We live in a world dominated by the impact of safety, both in terms of maximising life protection and reducing potential impact on the environment. Safety has risen to the top of many executive agendas, and its emergence as a critical business concern drives everything from workplace culture, to reduced business risk and the avoidance of unnecessary and costly operational downtime.
Protecting against fire risk plays a vital role in this safety-first approach, and the factors influencing the design, specification and use of fire suppression systems is changing. Typical considerations, such as effectiveness of the system and agent, cost of ownership, and health and safety, remain key aspects of the selection process. Added to this is the impact of changes in environmental legislation and the greater effect these will have on the fire suppression industry, and subsequently the system choice available to fire safety engineers and system designers.
Understanding the impact of legislative change
While the influence of environmental regulation is unavoidable, and tighter controls of harmful substances and materials should be encouraged, it is vital to consider the holistic effects of significant change to the fire suppression industry. Regulatory change translates into modifications, and sometimes transformations, of the solutions available to the market. In March 2014, the European Parliament supported a European Commission proposal to reduce the use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and greenhouse gases as part of the F-gas Regulation. This requirement to cut HFCs to 79% below average 2009-12 levels by 2030 was mandated effective from January 2015, with phase-down commencing from January 2016. Fire suppression systems are directly impacted by this regulation, particularly those using HFC-based extinguishing agents, as they have some of the highest global warming potential (GWP) in comparison to other sectors.
Given that some fire suppression systems have a service life of 20 years, it’s likely that older installations were designed with HFCs. Any HFC-based system already in-situ is also affected by the F-Gas regulation, including system recharging. This directs a disproportionate impact on fire suppression system owners, who not only face price increases as a resulted of limited HFC availability, but also must be aware of potential end-of-life and decommissioning costs of their existing systems when a suitable alternative must be installed.
One perspective in the fire suppression market is that the impact of the F-gas regulation can be dismissed as no HFC emissions are released unless the system discharges in the event of a fire. However, this does not represent an accurate interpretation of the F-gas requirements, as the regulation focuses on reducing HFC emissions by controlling the use, and therefore minimising the manufacture and sale of such products.
As the fire suppression market evolves and moves forward, there is a drive for innovation and technology development that supports viable alternatives to HFCs. The complexity of engineered fire suppression systems requires a robust and reliable solution that is matched to the application risks and takes into account the specific considerations in relation to pipework design, venting and storage of the extinguishing agent containers. Working with fire suppression system manufacturers who offer a wide range of products ensures that system designers can benefit from impartial guidance on the most effective suppression method for their particular application.
Viable options for effective fire suppression
Even before the introduction of the F-gas Regulation, fire suppression solutions using inert gases have long provided an effective alternative to HFC-based and halon systems. These solutions combine three primary gases – nitrogen, argon and carbon dioxide – to deprive the fire of oxygen and eliminate the potential for combustion. Inert gases displace a significant amount of the atmosphere within the protected space in order to suppress a fire. A typical atmospheric composition is approximately 21% oxygen, 78% nitrogen and a 1% blend of carbon dioxide, methane, helium and trace amounts of other gases. For inert gases to successfully control a fire, the oxygen level must be lowered to 15% or less, requiring 35-50% of the atmospheric volume to be replaced within a discharge time of 60 or 120 seconds. This change to the atmospheric conditions in the space requires appropriate venting to exhaust ambient atmosphere and release the inert gas on suppression of the fire, and presents one of the most significant challenges to system designers when engineering a gaseous fire suppression system.
Conventional inert gas systems can cause potential over pressurisation, resulting in collapsed walls, blown out doors and damage to a building’s structure, particularly in enclosed spaces such as data centres, electrical control rooms and laboratories. This is a result of the initial flow spike and peak pressure during initial discharge of the inert gas, and it is this pressure data that determines the specification of the system pipework and venting. To further reduce the risk of over pressurisation, larger size and high-pressure pipework based on hydraulic calculations defined by the system storage pressure is required, which can increase the complexity, cost and installation time of the fire suppression system.
To maximise the amount of inert gas within a specific system, the agent is stored in pressurised containers at up to 300 bar. This storage pressure differs across regional markets and is influenced by varying factors, with the typical storage pressure in Europe at 300 bar, 150-200 bar in the US, and 200 bar in the Middle East. In the US market in particular, storage pressures are lower than those in Europe due to the infrastructure that supports the refill of gas containers restricted to the 150-200 bar pressure range. The storage containers are the most expensive component in an inert gas fire suppression system, so designing a system at the highest storage pressure possible reduces the number of containers required to hold the inert gas. The current 300 bar inert gas fire suppression systems are maximising the capability of existing gas container design, and additional ancillary components such as orifice plates and manifolds are required in certain system designs.
Client to confirm following queries/provide additional briefing information;
- Are we looking to elaborate further on clean agents specifically within this section?
- What are the additional key customer/market challenges that we can highlight?
- What further trends does Tyco FPP see in relation to engineered fire suppression systems?
Time for a change
The shift in market dynamics within the fire suppression industry has increased the use of alternative systems to reduce the reliance on HFC and halon-based agents. Product development and innovation form a key part of this transition. It is experienced manufacturers, such as Tyco Fire Protection Products, working closely with industry associations and standards authorities, who are helping to drive the trend towards more effective, ‘greener’ fire suppression technology.
Innovation in inert gas fire suppression
Overcoming the key design and engineering challenges of inert gas fire suppression systems is the stimulus for new, innovative technologies that can improve performance and reduce costs for system owners. To support this industry improvement, Tyco Fire Protection Products has developed its unique iFLOW delivery system for inert gas fire suppression systems.
The iFLOW system provides regulated discharge pressure to eliminate the potential for flow spikes and peak pressure. This controlled flow of the inert gas enables smaller diameter, lower pressure pipework and reduced pressure relief venting to help design engineers minimise complexity in their system, and therefore unnecessary pressure venting costs.
Using three innovative components that combine as part of an integrated fire suppression system – the iFLOW valve, the iFLOW horizontal check valve and the matrix container racking system – engineers can design out additional ancillary components, such as orifice plates and manifolds, and achieve a more effective and less complex fire suppression solution.
The iFLOW valve regulates flow at nominal pressures of 60 bar (in a 300 bar system) and 40 bar (in a 200 bar system). It reduces the peak pressure spike associated with conventional orifice systems and achieves 95% of the design concentration within 60 or 120 seconds as required by recognised industry standards. The iFLOW valve also limits the output pressure, even in the event of a discharge occurring against a closed selector valve, making it one of the safest valves on the market. The iFLOW check valve connects multiple containers and can eliminate the need for a discharge manifold on certain systems, to help minimise installation time.
The challenge of designing fire suppression systems within complex spaces, either as part of a new construction project or a retro-fit to an existing building, can impact on the layout of the container bank, leading to more complicated installations. iFLOW overcomes this with the matrix container racking system that offers greater flexibility and options for the container layout. This provides greater choice when systems have to be installed in tight spaces. When compared with traditional racking systems, the matrix design enables containers to be positioned in conventional rows or even arranged around columns to fully utilise available space, and also facilitates quicker removal of containers during recharge and maintenance.
The controlled flow discharge performance offered by iFLOW is a new innovation in engineered fire suppression and represents a significant change to how engineers can design and install robust and reliable systems, while overcoming the challenges of total flooding solutions. The iFLOW Fire Suppression System was developed through extensive testing, and is certified and approved with recognised bodies, including VdS, UL and FM.
For more information, go to www.tfppemea.com