Progress 07/01/22 to 02/28/25

Outputs
Target Audience:This effort is serving three audiences. First, MSI's effort to improve fire shelter efficacy is squarely aimed at enhancing the safety and survivability of HotShots and SmokeJumpers, and Contractors who all carry emergency fire shelters on their belt as a requirement for of their occupations. MSI primarily serves this target audience in this effort. We expect our Phase I and Phase II work combined will benefit members of thistarget audience by providing a fire shelter that provides 20% greater protection with no additional weight or bulk. Second, MSI hired and trained engineering interns from the local university in Flagstaff, AZ. These interns benefited directly from the current project because they received experience with real world engineering tasks proceeding under a project managed by state-of-the-art practices. Thirdly, this effort indirectly benefits NASA and it's efforts to reduce the costs of downmassing payloads through planetary atmospheres. If MSI successfully commercializes an improved fire shelter, the same system of production could also be used to satisfy NASA's insulation requirements. Changes/Problems:Two No Cost Extensions (NCE's) were required to complete this project as planned. The original project was envisioned as a 9-month effort. However the NCE's tolerated delays in obtaining custom-made materials and delays in obtaining full scale fire shelter testing. Although inconvenient, the NCE's allowed MSI to complete the planned work without compromise. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?MSI hired and trained engineering interns from the local university, Northern Arizona University, in Flagstaff, AZ, and utilized student-led trial production runs at State University of New York (SUNY) to make sample MIDDLE material. These interns benefited directly from the current project because they received experience with real world engineering tasks proceeding under a project managed by state-of-the-art practices. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Nothing Reported What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Nothing Reported

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? Of the anticipated 11-second improvement, MSI has so far demonstrated a 3-second increase in habitability time in full-scale testing and a 20-second increase in coupon-scale testing. This improvement was achieved without increasing the overall weight or bulk of the shelter. The weight and thickness of the added insulation layer were offset by incorporating thinner, lighter outer shell and floor fabrics. Overall, the Phase I effort demonstrated the potential advantages of a 3-layer fire shelter design over the current 2-layer M2002, increasing the likelihood that the targeted 20% improvement will be achieved in Phase II. To accomplish this, MSI collaborated with current vendors in the fire shelter supply chain. A unique OUTER layer was produced for the project by Custom Laminating Corp. Prototype fire shelters, combining the OUTER, MIDDLE, and INNER layers, were assembled by Anchor Industries. Coupon tests and full-scale tests were conducted by MYAC Consulting Inc. Two NCEs, graciously granted by NIFA, allowed MSI to harness the specialized capabilities of each vendor to develop and evaluate the 3-layer design. Although MSI's 3-layer prototype used the standard M2002 INNER, MSI prepared the MIDDLE layer in-house. This MIDDLE comprised a foil/fabric laminate with a fabric-enhancing coating on the non-foil side. The coating included opacifiers to block radiant heat, sealants to block advective heat, and intumescent particles to absorb heat. While the thinner, lighter OUTER allowed heat to penetrate more quickly, the MIDDLE layer effectively retarded heat flow--adding an average of 3 seconds in full-scale shelter tests and 20 seconds in 8-inch square coupon tests. MSI believes that further refinement of the MIDDLE layer will enable the full 20% improvement to be demonstrated in Phase II.

Publications

Progress 07/01/23 to 06/30/24

Outputs
Target Audience:This effort is servingthree audiences. MSI's effort to improve fire shelter efficacy is squarely aimed at enhancing the safety and survivability of wildland firefighters. MSI primarily serves this target audience in this effort. Second, MSI hired and trainedengineering interns from the local university in Flagstaff, AZ. These interns benefited directlyfrom the current project because they received experience with real world engineering tasks proceeding under a project managedby state-of-the-art practices. Thirdly, this effort indirectly benefits NASA and it's efforts to reduce the costs of downmassingpayloads through planetary atmospheres. If MSI successfully commercializes an improved fire shelter, the same system ofproduction could also be used to satisfy NASA's occasional insulation requirements. Changes/Problems:Not being able to scale up our good results from coupon level tests to full scale fire shelter tests was definitely an unexpected outcome. Our in-house coupon tests confirmed that the M2002 layup would fail at 55 seconds, which is consistent with 20 years of prior research. Our in-house coupon tests of the downselected 3-layer design indicated that the shelter would fail at 79 seconds, which would have exceeded our goal of 66 seconds, and demonstrated a 44% improvement compared to the 20% improvement promised in the proposal. However, the full scale 3-layer prototypes outperformed the M2002 by only 4seconds or 11%. While it is true that the M2002 and prototype shelters were tested side-by-side in the same test system, it is also obvious from the results that the test was different from tests conducted over the past 20 years. Once the 2-layer M2002 design was finalized and the test conditions set at 15W/cm2 using the old system, results over the years were fairly consistent in confirming shelter survivability to be 55 seconds. The new test rig, which is ostensibly identical in design and set at the same heat flux, indicated the M2002 would fail at 37 seconds, which is 33% worse than we would expect. MSI's 3-layer design also did not do as well as expected. Unexpected results can open the door to new approaches to solving problems. Fire fighters are not served by a fire shelter that performs well in only one set of conditions, if those conditions do not represent a majority of fires. Therefore, in Phase II, we are likely to propose testing under a variety of test conditions to develop an improved shelter design that does well in all conditions. We would not have questioned the test method or conditions had it not been for these unexpected results. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?MSI hired and trainedengineering interns from the local university, Northern Arizona University,in Flagstaff, AZ. These interns benefited directlyfrom the current project because they received experience with real world engineering tasks proceeding under a project managedby state-of-the-art practices. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Nothing Reported What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Although we have met all of the milestones and completed all of the tasks, we expect to test one more concept that could help reduce internal heat flux without increasing shelter weight or bulk. The OUTER, which is a laminate of silica cloth and aluminum foil, is bonded using an adhesive. We believe it may be possible to use an alternative adhesive that reduces radiation through the OUTER. When NASA tried this, shelters faileddue to toxic gas release but our 3-layer system was very effective as a gas barrier against those gasses so alternative adhesives may be worth a second look. If merit is shown in coupon-level tests, further consideration would be proposed in Phase II.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? MSI did not successfully demonstrate a 20% improvement in habitability, although the concept of adding a third layer was proven to have merit, and prototypes were produced that met the weight and volume criteria. The protototypes were on average 6 seconds better than the M2002, which was not a statistically significant improvement. Extenuating circumstances include use of a new test system that predicts shorter survival times for all shelters under the same conditions as were usedin the previous tester. Regardless of test conditions, the standard M2002 and protototype shelters were tested side-by-side, and the improvement was too small to be considered statistically significant. MSI also successfully incorporated vendors from the current M2002 supply chain. This was a risky goal of the as-proposed plan because of the 9-month period or performance. However, because we were granted two one-year extensions, we were able to use Custom Laminating Company to produce a special OUTER material, and use Anchor Industries to assemble the actual test shelters. Each of these collaborations required several months but the overall project benefited from the delay because less uncertainty was introduced through the use of new vendors.

Publications

Progress 07/01/22 to 06/30/23

Outputs
Target Audience:The target audience of our project are the wildland fire fighters like HotShots and SmokeJumpers,and Contractors who all carry emergency fire shelters on their belt as a requirement for of their occupations. We expect our work will benefit members of the target audience by providing a fire shelter that provides 20% greaterprotection with no additional weight or bulk. Changes/Problems:Testing full scale shelters has been delayed because there is no lab available to perform the test. The original proposal included a subcontract for these tests to University of Alberta (UoA) but their lab was vandalized and has not yet been restored. Although the fire sheltertesting facility at North Carolina State University was never quite able to duplicate the UoA results, we did consider using their facility until we learned their testing set-uphad been disassembled. We are not aware of any other testing facility that could properly evaluate our prototypes so we are waiting for the UoA facility to come back on line, which is likely to be in the spring of 2024. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?We have used the project as a means of helping undergraduate students to obtain experiences with laboratory practices. Students were genuinely excited about the opportunity to work on safety equipment, and developed professionally as a result of their passion and persistence. Two of those student-interns have moved on to better full time opportunities, and putting their improved skills to work. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Nothing Reported What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?We will continue working to improve manufacturing methods that apply to scaling up manufacture of the MIDDLE layer under Task 3. As soon as the lab facility needed to evaluate the full scale shelters is ready, prototype shelters will be fabricated under Task 4 and tested under Task 5.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? 1.0, Develop Candidate MIDDLE Layers - Multiple variations on 2 findamentally different MIDDLE concepts were developed and evaluated. Each concept met or exceeded the goal of improving performance by 20% when tested in 6 in. square samples. 2.0, Optimize Fire Shelter Lay-Up - Candidate MIDDLE layers were optimized to maximize areal weight, thickness, and flexibility to support fabrication, storage and deployment as a shelter. Although weight and thickness criteria can be met unequivocally, the durability development and evaluations will require further effort in Phase II. 3.0, Pilot Production of MIDDLE Layer - MIDDLE layer fabrication was scaled up from coupon level to a level able to support shelter fabrication for full scale shelter tests. Full size shelters are assembled from 30 in. X 48 in. panels, methods were developed to produce panels this size. Work continues to improve the quality and consistency of the panels. 4.0, Produce Prototype Fire Shelters - Shelters were not produced. 5.0, Test Prototype Fire Shelters - Shelters were not tested. 6.0, Identify Best Fire Shelter Design(s) - A final downselection of the improved fire shelter design was not completed. 7.0, Project Management, Reporting and TABA - The program is being managed according to our best practices. Most of the TABA work has been completed, with help from a team of business students from ASU under the guidance of Mr. Russ Yelton. A summary of the TABA work will be written as the project nears its end.

Publications