Date post: | 01-Apr-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | guadalupe-woulfe |
View: | 213 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Objective - Develop a test method that is:
•Representative of Actual Conditions
•Repeatable and Consistent
•Obtainable by All Labs in All Parts of the World
Test Method Co-Developed With NPRM
...Test Method Perfection
...Release NPRM
Delay Implementation Process
Discrepancies in Calibration and Requirements
Cold-Side Heat Flux: 1.5 or 2.0 Btu/ft2 sec?
Air Inlet Velocity: 2000, 2100, or 2200 ft/min??
Burner Heat Flux: 13.5 +/-0.5, 15.2 +/- 0.8, or 16.0 +/- 0.8???
Requirements have changed as more is learned about the equipment
Chance for industry to participate in the development of the requirements
Objective of Testing, Research, & Round Robin:
• Establish Similar Calibration Procedure
• Produce Similar Exposure From Burner
• Achieve Similar Test Results
Factors That Can Influence Calibration
• Air Intake Velocity
• Air Intake Temperature
• Fuel Flowrate
• Fuel Temperature
• Instrumentation (type/size of thermocouple, calorimeter type)
• Other Adjustments (position of igniters, static disc, tabs)
• Fuel Type (Jet A, Diesel, Fuel Oil)
• Environmental Conditions (relative humidity, barometric pressure)
Latest Calibration Procedure
Temperature: (1850 +/- 100oF)
Adjust Fuel Flowrate to 6.0 +/- 0.2 gal/hr
Adjust Burner Intake Air Velocity to 2100 +/- 100 ft/min
Heat Flux: (16.0 +/- 0.8 Btu/ft2 sec)
•After 2-minute warm-up, swing burner into position, •allow 1 minute stabilization, •take reading for 30 seconds (once per second) and average, •swing burner away from flame
•After 2-minute warm-up, swing burner into position, •allow 1 minute stabilization, •take reading for 30 seconds (once per second) and average, •swing burner away from flame
Air Velocity/Airflow Measurement
Reasons for measuring airflow at intake location:
•Allows for continuous monitoring
•Prevents removal/disruption of tabs
•Eliminates need to remove burner cone
•Intake velocity = Outlet velocity/
Intake Airbox Holding Air Velocity Meter
Intake Airbox
Data Collection Procedure is Critical
Effect of Soot Buildup on Calorimeter Performance(2 minute warm-up away from calorimeter surface)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time (minutes)
He
at
Flu
x (
Btu
/ft2 s
ec
)
1900 ft/min2000 ft/min2100 ft/min2200 ft/min2400 ft/min2600 ft/min
Date: 11/24/99
Average Rake Temperature Vs. TimeAt Various Air Velocity Settings
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
0 2 4 6 8 10
Time (minutes)
Te
mp
era
ture
(oF
)
1900 ft/min
2000 ft/min2100 ft/min
2200 ft/min2400 ft/min
Data Collection Procedure is Critical
Temperature Profile Bias
Backside Heat Flux MeasurementsCalorimeters Mounted at 4 Inches from Centerline
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Time (seconds)
He
at F
lux
(Btu
/ft2
se
c)
Cal #1 Baseline
Cal #2 Baseline
Cal #1 Nextel Test
Cal #2 Nextel Test
Location of Flame Enhancement Tab
Static Disc Mounted to Igniter Assembly
Material 1
Material 2
Material 3
Material 4
Round Robin Test Results (Initial)
Material 5
Material 6
Material 7
Material 8
Round Robin Test Results (Initial)
Burnthrough Round Robin Test ResultsFAA Lab
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Material
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Not
Tes
ted
Material 1 Comparison (Initial)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 2 Comparison (Initial)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 3 Comparison (Initial)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 4 Comparison (Initial)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 5 Comparison (Initial)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
No
Dat
a Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 6 Comparison (Initial)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
No
Dat
a
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 7 Comparison (Initial)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
No
Dat
a
No
Dat
a
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 8 Comparison (Initial)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
No
Dat
a
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 1 Comparison (Final)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
(S
ec
on
ds
)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 2 Comparison (Final)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 3 Comparison (Final)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 4 Comparison (Final)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 5 Comparison (Final)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 6 Comparison (Final)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 7 Comparison (Final)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Material 8 Comparison (Final)
0
60
120
180
240
300
360
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Red
uced
Bur
ner
Out
put
Correlation Using 6 GPH Burner (Full Scale vs. Lab Scale)
0
30
60
90
120
150
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
1:24
1:361:38
2:14
1:24 Avg
1:54 Avg
2000 ft/min 2100 ft/min 2200 ft/min
Full Scale Testsin 707
Lab Scale Tests with Burner.0
63
-Inc
h A
lcla
d +
3 L
aye
r A
ero
cor
.06
3-I
nch
Alc
lad
+ 4
Lay
er
Ae
roco
r
1:22 Avg
1:37 Avg
Correlation Using 4 GPH Burner (Full Scale vs. Lab Scale)
0
30
60
90
120
150
Fa
ilure
Tim
e (
Se
co
nd
s)
2000 ft/min 2200 ft/min
.06
3-I
nch
Alc
lad
+ 3
Lay
er
Ae
roco
r
.06
3-I
nch
Alc
lad
+ 4
Lay
er
Ae
roco
r
1:24
1:361:36 Avg
1:42 Avg
1:29 Avg
1:35 Avg
Full Scale Testsin 707
Lab Scale Tests with Burner
4 GPH Calibration Data
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
Intake Air Velocity (ft/min)
Te
mp
era
ture
(oF
)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
He
at
Flu
x (
Btu
/ft2 s
ec
)
1800 2000 2200
6 GPH Calibration Data
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
Intake Air Velocity (ft/min)
Te
mp
era
ture
(oF
)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
He
at
Flu
x (
Btu
/ft2 s
ec
)
2000 2100 2200
Temperature Profile Comparison (Final Calibration)
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
Te
mp
era
ture
(oF
)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Temperature Profile Comparison (Initial Calibration)
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
Te
mp
era
ture
(oF
)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Heat Flux Comparison
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
He
at
Flu
x (
Btu
/ft2 s
ec
)
Lab A Lab B Lab C Lab D Lab E Lab F Lab G Lab H Lab I Lab J
Minimum Burner Heat Flux Maximum Burner Heat Flux