DEVELOPMENTS IN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF

GAS GENERATORS FOR FIRE SUPPRESSION

P a u l H. Wierenga and Gary F. Holland

Primex Aerospace Company

Redniond, WA 9XO73-9709, USA

INTRODUCTION
Primex Aerospace Company (PAC) has been a world leader in the development and production
of solid propellant gas generators, hybrid gas generators, and stored gas systems for the past
30 years. PAC maintains core businesses in the areas of fire suppression. automotive airbags.
emergency escape slides for aircraft, buoyancy/flotation systems, and submunition dispensing
systems.
PAC has been involved with the development and production of pyrotechnic devices for commercial applications since the late 1960s, with much of this activity being devoted to automobile
airhag inflators. Two basic types of propellants are used in automotive airbag inflators: sodium
azide-based propellant systems and non-azide propellant systems. These propellants are designed to exhaust a niixturc of nitrogen, water vapor, and carbon dioxide gas. With the advent of a
need for small and lightweight fire protection systems, and a desire to replace Halon 1301 a s the
agent of choice for fire suppression systems. PAC initiated research and development efforts to
apply the airbag technology to fire suppression. This erfort resulted in a new gas generator
propellant ideally suited for fire suppression applications [ 1-41, These devices are called Solid
Propellant Fire Extinguishers (SPFE), and arc at times referred to a s Solid Propellant Gas
Generators (SPGG) or Radial Fire Extinguishers (RFE).
Figure I illustrates the basic design of a Solid Propellant Fire Extinguisher (SPFE). The functioning of a SPFE is quite similar to that of conventional nitrogen-pressurized fire extinguisher in
that both begin with electrical initiation. Upon receipt of an electrical signal. the SPFE initiator
functions to ignite a solid propellant booster charge. This booster, in turn, ignites the main propellant grain or pellets, causing SPFE internal pressure to increase rapidly and rupture a series of
hermetic seals. This process opens the SPFEs radial exhaust ports, allowing large amounts of
gas to enter the fire zone in a non-propulsive manner.
Many of the design attributes that SPFEs inherited from their automotive airbag inflator counterparts make them extremely robust and ideally suited for a whole range of tire suppression applications. Some of these unique features are described below.
Tailorable agent discharge profile-The agent discharge profile of a SPFE can be precisely
optimized to meet the fire suppression requirements of a specific application. The agent discharge profile is a funclion of the propellant formulation and physical size/shape of the propellant pellets or grain. PAC has developed and tested SPFEs with agent discharge durations
ranging from a few milliseconds to in excess of 10 sec.

Halon Options

Technical Working Conl'crcncc

27-2'1 April l 9 Y l l

453

,/hermetic

seal
over exII~uus1polls

Figure 1. Solid propellant fire extinguisher.

Figure 2. Full-scale fire testing.

Small size a n d lightweightSolid propellants offer the most volume-efficient means to store a
gas. In addition. testing has identified inherent performance advantages associated with SPFEs
that allow for reduced agent weight requirements as compared to conventional nitrogen
pressurized stored agent systems. The net effect is a much smaller and lighter weight device than
can be achieved with other fire suppression technologies.
No s t o r a g e p r e s s u r e S P F E s do not require a nitrogen pressurant to deliver agent, hence leakage
during storage is not a concern. The internal pressure of a SPFE remains at ambient until the
device is functioned. This eliminates the logistics, maintainability, handling, and safety concerns
associated with typical nitrogen pressurized stored agent bottles.
Orientation a n d acceleration insensitiveSPFEs operate the same regardless of orientation or
G-loading. A nitrogen pressurized agent system will not function correctly across the operating
temperature range if a vehicle is experiencing high acceleration forces from maneuvering or is
oriented such that the agent is not situated over the outlet port with the nitrogen above the agent.
Long shelflifeSPFEs are designed for a 20-year life. The PAC SPFE is based on the same
design principles as automotive air bag inflators that must be capable of the rigors of a 20-year
automobile life.
Hermetically sealed construction-As with the automobile air bag inflators, the SPFE is
hermetically sealed to 10.' scc helium/sec, which assures propellant integrity is maintained over
the life of the cartridge.
Low maintainability-There are no maintainability requirements for the SPFE. It is always
ready to function if the built-in-test (BIT) has verified squib bridgewire continuity. Since the
SPFE has no storage pressure, leakage during storage is not a concern, as with a nitrogenpressurized system.
Nontoxic-The exhaust products of the PAC fire suppression propellant are principally COz, Nl,
and HzO.
Noncorrosive-ASTM coupon testing has been completed using the exhaust products of the
PAC SPFE. These tests have shown that the PAC SPFE complies with the stringent noncorrosive requirements of the US military aircraft community.
Environmentallyfn'endZ~Noneof the gases (C02,N2, and H20) produced by the PAC SPFE is
chemically capable of contributing to the depletion of atmospheric ozone. Therefore, the ODP
equals zero. An estimate of the GWP for the agent output of the PAC SPFE is the weighted
average of COz emitted in the gas mixture (- 0.31). Therefore, the GWP is very low.
454

Halon Options Technical Workins Conference

27-29 April 1999

PAC has conducted in excess of 1000 full-scale tests with SPFE systems against a variety of fire
threats in a range of hay sizes and configurations (Figure 2). This full-scale live tire testing has
shown that SPFEs are ;in efficient solution for a wide variety of fire suppression applications and
platforms. I n addition. this extensive test history has given PAC ii unique opportunity to develop
a large database of empirical test data.
PAC has used this test database to devclop straightforward sizing models that incorporate it bay's
volume, vent area, surface area, clutter concentration, and internal airflow to detcrmine the SPFE
configuration required to providc adequate agent concentration such that the fire is extinguished.
Typically bay agent concentrations are verified using real-time concentration measurement
instrumentation. in much the same way that the Halon 1301 systems have historically been
qualified. This approach has been successfully employed to size and qualify PAC SPFE dry bay
fire protection systems for both the F/A-l8E/F and V-22 Osprey aircraft (Figures 3 and 4).

Figure 3. PAC SPFEs are currently in

production for the F/A- I8E/F.

Figure 4. PAC SPFE systems are currently in

production for the V-22 Osprey.

FIRE SUPPRESSION MECHANISM

An accurate and detailed understanding of the operative mechanism for flame suppression by
SPFE devices is important for reasons including optimization of agent composition, agent
delivery systems, and platform survivability. A definition and characterization of the critical
parameters for evaluating the fire suppression efficiency of SPFE systems is thereforc critical to
the further development and deployment of this technology.
Review of Combustion Chemistry
Flame combustion is often modeled using a one-step chemical reaction expression [SI, whereby
the rate of the reaction is related to the extent of collisions between fuel molecules and oxidizer
molecules. This collision frequency is related to fuel concentration [fuel], and oxidizer
concentration [oxid], according to
Halon Oplion\ Tcchnic;tl Workinf Conlcrcncc

27-24 April I')W

455

Rate = k [fuel] [oxid]

(1)

and the one-step chemical rate constant k is given by:

k = AT" exp ( - h / R T )

In general, Equations ( I ) and (2) indicate that the rate of combustion can be diminished by
(a) decreasing the concentration of the relevant species, [fuel] and/or [oxid], and (b) decreasing
the reaction temperature T. At temperatures above approximately 1600 K, air-hydrocarbon
mixtures are capable of self-sustaining combustion because sufficient heat is released by the
combustion process and fed hack to vaporize more fuel and initiate further combustion. Any
process intended to quench combustion, or extinguish a fire, must therefore reduce the chemical
rate constant to some value below that self-sustaining rate.
A concise approach expressing the extinction condition in a global form was developed by
Damkohler [SI. The Damkohler number D is given as the ratio of the residence time of
combustion species in the combustion zone, T~~~(zre5 flame zone length / flow-rate) and the
characteristic chemical reaction time ~~h~~ ('tchem 1 /reaction rate) from one-step model
expression (l),

(3)

D = Trehchem.

Conditions of extinction are possible below a critical ratio De. Minimizing D can be achieved by
decreasing ,,z, or by increasing zchem. Shorter residence time can be achieved by increasing the
flow rate through the flame zone. Cooling the mixture (Equation 2), diluting the reactants
(Equation I), or chemically interfering with the combustion process can produce longer chemical
reaction times.

SPFE FIRE SUPPRESSION MECHANISTICS

In general, there are four primary pathways to fire suppression: dilution. cooling, chemical interference, and flow rate effects. SPFE fire suppression systems incorporate aspects of each of
these mechanistic approaches in combination to affect flame extinction.
Dilution
The effectiveness of the inert gas discharged by a SPFE is enhanced by the high specific volume
of the hot gases resulting from the combustion process. On entry into an open tire zone, the
SPFE exhaust displaces air, consequently dropping the oxygen concentration quickly. Hydrocarbon combustion is largely quenched when oxygen levels fall helow 15%. so total inert gas
concentrations of 28% are expected to be sufficient for flame extinction [6-81. This concentration
is close to levels determined for CO2,Nz, and HzO based upon cup-burner testing.
Full-scale fire suppression testing of SPFE technology on platforms including the V-22 wing
bays, F/A-18 E/F, F-22 and C-I30drybays. as well as the F/A-lEE/F and F-22 engine bays, have
indicated that fires are always extinguished under conditions where oxygen levels are -12%
(Figure 5). However, suppression has also been observed in conditions where oxygen concentrations were higher than 15% (Figure 6). These data, when considered in light of published

456

Hillon Options Technical Working Confercnce

27-2') April I Y Y Y

analysis for pure N2, indicate that the oxygen dilution mechanism contribution is less than 30%
of the total flame suppression mechanism, as used by SPFE technology.

&

,.
,

,6

..

.
.
.......

II

Figure 5. Suppression at 12% 0 2 .

Figure 6. Suppression at 18% 0

Cooling
The effects of dilution and cooling are intimately intertwined. Babushok et al. 19,IO] dernonstrated that for pure N2.approximately 30% of its effectiveness is due to dilution. with 70% due
to the enthalpy associated with cooling the combustion reaction. The ability of agent to cool the
combustion region is directly related to the temperature of the agent. The model of Huggett
[ I I.121 suggests cooling to temperatures below 1600 K is necessary; consequently. as T,
increases in Equation (4). the overall amount of agent would also be expected to increase to
effect the samc degree of cooling:
7,

In the case o l solid propcllant fire extinguishers, calculated adiabatic combustion temperatures
are 1000 to 2000 K. but thermal losses to the hardware reduce the exhaust temperature
significantly. Thermal models predict, and SPFE testing corroborates, that air/agent blends have
temperatures SO0 K/400 "F. Consequently, the cooling capacity of a SPFE discharge will be
less than the cooling capacity of inert gas blends discharged at ambient tcmperatures. Sincc
typical extinction concentrations for both pure inert gases and SPFE exhausts are nearly identical,
elfects other than pure cooling must contribute significantly to SPFEs effectiveness in fire
suppression.

Further insight into this process comes from published reports by Grosshandler [ 131, using
turbulent spray burner testing and Trees et al. [ 141, using counterflow burncr testing. These
reports indicate that for a wide variety of agents, larger minimum loads are required to obtain
extinction as air temperature increases from 2 to 1 50 "C (420 K). The enhanced oxidizer (air)
temperature has the effect of increasing the rate of fuel evaporation and flame temperature. This
Halon Oplions Tcchnical Working Conlerencc

27-29 April IWO

457

results in faster chemical kinetics in the combustion zone, thereby creating a more vigorous fire
scenario that requires greater agent loads for suppression. The implication from these data is that
a pure cooling mechanism contributes 3G70% of the total suppressant capability of SPFEs.

Flow Rate Effects

The high rate of gas production also contributes to the effectiveness of solid propellant fire
extinguishers. The rapid delivery of gaseous agent to the combustion zone results in detachment
of the flame from a flame holder (typically a bluff body in the fire zone). This picture is
consistent with decreasing the flow time, or residence time of fuel and oxidizer species in the
combustion zone. High flow rates are achievable using pelletized or granular propellants, where
action times are of the order 100-250 msec; these rapid discharge times are difficult to achieve
with traditional nitrogen pressurized systems.
The SPFE testing at PAC has shown that there are cases where the agent concentration is insufficient to accomplish suppression by dilution and cooling alone. In these cases. rapid agent discharge, Le., flame strain, plays an important role in the suppression event, attributing in some
cases as much as SO% of the total suppression capability.

Chemical Effects
SPFE baseline inert gas-producing propellants are considered to be physically acting agents,
without any chemically active components. This approach to suppression contrasts with that of
Halon 1301. The key to the ability of Halon 1301 to rapidly terminate a fire scenario is its direct
interference with the chemical steps comprising the combustion process.
Hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel, JP-8) combustion is a process driven by reactive fragments known as
chemical radicals, such as OH. and Ha. Combining with, or trapping, these radical species
removes them from the cornbustion process, thereby diminishing the heat available to sustain the
combustion process. One highly efficient means for radical trapping utilizes another radical
species, or radical trap. For Halon 1301 the ability to terminate radical combustion reactions
comes via formation of atomic bromine, or Br., a radical trap for the critical combustion
intermediates, e.g., OH* and He:
CF3Br d
,C F y
Bra

+ He, OH-

+ Br> HBr, HOBr

In the absence of heat (or fire), Halon 1301 does not generate the Br* radical traps and therefore
has no chemical activity. Since 80% of Halon 1301 activity derives from its chemical action
[ 151, this reduced effectiveness significantly decreases Halon I301 capability for relight inhibition. Since in the absence of heat source, CF3Br is a purely physical (cooling/dilution) agent.

FULL-SCALE TESTING
Since 1993, PAC has conducted live fire testing in a multitude of full-scale test articles (Figure 7) representing diverse applications with various flammable fluids, including JP-8, JP-4,
gasoline, high and low pressure Mil-H-83282, and Mil-C-87252 hydraulic fluids. Typical bay
volumes evaluated ranged between 7 and 140 ft3. SPFE technology successfully extinguished

458

Halon Options Technical Working Confcrencc

21-29 April 1999

fires initiated by 12.7 mm API. 23 mm HEI, and 30 mm HE1 rounds as well a s traditional spray
and baffle-stabilized pool fire configurations. Internal airflow during the tests ranged from 0.0 to
4.0 Ibm/scc. In some cases, external airtlow (representing flight conditions) was present for aircraft applications. This air velocity ranged between 200 and 400 knots. In total, this represents

Figure 7. PAC has participated in extensive full-scale fire tevting

1000+ individual fire tests in 25+ full-scale test articles. Table I identifies a few of these test
programs. Based on the extensive test configurations and the sheer quantity of tests conducted,
one could argue that PAC SPFE technology has been more thoroughly tested in representative
full-scale test articles than any other nonhalon fire suppression technology.
Many test variables affect the amount of agent required to extinguish a fire. Typically. the fire
intensity increases with the threat sire. For example, testing has shown that a fire zone induced
by an HE1 round requires more agent than a fire started by an API threat or spray fire. Raffle
stabilized pool fires arc more difficult to extinguish than spray [ires. JP-8 fires generally require
more agent than heptane fires. Bays with significant internal airflow or venting flush out fire
int more rapidly and are more susceptible to a fire reignition than bays with minimal
internal airflow and venting. Finally. some bays are more challenging as a result of their aspect
ratio. clutter, and other design-related features. Although all of these parameters affect minimum
agent requirements for fire suppression. PAC has
1.0
determined that it is possible to tie SPFE agent
requirements to a few key parameters and achieve
P.4C Inert Gas SPFE
successful fire extinguishment every time.
0.75
PAC Active Gas SPFE

0.5

0.25

Testing has shown that the inert gas blends produced by

SPFE technology consistently outperform, on 21 weight
basis, other nonhalon fire suppression technologies.
regardless of bay size or configuration. The test data
show that an inert gas SPFE agent weight is typically
25 to 50% that of a nitrogen pressurized HFC- I25
system. needed to extinguish a given fire (Figure 8).
H;don Options Technical Working Conlerence

Figure 8. Relative agent weights.

27-29 April 1044

459

This was observed during PACs very first full-scale test program in 1993, conducted at NAWC
China Lake, and was reconfirmed most recently on a dry bay test program conducted at WPAFB
in Dayton.
TABLE 1. PAC SPFE TEST PROGRAMS HAVE SPANNED THE PAST DECADE.

Review of the test data confirms that a solid propellant fire extinguisher suppresses a fire via a
combination of fire suppression mechanisms. Specifically, an inert gas producing SPFE takes
advantage of three of these mechanisms (dilution, cooling, and strain). The performance advantages demonstrated by a SPFE illustrate the advantages of using multiple fire suppression mechanisms in unison, rather than relying on a single mechanism (i.e., dilution or cooling) for suppression. Additionally, the testing has shown that the performance advantage ratio (SPFE versus
other nonhalon technologies) has remained the same, regardless of bay size or test configuration.
This suggests that the relative effect that each separate fire suppression mechanism (dilution,
cooling, and strain) contributes to the performance of the SPFE remains approximately the same.
It is important to emphasize that the fire suppression event time associated with a SPFE (designed for a rapid discharge) is an order of magnitude faster than any other event timeline inside the
bay. For example, a SPFE discharges most of its agent within 100 msec., as compared to a
typical bay that might see as much as one air exchange per second. The agent discharge overwhelms all other factors that typically contribute to fire suppression effectiveness. In addition,
this rapid discharge provides the agent with significant momentum and therefore better agent
460

Halon Options Technical Working Conlerencc

27-2Y April 1999

distribution. As a result, internal airflow. venting, and clutter have a reduccd impact on SPFE
system performance as compared to a traditional nitrogen pressurized nonhalon system.
Because of the active role PAC has played in the design. dcvelopment, and testing of SPFEs for
fire suppression. PAC has becn in the unique position to accumulate a large database of test and
performance data. We have used these empirical data to develop several analytical methods and
computer codes for sizing SPFE systems to various applications. Givcn the bay volume, veni
area, surfiicc area, clutter concentration, and internal airflow, the SPFE configuration necessary
to provide adequate agent concentratioii such that the fire is consistently extinguished can be
determined. Typically, bay agent concentrations arc verified using real-time concentration
measurement instrumentation during a full-scale test program. This approach has becn used very
successfully during various development programs.
More recently, PAC has identified several simple relationships to help designers idcntify SPFE
agent weight rcquircmcnts for their particular application. This approach represents a marriagc
of fire suppression science and practical real-world test experience. These relationships are
based on data collected during all of the full-scale and lab-scale fire suppression test programs
PAC has participated in and describe a minimum agent concentration for the energy levels
associated with various fire threats (more specifically, an SPFE agent requircment per cuhic foot
of bay volume to he suppressed). PAC has developed such a relationship for both the inert gas
SPFE and the chemically active SPFE. Figure 9 describes these relationships for PAC inert and
chemically active gas SPFEs as well a s a similar relationship for HFC-I25 (based on empirical
test data) for comparison purposes.
Using these conccntration/threat relationships, a fire protection system can he sized, agent
concentrations mcasurcd. and a system designed and qualified without the need for expensive
full-scale live fire testing. If a very robust design approach is desired. onc could size it systcrn
based on a fire threat in excess of what is realistic for the desired application. This methodology
parallels the approach taken for designing Halon 1301 systems during the past 30 ycars.

Halm Option\ Technical Working Cnnlerencr

27-29 April I V J O

46 I

9x
Sx

. .-:- - - HFC-125

P Z r inert ga5 SPFE

PAC active gas SPFE

IX

FIRE /THREAT INTENSITY

Iminimd)

API

Imodcrale,

Spray Fire

Med. HE1 Pool Fire

(high)
Large HE1

Figure 9. Suppressant requirements as a function of fire threat.

CHEMICALLY ACTIVE AGENTS / ADDITIVES

One shortcoming of inert gas producing solid propellant fire suppression systems is a total
reliance upon phvsical, as opposed to a more efficient chemical activity. The incorporation of
chemical activity into solid propellants adds to the previously cited advantages of greater
efficiency and lower unit weight, lower overall gas temperatures, and the possibility for even
faster suppression action. Furthermore, the use of pymtechnic techniques for generation of
chemically active agents results in particles of very small size and consequent high activity.

The advantages of chemically active powders have been well documented by Ewing et al. [ 161, in
which the effectiveness for several powders approached 10X greater than that observed for Halon
1301 on a mass basis. The greatest activity was found for powders of small particle size. Particles of several different chemical compositions were observed to offer enhanced fire suppression efficiencies when particle sizes were less than approximately 30 pm. Some compositions
Na2C03, and NaCI.
demonstrated to he effective were K2CO~,
By incorporation of suitable reagents into a propellant composition, chemically active agents are
generated pyrotechnically [ 171. The combustion process allows formation of thermodynamically
stable materials that are derived from more energetic materials (fuels or oxidizers). Because of
the high temperatures encountered in propellant combustion, solid byproducts are formed in
micron size. Proper selection allows these resulting materials to be effective in fire suppression
applications: taken together with the high combustion temperatures, the result is pyrotechnic
generation of very small particles of chemically active agents. The gaseous byproducts of propellant combustion carry the chemically active agents through a delivery system, which directs the

462

Halon Options Technical Working Conierencc

27-29 April 1999

agents into the fire zone. The greater reactivity of these pyrotechnically generated small particle
size solids translates into significant improvements in the mass efficiency of solid propellant
systems used for fire suppression.
Suitable combinations of energetic fuels and additives with oxidizers, such as potassium nitrate
or potassium perchlorate. can be used for pyrotechnic generation of K2COI or KCI, which can he
used to affect chemical suppression of fires. Potassium species have been shown to possess
significant levels of chemical activity, but their mechanisms of action appear to be quite different. Among the halides, iodide salts would be anticipated to show the greatest efficiency
because of the greater stability of their atomic radicals. On delivery to the fire zone, elevated
temperatures would cause the thermal dissociation of these salts; for example,

where here M = alkali metal and X = halogen species

The thermally generated atomic radicals can then combine with radical species present in the
combustion process, thereby terminating or quenching the combustion process.
A combination of sub-scale and full-scale testing has demonstrated that the incorporation of
chemically active additives can yield substantial improvements in fire suppression efficiency in
several embodiments of SPFE fire suppression technology. PAC research explored powdered
candidate agents by injection into an axially flowing turbulent airstream and carried into ;ijet fuel
(JP-81 spray tlaine in a sub-scale test fixture known as ;I turbulent spray burner (TSB). Candidate
powders were selected from the family of substances known a s alkali and alkaline earth halides
and pseudohalides like coininon table salt, sodium chloride (NaCl), and road salt, or calcium
chloride (CaC12). The outcome of this comparative testing yielded a relative ranking of the most
effective powdered suppression agent tested.
Turbulent Spray Burner (TSB) Subscale Tests

PAC used a turbulent spray burner based on the design developed by N E T [ 181, in order to rank
fire suppression capability of powder compounds. A solid agent delivery system was incorporated upstream from the air flow inlet, whereby the powder was injected horizontally through an
open orifice. The powders were initially prepared by ball-milling and sieving through a 325mesh US Standard Testing Sieve (Tyler eq. 325 mesh) to produce a particle size < 40 km. All
agents were dried at 85 C until the time of testing. The injection port was inserted into the agent
line between the blow-down vessel and the spray burner. The blow-down vessel was a standard
compressed air tank regulated to 46 psig. Experimental testing demonstrates that for TSB flames
under identical conditions and evaluated on ii per mass basis, the order of fire suppression
efficiency is shown in Figure IO.

Halon Option.; Tcchnicul Working Conkercnoc

21-29 April 1999

463

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4

0.2

n
-

K2C03

KI

Nal

KCI

KBr

Figure IO. Active powder performance in PAC TSB testing.

Powder effectiveness among alkali halides was highest for the iodide salts, as might be expected
on the basis of the greater stability of the iodide atomic radicals. The observed performance for
the bromide and chloride does not fit the trend anticipated on these same grounds. A comparison
of KI vs. NaI indicates a small effect from the alkali metal, with the potassium species activity
higher on a molar basis. More puzzling is a comparison of potassium carbonate with the metal
halides, suggesting a more complex explanation of powder effectiveness than the parallel
between halogen contribution to suppression effectiveness in the alkali halides and Halon 1301.
Babushok and coworkers at NIST have explored the chemical limits to flame inhibition, comparing the chemical kinetics of hydrocarbon flames in the presence of Halon 1301 and various
superagents, examining the reaction rates in light of measured extinction concentration data
[ 191. They found that the rate constants for iron pentacarbonyl flame quenching were -1OOx
faster than found for Halon 1301, and that this represented a limiting case for chemical effectiveness. This means that chemically active flame suppression could not occur more quickly than in
the presence of Fe(C0)S; this observation of -1OOx increased effectiveness has been supported
by suppression testing. The key to this enhanced effectiveness was determined to be the more
efficient regeneration of radical scavengers from Fe(CO)s as opposed to CF3Br. Since the key
radical scavengers in Halon 1301 are the halogen atoms Br*, the Babushok finding indicates that
the Fe(C0)5-based scavengers are more efficient at regeneration and hence, flame suppression.
The Babushok work implicates flame chemistry similar to that of iron pentacarbonyl-but more
complex-for powder species such as sodium bicarbonate, NaHC03. In the same vein, the
greater efficiency of KzC03 vs. alkali halides, MX, can be explained in similar terms if alkali
atoms, rather than halogen atoms, are the primary agents for chemical effectiveness. Further it
appears that the M-X combination leads to inferior catalyst regeneration, Le., more dead ends,
for M atoms in the MX case, whereas the K-oxide chemistry of K2C03 is richer in terms of
recycling capability, thereby requiring less agent to achieve the effectiveness.

464

Halon Options Technical Working Confercnce 27-29 Apnl IY99

FULL-SCALE TESTING
Starting in 1996, PAC began testing chemically active SPFE technology in full-scale fire test
fixturcs. All of this testing was conducted in parallcl with ongoing testing programs, which were
evaluating inert gas SPFE technology for various aircraft and land vehicle applications. Typically, the active SPFE technology was testcd in addition to the incrt gas SPFE technology. This
cnabled PAC to evaluate the advantagcs of chemical activity on a truly level playing field, one
that is representative oT real-world fire protection applications.
The full-scale testing clearly demonstrated the advantagcs of adding chemical activity to SPFE
technology [201. (Solid propellant fire suppression technology had already proven itsclf a s
having :I significant performance/weight advantage over other nonhalon fire suppression technologies.) The addition of chemical activity improved the performance/weight advantapc of inert
gas producing SPFEs by a factor of 2 (Figure 9). More importantly, full-scale tcsting identified
scveral additional benefits.
The chcmical activity introduced by the PAC chemically active SPFEs creates a more robust fire
extinguishment mcchanism, one that is not susceptible to slight bay configuration changes, as
incrting type fire suppression systems can be. During video review of full-scale fire suppression
tcsts, a difference is observable between a dilution/cooling/strain extinguishment vs. one that
incorporates chcmical activity. Typically, during a dilution/cooling/strain cxtinguishment event.
one can observe the fire rapidly jumping to zones inside a bay that still offer a stoichiometrically
balanced environment. Eventually, as ;dl of the oxygen in the bay is sufficiently diluted, the fire
is cxtinguished.
During a chemically active fire suppression event, the fire does not jump around. instead the Tire
appears to rapidly vanish. One can observe the interference of the combustion reaction by the
active radical species as a function of time. It appears as though the agcnt is cngulfing (or
absorbing) the fire. As a result, the firc docs not have an opportunity to move outside the bay or
hide. This observation has been made during scveral full-. le test programs involving various
firc threats. This increased robustness offers significant advantages whcn one is dcaling with
fires that are induced by large ballistic threats or bays that have excessive vent areas (such as
some land vehicle engine compartments).
As an aside, it is important to note that a true fire reignition (or relight) only occurs if exposed
surfaccs exist inside the bay with tempcraturcs above the hot-surface-ignition-temperature
(HSlT) ofthe associated fuel. This situation can occur when a fire is allowed to burn for an
extended time prior to the discharge of the fire suppression agent. thereby heating the internal
surfaces of the bay. This is more prevalent in engine nacelles, where the pilot is required to
activate the fire suppression system manually. Aircraft dry bays, or other applications that
incorporate an autonomously activated fire suppression system, generally do not exhibit a re-light
condition. However, on several occasions during full-scale livc fire testing, re-light likc events
havc been observed. This occurs wbcn a fire suppression system has been discharged. thercby
extinguishing the firc inside the bay. Yet the firc lingers (or is pushed) outside the bay. only to
reenter the bay as soon as the extinguishing agent has hcen flushed out and the oxygen conccntration has returned to levels that suppon combustion. This phenomenon is most common when a
fire suppressant is used that relies on dilution and does not incorporate any chemical activity. and
it highlights the merits of incorporating chemical activity into the fire suppression system.
Halon Option\ Technical Working Conlcrencc

27-2') April I'JW

465

An additional advantage demonstrated during full-scale testing is a result of the higher

performance/weight ratio afforded by a chemically active SPFE. Since a 2X-performance
increase results in SO% reduction in gas production, there is less gas being discharged into the
bay, making chemically active SPFEs attractive for applications that incorporate tightly sealed
bays with minimal venting or airflow. A SO% reduction in gas production equates to similar
reductions in the SPFEs use of dilution, cooling, and strain as the principal fire suppression
mechanisms. The performance differences, recorded between inert gas SPFE technology and
chemically active SPFE technology during full-scale testing, suggest that PAC chemically active
SPFE technology extinguishes fires via a mechanism that is approximately 10%dilution, 20%
cooling, 20% strain, and SO% chemical (Table 2). Real-time discrete-point concentration
measurements conducted during full-scale test programs demonstrated that robust fire extinguishment consistently occurred when oxygen concentrations of -19% were achieved.
TABLE 2. RELATIVE USE OF FIRE SUPPRESSION MECHANISM.

Mechanism

Halon 1301

Nitrogen

Suppressant Type
HFCs

Dilution - %
Cooling - %
Chemical - %
Strain - %

30
70

20
80

20
80

Inert Gas
SPFE
20
40

Active Gas
SPFE
IO

20
SO

40

20

Chemically active SPFE technology performance parallels that of Halon 1301. As Sheinson et
al. [IS]have discussed, halon extinguishes fires via a mechanism that is approximately 20%
dilution and 80% chemical. Published design equations for Halon 1301 identify oxygen
concentrations of -20% as sufficient to achieve consistent fire extinguishment, nearly the same
as measured during chemically active SPFE testing.
These test results and observations are important since they tie the full-scale test results to the
lab-scale test results and highlight the parallels between traditional Halon 1301 fire protection
philosophies and SPFE technology fire protection philosophies. Both technologies can be sized
and qualified (via concentration measurements) using a straightforward design approach.

1500

0.Conuentiona,Pressuriled
ABCPowderWem

0 .Primex SPFE system

250

Full-scale testing has also shown how the rapid

agent delivery associated with SPFE technology
augments the effectiveness of a chemically active
agent. This was demonstrated recently during a
fire test program involving a highly ventilated
bay. The fire threat included both a spray fire
and a pool fire. The test program evaluated
various fire suppression technologies. The two
most effective technologies (by a long shot), both
incorporated a chemically active agent. One
approach used a powder delivered via a trdditional nitrogen pressurized system; the other was a

Figure 1 1. SPFE delivery is more efficient.

466

Halon Options Technical Working Conference 21-29 April 1999

chemically active SPFE. The chemically active SPFE outperformed the nitrogen-pressurized
powder system, o n an agent weight basis, by a factor of -4. The results are shown in Figure I I .
These test results highlight the advantages associated with a high velocity agent discharge. The
agent is delivered with much higher momentum, giving it better flame front penetration
characteristics and better distribution throughout thc bay.
le testing has demonstrated the advantages of using a chemically active fire suppressant.
Solid propellant fire extinguishers offer a highly effective means for delivering it chemically
active agent. The chemical activity works hand-in-hand with SPFE technology. The synergism
of SPFE technology and chemically active agents offer a fire suppression technology that is more
efficient and robust than is currently available with other fire suppression technologies.

SUMMARY
SPFE systems have been shown to be effective for providing fire suppression protection in 21
whole range of nonoccupied applications. These systems require no distribution lines and
provide fire protection at volume/weight requirements compai-able to Halon 1301. Sizing models
have been developed and validated to determine the required agent loading for a number of firc
scenarios and fire threats. thereby obviating extensive and expensive full-scale testing. The
SPFE approach maximizes its efficiency by taking full advantage of the synergistic interactions
of dilution, cooling, flame strain, and chemical interference to effect fire suppression. SPFE
delivery of chemical agents offers advantages of lightweight, small size. rapid action, and robust
performance in it variety of firc scenarios. SPFE systems should be considered for all nonoccupied applications requiring a robust suppression system. such as aircraft drybays and vehicle
engine compartments. where a small and lightweight fire protection system is desired.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank Dr. Anthony Hamins and Dr. Don Burgess of NlST for several helpful
discussions. The generous support of NAVAIR, NAWC-China Lake, WPAFB Survivability
Lab, Aberdeen Proving Grounds, V-22 and F- 18 E/F, F-22 and C- I30 program offices are
graciously acknowledged for supporting parts of this work. We also wish to acknowledge the
help of our PAC fire suppression colleagues, in particular Nick Wolf. Kim Wilson, Chuck
Anderson, Gary Gregg. E. J. Wucherer, Dr. Frank Lu, Mitch Mitchell, Pat Finnelly, Lyle
Galbraith. and John Italiane.

REFERENCES
I.
2.

3.

L. D. Galbraith, G. F. Holland, D. R. Poole, and R. M. Mitchell, Apparatus for Suppressing a Fire, US Patent No. 5,423.384; 1995.
R. Reed, M. L. Chan, and K. L. Moore. Pyrotechnic Fire Extinguishing Method, US
Patent No. 4.601,344; 1986.
J . B. Neidert. R . E. Black 111, R. D. Lynch, J. D. Martin, and T. Simpson. Fighting Fire
with Fire: Solid propellant Gas Generator Technology for Fire Suppression, presented at
JANNAF Propellant Conference, Cleveland, OH, 1998.
H d o n Oplions Tcchnic;rl Working Conlercncc

27-29 April I W l J

467

4.

5.
6.
7.
8.

9.
IO.

11.
12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.
18.

19.
20.

468

J. C. Yang and W. L. Grosshandler, Solid Propellant Gas Generators, Proceedings qfthe

1995 Workshop: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, 1995.
F. A. Williams, A Unified View of Fire Suppression,J. Fire & Flammability, 5 , pp. 5463, 1974.
B. Lewis and G. VonElbe, Combustion, Flames and Explosions of Gases, Third ed:
Academic Press. Inc., 1987.
A. F. Roberts and B. W. Quince, A Limiting Condition for the Burning of Flammable
Liquids, Combustion and Flame, 20, pp. 245-251, 1973.
D. J. Rasbash, Extinction of Fires by Water Sprays,Fire Research Abstracts and
Reviews. 4, pp. 28-53, 1962.
T. Noto, V. Babushok, A. Hamins, and W. Tsang, Inhibition Effectiveness of Halogenated
Compounds, Combustion and Flame, 112, pp. 147-160, 1998.
V. Babushok, T. Noto, A. Hamins, and W. Tsang, Chemical and Physical Influences of
Halogenated Fire Suppressants, Proceedings, Halon Options Technical Working
Conference. Albuquerque, NM, pp. 55-65, 1997.
C. Huggett, Habitable Atmospheres Which Do Not Support Combustion, Cornbusrion
and Flame, 20, pp. 140-142, 1973.
D. M. Tucker, D. D. Drysdale, and D. J. Rasbash, The Extinction of Diffusion Flames
Burning in Various Oxygen Concentrations by Inert Gases and Bromotrifluoromethane,
Combustion and Flame, 4 I , pp. 293-300, 198 1.
W. L. Grosshandler, G. Gmurczyk, and C. Presser, Effectiveness of Halon Alternatives in
Suppressing Dynamic Combustion Processes, Halon Replacements: Technoloxy and
Science, ACS Symp. Ser., Vol. 61 I , A. W. Miziolek and W. Tsang, Eds. Washington, DC:
American Chemical Society, pp. 205-224, 1995.
D. Trees, K. Seshadri, and A. Hamins, Experimental Studies of Diffusion Flame
Extinction with Halogenated and Inert Fire Suppressants, Halon Replacements:
Technology and Science, ACS Symp. Ser., Vol. 61 I , A. W. Miziolek and W. Tsang, Eds.
Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, pp. 190-203, 1994.
R. S. Sheinson, J. E. Penner-Hahn. and D. Indritz, The Physical and Chemical Action of
Fire Suppressants, Fire Safety Journal, 15. pp. 437-450, 1989.
C. T. Ewing, F. R. Faith. J. T. Hughes, and H. W. Carhart, Flame Extinguishment
Properties of Dry Chemicals: Extinction Concentrations for Small Diffusion Pan Fires,
Fire Technology, 25, pp. 134-149, 1989.
G. F. Holland and M. A. Wilson, Chemically Active Fire Suppression Composition, US
Patent No. pending; 1998.
A. Hamins, T. Cleary, P. Bothwick, N. Gorchkov, K. McGrattan, G. Fomey. W.
Grosshandler, C. Presser, and L. Melton, Suppression of Engine Nacelle Fires, Fire
Suppression System Performance i$Altemative Agents in Aircraft Engine Nacelle and Dry
Bay Lahoratory Simulations: SP 890, Volume 11, R. G. G a m , Ed.: NIST, 1995, pp. 1-199.
V. Babushok, W. Tsang, G. T. Linteris, and D. Reinelt, Chemical Limits to Flame
Inhibition, Comhustion and Flame, 1 IS,pp. 551-560, 1998.
A. Hamins, T. Cleary, and J. Yang, An analysis of the Wright Patterson Full-scale Engine
Nacelle Fire Suppression Experiments, US Department of Commerce, Technology
Administration, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD,
NISTIR-6193, 1997.

Halon Options Technical Working Conference 27-29 April I Y9Y