NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS &

TECHNOLOGY

Research Information Center

Gaithersburg, MD 2089#

NBSIR 88-3806

Fire Environment in Counterflow

Ventilation (The In-flight Cabin

Aircraft Fire Problem)

B. J. McCaffrey

University of Maryland

Baltimore, MD 21228

W. J. Rinkinen

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Bureau of Standards

National Engineering Laboratory

Center for Fire Research

Gaithersburg, MD 20899

June 1938

T5 vs#rs • *r4q***a

1913 -i 9sa Sponsored in part by:

Federal Aviation Administration

Atlantic City International Airport, NJ 08405

NBSIR 88-3806

FIRE ENVIRONMENT IN COUNTERFLOW

VENTILATION (THE IN-FLIGHT CABIN

AIRCRAFT FIRE PROBLEM)

B. J. McCaffrey

University of Maryland

Baltimore, MD 21228

W. J. Rinkinen

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Bureau of Standards

National Engineering Laboratory

Center for Fire Research

Gaithersburg, MD 20899

June 1988

Sponsored in part by:

Federal Aviation Administration

Atlantic City International Airport, NJ 08405

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, C. William Verity, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Ernest Ambler, Director
.

'

.

'

.
Table of Contents

Page

List of Tables iv

List of Figures v

Abstract 1

1.0 Introduction 2

2 . 0 Experimental 6

3.0 Results 9

3.1 Effect of Ventilation Rate and Position on Gas

Ceiling, and Wall Temperature 15

3.2 Effect of Seats 19

3.3 Effect of Fire Size 20

3.4 Ceiling Heat Transfer 29

3.5 Stratification 32

4.0 Discussion 34

5.0 Conclusions 34

6.0 Acknowledgements 36

7.0 References 37

Appendix 38

iii
List of Tables

Page

Table 1. Experiment Parameters 10

Table 2. Ceiling Temperature Correlation Parameters 25

Table 3. Upper Gas Level Temperature Correlation Parameters 27

iv
List of Figures

Page

Figure 1. Interior View of One Half of Symmetric Enclosure 60

Figure 2. Typical Seat 61

Figure 3. Time Histories TC Tree A F1202 62

Figure 4. Time Histories TC Tree B F1202 63

Figure 5. Time Histories TC Tree C F1202 64

Figure 6. Time Histories TC Tree C F1202 65

Figure 7. Exhaust Gas TC Histories F1202 66

Figure 8. Ceiling Temperatures Histories F1202 67

Figure 9. Interior Wall TC Traces F1202 68

Figure 10. Exterior Temperature Rise and Heat Flux Histories F1202 .. 69

Figure 11. Exterior Temperature Rise and Heat Flux Histories F1202 .. 70

Figure 12. Ventilation Flow and Cabin Differential Pressure

Histories F1202 71

Figure 13. Gas Temperature -Time Traces. TC Tree D, 30kW Fire

2 min Rate 72

Figure 14. Gas Temperature -Time Traces. TC Tree D, 30kW Fire

4.5 min Rate 73

Figure 15. Ceiling Temperature -Time Traces. 4 Positions, 30kW

Two Ventilation Rates 74

Figure 16. External Wall Temperature, Heat Flux-Time Plots.

30kW, 2 min Rate 75

Figure 17. External Wall Temperature, Heat Flux-Time Plots.

30kW, 4.5 min Rate 76

Figure 18. Exhaust Flow TC Readings. Two Ventilation Rates,

Two per run 77

Figure 19. ERFC-like Curve Fits to Ceiling Temperature Data. T1 . . .

78

Figure 20. ERFC-like Curve Fits to Ceiling Temperature Data. T2 .... 79

Figure 21. ERFC-like Curve Fits to Ceiling Temperature Data. T3 .... 80

v
List of Figures (continued)

Page

Figure 22. ERFC-like Curve Fits to Ceiling Temperature Data. T4 . . . 81

Figure 23. Ceiling Thermal Characteristics, ATm and h vs Q

and r/H 82

Figure 24. ERFC-like Curve Fits to Gas Temperature Data. B1 83

Figure 25. ERFC-like Curve Fits to Gas Temperature Data. Cl 84

Figure 26. ERFC-like Curve Fits to Gas Temperature Data. A2 85

Figure 27. ERFC-like Curve Fits to Gas Temperature Data. D1 86

Figure 28. Ceiling and Gas Thermal Characteristics and Heat

Transfer Coefficient vs. position 87

Figure 29. Calculated Ceiling Heat Transfer Decay for 30kW

Fire at r/H - 0, 1 88

Figure 30. Normalized Solution and Small Time Approximation 89

Figure 31. Gas Temperature -Time Trace, TC Tree D, 40kW Fire 90

Figure 32. Vertical Temperature Profiles (selected times) 91

Figure 33. Normalized Temperature Profile 92

vi
Fire Environment In Counterflow Ventilation

(The In-flight Aircraft Cabin Fire Problem)

B.J. McCaffrey and W.J. Rinkinen

Abstract

Using propane gas burning in a diffusive mode, fire sources up to the

equivalent heat release rate of a fully involved seat were simulated in an

approximately 1/2-scale closed section of a ventilated wide-body aircraft

cabin. The ventilation flow direction was as in commercial practice-counter

to that of the buoyancy driven fire gases, i.e., fresh air was forced in at

the top of the enclosure and drawn out at the bottom. Results for the 1/2-

scale system indicate that for nominal ventilation rates, significant enthalpy

exchange through ventilation in times corresponding to a few airchanges is

limited. That is, only a small proportion of the energy release rate of the

fire is getting exhausted. These results will depend on time, it may not be a

general conclusion. Also the time response of the aircraft cabin material may

be different than this experimental facility, and a complete dimensionless

variable analysis might suggest different time scales, full to 1/2 scale.

Correlations of thermal conditions in the enclosure as a function of time,

heat release rate of the fire, and position in the cabin are presented. Semiinfinite transient conduction models appear adequate in capturing the

essential features of the fire plume - ceiling thermal interaction. Reduced

1
data for the entire test series will be made available for future cabin

modelling purposes. Data from one typical experiment is included in the

appendix of the present report. The others will be made available through

NTIS and for the near term on the CFR Electronic Bulletin Board. (CFRBBS: 24

hrs/day, 7 days/wk,

301-921-6302)

1.0 Introduction

The effects of normal aircraft ventilation on the growth of an incipient

inflight fire as well as on the spread of smoke and toxic products in the

cabin are at present not known to any reliable, empirically-based degree.

Because of the lack of good information no guidelines are available to a

flight crew concerning possible mitigative actions to be initiated regarding

cabin ventilation when they are confronted with an on-board fire incident. In

an effort to establish the necessary data base the Federal Aviation

Administration has recently begun studies both at their laboratories and

through contracts with various fire research organizations aimed at

elucidating the phenomena and gaining the required scientific understanding.

Not only will these studies offer near-term benefit, for example, insight for

recommendations and guidelines for crew action in the event of fire, but they

should in addition offer the rational basis for estimating the possible

benefits of proposed future design changes, for example, emergency venting of

smoke

2
One such study, the subject of this report, is taking place at the Center for

Fire Research (CFR) , National Bureau of Standards. This study involves an

experimental program in a 1/2-scale section of a wide body simulated aircraft,

exactly addressing the effects of ventilation on the fire environment.

(Aircraft cabins are generally ventilated from top to bottom. Fresh air is

forced in at the ceiling of the fuselage and exhausted near the floor. Fires

create hot gases with buoyant forces which are in the opposite direction from

that of the ventilation flow. The inability to analytically characterize the

resulting large scale eddy mixing process is responsible for the uncertainty

surrounding the fire question.)

This report looks at the major thermal effects and addresses the following

tasks

i) the design and instrumentation of a test article simulating the

interior and ventilation pattern present in commercial aircraft;

ii) the collecting of the necessary data required to thoroughly

determine the effects of "counterflow" ventilation on fire growth

and spread;

iii) heat transfer to the ceiling of the test article. It became

apparent soon after the initiation of the study that a major

portion of the energy release rate of the fire was not getting

exhausted through the floor vents. Rather, the energy was

3
being transferred to the ceiling, and hence it was necessary to

study carefully the implications of that heat transfer.

A description of the test article will be presented along with the results of

a systematic study of the thermal environment resulting from a constant heat

release rate fire in a closed chamber ventilated in a counterflow direction,

i.e., from top to bottom, at air exchange rates equivalent to those

encountered in a commercial aircraft. (Throughout this study it must be kept

in mind that only trends and phenomena are being investigated. Caution must

be exercised in interpreting the small scale measurements. For example in the

case of exchange rates, Froude number scaling analysis would yield differences

of J2 in event times between model and full scale. See Quintiere (1978) for a

full discussion of this point.)

Surprisingly in the past there have been few studies which have attempted to

predict the fire environment in a moderately sealed enclosure for any sort of

forced ventilation. For aircraft specifically, Sarkos and Hill (1985) noted

substantial differences in hazard histories at different points throughout the

cabin between a controlled ventilation, in-flight fire scenario case (the

present configuration) compared with the postcrash tests where the cabin was

ventilated naturally through fuselage openings . Apparently because of mixing

the former tended to distribute the seat fire hazards throughout the airplane,

i.e. hazard conditions existed at a station as much as 12 m (40 ft) from the

source at an elevation as low as 1.7 m (5 ft 6 in) prior to flashover. In

contrast hazardous conditions were limited to the ceiling layer in the

naturally ventilated, post crash test up until the point of flashover.

4
Up until very recently calculations involving numerical solutions of the

conservation equations with radiation and elaborate turbulence models, quite

successful in reasonably high velocity, forced convective flows, have not

yielded the same kinds of successes for highly buoyant, low speed flows. The

large scale structure responsible for the major share of the mixing has not

been properly modelled. DeSouza, Yang and Lloyd (1985) in a two-dimensional

calculation show that flows with velocities equal to 0.1 m/s have little

effect and flows at 1 m/s have drastic effects on the stability of the hot

upper layer. Unfortunately, there are non-negligible three-dimensional

effects associated with the flow field and the actual aircraft flow velocities

fall precisely between these two extremes. Mitler (1984) has attempted forced

ventilation calculations using zone models and indicates clearly the

weaknesses of that approach because of the lack of a good mixing algorithm for

the incoming stream. Finally, using a well-stirred reactor analysis Eklund

(1984 a,b) has shown the importance of ventilation with regard to fire hazard

development including visibility.

One experimental study of fire growth in a sealed container with ventilation,

worth noting, is that of a nuclear containment vessel at the Lawrence

Livermore National Laboratory, the resulting correlations presented by Foote,

Pagni , and Alvares (1986). In that study the representative upper level gas

temperature rise varied with the ventilation flow rate to a not immodest -0.36

power. Cox, Kumar, and Markatos (1986) were able to do a reasonable job in

reproducing some of these results using more modern three-dimensional field

modelling techniques. Unfortunately however, their ventilation flow direction

5
was in the same direction as the buoyant flow, i.e., in at the bottom and out

at the top, the same direction as the normally generated flows due to the fire

- the hot gases simply get pushed along by the vent flow.

There appears to be no systematic study in the literature of the desired

configuration. Evidence suggests that mixing of the upper layer is

significant (Sarkos and Hill 1985) and for the reversely ventilated (in at the

bottom- out at the top) case the thermal environment is medium to strongly

dependent on the ventilation rate. For the counterflow situation, the

direction of interest here, little guidelines exist - the present experimental

program was carried out to fill this void.

2 . 0 Experimental

A view of one-half of the test article is shown schematically in Fig. 1. It

is constructed of two symmetrical chambers built on a raised frame with wheels

so that the interior could be accessed easily, and with the two halves clamped

together forms a reasonably sealed enclosure. Each chamber is approximately

2.4m long by 2.4 m wide by 1.2 m high (8x8x4 ft) thus simulating to approximately 1/2-scale a closed section of aircraft 9.8m (32 ft) long by 4.9 m

(16 ft) wide by 2.4 m (8 ft) high. The skin is of 24 gauge (0.7 mm thick)

galvanized sheet and the frame was constructed of 38 x 38 mm and 51 x 51 mm

angle and channel members 3.2 mm thick of hot rolled, AISI C-1020 metal. The

skin was riveted to the frame, and the joints, generally overlapped sheet,

were sealed with high temperature silicone adhesives. High temperature gasket

material was used in the clamped butted joint where the two chambers were

6
connected. The reproducibility of the seal after movement of the chambers

could be determined by checking the pressure transducer reading at a given

ventilation flow rate. Windows in the walls provided visual observation of

the fire behavior.

The floor and ceiling were composed of sheets of calcium silicate board

("marinite”) which, positioned approximately 10 cm off the skin, formed a

plenum with slit openings to provide for the airflow, as shown in figure 1.

Fresh air is pumped from the laboratory into a top center aperture in both

halves of the box. It fills the plenum and flows out more or less uniformly,

since the slit area is a small fraction of the plenum cross section. The air

flows out of the two slits in the marinite for either of the two

configurations 'wall' or 'central' into the cabin proper. At the floor the

air flows out through the slits into the lower plenum and is collected through

two apertures in the bottom skin and continues out of the building through

ducting. The two apertures in the bottom skin are exact replicas of those in

the top skin. Fans located upstream of the top aperture provide flow and

positive pressure in the box. The building exhaust system provides slight

negative pressure near the outlet of the ducts leading from the bottom

apertures

The table in the Appendix provides the complete list of instruments and the

correspondence with locations and instrument type can be determined from

Figure 1. Not shown on the figure are the inlet airflow velocity

measurements, cabin pressure relative to the laboratory, gas sampling

instruments and smoke meters.

7
For the work reported here both fire size (a steady flow of C 3 H8 through a

0.15 m diameter glass bead burner located at the floor. Fig 1) and ventilation

were steady in time. The procedure was quite straightforward. The

ventilation fans were started and flow rates selected and several minutes were

allotted before steady conditions were assured. At that point the computer

was started, instructing the data scanner to begin reading the various

channels and writing the data to memory. After about one minute of data

taking the ignition system was activated and the propane flow rate was set to

the desired constant heat release rate value. The remainder of the

experimental procedure consisted in simply waiting for the desired run

duration time to elapse.

Most of the initial study consisted of experiments performed in an empty

enclosure. In order to evaluate the effect of additional thermal energy

storage capacity in the cabin simulated seats were constructed and placed

symmetrically in the cabin since it turned out that a large fraction of the

fire heat release was not being exhausted. In addition the effects on the

environment of any large scale fluid motion could possibly be evaluated since

blockage due to the presence of the seats would provide a different cabin flow

pattern. They were 32 in number and consisted of bent sheets of aluminum with

the seat and back composed of 13 mm thick sheets of marinite (Fig. 2) . If

required, material with different thermal capacitance could be accommodated.

3
3.0 Results

Table 1 presents the set of experiments for the thermal environment portion of

the study and gives condition of ventilation in terms of time for one air

exchange, i.e., 4.9 x 2.4 x 1.2 m

3

; ceiling ventilation position, either at

the wall or at positions 0.6 m in from the wall (see Fig. 1); heat release

rate and seating configuration.

The complete set of reduced data for one run, F1202 is shown in the Appendix.

Data in the same form i.e. 2-D arrays of time in seconds, and instrument

output, reduced to appropriate engineering units, is available for the entire

test series. Since the experimental set-up regarding ventilation direction in

a closed space is rather unique this data ought to be valuable regarding

future modelling efforts, especially in validating three dimensional turbulent

mixing schemes that are designed for handling large coherent eddy structures.

The results will show first the effect of ventilation rate on the environment

in the cabin for a fixed fire size and vent location. The vent position will

then be changed and the effect noted. The next section contains the work

relating to the effect of the fire size for a fixed ventilation rate and

contains considerable analysis of ceiling heat transfer rates in order that

the results may be generalized to different materials and scale. Finally a

section on stratification completes the thermal portion of the study.

Ventilation rates varied from 2 to 4 1/2 minutes as the time for one volume

airchange . Keep in mind any scale factor when interpreting these rates for

9
full scale. These are consistent with specification values for the commercial

fleet. It was not necessary to vary the rate (nor the inlet position) beyond

these limits because of the nature of the results - the buoyancy forces of the

fire were dominating over ventilation as regards exhausting enthalpy. The

extent of mixing however may depend on the venting rate and position.

Heat release rates varied from 6 to 60 kW in the experiments or if Froude

number scaling is assumed, 30 to 350 kW. This would correspond to full scale

heat release rates of 2 raised to the 5/2 power. The 350 kW fire is

representative of about a fully involved seat fire.

Table 1: Experiment Parameters

Run ID

Ventilation Ventilation

Exchange Inlet

Time (min. ) Location

Heat Release

Rate

(kW)

Seating

Configuration

F0402 2.0 WALL 30 None

F1102 2.0 WALL 30 None

F1202 2.4 WALL 30 None

F1902 4.5 WALL 30 None

F2502 2.4 CENTRAL 30 None

F0403 2.4 CENTRAL 30 None

F0503 2.4 CENTRAL 20 None

F1203 2.4 CENTRAL 10 None

F1803 2.4 CENTRAL 6 None

F1903 2.4 CENTRAL 40 None

F2603 2.4 CENTRAL 60 None

F0206 2.4 CENTRAL 30 32 Seats

The set of graphs of the data, contained in the appendix, is typical for all

the tests. They are for F1202, an intermediate fire size and ventilation

level, flow being through the '‘wall" and there are no seats. The first four
figures Fig. 3-6, are for the thermocouple trees or gas temperature around

the cabin. They rise rapidly as the fire is turned on, somewhere near the 60s

point, and except for their level the behavior in time of all the trees is

nearly identical - no transit delay time could be ascertained. (The TC's are

visually protected from any flame radiation by their angular location relative

to the support rod.) The front of the thermal wave is moving at meters per

second and hence only if the TC's were being sampled at a rate such that the

time between scans is less than one second could transit times be picked up.

Obviously in a real situation where the aspect ratio could involve the entire

length of the aircraft, spatial variation will become a factor.

Phenomenologically however this should not create a problem - the same things

will be happening at later times downstream.

The actual level of temperatures in different parts of the cabin will be

discussed in the section on the effect of fire size. Not surprisingly the TC

closest to the ceiling reaches the highest temperature and the furthest away

or lowest reaches the lowest temperature with the remainders ranked

accordingly. The glaring exception, TC 1 & 2 on tree A, can be explained by

structural blockage (see section on upper level gas temperatures) . This is an

important point. In spite of the external ventilation which will cause mixing

and stirring, the upper layer is perfectly stratified; dT/dz is everywhere

positive. From the figures 3-6 it can be seen that as the fire is turned off

the high to low ranking remains in spite of the fact that the ventilation is

running. The ventilation can not overcome the residual buoyancy in the gases

- the cabin is still stratified. One however can argue that the difference

between high and low in that case may not be very significant.

11
The point of all this speculation about stirring has to do with the ability of

the ventilation system to flush out adequately smoke and hot gases from the

cabin during a fire situation. Recall the exhaust is going out at the floor

level. If the buoyancy of the fire gases is such that only relatively cool

and clean air is remaining near the floor then the system cannot be expected

to perform adequately. What size of buoyant forces, or fire condition can

overcome the plane's ventilation system will need to be addressed. A small

smoldering fire (like a whole group of smokers) can obviously be handled by

the present system, however it is not clear whether or not toxic products

associated with the fire-cabin scenario seen on Figs. 3- 6 could be adequately

flushed from the cabin in a reasonable amount of time using the same

ventilation system.

Fig. 7 shows the temperature of the thermocouples located in the two ventilation exhaust lines and confirms the contention made above that only cool gas

is being removed in times of interest for this case. The level has hardly

reached 50 °C at 450 seconds, when the fire has been turned off. (Fig. 7 and

the previous figures indicate significant thermal stratification, in

themselves however they cannot indicate the level of mixing of conserved

species.) The much more gradual rise in time vs the gas temperature behavior

in Fig. 7 indicates the delay in "filling" the entire cabin from the top down

before any warm gas appears in the exhaust.

Next, on Fig. 8, are the time history of the ceiling TC's which like the gas

temperature show a rapid rise in temperature. These are TC's peened into the

12
marinite ceiling and offer a reasonable measure of surface temperature rise

with time. The level of temperature attained will vary inversely with

distance from the fire. They are exposed to the full brunt of the fire plume

gases and will be critical in determining heat transfer rates later in the

analysis

Fig. 9 contains the traces of the output of four TC's mounted on the inside

walls at various positions around the cabin. The time histories are notably

different from the gas and ceiling time history in regards rapid temperature

rise and exhibit more the characteristic of the exhaust gases but at higher

temperature levels. These TC's are fastened to the metal walls with screws

and their slower response vs the ceiling ought to be attributed to the lower

convective coefficient due to lower gas velocities on the sidewalls, a finite

filling time to bring hot gases to the lower position on the walls and finally

the high thermal conductivity of the wall material. Additionally, for the

"wall" ventilation configuration the flow field is rather complex with the

cold jet running down the side along with a portion of the ceiling jet which

due to sufficient momentum has made the turn and starts heading downward

adjacent to the measuring station. The last effect can be checked with the

results of a "central" ventilation run which ought to present a different

local flow velocity to the probe. Comparison of Fig. 9 with its counterpart

for run F0403 , identical to F1202 except for location of the vent inlet, shows

little difference in temperature signal.

Wall temperature and heat transfer from exterior measurements can be seen on

Figs. 10 6c 11 which show on the same scale, gauge heat flux in kW/m2 and

13
temperature rise above ambient. There is a pair of signals for each of the

four stations, the smoother of the two is the thermopile temperature output.

Note before the fire is turned on there are some non-zero signals. Prior to

this run, an experiment took place and even after the period of time allowed

for cooling, the box still retained some small differential energy. For

single runs in a day these transducers registered negligible initial signal.

The time histories seen on Figs. 10 & 11 are similar to those seen on the

interior thermocouples, Fig. 9. The data seen on Figs. 10 & 11 can be used

for validating heat transfer model calculation for these wall flows.

Fig. 12 shows the output of the velocity measuring transducers in the inlet

ventilation ducts converted to volumetric flowrate and the static differential

pressure measurement, cabin to laboratory. The velocity profile across the

duct has been measured and documented and the use of a single centerline

measurement corrected accordingly. The non -uniformity of the flow signals

represent asymmetry between the two halves of the enclosure as do the two

exhaust temperature measurements on Fig. 7.

The behavior of the enclosure regarding pressure is interesting. As the fire

is turned on the spike in pressure signal due to expansion is clearly evident.

As heat is added continually at a constant rate it takes quite a while for the

cabin to equilibrate back to the initial, prior to fire, value. During other

tests with smaller fires and hence longer running times that equilibration was

assured to a high degree of accuracy. There is no doubt as to when the fire

is turned off as a mirror image of the process occurs . There are analyses

available which predict pressure rise in closed vessels due to the onset of a

14
fire using simple First Law Thermodynamic concepts. Fig. 12 may be used to

validate those with "small leaks" for pressure equilibration.

The above offers a sampling of the kinds of data that have been obtained and

is available for modelers interested in this configuration. The remainder of

the report presents detailed analyses appropriate to the problem at hand,

namely the effect of aircraft ventilation on the fire environment.

3.1 Effect of Ventilation Rate and Position on Gas

Ceiling, and Wall Temperature

At a fixed fire size (30 kW) there results little change in either gas

temperature (Figs. 13 & 14) or in ceiling or wall temperature (Figs. 15, 16 &

17) due to changes in the air exchange rate from 4h min to 2 min per

airchange. (Note that unlike Figs. 3 through 12, for the remaining graphs the

identification numbers on the right hand side of the curves do not necessarily

correspond to the channel numbers). In fact the wall heat transfer rates

(Fig. 16, 17) are just slightly higher in the higher exchange rate case

perhaps due to better contact of the hot gases with the wall surface. The

bulk gas temperatures (Fig. 13, 14) themselves however, appear to follow the

more intuitive direction, i.e. higher level temperature for lower flow rates.

Fig. 18 shows the exhaust flow thermocouple readings for the high and low flow

rates. There are two exhaust positions and hence two traces per experiment.

One can easily do a quick calculation of the enthalpy leaving in the exhaust

gases. The enclosure volume is 4x8x16 ft3

, (14.5 m

3

) or for the 2 min.

15
exchange rate, the volume flow rate is 14.5/2/60 - 0.12 ra 3 /s. At about 540s,

as the fire is turned off, the maximum temperature rise for the 2 rain, case is

about 25K. Hence

Q - VpC

p

AT - 0.12x1.2x1x1x25 - 3.6 kW

(using properties of room air, p - 1.2 kg/m3

; C

p - 1 kJ/kg-K). For the 4.5

min. case, the flow is 0.054 m

3 /s, the temperature rise is about 18 K and

hence the enthalpy leaving at about 500 s is .054x1. 2xlx 18 - 1.2 kW. Note

the falloff of the temperature signal compared to the gas or ceiling

temperatures when the fire is extinguished. In the latter cases the

temperature drops immediately. For the exhaust flow temperature only slight

decreases are noted as the gases containing stored energy in the enclosure

continues to flow out. Note also in the rising portion of the traces the much

more slowly rising signal than, for example, the gas or ceiling traces. That

is, the 3.6 and 1.2 kW figures, representing 12% and 4% respectively, of the

energy source, will continue to rise with time much more so than the more

asymptotically looking gas temperature traces

Instead of comparing the two cases at approximately the same absolute time

perhaps it would be more appropriate to compare the signals at comparable

characteristic flow times. For example 540 s for the 4.5 min. case is about

1.8 flow times [ (540-60)/(4. 5x60)

60 s before fire is ignited] or equal to

somewhere around 280 s for the 2 min. case (1.8x2x60+60). That AT would be

closer to 15K or about 2.2 kW or 7% of heat release rate. At times

corresponding to a few airchanges , only a small amount of energy is being

carried down and out through the ventilation.

16
The amount of energy through the metal side walls can be estimated using the

measurements of wail heat flux seen on Figs. 16 & 17. Heat flux values from

Fig. 16 & 17, and here no difference between the two cases will be assumed,

bunch around 0.2 to 0.3 kW/ra2 for three of the sensors and for the remaining

one, 0.7 to 0.8 kW/m2

. Assume that the wall area can be divided into a hot

upper central region (3 ra2

) to go with the high flux and the remainder of the

area (15 m

2

) for the lower values. The total flux through the walls at the

time the fire is turned off is

Q - q" x A - 0.75x3+0.25x15 - 6kW

or about 20% of the total heat release rate of the fire. Like the ventilation

thermocouples, the signals on Figs. 16 6e 17 fall gradually after the fire is

turned off. This indicates significant dissipation of a lot of stored energy.

The above indicates that approximately 30% of the total energy created by the

fire leaves through the walls and ventilation flow in times equal to several

airchanges. Therefore, 70% must remain. In the configuration without seats

only the floor and ceiling have the capability to store energy. These

internal components are separated by plenums from the actual metal floor and

ceiling skin. Over these times, the external metal floor and ceiling skin do

not get very warm. Therefore, their energy transfer paths have been ignored.

(The metal skin above the marinite ceiling is exposed to the incoming cool

17
air. The rise of the metal floor interior temperature will be reflected in

Fig. 18.)

Considering then that the floor and ceiling are the primary absorbers, the

thermal capacity is equal to

mC

p - (8x16/12)/ (3 . 281) 3 x 700 x 1.1 - 233 kJ/K

(where 700 kg/m3 and 1.1 kJ/kg K are representative of the density and

specific heat of the material) . If the heat transfer rate was assumed

constant over the 540-60 - 480 s time that the fire was turned on and assuming

70% of the 30 kW was being stored then an average temperature rise of the

interior would be 21/(233/480) - 43 K.

Observation of the ceiling surface temperature as the fire is turned off on

Fig. 15 indicates that a 40 K rise in ceiling temperature is not an

unreasonable number. To transfer all the energy the 12 m

2 ceiling would

require an average heat flux of 21/12 - 1.8 kW/m2

. Derived heat transfer

coefficients (see Ceiling Temperature section) are in the range .02 to .07

kW/m2 K making the average temperature difference between gas and ceiling 25 to

90 K - a reasonable number, not unlike the more detailed calculation result.

Obviously a more accurate partitioning of energy around the interior requires

the more detailed result, suffice it to say here that since a large fraction

of the energy does not get removed in the present configuration knowledge of

the thermal characteristic of the enclosure will be very important.

18
The conclusions reached above appear to be independent of the position of the

inlet :, slit" at least as regards the "wall" and "central" configurations.

Experiment F1202 , the "wall" ventilation case discussed earlier can be

compared to F0403 which is an identical run except for position - this is a

"central" case. To first approximation the results are identical - the graphs

of all the variables can be superimposed within the noise or normal

fluctuation of the signal. Some very minor differences are perceptible, e.g.

the ceiling temperature "T2" on Fig. 1 is on the order of ten degrees higher

for the wall ventilated case, as are the upper TC's on trees D&B slightly

higher. One might postulate a cooling curtain effect in the central case.

Again however these are very small changes and it would take considerably more

analysis of the data to quantify the precision of these differences. The data

is available to do precisely that if later models were dictating such

differences. For purposes here however, and to reasonably high confidence the

position of the vent had little effect on the measurements recorded.

3.2 Effect of Seats

The effect of seats is to exacerbate the problem of trying to exhaust hot

gases by the normal ventilation, i.e. out the bottom. Either through

additional energy transfer to the seats or by the blockage of large scale

flows the gas temperature in the lower regions is cooler and more stratified,

i.e. the gradient of temperature is larger. And this is reflected in the

level of exhaust gas temperature. For a given case, F0206 with seats vs F0403

without seats, everything else identical, there is about a factor of two

decrease in the differential temperature of the exhaust gases between the

19
configuration with seats opposed to that without seats at comparable flow

times. The remaining transducers are not greatly affected with some minor

differences e.g. exterior wall heat transfer in the lower regions is somewhat

less in the with- seat configuration. Upper level gas & ceiling temperatures

are similar in the two cases.

3.3 Effect of Fire Size

Gas, wall and ceiling as well as exhaust gas temperatures all vary

significantly with heat release rate. The generalization, details, etc. of

these findings are contained in the following.

i) Ceiling Temperatures (T1-T4)

An excellent fit of the temperature rise - time data of the ceiling thermocouple signal is:

- 1 - exp [h* ^

]

• erfc [ h J ^

] (1)

which is the solution for the surface temperature history for one -dimensional

heat conduction through a semi- infinite slab exposed at t-0 to a large mass of

fluid of temperature Tmax . Surface resistance is indicated through the,

assumed constant, film coefficient, h. The governing differential equation is

the familiar diffusion equation with the given initial and boundary

conditions

:

20
5T _

a

2 T

at

a

ax2

t<0 T-T0

t>0 , x-0 -k - h(Tmax -T)

( 2 )

( 3 )

(4)

The adequacy of Eq. (1) as a fit to a typical data set can be judged by

observation of Figs. 19 through 22. They show temperature rise -time data for

the four ceiling positions with the best least squares fit determined by Eq

(1) shown by the smooth curves. Note the data set includes only that portion

with the fire "on". The point here is to generalize the data and perhaps

garner something of the physics of the fire-ceiling interactions. Eq. (1) is

essentially a two parameter data-fit expression. The parameters are ATmax and

h^pck)* 3*. We do a least squares fit of the data to the Eq. (1) form and

derive the best constants. Using the simple semi- infinite transient

conduction model, Eqs . (l)-(4), one can associate or relate the derived ATmax

with the measured fluid or gas temperatures determined independently by the

thermocouple trees; the pck portion with the thermal properties of the given

"inert" ceiling material; and finally, the derived or best h, an effective

heat transfer coefficient, with the thermo -fluid mechanical environment

experienced by the ceiling.

It is an "effective" coefficient because of the simplicity of the thermal

model, i.e. no reradiation through the hot layer to the colder floor, the loss

of the semi- infinite approximation at longer times (small fires) due to the

finite thickness of the ceiling material and also the transient nature of the

gas temperature rise, to name just a few restrictions.

21
Having now a reasonable "model" for fire-ceiling interaction or at least a

reasonable analytical fit to the data, one is able to see how these parameters

change as a function of fire size. The results of least squares fitting of

all the ceiling temperature data for a fixed configuration in the form of Eq

.

(1) led to several observations. For a fixed fire size, Q, ATmax and h varied

considerably with position or location relative to the fire. At a fixed

position ATmax varied almost linearly with fire size and h varied much more

weakly with Q.

In order to systematize the data analysis more easily a functional form of the

h variation with Q was chosen Because of the nature of Eq. (1) and the data

sets, a range of ATmax and h values could yield similarly accurate least

squares fits. On a plot of the sum of the squares of the differences between

calculated values and actual data values vs h, the minimum of the curve (which

will be the best value for the fit) was rather broad. A very sharp minimum

would have dictated a unique pair. Therefore a range of h and corresponding

ATma X values would all give statistically similar results. Visual examination

of the plots could not differentiate which pair within the range yielded

better results.

The effective film coefficient h, was chosen to vary with Reynolds number to

the 1/2 power. This dependence is characteristic of an extremely wide range

of geometries from convective heat transfer studies. Velocities from buoyant

plumes and real fires vary with heat release to the 1/3 power, and hence h

will be allowed to vary with Q to the 1/6 power, a result totally consistent

within the experimental data scatter. (A larger Reynolds number exponent

22
could have been chosen if the lower portion of the flame zones where the

dependence on fire size becomes weaker, i.e. 1/5 in the intermittent and 0 in

the continuous flame, were controlling the phenomena. Irrespective of what

model is chosen the data dictates a weak h dependence on Q, which must be

satisfied.

)

The efficacy of choosing a fixed power for the h-Q variation can be demonstrated by considering the ATmax. vs Q data before and after fixing the 1/6 power

for h vs . Q. The correlation coefficients for the power fits of ATmax vs Q in

four ceiling positions ranged from 0.89 to 0.98 in the arbitrary situation.

By letting h vary with Q

1

6

, going back to the fitting routines and obtaining

the new AT it turns out that those ATma „ vs Q fits now have all four

correlation coefficients greater than 0.99!

The results of all the curve fittings are contained in Table 2 and illustrated

in Fig. 23 which shows how ATm (open symbols) and C or h (filled symbols) vary

with position in the cabin. Note that C/Q1/6

, i.e. the film coefficient, (C -

h/J pck) varies inversely with position from the fire, a not unexpected result

given that the fire generated gas flow velocities will be decreasing as one

moves further from the fire. The same is true, in general, as regards ATm

.

Except for position T1 which is slightly further from the fire than position

T2 and for all the central ventilation data (square symbols) exhibits higher

temperatures. With ventilation at the edge or wall position, T1 drops below

T2 following the trend of cooler regions being further from the fire (triangle

symbols) . The curtain of cool air falling between the fire and the positions

of T4 and T2 in the former case may provide disturbance to a decreasing

23
thermal stress with distance from the fire trend, that is, if one can ignore

the enclosure asymmetry to begin with. The hash marks on the figure indicate

the length and breath of the compartment. Perhaps T3 and T1 ought to be

compared separately from T4 and T2 for the central configuration cases.

The lower part of Fig. 23 yields for the present center ventilation configuration a film coefficient h of between about 5 and 80 W/m2 K. The lower number

is typical for free convection with the higher value (r/H -•*•0) well into the

forced convective range for gases . The data also bounds that found by

Quintiere (1978) for a ceiling in a corridor just outside a bum room.

To construct figure 23, an average n equal to 0.933 was chosen from Table 2.

The ATm - AQn was recalculated to yield a new A and compared to the

temperature levels at each position irrespective of slight changes in Table 2

values of n. Note the triangles on the figure, these are for the one data set

with wall ventilation and therefore have not gone through the extensive

analysis that the central ventilation or squares have, i.e. h a Q

1/s

. Quite

large decreases in h could result in small increases in ATm and still preserve

the goodness of the least squares fit. In other words the impression that h

for the wall ventilation case is twice that for the central ventilation may

not be a correct one. To convert C to h a value of pck * 0.1 (kw/m2 /K) 2 -s was

chosen for the ceiling material. How well the derived bulk "bath”

temperatures , ATm , compare to actual measured gas temperatures will be

presented in the next section.

24
TABLE 2: CEILING TEMPERATURE CORRELATION PARAMETERS 1

T3 T4 T2 T1

RUN I.D. Q(lcW) ATm (K) C(s'H) AT • m C ATm C AT C m

F0403 30 221 .166 136 .109 128 .0363 162 .0226

F0503 20 140 .155 93 .101 93 .0339 115 .0211

F1203 10 73.5 .138 48.3 .0904 47.6 .0302 57.5 .0188

F1803 6 44 .127 25.2 .0830 28 .0278 35.3 .0173

F1903 40 259 .174 172 .114 164 .0381 200 .0237

F2603 60 378 .186 248 .122 237 .0408 273 .0253

C/Q

1

' 6 .0942 .0616 .0206 .0128

A 8.43 4 .74 5 .61 7.34

ATm - AQr n 0.937 0 .978 .919 0.897

1 C t

Least Squares Fit to AT/ATm - 1 - e erfc Cj t (No seats, central

ventilation, 2.4 min-)

25
ii) Upper Level Gas Temperatures (A2 , 31, Cl, Dl)

Time histories of the uppermost thermocouple (TC) temperature rise for the

four TC trees are shown in Figs. 24-27. (Note for tree "A" that the second TC

is used since, due to blockage by a structural rib on the ceiling, the topmost

TC on that pole was somewhat shielded from the hottest gases and consistently

recorded a temperature slightly less than the second from the top.) For want

of any other particular method the data was correlated using the semi- infinite

erfc function analysis used previously. Observation of Fig. 24-27 seems to

indicate that it is adequately representing the data. The ATm and C's shown

on the traces are the determined least squares fit of Eq. (1).

Table 3 contains the results of the curve fitting analysis for the other five

fire sizes. The results of the variations with fire size or heat release

rate, Q, were similar to the ceiling analysis. That is, ATm varied, nearly

linearly with Q; while C, scattering considerably, varied very weakly with Q.

As before, to systematize the data analysis, C was made to vary with Q

1 1

6

, and

the analysis fitting was repeated to obtain the best ATm for that new C.

(Here the similarity to an actual convective film coefficient may be more

tenuous since gas or rather the TC's are being heated, not a semi infinite

plate) . An example of exactly how things change by this manipulation is to

consider Fig. 24-27. The ATm and C's shown on the figures are the "raw" or

best values. Those in the table have been "processed", e.g., ATm for Dl went

from 206 to 205 K while C increased from .085 to .0897 s" 1/2

, etc. Meanwhile

the sum of the squares of the deviations does not change appreciably. The big

26
TABLE 3: UPPER GAS LEVEL TEMPERATURE CORRELATION PARAMETERS 2

D1 A2 B1 Cl

RUN I.D. Q(kW) ATm (K) C(s'H) ATm C AT_ C rn ATm C

F0403 30 163 .0855 180 .0860 145 .0506 144 .0569

F0503 20 113 .0799 125 .0804 99 .0473 104 .0532

F1203 10 61 .0712 68 .0716 54.5 .0421 58 .0474

F1803 6 43 .0654 44 .0658 35.5 .0387 36 .0435

F1903 40 205 .0897 226 .0902 185 .0531 184 .0597

F2603 60 260 .0960 301 .0966 242 .0568 243 .0639

C/Q1 ' 6 .0485 .0488 .0287 .0323

A 9.89 9 .74 7.77 8.37

AT. - AQ n n .812 .848 .851 .833

2 Least Squares Fit to AT/ATm erfc Cj t (No seats, central

ventilation, 2.4 min-)

27
difference again came about when considering ATm vs Q. In all cases

the correlation coefficient increases to over 0.99 with the formalized C-Q1/6

variation.

From Table 3 the mean power for gas variation, 0.836 is measurably lower and

the data is less scattered than the ceiling temperature rise variation, i.e.

n-0.933. Fig. 28 shows the radial variation of ATm /Q- 836 with again the

numbers reworked using the constant n. For comparison the ceiling variation

with distance using 0.933 is also shown. Heat transfer to the ceiling as a

function of position (as well as with time) can be determined from the plot.

Additional information required is contained in figure 28 which shows C/Q1/6

for the gas as well as the ceiling. Here they are left in the "C" form, a

simple data fitting constant, as opposed to conversion of the ceiling value to

h as on Fig. 23.

The gas values of C appear to be less dependent on position than those of the

ceiling. For the ceiling C increases significantly as one gets closer to the

fire indicating a smaller time constant or smaller time to reach ATm

. Here

the analog with a film or heat transfer coefficient makes sense - the plume

velocities will be highest in the stagnation - turning region of the ceiling.

We now have the ceiling temperature rise as well as a representative upper

level gas temperature rise due to a fire in a cabin ventilated from above. As

a function of time,

max AT - AT, [1 - exp(C2 t) • erfc(Cjt)] (5)
with

- A, (r/H) Q

ni AT,max ( 6 )

for

i- gas ' ni - .836

i- ceiling ni - .933

C - B t (r/H) Q

1/6 (7)

where &.

L (r/H) and Bi (r/H) are contained on the upper and lower portions of

Fig. 28 respectively.

At any radial position the heat transfer rate, gas to ceiling, is from the

simple model

For the film coefficient, hc

, derived using the semi- infinite analysis, Tmax

was assumed to be the constant bath temperature into which one side of the

ceiling was suddenly exposed. In reality the gas temperature itself is

rising. Additionally from Fig. 28 the independent experimentally derived ATm

for the gas is somewhat higher. It will be useful to see the effect on heat

transfer of using the higher and transient gas temperature.

Using the data representation, Eq. (1), the above becomes

3.4 Ceiling Heat Transfer

( 8 )

29
q"/h n - AT - AT

c mg ime

[1 - exp (C2 t ) • erfc (Cc J t )

( 6 )

where the additional subscripts g and c indicate gas and ceiling respectively.

Note that if the ceiling maximum temperature (the semi - infinite approx.) is

used for the bath or gas temperature then Eq. (9) reduces to

and a: - .3480242, a2 - - .0958798, a3 - .7478556, p - .47047

Note the first term, a sort of compensation for weaknesses in the

semi- infinite model since the experimental gas temperatures always come out

higher than the bath temperature of the model, represents a value of order 10%

or less of the second term for times of interest here and hence Eq. (10) (and

Eq. (11) for short times) ought to be adequate in predicting heat transfer to

the ceiling. That is, even though from Fig. 28 the gas temperatures are

q - h^AT^ exp(C2 t) • erfc(Cc Jt)j ( 10 )

or at short times, say to 30 seconds for Cc of order 0.05 s~ 1/2

, we can

approximate the erfc expression and obtain the convenient

q" - hc AT„ c (1-Cjt) ( 11 )

The complete solution can be expressed as (Abramowitz and Stegun 1965)

( 12 )

where t

1

c " 1 + pce Jt

30
higher than the derived ceiling temperature the effect on ceiling heat

transfer is small.

The maximum value, i.e. when t -*• o , is from (11):

(13)

From Fig. 23 or Table 2 we can find the variation of q" with fire size, i.e.

1/6 + .93, not a great deal different from direct proportionality. This is a

significant finding. It is of interest to determine the partitioning of

energy throughout the various modes independent of fire size since perfect

scaling will not have been obtained in simulation. That is, it is important

to know that, for example, the enthalpy leaving through the lower vents

represents some particular fraction of the heat release over the whole range

of possible fire sizes and not, for example, just for small or just for large

fires. Proportionality insures that the ceiling heat transfer, representing a

large fraction of the energy, does indeed scale with fire size.

From Fig. 23 the variations with position are seen to be, not surprisingly,

very significant. If one extrapolates the four central ventilation points for

h and the two more-central ATm points (T3 and T :

) to r/H -* 0, the maximum

values of ceiling heat transfer may be estimated.

h/Q1/6 - 0.043 (14)

ATm /Q- 93 - 9.5 (15)

31
in kW, K, and m.

For the 30 kW heat release rate example, Eq. (13) will yield . 043x9 . 5X30 1 1 =*

17 kW/m2

. At r/H - 1 this reduces to about 7kW/m2 and so on, decreasing

strongly with distance from the fire. With heat transfer rates of this order

it is quite plausible for the approx. 70% figure of the energy to be absorbed

by the ceiling.

How the heat transfer rate falls in time can be seen on Fig. 29 which shows

the above example case, the 30kW fire, for the two r/H positions. Initially

there is quite a dramatic reduction. Things begin to level off approximately

at times corresponding to when the exhaust TC'S are beginning to sense warm

air coming out. (Fig. 18).

The generalized form of the solution of the semi- infinite model Eq. (10) is

shown on figure 30 where the non-dimensional heat transfer rate q"/(hc ATm ) i s

plotted vs. dimensionless time, Cjt. The early times solution Eq. (11) is

also shown for convenience. The quantities, h and C, are related according to

C * h/J pck

3.5 Stratification

Fig. 31 shows eight traces of thermocouple readings, top- to-bottom, for tree D

during a 40kW, central ventilation, 2.4 min rate, no seat test configuration.

At arbitrary times one can look at the distribution of temperature with

32
elevation. Fig. 32 presents six such profiles at times equal to 30 s through

460 s after ignition. Obviously, hotter gases are at the top with the entire

profile rising in time.

The question now arises as to how to generalize such a plot. The easiest

method is to normalize each trace to some value that is representative of that

time. Since all the information has been gathered and correlated for the top

or maximum reading thermocouples, the trace of that thermocouple would be the

obvious choice. Using the erfc model (Fig. 24-27) and the parameters from

Table 3 we can, first subtracting out the initial ambient temperature, divide

each of the readings of the profiles by the calculated maximum temperature for

that time

Fig. 33 shows the normalized profiles, the fraction of the maximum temperature

at the time, that maximum being calculated via Eq. 1 using ATm - 205K and

C - 0.0897 s' 1/2 . At long times a somewhat universal profile is achieved.

The level of scatter is about ± 10% at the top. However we do clearly see the

enclosure "filling 1’ as the 30 s profile falls much lower than the one at 60 s

which is lower than that at 120 s. The 120 s profile is beginning to approach

the longer time result where temporal non -uniformity tends to disappear, and

the whole bulk of gas or each strata moves upward in temperature

simultaneously. Before this point is reached, times less than 120 s, the

upper gases get hotter quickly and the lower gases slowly - there is definite

temporal non- uniformity - the rates of rise are different in the upper and

lower regions.

33
Regarding safety, how the 30 s and subsequent profiles on Fig. 33 "swing" up

to the hotter universal profile will be extremely important. The ventilation

effects (rate, position, other characteristics) on the universal profile and

the "swing" will be required to be documented. That data are available as are

the conserved species measurements including C02

, CO and 02 and will be

available in a forthcoming publication.

4.0 Discussion

As well as further data analysis of the kind just indicated above, certain

other tasks, the importance of which have become clearer during this study,

ought to be pursued further. The thermal environment as a function of heat

release is known and various scaling schemes are available which would give

confidence to ones ability to generalize these results. Therefore the

question as to what size or lower limit of heat release rate will be handled

to some prescribed criteria by present ventilation can be posed and a

quantitative answer provided.

5.0 Conclusions

The conclusions for the thermal field portion of these studies are as follows:

Within times of interest, i.e., a few airchanges , the bulk of the fire

produced energy was not being exhausted through the normal floor ventilation.

The hot gases were accumulating close to the ceiling and except for some local

mixing, were hardly affected by the incoming cold stream. As time progressed

and the cabin began to fill from the top downward and heat transfer rates

34
decreased as the ceiling and walls heated, only then did significant

temperature levels begin to appear in the outflow stream.

In the present apparatus most of the energy of the fire is transiently being

stored in the "marinite" ceiling. The results have been generalized in terms

of a semi- infini te slab model exposed to a high temperature constant bath, a

function of fire size, through a constant convective film coefficient, h,

dependent on position in the cabin and weakly on fire size. Heat transfer to

the cabin ceiling was found to scale with fire size through almost direct

proportionality thus insuring the generality of the present experiments . The

behavior of different ceiling materials ought to be reflected through different pck values. Different geometries ought to be reflected by the variation of h through different Reynolds and Grashoff numbers as well as with the

heat release rate variations of plume theory. All these effects have been

documented and await further analytical data manipulation and experimental

verification.

35
6 . 0 Acknowledgements

Dan Madrzykowski with some help from Bob Vettori converted a conceptual design

into a very durable excellently operating experimental apparatus in the form

of the 1/2 scale, simulated wide body aircraft cabin used in the present and

proposed future studies. Without their friendly cooperation and hard work

this task could not have been completed. Thanks are also due the technical

coordinator at FAA, Dr. Thor Eklund, who from the broader view of the entire

cabin fire problem was able to guide this work effectively suggesting which

and how best to approach each of the problems.

36
7.0 References

1. Cox, G. , Kumar, S., Markatos , N.C., (1986) "Some Field Model Validation

Studies, Fire Safety Science-Proceedings of the First International

Symposium", Hemisphere Publishing Corp. p. 159.

2. DeSouza, B.P., Yang, K.T.

,

Lloyd, J.R., (1985) "Numerical Simulations of

the Effect of Floor and Ceiling Venting on Fire and Smoke Spread in

Aircraft Cabins”, NBS-GCR-84-479 , National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD

3. Eklund, T.I., (1984 a) "Effects of Ventilation and Panel Properties on

Temperature Rise from Aircraft Fires", DOT/FAA/CT - TN 83/63 FAA

Technical Note, Technical Center, Atlantic City.

Eklund, T.I., (1984 b) "An Analysis for Relating Visibility to Smoke

Production and Ventilation", DOT/FAA/CT-TN 84/22.

4. Foote, K.L., Pagni , P.J., Alvares , N.J., (1986) "Temperature Correlations for Forced-Ventilated Compartment Fires, Fire Safety ScienceProceedings of the First International Symposium" , Hemisphere Publishing

Corp. p.139.

5. Mitler, H.E., (1984) "Zone Modeling of Forced Ventilation Fires",

Combustion Science and Technology 39, 83.

6. Quintiere, J., McCaffrey, B.J., and Kashiwagi, T. , (1978) A Scaling

Study of a Corridor Subject to a Room Fire, Combustion Science and

Technology 18, pp 1-19.

7. Sarkos , C.P. and Hill, R.G.(1985), "Evaluation of Aircraft Interior

Panels Under Full-Scale Cabin Fire Test Conditions", AIAA 23rd Aerospace

Sciences Meeting, Reno.

8. Abramowitz , M. and Stegun, I. A., Handbook of Mathematical Functions,

National Bureau of Standards Applied Math Series 55, 1965.

37

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

Table: Instrumentation

Description Location

TC North Wall, Interior 0.3 m above floor, 0.3 m east of cabin centerline

TC Tree A .0413 m from ceiling

TC (centerline, 1.22 m from east

wall)

.0889 m from ceiling

TC (centerline, 1.22 m from east

wall)

.152 m from ceiling

TC (centerline, 1.22 m from east wall)

.216 m from ceiling

TC (centerline, 1.22 m from east

wall)

.292 m from ceiling

TC (centerline, 1.22 m from east

wall)

.397 m from ceiling

TC (centerline, 1.22 m from east

wall)

.518 m from ceiling

TC Ventilation Exhaust West End

TC Tree B .0413 m from ceiling

TC (.61 m from east and south

walls)

.0889 m from ceiling

TC (.61 m from east and south

walls)

.152 m from ceiling

TC (.61 m from east and south

walls)

.216 m from ceiling

TC (.61 m from east and south

walls

)

.292 m from ceiling

TC (.61 m from east and south

walls

)

.397 m from ceiling

TC (.61 m from east and south

walls)

.518 m from ceiling

TC Ventilation Exhaust East End

TC Tree D .0413 m from ceiling

TC (1.83 m from east, .30 m from

south walls)

.0889 m from ceiling

TC (1.83 m from east, .30 m from

south walls)

. 152 m from ceiling

TC (1.83 m from east, .30 m from

south walls)

.216 m from ceiling

TC (1.83 m from east, .30 m from

south walls)

.292 m from ceiling

TC (1.83 m from east, .30 m from

south walls)

.397 m from ceiling

TC (1.83 m from east, .30 m from

south walls)

.518 m from ceiling

TC (1.83 m from east, .30 m from

south walls)

.690 m from ceiling

TC Tree C .0413 m from ceiling

TC (centerline, 0.3 m from east

wall)

.0889 m from ceiling

TC (centerline, 0.3 m from east

wall)

.152 m from ceiling

TC (centerline, 0.3 m from east

wall)

.216 m from ceiling

TC (centerline, 0.3 m from east

wall)

.292 m from ceiling

TC (centerline, 0.3 m from east

wall)

.397 m from ceiling

39
Channel No. Description Location

31 TC (centerline, 0.3 m from east

wall)

.518 m from ceiling

32 TC (centerline, 0.3 m from east

wall)

.690 m from ceiling

33 TC Ceiling "Tl" Centerline 0.61 m from east wall

34 TC Ceiling ”T2" 0.30 m from north 0.91 from east wall

35 TC Ceiling "T3" Centerline 1.83 m from east wall

36 TC Ceiling ”T4" 0.30 m from north 1 . 83 m from east wall

37 TC East Wall, Interior 0.61 m

above floor

0.3 m north of centerline

38 TC North Wall, Interior 0.30 m

below ceiling

0.3 m east of cabin centerline

39 TC North Wall, Interior 0.76 m

above floor

0.76 m from east wall

40 HF North Wall, Exterior 0.17 m

below ceiling

2.15 m from east wall

41 TC

HF

North Wall, Exterior 0.17 m

below ceiling

2.15 m from east wall

42 HF North Wall, Exterior 0.22 m

above floor

2.16 m from east wall

43 tchf North Wall, Exterior 0.22 m

above floor

2.16 m from east wall

44 HF North Wall, Exterior 0.22 m

above floor

0.30 m from east wall

45 TC1 HF

North Wall, Exterior 0.22 m

above floor

0.30 m from east wall

46 HF North Wall, Exterior 0.21 m

below ceiling

0 . 32 m from east wall

47 tc

hf North Wall, Exterior 0.21 m

below ceiling

0.32 m from east wall

48 V Inlet flow velocity, east half

49 V Inlet flow velocity, west half

50 Ap Cabin Static Pressure Differential

51 °2 Cabin 0 2 Concentration various locations

52 CO Cabin CO Concentration various locations

53 co 2 Cabin C02 Concentration various locations

54 °2 Exhaust gas 0 2 Concentration

55

56

57

58

59

TC - thermocouple chromel- alumel 0.25 mm D wire (on trees - TC’s faced away from fire)

HF - foil type heat flow sensors (RdF Corporation 20480-3)

TC__ - copper constantan thermocouples (integral part of heat flow sensor)

nr V - linearized, temp, compensated hot film anemometer (Onega FMA 603V) cross section was traversed at various fan settings in order to convert single, centerline velocity

value into a flow rate. (Profile fitted nicely into 1/7 power. Re -» 10 for all

conditions)

40
The following sheets contain the reduced data for run F1202. See preceding

table in Appendix for detailed descriptions of channel numbers, locations from

Figure 1 and Appendix, units from axes on remaining figures.

41
'

‘

.

.
( 3 )0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

210

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

310

320

330

340

350

360

370

380

390

400

410

420

430

440 7

26

26

26

26

26

26

26

27

28

32

39

45

50

54

58

59

61

63

65

68

70

71

73

74

78

75

77

78

79

80

79

81

81

81

81

81

82

83

84

86

84

85

86

86

87

CHANNEL1 2 3 4 5 6

27 27 27 26 26 26

27 27 27 26 26 26

27 27 27 26 27 26

27 27 27 26 26 26

27 27 27 26 26 26

27 27 27 26 26 26

27 27 27 26 26 27

27 27 27 27 27 29

59 73 43 32 31 35

71 99 70 46 40 44

82 111 79 55 48 52

94 124 78 62 55 54

93 124 87 65 58 58

93 122 90 70 61 60

99 127 89 71 64 61

102 134 93 73 66 63

109 136 91 74 67 66

103 127 109 86 70 68

113 145 104 80 71 69

102 124 107 85 74 71

109 148 120 88 78 76

111 130 115 97 82 76

122 154 126 92 80 78

108 142 118 93 82 81

121 141 123 101 38 78

123 149 119 97 84 81

119 140 123 101 87 81

132 158 121 98 85 82

118 139 118 98 83 85

127 157 133 103 89 82

115 134 117 95 86 34

125 155 128 101 89 83

128 156 133 99 86 83

123 141 123 99 86 82

117 144 122 98 87 85

129 158 125 102 91 34

128 144 129 109 90 86

126 154 128 108 92 86

129 155 126 105 92 87

136 163 135 102 92 87

126 144 120 99 90 88

135 159 123 102 93 88

139 168 135 103 94 88

126 142 123 102 92 38

125 149 121 104 92 90

42
( 3 ) 450

460

470

430

490

500

510

520

530

540

550

560

570

580

590

600

610

620

630

640

650

660

670

630

690

700

710

720

730

740

750

760

770

730

790

800

810

820

830

840

850

860

870

880

890 7

87

88

87

89

86

80

75

70

67

64

61

60

57

56

55

54

53

51

51

50

49

49

48

48

47

46

46

45

45

45

45

44

44

44

43

43

43

43

43

43

43

42

42

42

42 2 3

139 167 130

134 154 140

125 144 126

134 159 143

118 125 115

103 102 97

94 92 88

89 85 81

82 79 76

77 74 72

74 71 69

71 69 67

68 66 64

66 64 63

64 62 61

63 61 59

62 60 58

62 59 57

60 58 56

59 56 55

58 56 54

56 55 53

56 54 53

54 53 53

53 53 52

53 53 52

53 52 51

52 51 51

52 51 50

52 51 50

51 50 49

50 51 49

51 50 49

51 50 48

51 49 48

51 50 47

51 49 47

50 49 47

49 43 48

49 48 48

49 48 47

49 48 47

51 48 46

49 47 46

48 47 47 4 5 6

106 94 91

108 93 90

107 93 93

114 97 91

103 93 83

93 85 76

84 78 72

77 73 68

73 70 65

69 67 63

67 64 61

65 62 59

62 60 57

61 58 56

59 58 55

58 56 54

56 55 53

55 54 53

54 53 51

53 52 51

53 52 50

52 51 50

52 51 49

51 50 49

51 50 43

50 49 48

49 48 48

49 49 47

49 48 46

48 48 46

47 47 46

48 47 46

47 47 45

47 47 45

47 46 45

47 46 45

46 46 44

46 46 45

47 46 44

46 45 44

45 45 44

45 45 43

45 44 43

45 44 43

44 44 43

43
(a)0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

210

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

310

320

330

340

350

360

370

380

390

400

410

420

430

440

14

27

27

27

27

27

27

27

27

32

39

48

51

54

57

60

61

63

67

69

71

74

77

79

77

79

80

82

83

81

85

82

85

84

34

83

36

86

86

86

38

36

89

89

88

87

CHANNEL9 10 11 12 13

27 27 27 27 27

27 27 27 28 27

27 27 27 27 27

27 27 27 28 27

28 27 27 28 27

28 27 27 27 27

27 27 27 27 27

28 28 28 28 28

52 46 42 37 33

65 62 59 53 42

74 71 69 57 49

81 77 77 60 53

34 81 80 63 57

88 86 82 69 60

90 86 85 70 62

93 89 85 71 65

93 89 86 73 66

95 92 89 79 71

99 95 89 82 74

93 92 91 82 74

97 94 91 89 82

94 96 96 91 82

102 99 95 94 84

99 96 95 89 81

109 105 103 94 86

105 101 98 93 87

108 104 103 95 87

110 105 100 94 86

101 100 98 94 34

111 107 105 100 90

103 100 98 92 85

110 105 101 97 91

112 108 104 99 91

109 107 103 96 88

106 102 99 93 88

113 108 107 99 92

110 110 106 96 91

114 111 106 96 90

113 112 112 100 91

120 117 112 100 92

111 110 107 95 89

116 113 111 101 95

121 115 113 104 92

112 111 106 99 90

113 109 106 99 92

44
< 3 ) 450

460

470

480

490

500

510

520

530

540

550

560

570

580

590

600

610

620

630

640

650

660

670

680

690

700

710

720

730

740

750

760

770

780

790

800

810

820

830

840

850

860

870

880

890 9 10 11 14

121 114 114

121 117 115

113 110 108

119 115 112

107 104 99

91 90 88

82 81 81

78 77 76

73 73 72

70 69 69

68 67 66

65 64 63

62 62 61

61 60 60

59 59 58

58 57 57

58 56 56

57 55 55

55 54 54

54 54 53

54 53 52

53 52 51

53 51 51

53 51 50

52 51 50

52 50 50

51 50 49

50 49 49

50 49 49

50 49 49

50 49 49

49 48 48

49 48 48

48 48 48

48 47 47

47 47 47

47 47 47

47 47 46

48 46 46

47 46 46

48 46 46

46 46 46

46 45 46

46 45 45

46 45 45

12 13

104 93 88

110 95 90

101 93 88

108 104 94

95 92 86

85 83 81

78 77 77

74 74 72

71 70 67

67 66 64

64 63 62

62 62 60

61 60 58

59 58 58

57 57 56

56 56 54

55 54 53

54 53 53

53 53 52

53 52 51

52 51 50

51 51 50

51 50 49

50 49 49

50 49 48

50 49 48

49 48 48

49 48 47

49 48 47

49 47 47

48 47 46

48 47 46

48 46 46

48 46 45

47 46 45

47 46 45

47 46 45

46 46 45

46 46 45

46 45 45

46 45 44

46 45 44

46 45 44

46 45 44

45 45 43

45
1202D

TIME CHANNEL ( 3 ) 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 0 28 28 28 28 28 28 27

10 28 28 28 28 28 28 27

20 28 28 28 28 28 28 27

30 28 28 28 28 28 28 27

40 28 28 28 28 28 28 27

50 28 27 28 28 28 28 27

60 28 27 28 28 28 27 28

70 46 38 34 30 29 28 28

SO 83 80 64 41 31 30 30

90 98 96 79 53 41 37 33

100 111 108 81 59 48 44 40

110 121 116 90 64 53 51 46

120 126 122 88 66 58 56 52

130 130 121 90 69 61 60 55

140 135 128 93 72 64 62 58

150 136 130 97 76 67 65 61

160 132 129 98 75 69 67 64

170 134 130 104 83 72 69 66

180 141 137 118 87 74 71 68

190 130 127 113 88 76 72 69

200 135 132 112 92 80 74 71

210 132 132 117 94 81 75 73

220 146 138 115 93 83 77 74

230 137 130 117 96 84 79 76

240 138 135 118 99 88 82 77

250 143 141 125 101 87 82 78

260 142 140 121 105 89 82 79

270 147 143 126 105 87 82 79

280 139 135 124 99 88 84 81

290 152 151 139 104 90 85 31

300 145 136 117 97 88 85 82

310 142 137 117 98 89 87 83

320 153 148 130 99 89 86 83

330 155 151 131 103 89 88 83

340 140 135 123 102 92 87 83

350 152 149 134 106 93 88 84

360 161 156 130 109 92 88 84

370 147 142 127 112 92 89 86

380 155 149 126 102 93 89 85

390 166 160 130 107 93 89 36

400 154 146 113 101 94 89 85

410 152 148 129 105 93 90 87

420 164 157 137 114 95 90 87

430 157 146 119 106 95 90 87

440 154 143 123 103 94 90 87

46
( 3 ) 450

460

470

480

490

500

510

520

530

540

550

560

570

580

590

600

610

620

630

640

650

660

670

680

690

700

710

720

730

740

750

760

770

780

790

800

810

820

830

840

850

860

870

880

890

23

88

90

89

90

86

81

74

71

67

65

62

60

58

57

56

55

54

53

52

52

51

50

50

50

49

48

48

48

48

47

47

47

47

46

46

46

46

46

45

45

45

45

44

44

44

17 18 19

160 154 129

158 150 125

154 149 120

158 154 137

120 118 109

103 101 95

93 91 87

86 84 81

80 78 75

76 74 72

73 71 69

71 68 66

68 66 64

65 64 62

63 62 60

61 61 59

61 60 59

60 59 57

59 58 56

58 56 55

57 56 55

56 55 54

56 54 53

56 54 53

55 53 52

53 52 51

53 52 51

53 51 51

53 50 51

52 50 50

51 50 49

52 50 49

52 49 49

51 49 49

51 48 49

50 48 48

50 48 48

50 48 48

49 48 47

49 47 47

49 47 48

50 47 47

49 47 47

49 46 47

49 46 46

20 21 22

103 95 91

113 97 92

105 96 92

110 99 93

99 94 89

91 88 84

82 80 75

77 76 72

73 71 68

70 68 66

67 65 63

64 63 61

62 61 59

60 60 58

59 58 57

58 57 55

56 56 54

55 55 54

55 54 53

54 53 52

53 52 52

52 52 51

52 51 50

51 51 50

51 50 49

50 50 49

50 49 48

49 49 48

49 49 48

49 48 48

49 48 47

48 48 47

48 47 47

48 47 47

48 47 47

47 47 46

47 47 46

47 47 46

47 46 45

46 46 45

46 46 45

46 46 45

46 46 45

46 46 45

46 45 45

47
24

27

27

27

27

27

27

27

28

31

33

36

40

44

49

52

54

57

59

61

63

65

67

69

70

70

72

73

73

74

76

76

76

77

78

78

79

80

80

80

81

81

81

82

82

83

30

27

27

27

27

27

27

27

27

33

38

43

47

52

55

57

60

62

64

66

68

70

72

75

76

77

77

78

79

80

82

80

83

83

83

84

84

83

85

86

85

85

86

86

86

86

1202C

TIME CHANNEL

(a) 25 26 27 28 29 0 27 27 27 27 27

10 27 27 27 27 27

20 27 27 27 27 27

30 27 27 27 27 27

40 27 27 27 27 27

50 27 27 27 27 27

60 27 27 27 27 27

70 28 28 28 27 27

80 52 51 49 42 37

90 69 66 62 52 43

100 78 76 71 59 49

110 84 82 82 65 53

120 87 86 82 66 57

130 89 89 88 73 59

140 90 93 90 72 60

150 95 95 93 73 62

160 97 96 95 74 65

170 94 96 94 79 68

180 98 98 98 89 74

190 95 96 97 85 73

200 104 104 106 93 78

210 97 99 99 91 79

220 103 106 105 98 84

230 109 107 104 97 84

240 102 104 103 97 84

250 110 111 111 101 91

260 105 108 106 97 85

270 112 113 112 ICO 86

280 115 110 108 100 87

290 110 112 111 101 89

300 104 106 104 96 85

310 112 112 111 101 88

320 115 113 113 100 87

330 107 113 110 98 87

340 116 115 111 103 90

350 117 118 114 103 89

360 110 113 111 102 90

370 116 115 113 106 92

380 121 119 116 104 91

390 115 118 116 105 91

400 112 113 112 100 89

410 119 118 115 105 95

420 121 124 121 105 93

430 111 115 112 102 91

440 123 118 117 108 93

48
24

83

84

85

84

80

77

72

69

65

63

61

59

58

57

56

55

54

53

53

52

51

51

50

50

49

49

48

48

48

47

47

47

47

47

46

46

46

46

45

45

45

45

45

44

45

30

87

87

87

90

85

80

76

71

68

65

62

60

59

57

55

54

53

53

52

51

51

50

49

49

48

48

48

47

47

47

46

46

46

45

45

45

45

45

45

44

44

44

44

43

43

TIME ( 3 ) 25

450 123

460 117

470 112

480 121

490 104

500 91

510 83

520 78

530 75

540 71

550 68

560 66

570 64

580 63

590 61

600 60

610 58

620 58

630 57

640 56

650 54

660 53

670 52

680 53

690 52

700 52

710 51

720 51

730 50

740 49

750 49

760 49

770 49

780 49

790 48

800 48

810 48

820 47

830 48

840 47

850 47

860 47

870 47

880 46

890 46

26 27

121 117

120 118

114 112

121 122

104 102

91 90

83 83

78 77

74 73

70 69

67 66

65 64

64 63

63 62

60 60

59 58

58 57

57 56

56 55

55 54

54 53

53 52

52 52

52 51

51 51

51 51

50 50

50 49

49 49

49 48

48 48

48 48

48 48

48 47

47 47

47 47

47 47

47 46

46 46

46 46

46 46

46 46

46 46

46 45

45 45

28 29

105 94

108 93

105 96

113 98

96 89

87 83

81 78

76 74

72 70

69 67

66 65

64 62

62 61

61 59

59 57

58 56

57 55

56 54

55 54

54 53

53 52

53 51

52 50

51 50

51 50

50 49

50 48

49 48

49 48

48 47

48 47

48 47

48 47

47 46

47 46

46 46

46 45

47 46

46 45

46 45

46 45

46 44

46 44

45 44

45 44

/.n
31

27

26

26

27

26

27

27

28

30

33

40

44

49

51

55

58

61

62

63

65

67

69

70

72

73

72

75

75

76

77

75

78

78

78

79

79

79

80

81

81

81

33

82

81

83

1202T

TIME CHANNEL

32 (a) 33 34 35 36

26 0 27 28 29 29

26 10 27 28 29 29

26 20 27 28 29 29

26 30 27 28 29 29

26 40 27 28 29 29

26 50 27 28 29 29

26 60 27 28 29 29

27 70 30 34 112 58

28 80 38 49 132 83

30 90 45 62 161 93

34 100 50 66 166 103

39 110 56 71 164 108

45 120 57 77 169 116

48 130 58 78 172 121

51 140 60 79 187 120

54 150 62 SO 184 120

56 160 63 83 183 123

58 170 61 80 160 114

61 ISO 65 85 157 109

61 190 63 80 155 134

65 200 69 88 175 121

65 210 65 82 182 127

68 220 68 86 150 111

68 230 68 87 205 135

71 240 66 83 169 113

71 250 72 91 202 120

73 260 69 87 192 124

73 270 73 87 155 115

72 280 74 95 204 143

74 290 73 90 158 120

73 300 72 91 170 148

75 310 74 95 189 143

75 320 75 95 201 125

75 330 73 88 154 116

76 340 74 99 217 145

77 350 77 99 182 126

77 360 75 89 172 119

76 370 77 97 214 142

78 380 78 99 225 146

79 390 78 94 177 132

77 400 77 96 176 138

79 410 78 101 247 148

80 420 81 100 188 127

79 430 77 93 171 130

80 440 81 102 217 150

50
31

83

83

84

87

81

76

73

69

64

62

61

58

57

55

54

53

51

51

51

50

49

49

48

48

47

47

46

45

45

45

45

45

44

44

44

44

44

43

44

43

43

43

42

42

42

32 36

TIME

<s) 33

81 450 82

80 460 80

80 470 81

82 480 83

79 490 74

75 500 68

71 510 65

67 520 62

63 530 60

60 540 59

57 550 57

56 560 56

54 570 55

53 580 54

51 590 54

50 600 53

50 610 52

49 620 52

49 630 51

48 640 51

48 650 50

47 660 50

47 670 50

46 680 50

46 690 49

45 700 49

45 710 49

44 720 49

44 730 48

44 740 48

44 750 48

44 760 48

43 770 47

43 780 47

43 790 47

43 800 47

42 810 47

42 820 47

42 830 46

42 840 46

42 850 46

42 860 46

42 870 46

41 880 46

41 890 46

34 35

104 215 152

98 173 132

98 179 145

101 162 130

86 130 104

77 111 92

72 108 86

69 103 81

66 100 78

64 98 76

63 95 74

61 93 72

60 91 71

59 89 69

58 88 68

58 87 68

57 82 67

57 83 66

56 82 65

56 82 64

55 81 64

55 80 63

54 79 63

54 78 62

54 75 62

54 75 62

53 74 61

53 74 61

53 73 61

52 72 60

52 72 60

52 71 59

52 71 59

52 68 59

51 69 59

51 70 59

51 68 58

51 66 58

51 67 58

50 64 57

50 65 56

50 66 56

50 65 56

50 63 56

50 65 55
12Q2W 1202H

TIME

(a) 37 38 0 23 24

10 23 24

20 23 24

30 23 24

40 23 24

50 23 24

60 23 24

70 23 24

80 25 25

90 26 25

100 27 27

110 29 28

120 30 29

130 32 30

140 33 32

150 34 33

160 36 34

170 37 36

180 38 37

190 39 38

200 41 39

210 42 41

220 43 42

230 44 43

240 45 44

250 46 45

260 47 46

270 48 47

280 49 48

290 50 49

300 51 50

310 51 50

320 52 51

330 53 52

340 53 52

350 54 53

360 55 54

370 55 54

380 56 55

390 56 55

400 57 56

410 57 56

420 58 57

430 58 57

440 59 57

TIME

O < a ) 40

25 0 3.070

25 10 2.218

25 20 1.706

25 30 1.535

24 40 3.241

25 50 2.900

25 60 2.729

25 70 4.776

26 80 8.700

27 90 9.552

28 100 12.111

30 110 13.305

31 120 20.299

33 130 25.246

34 140 20.469

35 150 24.734

37 160 26.440

38 170 26.610

39 180 31.045

40 190 43.668

41 200 34.286

42 210 51 . 174

43 220 41.792

44 230 56.803

45 240 39.915

46 250 49.638

47 260 54.756

47 270 44.180

48 280 55.609

49 290 54.244

49 300 60.044

50 310 71.984

51 320 82.901

51 330 65.332

52 340 62.091

52 350 61.408

52 360 60.385

53 370 67.549

53 380 76.249

54 390 73.861

54 400 75.055

54 410 80.343

55 420 68.231

55 430 82.731

55 440 110.1938

39

25

25

25

25

25

24

24

25

27

28

30

32

34

36

38

39

41

43

44

47

49

51

52

54

55

57

58

59

61

62

63

63

64

65

66

66

67

68

68

68

69

69

70

70

71

52
TIME ( 3 )

450

460

470

480

490

500

510

520

530

540

550

560

570

580

590

600

610

620

630

640

650

660

670

680

690

700

710

720

730

740

750

760

770

780

790

800

810

820

830

840

850

860

870

880

890

37 38 39 0

TIME ( 3 ) 40

59 58 71 56 450 82.901

60 58 71 56 460 91.260

60 58 72 56 470 79 . 490

61 59 72 57 480 84.095

60 58 71 56 490 73.178

60 58 69 55 500 65.332

59 57 68 54 510 65.161

58 56 66 53 520 59.873

57 56 65 52 530 65.332

56 55 63 51 540 55.097

55 54 62 50 550 53.391

54 53 60 49 560 53.391

54 52 59 48 570 54.415

53 51 58 48 580 55.097

52 50 56 47 590 38.551

51 49 55 46 600 43.839

50 49 54 45 610 41.109

50 48 53 45 620 40.257

49 47 52 44 630 44.009

48 46 51 43 640 38.551

48 46 50 43 650 32.581

47 45 49 42 660 34.286

46 45 49 42 670 33.092

46 44 48 41 680 29.169

45 43 47 41 690 32.922

45 43 46 40 700 24 . 904

44 42 46 40 710 25.928

44 42 45 39 720 32.581

43 41 44 39 730 30.192

43 41 44 39 740 22.005

42 41 43 38 750 20.811

42 40 43 38 760 19.617

42 40 42 38 770 21.493

41 39 42 38 780 18.593

41 39 41 37 790 20.128

40 39 41 37 800 23.369

40 38 41 37 810 26.781

40 38 40 36 820 20 . 128

39 38 40 36 330 17.228

39 37 40 36 840 15.011

39 37 39 36 850 15.011

38 37 39 36 860 23.540

38 37 39 36 870 15.352

38 36 38 35 880 13.135

38 36 38 35 890 22.858
4122222222468

10

12

15

17

20

22

25

27

30

32

34

38

38

40

42

43

45

48

48

49

51

52

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

64

1202

J

TIME

42 43 ( a ) 44 45

1.896 0 0 1.046 0

1.896 0 10 1.046 0

3.102 0 20 1.394 0

2.930 0 30 1.220 0

2.585 0 40 1.917 0

2.585 0 50 1.743 0

2.413 0 60 2.440 0

2.930 0 70 1.220 0

3.619 0 80 1.743 0

3.964 1 90 1.917 0

5.170 1 100 2.265 0

6.032 2 110 2.788 0

6.377 3 120 3.311 0

6. 549 4 130 3.834 1

7.239 5 140 4.356 1

10.341 6 150 3.659 2

9.479 7 160 5.228 3

10.858 8 170 6.099 3

11.892 9 180 5.925 4

10.858 10 190 7.144 5

15.167 11 200 6.273 5

14.133 12 210 7.144 6

13.960 13 220 5.750 7

19.476 14 230 10.107 8

17.924 15 240 7.841 9

16.373 16 250 9.235 10

16.890 17 260 14.115 10

19.476 18 270 12.546 11

22.233 18 280 15.160 12

17.924 19 290 13.418 13

20.510 20 300 14.463 13

24.646 21 310 19.342 14

24.818 22 320 18.471 15

23.267 23 330 15.334 15

23.784 24 340 15.334 16

28.955 24 350 14.637 17

24.474 25 360 22.130 17

28.782 26 370 25.093 18

29.127 26 380 20.388 18

25.163 27 390 20.039 19

28.265 28 400 17.425 20

28.265 28 410 15.857 20

27.748 29 420 20.388 21

28.782 30 430 24.918 21

31.368 30 440 30.494 21 i
41

66

66

67

67

67

65

64

62

60

59

57

55

53

51

49

43

46

44

42

41

39

38

37

35

34

33

32

31

30

29

28

27

26

25

25

24

23

23

22

21

21

20

20

19

19

42 45

TIME

43 (s) 44

32.574

30.161

29.299

33.731

33.091

28.782

33.264

30.506

38.951

27.748

27.231

24.474

23.612

26.370

26.887

22.923

27.576

21.716

23.957

22.405

34.642

19.820

22.578

24.474

23.440

20.165

19.648

23.612

20.632

21.027

16.029

16.546

23.440

17.235

17.063

18.958

15.684

15.856

13.788

15.511

14.305

13.788

14.650

12.237

14.133

31 450 30.146 22

31 460 26.487 22

32 470 21.782 23

32 480 21.956 23

32 490 21.782 24

33 500 23.350 24

32 510 30.843 24

32 520 27.881 24

32 530 25.441 24

32 540 26.312 23

31 550 18.994 23

31 560 19.168 23

30 570 20.039 23

30 580 21.956 22

29 590 21.782 22

29 600 20.213 21

28 610 21.956 21

28 620 23.350 21

27 630 23.524 20

26 640 22.653 20

26 650 19.691 19

25 660 16.554 19

25 670 19.516 19

24 680 14.986 18

24 690 12.546 18

23 700 15.857 17

23 710 17.425 17

22 720 17.251 17

22 730 18.297 16

21 740 19.865 16

21 750 15.334 16

20 760 16.554 15

20 770 16.206 15

19 780 16.380 15

19 790 12.372 14

18 800 14.812 14

18 810 14.115 14

18 820 16.728 13

17 830 10.630 13

17 840 12.546 13

17 850 14.812 12

16 860 9.235 12

16 870 12.721 12

16 880 11.849 12

15 890 11.501 12
1202

K

TIME

46 47 ( 3 ) 43 49 50

2.737 1 0 0.502 0.510 0.240

3.592 1 10 0.527 0.528 0.244

1.710 1 20 0.536 0.510 0.241

2.395 1 30 0.556 0.487 0.244

2.566 1 40 0.504 0.532 0.251

2.052 1 50 0.510 0.480 0.246

2.052 1 60 0.512 0.517 0.279

3.250 1 70 0.532 0.501 0.536

3.079 2 80 0.463 0.518 0.451

3.250 2 90 0.447 0.512 0.419

4.789 2 100 0.516 0.496 0.390

4.447 3 110 0.508 0.530 0.395

4.276 3 120 0.497 0.483 0.360

4.789 4 130 0.479 0.485 0.334

5.815 5 140 0.481 0.505 0.328

9.407 5 150 0.501 0.486 0.331

6.157 6 160 0.527 0.507 0.322

6.157 7 170 0.500 0.499 0.363

7.697 8 180 0.479 0.508 0.337

8.723 8 190 0.550 0.432 0.290

8.723 9 200 0.479 0.468 0.306

9.065 10 210 0.533 0.489 0.339

11.973 10 220 0.517 0.553 0.293

13.683 11 230 0.518 0.467 0.293

9.407 12 240 0.504 0.504 0.309

9.749 12 250 0.486 0.521 0.282

11.802 13 260 0.482 0.510 0.297

14.025 13 270 0.489 0.514 0.273

10.262 14 280 0.508 0.428 0.289

10.947 14 290 0.508 0.486 0.250

13.170 15 300 0.543 0.461 0.240

12.315 16 310 0.486 0.507 0.299

15.223 16 320 0.530 0.463 0.296

16.078 17 330 0.511 0.458 0.299

14.196 17 340 0.521 0.473 0.297

12.657 18 350 0.519 0.486 0.279

16.249 18 360 0.515 0.515 0.293

22.577 19 370 0.500 0.508 0.275

14.025 19 380 0.535 0.460 0.268

16.249 19 390 0.516 0.496 0.273

18.472 20 400 0.519 0.514 0.247

14.367 20 410 0.536 0.491 0.307

20.012 21 420 0.538 0.476 0.289

19.670 21 430 0.532 0.464 0.266

20.012 21 440 0.531 0.493 0.293

56 i
46 47

TIME ( a ) 48 49 50

19.670 22 450 0.532 0.502 0.278

20.867 22 460 0.518 0.497 0.262

21.038 22 470 0.515 0.505 0.292

20.867 23 480 0.520 0.513 0.058

20.525 23 490 0.522 0.512 0.112

22.920 23 500 0.527 0.504 0.140

26.169 23 510 0.499 0.511 0.159

19.328 23 520 0.526 0.501 0.177

22.064 22 530 0.500 0.514 0.191

22.406 22 540 0.508 0.511 0.201

23.433 22 550 0.540 0.513 0.212

16.762 21 560 0.473 0.542 0.219

16.762 21 570 0.513 0.492 0 . 220

18.301 21 580 0 . 530 0.514 0.226

18.643 20 590 0.534 0.518 0.232

20.012 20 600 0.523 0.493 0.234

20.183 19 610 0.501 0.508 0.239

14.881 19 620 0.510 0.532 0.242

14.710 18 630 0.514 0.494 0.244

12.657 18 640 0.510 0.475 0.245

17.617 IS 650 0.505 0.504 0.245

12.999 17 660 0.521 0.483 0.248

16.762 17 670 0.516 0.476 0.249

12.315 17 680 0.534 0.480 0.251

14.710 16 690 0.560 0.483 0.255

17.959 16 700 0.515 0.477 0.251

21.209 16 710 0.507 0.524 0.254

12.315 15 720 0.510 0.476 0.253

15.907 15 730 0.537 0.488 0.254

14.710 15 740 0.489 0.537 0.253

13.512 14 750 0.471 0.461 0.256

17.446 14 760 0.499 0.545 0.256

11.631 14 770 0.487 0.511 0.253

12.144 14 780 0.523 0.513 0.255

9.749 13 790 0.534 0.461 0.252

11.460 13 800 0.479 0.503 0.256

13.170 13 810 0.531 0.509 0.257

10.434 13 820 0.544 0.517 0.257

9.065 13 830 0.534 0.531 0.259

12.486 12 840 0.525 0.482 0.257

11.631 12 850 0.517 0.501 0.257

10.776 12 860 0.490 0.511 0.258

13.854 12 870 0.524 0.532 0.259

11.631 12 880 0.551 0.494 0.259

9.749 11 890 0.561 0.514 0.261

57
LIST OF FIGURES

1) Interior View of One Half of Symmetric Enclosure.

2) Typical Seat.

3) Time Histories TC Tree A F1202

4) Time Histories TC Tree B F1202

5) Time Histories TC Tree C F1202

6) Time Histories TC Tree D F1202

7) Exhaust Gas TC Histories F1202

8) Ceiling Temperatures Histories F1202

9) Interior Wall TC Traces F1202

10) Exterior Temperature Rise and Heat Flux Histories F1202

11) Exterior Temperature Rise and Heat Flux Histories F1202

12) Ventilation Flow Rates and Cabin Differential Pressure Histories F1202

13) Gas Temperature -Time Traces. TC Tree D, 30kW Fire 2 min Rate

14) Gas Temperature -Time Traces. TC Tree D, 30kW Fire 4.5 min Rate

15) Ceiling Temperature -Time Traces. 4 Positions, 30kW, Two Ventilation

Rates

.

16) External Wall Temperature, Heat Flux-Time Plots. 30kW, 2 min Rate

17) External Wall Temperature, Heat Flux-Time Plots. 30kW, 4.5 min Rate

18) Exhaust Flow TC Readings. Two Ventilation Rates, Two per run.

19) ERFC-like Curve Fits to Ceiling Temperature Data. T1

20) ERFC-like Curve Fits to Ceiling Temperature Data. T2

21) ERFC-like Curve Fits to Ceiling Temperature Data. T3

22) ERFC-like Curve Fits to Ceiling Temperature Data. T4

23) Ceiling Thermal Characteristics, ATm and h vs Q and r/H.

24) ERFC-like Curve Fits to Gas Temperature Data. B1

58
25) ERFC-like Curve Fits to Gas Temperature Data. Cl

26) ERFC-like Curve Fits to Gas Temperature Data. A2

27) ERFC-like Curve Fits to Gas Temperature Data. D1

28) Ceiling and Gas Thermal Characteristics and Heat Transfer

Coefficient vs. position.

29) Calculated Ceiling Heat Transfer Decay for 30kW Fire at r/H - 0, 1

30) Normalized Solution and Small Time Approximation.

31) Gas Temperature -Time Trace, TC Tree D, 40kW Fire

32) Vertical Temperature Profiles (selected times)

33) Normalized Temperature Profile

59
FIG.

1

Interior

View

of

One

Half

of

Symmetric

Enclosure.
Marinite

Sheet

39.4

x

34.4

x

1.27

rf

LO

CO

61

All

dimensions

in

cm
F1202

oj m T in cd f

^cn

LU

CU

(3) 3HfllVti3dW31

62

THERMOCOUPLE

TREE

A

FIG.

3

Time

Histories

TC

Tree

A

F1202
F

1202

O ^ ^

'F

O") 'H rl r—( I H

o

CU 1 T~\ T-( T—t

(3) 3UniVti3dW31

63

THERMOCOUPLE

TREE

B

FIG.

4

Time

Histories

TC

Tree

B

FI202
F

1202

in cd x o< o ^ cu

c\j cu cm x oj cn m cn

J2

LU

cu

(D) 3bfliVH3dW31

64

THERMOCOUPLE

TREE

C

FIG.

5

Time

Histories

TC

Tree

C

FI202
F1202

r^GDCTJ-rj^cvim^r

ri ri ri C'J CM CU OJ CU

(3) 3aniVU3dW31

65

THERMOCOUPLE

TREE

D

FIG.

6

Time

Histories

TC

Tree

D

F1202
tIdUd.

CD

QQ

O

cn

LU2

0) 3anivb3dM3i

66

EXHAUST

THERMOCOUPLE

FIG.

7

Exhc

ust

Gas

TC

Histories

F1202
r

laud

on^in v' rn rn cn ' r

- o

CU t—( t-1 tH

O) 3aniva3dW3i

67

CEILING

THERMOCOUPLES

FIG.

8

Ceiling

Temperatures

Histories

F1202
100

CD CD

m cn m

O

(3) 3UniVb3dW31

68

-

WALL

THERMOCOUPLES

FIG.

9

Interior

Wall

TC

Traces

F1202
PCiPT.

o cu 1 f i ^ ^r

-• o

LU

HH

I—

(OOTXUS/Ui/Mi!} xni.d (») dWriC

69

TEMP.

RISE

S

HEAT

FLUX

I

FIG.

10

Exterior

Temperature

Rise

and

Heat

Flux

Histories

F1202
t

id id t ^

o

in

(00T^€Ui/Ui/M>!) xnid (n) dw^ic

70

TEMP

RISE

G

HEAT

FLUX

II

FIG.

11

Exterior

Temperature

Rise

and

Heat

Flux

Histories

F1202
GO CD O

'T LD

(oi*s/e**uj) MOid (uaoi) da

71

FLOWS

fi

DELTA

P
200

n co n in to :• cd

i

\

o

CD

(3) 3UniVb3dW3i

72

THERMOCOUPLE

TREE

D

FIG.

13

Gas

Temperature

-Time

Traces.

TC

Tree

D,

30kW

Fire

2

min

Rate
minj

on ^

lc 10 ;• od

(3) 3tiniVH3dW31

73

THERMOCOUPLE

TREE

D
h

1102,

r

1902

o o o o ID in in n

cu cu cu cu ~r •r

in

t-h O

HH

UC-t

cu

(3) 3yniVd3dW3±

74

CEILING

THERMOCOUPLES

Ceiling

Temperature

-Time

Traces.

4

Positions,

30kW,

Two

Ventilation

Rates.
100

Ti OJ 7 If] ID N QD

o

(00T*UJ/UJ/M>!) xnid (M) dW31Q

75

EXTERNAL

TEMPERATURE

RISE

£

HEAT

FLUX

External

Wall

Temperature,

Heat

Flux-Time

Plots.

30kW,

2

min

Rate
CM n 'T in CD GO

(oot^ui/uj/mm) xnid (>o dW3ia

76

EXTERNAL

TEMPERATURE

RISE

S

HEAT

FLUX

External

Wall

Temperature,

Heat

Flux-Time

Plots.

30kW,

h

. 5

min

Rate
*-« oi :n t

o

O) 3ymvti3dW3i

77

EXHAUST

FLOW

TEMPERATURE

FIG.

18

Exhaust

Flow

TC

Readings.

Two

Ventilation

Rates,

Two

per

run.
I

ERFC-like

Curve

Fits

to

Ceiling

Temperature

Data.
F1903T2

DTm=1

64

C=.0381

CNH

00 asm 3amva3dW3J.

79

tlG.

20

ERFC-like

Curve

Fits

to

Ceiling

Temperature

Data.
F1903T3

DTm=258

C=.174

(x) 3sia 3afuva3dW3i

i

80

FIG.

21

ERFC-like

Curve

Fits

to

Ceiling

Temperature

Data.
F1903T4

DTm=172

C=.1

14

(x) 3sm 3anxva3dW3i

81
10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

FIG

T

A

A

a

ToT2 '1

No seats, 2.4 min

Central ventilation

6 data sets

6-60 kW (h~Q 1/6

) a Wall ventilation

30 kW

23

1.0 2.0

r/H

Zl Tn open symbols C or h filled symbols

3.0

Ceiling Thermal Characteristics , ATm and h vs Q and r/H.

82

A
F1903B1

00 asm aamvaadwai

83

ERFClike

Curve

Fits

to

Gas

Temperature

Data.
F1903C1

(>0 3Sia 3an±va3dW3±

84

i

FIG.

25

ERFC-like

Curve

Fits

to

Gas

Temperature

Data.
F1903A2

o

o

to

(X) 3SIH 3dniVU3dW31

85

FIG.

26

ERFC-like

Curve

Fits

to

Gas

Temperature

Data.
F1903D1

00 3Sia 3amvd3dW31

86

4

FIG.

27

ERFC-like

Curve

Fits

to

Gas

Temperature

Data.
10

r/H

r/H

FIG. 28 Ceiling and Gas Thermal Characteristics and Heat Transfer

Coefficient vs. position.

87
CEILING

HEAT

TRANSFER

30kW

r/H=0

r/H=1

(uj^lu/m>1) JQ^*UDJ1 +d©

Ouiii*o

88

t

Calculated

Ceiling

Heat

Transfer

Decay

for

30kW

Fire

at

r/H
89

FIG.

30

Normalized

Solution

and

Small

Time

Approximation.
h

iyuju

vH ,'J n ^

LT (O r. GD

o

o o o o o o o O O O o

o CD CD cu o GO CD CU

cu *r-i

(3) 3yniVH3dW31

90

THERMOCOUPLE

TREE

D

FIG.

31

Gas

Temperature

-Time

Trace,

TC

Tree

D,

AOkW

Fire
1903D

Thermocouple

Tree

ooo

! a

»

(

ooooooooooo 00)ON»lOtK)Ni-0 o o o © o o o

0) 60 N (O m ^

K)

o o o

CH

O

cn0) E

1-4 U

T3

<V u

o

CN

Cl

O

i—

U*

(9) 3anXVH3dW31

91

FRACTIONAL

HEIGHT

FROM

CEILING
1903D

TC

TREE

DTm=205K

C=.0897/sqr(s)

r

&

FRACTIONAL

HEIGHT

FROM

CEILING

FO«M NBS-H4A (BfV.l 1-44*

U.S. DEPT. OF COMM. 1. PUBLICATION OR 2. Performing Organ. Report No. 3. Publication Date

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET (See instructions)

REPORT NO.

NBSIR-88/3806 June 1988

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Fire Environment In Counterflow Ventilation (The In-flight Aircraft Cabin

Fire Problem)

5. AUTHOR(S)

B.J. McCaffrey and W.J. Rinkinen

6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION (If joint or other than NBS. see instructions) 7. Contract/Grant No.

national bureau of stanoards University of Maryland

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMBICE Baltimore, MD 21228 8. Type of Report & Period Covered

GAITHERSBURG, MO 20899

9.

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

Federal Aviation Administration

Atlantic City International Airport, NJ 08405

io. supplementary notes

|

1 Document describes a computer program; SF-185, FlPS Software Summary, is actached.

11.

ABSTRACT (A 200-word or less factual summary of most si gnificant in formation. If document includes a s ignificant

bi bl iography or literature survey, mention it here)

Using propane gas burning in a diffusive mode, fire sources up to the equivalent heat

release rate of a fully involved seat were simulated in an approx. 1/2-scale closed

section of a ventilated-wide-body aircraft cabin. The ventilation flow direction was

as in a commercial practice-counter to that of the buoyancy driven fire gases, i.e.,

fresh air was forced in at the top of the enclosure and drawn out at the bottom.

Results indicate that for nominal ventilation rates the potential for significant

enthalpy exchange through ventilation in times corresponding to a few airchanges is

limited. That is, only a small proportion of the energy release rate of the fire is

getting exhausted. Correlations of thermal conditions in the enclosure as a function

of time, heat release rate of the fire, and position in the cabin are presented.

Semi- inf inite transient conduction models appear adequate in capturing the essential

features of the fire—ceiling thermal interaction. Reduced data on PC-readable floppy

disks for the entire test series will be made available for future cabin modelling

purposes

.

12.

KEY WORDS (Six to twelve entries ; alphabetical order; capitalize only proper names; and separate key words by semi colon s) aircraft fires; heat transfer; scale models; simulation; ventilation; seats

13.

AVAILABILITY

; X ! Uni i mi ted For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

Order From Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC

20402.

_X Order From National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, VA 22161

14. NO. OF

PRINTED PAGES

99

15. Price

$13.95

USCOMM-OC 83-6006
'

1 tf

.

V

'

.