|
The Concorde accident occurred outside Paris soon after takeoff
on 25 July 2000. The sequence of events appeared to be the
disintegration of a tyre, followed by the impact of the tyre
fragment on the number 5 fuel tank. Fuel from the tank, together
with air, was then drawn through the engine creating a fire
that brought down the aircraft.
The key factors for investigators in this accident were:
-
What caused the tyre to burst and had there been previous
incidents of this type?
- When
the tyre hit the aircraft structure, how did this impact
affect the fuel tank?
- How
did the fuel ejected from the tank get burnt in and around
the aircraft engines?
How did investigators reach their conclusions about the
bursting tyre?
Impact dynamics contributed to explaining why the tyre burst.
The initial thoughts were that the tyre fragment had penetrated
the fuel tank. This was shown not to be a complete answer,
as the hole in the fuel tank was at the other end of the tank
from the potential impact site. Previous incidents with Concorde
had revealed potential problems with the tyres. The burst
tyre had a cross-ply construction, but a radial ply design
has now been designed to increase the strength, and hopefully
prevent any future problems.
What conclusions were made about the tyres impact on the
fuel tank?
Computational fluid dynamics were needed to resolve this problem.
A suggestion was made that a shock wave had been set up in
both the tank material and the kerosene. This shock wave was
of such a magnitude that the thin wall of the fuel tank was
punctured with a hole that indicated that the fracture went
from the inside of the tank to the outside, the reverse to
a hole created by penetration. This hypothesis was confirmed
by impact dynamics simulations, which also indicated that
a hole, so created, would produce a large fuel flow. A note
of reservation to the report made by other investigators suggests
that a small penetration could have occurred and contributed
to the fuel flow from the tank to the outside. An aramid fibre-reinforced
rubber fabric has now been developed to improve the strength
of the fuel tanks, and has been inserted into all the fuel
tanks of Concorde.
How was the burning of the fuel investigated?
The problem of the burning fuel was solved largely by identification
of the "foreign" material, which was suggested had come from
an aircraft that had previously used the same runway at Paris
Charles de Gaulle airport. The most reasonable hypothesis
(others were considered) was that the fuel from the tank mixed
with the hot gases around the rear of the engines and created
a fuel fire external to the aircraft. This would prevent the
landing gear from being retracted and would also in the 75
seconds that the fire was visible for (eye witness reports),
soften the aluminium alloy structure of the aircraft. To test
the hypotheses, work was commissioned about whether self-ignition
of the gases could occur, as well as a numerical simulation
(using computational fluid dynamics) of the temperatures reached
during a 75 second fire with a flame temperature of 1100_C.
The latter gave good predictions of temperature, correlated
to pieces of wreckage found. The hypothesis of self-ignition
appeared feasible, but the researchers carrying out the study
on behalf of the BEA indicated that their results would be
too dependent on the model of turbulent combustion selected
and that further research was needed to be more certain. This
research would have used computational fluid dynamics models
as part of their approach. Another possible explanation for
the fire was the ignition of the escaping kerosene by an electrical
discharge, a hypothesis backed up by simulation and trials.
The final report mentions both as possible explanations for
the fire. It should be noted that no aircraft could be expected
to survive if large quantities of fuel are channelled towards
the hot areas at the rear of a turbojet with reheat.
One of the difficulties that the investigators faced was that
not all of the key part of the aircraft structure survived
in a recognisable form for analysis. With a more complete
reconstruction, competing theories can more easily be evaluated.
Further Reading
Reports (preliminary, first and second interim and final)
are to be found on the French BEA (Bureau Enquetes-Accidents)
website: www.bea-fr.org.
Except for the final report, which is still only in French,
all other reports are in both French and English. The definitive
text is, however, in French.
|