Fires System for Roadster

[skullandbones]

It's time to begin the design and mockup of the fire system for my roadster being summer is upon us (record hot days last week). Any discussion or input will be greatly appreciated. I don't mind criticism but if you want to chime in for why you think it won't work support your view or opinion with some facts, OK?

I'm planning an under hood system that will dispense halon via these dispersal nozzles. They are used in a commercially sold system which utilizes FE36 (so that's what they are tested on). The specific gravity of halon (1.512) is greater than the FE36 (1.37) but the two chemicals do share a lot of similar properties that suggest the nozzles will be effective for the use with halon. Shroud Saftey says they still support halon systems but do not offer halon replacement for the old halon systems. Both are gases that are liquefied at pressure so the characteristics of the extinguishant flow is streaming liquid droplets with some gas formation on release for both. The system is very simple mechanically speaking. It will utilize 5/16 inch steel tubing in the engine bay (4 nozzles) coming together at the rear of the engine by to a T-connector. From there it will have a flex braided tubing back to the halon bottle mounted on the rear firewall.

My planned use (not that I ever want to use it) is to use the remote system to suppress the engine fire until I can retrieve a fire blanket and larger extinguisher from the trunk. I will be testing this system on a simulated platform that is similar in shape and size to the roadster engine bay. That is already constructed and I have a mock up engine with valve covers and intake. The fire source will be a pan of gasoline setting on top of the lower half of the efi manifold. There will be a demonstration video on u tube.

The system will be easily activated by pulling the safety pin and pressing down with palm of hand (mounted rigidly).



http://stroudsafety.com/Photos/FireSuppression/TubingNozzle.jpg



Description

Model No.



Tubing Nozzle 3-Port

Thanks,

WEK.:cool::cool::cool:

[2FAST4U]

I had one on my first roadster, but switched to an aqueous foam system on my GT 40 and my current roadster build

[FFRSpec72]

I use halon in my challenge car, it works and is not disruptive to the car, the gas is poisonous but in a open cockpit car I don't see any issues. I have used the same nozzles you have listed with basically the same number of nozzles and trigger system. One thing I did different on my 818R was to add another trigger so that the corner workers (or someone outside the car can pull)

[russelljones48]

So, I was curious since my background is in large datacenters where Halon has been "banned" since about 1993. I did a few quick searches and it is also banned by most racing organizations. I'm not the most "green" person in the world but there seems to be a good case for using something other than Halon for fire suppression in cars - both safety and "green". If you search for HS Hammel there's a link to a paper by a chemist at DuPont on the topic. Since DuPont makes the alternative my guess is that you have to take this with a grain of salt but I think the overall evidence is there...

[FFRSpec72]

So, I was curious since my background is in large datacenters where Halon has been "banned" since about 1993. I did a few quick searches and it is also banned by most racing organizations. I'm not the most "green" person in the world but there seems to be a good case for using something other than Halon for fire suppression in cars - both safety and "green". If you search for HS Hammel there's a link to a paper by a chemist at DuPont on the topic. Since DuPont makes the alternative my guess is that you have to take this with a grain of salt but I think the overall evidence is there...

SCCA, NASA, ICSCC and others still allow FE36 Halon, its just not recommended, cars that are equipped with Halon can still use it. If your racing your not "green".

[skullandbones]

Halon destruction is somewhat of a conundrum (see below). At present the best way to keep it out of the atmosphere is to store it in it's cylinder. I suppose there will be a point when there is none to speak of but unfortunately some of the replacements have their own problems as Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS).

There are six processes that have been identified as suitable for destruction by the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. These are (1) liquid injection incineration, (2) reactor cracking, (3) gaseous/fume oxidation, (4) rotary kiln incineration, (5) cement kiln, and (6) radiofrequency plasma destruction. In addition, destruction technologies that achieve destruction efficiencies of 98 percent or greater may be approved by EPA.

In the United States, very few destruction facilities for ozone-depleting substances (ODS's) such as Halons currently exist. This is due in part to technical difficulties in destroying Halons and other ODS's, and the costs of doing so. EPA continues to monitor technological developments in the United States and other countries for the destruction of ozone-depleting substances.

I am not going to expel the Halon canister I have (1 lb) unless there is an engine fire. It will be kept in it's container until the gauge indicates it is no longer useable. At that point I really don't have a good choice except to send it to a recycling center if there is one available. Then I will replace with a more ozone friendly alternative. When I test, it will be with a small extinguisher other than the halon one.

Tony: do you build yours from a kit and what was it?

2Fast: what system are you using?

Russell: I'm not challenging your statement but I could have sworn our reference lab was using a Halon system in IT after 1993. I'm not sure but maybe they had some regulatory latitude or "grandfather clause" or something of that nature. I know replacing it would have been major dollars. Could be wrong. I'm hoping my other green initiatives like bamboo flooring, Apex Block (50 R value) and a proposed geothermal system for our house will put me somewhere in the green column. So many ways to feel guilt ridden!

Thanks guys,

WEK.

[2FAST4U]

I'm using one of these. The 3.375L Mechanical system

https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/productselection.asp?Product=2436

[FFRSpec72]

I'm using one of these. The 3.375L Mechanical system

https://www.pegasusautoracing.com/productselection.asp?Product=2436

This is the same one I have installed in my 818R.

My halon system was hand built for the challenge car (not a kit) as this was back in 2003 and did not have the choice of all the SPA systems

[jimgood]

I was just researching this the other day. I don't see any advantage to using Halon. The cost is basically the same for all of them. The FE-36 are approved, have no ozone depletion potential and low toxicity. So why Halon?

Also, I see this statement on the Pegasus website:
Halon is no longer SFI-approved. These systems are only SCCA-legal in cars registered prior to 01/01/2009. As these Halon systems sell out, they will be replaced with SFI-Approved and SCCA-Legal FE-36 Fire Suppression Systems.

[jimgood]

There's a good comparison on the major fire suppression systems here: http://www.ioportracing.com/faq/fire.htm

The one advantage of Halon is that it takes less volume over the FE-36.