Development of a Lab-Scale Test For Evaluating ... Marker FAA Technical Center Development of a Lab-Scale Test For Evaluating Decomposition Products of Burnthrough Compliant Insulation

Tim MarkerFAA Technical Center

Development of a Lab-Scale Test For Evaluating Decomposition Products of

Burnthrough Compliant Insulation Systems

Fuselage Burnthrough Chronology

Full-sale test article built at FAATC in mid 1990’s for evaluating performance ofburnthrough-resistant thermal acoustic insulation materials.

Testing indicated burnthrough-resistant insulation provided a much moresurvivable cabin atmosphere when compared to current insulation materials.

Although burnthrough resistant materials provide a benefit, the ingress of toxicgases resulting from decomposition of the insulation needs to be quantified.

FAA issued NPRM, 2003 Final Rule issued, 2009 compliance.

2005 FAATC began development of a lab-scale test for evaluating toxicgas decomposition products that could be generated inside fuselageduring a postcrash fire.

It is anticipated that this test method could be used to evaluate the potential toxicity of insulation constructions and innovations meetingthe new burnthrough test requirements, in order to ensure that an adverse condition will not result inside an intact fuselage when exposed to an external fuel fire, despite the high burnthrough performance associated with a particular system.

Development of Lab-Scale Test For MeasuringDecomposition Products During a Postcrash Fire

This test method could also be used to evaluate the toxic contribution of the basic fuselage structure, whenever a nonmetallic material is used as the primary component.

Conduct lab-scale burnthrough test on 2 types of burnthrough resistantinsulation, and 1 type of structural composite material (without insulation).Measured the build-up of toxic and flammable gases within an enclosuresimulating a fuselage

Conduct subsequent full-scale tests with identical insulation materials toestablish realistic baseline data using FTIR.

Methodology

Determine concentration scaling factor between lab and full-scale tests inorder to develop appropriate pass/fail criteria for lab-scale test.

complete

complete

pending

complete

Produce Final Report and guidance on the acceptable level of decompositionproducts generated during lab-scale box test.

Apparatus for Evaluating Toxic Gas Decomposition Products

Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR)/Total Hydrocarbon Gas analysis systemused to collect and measure toxic and flammable gases yielded during tests.

Burner configuration according to 25.856(b) Appendix F, Part VII.

Steel cube box simulates intact fuselage and serves as enclosure to collectemitted gases.

Additional analyzers measured the concentration of carbon monoxide,carbon dioxide, oxygen, and total hydrocarbons (THC) as propane.

Lab-Scale Apparatus for Evaluating Toxic Gas Decomposition Products

FTIR and THC Sampling System Used in Lab-Scale Testing

Gases Measured By FTIR

Flammable Gases

C2H2 Acetylene

C2H4 Ethylene

C2H6 Ethane

C3H8 Propane

C6H5NH2 Aniline

C6H5OH Phenol

C6H6 Benzene

CH2CHCHO Acrolein

CH4 Methane

Other Gases

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

H2O Water

N2O Nitrous Oxide

Sulfur DioxideSO2

Nitrogen DioxideNO2

Nitrogen OxideNO

AmmoniaNH3

Hydrofluoric AcidHF

Hydrogen CyanideHCN

Hydrogen ChlorideHCL

Hydrogen BromideHBr

Carbonyl SulfideCOS

Carbonyl FluorideCOF2

PhosgeneCOCl2

Carbon DioxideCO2

Carbon MonoxideCO

MethaneCH4

AcroleinCH2CHCHO

BenzeneC6H6

PhenolC6H5OH

AnilineC6H5NH2

Toxic Gases

Material Systems Tested in Lab-Scale Apparatus

051213 Box Test 5-- PAN/ Metalized PVF

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 60 120 180 240 300

Time (seconds)

Oth

er G

ases

(pp

m)

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

CO

, CO

2 and H2O

(ppm)

C2H2 C2H4 C2H6 C3H8 C6H5NH2 C6H5OH C6H6 CH2CHCHO CH4 COCl2 COF2 COS HBr HClHCN HF N20 NH3 NO NO2 SO2 CO CO2 water

PAN Insulation Test Using FTIR Analysis

051213 Box Test 5- PAN/Metalized PVF

0

1

2

3

0 60 120 180 240 300Time (seconds)

CO

, CO

2 an

d O

2 D

eple

tion

(Per

cent

)

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

Total Hydrocarbons as Propane

(Percent)

CO CO2 O2 depletion THC as Propane

PAN Insulation Test Using Gas Analyzers

051212 Box Test 2-- FG/Ceramic Barrier/Metalized PVF

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 60 120 180 240 300Time (seconds)

Oth

er G

ases

(pp

m)

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

CO

, CO

2 and H2O

(ppm)

C2H2 C2H4 C2H6 C3H8 C6H5NH2 C6H5OH C6H6 CH2CHCHO CH4 COCl2 COF2 COS HBr HClHCN HF N20 NH3 NO NO2 SO2 CO CO2 water

FG/Ceramic Barrier Insulation Test Using FTIR Analysis

051208 ACM-- Box Test 1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 60 120 180 240 300T ime (seconds)

Oth

er G

ases

(pp

m)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

H2O

and CO

2 (ppm)

C 2H 2 C 2H 4 C 2H 6 C 3H 8 C 6H 5NH 2 C 6H 5OH C 6H 6 C H 2C H C H O C H 4 C O C OC l2 C OF2 C OS H B r H C lH C N H F N 20 N H 3 N O N O2 SO2 C O2 w ater

Structural Composite Material Test Using FTIR Analysis

Comparison of Box Test Results at 5 Minutes

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

CO CO2 H20 THC as Propane

Gas

Yie

lds

(ppm

)

PAN/Metallized PVFFG/Ceramic Barrier/Metallized PVFStructural Composite

Comparison of Box Test Results at 5 Minutes

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

C6H5N

H2 C6H

5OH

C6H6

CH2CHCHO COCl2 COF2

COS HBr HClHCN

HF N20

NH3

NO NO2 SO2

Gas

Yie

lds

(ppm

)

PAN/Metallized PVFFG/Ceramic Barrier/Metallized PVFStructural Composite

Development of a Laboratory-Scale Test for Evaluating the Decomposition Products Generated Inside an Intact Fuselage During a Simulated Postcrash Fuel Fire Timothy R. Marker Louise C. Speitel April 2007 DOT/FAA/AR-TN07/15 This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Services (NTIS), Springfield, Virginia 22161

U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration te

tec

hnic

al n

ote

tech

nica

Full-Scale Test Article for Evaluating Decomposition Products of BurnthroughCompliant Insulation Systems and Non-Metallic Fuselage Structure




FTIR and THC Sampling System Used in Full-Scale Testing

Full-Scale Test ResultsPAN Insulation System

Full-Scale Test Results, PAN Insulation System

Full-Scale Test Results, PAN Insulation SystemPre-test

Full-Scale Test Results, PAN Insulation SystemPost-test

Full-Scale Test Results, PAN Insulation SystemPost-test

Full-Scale Results, PAN Insulation, Gas AnalyzersCarbon Monoxide Levels

0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

0.035

0.040

0.045

0.050

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420

Time (Seconds)

% C

arbo

n M

onox

ide

% CO Mid 5'6"% CO Fwd 5'6"% CO Fwd 3'6"

PAN Insulation, already corrected

Carbon Dioxide Levels

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420

Time (Seconds)

% C

arbo

n D

ioxi

de

% CO2 Mid 5'6"% CO2 Fwd 3'6"

PAN Insulation, already corrected

Full-Scale Results, PAN Insulation, Gas Analyzers

Full-Scale Test PAN Metallized PVF (10/25/2007)Mid Station at 5' 6"

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

0 60 120 180 240 300 360

Time (Seconds)

Oth

er G

ases

(ppm

)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

CO

, CO

2 , and H2 O

(ppm)

C2H2 C2H4 C2H6 C3H8 C6H5NH2 C6H5OH C6H6 CH2CHCHO CH4 COCl2 COF2 COS HBR HCL HCN HF N20 NH3 NO NO2 SO2 CO CO2 water

Full-Scale Results, PAN Insulation, FTIR

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

CO CO2 H20 THC asPropane

OxygenDepletion

Gases

Gas

Yie

lds

@ 5

Min

utes

(ppm

)Mid Station at 5'6"

Fwd Station at 5'6"

Full Scale Test PAN/ Met PVF (10/25/2007)

Full-Scale Results, PAN Insulation, FTIR

Full Scale Test PAN/Met PVF (10/25/2007)Comparision of FTIR and Gas Analyzer Results at 300 Seconds

Mid Station at 5'6"

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

CO CO2 THC as Propane

Gases

Gas

Yie

lds

(ppm

)

FTIR Gas Analysers

Full-Scale Results, PAN Insulation, Comparison

Full-Scale Test ResultsCeramic Barrier Insulation System

(Modified Configuration)

Full-Scale Test Results, Ceramic Barrier Insulation System IIPre-test

Full-Scale Test Results, Ceramic Barrier Insulation System II

Full-Scale Test Results, Ceramic Barrier Insulation System IIPost-test




Full-Scale Results, Ceramic Barrier Insulation II, Gas Analyzer Carbon Monoxide Levels

0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

0.035

0.040

0.045

0.050

0 60 120 180 240 300 360

Time (Seconds)

Car

bon

Mon

oxid

e (%

)

CO MID 5'6"CO FWD 5'6"CO FWD 3'6"

FG/Nextel 2nd test, already corrected for lag


0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0 60 120 180 240 300 360

Time (Seconds)

Car

bon

Dio

xide

(%)

CO2 MID 5'6"CO2 MID 3'6"CO2 FWD 5'6"CO2 FWD 3'6"

FG/Nextel 2nd test, already corrected for lag

Full-Scale Results, Ceramic Barrier Insulation II, Gas Analyzer

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000


OxygenDepletion

Gases

Gas

Yie

lds

@ 2

60 S

econ

ds (p

pm)

Mid Station at 5'6"

Fwd Station at 5'6"

Full Scale Test Nextel/FG/met PVF (2/22/2008)

Full-Scale Results, Ceramic Barrier Insulation II, FTIR

Full Scale Test Nextel/FG/Met PVF (2/22/2008)Comparision of FTIR and Gas Analyzer Results at 260 Seconds

Mid Station at 5'6"

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000


Gases

Gas

Yie

lds

(ppm

)

FTIR Gas Analysers

Full-Scale Results, Ceramic Barrier Insulation II, Comparison

Full-Scale Test ResultsStructural Composite System

Full-Scale Test Results, Structural Composite SystemPre-test

Full-Scale Test Results, Structural Composite System

Full-Scale Test Results, Structural Composite SystemPost-test



Full-Scale Results, Structural Composite, Gas AnalyzerCarbon Monoxide

0.000

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.010

0.012

0.014

0.016

0.018

0.020

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480

Time (Seconds)

Car

bon

Mon

oxid

e (%

)

CO Mid 5'6"CO FWD 5'6"CO FWD 3'6"

Carbon/Epoxy, already corrected for lag


0.000

0.005

0.010

0.015

0.020

0.025

0.030

0.035

0.040

0.045

0.050

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480

Time (Seconds)

Car

bon

Dio

xide

(%)

CO2 Mid 5'6"CO2 FWD 3'6"

Carbon/Epoxy, already corrected for lag

Full-Scale Results, Structural Composite, Gas Analyzer

Full Scale Test Structural Composite (11/28/2007)Mid Station at 5'6"

0

5

10

15

20

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420Time ( Seconds)

Oth

er G

ases

(ppm

)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

CO

2 and H20 (ppm

)

C2H2 C2H4 C2H6 C3H8 C6H5NH2 C6H5OH C6H6 CH2CHCHO CH4 CO COCl2 COF2 COS HBR HCL HCN HF N20 NH3 NO NO2 SO2 CO2 water

Full-Scale Results, Structural Composite, FTIR

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700


OxygenDepletion

Gases

Gas

Yie

lds

@ 5

Min

utes

(ppm

)Mid Station at 5'6"

Fwd Station at 5'6"

Full Scale Test Structural Composite (11/28/2007)

Full-Scale Results, Structural Composite, FTIR

Full Scale Test Structural Composite (11/28/2007)Comparision of FTIR and Gas Analyzer Results at 5 Minutes

Mid Station at 5'6"

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160


Gases

Gas

Yie

lds

(ppm

)FTIR Gas Analysers

Full-Scale Results, Structural Composite, Comparison

Full-Scale Results, Comparison of 3 Insulation Systems

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

CO CO2 THC as Propane HCN

Gas

Yie

lds

@ 5

Min

utes

(ppm

)

PAN/ Metallized PVFCeramic Barrier/ FG/ Matallized PVFStructural Composite

Fractional Effective Dose ComparisonForward Station, 66" Height

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480

Time (Seconds)

Frac

tiona

l Effe

ctiv

e D

ose

(%)

PAN FED Fwd 66"Ceramic Barrier FED Fwd 66"Composite Skin FED Fwd 66"

Fractional Effective Dose ComparisonMid Station, 66" Height

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480

Time (Seconds)

Frac

tiona

l Effe

ctiv

e D

ose

(%)

PAN FED Mid 66"Ceramic Barrier FED Mid 66"Composite Skin FED Mid 66"

What do we do with all this data?

How does data compare to small scale results?

Determination of Full Scale Test Article Volume

Determination of Gas Concentration Scaling Factor

Ratio of VolumeBox to Burn AreaBox = 60.33 ft3 / 9.25 ft2 = 6.52

Ratio of VolumeFSTest to Burn AreaFSTest = 9258.1 ft3 / 64 ft2 = 144.7

Ratio of Full Scale to Lab Scale = 144.7 / 6.52 = 22.2

Theoretical Lab Scale Box Concentration is 22.2 Times Greater than Full Scale Concentration

Full-Scale Test Article has 22.2 Times More Volume per Burn Area than Lab Scale Box

Gas Concentration Scaling, PAN Insulation System

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

C6H5N

H2 C6H

5OH

C6H6

CH2CHCHO COCl2 COF2

COS HBr HClHCN

HF N20

NH3 NO NO2 SO2

COCO2H20

THC as Pro

pane

Oxygen

Dep

letion

Gases

Box

Tes

t Yie

lds/

Ful

l Sca

le Y

ield

sFire Side at 5'6"Forward at 5'6"

PAN/Met PVFScaling Divisors @ 5 Minutes

Gas Concentration Scaling, Ceramic Barrier Insulation System

05

1015202530354045505560657075808590

C6H5N

H2 C6H

5OH

C6H6

CH2CHCHO COCl2 COF2

COS HBr HClHCN

HF N20

NH3 NO NO2 SO2

COCO2H20

THC as Pro

pane

Oxygen

Dep

letion

Gases

Box

Tes

t Yie

lds/

Ful

l Sca

le Y

ield

s

Mid Station at 5'6"Fwd Station at 5'6"

Nextel/FG/met PVFScaling Divisors @ 260 Seconds

Gas Concentration Scaling, Structural Composite System

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

C6H5N

H2 C6H

5OH

C6H6

CH2CHCHO COCl2 COF2

COS HBr HClHCN

HF N20

NH3 NO NO2 SO2

COCO2H20

THC as Pro

pane

Oxygen

Dep

letion

Gases

Box

Tes

t Yie

lds/

Ful

l Sca

le Y

ield

s Mid Station at 5'6"Fwd Station at 5'6"

Structural CompositeScaling Divisors @ 5 Minutes

Gas Concentration Scaling, Findings

Analysis only considers volumetric aspects

Analysis assumes perfect mixing

Analysis does not consider surface area effects

Not all of gases scale similarly (example: COS)

Primary intoxicants (CO, HCN) scaled similarly

Development of Decomposition Products Limits forBurnthrough Compliant Insulation Systems

Difficult to use volumetric scaling as basis for setting limits in lab-scale test.

Since full-scale tests did not result in adverse conditions inside fuselage,

Take maximum (peak) values obtained in box test for each gas,

Add reasonable safety factor,

Establish acceptable decomposition limits in box test

Example: HCN

During full-scale tests, HCN did not reach toxic levels for any of three materials

HCN acceptable limit would be set at 500 ppm in box test.

If a burnthrough compliant material produced greater than 500 ppm HCNduring a box test, then a full-scale test would be necessary.

Development of Decomposition Products Limits forBurnthrough Compliant Insulation Systems

PAN material 470 ppm

FG/ceramic barrier 120 ppm

Composite skin 0 ppm

During lab-scale tests, HCN reached the following levels:

60 Minute Exposure

30 Minute Exposure

FED Effect

Mid Station at 5'6"

Fwd Station at 5'6"

Mid Station at 5'6"

Fwd Station at 5'6"

Mid Station at 5'6"

Fwd Station at 5'6"

Incap Conc LC50

Derived from 60

min ERPG3

Derived from 30

min IDLH

ERPG 3 (2007)

IDLH (1995)

FED Effect

NH2 4.63 3.27 5.5 3.27 1.73 0.29 Not Avail 600 ? 100 0.009 68.73 91.14 6.14 600 x 15.7 (IDLH) 9,420 0.010 C6H5NH2 14.8 16.6 3.5OH 7.02 4.59 9.57 5.01 9.4 4 Not Avail 2400 1500 200 250 0.004 52.22 38.95 9.78 2400 x 4.2 (ERPG) 10,080 0.005 C6H5OH 7.4 4.1 1.0

10.46 10.41 8.05 4.56 7.21 3.21 ? ? 12,000 3000 1000 500 0.001 76.60 52.5 8.3312,000 x 5.0

(ERPG) 60,000 0.001 C6H6 7.3 6.5 1.2

HCHO 0 0 0 0 0 0 10928 7783 18 12 1.5 2 0.000 55.50 146.04 0 7783 x 4 (LC50) 31,132 0.005 CH2CHCHO #DIV/0! #DIV/0! ND2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? 102 d 12 12 1 2 0.000 0.00 3.9 0 102 x 4 (LC50) 408 0.010 COCl2 ND #DIV/0! ND

0 0.21 0 0 0 0 ? ? 300 25 (est) ? 0.001 0.00 0 0.43 300 x 4 (ERPG3) 1,200 0.000 COF2 ND ND #DIV/0!

0 0.61 0 0 0.53 0.34

500* (500 for 15min-

brain damage)

(1000 for 15

minutes)1200 (H2S) 100 (H2S) ? 0.001 38.66 0 0.84 500 x 4 2,000 0.019 COS >40 ND 1.6 Yes 5

0 0 0 0 0 0 16830 15900 1800 180 150 (est) 30 0.000 0.00 0 0 15900 x 4 (LC50) 63,600 0.000 HBr ND ND ND0 0 0 0 0.49 0.29 16830 15900 1800 300 150 50 0.000 0.00 0 3.43 15900 x 4 (LC50) 63,600 0.000 HCl ND ND 7.0

16.4 10.75 0 0 0 0 176 560 300 300 25 50 0.093 467.00 111.74 0 176 x 20 (Incap) 3,520 0.133 HCN 28.5 #DIV/0! ND Yes 6peak) 22.7 26.9 176 560 300 300 25 50 0.153 467.00 111.74 0 176 x 20 (Incap) 3,520 0.133 HCN 20.6 Yes

0 0 0 0 0 0 7663 7227 600 180 50 30 0.000 14.46 19.3 0 7227 x 4 (LC50) 28,908 0.001 HF #DIV/0! #DIV/0! ND3.95 9.94 7.81 3.72 2.99 1 ? ? ? ? 18.75 62.56 0 No Limit N20 4.7 8.0 ND

5.55 4.32 4.5 1.82 1.36 1 ? ? 9000 1800 750 300 0.003 367.20 289.19 3.3 9000 x 65.3 (ERPG) 587,700 0.001 NH3 66.2 64.3 2.40 0 0 0 0 0 12850 4260 1800 600 150 100 0.000 0.00 0 0 4260 x 4 (LC50) 17,040 0.000 NO ND ND ND

2.02 1.19 13.13 6.19 0 0 2570 852 360 120 30 20 0.007 0.00 0 0 852 x 4 3,408 0.000 NO2 ND ND ND19.81 2.06 2.04 1.33 2.82 2.56 ? 2115 180 600 15 100 0.009 246.57 0 31.17 2115 x 11.8 24,957 0.010 SO2 12.4 ND 11.1

peak) 55.4 65.5 ? 2115 180 600 15 100 0.031 246.57 0 31.17 2115 x 4.5 9,518 0.026 SO2 4.5 Yes 3

190.9 104.8 99.18 44.49 7.7 4.2 6850 16600 6000 7200 500 1200 0.028 4645.76 2116.23 55.3216600 x 17.6

(ERPG3) 292,160 0.016 CO 24.3 21.3 7.2 Yes 6,51367.6 730.3 2674.66 1608 42 30 88000 40000 0.030 11506.60 12657 96.7 88,000 x 6.6 580,800 0.022 CO2 8.4 4.7 2.3 Yes c 17,71973.9 4885 3160.63 1684 627 276 10164.77 19430 1808.29 No Limit N/A H2O 5.1 6.1 2.9

s ne 97.9 72.2 68.17 55.21 22 20.8 0.005 629.71 903.5 22.0 21,000 x 6.9 144,900 0.006

THC as Propane 6.4 13.3 1.0

en tion 3500 2100 6470 2920 150 0 136000 3000.00 1120 Remove

Oxygen Depletion 0.9 7.5

Gases to Measure FED > .02

Acceptable Lab-Scale Tox Limit

(ppm)PAN/Met PVF

FG/ Ceramic Barrier/Met PVF (260 Sec)

Structural Composite

Scaling Factor Mid Station at 5'6"

FG/Ceramic

Barrier/Met PVF

Yields 5

utes test

PAN/Met PVF

FG/Ceramic Barrier/Met PVF

(260 Sec)Structural Composite

Max AlloweConc. (ppm ) Max BoTest Conc x1.4

Full-Scale Test Data Lab-Scale Data

Structural Composit

e

5 Minute Exposure

PAN/Met PVF

Allowable Exposure from Various References

Acceptable Lab-Scale Tox Limit= 5

Min Exp Limit x Scaling Factor

(ppm)

Documents

Development of a Lab-Scale Test For Evaluating ... Marker FAA Technical Center Development of a Lab-Scale Test For Evaluating Decomposition Products of Burnthrough Compliant Insulation