation Administration 0 Composite Wing Tank Flammability November 20, Composite and Aluminum Wing Tank Flammability Comparison Testing.
Federal Aviation Administration COMPOSITE MATERIAL FIRE FIGHTING Presented to:International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Renton, Washington,
Developing Fire Safety Assessments Future Considerations Fire and Materials Working Group March 4 – 5, 2009 Daniel Slaton, Boeing.
Composite Fuselage Firefighting Issues International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Naples, FL 4 Mar 2009 By Doug Dierdorf, Ph.D. Principle.
March 26-27, 2003 International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Phoenix, Az Inerting of a Scale 747SP Center-Wing Fuel Tank During a Typical.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Special Conditions for Passenger Airplanes,
Results and Discussion of Seat Round Robin Pat Cahill.
Federal Aviation Administration 0 Composite Wing Tank Flammability May 19 th, Composite and Aluminum Wing Tank Flammability Comparison Testing Steve.
Federal Aviation Administration 0 Composite Wing Tank Flammability May 20, Composite and Aluminum Wing Tank Flammability Comparison Testing Steve.
J Developments in: - Low Smoke Fire Resistant Floor Coverings - Low Smoke Fire Resistant Interior Repair Compounds.
Federal Aviation Administration Status of Research & Testing to Replace Halon Extinguishing Agents in Civil Aviation Douglas Ingerson Louise Speitel Constantine.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Meeting Task Group Session on Revised.
Tim Marker FAA Technical Center Development of a Lab-Scale Test For Evaluating Toxic Gas Decomposition Products Generated Inside a Fuselage During a Postcrash.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Discussion of Full-Scale Testing of Leather.
Federal Aviation Administration 0 EFB Hazard Assessment November 17, Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) Hazard Assessment Steve Summer Federal Aviation.
Tim Marker Round Robin 5 Test Results for Proposed Insulation Burnthrough Test Standard FAA Technical Center.
Tim Marker Laboratory & Full Scale Testing of Non Traditional Lightweight Aircraft Seats FAA Technical Center.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Meeting Test Cell Airflow Study For Cargo.
Wing Tank Flammability Testing William Cavage Steven Summer AAR-440 Fire Safety Branch Wm. J. Hughes Technical Center Federal Aviation Administration International.
Federal Aviation Administration COMPOSITE MATERIAL FIRE FIGHTING Presented to:International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Köln, Germany Presented.
Response to Aircraft Ducting Working Group Members’ Questions
UNIT IV AUXILIARY SYSTEM
International Aircraft Materials Fire Test Working Group Meeting
AIRCRAFT FIRE REGULATIONS
Presentation transcript:

Tim Marker Laboratory & Full Scale Testing of Non Traditional Lightweight Aircraft Seats FAA Technical Center

Problem: Next Generation aircraft seats utilizing lighter materials in their construction are unfairly restricted by the FAR-mandated 10% weight loss criteria. Example: 5 lb seat[( ) / 5.0] x 100 = 8.0% PASS % Weight Loss = (initial weight – final weight) / (initial weight) x 100 Example: 3 lb seat[( ) / 3.0] x 100 = 13.3% FAIL Proposed Testing: Evaluate performance of lightweight seat cushions under realistic conditions.

Testing Proposed by FAATC in June 2002 Supply 18 Sets of Test Cushions to FAATC Test Cushion Construction per FAR (c) Appendix F, Part II (or Handbook) “Each specimen tested must be fabricated using the principal components (i.e., foam core, flotation material, fire blocking material, if used, and dress covering) and assembly processes (representative seams and closures) intended for use in the production articles. If a different material combination is used for the back cushion than the bottom cushion, both material combinations must be tested as complete specimen sets, each set consisting of a back cushion specimen and a bottom cushion specimen.” Bottom: 18 W x 20 D x 4 T Back: 18 W x 25 H x 2 T

FAATC randomly selects 6 sets of cushions to conduct lab-scale tests (oil burner) Proceed with full-scale evaluation using remaining 12 sets Confirm seats exceed 10% weight loss Testing Proposed by FAATC in June 2002 If Yes

Description of Materials Baseline Seat 1 (6 tests) Standard fire retardant foam, 2.75 lb/ft 3 density Standard 90/10 wool/nylon blend dress cover Baseline Seat 2 (3 tests) Standard fire retardant foam, 2.75 lb/ft 3 density Standard 90/10 wool/nylon blend dress cover PBI felt fire blocking fabric, 290 g/m 2

Description of Materials (con’t) Lightweight Seat A (6 tests) Fire hardened foam, 0.62 lb/ft 3 density, no blocking layer Lightweight Seat B (6 tests) Lightweight Seat C (6 tests) Lightweight Seat D (6 tests) Fire hardened foam 3.0 lb/ft 3 + lightweight foam 0.59 lb/ft 3, no blocking layer Dress Cover: Wool 91% / PA 9% 380 g/m 2 Lightweight foam 0.59 lb/ft 3, no blocking layer Dress Cover: Wool 91% / PA 9% 380 g/m 2 Fire hardened foam, 2.2 lb/ft 3 density, no blocking layer Dress Cover: Wool 91% / PA 9%, 375 g/m 2 Dress Cover: Wool 90% / PA 10%, 380 g/m 2

Lab-Scale Test Results PASS FAIL

Analysis of Laboratory Tests on Lightweight Seats Bottom dress cover yields higher % weight loss than bottom cushion in all cases Back dress cover yields higher % weight loss than back cushion in A, C, and D Ratio of total cushion weight to total dress cover weight ranged from.65 to 2.2 Lightweight Seat A ratio = 0.65 Lightweight Seat B ratio = 1.99 Lightweight Seat C ratio = 2.19 Lightweight Seat D ratio = 1.60

Full-Scale Test Parameters Interior Materials 0.25-Inch thick crushed-core Nomex honeycomb panels, meets 65/65 Aircraft-grade carpet, meets VBB Test Execution Test Article B707 fuselage, fully fire hardened interior Instrumentation Continuous gas analysis at 2 locations, 2 heights Temperature measurement: 3 thermocouple trees + individual seat thermocouples Smoke measurement: smoke-meters at 2 locations, 3 heights each 4 interior video cameras, 2 external 55 gallon JP8 fuel fire in 8’ by 10’ pan adjacent to fuselage External fuel fire extinguished following noticeable flashover

Baseline Test Fire Blocked Urethane Using PBI Felt Material with 90/10 Wool/Nylon Dress Weight Loss ranged from 6 to 10% in Lab Test AFFF applied to pan 5:30 CO 2 Extinguishing Agent applied to 6:30 Full-Scale Test Parameters

Fire hardened foam, no blocking layer, with 91/9 Wool/Nylon dress cover Weight Loss ranged from 15 to 25% in Lab Test Lightweight Seat A Lightweight Seat B Fire hardened foam, no blocking layer, with 90/10 Wool/Nylon dress cover Weight Loss ranged from 11 to 14% in Lab Test AFFF applied to pan 5:30 CO 2 Extinguishing Agent applied to 6:30 AFFF applied to pan 4:30 CO 2 Extinguishing Agent applied to 5:30 Full-Scale Test Parameters

Fire hardened foam, no blocking layer, with 91/9 Wool/Nylon dress cover Weight Loss ranged from 10 to 17% in Lab Test Lightweight Seat C Lightweight Seat D Fire hardened foam, no blocking layer, with 90/10 Wool/Nylon dress cover Weight Loss ranged from 13 to 14% in Lab Test AFFF applied to pan 5:30 CO 2 Extinguishing Agent applied to 6:00 AFFF applied to pan 5:15 CO 2 Extinguishing Agent applied to 5:30 Full-Scale Test Parameters

Full-Scale Test Apparatus

Seat Identification & Thermocouple Location

Full-Scale Test Configuration in 707

View Into Fire Door in 707

Thermocouple Placement on Seats

Close-up of Seat Thermocouple

Typical Cabin 1:00

Typical Cabin 2:00

Typical Cabin 3:00

Typical Post Event

Full-Scale Weight Loss Results

Analysis of Full-Scale Weight % Loss Data All tests resulted in high percentage weight loss of seats near fire door Percentage weight loss of seat 4 a good indicator of fire crossing aisle Percentage weight loss during full-scale tests largely dependent on length of test/suppression of the external fire, and not a good indicator of overall cushion performance.

Temperature, Fire Gas, and Smoke Levels

Full-Scale Test Analysis Baseline test using traditional fire-blocked seats resulted in a flashover condition at approximately 5:00 minutes. Lightweight seats A, C, and D resulted in a more subtle flashover condition, occurring slightly later, approximately 5:00 to 5:30 minutes. Lightweight B resulted in a quicker flashover condition, approximately 3:30 from start. Lightweight C produced more smoke and higher gas levels than all others. Lightweight D resulted in lowest temperatures, smoke, heat flux, and gas levels.

$$$$ What is Lightweight? $$$

Possible Acceptance Criteria