1. Korean Research Results “Fire resistance test” June 2, 2015 Korea Transportation Safty Authority (TS) Korea Automobile Testing & Research Institute (KATRI) Seulki Lee Senior Researcher UN ECE / WP29 / GRSP/ 8 th EVS Informal Meeting in Washington D.C (4 th TFG-7 F2F Meeting) EVS TF-03-XXe

2. 1 Part 1. Short Term Fire Resistance Test 1. Adopting test(A) with being optional or replacement of test(B) (~ 8 th EVS meeting) 2. Reviewing the GTR draft text proposed by Korea ☞ Korea will take members’ additional opinions by email (~ 30 th April) ☞ Korea will review if the position of thermo has to be defined (~ 8 th EVS meeting) ☞ Korea will suggest the detailed description for temperature (~ 8th EVS meeting) 3. Investigating if test facilities exists that could conduct the test(A) ☞ Assistance needed from IWG secretary to ask contracting parties(~ 30 th April) 4. Submitting the GTR draft improved regarding to short term test (~ 8th EVS meeting) 5. Need to get US’s opinion on Korean proposal as short term (~ 8th EVS meeting) Open issues & Future work

3. 2 Part 2. Long Term Fire Resistance Test 1. Basic issues of the fire resistance test such as purpose, definition of long term, exposure time, etc. 2. A long term fire resistance test ☞ US and Canada will suggest the detailed working plan and timeline with regard to long term test (~ 8th EVS meeting) Open issues & Future work

4. 3 rd face to face meeting Proposed draft text on test(A) needs to be reviewed. - Authority to choose the test either test(A) or test(B) must to be defined in current GTR draft - Position of thermo sensors must be defined to make sure repeatability - Korea will review if and how thermo sensor location has to be defined - The necessity of upper limit 1100℃ must to be reviewed - Detailed description such as temperature profile is to be needed TF7 need to investigate for contracting parties if test facilities exists that could conduct the test(A) proposed by Korea. 3 Open issues & Future work

5. 4 Structure (1)-OICA’s proposal Opinion of KATRI for EVS GTR draft proposal Structure (2)-KATRI’s opinion 6.2.6.1 Purpose 6.2.6.2 Installation 6.2.6.3 Procedure 6.2.6.3.1 General Condition 6.2.6.3.2 Test procedure 6.3.6.2.2.1 Vehicle based test 6.3.6.2.2.2 Component based test 6.2.6.3.3 Gasoline pool fire test 6.2.6.3.4 LPG burner fire test 6.2.6.1 Purpose 6.2.6.2 General Condition 6.2.6.3 Installation 6.2.6.4 Procedure 6.2.6.4.1 Vehicle based test 6.2.6.4.2 Component based test 6.2.6.4.2.1 Gasoline pool fire test 6.2.6.4.2.2 LPG burner fire test General condition goes up to upper level The procedure of Gasoline and LPG test are included in a component test (In vehicle based test, such as “detailed test procedure shall be followed by component test” should be mentioned in 6.2.6.4.1

6. 5 Opinion of KATRI for EVS GTR draft proposal Position of thermo sensors ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ (×) (O)  Japan comment  Position of thermo sensors must be defined to make sure repeatability  KATRI Opinion  As a result of KATRI test, all the position of temperature satisfy the requirement, but temp. at the center is relatively lower than that of side  We can not assure that which 5 points represent the REESS due to indeterminate shape and size of REESS  So, without defining the position of thermo sensors, the 5 points can be determined with a common sense as described below Position of thermo sensors 6.2.6.4.2.2.2. At least [5] temperature sensors which can represent whole area of the Tested-Device shall be installed 25mm±10mm from the bottom of the Tested-Device’s external surface along its longitudinal axis. Each temperature sensors should satisfy the temperature conditions.

7. 6 Opinion of KATRI for EVS GTR draft proposal  Japan comment  The necessity of upper limit 1100℃ must to be reviewed  JARI research memo (EVS 7 th meeting in Paris)  JARI recommended to use LPG burner with not air pre-mixed LPG which can cause red flame (imcomplete combustion area) The necessity of upper limit 1100℃ Pre-mixture LPG flame LPG flame (not Pre-mixed) Red flame Blue flame Flame temperature Radiation High Low High Heat flux [W/m 2 ] Red flame  KATRI comment  We should make flame in the “Incomplete combustion area” which consist of sufficient LPG flow rate and low air rate  Yellow flame is not suitable for fire test due to low temperatuer.

8. Complete combustion(Blue flame)Incommplete combustion(Red flame) 1015℃662℃864℃678℃ 7 Opinion of KATRI for EVS GTR draft proposal  KATRI test  The shape & temperature of flame with different air rate condition in a single Bunsen burner  KATRI opinion  In case of LPG burner proposed by KATRI, the maximum temperature of flame can be higher than single Bunsen burner influenced by such as a radiation  Upper limit 1100 ℃ means not to reach complete combustion area  Need to regulate upper temperature

9. 8 Opinion of KATRI for EVS GTR draft proposal  Vehicle based exposure temperature comparison test (EVS 7 th meeting in Paris) Review of vehicle based test using LPG burner Test configurations Test(A)-KMVSSTest(B)-GTR Draft Descriptions * DUT : PRIUS Body & REESS Case - Body : Remove the combustible material in body - REESS : Remove the battery cell and sub systems - DUT setting Height ㆍ TEST(A) : 31.5 cm (Nozzle to bottom of vehicle body) ㆍ TEST(A’) : Actual mounting condition ㆍ TEST(B) : Actual mounting condition * DAQ get 8 temp. channel - Measurement height : 25±10mm from the bottom of DUT’s external surface by the vertical direction - REESS Case : 4 points - Vehicle body: 4 points - K-Type Thermocouple : ∅1.6mm Temp. measuring 8 points ①② : Inside temp. (Case) ③④ : Bottom temp. (Case) ⑤ : Inside temp. (Body) ⑥⑦⑧ : Bottom temp (Body) ⑦ ⑧ ⑥ ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ Mar. 2015

10. 9 Progress Report of KATRI Research Test Result MeasurementTEST(A)TEST(A’)TEST(B) Avg. Temp.(For 150 sec) (For 130 sec) - REESS Inside109 ℃64 ℃37 ℃ - REESS Bottom122 ℃66 ℃38 ℃ - Body inside141 ℃125 ℃35 ℃ - Body Bottom(High)693 ℃617 ℃570 ℃ - Body Bottom(Low)872 ℃813 ℃537 ℃ Max. Temp.976 ℃939 ℃887 ℃ Comment  The temperature of Test(A) is about 100℃ higher than the Test(A’)  The temperature of Test(B) is lower than others due to its small exposure area  The temperature of Test(A) around the bottom are irregular because the shape of vehicle’s body frame is not flat at the bottom  The temperature of vehicle bottom at the longitudinal position where REESS is mounted is 690 ℃ in Test(A), 620 ℃ in Test(A’), 570 ℃ in Test(B)

11. 10 Opinion of KATRI for EVS GTR draft proposal  Vehicle based exposure temperature test Test configurations Test(A)-31.5cmTest(A’)-Actual mounting Descriptions * DUT : PRIUS Body & REESS Case - Body : Remove the combustible material in body - REESS : Remove the battery cell and sub systems - DUT setting Height ㆍ TEST(A) : 31.5 cm (Nozzle to bottom of vehicle body) ㆍ TEST(A’) : Actual mounting condition * DAQ get 6 temp. channel - Measurement height : 25±10mm from the bottom of DUT’s external surface by the vertical direction - REESS inside : 1 points - Vehicle body : 5 points(Bottom) - K-Type Thermocouple : ∅1.6mm ⑥ May. 2015 ⑥ ①②③④⑤ ⑤ ④ ② ③ ① Temp. measuring 6 points 64 cm 31.5 cm Fire resource

12. 11 Test Result KATRI Opinion  The average temperature of vehicle bottom at the longtitudinal position where REESS is mounted is 760 ℃ in Test(A) and 732 ℃  In the vehicle based test, it is difficult to meet the test requirement of temperature(800℃) and reaching time(30 sec.)  Most of REESS in HEV will be installed similar positioni to PRIUS, so similar result might be expected  To apply LPG burner to vehicle based test, it is necessary to adjust the temperature and vehicle height as the test requirement temperature : 800 ℃ → 600 ℃ height of vehicle installed : actual mounting condition → can be variable from actual mounting condition Test Result Temp. distribution - Total Avg. Temp. : 759.6 ℃ ☞ REESS inside : 126.9 ℃ (Ignition after 30 sec ~ Fuel cut) - Max. Temp. : 877.4 ℃ - 600 ℃ reaching time : 30 sec Temp. distribution - Total Avg. Temp. : 732.4 ℃ ☞ REESS inside : 122.8 ℃ (Ignition after 30 sec ~ Fuel cut) - Max. Temp. : 840.3 ℃ - 600 ℃ reaching time : 40 sec Opinion of KATRI for EVS GTR draft proposal

13. 12 Opinion of KATRI for EVS GTR draft proposal  Purpose  The existing test-equipment has no problem for performing short duration fire test, but when operating for a long time continuously, it is a little difficult to keep same condition due to the latent heat of vaporization which can cause decrease of gas flow rate and temperature. To solve this problem, an improvement of LPG supply was necessary.  Solution  Installing a vaporizer(electric heated water type) so that the gas flow rate and the temperature could be kept constant. Improvement of LPG supply

14. 1,000×1,000×200 mm, Floor area : 1 ㎡K-Type ∅1.6mm / 25±10mm from the bottom of DUT 13 Opinion of KATRI for EVS GTR draft proposal Performance test for improved LPG burner ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥  Purpose  To adjust the fire condition as we had improved the LPG supply  As the supplied gas temperature increase, the pressure of gas gets increase, and the shape of flame become bigger than before even the gas flow rate keeps same  Performance test  Confirm the optimum gas flow rate and height of Tested-Device installed

15. 14  Test scene and result LPG mass flow rate Per 1 Burner module : 30 kg/h → 35 kg/h Total (5 Modules) : 150 kg/h → 175kg/h Supplied LPG Temp. : 0 ℃ → 35~45 ℃ Increase the pressure of LPG Test Result Opinion of KATRI for EVS GTR draft proposal Temp. distribution - Total avg. Temp. : 914 ℃ (Ignition after 30 sec ~ Fuel cut) - Max. Temp. : 1009 ℃ - 800 ℃ reaching time : 27 sec - Height of flame : about 60 cm - DUT setting Height : 40 cm (Nozzle to Bottom of DUT)

16. 15 Test Result Opinion of KATRI for EVS GTR draft proposal Temp. distribution - Total Avg. Temp. : 914 ℃ (Ignition after 30 sec ~ Fuel cut) - Max. Temp. : 1009 ℃ - Height of flame : about 60 cm - DUT setting Height : 40 cm (Nozzle to Bottom of DUT) Temp. distribution - Total Avg. Temp. : 881 ℃ (Ignition after 30 sec ~ Fuel cut) - Max. Temp. : 955 ℃ - Height of flame : about 50 cm - DUT setting Height : 31.5 cm (Nozzle to Bottom of DUT)  Comparison BEFORE & AFTER improving LPG supply condition The entire scale of flame gets bigger due to increase of gas flow rate The average temperature gets increased about 70 ℃ through 5 points. The thermal energy of LPG type possibly gets closer to that of gasoline pool type The thermal energy per unit area of gasoline pool test is 16% higher than LPG burner test for the large mock-up condition(EVSTF-02-23e-Simulation result)

17. 16 Investigation on test facilities CountryOrganizationpossessioncapabilityTest Facility US, Texas △ O Two different test setup 1.Utilize plate burner that introduce a propane air mixture : obtain 800℃ quickly 2.Manifold system that supplies propane to nozzles : around 1000℃ US, Texas △ OLPG pan burner CanadaCNRC.NRC △ O Propane Sand Burner Canada △ O TÜV SÜD has performed similar tests of approximately the same physical footprint. The proposed hardware is different and would require some development efforts Japan?? No facilities to perform the proposed test method. but have experienced tests with LPG burner (from JARI memo) Sweden △ O SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden could conduct test according to the proposed test method. http://www.sp.se/en/index/services/vehicles/Sidor/default.aspx China △ O To be Have a similar device, but not satisfy the requirement. The device is being improved by August.

18. Thank you!