Posted on 09/28/2013 9:00:13 AM PDT by Alberta's Child
I'm looking for some input from knowledgeable folks here on FreeRepublic about an interesting matter a friend of mine is dealing with. He owns a commercial building with a wet sprinkler system, and a tenant is looking to install a lot of new electronic/IT equipment in one room. The building code requires the sprinklers, but there's an obvious risk to expensive electronic equipment (and maybe an elevated risk of electrocution for staff and firefighters) if the sprinklers are activated in a fire.
The obvious solution would be to remove the sprinkler heads in that particular room, but this is not something that would be permitted under the local fire code.
Has anyone here dealt with a situation where a sprinkler system like this was modified to the minimize risk of damage to sensitive electronic equipment, while at the same time meeting all of the fire safety requirements related to the sprinkler system?
Agreed, and the bottom line is that it has been banned since 1994 so it is not even an option.
All data says that Halon will not deplete the oxygen, but I don’t want to be in a dump.
“they almost always ALL turn on”
Not true, each sprinkler head is individually triggered by its solder that melts at a specific temperature, commonly 160, 210, or 280 degrees (by Fire Marshall permission).
The first head that discharges generally cools the combustion gases so that the nearby heads don’t go off. 99% of all fire are distinguished by 4 heads or less.
Partly right, also incorrect.
You want to consult with a Fire Protection Engineer for the best guidance, but having just overseen a 2-zone FM-200 system installation in a Data Center inside a wet-piped fire sprinkled bldg, here are some lessons learned. Every situation is different and this is nothing more than chatter:
In my situation, I wanted to avoid life safety risks of water infiltration into an 80kW UPS system battery bank. Yours is a little different, all AC no huge DC risks.
Technically, the entire bldg and its zones have be protected under original construction, probably as a wet piped system. So Fire Protection is sprinklered, and your Fire Alarm system is zoned accordingly.
An inert gas system is a type of fire protection system which might be used where water is not preferable, but it is very costly. You would have to first build an isolated room, where all doors and windows are immediately shut, must be tested for absolute seal, doors typically have to be closed with a strong door closure, but not to exceed 20-40lbs opening strength for ABA ADA compliance.
Your HVAC system must also be isolated and sealed to avoid any air fanning a fire.
Typically the HVAC dampers are controlled by the Bldg Fire Alarm Control Panel, with reports and alarms sent back to a fire station. In order for the FM-200 system to work, it has to control the HVAC dampers. Some coordination issues can arise between the 2 systems. You will end up with a FM-200 Control Panel and a Bldg FACP. They have to talk to each other and coordinated, designed, inspected, and tested.
When testing them, everybody in the bldg is going to be interrupted for an hour to a couple of days, depending on the situation.
Usually the FM-200 system is treated as a Supplementary System to the Fire Sprinkler Primary Fire Protection System.
So your FACP sequence of Operations has to be reviewed and closely coordinated, because many situations will flood the room anyways with the water, even when the FM-200 system is present.
A small room, say 13’x20’x9’ tall, will require about $13,000 of the FM-200 gas alone and it isn’t always rechargeable locally, as it has to be certified and it might have to be sent back to the East Coast for recharge.
At the same time you install the FM-200 system, you also have to install a complete exhaust and ventilation system with controls available to first responders. That means you also have to install exhaust fans and ductwork to the outside, and make-up air to replace the gas being exhausted, and both of those systems have to have sensors and controls to isolate the room for the FM-200 gas to fill the room.
The system likely costs about $7k-$21k, but the additional coordination with the FA, FP, and HVAC, and possibly Elec shunt trips to main panelboards can become very costly.
These systems need to be fully designed by an interdisciplinary team with heavy commissionaing and testing requirements in close coordination with the local Fire Marshall/Code inspectors for proper commissioning.
Look up
NFPA 2001 Standard on Clean Agent Fire Extinguishing Systems
NFPA 101 Life Safety Code
NFPA 13E Recommended Practice for Fire Department Operations in Properties Protected by Sprinkler and Standpipe Systems
NFPA 72 (NEC)
You will have to have a design signed off by an FPE and likely by an Elec Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, and and Architect, and depending upon where you are at, a Structural Engineer and seismic retrofit calcs.
Additionally, the smoke generated to trigger the FM-200 system is also conductive to electrical systems, so you still will likely short out your equipment, whether it iss wet sprinklered or FM-200 protected.
FM-200 does allow occupied areas to be exited and it can be breathed, unlike HALON systems, but most Fire Inspectors/Chiefs don’t like the FM-200 systems. They tend to cause more false alarms than the wet pipe systems.
You are probably better off with a better alarm system and electrical circuit breaker system with panic buttons which can be easily reset. Really depends on your situation.
Find a good FPE for proper consultation.
Correct,..Fire Suppression, not Fire Extinguishing System.
I believe what he would need is called a Haylon Fire Suppression System.
Halon was/is the gold standard for fire suppression in IT areas. I've been retired for long enough to admit that there be something new, however I do know a few things about Halon. It's generally nontoxic and safe to use on electronic equipment. It works by displacing air (20% oxygen) and is heaver than air so it fills the room starting at the floor and fills the space from the bottom up. This allows some time to evacuate ALL the humans in the area to avoid suffocation.
If the space being protected by Halon is on an upper story it is necessary to have outward opening doors that are fitted with automatic door closers lest the Halon pour down the stairwell as fast is it is being dumped into the protected area. It will seek the lowest level because it is heaver than air and may sometimes be found in the basement, days after the fire is extinguished. Fire responders will ventilate the lower floors to remove all remaining traces of the gas. This my have an impact on the tenants in other areas of the building.
Lastly, Halon is not cheap but it does offer the best protection for your situation. You may want to talk with the local Fire Inspectors to find out if Halon is allowed under their codes before making an investment. As I said, Halon may have competition from something newer and less expensive.
Regards,
GtG
PS I believe Halon has displaced CO2 as a fire suppressant because when liquid CO2 is dispersed it drops to something like -72°F and becomes a snow like solid. This is not ideal for fires in enclosed equipment cabinets. It's also likely to create thermal shock in operating equipment.
BTW, another way to look at the problem involves Elec Power distribution design.
Many folks are now mandating ASHRAE 90.1 which has lots and lots of new electrical distribution system impacts on interior power and lighting circuits.
You might be able to save a lot of power and come up to code in the same effort by only focusing on electrical work.
The NFPA codes have a lot of wiggle room when it comes to de-energizing equipment vice power shut-down.
In one case, a breaker is opened, but some conductors might remain energized. In the other case everything is de-energized. Makes a huge different when trying to initiate a sequence of operations to close fire dampers in HVAC ductwork, and in IT equipment shut-down procedures.
If dealing with databases and transaction processing, your MIS architects need to be involved as it may require several minutes of emergency UPS power to properly close all transactions.
The building gets a credit for the sprinkler system on its insurance. And it may be required by City code. So trying to get the building owner to change is probably fruitless.
The electrical devices should be covered by the tenant’s insurance policy for their contents. Check with their insurance agent for adequate coverage to cover the risk of replacement.
Data that could be lost should be backed up off site anyway.
Hi Alberta,
please look into fogging sprinklers.
it uses water at much higher pressure but only a dense fog comes out of the nozzles.
does not suffocate people in the area of fire suppression
the fog is dense but won’t even wet your glasses.
I am not connected to this firm but the concept is explained at this link: www.marioff.com/ water-mist/ fire-suppression-with-hi-fogr-how-does-it-work
Regards,
Lurking’
A Halon system would be permitted but, is very expensive.
We use them in clean rooms and data centers.
http://fireprotectionconsultant.com/computer-room-fire-suppression.php
I like the idea of the "closet" as someone else posted it here. That may not be a bad option, if there is room to fit it in that IT room.
Some possible good news in this case is that the building was never required to have a sprinkler system when it was originally constructed back in the 1960s. The sprinkler system was added later to address a retrofit requirement of the local fire inspector, so I don't believe it was required to meet all of the current requirements as if it were installed in a new building.
That's an item of discussion with the fire inspector.
Spoiler:
At the cost level of what you described they’re putting in, it isn’t about saving the equipment from a building fire, it’s about saving the building from an equipment fire.
But it all comes down to what does it take for you to get the building occupied and generating cash flow.
1. They are not making halon systems anymore. There are some still in existence, but they are "grandfathered in" and survive only because halon is still being traded around on exchanges.
2. Another non-water suppressant (FM-200 or CO2) may be an option but as noted, depending on the size of the space, may be expensive. Not only do you have the new equipment, but it also may require the addition of a monitored fire alarm system.
3. Pre-action or a dry-pipe sprinkler system may be an option. Some new buildings I've seen lately are opting for pre-action for their data rooms.
4. As noted, fire sprinkler heads all going off at once is a persistent myth perpetuated by Hollywood (don't get me started about portrayals of sprinklers going off by pulling a fire alarm pull-station). Most fires in my 30 year fire service experience are put out by ONE head. More heads may become involved if the room is more heavily loaded with combustibles.
5. Local codes can and do vary, and even may change with the introduction of new Fire and Building Code editions (typically every other year) and local amendments so you can take much of what you've read on this thread with a grain of salt. Your best bet is to research your local code and/or consult your local code official.
Install a Halon system. though I understand it cannot be a ling area. This would suffice for the code and then the wet system can be capped.
contact you local fire protection specialist....he can answer your questions...
local fire inspectors are not your best bet as they are sometimes wrong....very wrong
water and electrical equipment don’t go together
Waterproof housings for the equipment....
As you’ve probably figured out, posts 43, 47, and 54 are the ones to really pay attention to. I say that as someone who used to be a consulting engineer in this area, bit who has been out of it for about 15 years. Listen to those guys.
Most water sprinkler heads won’t open unless your stuff is on fire, a small piece of metal has to melt on each individual sprinkler head for it to open. So unless it is above a certain temperature in the room, they won’t open.
Post 54 exercises much better wherewithal than mine.
If I had to do it again, I’d simple change out a couple of sprinkler heads to a higher temp head, install some head guards, so they don’t inadvertently get bumped and discharge, perhaps throw in a shunt trip breaker on a main or sub panel, spend about $600-$2500 and save a 1/4 million bucks and improve the IT backup protocols with additional auxiliary power genset and AutoTransferSwitch with the spare change.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.