Get Listed for Free on our New Business Directory

Want greater exposure? Here's a 75% discount code for all paid packages - HSfB17

Fire Suppesstion System

Discuss all things fire related.

Moderator: Moderators

diamondno1
Student
Student
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 9:30 pm

Fire Suppesstion System

Post by diamondno1 » Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:20 pm

H All :wave:

We have a fire suppresstion system fitted within a randex storage unit in our dispatch area. My question is does this sytem need to be connected to our main fire detection triggering a whole site evacuation in the event it was activated .scratch .geek .We have a suppression system in our server room which is not connected. Any advice would be great .

Essex
Jnr Member
Jnr Member
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 9:15 pm

Re: Fire Suppesstion System

Post by Essex » Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:58 pm

My advice would be to seek the advice of a specialist on fire suppression systems and for them to liase closely with the person that draws up your FRA to determine what does and does not need to happen in the event of a fire alarm.

Too many questions and possible answers to be of any help on a forum.
Education is the key. A manager should always stand by their team. They employed them.

User avatar
Elf&Safety
Student
Student
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 12:11 pm
Industry Sector: Micro-Electronics Manufacture
Location: England

Re: Fire Suppesstion System

Post by Elf&Safety » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:13 pm

What i would do personally is put extra detectors in the area, that way it is in essence connected. If the fire isn't contained sufficiently or if smoke escapes it would trigger normal procedures. In theory the system should completely stop the fire and that should be it. However, you've clearly decided these machines are at risk of fire hence the system installed, standard smoke detectors or if space and design allows infra-red in the ceiling space should give you more confidence.

My previous fire supression systems were never connected to the main system however our system was top notch and would detect if it hadn't been controlled sufficiently or if too much powder escaped etc (maybe door on machine was open at the time etc... ) Do you have a powder system btw?

User avatar
Messy
Grand Shidoshi
Grand Shidoshi
Posts: 2734
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 8:59 am
Location: Job based in Central London

Re: Fire Suppesstion System

Post by Messy » Fri Aug 11, 2017 8:18 pm

My question would be if the fire suppression system has operated, why on earth would you not want it linked to the fire detection system? There's a fire for goodness sake!!

Most are suppression systems operated by heat or manual operation, so unwanted fire signals are unlikely. Sprinkler systems should be connected via a short delay as pressure differentials can cause problems in flow switches and lead to false activations, but other systems can be linked easily

Seriously, why would you not link it - especially a server room? .scratch

diamondno1
Student
Student
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 9:30 pm

Re: Fire Suppesstion System

Post by diamondno1 » Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:30 pm

Thanks All

I will take on your comments, and will discuss them with our faciltites department :evil:as i cant get an answer as to why they have not connected up the server room before now .scratch


User avatar
Messy
Grand Shidoshi
Grand Shidoshi
Posts: 2734
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 8:59 am
Location: Job based in Central London

Re: Fire Suppesstion System

Post by Messy » Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:55 pm

diamondno1 wrote:
Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:30 pm
Thanks All

I will take on your comments, and will discuss them with our faciltites department :evil:as i cant get an answer as to why they have not connected up the server room before now .scratch

I would be interested in their rationale in not connecting these system to the fire alarm once you are aware- AND as long as you won't be betraying any commercial or contractural confidences by doing so of course!

User avatar
Elf&Safety
Student
Student
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 12:11 pm
Industry Sector: Micro-Electronics Manufacture
Location: England

Re: Fire Suppesstion System

Post by Elf&Safety » Mon Aug 14, 2017 10:58 am

Our system for the server room was completely self contained and in theory the building didn't need to be evacuated as the risk of fire spread was supposed to be non existant due to the system. It was a sealed room and once the powder is used the fire can't continue... so where is the need to evacuate people? If there is your normal system should be able to detect it. We had an extra fire detector outside the room, if any particles or smoke escaped the alarm would be triggered.... i wouldn't say there is a need for it to be connected but i supposed it's dependant on design of the building and the system.

Think some people are missing the point.... once the system is activated; there is no fire!!

User avatar
witsd
Snr Member
Snr Member
Posts: 556
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2014 4:37 pm
Location: Glasgow

Re: Fire Suppesstion System

Post by witsd » Mon Aug 14, 2017 11:18 am

I hadn't realised that fire suppression systems were infallible... :P
We often think that when we have completed our study of one we know all about two, because 'two' is 'one and one.' We forget that we still have to make a study of 'and.'

User avatar
martin1804
Member
Member
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:53 am

Re: Fire Suppesstion System

Post by martin1804 » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:54 pm

And the earlier question regarding is the suppression system powder based is relevant too. If powder suppression is used, even if it puts out the fire I would be evacuating until the air is clear of the nasty powder particles. That would clear the area nearly as well as smoke from a fire...

User avatar
Messy
Grand Shidoshi
Grand Shidoshi
Posts: 2734
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 8:59 am
Location: Job based in Central London

Re: Fire Suppesstion System

Post by Messy » Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:58 pm

Once upon a time, BS5839 was pretty relaxed and allowed detection in corridors and escape routes only to achieve a Cat 3 system.

Then, after some research, boffins concluded that as the alarm would only be sounded when the escape route was actually affected by smoke, this could in certain cases be too late to provide an effective available safe egress time (ASET). In short, in some cases, by the time punters reached their escape route, it was too late and they were trapped.

So The British Standard Institute changed their category L3 standard (BS5839-1) to include; ' escape routes and rooms leading on to escape routes'.

Now a fire would be detected earlier - in the room and alarm sounded immediately and crucially, whilst the corridor and stairs were still clear and available.

Now this server room:

1) The risk of fire has been assessed and the findings dictate it requiring an expensive suppression system. Now look again, its described for fire 'suppression'. I do not know of a system that will give a 100% cast iron guarantee that it will extinguisher a fire. Even huge sprinkler systems with unlimited water supplies are designed to hold/contain and suppress fires. By and large, they will extinguish the fire - but not always. If a fire safety engineer promises full extinguishment - sack him/her as they are telling porkies

2) Nearly all suppression systems work on heat activation &/or double knock smoke/simultaneous system where 2 x smoke detectors need to activate before firing the suppression system. We have a water mist system where 3 x heads (2 x smoke and 1 x heat) are required before water flows. So false alarms are rare and the fire will be well involved before anyone knows of it

3) Someone needs to be aware that the system has activated, so linking it to the buildings AFD system seem sensible. How else would you know the system has operated?

4) Of course the FRA will determine fire detection solutions, but I find it difficult to imagine that where any detection is fitted, it will not include a server room. Even in a cat M system (manual call points only), a local detection system could be fitted to the server room to make this a L5/M system


I do not subscribe that any server room is totally 'sealed' or any suppression system is totally reliable. I have worked on very large data hall projects and if such systems were on the market, we would have used them!

I am not saying its impossible for a server room to be fitted with a suppression system and no AFD, but I simply cannot understand the rationale that would allow this mis match of a fire safety strategy. But I am big enough and ugly enough to learn and be put right, so please help me understand the justification !!!

User avatar
witsd
Snr Member
Snr Member
Posts: 556
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2014 4:37 pm
Location: Glasgow

Re: Fire Suppesstion System

Post by witsd » Tue Aug 15, 2017 12:38 am

Just to follow on from Messy's post, a suppressed fire may still be a fire:

Image
We often think that when we have completed our study of one we know all about two, because 'two' is 'one and one.' We forget that we still have to make a study of 'and.'

User avatar
Messy
Grand Shidoshi
Grand Shidoshi
Posts: 2734
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 8:59 am
Location: Job based in Central London

Re: Fire Suppesstion System

Post by Messy » Tue Aug 15, 2017 7:23 pm

clapclap :shock: :lol:

That's the photo after the fire brigade arrive

Post Reply

 

 Health, Environment and Risk Training - for all your NEBOSH, IOSH and in-house training. Contact us for excellent consultancy rates

Follow us on Twitter Find us on Facebook Find us on on LinkedIn

Terms of Use Privacy Policy