|
. .
<br /> IL, Gemnus Boeing Project Contract No.EVE-16-2929
<br /> Technologyi Development CEI Project No. 160731
<br /> •
<br /> N
<br /> IWIIIIP
<br /> -,w--#,---___----- .IIP--...,.,,,r0
<br /> 0.,?,_._____ ____--------:---r'.;...."'"----, _______;_:_____„--___010.......-. N'.„„„/'''', N.N,4
<br /> 1 C.::-., :::..- xriiii*::-.,; <_ 411..
<br /> ----10:-;-.<1;,,,,e,...r...1;15,-..,;*4..:: . 7";4000- j ' ---- /11'
<br /> 1111111111111111
<br /> le
<br /> ��1�; Alt ,,,,
<br /> ,,,,,..,.:::„.„,,,-._ .„- f -',-_% o
<br /> it,
<br /> ,. rim .,; o„
<br /> N.ii,,,,,‘:-, ---,...„i,-,ve- --_ O, . ..--.: -:.?"-.......---;11*--":--- .- :'
<br /> :;'VW,_,, . .';'-'4,11,r,...:
<br /> Figure 48: 777-9x, wing/tail/empennage/center stands, stackers, and paint guns
<br /> components used to develop the computational flow volume for Case 2
<br /> simulations.
<br /> An identical physics model was implemented as was used in Case 1/Scenario 2, but using the
<br /> new specified air flow distribution among the various supply and exhaust vents. The paint spray
<br /> guns emissions were identical (though locations were adjusted for the 777-9x aircraft) and the
<br /> hangar door leakage model was set up similarly.
<br /> 4.2 Modeling Results
<br /> All Case 2 CFD models were solved to a steady-state value by iterating on the solution until
<br /> engineering values of interest (velocities, pressures, % of LEL, and exhaust volatiles mass flows)
<br /> reached a quasi-steady-state value, then the flow solution was averaged over 1,000 iterations to
<br /> produce a mean value from the slightly varying flow.
<br /> 4.2.1 45-04 Hazardous Boundaries Solid Modeling
<br /> To aid in visualizing the extent of the computed overspray clouds, a 3D model of the
<br /> proposed Class 1 Div. 1 and Class 1 Div. 2 hazardous boundaries was developed. This is shown
<br /> in Figure 49 and is the reference for various CFD cut planes through the 45-04 interior volume
<br /> for the different painting conditions to show % of LEL distributions in context, Figure 59. As
<br /> seen in Figure 49, the C1D2 boundary includes the 18" above the floor boundary. For the
<br /> purposes of being consistent with the 45-01 CFD analysis [1] and to avoid confusion in plan
<br /> views of the >2% of LEL clouds within the C 1 D 1 and C1D2 boundaries, the CFD results will be
<br /> 54
<br />
|