Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

DARPA Creates Machine Which Extinguishes Fires With Sound

Posted by samzenpus on from the wall-of-sound dept.

SchrodingerZ writes "The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is known for making odd scientific advances ranging from hypersonic unnamed rockets to bionic prosthetic limbs to insect-sized reconnaissance drones. But recently DARPA has made a interesting advancement in the field of fire suppression. Using two speakers arranged on either side of an open liquid fuel flame, an acoustic field was emitted and engulfed the fire. 'The sound increases air velocity, which then thins the area of the flame where combustion occurs, known as the flame boundary.' This make the flame weak and much easier to douse. Another wonderful thing about this: it's not even that loud! DARPA began its testing in 2008, stating that despite extensive research in this area, there have been no new methods for extinguishing and/or manipulating fire in almost 50 years. The agency plans to expand on this experiment and try to make it successful on a practical scale."

21 of 121 comments (clear)

  1. Who knew that naming a rocket... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...would be so difficult?

    1. Re:Who knew that naming a rocket... by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, that's the thing—it's actually quite easy to make a hypersonic rocket with a name, but unnaming such a rocket would require more energy than the sun's entire output for a year, as you'd have to eradicate to eliminate all evidence, thought, and mention of the rocket's name from history. It took DARPA contractors decades to come up with a novel method of paperwork shuffling so dense that they could create unnamed rockets that would be completely impenetrable to espionage. Unfortunately, they aren't perfect; it's still possible to give individual rockets names once they're loaded into a vehicle or turret for firing, as at that point they enter the realm of conscious human perception. Despite the potential dire consequences for captured vehicles and compromised air bases, all contractors were paid upfront for the usual budget overruns.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    2. Re:Who knew that naming a rocket... by million_monkeys · · Score: 4, Funny

      Coming up with a name is easy. The hard part is making that name into an acronym for something. That's a new rule: all names have to be an acronym as well. For example, the unnamed rocket linked to in the summary is called Falcon and it stands for Force Application and Launch from CONtinental United States. I'm sure they spent a lot of time trying to get that right.

    3. Re:Who knew that naming a rocket... by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 3, Funny

      Such a shame, too, when Fiery And Large Crewless Orbital Nuisance is available. It's like they're not even trying to do their jobs!

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  2. DARPA is doing Mythbusters reruns, now? by Shandon · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Mythbusters did that already, in Episode 76 (http://mythbustersresults.com/episode76). So we know that works already...

    1. Re:DARPA is doing Mythbusters reruns, now? by Joce640k · · Score: 3, Informative

      it's been a topic of research since 1900

      Mythbusters don't do research, they only do experiments.

      Obligatory XKCD

      --
      No sig today...
  3. Rockets? by GodGell · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hypersonic unnamed rockets? Wait until Anonymous hears about that...

    --
    [SHOW SOME LENIENCY TOWARDS ... I mean, FUCK BETA] Eat. Survive. Reproduce. GOTO 10
  4. CO2? by sonamchauhan · · Score: 3, Interesting


    "The team arranged two speakers either side of a liquid fuel flame to demonstrate how fire can be controlled by amping up an acoustic field. The sound increases air velocity, which then thins the area of the flame where combustion occurs, known as the flame boundary. Once the boundary area is thinned, the flame is easier to extinguish. "

    Pardon my scepticism, but if you can position speakers at the base of a flame, you can also position CO2 nozzles there too.

    BUT - this could be significant - a robot carrying speakers does not need to carry a CO2 gas supply.

    Or they could the two techniques in combination -- using an accoustic field to shape a CO2 extinguishant stream that manipulates the "flow of cold plasma" feeding the flame.

    1. Re:CO2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Quenching a fire in a submarine would probably be far less problematic if you could use sound instead of gases.

    2. Re:CO2? by Unkyjar · · Score: 4, Informative

      "The Instant Fire Suppression project was specifically launched to devise new ways of tackling fires in enclosed spaces, such as aircraft cockpits and ship holds, where fires are obviously devastating and incredibly difficult to control." - TFA

    3. Re:CO2? by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      BUT - this could be significant - a robot carrying speakers does not need to carry a CO2 gas supply.

      Robot carrying speakers has to run back and forth dropping speakers. Speakers which are robots, much better.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:CO2? by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Also, think about utility corridors in large building where an electrical fire or something of the sorts are a danger. Using gasses or toxic chemicals might present a danger to humans still inside the building. Mount a few rails with speakers connected and send them to the hot spot as needed.

      Or use something like this and line evacuation routes people would take in case of fire helping ensure an open escape path for longer periods of time.

    5. Re:CO2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      AKA: Submarines. Navy just had a very expensive submarine fire. If they could simply install speakers, they could avoid a very expensive fire suppression retrofit. Risk of crew suffocation and equipment damage are always present with chemical or gas based systems.

    6. Re:CO2? by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Acoustic fire suppression also leaves a LOT less mess behind. Think server rooms, restaurants and print shops where the fire suppression system typically causes about as much damage (in that area) as the fire itself.

    7. Re:CO2? by icebrain · · Score: 2

      This system may put out open flames, but it's not going to do anything about heated gases or smoldering combustion, and I don't think it'll do much to prevent reignition, flashover, backdraft, etc.

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
  5. Sonic Screwdrivers by Arancaytar · · Score: 2

    Just around the corner.

    1. Re:Sonic Screwdrivers by skine · · Score: 2

      Except that this works on wood.

  6. high altitude by fonitrus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    thin air on demand could be nice for high altitude training without going to the mountains and just make these simulated high altitude training centres in local urban areas. lowering the training costs for athletes both in travel and being away from family.

  7. Unfortunately... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

    It also kills everyone within 100 meters of the fire.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  8. Re:My Fire Extinguisher goes to... by azalin · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wait for it....

    11

    Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!

    Well, this time the .sig and the post align perfectly.

  9. Extinguishing fires... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

    there's an app for that.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.