I had a client ask about Oxygen-Reduced Systems (ORS), aka Hypoxic air technology (displacing ambient oxygen in an enclosed environment such as in warehouses). I did a quick read with what's available on Wiki, FM and NFPA. But even my go-to suppression people have hardly encountered these. Testing has been very specific.

Just to increase my knowledge, does anyone here have an practical experience in these?

Are these systems really being installed?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Are foam system test headers allowed to flow outside and discharge the foam to the ground/storm water?

I see more and more places are banning AFFF from storm water.

What about flowing AR-SFFF to storm?

Any recommendations for capture if its not allowed to be send down the storm drain?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Is there a room volume cut off that you use for clean agent space to make sure that your system will pass the room integrity fan test?

As an extreme example, a 50,000 sf space would probably be better for something like a double interlock preaction system since it would be difficult to make sure that the space is of tight enough construction to hold the clean agent (there will inherently be some leaks in construction despite doing all the recommended practices of gasketing, door threshold blocking, etc).

Thanks in advance!

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

What is the correct procedure for determining the quantity of the reserve amount of foam, such as FP 3%, for a plant?

I've looked specifically through NFPA 11 and NFPA 16, and can't determine it.

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a customer who is building a storage building that includes flammable liquids.

The liquids are Class I-B flammable (as classified under NFPA 30).

I understand that there are limits for the quantity that is allowed within one control area. The Maximum Allowable Quantity (MAQ) is 120 gallons, from NFPA 30 tables. The reading can be increased 100% when a sprinkler system is used. 

So the limit increases to 240 gallons with sprinkler protection.

The number can increase even more when stored in approved liquid storage cabinets or safety cans, which I assume the customer would prefer.

So the final MAQ becomes 240 gallons x 2 = 480 gallons.

The biggest storage room is 2,000 square feet and the customer wants to exceed the MAQ to be above 480 gallons in that storage room.

I have understood that exceeding the MAQ is permitted if the building is classified as an H-3 Occupancy (High Hazard). This occupancy applies more restrictive requirements. 

Is there any numerical value for a new MAQ limit in that case?

My current path is as follows:
Class I-B liquid storage in Storage occupancy > maximum MAQ exceeded > building re-classified as H-3 Occupancy > but where is the new MAQ?

Thanks in advance for your input. I usually design under SFS and CEA standards, and they don't have the same MAQ concept within those standards.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I am overseeing an NFPA 101, Chapter 43 reconstruction project in an existing storage occupancy that is changing to an industrial/high hazard occupancy.

I am trying to coordinate the means of egress during construction.

Other parts of the building are currently occupied and the new area is less than 50% of the building.

Section 43.7.2.3 requires that the area comply with the applicable new construction chapters of the occupancy. The hazard category per table 43.7.3 leads me to believe this would be a hazard category 1.

The question is: when is the construction area considered to be high hazard?

The contents of the hazardous occupancy will not be present through the entirety of the construction and will only be put in place after the space is ready to be occupied and compliant with all means of egress requirements. During construction, the "high hazard contents room" is just a small room with nothing located inside.

Even with no high hazard contents present until the space is ready to be occupied, does it need to meet the egress requirements of new industrial/high hazard or can it meet the egress requirements of existing for storage?

Thanks.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a project where we're adding a sound (anechoic) chamber and and protecting it with clean agent.

A question came up as to whether or not dampers are required for the HVAC system that provide supply and return air to the pre-manufactured chamber.

Is an anechoic chamber required to have dampers for limiting the migration of the clean agent?

My thinking is that the clean agent will be activated by an air sampling system, so there should be no meaningful amount of smoke in the chamber.

That said, do the dampers have to be listed for fire/smoke? 

Any help with getting specifics from code or a clearer understanding is always appreciated from the community so thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

3M recently announced they will no longer manufacture NOVEC 1230 by end of 2025 due to the presence of PFAS (https://news.3m.com/2022-12-20-3M-to-Exit-PFAS-Manufacturing-by-the-End-of-2025).

Other similar agents, such as FM-200, have similar environmental concerns due to having HCFCs.

Does anyone know a chemical fire suppression agent that doesn't have CFC or PFAS issues?

I know there is a new NFPA standard (770) on hybrid systems and that the Victualic Vortex is one such system, but not sure what other alternatives are out on the market. Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a situation where we'll have a piece of equipment in one control area that has a closed-use pipe arrangement with oxidizing gases that goes through different control areas. I've gotten conflicting feedback on this.

How do you figure the amount of "in-use" for each control area? 

Here's a sketch of the concept:

The equipment that is using the oxygen is on the fourth floor Control Area 2. The tanks that feed it are (2) 200 CF oxygen tanks that are in the second floor Control Area 1.

Which of the following two scenarios is the proper way to tally up the "in-use" quantity for the fourth floor Control Area 2 when comparing against the Maximum Allowable Quantities (MAQs)?

• Concept #1: The "in-use" amount is only the gas within the equipment itself, and only the gas within the piping to the extent of the control area wall.
• Concept #2: The "in-use" amount is all of the gas within the equipment itself, and all of the gas within all of the piping, and all of the gas within the (2) oxygen tanks which are actively hooked up to it.

 
My initial gut reaction was that the second option is correct, but now I’m not sure. My reasoning being that if there is an event in 4th floor control area 2 that causes a leak or something like that, it’s not going to just leak out what is physically within the control area… it’s going to leak out everything in all of the piping, all of the equipment, and all of the hooked up tanks. This is all presuming there are no safety devices to stop this from happening.

Assuming my initial gut reaction was correct, is there a way to limit the amount so that it stops at the control area wall?

As in: is there a safety device such as an automatic shutoff valve we can put at the wall such that in the event of a leak or other event, the automatic valve will shut off and then we only have to count the amount of gas between the equipment and the shutoff valve?

I’ve looked in the IBC and its commentary for more info, but couldn’t find anything helpful. I’ve also reached out to a number of different people and there seems to be a variety of different opinions on it.

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I am a fire sprinkler fitter a military installation. Have a question regarding low expansion foam systems with the use of Viking Grate nozzles.

Of course with the concerns of AFFF, there are many issues and decisions flying around about the existing systems we have out here in our aircraft hangars.

Is it acceptable to use the Viking grate nozzles without the low expansion foam?

How does this provide any fire protection?

Obviously, this is not how the system was designed, in my opinion.

Please help me understand how this can be acceptable. I appreciate any and all input. 

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

What are some popular solutions for elimination of wet-pipe sprinkler systems in data centers that have installed wet-pipe, VESDA and clean agent systems?

A client wants me to find a solution that will be acceptable to the local Authority Having Jurisdiction to eliminate the wet-pipe sprinkler system in the data center portion of the facility.

We already have the VESDA and clean agent. Are there other recommendations/insight here that might be helpful?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a stand alone open-air pool pavilion with no attached building.

There is a gas grill under the roof with a very elaborate hood/exhaust/Ansul system. There is no fire alarm system in this pool pavilion.

The Fire Inspector wants the Ansul system monitored by the clubhouse fire alarm system that is 100-ft away.

Is he correct by code?

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

[Moderator's note: since the first lithium battery question a few weeks ago, we've been flooded with more questions on the topic. We'll do our best to not overburden everyone here but still keep with the topics people are asking. As always, we're thankful for you all!]

Could anybody point out some publications that deal specifically with the ventilation of lithium-ion batteries during off-gassing and how the ventilation should be controlled?

I am familiar with FM Global Loss Prevention Datasheet, and NFPA 855, and I went through some publications such as FIA, however from those I only get that there should be sufficient ventilation.

I am more interested in the off-gas detection part of the design.

The ventilation should be turned on and ESS turned off at the first sign of explosive gasses, but what gasses should those be?

H2, CO, C2H4, CH4, or all mentioned in a combination?

Not sure how to proceed in this.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Given the HFC (hydrofluorocarbon) production phase-out, what are you currently recommending to your clients and customers regarding the installation of new FM-200 systems at this time?

Just curious to get a status check on how you approach this challenge. Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I wanted to pose the question on hazardous material storage lockers. We wish to protect the locker in accordance with Chapter 14 of NFPA 30 and have rated it for 4-hours to eliminate the need for fire separation distance to the immediately-adjacent main building as allowed.

The locker will not be structurally attached and will only have flashing connecting the two to keep out the elements, garbage, and animals. The locker will only have people in as necessary to get the liquids out.

The main building has a door on the "exterior wall" that opens and "reveals" the 3-hour rated hazardous material locker door, which you have to open to get inside the locker.

NFPA 30 2015 handbook Section 14.4.3 denotes that lockers over 1500 sqft should be protected permanent building such as attached buildings or warehouses. Our locker is under the 1500 sqft requirements so therefore I would say we are not a building but a "locker".

Therefore, the exterior wall openings allowances of IBC (2015) Table 705.8 would be to the lot line (over 10ft) and not the locker itself (0ft), allowing our client to access the locker from the inside of the main building and not having to go outside to access it from the exterior.

I was wondering if anyone has had a similar experience or if we should just call it part of the main building and protect it as such and lose the allowances of Chapter 14.

Thanks in advance!

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We're working on an aircraft hanger with a foam system. I can't quite nail this down, as NFPA 409 and the UFC don't spell this out - do the hangar doors need to be open, or closed, in case of a fire or to test the foam system?

Again, don't see any guidance spelled out in either standard. Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

NFPA 101 has commentary that states that kitchen hood suppression systems are not required to activate public mode alarm for fire alarm systems.

Our Authority Having Jurisdiction stated that since the kitchen hood systems are provided in lieu of required sprinkler systems, then they are required to activate public mode alarm.

What is the generally accepted practice for kitchen hood suppression monitoring?

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I am working on a project that is manufacturing lithium-metal batteries (not lithium-ion). There are multiple areas throughout the manufacturing process where there is a risk of exposed lithium metal.

With lithium being water reactive, any water based system is not an option.

Are there any known alternative fire suppression systems listed and approved for use on a lithium fire?

I know that per a couple of different NFPA codes that clean agent and dry-chemical systems are not recommended for use on lithium fires. From what I can find there are just manual fire extinguishers (such and ANSUL's lith-x) for use on lithium fires.

Any input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

NFPA 11 identifies several materials for foam concentrate pipe & valves, including brass, bronze, stainless steel (304 or 316), or other material in accordance with foam concentrate manufacturer's certification of compatibility with the foam concentrate as approved by the AHJ. [NFPA 11-2016 4.7.1.1]

Can we use hot-dipped carbon steel pipe to meet this requirement after the foam pump to the foam chamber of the cone roof tanks?

The distance is more than a mile long (1.2 miles, 2 km). Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

The International Fire Code (IFC) Section 6004 for highly toxic and toxic gases states the following for exhausted enclosures:

6004.1.3(1) The average ventilation velocity at the face of the enclosure shall not be less than 200 feet per minute with not less than 150 feet per minute.

However, in the same section for gas cabinets (Section 6004.1.2(1)), the words "at any point of the access port or window" are added after "150 feet per minute."

Doe anyone know if this was an oversight by the authors of this section? Did they miss a few words in the requirement for exhausted enclosures?

I don't understand why the 150 feet per minute would be for gas cabinets but not exhausted enclosures (albeit without referencing where the 150 feet per minute measurement is to be taken). This issue is coming up at my work as we have several exhausted enclosures and gas cabinets and some of the exhausted enclosures have ports/windows which are sealed shut. Thanks in advance!

​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We're under the International Fire Code, Section 903.2.11.5. This section allows fire sprinklers to be installed in commercial hood/duct systems.

Is this intended to be in the ductwork only, or also protecting the cooking equipment?

I've never seen this before, but it seems to go against everything we're taught about cooking and grease fires (don't put water on them)! Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We are designing a clean agent system for electrical rooms located within a high-rise building. We are proposing having dedicated clean agent releasing control panels for the electrical rooms, and a separate building Fire Alarm Control Panel.

Is it mandatory to connect fire/smoke dampers (and other shutdown devices) in the electrical room with the clean agent releasing panel, or can these be connected to the building fire alarm system?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have been asked if a 20+ year old wet pipe sprinkler system we installed into a paint application room is the correct method of protection for a specific paint product that is currently being used.

The MSDS sheets for a few of the products they now use indicate protection with dry chemical, foam, or water fog.

I have been told that the MSDS sheets typically refer to the product as its being stored and not necessarily as its being applied. The storage is not happening in this room of course, but in approved fire-rated storage cabinets outside the area. None of the typical requirements for alternate protection are met per NFPA 33.

Basically other than the product data sheets, this is a run of the mill paint application area. Nothing automated or fancy.

Anyone have any experience with a similar situation?

​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe