David Atkinson BSc. Chem. Eng.

Technical Director

Westport, Ireland

May 2014

BLUERAD LTD

BLUEPROOF

Blueproof and Governors Island

This presentation precedes the overview of the Governors Island (GI) experiments presented by Underwriters Laboratories (UL) and partially draws from their GI presentation.

What UL will present is groundbreaking and is focused on protecting fire crews. However the importance of these findings on structural design and its influence on the home and the occupants in a fire cannot be ignored.

Bluerad are focused not just on the fire fighter in the front line but also the public. New tactics will save fire fighters’ lives and I applaud that.

So, how can the other findings be implemented?

The first barrier we can implement quickly is Blueproof.

However, there is still a lot of work to be done on other aspects, some of which this presentation will address.

• The GI experiments demonstrated that applying water directly into the fire compartment, as soon as possible, resulted in the most effective means of suppressing the fire

• This is not new and has been called by many names

– Blitz attack

– Resetting the fire

– Early water

– Transitional attack

Blueproof provides the method to achieve thisby already being present in the fire compartment

Blueproof and Governors Island

Blueproof Experiment Data

Blueproof has been proven to direct water onto the greatest heat source, where and when it is needed the most.

An unpowered, self targeting, cost-effective fire suppression device that:

• dramatically reduces the temperatures throughout the structure

• helps to maintain oxygen levels within survivable limits, and reduces smoke

• protects fire fighters and occupants against flashover

• Starts to suppress the fire before the brigade receive the call.

• still requires input from the emergency services

• meets the requirements of the directive 2001/95/EC of the European parliament and of the council of the 3 December 2001 on general product safety

• Satisfies the requirements of As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP)

Initial concept development

Blueproof

Blueproof

Initial Concept Development

• very little water has a massive effect on a fire [1]

• the amount of fluid in a heating panel gives twice the requirement to suppress a fire in an average sized room [2]

• a high tech device can be used to release the fluid from the heating panel

• the device will meet the temperature and pressure requirements of a household radiator under normal operating conditions (13 bar and 75 oC operating and 85 oC max ) [3]

[1] Ref: Essentials of Fire Fighting and Fire Department Operations 5th Edition correlated to the 2008 edition of NFPA 1001.[2] Ref The Case For Space Royal Institute for British Architects 2011[3] Ref. Din EN 442

From the initial observations based on science that have been the inspiration to GI and Bluerad’s design team, we know:

Mode of Action

In a fire, the device releases the fluid in the heating panel into the room.

This happens when surface failure occurs along the lines of least resistance

[4] Spherulites embedded into a mosaic mesogen in the Maltese Cross pattern

The surface of Blueproof during heat testing failing openWhy is this important?. Fluid flow and smoke

elimination.

Plastic Fails open in a Maltese Cross Pattern [4]

Surface designWe designed bursting discs, a form of Pressure Safety Valve (PSV)

designed to code [5]

[5] American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)

A fire tested sample displaying how the thinned

wall section formed a nozzle

Thinned wall bursting discsections

Fire TestingTunnel Test experiments on Blueproof device

• confirmed activation time (avg. 44 seconds), way below the bench mark of 90 seconds for sprinkler in accordance to Code [6]

During full scale experiment with flame impingement [7]

• The device operated in all directions off five facets. It targeted the flames

This was unexpected as the device targeted the flames 5 distinct jets formed

[6] ASTM E84, NFPA 255, UL 723 and ULC S102

[7] ISO 5660-1-2002 Reaction to fire tests. Heat release, smoke production and mass loss rate. Part 1: Heat release

rate (Cone calorimeter method) International Organisation of standardization Geneva. 2002

Fire TestingDuring full scale experiment without flame impingement [8]

• The device activated on the uppermost facet as the heat radiated down from the ceiling

[8] ISO TC 021/SC 05 Fire Protection – Automatic Sprinkler Systems –

Part 13: Requirements and test methods for extended coverage sprinklers 14-06-2013

Integrity during fireDid Blueproof melt?

• The air trapped at the top of the heating panel was forced through the surface of the device during the Vicat (softening) phase

• Fluid passed through the device, it cooled and maintained its integrity.

• During full-scale fire experiments. Blueproofs retained their integrity as shown below

All the above devices were subjected to direct flame impingementon the test rig [7].

Device subjected to full scale fire test displays

similar behaviour

Direct flame impingement

Typical spray patterns during activationwith flame impingement [7]

Heat flux equivalent to one upholstered chair. Enough energy to create flashover.

Temperature decay

How long before the fire is suppressed by Blueproof?

• The rate of temperature decay occurs almost as fast as the rate of rise.

• The room cools within 20 to 50 seconds of activation as the fluid is released.

• Test chamber cooled in seconds after activation of the device. As data from GI suggested.

• Blueproof data showed that the temperatures fell dramatically

• GI data showed that this happened throughout the structure.

Source for the graph: Fire Mutual Research Council Serial No. 21011.4 RC75-T-31 June 1975

Blueproof device

activated: fluid

released

Control of flow path

176.6 -> 510 oC

426 -> 982 oC

49-> 71 oC

426 -> 982 oC

426 -> 871 oC

76 -> 143 oC

Source Fire Behaviour and Tactical Considerations Aug 23rd 2013 IAFTV NIST UL

Note: the temperature rises

Impact of using water

Source Fire Behaviour and Tactical Considerations Aug 23rd 2013 IAFTV NIST UL

43-> 43 oC

107-> 88 oC

426-> 149 oC

926-> 149 oC

315-> 93 oC

121-> 93 oC

648-> 204 oC

Note: the temperature falls dramatically

Impact of water on structure

Source: Fire Behaviour and Tactical Considerations Aug 23rd 2013 IAFTV NIST UL

815-> 37 oC

815-> 21 oC

843-> 121 oC

454-> 204 oC

649-> 204 oC

71-> 71 oC

Temperature Fall with water application

Source Fire Behaviour and Tactical Considerations Aug 23rd 2013 IAFTV NIST UL

982-> 426 oC

482-> 260 oC

71-> 71 oC

315-> 176 oC

143-> 98 oC

371-> 148 oC

648-> 149 oC

How do we getfine mist?Pulse?

Activation at a height of 3 feet or 1 meter

Source Fire Behaviour and Tactical Considerations Aug 23rd 2013 IAFTV NIST UL

204-> 93 oC 37-> 48 oC

482-> 121 oC

204-> 65 oC

482 -> 65 oC

537-> 93 oC

BlueproofActivates at 350oC

Blueproof full scale fire experiment

Accelerant added Fire started Fire suppressed by 5 distinct streams created during experiment

Crib to ISO [8]

Blueproof head locationAs per ISO [8] for a sidewall

mounted sprinkler head

Pressure incresed in heating

panel from 1.5 to over 9 bars

in seconds

Blueproof full scale fire experiment

• Temperatures fell by hundreds of degrees. The device self-targeted the highest heat source and temperatures were suppressed within a few minutes. There was minimal delay between fire onset and attack.

• Suppressing fire lessens oxygen depletion, improving the likelihood of occupant survival.

• When fire fighters arrive they would enter a better controlled climate, in which oxygen levels have stabilized and the whole structure is cooling.

• Blueproof attacks the fire locally not remotely. A fire crew making an exterior water application has limitations to how and where they can direct the hose stream because of obstacles.

• In the final Blueproof full scale fire experiment the layer of gases at the ceiling was almost invisible. The instruments demonstrated the temperature profile. The water blasting from the radiator at the ceiling into the gases indicated that the radiated heat from those gases had activated the device.

Water usage

Blueproof creates a cyclonic fog pattern. It does not entrain air to feed the fire during interruption to flow. This contrasts with a fire fighter who may break contact with the target due to manual handling errors and hence entrain air when using a hose remotely.

Typical Blueprooffog pattern at 3.5 bar [7]

In the full-scale fire experimentsthe pressure in the heating panel increased toover 9 bar in seconds and forced the water fromthe panel [8]

Cooling the gas layer

The cooling of the hot gas layer directly at the ceiling is significant.

This reduces the risk of flashover. It performs an action that has to be undertaken by a fire fighter prior to room entry.

By spraying water into ceiling gases from below, Blueproof reduces the risk to the fire fighter entering the structure to effect an attack and rescue.

If occupants open a door, it lessens the risk of them being struck by a wall of flame during escape and evacuation.

But why is this so important?

Hydrocarbon gases go through phases. It is raw gases in a fire that are the most dangerous form and are highly unpredictable. They do not gather at the ceiling in one area they plume.

They go through tolerable limits. lower explosive limit (LEL) and upper explosive limits (UEL). Between the LEL and the UEL they ignite.

We calibrate smoke alarms and gas detectors to react within a percentage of these limits.

Migration of the gas layer

We have to stop the migration. This is so important as found in the gas industry.

On confirmed fire a zone is isolated. All ESDVs close, the systems de pressurize, HVAC systems shut down and fire dampers close.

The same unprocessed raw hydrocarbon gases are produced in a house fire. But in the home it is unrealistic to effect the isolation however, the threat remains the same.

Why isolate? The gases have had time to penetrate the electrical fittings and ignite.

Currently there is no form of fire trap between floors in the home.

There is nothing between the pipe tracts or service tracts in homes. Rooms are not compartmentalized and the fire can easily spread through the ceiling to the upper floors and through the cupboards, as proven at Governors Island.

A typical kitchen contains enough alcohol, sugars and feedstock to warrant a fire safe enclosure in industry. The extraction systems, coated in oil and grease with no isolation provide a direct route into the ceiling void and easily ignite.

Blueproof will reduce the effects of the migration.

Rapid Pressure RiseDuring experiments the radiator/heating panel that Blueproof was attached to absorbed the heat so quickly that its internal pressure increased, from 1.5 bar to over 9 bar in seconds. This added pressure propelled the water into the ceiling gases. This behaviour is called ‘Blocked in pressure’ and it is one of the key questions used during a Hazards and Operability study (HAZOP).

It is one of the key factors to be address during the reverse flow and pressure rise section of the HAZOP study.

The HAZOP studies system design to establish the need for additional safety measures, of which a Pressure Safety Valves (PSV’s), in the case of fire or pressure rise or fall, is one example. The HAZOP is an industrial requirement and in some EU country’s a legal requirement. Normally it follows the guidelines of ISO 17776. Blueproof is a form of PSV.

A heating panel is designed to withstand 13 bar in accordance to EN 442. In the full scale fire experiment with two cribs and a fully developed fire, Blueproofactivated at around 9 bar but the pressure in the panel continued to rise to 10 bar. This is a typical display of blocked in pressure behaviour.

Smoke ScrubbingTo scrub smoke, it needs good contact with the water. Blueproof provides almost perfect water contact by giving excellent droplet size distribution.

Smoke scrubbing

The maximum efficiency for a wet scrubber is achieved between the2 to 8 microns droplet size range.

Ref: Effect of Diffusiophoresis on particle collection by wet scrubbers Leslie E.Sparks and Michael J. Pilat Water air resourcesdivision, department of civil Engineering. University of Washington 1970

NFPA 750Classes fine mist water spray systems.1. 200 microns2. 400 microns3. 400 + micronsThe systems are for suppression not scrubbing smoke.

Blueproof creates a cyclonicswirling direct stream, not a fine mist system.

Smoke scrubbing vs. water mist cooling

The maximum efficiency Is achieved in the 2 to 8 microns droplet size range for a wet scrubber. Pressure fog is the closest but requires up to 100 bar to operate.

Ref: A review of water mist fire suppression systems – fundamental studies. Zhigang Liu and Andrew K.Kim Fire Risk Management Program Institute for Research in Construction. National Research Council Canada. 2000

Smoke scrubbingBlueproof removed the smoke efficiently.

The device swirls the fluid flow and breaks up droplets by causing collisions.

This was shown in slide 8.

Cyclonic action and addition of steam produces a five fold increase in particulate removal. 99.9% smoke removal is possible using a steam venturi at 3.5 bar [8]

Blueproof by design is a venturi

The Venturi effect [9] is a jet effect; as with a funnel the velocity of the fluid increases as the cross sectional area decreases, with the static pressure correspondingly decreasing. According to the laws governing fluid dynamics, a fluid's velocity must increase as it passes through a constriction to satisfy the principle of continuity,

Source: Spraying Systems Co

[8] Semrau et al , 1955.

[9] ‘The Venturi effect’ Wolfram Demonstrations Project.

Blueproof does not put water onto the flame source, but it does lower the room temperature. To put out an oil fire the oil has to be cooled and starved of air or it can be placed under a controlled burn until spent. Bluerad intends to demonstrate that this can be achieved in a future experiment .

This shows a controlled burn through a flameWater is not flowing into the feed stock. The gas burner.

In the photo the colour of the flame front has changed as the water is limiting its growth.The flame is cool at the bottom as it draws in the air and hot at the top as it release’s particulates.AFFF foam is used on industrial oil fires or a controlled burn. Why are controlled burns rare? we loose the lights.

Kitchens

Kitchens

What GI proved is that kitchen fires do not follow the expected path.

In industry it is mandatory in kitchens :-

• to stop water hitting deep fat fryers.

• automatically isolate the HVAC systems.

and normally the area is totally flooded. Sprinklers are shielded. Extraction systems have CO2 flooding.

In the home, fire blanket use is recommended to smother a pan fire.

However, oil has to be cooled to prevent re-ignition, and we do not shut in cooker hood extraction systems.

With Blueproof a controlled burn can be undertaken. Loss of lights is not important as the environmental and cost impact is negligible. In comparison to

to the likes of Dhahran and Zelten.

High Rise

GI and Bluerad experiments showed common results for fires in structures. UL experimented in a 4 storey house and Bluerad in a fire test chamber. However apartment blocks are common throughout Europe.

But how do our findings apply to high rise? UL experimented on separate floors.

The findings have not been applied to high rise.

Exterior fire attack & Flashover

• The final full scale experiment involved increased ventilation to the test chamber.

• The fuel load in the test chamber had been doubled to ensure flashover conditions.

• Flash over did not occur

Impact on building occupants

• Fire suppression from the interior at the onset with Blueproof massively increases the potential survival time! Oxygen levels stabilized above breathable limits!

• Smoke concentration falls as the oxygen concentrations stabilize.

• Potential survival times need to be determined

• Unfortunately smoldering has not been studied to the same extent as flaming and there is a lack of quantitative guidelines [10]

• During a smoldering fire the device will activate. The time taken for this needs to be determined as it can take between 22 and 306 minutes for a bed to flame [11]

[11 ] V.Babrauskas and J.Kransky, ‘Upholstered Furniture Transition from Smoldering to

Flaming’ Journal of Forensic Science, Nov. pp 1029-1031 (1997)

[10 ] Section Two, Chapter 9, Smoldering Combustion, T.J. Ohlemiller Fire Dynamics

Conclusion

For the very first time in history the biggest killer in a fire: smoke has been defeated and without your help and encouragement it would not have happened. A special thanks to all the people involved in the development of this presentation from all walks of life.

A very big Thanks