Halons (halocarbons) have been employed extensively as fire suppression agents over the past three decades, but now have been phased out due to indications they may be responsible for the depletion of stratospheric ozone.1 As a result, efficient, nontoxic flame suppression agents must be found to replace halons. Obvious alternatives are other halogenated hydrocarbons, and much research has recently been devoted to understanding their relative performance and inhibition mechanisms.2 However, an agent with all of the desired properties of CF 3 Br (halon 1301) is proving difficult to find. Consequently, additional research is necessary to identify new suppressants and understand the mechanisms of inhibition of known, effective agents.Flame studies have shown that metal-containing compounds are promising candidates for replacing halons as fire suppression agents.3 In particular, flame velocity studies indicate Fe(CO) 5 can be up to sixty times more efficient a flame inhibitor than CF 3 Br.3 Little has been known, however, about the kinetic mechanism by which iron achieves such impressive flame inhibition. Although iron pentacarbonyl itself is too toxic to be a useful halon replacement, understanding the reasons for its efficiency could provide valuable insight into which chemical properties are most critical to efficient flame inhibition.The first experimental studies of flame inhibition by iron pentacarbonyl are the studies of Wagner and co-workers 4,5 The inhibition effect of Fe(CO) 5 was investigated by measuring the burning velocity of premixed flames with inhibitor added to the reactants. In that research, Bonne et al. 5 found Fe(CO) 5 to be significantly more effective than Br 2 in premixed H 2 -air and hexane-air flames and found that its inhibition effectiveness decreased as the pressure was reduced below atmospheric. Reinelt and Linteris 6 studied the flame inhibition effect of iron pentacarbonyl in premixed flames by measuring the burning velocity, and in counterflow diffusion flames by measuring the extinction strain rate. They found that at low Fe(CO) 5 mole fraction, the burning velocity was strongly dependent on inhibitor mole fraction, whereas at high Fe(CO) 5 mole fraction, the burning velocity was nearly independent of inhibitor mole fraction.In our previous work, 7 it was found that the small amount of Fe(CO) 5 did not cause an increase in the ignition delay of methane. It was a quite surprising result, because that was attempted to increase the ignition delay of methane by addition of Fe(CO) 5 which was known to decrease flame velocity of hydrocarbons effectively. In the present work, the addition effect of Fe(CO) 5 on C 2 H 6 ignition was investigated in order to understand the general features of Fe(CO) 5 as a combustion inhibitor. The characteristics of the oxidation of CH 4 are different from all other hydrocarbons. The dissociation energy of the C-H bond in CH 4 (435 kJ/mol) is much higher that of C-C bonds in C 2 H 6 (370 kJ/mol) or larger aliphatics.8 For this reason, the oxidation of ethan...