×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

(OP)
A hospital I am doing has a new file storage room with rolling racks for storage of patient records.

Original ceiling height was to be 10'-0" but due to duct conflicts (hard to believe this would happen in a hospital) the ceiling had to be lowered to 9'4.  Rack height is 8'-0". Clearance between sprinkler and top of rack is under 18"

Does anyone know of an alternative to having to lower the racks to maintain the required 18" clearance?  

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

How about sidewall heads?

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Just a thought

do you need 18 inches when using a sidewall???



add more heads???


raise the ceiling around the heads so you get the 18 as long as you to not obstruc the spray pattern??
There cannot be duct  covering  the entire room

raise the cieling as much as possible and lower wher there is duct, and add heads as needed??

you are only talking two inches
 

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

(OP)
I think sidewall sprinklers require the 18" as well.

The only straw I can find is 8.5.6.4.

8.5.6* Clearance to Storage.
8.5.6.4  A minimum clearance to storage of less than 18 in. (457 mm) between the top of storage and ceiling sprinkler deflectors shall be permitted where proven by successful large-scale fire tests for the particular hazard.

which I doubt this has happened but you never know until you ask.

The area in question is not a large area it measures about 10'x20' and the problem really isn't mine because someone else lowered the ceiling.


 

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

There was a recent article on the SFPE Fire Protection Engineeering Journal on this specific subject.

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

The best approach might be to use "extended coverage" heads which are approved for 400 sq. ft. BUT you should install the heads as close as the technical data sheets allow (I know of one manufacturer who allows minumum 8 ft. head spacing) for the given sprinkler. This approach provides sprinkler heads which have a much flatter umbrella and will be more effective given the <18 in. clearance. You could install 6 heads in your 10x20 room and be fairly certain any anticipated fire will be controlled. You might want to involve a FPE or get written approval from the AHJ since this is outside of normal NFPA standards.

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

They had some good info on this at NFPA annual meeting in Las Vegas this year. Do not know if this is the same info that Stookey is referring too. BUT the full scale tests done on this type of storage produced some interesting results. The sprinklers took more then 60 minutes to activate, densities of .70/1500 did not control a fire because of the shielding. The smoke detector activated within 60 seconds of the start of the fire. We now require smoke detection to a CS even if we have sprinkler protection.

****************************************
Fire Sprinklers Save Firefighters' Lives Too!


 

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Wait a minute. There must have been some other contributing factor if the sprinklers in the example referenced by LCREP required >60 minutes to operate. I assume the situation described by SD2 has a smooth flat ceiling and standard gypsum walls which create a standard size room (10x20). Given these parameters, the sprinklers will operate during the early stages of the fire incident. The only potential problem outlined by SD2 was <18 in. clearance. There are very few instances I can think of where a sprinkler system would be considered effective if the heads fail to operate in the first 60 minutes.

By the way.......I am a huge supporter of smoke detection for early notification even when adequate water based fire protection systems are provided. Some hazards warrant both sprinklers and smoke detection.

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

The problem is in a very tight configuration the fire is very slow moving and not producing huge amounts of heat, thus the slow activation of the sprinkler. BUT once it does get going with little space for water to get to the seat of the fire, the sprinklers had little effect in controlling the fire. The key was early detection with manual firefighting.

NOW do not get me wrong, I am not saying you can eliminate the sprinklers, I am just saying in this case the fire detection played a large roll in the eventual extinguishment of the fire.

****************************************
Fire Sprinklers Save Firefighters' Lives Too!


 

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Short of any applicable test criteria that you may convince the AHJ to accept as a variance, or by using the equivalency clause, it seems to me that when owners insist on this arrangement, then we as installers have limited choices.  

You need an independent detection system tied to you water based protection.  Can you say Pre-action?  

There is always a cause/effect relationship to owner's decisions.  This one seems simple to me, you did not choose to use the compact/track shelving, the owner did.  

The next best option is likely pre-action or perhaps gaseous based protection in combination with pre-action.  Why try to suggest other methods such as extended coverage heads, or sidewalls, when this would clearly be outside their product listing?  Do you really want that liability?

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Using a pre-action system makes no sense at all. We are already dealing with a wet sprinkler system.......using a pre-action system would only reduce the overall reliability of the system (the actuation devices for the preaction system would have to operate prior to the introduction of water to the system).  

Gaseous systems are also not a very wise approach because we are dealing with ordinary combustible materials (seated fires). Most gaseous systems are not designed or applicable for ordinary combustible materials; they are not considered an effective extinguishing agent for ordinary combustibles and the fire usually re-ignites after the concentration of the gaseous extinguishing agent dissipates.

As a FPE, we must understand that NFPA codes do not cover every possible scenario. In some instances we are required to use our experience and engineering judgement to develop designs which will be effective for the given occupancy/situation when the applicable codes/standards and product listings do not specifically fit a certain situation. Taking into acount the relatively small size (200 sq. ft.) of the room, understanding the reasoning behind the 18 in. clearance requirement and then doing a little research and math using the proven/tested umbrella pattern for a specific sprinkler head to confirm the water spray will not be obstructed is a solid engineering approach. I would also like to see smoke detection in this room for prompt manual response.

I would need to confirm several facts prior to writing a letter for this project, but I still maintain this approach is probably the best (and most economical) solution given the information included in the above posts by SD2.

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Yes I agree pre-action system is a waste of $$ for a 200 sq. ft. room. IF the client was very concerned about water damage, then yea go with the pre-action system. Given the delay in the activation for the sprinklers, if and when they go off, they will do little to control/extinguish the fire, BUT perhaps they will prevent the spread of the fire and protect the building. Either way the contents of the shelves will have significant damage.

This may be a good time to ask the client how important are the records and can they be recreated with little or no $$ or loss of business. If the answer is NO, better have the client think again about this type of shelving system. Remember just because it is on site does not mean we can protect it.

 

****************************************
Fire Sprinklers Save Firefighters' Lives Too!


 

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

My point about the pre-action system suggestion was that it does absolutely nothing to resolve the clearance issue. It would only result in a huge increase in the project price and cost the building owner time and money for the inspection and maintenance.  

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

I know some people hate the question, but where are the possible igintion sources in the room.

Just taking a wild guess but the files are manual??? no electic motors???

Than about all that is left is lights and the smoker some one will bring up.

So the possibility of a fire starting in here???

Add more sprinkers????

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Rather than speculating on a suggested fire protection design which may offer little or no solutions I suggest you read the attached paper and recognize that this problem does not present intuitive solutions:

http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files//PDF/Research/Compact_Mobile_Shelving.pdf

I'll sit back and await the results of the suppression theory equations and fire tests that are performed. For now, this paper offers some relatively good interim measures.  

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Sorry

I neglected to attach the test report. Tom was again correct in that smoke detection is important for these installations. I would also consider fire-resistive separation of storage rooms from the remainder of the tenant spaces or occupancy.

http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files//PDF/Research/CompactShelvingFireTestingProjectSchirmer.pdf

I can see some real firefighter awareness issues that need to be communicated to responders - especially given the number of these systems installed in law offices, whom seem to always have the really nice offices on the top floors of high rise buildings.

 

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Thank you very much for the info stookey. I didn't get all the way through the test report but the general report and determinations was very interesting. I don't want no part of them:)

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Cidona

This a unique case where fire detection in combination with fire-resistive construction will work well. In a sprinklered building this storage configuration requires a high degree of respect.

I understand from the FPE supervising the tests that the test results will be reflected in NFPA 13. This is a problem because this style of storage needs NFPA 72 compliant detection.

Based on my discussions with the supervising FPE the problem needs more tests but it offers enough for lower-level archieve fire risks.

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Stookey

Thanks for posting the links to the information, very interesting reading. This is yet another case where we  think just put a sprinkler in place and everything will be OK. After all it works so well so many times before, why not here? Just think this all got started with the old 18" rule and how to make it fit. So perhaps in a few years we will have an answer, and a code section to reference for this hazard. But just think of all of these storage units that will be sold between now and then. I wonder if the manufactures are aware of the test results and the fire protection problem they are creating by installing the product??

Smoke detection, and a rated fire enclosure seem the way to go. Smoke is an easy fix, BUT the rated fire enclosure will be the challenge on retrofit applications. Yea I know you can not ask for this after the fact, put I sure can!

I believe CDA asked the question where is the source of the fire? Some of the larger units have electric motors to move the units. Also you can not forget our friendly arsonist. I recall a large record storage fire in NJ in the 1990's where an arsonist got to two 100K sq. ft. record storage warehouses to damage records.  

****************************************
Fire Sprinklers Save Firefighters' Lives Too!


 

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

The test report was very interesting. Thanks Stookey.

I am having a hard time figuring out why you guys are getting so concerned about this storage arrangement. The test results in each test show the fire was controlled in each instance with 0.10 density. The storage arrangement has a relatively slow fire propogation, the heat generation is slower than even most light hazard occupancies, room temperatures were not excessive and the number of operating sprinklers was acceptable. The tests were allow to burn free for 80-90 minutes with no manual fire fighting efforts. We are dealing with control mode sprinklers and each of these tests were a complete success during the early periods (you could even make a strong case they were a success for the entire 80-90 minute test period). In a real world fire incident, fire fighters would be able to extinguish the fire relatively quickly after arriving on the scene. Consider all of the above AND realize we are talking about a 0.10 density with no fire walls to hinder fire spread outside of the storage array!  

In a 200 sq. ft. room with fire subdivision, sprinkler protection (maybe use a 0.25 gpm/sq. ft. density if you will sleep better), and smoke detection to ensure a prompt response, I would say we are golden.

What specifically am I missing??

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

For myself, there were too many varibles in the tests to be able to apply. The flue spaces, barrier spacing, etc were all playing a critcal role. Some of the tests had much greater deflector to storage distance than is often available. My understanding was not all of the tests provided control. I've attached an extract paragraph will is what put me off trying to apply regular sprinkler layout.
 

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Cidona

Your post implies that you want sprinklers to protect your client from all hazards. Fire does not follow that model. These storage systems are based on multiple permutations and it really requires either:

A - Major and detailed engineering analysis
B - Survey of the hazards and the application of economical and reliable engineering controls.

FFP1 has the same logic as mine: LH1 sprinklers appears to work. My response to my clients is smoke detection and some fire-resistive separation. What these reports don't consider is the value of the contents. If its the Federalist Papers on how the US constitution was written, those are historically important. If its Enron's shareholder plans, well I currently use those as toilet paper.

 

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

'A - Major and detailed engineering analysis
B - Survey of the hazards and the application of economical and reliable engineering controls.'

I am not a PE and therefore don't concider myself qualified to do either one of these. I need to see it in the standard for me to apply and it seems to date the committee has not done so.

I am sprinkler only guy. Reading the report, I have an idea of some of the conciderations that should be taken into account and advise the client of some of the issues involved and why this requires proper concideration by a PE.

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

Excellent point by Cidona!

A suitable protection scheme for this exact situation is not currently provided by NFPA 13; therefore, it would be prudent to involve a qualified FPE.

 

RE: Rolling fire storage racks of the sort seen in hospitals

(OP)
FFP1

"A suitable protection scheme for this exact situation is not currently provided by NFPA 13; therefore, it would be prudent to involve a qualified FPE."

Absolutely.

 

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources