3003 W CASINO RD PAINT HANGAR BOUNDARIES 2023-07-20

• Geminus Boeing Project Contract No.EVE-16-2929 Technology Development CEI Project No. 160731 approach is the same, and the same type of volatiles are assumed. The 5x potential % of LEL error thus makes overspray clouds of >2% of interest since they may correspond to values of 10% of LEL with the 5x potential error factor utilized. 4 Modified 45-04 Hangar CFD Modeling & Results (Case 2 & 3) The primary computational model differences between Case 1/Scenario 2 and all of the Case 2 & 3 simulations is the flow volume internal geometry — i.e. a different aircraft, different wing stands and different air supply and exhaust vent details consistent with the planned modifications to the 45-04 hangar to accommodate the longer 777-9x aircraft. The CFD solver physical models and paint injection modeling are identical. 4.1 Case 2 & 3 Flow Volume Geometry & CFD Model Description The 45-04 new configuration components that make up the internal flow volume to be simulated consist of the 777-9x aircraft, updated wing stands, modified air supply and floor exhaust ducts (at the nose of the aircraft) and paint stacker locations appropriate for the longer length aircraft. As in the previous Case 1 model the wing, tail, and empennage stands are modeled with solid structural support and actuation components with the steel grating modeled as a porous solid that only allows flow to pass normally through the material with an empirically derived pressure drop. These components are shown in with the steel gratings highlighted in yellow. The hangar door air leakage locations, as in the previous model, are depicted as 6 vertical lines and 12 horizontal lines at the entrance to the hangar. Case 2 models the airflow and volatile concentration in the hangar while the fuselage, engine cowl, and vertical tail are being painted. Case 3 models the airflow and volatile concentration in the hangar while the fuselage, wing, and horizontal stabilizer are being painted (see Figure 2). 53