NFPA 2112 Round Robin Manikin Testing NFPA 2112 Thermal Manikin Task - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

NFPA 2112 Round Robin Manikin Testing NFPA 2112 Thermal Manikin Task Group April 29 th , 2016

Issue • In recent years the burn injury predictions have started to differ significantly more than in the past Test Results for 4.5 oz (154 g/m2) Nomex III A with underwear Test Method ASTM F1930 -11 Results from Alberta 40.8 % (TPBI) Results from 20 % DuPont (TPBI) Results from 37 % NCSU (TPBI)

NFPA 2112 Task Group Request • Using the same fabrics and test procedure – Determine the expected differences between laboratories performing NFPA 2112 testing • Propose language that might improve agreement between labs

Task Group Language Proposed to NFPA 2112 – 3 second nude calibration exposure • Average incident heat flux calculated from one to three seconds • Numerical fitting function not to be used to calculate incident heat flux • Average incident heat flux is greater than or equal to 79 kw/m 2 at 1 second mark – In situ testing at 4, 8, and 12kW/m 2 • 6 sensors to be verified (right and left arms and legs, chest and back) • 4, 8, and 12kW/m2 levels

2011 ISO Round Robin Data ISO 13506 Results Section 9.5.3 120 s data acquisition 70 Percent Under Garment Second 60 Degree or Worse 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Laboratory

NFPA 2112 Round Robin Testing 2015 – Six fabrics tested • Fabric A: 4.5 osy Aramid • Fabric B: 5.8 osy FR Modacrylic/Aramid • Fabric C: 3.4 osy Aramid • Fabric D: 6.0 osy Aramid • Fabric E: 7.5 osy FR Cotton • Fabric F: 6.5 osy FR Cotton blend – Three Second Exposure, with 100% cotton t ‐ shirt and briefs

Round Robin Results – Five Labs Participated • University of Alberta • DuPont Richmond • North Carolina State University • Aitex • BTTG – Results Anonymized for the five labs • Labs 3 and 4 compliant with proposed task group language • Labs 1, 2, and 5 not compliant with proposed task group language

Round Robin Results ‐ Analysis – Display Results – Identify any outliers – Compare labs results vs. fabric types – Can each lab distinguish between fabric types

Round Robin Results ‐ All Labs ALL LABS AVERAGE BURN INJURY PREDICTIONS 70 Overall % Body Burn 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 4.5 osy Aramid 5.8 osy FR 3.4 osy Aramid 6.0 osy Aramid 7.5 osy FR Cotton 6.5 osy FR Cotton Modacrylic/Aramid Blend Lab #1 Lab 2 Lab 3 Lab 4 Lab 5

Test Results for 4.5 oz (154 g/m2) Nomex III A with underwear using different skin properties, 3 sec. exposure at 84 kW/m2. Percent 2nd degree or worse, including head. Test Method ASTM F1930- 00 ASTM F1930 -11 50/1500/10000 75/1125/3885 Skin thicknesses μ m (based on whole (based on forearm) body) Results from Alberta 47.2 % 40.8 % (TPBI) Results from 36 % 20 % DuPont (TPBI) Results from 41 % 37 % NCSU (TPBI) reduction in reported value Alberta: 6.4 % reduction in reported value DuPont: 16 % reduction in reported value NCSU: 4 % * Slide from “ASTM New Orleans LA, January 1 st , 2015” Presentation by Douglas Dale, University of Alberta

Lab Results Results for Fabric A ‐ (4.5 osy Aramid)

Lab Results (1 ‐ 4) for Fabric A (4.5 osy Aramid) 95% Confidence Interval Prediction Mean ‐ 36.62% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% 33.77% 39.46% Lab Lab p ‐ Value 4 1 0.0279* 4 2 0.0787 3 1 0.1038 3 2 0.2670 4 3 0.6520 2 1 0.9833

Lab Results Results for Fabric B ‐ (5.8osy Modacrylic/Aramid)

Lab Results (1 ‐ 4) for Fabric B (5.8osy Modacrylic/Aramid) 95% Confidence Interval Prediction Mean ‐ 19.70% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% 14.68% 24.73% Lab Lab p ‐ Value 3 2 <.0001* 4 2 0.0001* 3 1 0.0027* 4 1 0.0095* 1 2 0.0740 3 4 0.9404

Lab Results (1 ‐ 4) for Fabric C (3.4osy Aramid) 95% Confidence Interval Prediction Mean ‐ 48.79% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% 47.76% 49.82% Lab Lab p ‐ Value 4 2 0.0181* 3 2 0.0840 1 2 0.2876 4 1 0.3798 4 3 0.6567 3 1 0.9203

Lab Results Results for Fabric C ‐ (3.4osy Aramid)

Lab Results (1 ‐ 4) Results for Fabric D ‐ (6.0osy Aramid)

Lab Results (1 ‐ 4) for Fabric D (6.0osy Aramid) 95% Confidence Interval Prediction Mean ‐ 19.51% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% 15.24% 23.77% Lab Lab p ‐ Value 4 1 <.0001* 4 2 <.0001* 4 3 0.0002* 3 1 0.0019* 3 2 0.0064* 2 1 0.7342

Lab Results (1 ‐ 4) Results for Fabric E ‐ (7.5osy FR Cotton)

Lab Results (1 ‐ 4) Results for Fabric E ‐ (7.5osy FR Cotton) 95% Confidence Interval Prediction Mean ‐ 27.56% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% 20.85% 34.07% Lab Lab p ‐ Value 2 1 0.0037* 4 1 0.0061* 3 1 0.1158 2 3 0.1212 4 3 0.2116 2 4 0.9759

Lab Results (1 ‐ 4) Results for Fabric F ‐ (6.5osy FR Cotton Blend)

Lab Results (1 ‐ 4) Results for Fabric F ‐ (6.5osy FR Cotton Blend) 95% Confidence Interval Prediction Mean ‐ 30.80% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% 23.30% 38.31% Lab Lab p ‐ Value 4 1 0.0003* 2 1 0.0012* 3 1 0.0105* 4 3 0.0613 2 3 0.3437 4 2 0.6058

Can a Lab Distinguish Between the Fabrics?

Can a Lab Distinguish Between the Fabrics? Lab 1 Lab 2 Lab 3 Lab 4 Lab 5

Historical Perspective North American Labs ASTM 2002 vs. NFPA 2112 ‐ 2015 Round Robin

North American Labs: ASTM F1930 ‐ 2002 Round Robin Results 3 second exposure, no underwear FR Cotton, 9 osy Aramid, 6 osy PBI/Kevlar, 4.5 osy 95% Confidence Interval 95% Confidence Interval 95% Confidence Interval Prediction Prediction Prediction Mean: 11.37% Mean: 28.03 Mean: 35.62 Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% 9.41% 13.33% 20.53% 35.54% 28.46% 42.78% Lab Lab p ‐ Value Lab Lab p ‐ Value Lab Lab p ‐ Value K P 0.0178* K P 0.0086* K P 0.0021* N P 0.1036 K N 0.0249* K N 0.0033* K N 0.3741 N P 0.6219 N P 0.8560

North American Labs: NFPA 2112 ‐ 2015 Round Robin Results 3 second exposure, with underwear Fabric A: 4.5 osy Aramid Fabric B: FR Modacrylic/Aramid Fabric C: 3.4 osy Aramid 95% Confidence Interval Prediction 95% Confidence Interval Prediction 95% Confidence Interval Prediction Mean: 38.08% Mean: 20.72 Mean: 48.8 Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% 35.69% 40.46% 14.37% 27.07% 47.45% 50.14% Lab Lab p ‐ Value Lab Lab p ‐ Value Lab Lab p ‐ Value 4 2 <.0001* 3 2 <.0001* 4 2 0.0207* 3 2 0.0007* 4 2 <.0001* 3 2 0.0778 4 3 0.0103* 3 4 0.7954 4 3 0.5420

North American Labs: NFPA 2112 ‐ 2015 Round Robin Results 3 second exposure, with underwear Fabric D: 6.0 osy Aramid Fabric E: 7.5 osy FR Cotton Fabric F: 6.5 osy FR Cotton Blend 95% Confidence Interval Prediction 95% Confidence Interval Prediction 95% Confidence Interval Prediction Mean: 21.5% Mean: 32.01% Mean: 36.47% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% Lower ‐ 95% Upper ‐ 95% 16.46% 26.56% 26.28% 37.74% 31.25% 41.69% Lab Lab p ‐ Value Lab Lab p ‐ Value Lab Lab p ‐ Value 4 2 <.0001* 2 3 0.1442 4 3 0.0773 4 3 0.0002* 4 3 0.2250 2 3 0.3189 3 2 0.0040* 2 4 0.9348 4 2 0.5336

Conclusion