REFERENCE

NBS

PUBLICATIONS

AlllDb DMflMLE

Evaluation and Refinement of

Test Methods Used for Measuring

Fire Hazards of Shipboard Hull

Insulations and Mattress Insert

Foams

B. T. Lee

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Bureau of Standards > National Engineering Laboratory

Center for Fire Research

Gaithersburg, MD 20899

May 1985

Supported in part by:

Department of the Navy

Naval Sea Systems Command (Sea 05R25)

Washington, DC 20362

qq

Under the Direction of: )avid Taylor Naval Ship R and D Center (Code 2843)

100 Annapolis, MD 21402

U56

85-3148

1985

OF ST nr & -

NBSIR 85-3148

EVALUATION AND REFINEMENT OF

TEST METHODS USED FOR MEASURING

FIRE HAZARDS OF SHIPBOARD HULL

INSULATIONS AND MATTRESS INSERT

FOAMS

B. T. Lee

U S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Bureau of Standards

National Engineering Laboratory

Center for Fire Research

Gaithersburg, MD 20899

May 1985

Supported in part by:

Department of the Navy

Naval Sea Systems Command (Sea 05R25)

Washington, DC 20362

Under the Direction of: David Taylor Naval Ship R and D Center (Code 2843)

Annapolis, MD 21402

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Malcolm Baldrige, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Ernest Ambler, Director

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF FIGURES ............ iv

LIST OF TABLES v

Abstract ........... 1

1. INTRODUCTION . 2

1.1 Thermal Insulation 2 1.2 Foam Mattress Materials ....... 3

1.3 Objectives of Study 7

2. FACILITIES AND EXPERIMENTAL TESTS ................ 9

2.1 Hull Insulation 9

2.1.1 Experimental Facilities .... ... 9

2.1.2 Room Fire Tests 12

2.2 Mattress Inserts 15

2.2.1 Experimental Facilities .... 15

2.2.2 Mattress Fire Tests 15

2.3 Calibration of Exhaust Collector Hoods for Heat Release

Rate Measurement 17

2.4 Quantification of Smoke, from Room Fire Tests ....... 18

2.5 Laboratory Tests of Fire Properties 20

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 20

3.1 Hull Insulation 20

3.1.1 Proposed Rating System ..... ..... 20

3.1.2 Evaluation of Polyphosphazene Foams 23

3.1.3 Comparison of Quarter-Scale and Full-Scale Room

Fire Tests 24

3.2 Mattress Insert Materials . 25

3.2.1 Room Fire Tests 25

3.2.2 Laboratory Fire Tests 29

4. SUMMARY 32

5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS „ 33

6. REFERENCES . 35

iii
LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 1 Quarter-scale and full-scale room fire tests

of interior finish materials 37

Figure 2 Quarter-scale and full-scale room fire tests

of mattress insert materials 38

iv
LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1. Interior finish materials 39

Table 2. Summary of quarter-scale room fire tests used in

rating procedure 40

Table 3A. Comparison of quarter-scale room fire tests on polyphosphazene and poly (vinyl chloride) /nitrile

rubber foams 41

Table 3B. Comparison of combustion products for quarter-scale

room fire tests on polyphosphazene and poly (vinyl

chloride) /nitrile rubber foams 42

Table 4A. Comparison of quarter-scale and full-scale room fire

tests on polyphosphazene foams 43

Table 4B. Comparison of combustion products for quarter-scale

and full-scale room fire tests on polyphosphazene

foams 44

Table 5. Mattress insert materials 45

Table 6. Quarter-scale room fire tests of mattress insert

materials 46

Table 7. Full-scale room fire test data 47

Table 8. Fire hazard ratings of individual interior finish

materials and material combinations 48

Table 9. Comparison of smoke production for room fire tests

and laboratory tests 49

Table 10. Comparison of heat release data for room fire tests and

laboratory tests 50

v

EVALUATION AND REFINEMENT OF TEST METHODS

USED FOR MEASURING FIRE HAZARDS OF SHIPBOARD

HULL INSULATIONS AND MATTRESS INSERT FOAMS

B. T. Lee

Abstract

A quarter-scale room fire test developed at NBS was used

to help develop a preliminary approach for fire hazard assessment

of wall-ceiling combinations of hull insulation materials.

The quarter-scale test has been refined to include measurement

of heat release rate, smoke, and carbon monoxide. In addition,

polyphosphazene foam insulations were evaluated with this

test

The quarter-scale test was also modified for testing

mattress insert materials, including polyphosphazene foam.

Existing tests, used for measuring total heat, rate of heat

release, and smoke production, were also used to evaluate

these materials. Heat release rate measurements with the Ohio

State University apparatus and smoke measurements with the ASTM

E 662 test, modified for horizontal placement of specimens,

gave adequate evaluation of the fire hazards of mattress

insert materials.

Key words: Fire hazards assessment; foam (materials); heat

release rate; hull insulation; interior finishes;

mattresses; polyphosphazene foams; small-scale

fire tests; smoke.

1
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Thermal Insulation

The fire performance requirements presently used by the Navy for

bulkhead and overhead insulation are stated in MIL-STD-1623D (SH) [1]^.

This standard calls for a maximum flame spread limit of 25 by the ASTM E

84 tunnel test [2] and some limit, depending on the material, on the

smoke developed by the same test. A compartment fire study of hull

insulations has demonstrated that flame spread tests, such as the E 84

test, often do not adequately reflect the flashover potential of these

insulations [3]. In that study, the insulation was used to line the

bulkhead and overhead of a 3.0mx 3.0mx 2.3m high compartment; a 62

kW gas burner in one back corner served as the ignition source. In one

case where an insulation satisfying the above fire performance requirements was used, flashover (full fire involvement) of the compartment

occurred in 46 seconds. The same report described the development of a

quarter-scale compartment fire test and evaluated its ability to follow

full-scale compartment fire behavior. The study concluded that the

quarter-scale test was useful as an economical screening tool for

evaluating a large number of materials. It offered advantages similar

to the full-scale test in that for any given fire initiation source, the

ignition, flame spread, heat release, and smoke generation characteristics of the insulation, along with the complex effects of the thermal

reinforcement on these properties as the fire grows, are all included.

However, the report recommended that final approval of an insulation

still be based on the results of a full-scale test.

‘'’Numbers in brackets refer to the literature references listed at the

end of this report.

2
There are also problems associated with smoke measurement from the

E 84 test which measures the integrated smoke obscuration and not

optical density. Smoke production from the test can not be quantified

since the volumetric flow through the tunnel is not measured. In addition,

differences in thermal exposure, ventilation, flame spread, and spatial

distribution and coagulation of the smoke particles between the E 84

test and the full-scale compartment fire test make it difficult to

relate smoke measurements between the two tests. Recent modifications

to the quarter-scale compartment fire test have enabled its use to measure

the production of smoke and carbon monoxide and rate of heat release

from the fire.

1.2 Foam Mattress Materials

The fire hazard requirements in the Navy’s purchase specification

MIL-M-18351F(SH) [4] call for testing of mattress insert (core) materials

with the ASTM E 162 radiant panel [5] for flammability and with the ASTM

E 662 smoke density chamber [6] which measures the specific optical

density of the combustion-generated smoke. These tests may not adequately

reflect the fire hazard of the material. First, it has been demonstrated [3] that tests such as the E 162 radiant panel and E 84 tunnel

tests, when used for measuring flammability of hull insulations, could

assign a "fire safe" rating to a potentially high fire hazard material.

There is no reason to expect that these tests are any more reliable for

evaluating mattress insert materials. Second, with the E 662 or the E

84 tests, it is difficult to extrapolate data to smoke levels representative of room fires of the same materials. Third, material configuration

and orientation affect the burning behavior of materials. The material

3
is positioned vertically in the E 662 test. In the E 84 test, the

material specimen is attached on the ceiling. Neither position is

representative of the actual placement of mattresses in a room. Finally,

differences in the thermal exposure, ventilation, flame spread, and

spatial distribution and coagulation of the smoke particles complicate

any attempt to derive correlations between the laboratory tests and the

compartment fire test of the same material.

Use of the E 662 test by itself could unfairly penalize materials

which would otherwise perform well under more realistic conditions, and

it could favor other materials which may not be as fire safe. In this

test, the entire surface of the material specimen is subjected to a

2 constant flux of 25 kW/m and contributes to the production of smoke.

The smoke density measured by that test must be scaled to the area of

fire involvement in the room. Unfortunately, this area of involvement

cannot be easily determined. For mattress materials exposed to a modest

size ignition source inside a room, one material may partially burn with

considerable production of smoke per unit affected surface area. The

overall smoke, however, may be less than that from another material

which generates less smoke per unit affected surface area but which

burns so rapidly that the material becomes fully involved by the fire.

Improved E 662 procedures have been developed to help assess more

realistically the fire hazard of materials. The test can be modified

for horizontal placement of mattress specimens to more closely simulate

the. actual orientation. Also introduced was the use of mass optical

density, the optical density per unit path length multiplied by the.

volume of the test chamber and divided by the mass of the material

consumed during the E 662 test. Mass optical density values from the

4
test could give an estimation of the smoke produced from the same

material burning inside a room, providing the free volume and mass of

material consumed in the room were known or could be estimated.

Although smoke obscuration and surface flame spread are important,

a primary concern should be the rate of heat release from the burning

mattress. Fire tests in a simulated fully-furnished shipboard berthing

compartment [7] have shown that the heat released from the bedding and

mattress alone could cause flashover of the compartment. Sometimes

potential heat measurements [8] are used to indicate the level of hazard

to the compartment. This neglects the rate at which this heat is released

in the space. A material can have a high potential heat but release it

at such a slow rate that it has little effect on the fire development.

Laboratory tests for measuring the rate of heat release of materials are

available [9,10]. One such test, the OSU calorimeter [10], is found at

many laboratories throughout the United States. Differences in thermal

exposure, ventilation, and fire spread can complicate correlation of the

heat release rate data from calorimeter-type tests with the degree of

fire buildup in the compartment fire test. However, such a correlation

has been demonstrated for a limited number of mattress types [11].

Another approach to predicting the heat release rate and thus the

potential for room flashover is to perform tests with scaled-down mattress

specimens inside a reduced-size enclosure. Mattress fire tests in 1973

[12] showed that the qualitative behavior of full-scale mattress burns

can be predicted from fire tests of scaled-down mattress specimens. That

5
study also recommended the development of a small-scale test to measure

the rate of smoke production of mattress materials in order to compare

the smoke levels which would be achieved in a controlled ventilation

compartment involved in a mattress fire. In a subsequent study [13],

the quarter-scale compartment fire test, used for screening shipboard

hull insulation [3], was modified for testing mattress specimens. In

that study, the modified quarter-scale test and its full-scale counterpart

test were performed on three types of mattresses: vinyl-covered cotton

batting with innerspring, vinyl-covered polyurethane with innerspring,

and vinyl-covered solid core polyurethane. The dimensions of the bed

frame and the bedding in this quarter-scale test were reduced by a

factor of four, except for the thickness of the frame and the thickness

of each bedding item which remained unchanged. One-quarter, one-half,

and full thickness mattresses were used. For the one-quarter thick

mattresses, there was not enough fuel for good simulation. Fires with

the full thickness mattresses were abandoned because of the extra burning

area of the specimen edges and because the height of the mattress became

too close to the ceiling. This extra burning surface together with the

closer proximity to the ceiling tended to obscure potential fire hazard

differences between the three types of mattresses. It was found that a

one-half thickness mattress appeared to have the best potential for

simulating full-scale fire behavior as measured by the temperature rise

of the gases flowing out from the room. When mattress thicknesses other

than one-quarter scale were used, the length and width of the bed spread

and sheet were lengthened to permit the same scaled overhang distance

from the floor. The modified quarter-scale test has also been used to

evaluate insulative barriers as a method of protecting polychloroprene

core mattresses [14]. That study concluded that the use of low density

noncombustible insulations does not upgrade the fire performance of

6
polychloroprene mattresses. Another area where this quarter-scale test

may be applied effectively would be in an investigation of the effect of

shipboard mattress ticking and bedding on mattress fire development.

Studies have been performed to analyze the role of ticking and bedding

on mattress flammability [12,15-19]. These investigations showed that,

in general, bedding did influence the burning of the mattress [15,16,17].

The role of ticking was uncertain, with the ticking playing a minor role

in the fire growth in two [15,18] of the four studies reviewed [12,15,

18,19]. The effect of ticking and bedding on mattress fire spread

appeared to depend upon the materials used and upon the fire exposure

from the ignition source.

Two tests are being developed at NBS to more accurately measure the

heat release rate from burning upholstered furniture and mattresses

using the oxygen consumption technique. These are a bench-scale calorimeter, used to test small representative horizontal specimens, and a

full-size furniture calorimeter. The former will be used to provide

input data on mattress products for the mathematical room fire models

which are being developed. Tests with the furniture calorimeter will be

used to evaluate these analytical models.

1.3 Objectives of Study

The purpose of the present study is to evaluate existing laboratory

tests for accurate measurement of the fire hazard potential of hull

insulation and mattress insert (core) materials and to develop new tests

if necessary. Usually a mattress is evaluated with ticking and sometimes with bedding in place. However, in accordance with the Navy's

7
request, mattress insert materials are tested without ticking nor

bedding. Specifically, the objectives are:

(1)

to further develop the NBS quarter-scale room fire test for

room lining and furnishing materials to include measurement of

heat release rate, smoke, and carbon monoxide;

(2) to develop a preliminary approach for fire hazard assessment

of wall-ceiling (bulkhead-overhead) combinations of hull

insulation materials;

(3) to evaluate the OSU calorimeter as means for measuring the

fire hazard of mattress insert (core) materials;

(4) to evaluate the ASTM E 662 test method, modified for horizontal placement and for mass loss measurement, for measuring

the smoke hazard of mattress insert materials;

(5) to evaluate the fire hazard potential of some polyphosphazene

foam hull insulations; and,

(6)

to assess various candidate shipboard foams as alternative

shipboard materials for the standard polychloroprene cushioning

material currently in use.

8
2. FACILITIES AND EXPERIMENTAL TESTS

2.1 Hull Insulation

2.1.1 Experimental Facilities

Two quarter-scale test enclosures were used in this study. Each

enclosure was 0.76 m x 0.76 m x 0.61 m high and scaled a3.0mx3.0mx

2.4 m high room. One enclosure consisted of a 6.4 mro thick aluminum

alloy shell, which was positioned over a 6.4 mm steel floor. Aluminum

alloy was chosen to provide a realistic heat sink and substrate for the

bonding of the Navy hull insulations to be tested. The other enclosure

was fabricated from 15.9 mm thick gypsum board held together at the

edges with 3.2 mm thick angle iron. This latter enclosure was used for

interior finish materials requiring spaced studs behind the material.

Each enclosure had a doorway opening of 0.49 m x 0.43 m high based on

physical modeling principles and empirical adjustments developed earlier

[3]. A 76 mm x 76 mm diffusion flame gas burner, positioned 76 mm above

the floor in one back corner, served as the ignition source and was left

on throughout the test period. Methane gas was metered to the burner at

a flow corresponding to a heat release rate of 1/16 of the rate of the

full-scale burner, based on previously developed physical modeling

principles [3].

3 A 0.61 m x 0.91 m hood, having an exhaust capability of 0.18 m /s,

was employed over the front end of the quarter-scale enclosure to collect

the exhaust from the fire. A 1.22 m long, 0.152 m diameter vertical

stack having an inlet orifice of 83 mm was connected to the hood. The

orifice was used to increase turbulent mixing of the exhaust. Smoke

9
attenuation of a light beam was measured at 0.55 m above the inlet.

Neutral optical density filters were used to calibrate the light sensor

over the range of optical densities from 0.04 to 3.0. Air temperature,

velocity, and concentrations of oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon

monoxide were measured in the stack at a position 1.02 m above the

inlet, where the exhaust was found to be well mixed. Temperature was

measured with a type K thermocouple made from 0.51 mm diameter wire.

Velocity was monitored with a pitot-static tube probe. Oxygen concentration was sensed by a paramagnetic analyzer. Nondispersive infrared

analyzers were used to record the concentrations of carbon dioxide and

carbon monoxide. From these measurements, the rate of heat release, the

mass flow of carbon monoxide, and the quantity of smoke generated from

the fire were determined.

Air temperatures in the quarter-scale enclosures were monitored at

25, 51, 102, 203, 305, 457, and 610 mm down from the center of the

ceiling and at 25, 51, 102, 203, 254, and 356 mm down from the top of

the doorway. Temperatures were measured using type K thermocouples

fabricated from 0.05 mm diameter wire. Thermal radiation incident on

the lower part of the room was monitored with a water-cooled, total heat

flux gauge of the Gardon type. Crumpled newspapers on the floor were

used to indicate if and when the irradiance was sufficient to ignite

light combustible materials in the lower portion of the room. This

stage of the room fire buildup is often referred to as flashover.

The full-scale room did not conform to a 3.0mx 3.0m x 2.4 m high

room having a 0.76 m x 2.03 m high opening at the middle of one wall as

originally planned. Due to a recommended change by the ASTM committee

on standard full-scale room fire testing, the standardized room

10
dimensions now are 2.4 mx 3.7 mx 2.4 m high with the same size opening

at the middle of the 2.4 m wide wall. This change should have little

effect on the fire development as the floor area decreased by only 4

percent, and the air flow into the room depends mainly on the doorway

opening, which remained unchanged. Consequently, a room having the

standardized dimensions was used. The walls and ceiling of the room were

covered with 6.4 mm thick aluminum alloy. A 0.305 m x 0.305 m diffusion

flame gas burner, using methane gas and located 0.30 m from the floor

and snug against one back corner, served as the ignition source. As

with the quarter-scale test, the burner was left on for the duration of

the test. The test room was located adjacent to a large 3.66 m x 4.88 m

3 exhaust collector hood having an exhaust capacity of about 3.0 m /s.

The stack to the hood was instrumented for the measurement of smoke,

temperature, velocity, oxygen, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide.

Optical density of the smoke was measured photometrically in the stack.

Neutral optical density filters were used to calibrate the light sensor

over the range of optical densities from 0.04 to 3.0. Air temperature

was measured with a type K thermocouple made from 0.51 mm diameter wire.

Velocity was monitored with a pitot-static tube probe. Oxygen concentration was recorded with a paramagnetic analyzer. Carbon dioxide and

carbon monoxide were measured with nondispersive infrared analyzers.

In the full-scale room tests, two different size type K thermocouples, fabricated from 0.05 mm and 0.51 mm diameter wires, were used

to measure air temperatures at 0.10, 0.50, 0.90, 1.30, and 1.78 m below

the doorway and at 0.10, 0.60, 1.20, 1.80, and 2.34 m below the center

of the ceiling. The larger thermocouples were less subject to breakage

from falling debris but had slower response and were more sensitive to

thermal radiation errors. Hence, they were used for backup measurement' .

11
Carbon monoxide was measured also at 0.30, 0.70, and 1.20 m below the

top of the doorway with nondispersive infrared analyzers. A watercooled flux gauge of the Gardon type was used to measure the irradiance

on the floor. Crumpled up newspapers on the floor were used to indicate

if and when flashover occurred.

2.1.2 Room Fire Tests

Figure 1 shows a representative quarter-scale room fire test and

its corresponding full-scale test of an interior finish material. The

interior finish materials used for the room fire tests are shown in

Table 1. The polyphosphazene foam (PZ) is a developmental bulkhead

material, and various formulations of the foam were evaluated in the

room fire tests. However, the scarcity of the PZ materials precluded

their use for the assessment of the rating procedure proposed in this

report. In the evaluation of this rating procedure and in the development of a system for combining ratings for wall and ceiling materials,

forty-four quarter-scale tests were performed using four different

materials. These materials were fibrous glass (FG) , poly (vinyl chloride) /nitrile rubber foam (PVCN) , gypsum wallboard (GB) , and prefinished

lauan plywood (PW) . FG and PVCN are commonly used on board submarines

and surface ships. GB and PW, on the other hand, are commonly used in

shore facilities and in residential housing; these were included to

assure that the test materials selected for the evaluation of the rating

procedure covered a wide range of fire properties. These forty-four

tests are listed in Table 2, along with the wall and ceiling finish

materials used in each test. In each test, air temperatures

t 12
were measured along the vertical centerline of the doorway and along the

height of the room below the center of the ceiling. The flux to the

floor and the time to room flashover, if it occurred, were also monitored. However, measurements of heat release rate, smoke, and carbon

monoxide were not taken for this series of 44 tests. The room environment in 41 of the tests was conditioned at a temperature between 24 and

29°C and at a relative humidity between 30 and 40 percent just prior to

testing. Prior to each test, the exterior of the room was surrounded

with a plastic envelope and the room environment was controlled with two

610 mm x 305 mm x 51 mm high pans filled with a saturated aqueous solution of calcium chloride for two days. In the remaining three tests,

the relative humidity was controlled at 22, 63, and 76 percent with dry

calcium sulfate and saturated aqueous solutions of calcium nitrate and

sodium carbonate, respectively. Several ignition exposures were used

for this series of 44 tests. The rate of heat release settings used for

the burner were 1.4, 2.8, 5.6, and 11.3 kW corresponding to methane gas

flows of 38, 75, 150, and 300 mJi/s at 20°C and 100 kPa, respectively.

In the fire hazard evaluation tests of polyphosphazene foams and

their comparison with the tests of a PVC-nitrile rubber foam, the currently used hull insulation, fourteen quarter-scale tests and three

full-scale tests were performed. These tests are shown in Tables 3 and

4. Radiant flux at the floor along with air temperatures at the doorway

and inside the room were measured in all of the tests. Measurements of

heat release, smoke, and carbon monoxide were taken in the vertical

stack, discussed in Section 2.1.1, for test numbers 78-14 through 78-18.

Test 78-13 had these measurements taken in a horizontal stack. These

stack measurements were not taken for the earlier tests 78-1 through

13
78-12 and for test 79-35. However, CO at the top of the doorway was

monitored for tests 78-1 through 78-12. Heat release rate, smoke, and

carbon monoxide measurements were recorded for all three full-scale

tests. The smoke meter malfunctioned for full-scale test 1. Since the

polyphosphazene insulations were closed-cell foams, they were assumed to

be unaffected by humidity conditions. Thus, no conditioning of these

insulations was undertaken prior to testing. The rates of heat release

used in ithese quarter-scale tests were 5.6, 8.4, and 11.3 kW, corresponding to methane flows of 150, 225, and 300 m£/s, respectively. A

methane flow of 3.6 l/s corresponding to 135 kW was used for the fullscale test.

14
2.2 Mattress Inserts

2.2.1 Experimental Facilities

A quarter-scale test enclosure constructed with light-weight (220

3 kg/m ) inorganic fiberboard, having the same dimensions as the enclosures

used to test hull insulation, was used to fire test mattress insert

specimens. Inorganic fiberboard was used to minimize heat losses to the

structure and at the same time assure the integrity of the structure for

extended usage in fire testing. In each of these fire tests, a single

165 mm x 483 mm x 51 mm thick nominal size foam specimen was positioned

on a simulated bed frame directly over a diffusion flame burner, which

was located at the center of the floor. The burner surface was 76 mm x

76 mm in area and was flush with the floor. The burner used methane gas

at a flow of 225 ml/s corresponding to 8.4 kW. This latter rate of heat

release was arbitrarily chosen to represent an ignition severity large

enough to adequately assess the fire hazard of mattresses, but not so

large as to overwhelm the mattresses being evaluated. A rate of 8.4 kW

corresponded to approximately 3/8 of the rate of heat input required for

room flashover and could represent the exposure from a fire in a lower

berth of a three-man bunk or a fuel spill under the bunk. The bed frame

was 0.48 m x 0.17 m x 0.13 m high and was fabricated from 3.2 mm thick x

12.7 mm angle iron with a 19.1 mm x 44.5 mm x 3.2 mm hardware cloth for

mattress support. The head of the bunk was centered against the back

wall.

The same 0.61 m x 0.91 m hood and associated instrumentation, discussed in section 2.1.1, were used for measuring heat release rate,

smoke, and carbon monoxide. Air temperatures were measured at 25.4

mm and 50.8 mm below the top of the doorway and at 25.4 mm and 76.2 mm

15
below the center of the ceiling using type K thermocouples made from 0.05 mm

diameter wires.

The same full-scale room used for testing hull insulation was lined

with 15.9 mm gypsum board for testing mattress inserts. In each test, a

1.94 m x 0.76 m x 0.10 m to 0.14 m thick nominal size mattress was

supported by a bed frame directly over a 0.305 m x 0.305 m porous plate

diffusion flame burner located at the center of the floor. The porous

surface of the burner was positioned 0.18 m above the floor. The burner

used methane gas at a flow rate of 3.6 £/s, corresponding to 135 kW, or

16 times as large as the burner fuel flow in the quarter-scale test as

required by previously developed scaling criteria [3]. The bed frame

was 1.94 m x 0.76 m x 0.51 m high and was constructed from 3 . 2 mm thick

angle iron with 1.6 mm diameter wire forming a wire grid having 51 mm x

102 mm spacing for mattress support. The head end of the bunk was

pushed against the back wall.

As in the room fire tests of hull insulation, smoke, air temperature,

velocity, oxygen concentration, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide were

also measured in the stack of the large hood. Carbon monoxide was

sampled at the same locations in the doorway as before. Thermocouples

placed in the same doorway and room interior locations were used to

monitor air temperatures in the mattress fire tests.

2.2.2 Mattress Fire Tests

Figure 2 shows a representative quarter-scale room fire test and

its corresponding full-scale room fire test of a mattress insert material.

16
The mattress insert specimens used in this study are shown in Table 5.

Polyurethane R was chosen as a reference material having a high hazard

potential. Polychloroprene RP was formerly an acceptable habitability

foam for use on board submarines and surface ships. However, the current specification [2] calls for a "low-smoke" version of polychloroprene foam, and polychloroprene RP does not qualify. Polychloroprene

DPSC was procured from Defense Personnel Support Center, Philadelphia,

PA and was supposed to be the same as the RP. The remaining materials

were all potential candidate replacement materials for the polychloroprene RP. Thirty-four quarter-scale room fire tests of mattress specimens were performed. Five were preliminary tests used to provide

insight as to what to expect and to further check out the adequacy of

the test instrumentation and experimental setup. The other 29 tests are

indicated in Table 6. The specimens were approximately 480 mm long, 170

mm wide, and 50 mm thick and had uniform material properties throughout

each specimen, except for the polychloroprene CC and polyphosphazene.

The polychloroprene CC consisted of laminated layers of foam, and the

polyphosphazene foam came in 12.7 mm thick sections. Consequently, four

pieces of polyphosphazene had to be wired together to give the proper

test specimen size. Sixteen full-scale tests were performed. These are

shown in Table 7. The full-scale polychloroprene CC mattress also consisted of laminated layers. The polychloroprene DPSC mattress insert

was allegedly the same as the polychloroprene RP and thus was not evaluated as part of the full-scale series. Full-scale polyphosphazene

mattress inserts were not available; therefore, only quarter-scale tests

of the material were performed.

2.3 Calibration of Exhaust Collector Hoods for Heat Release Rate Me.isun : nt

The exhaust collection stack for the quarter-scale test was calibrated for measurement of heat release rate using the quarter-scale

17
methane burner, which was also used as the ignition source in the room

hull insulation fire tests, positioned directly under the hood as well

as inside the room. The burner had a heat release rate of 16.5 kW based

on the flow of methane to the burner. The rate of heat release of the

burner can also be determined from the measurement of the volume flow

rate and the oxygen depletion of the air passing through the stack [21].

The calculated value based on this latter technique was 17.1 kW, or 4

percent larger than the actual value based on the methane flow rate, for

the burner located directly under the hood. When the burner having the

same methane flow rate was positioned at the center of the floor, the

calculated value was 15.8 kW, or 4 percent smaller than the actual size.

The + 4 percent accuracy is well within an estimated 10 percent experimental uncertainty in measuring volumetric flow and oxygen levels in the

stack. For the full-scale exhaust system, the stack was calibrated in a

similar manner. Using a heat release rate of 210 kW from the burner,

the calculated value was within + 7 percent of the actual rate. For

rates above 500 kW, a study [22] indicated that the flow velocity across

the cross-section of the full-scale stack was highly non-uniform, and

the heat release rate measurements had to be multiplied by 0.77 to give

the actual values. The calibration from that study was used for the

calculations of heat release rate above 500 kW in this report.

2.4 Quantification of Smoke from Room Fire Tests

The attenuation of a light beam by smoke is proportional to the

3 concentration of smoke, C

g (kg/m ), the path length, L (m), and the

attenuation characteristics of the smoke particles expressed as a

18
2 specific extinction coefficient, K (m /kg). Thus, the initial beam intensity I 0 is attenuated to I according to

—I -KC L

= e s ( 1 )

The measurement is often expressed as an optical density, O.D.,

O.D. = L° 8 10 ( 2 )

In the present series of tests, it was desired to evaluate the total

amount of smoke produced over the duration of the test. This can be

2 expressed in terms of the total extinction cross-section, E (m ) , where

filled air from the room, and the quantity O.D. change during the test,

E is determined by integrating over the duration of the test, t(s), or

Equation (4) can also be related to measurements performed in the

ASTM E 662 test with the smoke density chamber [6]. The quantity E is

equivalent to the product of the specific optical density measured in

that test and the specimen surface area employed in the test. Equation

(3) can be used to estimate the average O.D. per meter beyond the room

of fire origin if the smoke is dispersed over a known volume and the

effects of smoke deposition and coagulation are neglected.

(3)

3 and V (m ) is the total air volume filled with smoke, and C V is the

s

3

total smoke mass released. Since v (m /s), the volume flow of smoke-

(O.D. ) dt (4)

19
2.5 Laboratory Tests of Fire Properties

The mattress insert materials were also evaluated by laboratory

fire tests for rate of heat release, potential heat, and smoke production.

Both the NBS calorimeter [9] and the OSU calorimeter [10] were used to

measure rate of heat release. The potential heat test [8] and the smoke

density chamber, modified for mass loss measurement and horizontal

placement of the test specimen [11], were employed for measuring potential

heat and smoke generation of these materials.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Hull Insulation

3.1.1 Proposed Rating System

In the fire hazard assessment study of interior finish materials,

the test material fully lines the walls and ceiling of the quarter-scale

test room, and an ignition source is positioned in one back corner of

the room. A material is given a letter rating related to the energy of

the ignition source required for flashover in a 3.0mx3.0m room lined

with the material and a number rating based on the time in seconds to

reach flashover. The letter assignments are based on the occurrence or

nonoccurrence of flashover at five different ignition source gas flow

rates in the quarter-scale model tests. Preliminarily, these rates are

chosen to be 1, 1/2, 1/4, 1/8 and 1/16 of the heat input required to

flash over a space having the walls and ceiling lined with fire-exposed

fibrous glass with a glass cloth facing over a time period of 300 s or

longer. Fire exposed fibrous glass is selected because it has virtually

all of its organic binder burned away and absorbs a minimal quantity of

20
heat from the fire. These heat release rates correspond approximately

to 350, 175, 88, 44 and 22 kW for a3.0mx3.0mx2.4m high room. The

350 kW level is roughly equivalent to the rate of heat generated from a

slow burning uphostered chair, and the 22 kW rate is representative of a

small wastebasket fire. The heat release rate for the ignition source

used for the quarter-scale experiments would scale with the ratio of the

floor areas or 1/16 of the full-scale rates [3]. The method of assigning

the letter rating from A to F is outlined below.

Fraction of Gas Flow Rate Does Flashover Occur ?

Required for Flashover A B C D E F

1 No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

1/2 No No Yes Yes Yes Yes

1/4 No No No Yes Yes Yes

1/8 No No No No Yes Yes

1/16 No No No No No Yes

It is possible for an interior finish, e.g., gypsum wallboard, to obtain

an A rating. Gypsum wallboard has a much higher thermal conductivity, thereby allowing greater heat loss from the room, than the fibrous glass. Consequently, a room lined with gypsum wallboard would not flash over at the

highest gas flow rate. Fibrous glass at the same rate setting would flash

over and have a B rating. Once the lowest level for which flashover will

occur i6s determined, the time to flash over required for the numerical rating should be established at the next higher gas flow. This precaution will

avoid borderline cases when flashover may occur at a deceptively late time.

The exceptions are that a material rated A has no numerical rating since

flashover does not occur, and the time for a B rated material is determin< •<!

at a flow rate of one.

21
As an example, a 3.0mx3.0rax2.4m high room fully lined with a

material rated B/160 would not be expected to flash over with a 175 kW

source in the corner. However, it would be expected to flash over

in around 160 seconds in the case of a 350 kW source in the

corner of a room having an open doorway. Thus, there is some predictive

aspect included in the rating which is not the case, e.g., for the ASTM E

84 flame spread classification.

A summary of the results from the 44 tests that were performed to

give a preliminary assessment of the proposed rating procedure for room

lining materials is given in Table 2. The data in Table 2 were used to

give the matrix shown in Table 8 for rating individual and combinations

of wall and ceiling materials used in this study. From an analysis of

Table 8, it appears that if the wall and ceiling materials have different

ratings, then the combination will often have an intermediate rating.

For example:

(a) the use of a D or E rated material on the walls

together with a class A or B material on the ceiling could

cause the wall and ceiling material combination to have a

C or D rating;

(b) a class D or E finish on the ceiling together with a class B

wall lining could cause the combination to have a C or D

rating; and,

22
(c) wall finish has a greater effect than ceiling finish on the

fire performance of such material combinations when they are

evaluated under the test conditions used in this study. For

example, the A rated GB wall finish together with class D or E

ceiling finish resulted in class B combinations.

3.1.2 Evaluation of Polyphosphazene Foams

In the fire hazard comparison study of PZ foam with PVCN (B2) foam,

the room fire test results in Table 3 clearly showed the superiority of

PZ foam. For the same ignition exposure, the rooms lined with PZ (tests

78-2 and 78-13) did not experience flashover over a 900 s test period,

whereas the compartments covered with the PVCN (tests 78-1 and 79-35)

attained flashover after only 51 to 83 s. Even when PZ was substituted

for PVCN (B2) only on the ceiling, as in test 78-5, flashover was averted

A more recent formulation of the PVCN foam, PVCN (B2II), did not cause

flashover of the quarter-scale room when a 5.6 kW ignition exposure was

used. That test was not instrumented. A fully instrumented test of the

B2II insulation, run 78-17, was then performed with no occurrence of

room flashover. Although six formulations of PZ (APC-2, APC-4, APC-G

and H, APN, and CAPN) were used, the fire buildup, as evidenced by the

peak doorway and interior air temperatures, was about the

same in fire tests of most of the formulations. The interior air tempera

tures were similar for tests 78-2 and 78-13 using the APC-2 and APC-G

foams, respectively. In tests 78-4, 78-11, and 78-14, with the APC-2,

H, and APC-4 formulations respectively, similar doorway air temperatures

were reached. However, test 78-14 with the APC-4 foam achieved a much

higher room air temperature. Test 78-15 with the APN foam achieved a

23
somewhat lower doorway air temperature but an even higher room air

temperature than that in test 78-14. CAPN foam is a chlorinated polyphosphazene significantly different from the other PZ foams. Test 78-16

of the CAPN resulted in severe localized heating (flame impingement) of

the thermocouples near the ceiling with only a slightly higher doorway

air temperature than those temperatures in the tests of the other PZ

formulations. Increasing the ignition exposure to about one-half of the

rate of heat release needed for flashover, as in test 78-3, resulted in

flashover of the PZ (APC-2) foam. Test 78-12 with the PZ(H) foam showed

that a typical decorative shipboard paint could also affect PZ foam to

the extent that temperatures and CO concentrations similar to flashover

conditions, such as in test 78-1, were achieved in the test even though

the flashover indicator did not ignite. The duration of the high temperature pulse in that test may have been too short to affect ignition of

the indicator. Three coats of the same decorative paint over the CAPN

foam resulted in room flashover at 114 s.

3.1.3 Comparison of Quarter-Scale and Full-Scale Room Fire Tests

Only three full-scale tests of PZ were performed due to the scarcity

and cost of the material. Table 4 compares the results of the fullscale tests with their counterpart quarter-scale room tests. Quarterscale tests 78-14, 78-15 and 78-16, corresponding to full-scale tests 1,

5, and 6, respectively, had peak interior air temperatures over 600°C, a

temperature which is often an indicator of flashover [23]. However, the

doorway air temperatures for these quarter-scale tests were significantly

below 400°C. A study [24] has demonstrated that a doorway temperature

of 400°C or higher together with an interior air temperature of at least

600°C are both required before flashover occurs with the quarter-scale

24
test. Consequently, the quarter-scale room tests 78-14 to 78-16 suggested

borderline room flashover situations with test 78-16 with the CAPN being

the worst of the three tests. The same studies [23, 24] have shown that

the full-scale test is more severe than its quarter-scale counterpart.

Thus, there was a reasonable chance for all three full-scale tests and,

particularly, the counterpart of test 78-16, i.e., full-scale test 6, to

achieve flashover. Of the three full-scale tests, only test 6 reached

flashover. Once flashover is reached, there could be an order of magnitude increase in the peak rate of heat release and in the production of

CO and smoke from the fire. Table 4 shows that tests 1 and 5 had peak

heat release rates between 120 and 240 kW and a peak CO generation of

1.3 to 3.6 g/s. Smoke production for test 5, when expressed in terms of

2 the extinction cross section E discussed in section 2.4, was 520 m

after 300 s. In contrast, test 6, which reached flashover at 85 s, had

a peak rate of heat release of 2130 kW and a maximum rate of 34 g/s CO

2 at the time of flashover and a smoke production of 5170 m after 300 s.

It is interesting to note that the combined heat release rate value of

375 kW from the burner and burning foam in full-scale test 1 could have

also caused flashover of the room if that rate had been maintained for a

longer period [23].

3.2 Mattress Insert Materials

3.2.1 Room Fire Tests

A summary of the test results from the 29 quarter-scale room fire

tests is given in Tables 6 and 9. Data from the 16 full-scale room

tests are presented in Tables 7 and 9. The full-scale results in Table

7 indicated that the peak heat release rate of 2250 kW from the polvurethane R mattress insert greatly exceeded the rate required to cause

flashover of the room. This was confirmed by the doorway and interim

25
air temperatures exceeding 900°C. Fire tests of the polychloroprene RP,

polyurethanes SP and SP-H, and the polyimide IH resulted in peak heat

production rates between 88 to 109 kW. The peak total heat release

rate, which included the 135 kW from the gas burner, was about 230 kW

for these tests. The measurement accuracy at this rate level was about

+ 15 kW, meaning differences in heat release rates among these mattress

foams were too small to be ascertained with the instrumentation system.

The remaining tests in Table 7 had rates equal to or less than 70 kW.

Table 9 shows that the polyurethane R resulted in a smoke extinction

2 cross section E of 1050 m over the 180 s which it took to fully consume

the mattress. Heavy dark smoke was generated in the polychloroprene RP

test compared with a modest quantity of smoke produced in the test with

the SP-H. The extinction cross section E for smoke generated over the

2 2 first 300 s was 2150 m for the RP and 420 m for the SP-H. All of the

2 remaining mattresses resulted in E values of less than 190 m for the

300 s duration. After 1800 s, the RP and SP-H mattress tests had E

2 values of 6960 and 2200 m , respectively, compared with values less than

2 1140 m for the other mattress foams. Table 7 shows that the polyurethane

R had the highest peak mass flow rate of CO, i.e., 34 g/s, among the

mattresses tested. The tests with the SP-H, RP, and IH had maximum

values of 2.7, 1.5, and 1.5 g/s, respectively. The rest of the tests in

Table 7 had peak CO rates of less than 1.0 g/s.

In a Navy berthing area, there is approximately one three-tier bunk

2 with a 0.10 m thick mattress at each level for each 9.3 m of floor area

[25]. If all three 0.10 m thick mattresses were burning at the same

time, the air and room surfaces would reach higher temperatures than if

only one mattress was burning. The thermal feedback between adjacent

26
mattresses and the enhanced feedback from the hotter air and room surfaces

would reinforce the burning rate of each mattress. Thus, the heat

release rate for the three mattresses would be more than three times

greater than the values given in Table 7 for individual mattresses. The

total heat production rate in the room would be the sum of the rates for

the ignition source and the three mattresses. For polychloroprene RP

and polyurethane SP, this total heat release rate would exceed 435 kW.

These calculations further suggested that the fire involvement of the

polychloroprene mattresses in a 3.0 m x 3.0 m room could also cause room

« flashover, especially when the rest of the bedding such as the sheets,

pillows, and blankets were also involved. In fact, this has been demonstrated

in full-size room fire tests with three-man bunks [7].

The quarter-scale room fire tests ranked the mattress inserts,

using the rate of heat release as the basis, in the following order of

decreasing fire hazard: (1) polyurethane R; (2) polyurethanes SP-8 and

SP-H; (3) polychloroprene RP, including the DPSC, and polyurethane SP;

and (4) others. Whereas the full-scale tests indicated that the RP

behaved much like the SP-H in terms of peak heat release rate, the

quarter-scale tests showed the RP having about one-half of the rate for

the SP-H. The burning behavior of the polychloroprene RP and DPSC

specimens in the quarter-scale tests was significantly different from

the combustion of the full-size mattresses. The quarter-scale specimens,

0.05 m thick, exhibited surface flaming combustion but had no observable

smoldering combustion, whereas the 0.10 m thick full-size mattresses

exhibited both surface flaming combustion and glowing combustion in the

core of the mattress during the test. Apparently, the increased thickness

27
resulted in less heat escaping from the core, thereby allowing the

smoldering combustion to be self-sustained. This smoldering in the

full-size mattress could contribute significant heat release and could

account for the differences in heat release rates between the quarterscale and full-scale tests of the polychloroprene RP. This might also

have been the case for the polyurethane SP. The greatest differences in

heat release rates and air temperatures between the quarter-scale and

full-scale tests were for the polyurethane R. Once again, this was due

to differences in specimen thickness between the quarter-scale and fullscale tests. The problem is compounded by the fact that the full-scale

polyurethane R mattress was used in its original thickness of 0.14 m and

was thus almost three times thicker than its corresponding quarter-scale

mattress. This compared with a full-scale to quarter-scale mattress

thickness ratio of two for the shipboard and candidate mattresses. The

thicker full-scale mattresses burn longer with the fire heating the air

and room surfaces over a longer period. This results in a more pronounced

and prolonged thermal feedback from the flame, hot air, and heated

surfaces to the burning mattress, thereby further enhancing its rate of

combustion. The middle part of the thin polyurethane R mattress in the

quarter-scale test was quickly and completely consumed before the rest

of the mattress was involved. In the full-scale mattress fire, much of

the middle section was still burning by the time the whole mattress was

involved. The relative portion of mattress area still burning during

the peak full fire development was less in the quarter-scale test.

Consequently, the quarter-scale test of the polyurethane R produced much

less heat per unit time and less smoke than its full-scale counterpart

during their peak fire intensities for each square meter of surface. In

fact, the quarter-scale test produced less smoke obscuration than the

polychloroprene RP, which was not the case in the full-scale tests.

28
Nevertheless, the quarter-scale test can differentiate between the good

and poor fire risk mattress insert materials.

There was one mattress insert where two successive tests of the

material resulted in significantly different results for smoke obscuration.

Tests 13A and 13B of the laminated polychloroprene CC showed that there

was much more smoke generation in test 13A than in test 13B. This was

in agreement with visual observations. Nonuniformity in foam formulation

could have caused this difference. The higher smoke generation was not

observed in the full-scale tests of the material.

3.2.2 Laboratory Fire Tests

Table 10 compares data from the potential heat test and the OSU and

NBS rate of heat release calorimeters with results from the quarterscale and full-scale room tests. The listing of materials in Table 10

are given in the order of decreasing rate of heat release from the fullscale room fire tests. The ranking of the four materials having the

highest heat release rate, i.e., R, SP-H, RP, and SP were ranked in the

same order by the quarter-scale test, the OSU calorimeter, and the NBS

calorimeter. The OSU calorimeter had the same problem that the quarterscale test had in that the RP gave heat release rates which were much

lower than the rates for the SP-H. As explained in section 3.2.1, this

could have been a consequence of the specimen thickness. The OSU calorimeter had a higher value for HS-2 than expected. Similarly, the quarterscale test gave values that appeared high for the HS-2 and CC foams.

The problem could also be in the reliability of measuements below 100

kW in the full-scale tests. However, none of these discrepancies wen

29
major ones. More serious problems arose with correlations with the

potential heat data and with the NBS calorimeter results. The results

of the potential heat test did not correlate with the behavior of the

mattress materials in the full-scale room fire tests. For example, the

polyurethane HS had a potential heat of 47500 J/g, much higher than the

values for polyurethane R and polychloroprene RP, but performed well in

the room fire tests. With the NBS calorimeter data, the peak rate and

maximum 60 second averaged rate for polyurethane HS suggested that the

HS material would perform more like polychloroprene RP than like polychloroprene LS. However, the room fire tests showed that the polyurethane

HS behaved like the polychloroprene LS.

Table 9 compares the smoke production data from the E 662 test,

modified for horizontal placement of specimens, with the O.D./m and

extinction cross section E results from the quarter-scale and full-scale

tests. The foam materials in Table 9 are listed in a decreasing order

of total smoke generation, as indicated by the extinction cross section

values, after 300 s in each of the full-scale tests. Peak values of

optical density per meter, or smoke concentration, could indicate the

instantaneous peak levels in each test, but could not quantify the smoke

as a function of time. The O.D./m data from the full-scale tests ranked

the polyurethane R as being the worse smoke producing material. However,

when total smoke production over a 300 s duration was considered, the

chloroprene RP came out worse. Extinction cross-section values in the

quarter-scale test were more difficult to measure than in the full-scale

test, due to the much lower quantity of smoke produced in the former

test. Even if the smoke per unit path length, i.e., concentration, were

30
the same in the quarter-scale and full-scale stacks, the full-scale test

has the advantage in that its path length for smoke measurement is eight

times longer. Consequently, the quarter-scale test was unable to quantify

the smoke from tests of materials other than the RP and DPSC foams.

When the E values for the full-scale tests are divided by their respective mattress weights consumed by the fire, the resultant ratios

should correlate with the specific extinction areas derived from

the E 662 test, providing the fire exposures in the two tests are close

enough. In this study, correlation with the E 662 test was difficult

due to the limited data. The E values were available for the RP, R, and

SP-H foams, and these correlated roughly with their respective E 662

specific extinction areas. The E values for the CC, LS, HS-2, and IH

foams were too low to be measured with the existing smoke monitoring

system. However, visual observations suggested that the total smoke

generated in these cases was much less than that for the R and SP-H

foams. Since the weight loss for both the HS-2 and R foams was the

same, the specific extinction area E/M

g

from the room fire with the HS2

2 had to be lower than the 420 m /kg for the R foam. Furthermore, if

the IH foam generated the same total quantity of smoke as did the HS-2

foam, the specific extinction area E/M^ for the IH would be about five

times higher than that for the HS-2. This was because the weight of

mattress consumed in the IH test was only about one-fifth as great as

that for the HS-2. These observations were consistent with the specific

extinction areas from the E 662 test for the mattress foam specimens

studied. An advantage of using the modified E 662 test is that it

affords the resolution of differences beyond the lower range capability

of the full-scale measurement, providing the mass loss of the mat tressi-s

31
is known or can be estimated. Even without this knowledge, the specific

extinction area values from the modified E 662 test roughly correlates

with the E values from the full-size mattress fires.

4 . SUMMARY

1. A possible rating procedure has been demonstrated for measuring

the fire hazard potential of individual room lining materials

with the NBS quarter-scale room fire test. However, there is

a need to evaluate the procedure over a wider range of materials

to fully assess its strengths and limitations.

2. The interdependency of wall and ceiling materials in the

potential fire hazard rating of room linings has been examined.

High fire hazard materials either on the wall or ceiling

surfaces could seriously jeopardize the overall rating of the

room

3. Polyphosphazene foam was vastly superior to the poly (vinyl

chloride) /nitrile rubber foam B2, the currently used

hull insulation on board submarines, in the room fire tests of

these materials.

4. The potential heat measurements of the mattress insert materials

did not correlate with the full-scale test behavior of these

materials

5. Ranking of mattress insert materials for their potential rate

of heat release with the OSU calorimeter was as good as those

32
using the NBS calorimeter and the NBS quarter-scale room fire

test, modified for mattress testing. The limited data suggested that the OSU calorimeter can be useful in screening

out high fire hazard materials.

6. Reduced-thickness mattress specimens in the quarter-scale room

test could not experience the smoldering combustion found in

some full-size mattresses, because the former were not sufficiently thick to retain the heat, necessary to sustain smoldering, from escaping from the core. The reduced thickness

could also result in burning patterns different from those

observed in full-size mattress fires.

7. The ASTM E 662 test, modified for horizontal placement of the

test specimen, was found to give an adequate indicator of the

relative smoke generation potential of the mattress insert

materials evaluated in the room fire tests in this study.

8. Several candidate mattress inserts were demonstrated to have

lower rates of heat release and a lower production of CO and

smoke in the room fire tests performed in this study than the

polychloroprene RP formerly used on board submarines and

surface ships.

5 . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Appreciation is expressed to Mr. C. Veirtz, who built the test

compartments and performed the actual testing, to Mr. J. N. Breese for

reduction of most of the test data, and to Mr. W. J. Parker for his

helpful comments.

33
This study was supported in part by the Naval Sea Systems Command

(Dr. H. H. Vanderveldt, SEA 05R25) , Department of the Navy, under the

technical direction of Mr. William M. Widenor, David Taylor Naval Ship

Research and Development Center, Annapolis.

t

34
6 . REFERENCES

[1] Fire Performance Requirements and Approved Specifications for

Interior Finish Materials and Furnishings (Naval Shipboard Use)

MIL-STD-1623D (SH) , 7 December 1981.

[2] Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building

Materials. ASTM E 84. Philadelphia, PA: American Society for

Testing and Materials; 1981.

[3] Lee, B. T. ; Breese, J. N. ; Submarine Compartment Fire Study — Fire

Performance Evaluation of Hull Insulation. Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.)

NBSIR 78-1584; 1979 May.

[4] Mattresses and Mattress Ticks, Berth, Synthetic Cellular Rubber,

Naval Shipboard, MIL-M-18351F (SH) , 22 April 1981.

[5] Standard Test Method for Surface Flammability of Materials Using a Radiant Heat Energy Source. ASTM E 162. Philadelphia, PA: American

Society for Testing and Materials; 1981.

[6] Standard Test Method for Specific Optical Density of Smoke Generated

by Solid Materials. ASTM E 662. Philadelphia, PA: American

Society for Testing and Materials; 1979.

[7] Lee, B, T. ; Parker, W. J. ; Naval Shipboard Fire Risk Criteria —

Berthing Compartment Fire Study and Fire Performance Guidelines.

Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.) NBSIR 76-1052; 1976 September.

[8] Standard Test Method for Potential Heat of Building Materials.

NFPA No. 259-1976. Boston, MA: National Fire Protection Association;

1976.

[9] Tordella, J. ; Twilley, W. H. ; Development of a Calorimeter for Simultaneously Measuring Heat Release and Mass Loss Rates. Nat. Bur.

Stand. (U.S.) NBSIR 83-2708; 1983 June.

[10] Smith, E.E.; Heat Release Rate of Building Materials. Ignition,

Heat Release, and Noncombustibility of Materials (STP 502)

Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials;

1972.

[11] Babrauskas, V.; Combustion of Mattresses Exposed to Flaming Ignition

Sources, Part II. Bench-Scale Tests and Recommended Standard Test.

Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.) NBSIR 80-2186; 1980 October.

[12] Parker, W. J. ; Comparison of the Fire Performance of Neoprene and

Flame Retardant Polyurethane Mattresses. Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.)

NBSIR 73-177; 1973 April.

[13] Lee, B. T. ; Unpublished mattress fire tests.

35
[14] Breese, J. N. ; Tests on Insulative Barriers as a Method of Protecting

Neoprene Core Mattresses. Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.) NBSIR 77-1295;

1977 November.

[15] Hafer, C. A.; Yuill, C. H. ; Characterization of Bedding and Upholstery

Fires. Southwest Research Institute SwRI Project 3-2610, NBS-GCR

70-1; 1970.

[16] Yuill, C. H. ; The Life Hazard of Bedding and Upholstery Fires. J.

of Fire and Flamm. , 1, 312-323; 1970 October.

[17] Palmer, K. N. ; Taylor, W. ; Paul, K. T. ; Fire Hazards of Plastics in

Furniture and Furnishings: Characteristics of the Burning. Building

Research Establishment (Borehamwood) CP 3/75; 1975.

[18] Babrauskas, V.; Combustion of Mattresses Exposed to Flaming Ignition

Sources, Part 1: Full-scale Tests and Hazard Analysis. Nat. Bur.

Stand. (U.S.) NBSIR 77-1290; 1977 September.

[19] Saito, F. ; Flammability Characteristics of Mattresses. Journal of

Consumer Product Flammability, 4, 203-242; 1977 September.

[20] Rubber Sheets and Assembled and Molded Shapes, Cellular, Synthetic,

Open Cell (Foamed Latex). MIL-R-20092K (SH), 9 July 1984.

[21] Huggett, C.; Estimation of Rate of Heat Release by Means of Oxygen

Consumption Measurements. Fire and Materials, 4, 61-65; 1980.

[22] Lee, B. T. ; Effect of Ventilation of the Rates of Heat, Smoke, and

Carbon Monoxide Production in a Typical Jail Cell Fire. Nat. Bur.

Stand. (U.S.) NBSIR 82-2469; 1982 March.

[23] Lee, B. T.; Quarter-Scale Modeling of Room Fire Tests of Interior

Finish. Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.) NBSIR 81-2453; 1982 March.

[24] Lee, B. T. ; Fire Hazard Evaluation of Shipboard Hull Insulation and

Documentation of a Quarter-Scale Room Fire Test Protocol. Nat.

Bur. Stand. (U.S.) NBSIR 83-2642; 1983 August.

[25] Lee, B. T. ; Parker, W. J. ; Fire Buildup in Shipboard Compartments —

Characterization of Some Vulnerable Spaces and the Status of Prediction Analysis. Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.) NBSIR 79-1714; 1979

May.

36
37

Figure

1.

Quarter-scale

and

full-scale

room

fire

tests

of

interior

finish

materials
38

Figure

2.

Quarter-scale

and

full-scale

room

fire

tests
4-1 •H

COc3o X

0000 o

CO

CTn

om

O'

CO

CO

a>cXo m

CM CN

ONm

co iH

CO •H

Cm

a)

4-1 CO Xx

CO •HC

vM

Pm

Cmo

M-lCma) co

•H

4-1 COCJo

0)C- CO

CM

-tfI X o

00

CNm

PmXs x

co •Hc

•H«M

Imo

•H

(M3

4-1 c

XI

£5 &

CL,

a>Cm3

33

0)oo

CmCl

«<*N '

s bC cj c

Ct, 3 •H

V-M o 4-1 CO 3 3 <4-1 Cm

CJ Cm

CO 3 3

<4m CO 3

Cm 3

,5 T5 o

CO 0) 3 a

rH 4-1 o X •H c Cm

4-1 Cm

H

a o 4-1 Cm •H Pm <4M CJ 2 o

•t *

CO /"N PP Sh c

CO ai z CJ rH

N o

CO -o CJ ' Cl Pm •H

i"M

H > VM 4-1 CJ Cm Pm T) co 3 O w Cm 3 3 — r—4 CO * c rH

CO

X E O *3 3 3

CO CJ co

X

O

N >

co

O t—

o 3 3

r-i 1-H

p rH s X

CJ >N CO in

a Cm c u S X

co

O

CO •H 3 Pm o <4M 3 > X E X O w 3 c a "3

!m Sh 3 CO 3 3

Xl *—t pc;

a 3 rH CO •H o to 3 C 3

Pm CJ

X P*

4Jo • • • • • z i—

CN

m *3- in

K

39
Table

2.

Summary

of

Quarter-Scale

Room

Fire

Tests

Used

in

Rating

Procedure

§

N°

0 oooooooo

co^oo^oomcoo'

mocooconNH fQOvOvDO'O'Nsf vjvOsjNtmronN

OOOOOOOO

irirom<fvDcooo<r

ooooooioo mr»r«»rooooooin<f oomoovooonoNooN

-^mcMOfOomo <oooon-Oo-iin

i m n ia m n n m

ooooooooo 'joovOfnrN<too«3

, iN' innvDfn^NNooH

a»H<roa' 0'HNOfri vDvonrQ'jinmvDntNi

1 h h m

ooocbcboooo .Is, vOCMromcMr^v£)ro\Om OOvfCOinO'COMONOON

N^vD^OOnCOvONin m H vD o in CO VO CO OMA

•—< <r cm —< ro

o o o o i 4 o 4 4 - « _ _ ONnmoMnaJOOfnvo mNNAJ^vONOOvOeH

rooM<ro<tNNin'<f n<f(nfnfOfnfnfnnn

<r'th-NiDCT\O'N00C0N^-'CNr^rMvJ-C0 NfOOOrd^fOvDNfOHOfO'-t'OvOinin

>£

.

woooioooo22oooooo ut(Na'(N<rin<tinoo^!x<r<t<foor^^ ONO'Ma'a>^ooo^»H^~0'a.O'cnO''H

OOr^cMr'«*r'>.0'0''0OcMOc00'><t'0s£> oofnvDrsNoonvoNO'rsHCMrNNHN -HinfnHNinNfn^NNNnNcM'j^

oooooooooooo44ooo <rLn^HOO^or^ojr^-cr>r^.r^'^)CT'<j-CNjcr>co rNOO-tvDvOCMh.O 00 N 00 00 CO 00

in^vD*J, minv£)v£)<}, v£)fnOOvONNvDvO (nmnfOnnnfOmNvOfOnPiNtnn

e

C d M H

i i 9 i ii^iif i & o 4 j o 4

vo on I o vo

oo vo

+

1

1 1 O O I o o

<J- CM | O' O'

00 O' 00

+ , oo ooooooo + t + t t t +

•K * * *

i/'icomcoLDfOi/nfO

CQCQCQCQCQCQCQCQ oooooooo

O' O n -H (N N H

roof'd-—i<rcN<t-H

I I I I I I I I O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' r^r^r^r^-r^r^r^r^

I O O

I oo <roo

COiTiCOvIvDCONhh

i 4 vD H 00 in o

m * o * o m *

00 -K O * O CM * m cm m

incomcomv£>co\©oo

« « o o o o 2 O O fa > > cu

cu cu

ooooooooo

no>JN^o'N<ro' <fCM<r'-i— l—ICMCM

I I I I I I I I I O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O'

I. . b °

O'“ | m | m oo I <} m - r^. vo Is- vo

n^concONnNHH

cnvomvofnvooorovooo HinniriHinNHinN

««OOoBo 3^S OOfefc>>>5uCU&

CM Ph CM

Zoooooooooo 2 Z 2 Z 222225

>>>>>>>>>>

CMO-iCuCmCMO-iCMOjCMCM

HNn'jvOinM’O'Ooo

cmcmcm—

•

ro co ro co cm cm

l l l l I l I l l l O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O'

r— r—. i— r-~- r~- i— r'-r-^r-^r^

O O I 4 o

<r cm i oo

oo i£> vo

+ + + + + OOcm

I ooooooo i r^r^roo'cocMvo

r^NO oo rs n co oo oo

1 vo O' m o» cm ^ o<rNfOfOcon^

4 O' 00 CM O' O'* Z <rr^cor^O'coco z

—

i

<-M CM

ro <r -)C o O * O' O' * OM-nninsTsT-lC

oo cn *k oom-K fONO-K O'r^cncMO'cMin*

-H in • CM CM cn CM CM CM n CM CM

niOoOmiDCOi£)00<fiOvD'Ov£)iOiOCO^

HincMHincMinNHioinmininincMH

m«eooooBBBss3S3ss ooofefcfe>>>a.6icuESCai

g3233?23332325232 CMCmD-iCMO-iCmCUiCUiCUiCmCUiCmPuD-iCUiOl,

cm m oo m h n o oo n r^invocn-— <cMmm—<•—icMcnmmooo'

I I I I I I l l I I I I I I l I I O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O' O'

to d 2

2 u

a a o o 4J

•H 4J -o o w -h 2 d -o

•H d d < 3 3 u & a o

a) u x) 2 o u

4m O d • 0 3

o a) cm iJ 4-i m S S d d

C d dMP O > X H d d •hop cm a

M £ rl M 0 0

0u CO 4M O d d

tH d -HUM

M iH »m M

O 4M O VMM CO O 4J d d

d o i-h c d d Q 2 Cm M Ph CM,

+ t

40
Table

3A.

Comparison

of

Quarter-Scale

Room

Fire

Tests

on

Polyphosphazene

and

Poly(vinyl

chlorlde)/Nltrlle

Rubber

Foams

Time h-3

O' on >3-

O CM CM vO

O O' 1 0 00 1 OO

O |1 H m m •—j CO O' 0 O' so <r cm r^» CM CM | L CM O O 1 O H •A ^ 1 • *H • O

CL 0 E 'a 0 0 O

O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 -H 41

X 1 cu AJ 0 CO O CM vO O CM CO m >3- vO 00 >3- CO co vO -M- sO r- 00 SO 00 in m 1 23 e 0) 1 m 0 1 w H co <r 1 0 i AJ

<uE m

co

CO 55 141 11 160 114 216 113 1001 155 125 <r

114 1l11

1200 1200

•H j H l O 0 1 E_, K * CO * 2 • CJ

Cl 0 E ^ 0 0 O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O 0 O •H -H | X Aj co CO 00 co >3- <- in <r 00 X CM m l 49 O in sO —J CM CO CO co CO CM CO sO sO m O m 1 23 O <u <r 0 1 C: H CM co 1| t TM E lll1 (-1 Q 3 ^ 00 00 in co 00 so CM CO 00 O' «n CM O' 00 I 3 & • O £ * O 00 sO co _1

<J- OO n* >3- coO CM

Ca LA <r ro CO CO

O 1 AJ C^

23 CO 1^ CO CM 0 0) * ° CO l 1 1 1 l 1 <r <r <r 1 1 E •—1 j *H 11 H

CO 11l • O

AJ +

CO 0) +

Q)

A /-s + X CO m sO CM 0 I (X .X 1 1 1 1 • • | 1 • • • 1 • 1 1 -X CM SO sD <r 0 0

CJ ai CM

CO

w •—1 A CO

C/3 CD r—1

Q) 1 CO X

<v

u 11 to

Q)>O ^ X CO

CO

v-"

CO

CO

OO

O

O

OOO

O

O

m 1111 *3-

O

<u in 00

O

O

OO

O

O

OOO CM 1 O E Oh O' O' CM O' O' O' CM CM -H 1 •—J

O'

iH l 1 H Ca /\ /\ /\ /\ ns /\ /\ 1l ns C 11 1 0 1 i

Test

A ~ in

m

O

O

O o° 0 O 0 0 CM 1 O 0 1 *

Aj £ m 00

OOO 0 O CM CM CO CM 0

O' O' O' O' O'

—1 r^. O' 3 l 1 O 1 c l1 1 0 0) l 1 iH U ^ l 1 A A< 2 x sO sO sO vO ^3- <f >3- ^3- <r CO l sO <r vO <T 1 •H 3 .X • 1 • C O w in m in m m oc 00 00 00 00 00 1 m 00 in 00 1 be cn 1 1 M

J-N

O

H-1 ^ - 1111!1 11 CO CM CM HJ CM <r CM 1 * * 1 *—1

*H CO CO * CJ

J. CM 1 ^ 2 1 2 * * 1 »-« Aj w S_J CO CJ CJ 2 CL CJ 1 CL * *

CO 0) 2 2 0; w CL /-s CL CL < 1 < <r <r 1 2 A CJ CJ u c 2 <5 X < < CJ < 1 CJ CO X co ! CO > > x £

CMp

CJ

W v-' V-/ 1 -c vO & + l 23 CL CL > CM CM CM CM CM CM 1 CM CM 1 CJ 1 0- CL CL CL CL CL CL 11 CL 0 CL O U- Ca 1I 11 11 /-N /"'s CM CM CJ t—1

J-s /-\ 1 CM CM LL CM <r CM 1 z-\ * « 1 CC CO 1 1 CJ CJ A CM I 1 ^ 2 | 1 2 * It 1 2 u V-/ p ; CO CJ CJ 2 CL CJ 1 CL * * 1 !h « 2 2 Si V-' CL /~s CL CL < CL I < <T <T 1 A 0) 7: 0 g

CJ CJ 2 < X < < CJ < 1 CJ CO

X CO > > CM M CMp . CJ W s^ s^ 1 sO vO f + i CL CL > CM CM CM CM CM CM 1 CM 1 CM 1 CJ CJ 1 CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL O CL O Ca * 11 m CO n* <T in vO 1 00 CM 1 A CO m cm —j

<r •—< •—> CO 1 1 CO 1 1 1 1 1 1 l | | 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a> CO Oh co 00 00 00 ao 00 00 00 00 00 1 00 00 1 H n r-^ P*N N r*^ n* i1 h 11

V) •

o> so

Aj CO * u

be o c o

•h -c

•h 5 • Q) o oo

CJ r—i —>

<b I Uh £ CC Oa I a

0) CO a <r cu C • 4-1 a) m u eg c

•H ^ c O CO TJ H £ U

0)A 03

X 3

Aj E <U CO E A a • a o m be CM 0) AJ 0) T3 C A. cox:

oo E AJ o

>%O TJ

<0 COC E’S " O CM O O —

T5 r-i I a ac

u-< 3 r^. O o

Q) Z X O AJ EOS E 3

T3 AJ

-3- c

in ^ *cc cm a

*3 CJ <T

li Ee L. vO 3 O I (0 U O

«0 3 O AJ lA« E CO O u

CM

O CO

H c aj E CO o 4J O C AJ U

CO > O >

in o

cmX

cc

C o^o X O w 3 & S 3 — X X aj c

CO AJ **

cr. «o 05 AJ

*-*

X

C « 3 |

0! 41 3 N O U 3

AO « X o 3

S3 £ r

41

thick

and

fire-exposed

prior

to

test

to

eliminate

combustible

binder

material.

Test

included

for

reference

Otherwise,

at

time

of

maximum

interior

temperature T2.
Table

3

B.

Comparison

of

Combustion

Products

for

Quarter-Scale

Room

Fire

Test

on

Polyphosphazene

and

Poly(vinyl

chloride)/Nitrile

Rubber

Foams

C UJ

C— Q, H n

to o

• <u 2 p n i * • w o

S co o ^

rH O

O CO V to be

CO •*- J

« c

a: 2 o

CTJ £ 03 £ p_ x **w Q ° « CJ

4-> H S *H 3 ^

CO'-'

be CO

03 03 Z 4_) 03

I I I I I

till

—< <3-0 0

m

I I I CM

Ono o

vO vO vO vD sO m in m in m

/-N /-S /-S cm o

CM CM CM | | CQ ffi CQ U U

Z Z z < < U U u '-'w > > > N N

Dj Qj Qj D- Hi

CM (J CM CM | ||

CO CC CJ u u v—'' v-/ Ch Ph Oh z z < < <3

CJ CJ w W >> CM CM CM Hi Hi Hi H &

CO

I I I I I o o o

ctn <f r-H

O

oo^ |

o oo oo m cm <3

- <j- <3- on <r

tit m o on

I I

I I I

<3- ^ <r <r

00 00 oo 00 oo 00

M CM

CM I « CJ w Oh Z < X

CJ ww > CM CM

H^ Hi M CM

CM I CQ CJ ^ ^

Z < Z

CJ W w

> CM CM

Hi CO H

•—< <3^ —

I I I 00 00 oo

3 32

Ut

I ^ Z U Z H

<3

tj

I /-v Z U Z Hj

Oh Oh <3 <C <3 CJ

I I

I

I

I

I

I

I I

I

I

I I I oo oo oo

I I CJ I Oh | < I w | CM I Cl, I

I

I ^ I CM |

I I CJ I 0h | < !

I I oo I

I

O

<r

ON %

*

rom

Z * *

Oh * * < <t ^ <t

CJ CO PS co w so n-

vO

CM I CM I Oh O Oh O

z * *

Oh "K *

<1 <3

- <3

- u n 53 n w vO w vO

CM I CM | Oh O Oh O

00 CM

OX

O

03

T3 03 C

CO O C CO CJ U

4h O

O 4-1

CO

4-J 03 C CO

03 3

E

03 & U

3 co

co o CO CM

03 • E O

C b

CO

03 C J*

CJ o

E

4h CO

CO O

4-J 4-1 c

03 *3 E 03

03 CO

»-< 3

3

co E

CO

<13 CM E cn

T3 •

CO O

x

I X

00 4J n- b£i C X 03 bX rH 3O X

H 4-i

I T3 00 O

oX

4-1 CO 03

03 X

H 4-i

42

CO

and

smoke

measured

at

the

top

of

the

doorway.

Path

length

of

0.24

m

used

for

smoke

measurement
Table

4A.

Comparison

of

Quarter-Scale

and

Full-Scale

Room

Fire

Tests

on

Polyphosphazene

Foams

X3

O 'O m ^ so

o o o o o in m m

-H O

SO 00

O O

v£> oo

O

Csl

o

CSI 00

O

4HinO

O

oo

O'

S on

nj £

I 00

r-. —

I QC

T3

0) -a

oo u

co cr »-4

8. 2

U ^4

43

Otherwise,

at

time

of

maximum

Interior

air

temperature
cO Sia

i si

a) to 0 cO M

*»H rH QJCM

iJ »W > 0

a\ M X

0 fl O.

•H <D 0 H 0-> CO >

0

<D \.

cO O Q

Q3 0 • C4 CO O

£ ^

O

0) 4-1

P-i O

CO O

$ u " M w & o **N o o

Q CJ

4J *H _

CO -U „

0) CO ® H H w

3O

o ^M 3

3

bO *—lI c0 C CO nH •H 2 M

iH 03 •H'O W

<D C CO U CO S

Z 2 O

5! Sj Si

44
Table

5.

Mattress

Insert

Materials

w

u

<DCM

U

•H ^

bC ^

C B

0) w»J

>• ^um

•H E W \C bf

<u ^

O w

oo m

vO co o>

45

specimen
Table 6. Quarter-Scale Room Fire Tests of Mattress Insert Materials

Peak Stack Heat Peak Doorway Time to Peak Interior Time to Time to Temp. T

( Temp. Tj Temp. T2 T

2 Release Rate, Q Qg Test Material (kW) ( b ) (°C) ( s) (°C) (s)

1A Polyurethane R 23.2++ 59 350 48 630 30

IB Polyurethane R 19.5 103 340 94 650 30

1C Polyurethane R 25.9 42 400 31 580 32

16 Polyurethane

SP(8-20-05-l) 8.8 300 250 289 270 306

19 Polyurethane

SP (8-20-05-1) 8.1 342 240 340 280 344

21 Polyurethane SP-H 7.7 396 240 402 270 387

4A Polychloroprene RP 3 . 2++ 210 210 257 330 264

4B Polychloroprene RP 4.8 187 210 230 320 246

12 Polychloroprene DPSC 4.0 247 200 348 300 354

14A Polyurethane SP 3.3 420 210 480 260 465

14B Polyurethane SP 4.0 420 210 417 390 411

13A Polychloroprene CC 2.1 828 180 540 250 25 13B Polychloroprene CC 1.2 * 170 591 N/A** N/A**

17 Polyiraide IH 1.2 * 190 739 210 790

20 Polyimide IH 1.2 * 190 939 210 910

15 Polyurethane HS-2 <0.7 * 190 1137 220 1155

18 Polyurethane HS-2 1.2 * 200 1101 220 1109

3A Polyurethane HS <0.7++ * 170 504 250 67 3B Polyurethane HS <0.7 * 180 360 230 96

5A Polychloroprene LS <0.7++ * 170 480 230 348

5B Polychloroprene LS <0.7 * 170 540 230 504

2A Polyurethane WRG <0.7++ * 170 162 230 378

2B Polyurethane WRG <0.7 * 170 540 250 162

6 Polyphosphazene 7 <0.7 * 170 462 240 462

7 Polyphosphazene 8 <0.7 * 170 414 230 246

8 Polyphosphazene 9 <0.7 * 160 446 220 594

9 Polyphosphazene 10 <0.7 * 170 252 220 252

10 Polyphosphazene 11 <0.7 * 160 396 220 276

11 Polyphosphazene 12 <0.7 * 170 444 220 222

Burner Alone 8.4 163 ± 5 - 227 ± 10

* No measurable peak. ** Not available + The heat release rate of 8.4 kW from the burner has to be added to Q to obtain the total rate.. Measurement accuracy was about

4 percent of this total rate, e.g., ± 0.35 kW when the material specimen had no measurable heat release. H- Determined by chemical galvanic cell.

46
Table

7.

Full-Scale

Room

Fire

Test

t>a

ta

O o

<0 tJ

C/5c8

CO

0) Cu

0) aH5o

r—

C*-<

COCO 5

on

cmm on

co co o

ON CMo O I I ON I I I nO I o

-3- fO

O o V V o o V V o o V V

O —* V

v

V o o

*-> CM H 05 H *

oo00 oCM

CM

nO

CM

00 o

r>» on

vO CO CO CM

CM

O o o o <r

—< On CO CO

CM <f

oom oo ^ CM

oo no co co m oo

00

uoM

05

<0

05 Cu

CM H

0) H

O

+1 o

00

ON o o

00

CM CM oCMCM

OCMCMO

CM o o *—< ONCM -H

O

O—

CM CM o o ^ ONCM -H o o

ON

O •“H CM

O

O'

O

4J

05 h"

O 1 r*. co on i m —« i oo vO o

00 o

ON

O

'd- vO ^ CO

CO

vO r-*

m vO

ON 00

no oNO

O

vO co

<r co

O' NO

On CM m p-.

O' 00 co r>* t—^ CM

Oo

00

H

to§ - mH o

<r

On o o —< o CM CM oON o

ON o

00 o o

oo r". o or».

O

O

nO nO

O

O

N

O vO o\0

00 ON ^ in

CM CM o or-* VI VI o o

VI VI

O

O

o- P>* VI VI o o p^ r^» VI VI VI VI S S

05 0) u u a a o o u u. o o 5 3 O CJ Jo to

•v

•He

•Hto

rHo

0) 05 c c

CO co

CO C/5

ai a; c c

0) 0) o o g g

05 05 c c

CO (0 X si It 8 8

05 05

XT x: u a X to

CM CM I I C/5 C/5 x x o *-»

15 . *5

*-* It

X

b

u « o c

15

—

U S~i

2-8 - *2 «f ft*

47

the

gas

burner

has

to

be

added

to Q

to

obtain

the

total

rate.

Measurement

accuracy

was

about ±

15

kW

ata

total
Table

8.

Fire

Hazard

Ratings

of

Individual

Interior

Finish

Materials

and

Material

Combinations

**

Fraction

refers

to

ignition

exposure

expressed

as

fraction

of

gas

fuel

flow

rate

needed

for

room

flashover

when

room

is

lined

with

FG

material.

Parenthesis

represents

the

time

to

reach

flashover

at

that

ignition

exposure.
Table

9.

Comparison

of

Smoke

Production

for

Room

Fire

Tests

and

Laboratory

Tests oCM

*3C

cO <in

co co

*-> CO

LM

0) <u 4J 4Ju

a; co •H 3

co cr 0

co c 1 -H

a) e

aj

Wi CM

co

m 3 —

cr • o uO *3

«-•

C

CO

•3 m-i C

•H

C

0)s 0 . CM CM

00 CM • 0) • O 3 V

*3

a

Q

a; .c • bo w O

co 00 U c c

1) 0) <Q > ^

CO *3

jc s

01

U f

CO

C 09

a> a> u 3 u « -* a» —« «o a u cov O O *0 + tl

49
Table

10.

Comparison

of

Heat

Release

Data

for

Room

Fire

Tests

and

Laboratory

Tests

U

t0

0) 33C

0) Uo

Pi

W) 3 O

00

CMON

CM

M

a)o

CO

0)

O 4J 2 3 M • tO bO U >

pL. <3 oco

to cj

<u

CO

to

<u »—i

a)

to

CU x o o o o O CM 00 o o o

cm -<r o o o o m -h oVoVoV o o CM

on r>- I o

to

COTo

00ON

ON o

CM o o ^ CM V oNOI o oCOo oVoCM oCM O

CMI O

CM

(D to * S 0) -It •h 33 a»

3D to CO p3 O

a; i—i

tou

COI

Q>u

CO3

O'

to to

a; oz x

CU

X CO

to to

a) <u +o2 ^ CO

to to

0) <U pH lH 3

tn

u

CO

<U H +

00

00 or^VI or^VI oi^> V| l

PS

CUc

to Xu

CUu3

tO

XI Ph

C/5

0)C

to u

CUu3

to &

<uc

0)MaoMOo

to

PhCO

a)c

to £4~> a)M3

to

tud

to j=

4J

<u

(-> 3

to

CO

33

<Uc

to X

0)u3

to

CMI CO

33

<UC

to jdu

a)

>-• 3

to

CO

hJ

(Ud

<uao

t-i oo

to *

(Ud

<uN

to Xa

COoX

a.

to o

a. oPh o

Ph o

Ph

O

Ph

O

Ph oa* o o o o

CU CU Ph Ph

X

0)

too

<u »d

to

<u

toUi3

CJa

to

<u3

»—I

fO>

<ubO

to

CU>

tO

<U X4J

todo

<u

to

CO

<u Md

<D

0) -d

CO

<u

to

CJ

COIu

a> ocoo

<uUi3

COo&

<u

Ui

CU *3dx I CJ

PH<

-ad

to CMT

to Xao

Ph

(U •u

toUt >

<u

u-ado

T3

<U

CO

to 03 + * + * * + * * *

50

for

first

180s

of

test

for

exposed

specimen

surface

area

of

100

by

100

mm.

Values

determined

using

method

described

in

reference

[11].
NBS-114A (REV. 2*8C

)

U.S. DEPT. OF COMM.

4.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET (See instructions)

1. PUBLICATION OR

REPORT NO.

NBSIR 85-3148

2. Performing Organ. Report No. 3.

TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Publ ication Date

May 1985

EVALUATION AND REFINEMENT OF TEST METHODS USED

FOR MEASURING FIRE HAZARDS OF SHIPBOARD HULL

INSULATIONS AND MATTRESS INSERT FOAMS

5. AUTHOR(S)

B. T. Lee

6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION (If joint or other than NBS. see in struction s) 7. Contract/Grant No. national bureau of standards

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 8. Type of Report & Period Covered

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20234

9. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME AND COMPLETE ADDRESS (Street. City. State, ZIP)

Department of the Navy

Naval Sea Systems Command (Sea 05R25)

Washington, D. C. 20362

10.

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

I I Document describes a computer program; SF-185, FIPS Software Summary, is attached.

11.

ABSTRACT (A 200-word or less factual summary of most significant information. If document includes a significant

bibliography or literature survey, mention it here)

A quarter-scale room fire test developed at NBS was used to help develop a preliminary approach for fire hazard assessment of wall-ceiling combinations of hull insulation materials. The quarter-scale test has been refined to include measurement of

heat release rate, smoke, and carbon monoxide. In addition, polyphosphazene foam

insulations were evaluated with this test.

The quarter-scale test was also modified for testing mattress insert materials, including polyphosphazene foam. Existing tests, used for measuring total heat, rate

of heat release, and smoke production, were also used to evaluate these materials.

Heat release rate measurements with the Ohio State University apparatus and smoke

measurements with the ASTM E 662 test, modified for horizontal placement of specimens

gave adequate evaluation of the fire hazards of mattress insert materials.

12.

KEY WORDS '(Six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only proper names; and separate key words by sc- _ Fire hazards assessment; foam (materials); heat release rate; hull insulation:

interior finishes; mattresses; polyphosphazene foams; small scale fire tests; s- >v.

13.

AVAILABILITY

(XJ Uni imited

| | For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

~Z\ Order From Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, O.C.

20402.

14. NO. OF

PRINTED PAGES

56

15. Price

|Xj Order From National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, VA. 22161 $ 10 . 1C O MM> C 4 » •
'