Nanovapor Inc.
Safer. Faster. Greener.
temp.png

Aviation

Aircraft degassing has always been a time consuming requirement for managing the health and safety risks involved with fuel tank entry and maintenance.

 
G_AVI.png

The ever-increasing emphasis on reducing aircraft downtime is a constant challenge for aircraft maintenance. Unscheduled and scheduled maintenance events can be very costly for commercial airline operators, as the economic value of aircraft out-of-service time can range from at $25,000 to $250,000 per day, depending on aircraft size, fleet utilization, and market.


Why Nanovapor?

We specialize in more efficient aircraft degassing products and equipment that reduce aircraft downtime and create a much safer and healthier workplace.


NANOVAPOR’S PATENTED SYSTEM

When used with NanoVapor’s patented Model AV-3000 delivery unit, our proprietary TankSafe molecular suppressant reduces the time it takes to reach a safe LEL, without leaving any detectable residue behind. The AV-3000 has been specially engineered to activate and inject TankSafe into the aircraft fuel tank, forming a very effective evaporative barrier at the molecular level. This molecular suppression continues long after the TankSafe application has ended for long-lasting safety.


UNPRECEDENTED SPEED AND SAFETY

NanoVapor’s patented delivery system reduces aircraft degassing time by over 90% from currentdegassing methods, which can typically take 12 hours or longer. During this process, only limited maintenance work can be performed in or around the aircraft due to the flammability and health hazards. NanoVapor’s system returns valuable maintenance time and aircraft availability to the aircraft operators and repair companies.

A live side-by-side degassing demonstration was performed on the wing fuel tanks on a Boeing 737 aircraft. Prior to tank degassing, the jet fuel was drained using normal procedures. The wing tank on one side was then degassed using NanoVapor, while the tank on the other side was simultaneously degassed using conventional air purging. 


Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 1 compares the time it took NanoVapor to reduce the fuel vapors to the safe level of 100 ppm (13 minutes) as compared to normal air purging (more than 7 hours).

For operational safety, it’s also important to show that NanoVapor’s vapor suppression continues long after the NanoVapor system has been removed. Figure 2 shows how the vapor concentration stayed well below the safe entry level after removal, while the vapor concentration in the tank with air purging immediately increased above hazardous levels.