airliner cabin environment research overview · airliner cabin environment research overview ......
Post on 05-May-2020
7 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
William F. GaleAuburn University
Airliner cabinenvironment research
overviewPart 1 – Health related topics
Cabin environment
LeadAuburn University
Co-leadsHarvard UniversityPurdue University
Core teamBoise State UniversityKansas State UniversityU. of California BerkeleyU. Med. & D. New Jersey
Cross-disciplinary team
Focus
Near-termInterim & iterative approaches
~ 40 industry partnersIndustry collaboration
ManufacturersOperators/crewsSecurity
Partnerships
TRL 1 Basic principles observed and reportedTRL 2 Technology concept and/or application formulatedTRL 3 Analytical and experimental critical function and/or
characteristic proof-of conceptTRL 4 Component and/or breadboard validation in laboratory environmentTRL 5 Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant environmentTRL 6 System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant
environment (ground or space)TRL 7 System prototype demonstration in a space environmentTRL 8 Actual system completed and “flight qualified” through test and
demonstration (ground or space)TRL 9 Actual system “flight proven” through successful mission operations
TRL descriptions fromJohn C. Mankins Technology Readiness Levels, A White PaperAdvanced Concepts Office. Office of Space Access and Technology, NASA, 1995
NASA TRL scaleWhere do ACER & industry partners fit in?
ACER
ind.
Ozone
Pesticides
Cabin pressure
Air quality incidents & filters
In-flight measurements
Contaminant transport
Sensors
Decontamination
Infectious disease transmission
Integrated R & D program
CurrentCurrent NewNew
Ozone projectDrivers
Industry need: want longer-life ozone convertersPublic good: acceptable ozone levels?
How frequently do flights exceed FARs?Are current FARs appropriate?
TasksIn-flight ozone samplingOzone chemistryHuman interactions
Ozone tangible outcomes
Lower maintenance costsOzone converter pre-filtersto enhance converter lifeJoint with manufacturers
Informed basis for FARsGet rid of “the wrong stuff”
Byproducts worse than ozone itselfNeed to target the right chemistry
Drivers“Disinsection” to protect public health/agriculture/ecosystemsMandated by some governmentsMost work is for buildings Limited knowledge of exposure in cabin
TasksDetermine passenger/crew exposures & health implicationsDevelop guidelines
Pesticide project
Reduced disinsection costsReduction/elimination of pesticide use addresses crew concernsMake case to request relief from burdensome patchwork of regulations
Shows if disinsection harmful or notConsiders pesticide alternativesDoes disinsection actually work?
Pesticides tangible outcomes
DriversChamber data is forhealthy individualsAging population Health-compromisedpassengers
TasksReview Boeing funded OSU chamber studyAssess needs for new workChamber studies (restricted to rel. healthy) Monitoring passengers
Cabin pressure project
Pressure tangible outcomesNear term — physician guidance
Pretreatment for susceptible individualsSuitable first responseFewer disruptive health emergencies
Longer-term — design dataOSU study probably already influenced choice of 787’s cabin altitudeNew post-787 ECS designs can be made compatible with aging population
DriversInfrequent “smoke in the cabin” incidentsPossibility of bleed air contamination Health concerns expressed by crews
TasksIncidents (joint effort with OHRCA)
On-board sampling during “incidents”Fight attendant cohort studyAir quality incident reporting system
Sampling of aircraft filters
“Incidents” projects
“Incidents” tangible outcomesObjective data
Know what if anything ishappening, how often andhow significant?Enables informed discussion
Path to a fix (if there is a problem)Distinguish causes of perceived incidents e.g.bleed air issues vs. smoldering wiringCould localize to specific classes of equipment/operations enabling affordable fix
DriversNeeded for most ACER projectsASHRAE Phase I study was small-scale
TasksPassenger surveysAir quality samplingMicrobial sampling
In-flight measurements
Key enabling activity
Dec. # flights
Driver – where have all the(de)contaminants gone?
Correct location of sensorsEfficacious decontaminationImpact of air quality incidents, pesticides etc., etc.
TasksDevelop air distribution and transport models with predictive powerExperimental verification
Contaminant transport
Contaminantsource location
Key enabling activity for other projectsForensic/epidemiological toolsDesign tools for future aircraft
Contam. tran. outcomes
Infectious disease transmissionDrivers
Need to place civil aviation in the broader context of epidemiologyDistinguish between
Transport of infectious casesPassenger to passenger transmissionSurface mediated transmission
TasksIntegrates relevant knowledge from other ACER projectsAerosol studies & modeling
Image by ACER’s Bill Nazaroff
Disease trans. tangible outcomesReplaces conjecture “I got sick when I flew to...” with hard scienceIdentifies any changes needed to future generation ECS or cabinKey public health planning tool
Prioritize aircraft, versus terminal, versus other transportation modes etc.Prioritize response within the cabinMake best use of limitedresources (esp. in epidemic)
SummaryKey issues in passenger & crew health
OzonePesticidesCabin pressureAir quality incidents
Wider issuesDisease transmission
Enabling activitiesIn-flight measurementsContaminant transport
Acknowledgments
FAA Office of Aerospace Med.
The ACER team
ACER industry partners
Collaborators
Students & staff
Although the FAA has sponsored this project, it neither endorses nor rejects the findings of this research. The presentation of this information is in the interest of invoking technical community comment on the results and conclusions of the research.
Questions/Comments Please?
acer-coe.org
William F. GaleAuburn University
Airliner cabinenvironment research
overviewPart 2 – Chem.–bio. response
related topics
Sensors projectDrivers
Response to epidemics Defeat of chem.–bio. terrorismEnables other ACER projects
TasksEvaluation of COTS/GOTS/NM systemsModification for airliner useSensor locationIntegration into the cabin
Defines what’s practicableCuts through the sensor hypeDetermines what works in civil aviationRealistic expectations @ realistic $
Unglamorous, but practicable sensors Simple, low cost sensors in right locationsUse protocols recognize sensor limitations
Sensor backboneSmall, fast, cheap & useful for any sensorPractical to integrateinto cabin
Sensor tangible outcomes
Sensor “bread box”
Supports a suite of sensors
Data processing/comms.
Modular/scaleable
Aircraft-ready
Affordable
ProblemsCosts too muchTakes too longFalse positivesVol./mass/power
Hold at airport for PCR
Trigger sensor initiates sample capture
Normal landing
Drivers – respond toTerrorism
DC anthrax attacksTokyo subway sarin attackChlorine tankersAirliners favorite target
Epidemics/pandemicsSARSinfluenza and AITB, plague etc.
TasksTechnology reviewLab evaluationFull-scale demo.
Decon. project
Ready when next pandemic hitsEvaluated efficacy of COTS hardwareProcess tweaks have huge effect
Enables response to bioterrorDelivery system thatworks for civil aviationKnock down agentswithout risk to aircraft
Overcome barriers to airline useSafety issuesCost and logistics
Decon. tangible outcomes
Thermal decon. systemAeroClave COTS technology
Aircraft hookup
Antiviral only
T control/uniformity
RH control capability
Efficacy
(Long-term effects?)
Evaluation – thermal decon.
Limited scope for accel. lifing
Efficacy dataInfluenza
0.000001
0.00001
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time (min)
Frac
tion
Surv
ivin
g
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Num
ber o
f Log
Red
uctio
ns25% Relative Humidty (RH)
50% RH
75% RHDetection limit
Stainless steel substrates, 60 �Cº
Efficacy against BWAs well known, but use very dilute against viruses?
Materials compatibility?
Best method of delivery?
Vaporized hydrogenperoxide (VHP)
Materials/systems compatibility
Aircraft alloys, non-metallic materials & avionics
Single aisle demonstrationEnvironmental conditioning (AeroClave)VHP injection (STERIS)
Decon. projectWide-body demo
SummaryChem.–bio. sensors
COTS/GOTS/NM evaluationoptimization and support systemslimited capabilities with current generation
Whole airliner decontaminationefficacymaterials and systems compatibilityoptimal delivery and full-scale demospromising, but hurdles remain
Acknowledgments
FAA Office of Aerospace Med.
The ACER team
ACER industry partners
CollaboratorsStudents & staff
Although the FAA has sponsored this project, it neither endorses nor rejects the findings of this research. The presentation of this information is in the interest of invoking technical community comment on the results and conclusions of the research.
Questions/Comments Please?
acer-coe.org
top related