Final Report (Posted 06/13)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FINAL REPORT Demonstrate a Low Biochemical Oxygen Demand Aircraft Deicing Fluid ESTCP Project WP-200905 Ms. Mary Wyderski Air Force Material Command Mr. James Davila SAIC Version 1 March 2013 Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202- 4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From - To) 04-03-2013 Final Report Sep 2009 – Mar 2013 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER W91278-10-D-0089 Demonstrate a Low Biochemical Oxygen Demand Aircraft 5b. GRANT NUMBER Deicing Fluid N/A ESTCP Project WP-200905 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER N/A 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER N/A Ms. Mary Wyderski, AFMC AFLCMC/WWME 5e. TASK NUMBER Mr. James Davila, SAIC TO 0012 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER N/A 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER SAIC 3745 Pentagon Blvd Final Report – W91278-10-D- Beavercreek OH 45431 0089-0012 9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S) 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S) 12. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES N/A 14. ABSTRACT Aircraft deicing fluids are required to remove frozen precipitation from aircraft prior to flight, ensuring mission capability in winter conditions. The primary component in conventional fluids is propylene glycol (PG), which can exhibit a high biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) when it degrades. The aim of this demonstration was to investigate whether one reduced PG aircraft deicing fluid, EcoFlo (and later EcoFlo II), was effective at deicing aircraft while having no negative effects on flight performance, operational safety and aircraft materials. Evaluation included laboratory testing for compatibility with military aircraft materials, wind tunnel testing for fluid residue concerns (blurring windows/optical ports and leaving slippery surfaces), and an aircraft demonstration for effective and safe removal of frozen precipitation. The demonstration indicated that residue issues are still an obstruction to implementation and further reformulation and improvement must be considered. 15. SUBJECT TERMS Aircraft Deicing Fluid, ADF, EcoFlo, EcoFlo II, propylene glycol, low biochemical oxygen demand, environmentally friendly deicing fluid 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON OF ABSTRACT OF PAGES Mary Wyderski a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE 19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code) U U U UL 166 (937) 656-5570 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18 TABLE OF CONTENTS REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE………………………………...………………………………….ii TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………………………………..………….…….…….iii LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………….….………….…….iv LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………………………..iv LIST OF APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………………….…..…iv LIST OF ACRONYMS….............................................................................................................................v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………...………………….…..…...….vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.………………………………………………………………….............….. vii 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 BACKGROUND................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 OBJECTIVE OF THE DEMONSTRATION ..................................................................................... 2 1.3 REGULATORY DRIVERS ................................................................................................................ 3 2.0 DEMONSTRATION TECHNOLOGY .............................................................................................. 4 2.1 TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION....................................................................................................... 4 2.2 TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................... 6 2.3 ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS OF THE TECHNOLOGY .................................................. 7 3.0 PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................... 8 4.0 SITE/PLATFORM DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................. 12 4.1 TEST PLATFORM/FACILITIES..................................................................................................... 12 4.2 PRESENT OPERATIONS ................................................................................................................ 12 4.3 SITE-RELATED PERMITS AND REGULATIONS ...................................................................... 13 5.0 TEST DESIGN.................................................................................................................................. 14 5.1 LABORATORY TESTING .............................................................................................................. 14 5.2 TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION ............................................................................................ 15 6.0 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................... 16 6.1 LABORATORY TESTING .............................................................................................................. 16 6.2 TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION ............................................................................................ 20 7.0 COST ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................................................... 23 7.1 COST MODEL ................................................................................................................................. 23 7.2 COST ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON ....................................................................................... 24 8.0 IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................................................... 25 9.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 26 iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Target Hazardous Material Summary ........................................................................ 2 Table 2 EcoFlo/EcoFlo II/PG Characteristics ......................................................................... 5 Table 3 Qualitative Performance Objectives .......................................................................... 8 Table 4 Quantitative Performance Objectives ........................................................................10 Table 5 Material Compatibility Testing ..................................................................................16 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Typical Deicing Operation ........................................................................................ 4 Figure 2 ADF Wind Tunnel Visual Clarity Test Configuration (EcoFlo ADF) ......................19 Figure 3 Decision Support Tool Example ...............................................................................24 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A POINTS OF CONTACT APPENIDX B MATERIAL COMPATIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX C WIND TUNNEL REPORT iv LIST OF ACRONYMS ADF Aircraft Deicing Fluid AFB Air Force Base AMCTES Air Mobility Command Test and Evaluation Squadron AMS Aerospace Material Specification ANG Air National Guard BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand BRAC Base Realignment and Closure COD Chemical Oxygen Demand CTC Concurrent Technologies Corporation 3 D Degradable by Design DeicerTM DI Deionized DoD Department of Defense DSC Differential Scanning Calorimetry EPA Environmental Protection Agency EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act ESTCP Environmental Security Technology Certification Program HE Hydrogen Embrittlement LO Low Observable LOUT Lowest Operational Use Temperature NFARS Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NPE Nonylphenol Ethoxylate NSPS New Source Performance Standards OA Operational Assessment PG Propylene Glycol PMC Polymer Matrix Composite SAE Society of Aerospace Engineers SERDP Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program SME Subject Matter Experts WSET Water Spray Endurance Time v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The following individuals and organizations contributed to the successful execution of this demonstration/validation: The project manager for the EcoFlo aircraft deicing