Search Results

The US Army Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC) has developed a unique physics based modeling & simulation (M&S) capability using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) techniques to optimize automatic fire extinguishing system (AFES) designs and complement vehicle testing for both occupied and unoccupied spaces of military ground vehicles. The modeling techniques developed are based on reduced global kinetics for computational efficiency and are applicable to fire suppressants that are being used in Army vehicles namely, bromotrifluoromethane (Halon 1301), heptafluoropropane (HFC-227ea, trade name FM200), sodium-bicarbonate (SBC) powder, water + potassium acetate mixture, and pentafluoroethane (HFC-125, trade name, FE-25). These CFD simulations are performed using High Performance Computers (HPC) that enable the Army to assess AFES designs in a virtual world at far less cost than physical-fire tests.

Fire protection, active and passive, has been, and is, an important area of concern during the design, development and deployment phases for all modern ground vehicles. All US military vehicles carry handheld fire extinguishers, and many tactical and all combat vehicles have automatic fire protection systems that protect the crew, engine, and in some cases, external components such as fuel tanks and wheels, from potentially catastrophic combat events involving fire. Vehicle designs also mitigate fire hazards by separating the vehicle occupants from the most flammable materials, e.g., fuel and ammunition, as much as practical. Explosion protection of the crew and passengers in military vehicles is a unique application with unique requirements that must balance suppression actions with safety limits.

Fire safety is an important issue on any vehicle. Generally vehicle occupants and flammable materials are in close proximity and it is not always easy or practical for the occupants to move away in the event of a fire. A properly designed on-board, pre-engineered fire protection system can significantly mitigate the effects of a vehicle fire, including saving lives and reducing property losses. But such fire protection systems may not be appropriate for all vehicles. In any case, a properly designed system depends on the threat being well understood. Additionally, vehicle real-estate tradeoffs-including weight, size, cost and environmental factors-must be considered. When a fire protection system is appropriate, the type and configuration of the optimum system varies widely and will depend on the vehicle and its intended use.

A prototype fire suppression system was tested in one full-scale vehicle crash tests and three static vehicle fire tests. The prototype fire suppression system consisted of 2 Solid Propellant Gas Generators and two optical detectors. These components were installed on the hood of the test vehicle. A vehicle crash test and a series of static vehicle fire tests were performed to determine the effectiveness of this prototype fire suppression systems in extinguishing fires in the engine compartment of a crashed vehicle