CASBL conveyor

Figure 5. Simulated CASBL conveyor. (V) Locations of 6 in ID conveyor pressure relief vents (when used) (S) locations of sprinkler nozzle fittings welded to top of conveyor.

Figure 7. Flame velocities in CASBL conveyors. Test conditions dry MISP, 105 mm 1-in. bed depth no sprinklers, no vents ends open.

Seven confirmatory tests were conducted using the modified test setup shown in Figure 8. These tests were conducted to assure that additional propellant within a conveyor feed hopper would not result in a more severe burning condition than previously tested. Three nozzles with 90 psig water pressure were used for these tests since there were at least three nozzles on actual CASBL conveyors. One-hundred ten pounds of MISP propellant was used for each test. Initial tests used two IR detectors in the upper conveyor. Table IV shows that two of four tests stopped flame propagation. 

Application of these data to CASBL show that most water and/ or solvent-wet propellant and propellant ingredients will not sustain a burning reaction for the conditions which will exist in CASBL (Figure 2). These tests demonstrated that the existing conveyor sprinkler system is more than adequate to prevent between bays flame propagation in most CASBL locations. 

These study findings were employed to optimize Primac/ Telemac sprinkler systems in all CASBL vibratory conveyors. 

---