2003 HOTWC Sprinkler Presentation Final (1)

8/8/2019 2003 HOTWC Sprinkler Presentation Final (1)

1/44

A Comparison of FPETool Predictions to ExperimentalA Comparison of FPETool Predictions to Experimental

Results: Comparison of Clean Agent and Sprinkler SystemResults: Comparison of Clean Agent and Sprinkler System

Performance on InPerformance on In--Cabinet Fires:Cabinet Fires:

Mark L. Robin and Eric F. Forssell

Hughes Associates, Inc.

and

Steven T. GinnGreat Lakes Chemical Corporation

Presented at:

2003 Halon Options Technical Working Conference

Sheraton Old TownAlbuquerque, New Mexico

May 13-15, 2003


2/44

IntroductionIntroduction

j Telco and EDP Facility Fire Protection

y Clean agents

y Automatic sprinklers

y Clean agent + Automatic sprinklery Best Protection?

y Objective

y Compare performance of clean agent and

automatic sprinkler systemsy Employ FPETool for design of test scenario


3/44

Automatic Sprinkler Systems:Automatic Sprinkler Systems:

j Design objective is fire controly Contain fire to room of origin

y Control ceiling temperature to avoid structural damage

y Fire extinguishment NOTprimary objective

j Fire size at system activation relatively highy Sprinkler systems employ thermal response

y Water not released until temperature at fusible link or glassbulb in excess of 135 oF


4/44


Design ObjectivesDesign Objectives

- In general terms of property protection,

sprinkler systems are typically designed to

acheivefire co

ntrol...

- Fire control can be described as limiting the fire

size by decreasing the rate of heat release and

pre-wetting adjacent combustibles, while

maintaining ceiling gas temperatures so as to

avoid structural damage

NFPA Fire Protection Handbook, 19th Edition, p. 10-193.


5/44

Time

Heat

ReleaseRate

Fire ControlFire Control

sprinkler activation


6/44


Standard Preaction SystemStandard Preaction System

j System piping charged with air under pressure

j System equipped with a supplemental detection

systemj Water held back by a preaction valve

y Operation of the supplemental detection system allows the

preaction valve to open, admitting water into the pipe

network (sprinkler still closed)

j Water discharged from pipe network when fire hasgenerated sufficient heat to activate one or more

sprinklers


7/44

Valve

Water supply

Controlpanel

Detector

Sprinkler head

Operation of detector trips valve

Water delivered when head T=T rating

Preaction SystemPreaction System


8/44

Clean Agent Suppression Systems:Clean Agent Suppression Systems:

Primary AdvantagesPrimary Advantages

j Ability to extinguish shielded, obstructed or three-

dimensional fires in complex geometries

y Clean agents are gases

y Uniform distribution throughout an enclosure

j Ability, through the use of detection, to extinguish

fires at a very early stage

y Extinguishment well before direct or indirect fire/smoke

damage occurs

j Cause no collateral damage due to agent discharge

y Are clean

y No residues


9/44

Heat

ReleaseRate

Time

Fire Control (Sprinklers)

Fire extinguishment(clean agent)

Clean Agent Systems:Clean Agent Systems:

Design Objective = Fire ExtinguishmentDesign Objective = Fire Extinguishment

Fire Control vs.

Fire Extinguishment


10/44

Time

HeatReleaseRate

sprinkler activation

clean agentsystem activation

detection

FIRE CONTROL

FIRE EXTINGUISHMENT

Clean Agent System vs. Sprinkler SystemClean Agent System vs. Sprinkler System

(Fire Extinguishment vs. Fire Control)(Fire Extinguishment vs. Fire Control)


11/44

Spri kler Systems Clea ge t System

Suppression agent Water Gas

Design Objective

Fire Control:

Confine fire

Control ceiling T

Fire Extinguishment

Design Objective Protect structure Protect contents of structure

Activation Sprinkler head T u 135 oF

Automatic activation following

detection (air sampling, smoke

detectors)

Fire size at activation Can be 100's of kW

Low as 0.1 kW with air

aspirating detection system

Total Flooding No. Water not three dimensional,will not fill entire enclosure Yes. Agent distributeduniformly throughout enclosure

Cleanliness

No. Water damage, smoke

damage

Yes. No residues to clean up

following extinguishment

Comparison of Sprinkler andComparison of Sprinkler and

Clean Agent SystemsClean Agent Systems


12/44

Comparison Testing of PreactionComparison Testing of Preaction

Sprinkler and FMSprinkler and FM--200200

SystemsSystemsj FM-200System

y Designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 2001

j Preaction Sprinkler Systemy Designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 13

j Detection/Alarm Systemsy Designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 72


13/44



SystemsSystemsj Facility

y 32.8 x 32.8 x 12 foot enclosure

y 1.5 ft deep subfloor; suspended ceiling 2 ft belowdrywall ceiling

y 1/2 gypsum board over metal stud construction

y Enclosure access via two doors

y Eight polycarbonate windowsy Motorized damper system in ceiling for post-test

exhaust


14/44



SystemsSystemsj FM-200Tests

y Subfloor covered in plastic to prevent leakage of agent into

subfloor

j Sprinkler Test

y Plastic formed into dike to contain water and facilitate

removal of water after testing

j All Tests

y Area 20 x 26 ft covered with floor tilesy Cabinet containing fire array and various articles of

furniture

y arranged on floor tiles


15/44

20 t

orth

32 t 10 in

26 t32 t 10 in

our ra er IBM abinet maller abinet

ile abinet

abinet ontaining uel rray Tables Windo

xhaust Vent (in eiling)

igure 1 hamber chematic.


16/44


17/44



SystemsSystemsj Test Fire

y Eight sheets of 8 x 16 x 0.375 inch ABS

y

Vertically arranged in two rows of four sheetsy Mounted on all-thread rods in unistrut stand

y Fire array placed in a equipment cabinet

y Ignition: 3 mL heptane in 2 inch square pan

y Similar to plastic sheet fire test of UL 2166, UL

2127


18/44

1 Eight Sheets of

8 x 16 x 3/8 in

A S

76

16

16

1

7

21 38

2 in pan with

3 ml n-Heptane

Fuel ArrayFuel Array


19/44

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 100 200 300 400 500

Time, se conds

HeatR

elease,

kW

Heat Release Rate forInHeat Release Rate forIn--CabinetFireCabinetFire


20/44

Comparison of Preaction SprinklerComparison of Preaction Sprinkler

and FMand FM--200200SystemsSystems

Smoke Detection Systems (FM-200System)

j Fenwal AnaLASER II

y Air-sampling system, designed and installed by

distributor

y 1 inch PVC tubing main, 0.75 inch PVC branch lines

y Flow rate through system 0.0624 ft3/s

y 0.061% obscuration per foot alarm threshold

y Nine sampling holes, 11 ft spacings

y Exceeds NFPA 72 requirements

y Based on FM Loss Prevention Data Sheet 5-32 on

Electronic Data Processing Systems


21/44

Comparison of Preaction SprinklerComparison of Preaction Sprinkler

and FMand FM--200200

SystemsSystemsj Smoke Detection Systems (FM-200and

Sprinkler)

y

Simplex 4098 series True Alarm detectorsy Ionization and photoelectric

y Ionization: 1.3% obscuration/ft

y Photoelectric: 2.5% obscuration/ft

y Located at three air sampling points nearest fire

location


22/44

FMFM--200200Suppression SystemSuppression System

Designed in accordance with NFPA 2001

j 7% by volume FM-200

j Discharge time: 9.5 seconds

j Hygood Ltd cylinder

j Hygood Ltd 8-port aluminum nozzle

j orifice area 1.57 in2

j System design via Hygood Ltds design software

j 30 s delay employed from detection to system activation

j Maximum delay time allowed under recommendations of

FM Global Property Loss Prevention Sheet 5-14 on

Telecommunication Facilities


23/44

Preaction Sprinkler SystemPreaction Sprinkler System

Designed in accordance with NFPA 13

j Design and installation based on Ordinary Hazard

Class I

j

Nine sprinkler heads in main spacej Nine sprinkler heads above suspended ceiling

j 11 ft spacing for area coverage of 121 ft2

y Maximum spacing allowed under NFPA 13 is 15 ft

j

Recessed pendant standard response glass bulbsprinklers

y Temperature rating 155 oF

j Application density of 0.15 gpm/ft2 required


24/44

Preaction Sprinkler SystemPreaction Sprinkler System

Water supplyj NFPA 13 requires water supply to be adequate to supply all

sprinklers within the design area for a minimum of 60 minutes

18.2 gpm/head x 18 heads x 60 min = 19,600 gallons water

j Test facility unable to handle this quantity of water

j Water supply designed to supply the two sprinklers nearest

the fire location for a period of 30 minutes at the requireddesign flow rate of 18.2 gpm (application density 0.15 gpm/ft2)


25/44

Enclosure InstrumentationEnclosure Instrumentation

j Four thermocouple trees (Type K)

j Optical density

j O2

, CO, CO2

j FTIR: FM-200and HF concentrations

j Enclosure pressure

j Nozzle pressure

j

IR camera


26/44

Test ProcedureTest Procedurej Data acquisition commenced with ignition of heptane

below the ABS plastic array

j Room remained sealed during entire test

j FM-200 system system activated 30 s after AnaLASERII

smoke detection system went into alarm

j During preaction sprinkler system test, water supply

pump started prior to start of data acquisition


27/44

Input for FPETool SimulationsInput for FPETool Simulations

Input Parameter

inimum Oxygen Level

21oC

600oC

10.0

2.0

Heat Transfer Factor

Radiant fraction

ax energy loss internal

0.35

0.90

Sprinkler, NE location

Distance from center of fire (ft)

RTI (ft s)1/2

Activation temperature,oF

10.6

144

155

Sprinkler, N location

Distance from center of fire (ft)RTI (ft s) 1/2

Activation temperature,oF

11.3144

155


28/44

Input for FPETool SimulationsInput for FPETool Simulations

Input Parameter

Room dimensions

Ceiling height (ft)

Length (ft)

Width (ft)

8.0

32.8

32.8

Ceiling aterial

Thickness (in)Thermal conductivity (kW/mK)

Density (kg/m3)

Specific heat (KJ/kg K)

Glass fiber

0.50.00037

60

0.8

Ceiling aterial

Thickness (in)

Thermal conductivity (kW/mK)

Density (kg/m3)

Specific heat (KJ/kg K)

Gypsum board

0.5

0.00017

960

1.1


29/44

Heat Release Rate Required forHeat Release Rate Required for

Sprinkler ActivationSprinkler Activation

j Input

j Experimental HRR

j Location of firej Enclosure dimensions

j Location ofsprinkler heads

j Properties ofsprinkler heads

j Predict activation of NE sprinkler head at 249 seconds

j Ceiling jet temperature 249 oF

j Fire size approximately 210 kW


30/44

Smoke Detector Activation TimeSmoke Detector Activation Time

j Input

j Experimental HRR

j Location of fire

j

Enclosure dimensionsj Location ofsmoke detector

j FPETool: default activation temperature of 23 oF above initial T

j Predict activation of NE smoke detector at 95 seconds

j Ceiling jet temperature 93 oF

j Fire size approximately 15 kW


31/44

Results: FMResults: FM--200200SystemSystem

j AnaLASER II alarmed at 78 seconds from ignition

j FM-200system activated at 108 seconds from

ignition

j Fire extinguished at 125 seconds from ignition

j 7 seconds from end of system discharge

j Maximum ceiling T of 85 oF observed

j Fire damage

j slight scorching of inside of test cabinet

j Non-fire damagej several ceiling tiles displaced

j ceiling runner slightly bent


32/44


33/44

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 100 200 300 400 500

Time, seconds

Hea

tR

elease,

kW

detection

system activation

extinguishment

Extinguishment of In-Cabinet Fire byFM-200


34/44

Results: Preaction Sprinkler SystemResults: Preaction Sprinkler System

y Photoelectric detector in NE corner in full alarm

at 94 seconds from ignition

y Ionization detector in NE corner in full alarm at

112 seconds from ignition (FPETool: 95 s)

y Complete obscuration due to smoke at

approximately 240 seconds from ignition


35/44

Results: Preaction Sprinkler SystemResults: Preaction Sprinkler System

y Sprinkler head in NE corner actuated at 273

seconds from ignition (FPETool: 249 s)

y Sprinkler head in N corner actuated at 347

seconds from ignition

y Fire not extinguished by sprinkler system

y IR camera shows fire burning through entirety of test

y Fire contained to source cabinet

y Max ceiling temperature of 560 oF observed atthermocouple tree nearest fire


36/44

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 100 200 300 400 500

Time, seconds

Hea

tR

elease,

kW

detection

system activation

Control of In-Cabinet Fire with Preaction System


37/44

Ta le 3. Spri kler ctivatio Times

Sprinkler

Radial

distance

to fire,feet

easured

Activation

Time,seconds

Predicted

Activation

Time,seconds

easured

Ceiling Jet T

at bulb atactivation

oF

Predicted

Ceiling Jet T

at bulb atactivation,

oF

NE 10.6 278 249 288 249

N 11.3 352 253 276 250


38/44

Results: Preaction Sprinkler SystemResults: Preaction Sprinkler Systemy Fire Damage

y Test cabinet suffered extensive scorching

y Non-Fire Damage

y Black ring around entire enclosure

y Ceiling tiles discolored

y Soot particles scrubbed from smoke layer cover floor,

horizontal surfaces

y Walls discolored from smoke damagey Water damage to paper goods


39/44


40/44


41/44

Conclusions: System PerformanceConclusions: System Performance

y Preaction Sprinkler System

y Design objective attained: Fire was controlled

y System performed exactly as expected

y Fire contained to room of origin

y Ceiling temperatures managed such that structural

damage and/or collapse did not occur

y Structure saved

y FM-200 System

y Design objective attained: Fire extinguishedy System performed exactly as expected

y Contents of structure saved


42/44

ConclusionsConclusions

j Clean agent and preaction sprinkler systems vastly

different

y Fundamental design objective different: Control vs

Extinguishment

y Preaction systems best suited to protection of structurey Clean agent systems best suited to protection of contents of

structure

y Sprinkler systems alone inappropriate for protection of high

value assets

y Clean agents not ideally suited for structural protectiony FPETool useful for predicting performance of sprinkler system

and estimation of ceiling jet temperatures, smoke detector

activation and for test fire selection


43/44

j Applications involving expensive, sensitive assets

y Use of clean agents justified

y Clean agents offer unparalled peformance for very early

extinguishment of fires

j Maximum fire protection provided by use of a clean

agent system in combination with a sprinkler system

j Substantial additional risk reduction at high benefit/cost ratios

can be realized by protecting such assets with both a clean

agent system and a sprinkler system

ConclusionsConclusions


44/44

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements

Great LakesChemical Corporation

- Steve Ginn

HughesAssociates, Inc.

- Eric Forssell

- Jason Ouellette

- Matt Harrison

- Ralph Ouellette

- Art Hammett

- Jason Kennedy

2003 HOTWC Sprinkler Presentation Final (1)

Documents