Author Topic: Halon vs. FE-36  (Read 9368 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Blue

  • Guest
Halon vs. FE-36
« on: October 02, 2010, 07:08:45 PM »
Looking at SFI and FIA approved 5 lb fire systems for the driver's compartment, there is almost no cost difference between Halon and the approved replacement, FE-36.  Does anyone have experience with the performance of one vs. the other.  The engine compartment will be equipped with AFFF.

Offline Dynoroom

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2192
Re: Halon vs. FE-36
« Reply #1 on: October 03, 2010, 12:09:08 AM »
The only thing I'd mention in your research is keep in mind halon removes the oxygen and in a closed drivers compartment this can be a problem. google halon and see how much area is required for human occupancy in that environment. You might look at halon for the engine bay and cold fire or some other type of extinguishing agent in the drivers compartment.
Michael LeFevers
Kugel and LeFevers Pontiac Firebird

Without Data You're Just Another Guy With An Opinion!

Racing is just a series of "Problem Solving" events that allow you to spend money & make noise...

Blue

  • Guest
Re: Halon vs. FE-36
« Reply #2 on: October 03, 2010, 06:28:09 PM »
The only thing I'd mention in your research is keep in mind halon removes the oxygen and in a closed drivers compartment this can be a problem. google halon and see how much area is required for human occupancy in that environment. You might look at halon for the engine bay and cold fire or some other type of extinguishing agent in the drivers compartment.
Actually, I think halon is incredibly dangerous for a driver's compartment unless the driver has a compressed air source strapped to a sealed mask.  AFFF is much more preferable since it doesn't remove the oxygen and it stays around while Halon (or the equivalent) dilutes with ventalation.  As I read the rule book section 3.Q, SCTA requires Halon or FE-36 for the drivers compartment.  I don't agree, but it's a rule.

Offline Dr Goggles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3120
  • The Jarman-Stewart "Spirit of Sunshine" Bellytank
    • "Australian Bellytank" , http://thespiritofsunshine.blogspot.com/
Re: Halon vs. FE-36
« Reply #3 on: October 03, 2010, 07:02:19 PM »
The only thing I'd mention in your research is keep in mind halon removes the oxygen and in a closed drivers compartment this can be a problem. google halon and see how much area is required for human occupancy in that environment. You might look at halon for the engine bay and cold fire or some other type of extinguishing agent in the drivers compartment.

I'd second that recommendation for the obvious reasons, we had a near miss here with Halon in 2006.
Few understand what I'm trying to do but they vastly outnumber those who understand why...................

http://thespiritofsunshine.blogspot.com/

Current Australian E/GL record holder at 215.041mph

THE LUCKIEST MAN IN SLOW BUSINESS.

Offline interested bystander

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 997
Re: Halon vs. FE-36
« Reply #4 on: October 03, 2010, 07:14:47 PM »
Just looked up SFI's 17.1 spec.

Halon has been outlawed since 1 January 2008, as I read it.

Yrs. truly has been a giant critic of some of SFI's specs, particularly the Dragster/Funny Car, etc. Chassis Specs which are formulated , essentially, by a bunch of old weldors sittin' around a table with their favorite chassis fab suggestions and the destructive testing being after the fact from a serious, sometimes fatal, crash.

BUT, where the spec consists of controlled, scientific, testing, which is the case of almost ALL the other specs. I'm SFI's biggest fan. Those specs have saved a bunch of folk's TOOSHES.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2010, 07:23:48 PM by interested bystander »
5 mph in pit area (clothed)

saltfever

  • Guest
Re: Halon vs. FE-36
« Reply #5 on: October 03, 2010, 07:14:56 PM »
As I read the rule book section 3.Q, SCTA requires Halon or FE-36 for the drivers compartment.  I don't agree, but it's a rule.
You must have an old rule book. Page 34, 2010 . . ."Approved agents include Halon 1301, Halon 1211, DuPont FE36, and certain AFFF systems including Cold Fire 302, ESS Foam, Fire Fox Gem Foam or other Halon replacement certified by the manufacturer for use in confined space . . "    “. . .  Only Halon or Halon replacement agents may be used in the driver’s compartment”   :-)
« Last Edit: October 03, 2010, 08:56:27 PM by saltfever »

Blue

  • Guest
Re: Halon vs. FE-36
« Reply #6 on: October 03, 2010, 08:49:28 PM »
As I read the rule book section 3.Q, SCTA requires Halon or FE-36 for the drivers compartment.  I don't agree, but it's a rule.
You must have an old rule book. Page 34, 2010 . . ."Approved agents include Halon 1301, Halon 1211, DuPont FE36, and certain AFFF systems including Cold Fire 302, ESS Foam, Fire Fox Gem Foam or other Halon replacement certified by the manufacturer for use in confined space . . "    “. . .  Only Halon or Halon replacement agents (my edit, see above) may be used in the driver’s compartment”   :-)
Thank you, yes, my rule book is too old.  I am a big fan of AFFF and will pick the best option of those listed.

Offline Kiwi Paul

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 494
Re: Halon vs. FE-36
« Reply #7 on: October 03, 2010, 11:39:34 PM »
I don`t know much about AFFF Systems at all. Can anyone give me some links or suggestions on where to get info? Cost,coverage, bottle Size/pressure, etc, etc?

Offline Dr Goggles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3120
  • The Jarman-Stewart "Spirit of Sunshine" Bellytank
    • "Australian Bellytank" , http://thespiritofsunshine.blogspot.com/
Re: Halon vs. FE-36
« Reply #8 on: October 03, 2010, 11:59:08 PM »
I don`t know much about AFFF Systems at all. Can anyone give me some links or suggestions on where to get info? Cost,coverage, bottle Size/pressure, etc, etc?

The most common is ColdFire.................

There are several discussions that you could find on a search.AFFF is the safest it seems it doesn't blow away, it won't asphyxiate you , there are issues to keep an eye on though. It eats things and it coagulates inside small parts blocking them so we have elected to empty our cylinders each year . The content is stored in a lightproof plastic container and the bottle and dip tube is washed, they are then refilled and gassed by a licensed operator a week before we leave ....that way they'll last forever...and we can be confident they aren't blocked..

This is because when I noticed the THIRD of ours to corrode through the Aluminium cylinder and lose pressure I emptied it to find the dip tube was blocked and wouldn't have worked anyway...........


A second point to note is the systems come with Aluminium tube and fittings that "anyone in the home can put together without professional tools"....throw them away and use brake or clutch line with proper flares on the ends, blow some sort of anti-corrosive lubricant through the lines at the end of race week too.......I've never had to rely on the system for it's intended purpose these obsevations are just what I have noticed.....before I might need it to come through
Few understand what I'm trying to do but they vastly outnumber those who understand why...................

http://thespiritofsunshine.blogspot.com/

Current Australian E/GL record holder at 215.041mph

THE LUCKIEST MAN IN SLOW BUSINESS.

Offline Avanti Kid

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 292
  • 2006 Member of Bonneville 200 MPH Club
Re: Halon vs. FE-36
« Reply #9 on: October 04, 2010, 07:40:23 PM »
For my race car (#1963 Avanti) I have used 10 lbs of Cold Fire -302 and 5 lbs of CO2 for engine headers.  Dave
Original owner of 1963 Avanti; Age 84
2006 Bonneville 200 MPH Club Member
Canyon Country, CA
215.6 mph 289 CI Studebaker engine