Evaluation of alternative in-flight fire suppressants for full-scale testing in simulated aircraft engine nacelles and dry bays

Grosshandler, William L.; Gann, Richard G.; Pitts, William M.

doi:10.6028/nist.sp.861

Cited by 57 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For a given 2V 0 IR, argon requires the most amount added to the oxidizer stream to cause blow-off, whereas helium requires the least. The relative ranking of these three gases is comparable to those from cup-burner tests [17]. Although there is an effect of fuel injection rate on blow-off concentration (as noted above), the relative ranking of these agents were found to be similar, for a given fuel injection rate.…”

Section: Screening Inert Gaseous Agentssupporting

confidence: 62%

Dispersed liquid agent fire suppression screen apparatus

Yang¹,

Donnelly²,

Privé³

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Screening Inert Gaseous Agentssupporting

confidence: 62%

Dispersed liquid agent fire suppression screen apparatus

Yang¹,

Donnelly²,

Privé³

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Irrespective of the uncertainty associated with the estimated agent mass concentration, water and the aqueous agents studied here are found to be more effective than CF 3 Br, compared to the propane cup-burner value (17% by mass) for CF 3 Br [6]. The computational study by Lenta* and Chelliah [7] also demonstrates that 20-um water droplets are more effective (4.24% vs. 5.9% by mass) in extinguishing an opposed-flow methane diffusion flame than CF 3 Br at an extinction strain rate of ~ 176 sec" 1 .…”

Section: An Aerometrics Two-component Phase Doppler Particle Analyzermentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent Results from the Dispersed Liquid Agent Fire Suppressant Screen

Yang¹,

Privé²,

Donnelly³

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden lor this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to

show abstract

“…The most data available are for C2HF,. The volume fraction necessary to extinguish a small burning pool is about 8 % to 10 % in either a counter-or co-flow configuration, depending upon the fuel [4]. A baffle-stabilized fire of JP-8 with air flowing horizontally was extinguished when the volume fraction of C2HF, was between 7.5 % and 20.9 %, depending on the exact conditions in the experiment [3].…”

Section: Performance Parametermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The C,F,, on average, reduces the threat by 50% (Y = 0.5) when the volume fraction is 5 %, in contrast to about 8 % for C2HF, and just under 10 % for CF,I. Based upon limited data gathered in [4] for CF,Br/C,H,lair mixtures, a volume fraction of about 3.7 % of halon produces a value of 0.5 for Y.…”

Section: Performance Parametermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The shock speed is estimated to be accurate to better than * 4.4% of the reported value, while the combined accuracy of the radiation wave speed is estimated to be * 2 % of the range. Additional details of the facility design, measuring equipment, data acquisition and operating procedure are provided in the NIST special publications describing the overall program [3,4].…”

Section: Experimental Facilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Suppression Of High Speed Flames And Quasi-detonations

Grosshandler¹,

Gmurczyk²

1997

Fire Safety Science - Proceedings of the 5th International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Past research has identified three candidates as near term replacements for CF,Br in some aircraft total-flooding fire protection applications: CF,I, C2HF, and C,F,. The behavior of these compounds when added to lean, stoichiometric and rich propanelair mixtures exposed to subsonic and supersonic combustion waves is examined using a 10 m long, 50 mm diameter detonatioddeflagration tube. Pressure and visible radiation are measured as a function of the amount of agent in the mixture to determine the pressure ratio across the incident shock wave and the speed of the radiation front. The results are compared to earlier studies using ethene, in which significantly higher pressure ratios and wave speeds were generated. The presence of the three extinguishing compounds in the propanelair mixtures causes the combustion either to be enhanced or suppressed, and depending upon the dynamical situation and the concentration of the agent, any of the three can outperform the others. For example, C,F, is the most effective compound for attenuating combustion systems for all stoichiometries; C2HF, reduces the threat by 90 % when its volume fraction is 11 %, the best performance of the three, but amplifies the severity of the deflagration the most at a volume fraction of 5 %; and the best agent for attenuating the pressure increase of the shock wave is CF,I under most conditions.

show abstract

Evaluation of alternative in-flight fire suppressants for full-scale testing in simulated aircraft engine nacelles and dry bays

Cited by 57 publications

References 0 publications

Dispersed liquid agent fire suppression screen apparatus

Dispersed liquid agent fire suppression screen apparatus

Recent Results from the Dispersed Liquid Agent Fire Suppressant Screen

Suppression Of High Speed Flames And Quasi-detonations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About