NIST Time|NIST Home|About NIST|Contact NIST

HomeAll Years:AuthorKeywordTitle2005-2010:AuthorKeywordTitle

Turbulent Spray Burner for Assessing Halon Alternative Fire Suppressants.


pdf icon Turbulent Spray Burner for Assessing Halon Alternative Fire Suppressants. (670 K)
Grosshandler, W. L.; Lowe, D. L.; Rinkinen, W. J.; Presser, C.

93-WA/HT-23;

American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME). Winter Annual Meeting. November 28-December 3, 1993, New Orleans, LA, 1-8 pp, 1993.

Sponsor:

Air Force, Wright Patterson AFB, OH

Keywords:

halons; halon 1301; in-flight fires; fire protection; air velocity; injection; nitrogen; pressure; halon alternatives

Abstract:

A research program to characterize candidate compounds for replacing halon 1301 for in-flight aircraft fire protection is described in this paper. The thermodynamical, fluid mechanical, and flame extinction properties are examined, and a number of fuels and flame arrangements are investigated in an attempt to develop a general test protocol which will reliably predict the relative fire suppression efficiency of new agents being considered for a variety of applications. A coaxial turbulent spray burner was built to evaluate the relative effectiveness of agents for suppressing high intensity fuel fires such as one might encounter in a jet engine nacelle. Fuel is injected along the centerline of the 50 mm diameter burner, and air co-flows about the fuel passage at bulk velocities up to 33 m/s, producing an 18 kW flame with an overall equivalence ratio of 0.17. The flame is stabilized in the wake formed behind a 35 mm diameter disc surrounding the fuel nozzle. A key element of the facility is the agent delivery system, which is designed to inject the desired amount of material into the air upstream of the fuel nozzle. The amount of agent is controlled by varying the storage pressure and the duration of time (13 to 910 ms) that the solenoid valves remain open. The influence of air velocity, fuel flow, and injection period on the amount of a N2 required to extinguish the turbulent spray flame is discussed, and the effectiveness of twelve gaseous agents is compared.