Progress report of TFG 7 “Fire resistance test”

Mar 19, 2015

Korea Transportation Safty Authority (TS)

Korea Automobile Testing & Research Institute (KATRI)

Seul-ki Lee, Senior Researcher

UN ECE / WP29 / GRSP/ 7th EVS Informal Meeting in Paris

Study and discuss component based fire resistance test procedure of REESS 7.2.6.3.2 which has been proposed by Korea as an alternative.

Specification of optimized test equipment to fire resistance test conditions

Justification for the temperature and thermal energy of fire resistance test(A) compared to those of GTR draft(B)

Allowance of installation of additional protection device on REESS pack during the test

Any issues addressed in the process of discussion about fire resistance • Review the applicability of fire resistance test(A) to vehicle based test

Task

1

Notice 1) Test(A) : Fire resistance test procedure which is proposed by Korea as an alternative 2) Test(B) : Fire resistance test procedure which is proposed by OICA according to UN R.100

We had started discussion by e-mail from 13th Feb. 2014. We aggregated comments and questions from member of TFG 7 and reflect those to KATRI’s study scope. Circulate the draft of TFG TOR by leader with members : 13th Feb.2014 Collect opinions about the draft of TFG TOR from members : ~March.2014 KATRI give members feedback on members’ responses : 8th Apr.2014 Collecting an additional opinion • Comment by Japan(JARI) : 21st Apr.2014 • Comment by China(CATRC) : 29th Apr.2014 Present the results of intermediate study : 15th May.2014(5th EVS Meeting) 1st face to face meeting in Washington D.C : 15th May.2014 2nd face to face meeting in Seoul : 17th Nov.2014 Present the progress report : 19th Nov.2014(6th EVS Meeting) 3rd face to face meeting in Paris : 18th Mar.2015

Activity

2

1st face to face meeting (DOT Washington D.C, 15th May. 2014)

• Proposal of necessity to discuss basic issues of the fire resistance test such as a purpose, scope, etc. by NHTSA. • Proposal of necessity to discuss a long term fire resistance test by NHTSA.

☞ TFG-7 deals with only short term fire resistance test according to the TOR.

☞ Request NHTSA to share the up-to-date research results about fire resistance test.

☞ TFG-7 will decide if we discuss a long term fire resistance test additionally or not(to build up another TFG) after reviewing NHTSA’s research.

3

2nd face to face meeting (GRAND HYATT SEOUL, 17th Nov. 2014)

TF 7 leader opened meeting & welcomed the participants.Mr. Kim, KATRI chaired the meeting.Walk through of activities conducted prior the meeting. (Document XX)Proposed test method similar as used in GTR 13.Research report KATRI (Document YY)Justification of proposed tested, temperature and thermal energy.Comparison test A & B setup. Small & large pool fire test set up and small & large mockup.Modification of test equipment, nozzle spacing reduced from 150mm to 75mm.LPG mass flow rate new equipment 150kg/h.Indoor test facility available at KATRI. Ambient Temperature condition down to 0 deg. (R100 part 2). KATRI check.Thermal energy some higher with set up B(LPG burner).Still some test needs to be done, verification of small pool.Equivalence not fully show but prognosis is good.JAMA comment needs to understand why we need this requirement.KATRI point out that the R&R is better with the proposed method. J-LR, not in favor of the situation of having alternative tests in the GTR. Single test is preferred.Point out the need for a vehicle based test. Still open issue.

4

2nd face to face meeting

Plan TF7Test with small mock-upEquivalent test comparison A & B. (KATRI will continue research)Review vehicle base test (KATRI will continue research)Basic issues of fire resistance, purpose & exposure time. (NHTSA will look at this)Long time resistance test needed or not. (NHTSA will look at this)Perform test with same REESS in different test set up (A&B). Compare inside temperature during test.

Is fire test still needed based on current design & anticipated future developments?JARI showed film from a bon fire test, shows no “bomb” scenario just a “burn out” scenario.Scania expressed concerns with extrapolating results from small scale testing to large scale testing since the relation is not linear. Next meeting after decision in IWG.

Side Meeting : 18th Nov. 2014TF7 Divide the task into two parts(Short term & Long term) and progress in parallel.Agreed USA, Canada, Japan, Korea, OICA(Volvo, Scania)

5

3rd face to face meeting (Paris, 18th

Mar. 2015)

• Japan, China, Canada and OICA support the Korean proposal to use

LPG

burner for the proposed short term test

- US will give TF leader their opinion about Korean proposal

• US and Canada will suggest the detailed working plan and timeline

to

establish the GTR draft with regard to long term test by next

meeting

• US and Canada comment we need to concern the exposure time

extened

and how differently battery reacts depends on type of battery

• US and OICA prefer single test to be established in GTR

• China will consider long term exposure test further

• China and Canada presented their research as a reference

6

3rd 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.

7

Part 1. Short Term Fire Resistance Test1) CFD simulation about current test-equipment of KATRI : Finished2) Study on justification for the temperature and thermal energy of the fire resistance test(A) compared to those of GTR draft(B) : Finished3) Develop an optimized solution of current test equipment by CFD simulation : Finished 4) Modify the current test equipment and performance test : Finished - Additional performance test with small mock-up : Finished5) Allowance of installation of additional protection device on REESS pack during the test : Finished 6) Review the applicability of test(A) to vehicle based test : Finished7) Review the equivalency between test(A) and test(B) : Finished8) Review the horizontal areas of flame as followed by test : Finished

Part 2. Long Term Fire Resistance Test1) Review on basic issues of the fire resistance test : On going 2) Review on long term fire resistance test : On going

8

Study Status of TFG 7

9

Open issues & Future work

Part 1. Short Term Fire Resistance Test

1. Adopting test(A) with being optional or replacement of test(B) (~

8th EVS meeting)

2. Reviewing the GTR draft text proposed by Korea

☞ Korea will take members’ additional opinions by email (~ 30th

April)

☞ Korea will review if the position of thermo has to be defined (~

8th 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(~ 30th April)

4. Submitting the GTR draft improved regarding to short term test

(~ 8th EVS meeting)

5. Need to get US’s opinion against Korean proposal as short term

(~ 8th EVS meeting)

10

Open issues & Future work

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)

Thank you!