Propulsion Halon Replacement Federal Aviation Activity at ... · Ch# 11 Ch# 09 Ch# 08 Ch# 04 Ch# 01 Ch# 07 Ch# 05 Ch# 02 Ch# 10 Ch# 12 Ch# 06 Ch# 03 1301 03 324 12 c 7 Discuss the

Presented to:

By:

Date:

Federal AviationAdministration

Propulsion Halon Replacement Activity at the FAA WJ Hughes Technical Center

5TH Triennial International Fire and Cabin Safety Research Conference

Douglas Ingerson, EngineerFederal Aviation AdministrationWJ Hughes Technical CenterFire Safety TeamAtlantic City Int’l Airport, NJ USAtel : 609-485-4945email : [email protected]

30Oct2007

2 2Federal AviationAdministration

5TH Triennial Fire and Cabin Safety Research Conference30Oct2007

Presentation Overview

• Discuss the Minimum Performance Standard for Engine Nacelles and APU Compartments (MPSe)– Background– Describing the Test Process

• Review Outcomes from MPSe Testing to Date– HFC-125, CF3I, & FK-5-1-12– Noteworthy Observations

• Identify Pending Challenges to the MPSe



Discuss the MPSeBackground

• Who “owns” the MPSe?– FAA International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group– Composed of government and industry representatives

• International• Manufacturer, regulator• Civilian, military



Discuss the MPSeBackground

• Lineage– 1993, FAA , aviation industry, US Department of Defense/tri-service– Initial testing planned at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (WPAFB), OH

• 3 phase, down-select process resulting in a single halon replacement• Culminated in “Aircraft Engine/APU Fire Extinguishing System

Design Model (HFC-125)," AFRL-VA-WP-TR-TR-1999-3068– 1995, Project started at FAA WJ Hughes Technical Center (FAATC)

• Civil airplane industry wanted more halon replacement choices– 2000, “Options for Aircraft Engine Fire Protection,“ white paper,

http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/engine.pdf– 1996, “User Preferred Fire Extinguishing Agents for Engine and Auxiliary

Power Unit (APU) Compartments,” Report No. DOT/FAA/AR-96/80• Interests wanted to retain “...X %v/v for 0.5 second...” FAA

certification format without design model information



Discuss the MPSeDescribing the Test Process

• Empirical, full-scale, test process

• Considers test process & application constraints– Must be a reliable, repeatable TEST PROCESS– Must relate to a wide range of installations found in this APPLICATION

• Minimizes non-agent fire extinction mechanisms

• Limited review– Evaluates fire extinguishment performance only– Agent/airplane compatibility issues must be reviewed separately– MPSe requires that agent and airplane must be compatible




• Coupled characterization of Halon 1301 & replacement candidate performances

• Four test configurations– 2 ventilation regimes

• High = 1.2 kg/s @ 38°C (2.7 lbm/s @ T = 100°F)• Low = 0.45 kg/s @ 127°C (1.0 lbm/s @ T= 250°F)

– 2 fire threats, both baffle stabilized with persistent ignition & fuel sources• All fuels delivered at 0.95L/min at 66°C (0.25 US gal/min @ 150°F)• Spray fire using JP8, lubricating oil, OR hydraulic fluid• Pool fire using JP8 alone




Test

Sec

tion

STA 502

AIRFLOW

FWD

UPFIRE ZONEVIEW PORTS

TEST SECTION DIMENSIONS48 INCH (1.22 m) OD SHELL24 INCH (0.61 m) OD CORE~ 10.25 FEET (3.12 m) LONG




Spr

ay F

ire T

hrea

t

tube array, hotsurface ignitionthreat, sta 512

core ribsta 502

fuel spraynozzle, left

electricalarc gap

fuel spraynozzle, right

Up

Fwd

location of theformer massive

hot plate




Poo

l Fire

Thr

eat

shell ribsta 502

Up

Fwd

mobileelectricalarc gap

core ribsta 502

Return to Observations




Duc

t Int

erfa

ce

flangesta 551inlet for

the redexhaust duct

Up

Fwd

flangesta 592

duct interface(flames exiting

test sectionexhaust nozzle)

Return to Observations




• Demonstrating Halon 1301 Equivalence– Fire extinction

• Direct observation• Based on an average of 5 repeated fire tests• Verified against other fuels based on an average of 3 repeated fire

tests– Agent concentration

• Direct observation + mathematical manipulation• Based on 3 repeated non-fire tests

• Halon 1301 delivered to test fixture meeting the intent of FAA certification– Measured by Statham-derivative gas analyzer, 12 sampling points– 3 ring sampling arrangement, middle ring centered at flame front



Mee

ting

Inte

nt o

f FA

A

Cer

tific

atio

nAgent Concentration Profile

~ Ventilation @ 2.2 lb/s @ 100°F ~

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

Time (s)

Vol

umet

ric C

once

ntra

tion

~ H

alon

130

1 ~

Ch# 11Ch# 09Ch# 08Ch# 04Ch# 01Ch# 07Ch# 05Ch# 02Ch# 10Ch# 12Ch# 06Ch# 03

1301 03 324 12 c

7


(1.2 kg/s @ 38°C)

Return to Equivalent Concentration



Mee

ting

Inte

nt o

f FA

A

Cer

tific

atio

nAgent Concentration Profile

~ Ventilation @ 1.0 lb/s@260°F ~

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

Time (s)

Vol

umet

ric C

once

ntra

tion

~ H

alon

130

1 ~

Ch# 11Ch# 09Ch# 08Ch# 04Ch# 01Ch# 07Ch# 05Ch# 02Ch# 10Ch# 12Ch# 06Ch# 03

1301 03 506 16 c

(0.5 kg/s @ 127°C)





• Explaining equivalence by “fire extinction”– Reignition Time Delay (RTD)

• A visually observed duration of suppressed combustion• Occurs during the presence of forced ventilation, a transient agent

pulse, and persistent ignition/fuel sources•

– Desired conditions :••

( ) ( )( ) ( )H1301σ01quantity tReplacemenσ

H1301RTD01quantity tReplacemenRTD≈

≥

EXTINCTION FIREREIGNITION FIRE t- tRTD =




0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

Reignition Time Delay (sec)

Mas

s HFC

-125

(lbm

)

Pro

of o

f Con

cept

,E

quiv

alen

ce b

y Fi

re E

xtin

ctio

n




• Explaining equivalence by “concentration”– Fire testing ceases; equivalence by fire extinction is established– Agent distribution captured for the established agent delivery– Data pool composed of recorded concentration behavior :

• 2 flame front locations• 3 repeated tests

– Data pool is transformed :• From elapsed/historical time to durational behavior• Described by a best-fit least squares polynomial

– Equivalence by concentration is calculated by :• Using the related average RTD in the best-fit relationship• Solving for a volumetric concentration




Equ

ival

ence

by

Vol

umet

ric

Con

cent

ratio

n, T

rans

form

atio

n

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

Time (sec)

Vol

umet

ric

Con

cent

ratio

n, H

FC-1

25 (%

v/v)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5Volumetric Concentration, HFC-125 (%v/v)

Tim

e (s

ec)

Ch# 01

Ch# 02

data pool, 8.0# H125, JP8 HiV Spray


pr05

215.

xls,

C

EXAMPLEONLY

m = x kg HFC-125RTD_ave = 1.75 sec




Equ

ival

ence

by

Vol

umet

ric

Con

cent

ratio

n, T

rans

form

atio

n

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

Time (sec)

Vol

umet

ric

Con

cent

ratio

n, H

FC-1

25 (%

v/v)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

50 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Volumetric Concentration, HFC-125 (%v/v)

Tim

e (s

ec)

Ch# 01

Ch# 02



pr05

215.

xls,

Cha

rt

≈1.5




Equ

ival

ence

by

Vol

umet

ric

Con

cent

ratio

n, S

olut

ion

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

Time (sec)

Vol

umet

ric

Con

cent

ratio

n, H

FC-1

25 (%

v/v)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

50 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Volumetric Concentration, HFC-125 (%v/v)

Tim

e (s

ec)

Ch# 01

Ch# 02


6th Order best-fit polynomial

pr05

215.

xls,

Cha

rt2

RTD_ave = 1.75 s

Equ

ival

ent

Con

cent

ratio

n≈

12.3

%v/

v

EXAMPLEONLY




• Outputs from the MPSe test process– Equivalences

• minimum of 4 based on fire extinction performance (mass-based)• 4 based on agent distribution (volumetric concentration)

– Recommendation for a certification value is the largest of the 4equivalent concentrations

• for a gas, X %v/v simultaneously for 1/2 sec throughout the fire zone• for something else, ?

• Mass-based equivalence is NOT cited– Inefficient agent delivery systems can demonstrate parity with halon




HA

LON

130

1 V

ER

SU

SH

iVen

t JP

8 S

PR

AY

FIR

E(v

ideo

pla

ys a

t 1/2

spe

ed)

AIRFLOW

FWD

UP

Video Deleted



Outcomes from MPSe Testing to DateNoteworthy Observations

• Test histories include Halon 1301, HFC-125, CF3I, 2-bromotrifluoropropene (2-BTP), & FK-5-1-12

• Variation in test process & environment– If all is operating normally, test outcome is reasonably consistent– Anomalous behavior indicates fault

• Have determined equivalent concentrations for HFC-125, CF3I, FK-5-1-12– Relative relationship of equivalent concentrations are reasonable– Compare reasonably with reported inerting and cup burner data



Comparing the Fire Extinction Behavior ofCertification Halon 1301 in the FAA Nacelle Simulator

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.05.56.06.57.0

0360

5-15

, 154

603

611-

11, 1

057

0362

4-14

, 143

103

903-

11, 1

013

0391

6-12

, 084

703

c17-

13, 1

350

0410

8-10

, 100

804

217-

12, 1

346

0431

0-10

, 095

104

323-

10, 1

436

0442

1-10

, 103

004

503-

10, 1

500

0462

2-11

, 150

504

714-

10, 1

350

0480

2-11

, 150

404

809-

10, 0

838

0483

0-10

, 105

304

915-

11, 1

357

0641

1-11

, 143

306

427-

13, 1

430

0651

1-11

, 111

306

607-

11, 1

024

0662

0-11

, 103

506

809-

10, 1

543

0683

0-14

, 154

7

Test Identification of the FirstTest in the Sequence

Ave

rage

RT

D (s

econ

ds)

HiVent JP8 spray

HiVent OIL spray

LoVent JP8 spray

LoVent OIL spray

HiVent JP8 pool

LoVent JP8 pool

standard deviation for the 5tests forming the benchmark

MPS

Erev

03_O

l_be

nchm

arks

.xls

, all

H13

01 b

ench

mar

ks c

YE

AR

MO

NTH

(a=O

CT,

b=N

OV

, c=D

EC

)D

ATE

in M

ON

THTE

ST

IDE

NTI

FIC

ATI

ON

NU

MB

ER

Outcomes from MPSe Testing to Date



Outcomes from MPSe Testing to DateC

OM

PA

RIN

G L

AR

GE

ST

EQ

UIV

ALE

NT

CO

NC

EN

TRA

TIO

NS

with

INE

RTI

NG

/CU

P B

UR

NE

R D

ATA

4.5

7.1

6.1

17.6

8.1

15.7

6.5

8.8

14.7

3.2

8.7

0

5

10

15

20

CF3I HFC-125 FK-5-1-12

Replacement CandidateVol

umet

ric C

once

ntra

tion

(%v/

v)

Maximum Equivalent ConcentrationPeak Inerting Concentration (propane)Peak Inerting Concentration (methane)Cup Burner (n-Heptane)

MPS

E_re

v03_

ALL

-EQ

UIV

.xls

, ALL

mas

s+co

nc-e

quiv

GR

F sm

ry c

2

Peak Inerting Concentrationstaken from NFPA 2001 (2004),

Table A.5.4.3

Cup Burner Concentrationstaken from NFPA 2001 (2004),

Table A.5.4.2

via non-standard apparatus



Outcomes from MPSe Testing to DateNoteworthy Observations

• Observations at the duct interface– Initially not suspected as a region of interest– 2004, 2-BTP observed to be reactive– Temperature, pressure, & optical instrumentation added after 2004 testing– H1301 & candidates demonstrate different behaviors during reignition

• H1301 does not force any visible smoke into test bay• ALL successful replacement candidates forced visible smoke (NOT fire) into

the test bay in some configuration• Observations associated with normal boiling point (BP)

– FK-5-1-12 condensed in analyzer sample lines during bench scale investigations– Flame attachment more evident with increasing normal BP (CF3I, FK-5-1-12)

• anecdotal observations during pool fire testing• photoconductive photodiodes

Refresh memories about duct interface



Outcomes from MPSe Testing to DateC

OM

PA

RIN

G S

AM

PLE

LIN

E

TEM

PE

RA

TUR

E &

AN

ALY

ZER

SIG

NA

L B

EH

AV

IOR

S

Line length &wall temperature

10 ft @ 4°F<T<26°F6 ft @ 40<T<47

8.3 ft @ 104<T<155Q&40L tedlar bag

dry air + FK-5-1-12(v)

dry air% < 6 ppm H2O

vent toatmosphere

ch09ch12

12 ft x 0.125 in OD Cugas analyzer sample lines

flow through each line ≈ 800 scc/min

Pacific Scientific Halonyzer II Quad

12 in = 1 ft = 0.34 m°C = 5/9*(°F-32)

gas sampleflow



Outcomes from MPSe Testing to Date

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220

Time (sec)

Sens

or S

igna

l (V

DC

)

Room Temperature Sample Line Wall, 06308-13

Line Wall, 9 < T(°F) < 21, 06309-11

Line Wall, 41 < T(°F) < 46, 06310-11

Line Wall, 105 < T(°F) < 153, 06310-13

Signals are consistent for thesample line temperatures evaluated

in 06308-13 (reference test),06310-11, and 06310-13.

Sensor signal for a flow of air.

"Typical" sensor signal for the flow of air and agent vapor.

Sensor signal is not consistent with other tests in this series. Further, the valve connecting the gas sample bag was closed (note minorsignal spike) without the signal returning to something consistent

with air. Note behaviors of 06308-13, 06310-11, & 06310-13.

CO

MP

AR

ING

SA

MP

LE L

INE

TE

MP

ER

ATU

RE

& A

NA

LYZE

RS

IGN

AL

BE

HA

VIO

RS



Outcomes from MPSe Testing to DateO

BS

ER

VIN

G F

LAM

EA

TTA

CH

ME

NT

BE

HA

VIO

RD

OW

NS

TRE

AM

FR

OM

FIR

E Z

ON

EPHOTOCONDUCTIVEPHOTODIODE VIEWS

AIRFLOW

FWD

UP

sta515/viewing hot surfacesta558/12:00 viewsta586/12:00 viewred duct inlet/12:00 view

Illustrate anecdotal behavior in the Pool Fire Image




BS

ER

VIN

G F

LAM

EA

TTA

CH

ME

NT

BE

HA

VIO

RD

OW

NS

TRE

AM

FR

OM

FIR

E Z

ON

E

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

-65 -55 -45 -35 -25 -15 -5 5 15

Time (sec)Sign

al

photodiode - tube array (VDC)photodiode - entrance exh nzl (VDC)photodiode - exit exh nzl (VDC)photodiode - red duct (VDC)p/t - frx (VDC), 06412_11




BS

ER

VIN

G F

LAM

EA

TTA

CH

ME

NT

BE

HA

VIO

RD

OW

NS

TRE

AM

FR

OM

FIR

E Z

ON

E

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time (sec)Sign

al

p/t - frx (VDC), 06412_11photodiode - tube array (VDC)photodiode - entrance exh nzl (VDC)photodiode - exit exh nzl (VDC)photodiode - red duct (VDC)

-9 sec ≤ t ≤ 2 sec2 sec ≤ t ≤ 13 sec

11 sec from zero/pre-fire baseline




BS

ER

VIN

G F

LAM

EA

TTA

CH

ME

NT

BE

HA

VIO

RD

OW

NS

TRE

AM

FR

OM

FIR

E Z

ON

E

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1.6kgH1301,

JP8

4.3kgN1230,

JP8

4.0kgN1230,

JP8

4.0kgN1230,JP8 /4

N2, JP8 /4

Agent, Agent Mass, & Fuel used in the Spray Fire Scenario

Phot

odio

de S

igna

l (V

DC

) & T

ime

(sec

)

average signal, baseline (no fire)average signal, fire (pre-RTD)average signal, including RTDstandard deviation signal, baselinestandard deviation signal, firestandard deviation signal, including RTDRTD (sec)

NOTE : ALL information presented is calculatedfor an 11 second duration, except for the 8 second

baseline sampling for 4.0 kg N1230, JP8 /4

pr06

a26.

xls,

ave

sign

als p

hoto

diod

e H

iV c

highventilation



Identify Pending Challenges to the MPSe

• Need to move away from a H1301 benchmark

• Currently working with a solid aerosol, i.e. NOT a gaseous agent

• Sensitivity of the calculated equivalent concentration to the shape of the concentration history



Concluding Summary

• Equivalent concentrations– HFC-125 = 17.6%v/v– CF3I = 7.1%v/v– FK-5-1-12 = 6.1%v/v

• Observations indicate considerations must be made for agents as they depart from behavior similar to Halon 1301

• Additional issues exist which may impact the MPSe

Documents

Propulsion Halon Replacement Federal Aviation Activity at ... · Ch# 11 Ch# 09 Ch# 08 Ch# 04 Ch# 01 Ch# 07 Ch# 05 Ch# 02 Ch# 10 Ch# 12 Ch# 06 Ch# 03 1301 03 324 12 c 7 Discuss the