development of a next-generation burner for testing ... venturi) – fuel provided by a pressurized...
TRANSCRIPT
Presented to:
By:
Date:
Federal AviationAdministration
Development of a Next-Generation Burner for Testing Thermal Acoustic Insulation Burnthrough Resistance
5th Triennial IFCSRC
Robert Ian Ochs, FAA Technical Center
October 31, 2007
NexGen Burner Development 2Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Outline
• Background• Next Generation Burner Design• Operational Parameters• Proof of Concept• Construction and Calibration of Multiple
NexGen Burners• Comparative Testing of NexGen Burners at
Various Locations
NexGen Burner Development 3Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Background
• Final Rule on thermal acoustic insulation burnthrough was issued in August 2003, but the compliance date was delayed until September 2009– Airframe manufacturers had concerns with the
availability and reliability of the specified test apparatus (Park DPL 3400 oil burner)
• The Park oil burner was found to be out of production• Two different types of DPL 3400 were manufactured over
the years, producing different flames
NexGen Burner Development 4Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
NexGen Burner Concept• Initial Concept:
– Compressed air metered with a sonic nozzle (critical flow venturi)
– Fuel provided by a pressurized fuel tank
– Utilize the original Park draft tube components
• Stator• Igniters• Nozzle• Turbulator
– By using the same components and matching the air velocity and fuel flow rate, the overall character of the flame is unchanged
NexGen Burner Development 5Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
NexGen Burner Design
Cone
Turbulator
Fuel Nozzle
Igniters
StatorDraft Tube
Housing
Cradle
Muffler
Sonic Orifice
Pressure Regulator
NexGen Burner Development 6Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
NexGen Burner Development 7Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Solenoid or manual ball valve
Pressure Regulator (in the range of 0-150 psig)
e.g., Bellofram Type 70 Pressure Regulator, 2-150 psig, max 250 psig inlet, approx $79
Fuel
Air/N2 @ ~120 psig
Solenoid or manual ball valve
Compressed gas (from bottled Nitrogen or Air, or air compressor, if it is capable
VentPressurized Air Inlet
Nozzle 5.5 GPH 80 deg-PL
Vent to lab or outdoors
Pressure Vessel (for example, McMaster-Carr p/n 1584K7, ASME-Code Vertical Pressure Tank W/O Top Plate, 15 Gallon Capacity, 12" Dia X 33" L, $278.69) or any suitable pressure vessel that can withstand pressures of around 150 psig.
Fuel Fill
Fuel Outlet This schematic is pretty basic. You can supplement this design with whatever instrumentation you would like to obtain the required data or to make for easier operation. Some examples would be a pressure transducer, remotely operated solenoid valves, fuel flow meter, etc.
Pressurized Fuel SystemSolenoid or manual ball valve
High pressure liquid level sight gauge (We use McMaster Carr p/n: 3706K23)
Needle valve to control venting
Ice Bath
H2O
NexGen Burner Development 8Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Air Velocity Observations
Exit Velocity as a Function of Inlet Air Temperature
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Inlet Pressure, psig
Exit
Velo
city
, fpm
Air Temp = 50°FAir Temp = 110°F
EXIT VELOCITY AS A FUNCTION OF TEMPERATURE, 60 PSIG
1280130013201340136013801400142014401460
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
TEMPERATURE, DEG. F
VELO
CIT
Y, F
PM
NexGen Burner Development 9Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Flowrate as a Function of Temperature, Nozzle "A", 120 psig
5.76
5.65
5.58
5.55
5.6
5.65
5.7
5.75
5.8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140
Temperature
Flow
rate
, gph
Comparison of Fuel Density
775780785790795800805810815820825
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140
Temperature, °FD
ensi
ty, k
g/m
3
JP8 @ FAATCJet-A @ Boeing
Fuel Temperature Observations
NexGen Burner Development 10Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Insulated Beverage Cooler 72 qt. capacity
Air Cooling
Water in/out
Fuel Cooling
Fuel in/out
Ice / Water Mixture
Ice Bath
NexGen Burner Development 11Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Heat Exchange System
Fuel Tank
Water Pump
Air From Compressor
Condensate Separator
McMaster-Carr p/n 43775K55
BurnerCooler w/ice water Heat Exchanger
McMaster-Carr p/n 3865K78
Blue = Water Lines
Orange = Fuel Lines
Black = Air Lines
NexGen Burner Development 12Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Burner Operational Parameters
• Fuel– Type: JP8, Jet A or equivalent– Nozzle: Monarch 5.5 gph 80°PL– Pressure: 120 psig (±2 psig)– Temperature: 42°F (±10°F)– Flowrate: 6.0 gph (±0.3 gph)
• Air– Pressure: 60 psig (±2 psig)– Temperature: 50°F (±10°F)– Mass Flow Rate: 66 SCFM (dictated by pressure)
NexGen Burner Development 13Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Flame Temperature Measurement
18001820184018601880190019201940196019802000
T/C 1
T/C 2
T/C 3
T/C 4
T/C 5
T/C 6
T/C 7
Averag
e
Thermocouple, Left to Right
Tem
pera
ture
, ºF
Measurement 1Measurement 2
NexGen Burner Development 14Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Proof of Concept: RRVIII-Mat’l A
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
FAAFlanged
FAASocket
FAASocket 2
NexGen Lab C Lab I Lab J
Bur
nthr
ough
Tim
e, se
c.
Average = 95.3 sec.
NexGen Burner Development 15Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Proof of Concept: RRVIII-Mat’l B
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
FAAFlanged
FAASocket
FAASocket 2
NexGen Lab C Lab I Lab J
Bur
nthr
ough
Tim
e, se
c.
Average = 265.9 sec.
NexGen Burner Development 16Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Proof of Concept: RRVIII-Mat’l C
0
50
100
150
200
250
FAAFlanged
FAASocket
FAASocket 2
NexGen Lab C Lab I Lab J
Tim
e to
Exc
eed
2.0
BT
U/ft
2 *s, s
ec.
Average = 100.7 sec.
NexGen Burner Development 17Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Repeatability – Relative Standard Deviation
0
5
10
15
20
FAAFlanged
FAASocket
FAASocket 2
NexGen Lab C Lab I Lab J
Rel
ativ
e St
anda
rd D
evia
tion,
%
NexGen Burner Development 18Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Summary of Concept Phase
• A burner can be fabricated from easily obtainable parts and materials
• By replicating the input/output parameters of the Park oil burner, the concept burner could deliver a flame similar in character to that of the Park
• The concept burner’s burnthrough performance was shown to be similar to the FAA Park oil burner, as well as several other “socket” type Park oil burners
• A better method of measuring the burner performance is desired with a higher level of accuracy
NexGen Burner Development 19Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Construction and Calibration of Multiple Burners• Objective
– Construct 10 identical burners– Show reliability of performance from test to test (one burner)– Show repeatability of burner performance from burner to burner– Show reproducibility of burner performance at various locations
• Procedure– Assemble and designate a burner (i.e., NG1, NG2, etc.)– Burner components are unique to each designated burner (stator,
turbulator, cone, fuel rail, fuel nozzle, pressure regulator, muffler, sonic orifice)
– Measure burner performance at FAATC lab (fuel flow, air flow, flame temperature, burnthrough times)
– Package burner, ship to participating laboratory– Lab will perform same tests and compare results– If results are similar to those obtained at the FAATC, then burner is
performing properly
NexGen Burner Development 20Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
NexGen Burner Distribution
• Currently, NexGen burners are located at:– NG1: CEAT, Toulouse, France– NG2: FAATC– NG3: FAATC– NG4: Mexmil, Santa Ana, CA, USA– NG5: AIRBUS, Bremen, Germany– NG6: BOEING, Seattle, WA, USA– NG7: FAATC– NG8: FAATC– NG9: FAATC– NG10: FAATC
• Parts for more burners will be ordered soon!
NexGen Burner Development 21Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
New Blanket Holder
• Lightweight PAN (TexTech) materials have been found to have a high level of consistency with characteristic burnthrough times related to the material density (8579 or 8611)
• These materials were also found to be greatly affected by the original blanket holder, the test rig that simulates the structure of an aircraft fuselage
• A new sample holder was designed to increase the consistency of the burnthrough times in order to isolate the performance of the NexGen burners from all other effects
NexGen Burner Development 22Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Picture Frame Blanket HolderINNER FRAME
OUTER FRAME
SUPPORTS
NexGen Burner Development 23Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Picture Frame Blanket Holder
NexGen Burner Development 24Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Frame Alignment
Centerline of picture frame (9.125”) is aligned with centerline of cone
CL
CL
4” from cone face to blanket surface
NexGen Burner Development 25Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Material will typically shrink within 20 sec. from the top and the sides. The center portion, where the burnthrough is occurring, will not be affected by this.
Testing
NexGen Burner Development 26Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Picture Frame Initial Results• High level of repeatability was
observed– Identical results observed with
the FAA Park and the NexGen– Much higher level of
repeatability– Relative Standard Deviation
decreased by a factor of 10
229 229
0
50
100
150
200
250
FAA Flanged Park NexGen
Bur
nthr
ough
Tim
e, se
c.
10
12
0.7
2.6
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
FAA Park NexGen
Burner
RSD
%
Original Blanket HolderPicture Frame
NexGen Burner Development 27Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
NexGen Comparative Test Results
170
181
208
169
184
209
188 190
226
186 187
220228
180
217208
177 175
211
224
185 183
208
227
187 184
230 232
219223
228
0
50
100
150
200
250
19391-8579R 19391A-8579R 19394-8611R 19395-8611R
Material
Bur
nthr
ough
Tim
e, se
c. FAA-ParkFAA-NG1CEAT-NG1FAA-NG4Mexmil-NG4FAA-NG5Boeing-NG6FAA-NG7
NexGen Burner Development 28Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
NexGen Repeatability
1.13
1.39
2.40
3.19
2.42
3.89
5.37
3.90
3.53
1.47
3.53
1.89
3.99
0.00
2.29
2.78
4.68
4.25
3.44
0.26
2.49
3.12 3.05
2.64
1.191.30 1.23
1.971.77
2.762.89
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
19391-8579R 19391A-8579R 19394-8611R 19395-8611R
Material
Rel
ativ
e St
anda
rd D
evia
tion,
%
FAA-ParkFAA-NG1CEAT-NG1FAA-NG4Mexmil-NG4FAA-NG5Boeing-NG6FAA-NG7
NexGen Burner Development 29Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Reproducibility
4.8
3.7
4.6
3.7
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
19391-8579R 19391A-8579R 19394-8611R 19395-8611R
Material
Rel
ativ
e St
anda
rd D
evia
tion,
%
NexGen Burner Development 30Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Overall Reproducibility
181.71
220.33
0
50
100
150
200
250
8579 8611
Material
Bur
nthr
ough
Tim
e, se
c.
8579
Overall Average: 181.71 sec
Overall S.D.: 7.77 sec
Overall %SD: 4.28%
8611
Overall Average: 220.33 sec
Overall S.D.: 9.83 sec
Overall %SD: 4.46%
NexGen Burner Development 31Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Summary of Results
• Overall, the picture frame test method was useful in determining if burners are performing properly at different locations
• The test method was found to be more repeatable and reproducible than when testing the same materials on the original blanket holder
• Although this test method provides highly accurate results, it is in no means intended to replace the original test method
• This testing method will not be required for calibrating NexGen burners; rather it can be used to ensure that a burner is not deviating from it’s original performance
NexGen Burner Development 32Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Thermal Acoustic Insulation Blanket Comparative Testing
• Boeing created 3 types of thermal acoustic insulation specimen samples: Material A, B, and C
• Three tests worth of each material were created for each burner; therefore, each burner would run 9 tests total
• Tests were run initially at Boeing then at the tech center on the FAA Park and FAA NG4 with Boeing personnel witnessing testing
NexGen Burner Development 33Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Burner Input Parameters and Backside Heat Flux - Material A - FAA Park
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 100 200 300 400 500
Time, sec.
Tem
pera
ture
, °F
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Back
side
Hea
t Flu
x,
BTU/
ft2s AirTemp
FuelTempCal1
Cal2
Test Start at 2 min.
Results – FAA Park, Material A
NexGen Burner Development 34Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Results – FAA NG4, Material ABurner Input Parameters and Backside Heat Flux - Material A - FAA NG4
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 100 200 300 400 500
Time, sec
Pres
sure
, psi
g, a
nd
Tem
pera
ture
, °F.
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Bac
ksid
e H
eat
Flux
,BTU
/FT2
-s AirPresFuelPresAirTempFuelTempCal1Cal2
Test Start at 2 min.
NexGen Burner Development 35Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Results – Boeing NG6, Material ABurner Input Parameters and Backside Heat Flux - Material A - Boeing NG6
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 100 200 300 400 500
Time, sec.
Pres
sure
, psi
g an
d Te
mpe
ratu
re °F
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Bac
ksid
e H
eat F
lux
BTU
/FT2
-s
AirPresFuelPresAirTempFuelTempCal1Cal2
Test Start at 2 min.
NexGen Burner Development 36Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Summary
• A next-generation burner was developed for testing the burnthrough resistance of thermal acoustic insulation– The burner was constructed from readily available parts and materials– The burner performance was proven to be similar to that of the FAA
Park– The burner was shown to perform similarly when moved from one
laboratory to another– Multiple burners were constructed, and all were found to be in good
agreement with each other and the FAA Park• A method was developed for quantifying the burnthrough
performance of the NexGen burners• When testing thermal acoustic insulation blankets, the
NexGen burners provided very similar results to that of the FAA Park
• More fundamental research is required in order to have a burner with a higher level of accuracy
NexGen Burner Development 37Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Future Work - Analysis
• Further insight into the fundamental physical problem is necessary
• Although the current burner will suffice for now, advances in material science may require a burner that can be highly accurate
• Literature search – review papers on droplet studies, swirl flow, soot formation, etc. will be necessary
• Separate physical analyses of the airflow and fuel spray of the current burner configuration
• Parametric study – determination of parameters that have the most significant effects on burnthrough
• Use this knowledge to design an optimally configured burner that can operate at high levels of precision anywhere in the world
NexGen Burner Development 38Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Techniques
• Flow visualization techniques will be used to study the physical problem
• Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) can be used to determine the 3-dimensional velocity field at any plane in the flow; and can be used to measure the magnitude of the swirl flow
• Software can be used to determine the pressure field, temperature, density, etc.
• PIV can also indicate the density of the spray in the airflow, as well as droplet size distribution
• All of this data can be useful in optimizing the burner configuration
• CAD software can be used to develop prototype swirl inducing devices
NexGen Burner Development 39Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 31, 2007
Questions, Comments, Suggestions, Input?