Transcript High Challenge Warehouse Case Study

High challenge warehouse case
study – Summary
February 19, 2010
Richard Gallagher
Michael Gollner
Zurich Services Corporation
Zurich Risk Engineering
Objectives
Review the results of the high challenge warehouse workshop
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Recognize participants
Explain the project background
Review case
– Given information
– Question
Summarize the eight presentations
Recap the overall findings
Zurich Risk Engineering
Case study participants
Schirmer Engineering
Rolf Jensen and Associates
FPI Consortium
Telgian
Summit Fire Protection
Hughes Associates
© Zurich Risk Engineering
UCSD
WPI
Creative FPE Solutions
XL GAPS
Zurich Risk Engineering
Dan O’Connor, Garner Palenske
Richard Bukowski
Warde Comeaux
Tracy Bellamy
Sean Merkel, Ryan Bierwerth
Jerry Back, Joe Scheffey,
Dan Gottuk
Michael Gollner
Ali Rangawala
Jonathan Perricone
John Frank
Background
NFPA 13 basis:
Automatic sprinklers control or suppression a fire
Final fire extinguishment by the fire service
Today’s warehouses
High challenges to both sprinklers and fire service
Recent fire experience
Not always reasonable to expect manual intervention
Foundation
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Addressing research to support potential changes to NFPA standards.
Zurich Risk Engineering
Workshop approach
Basis for workshop
Theoretical Case Study
Presentations
Six leading FPE companies share innovative design concepts
One presentation on novel approach to manual fire suppression
One presentation addressing need to step back further and understand
commodities and storage
Format
© Zurich Risk Engineering
20 minute presentations
Panel Q&A
Zurich Risk Engineering
Case Study Warehouse
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
6
General conditions
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Who What Where -
XYZ Company
New warehouse
Rural region of US
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
7
Facility parameters
Two attached buildings
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Low Bay
– 100’ x 150’ x 35’ tall
High Bay
– 55’ x 150’ x 65’ tall
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
8
Facility construction
Roof –Noncombustible steel deck on steel bar joist
High bay rack supported roof
Exterior walls – Insulated metal panel
Interior walls
Between Low Bay and High Bay
150’ long
Reinforced concrete block
– Up to Low Bay roof
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Floors – Reinforced concrete
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
9
Public protection
Public fire service
Volunteer department
XYZ Company is first storage facility in district
Public water
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Extending main 3 miles to site
Limited flow
– 60 psi static / 20 psi residual / 800 gpm flowing
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
10
Private protection
Water supply
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Two fire pumps – one electric, one diesel
Ground water suction tank
Detached fire pump house 300 feet from building
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
11
Storage commodity
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Group A plastics
Unexpanded
In cartons
Nonencapsulated
Conventional wood pallets
Pallet loads 4’ x 4’ x 4’
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
12
Storage configuration
Workshop focus
The High Bay warehouse
High bay
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Multiple row rack (4 pallets deep) flanked
by double row racks
Racks are separated aisles
– 5 ft wide
Array 23 pallets long & 13 pallets high
Nominal 6” flues around each pallet load
Tiers 5’ tall
Elevation View
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
13
Stock handling
Low Bay
Industrial trucks
High Bay
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Automatic storage and retrieval
system (ASRS)
Two ASRS systems
Operate in 5 ft wide aisles
Photo source: FEMA
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
14
The challenge
Local fire chief has made it clear that
in the event of a fire Will enter building to save people
Will not enter building to save property
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Question:
As the fire protection engineer of record, what
fire protection design will be proposed to
achieve final fire extinguishment without fire
service intervention?
Photo source: FEMA
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
15
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Summary of case study presentations
Zurich Risk Engineering
Summary format
Ignition Agent Detection/
Release ASRS Failure Comments -
Sources of ignition
Extinguishing media
Method of detection and release
Uses for ASRS
Noted failure concerns for method
Additional comments
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Where no data provided – marked “NA” and grayed-out
Zurich Risk Engineering
Schirmer Engineering
Ignition Agent -
Arson, electrical, etc.
Water - ESFR high zone at intersection of flues & over aisles
ESFR low zone at intersection of flues
One level in-racks in each zone
1600 gpm either zone
Horizontal barrier between high and low zones
CO2 -
Low zone for redundancy (higher exposure area)
Local application, can pipe long distances, can handle
flammable liquids and electrical fires, no pumps,
Use a 30-60 second discharge
Divide low zone into sections (CO2 volume calculations)
Detection/
Release -
© Zurich Risk Engineering
ASRS Failure -
Sprinkler fusible element, In-rack linear/spot heat detection
NA
NA
Comments - Test ESFR configuration, locate in flues, avoid water ricochet
Test low zone detection concept
Develop CO2 nozzle
Technology proven and can implement today
Zurich Risk Engineering
Rolf Jensen and Associates
Ignition -
NA
Agent -
Water mist
Zoned vertically (vertical risers)
Spray either side of pallet and one side of adjacent pallet
High velocity exhaust fans on outside walls
- Produce airflow perpendicular to aisles to distribute water mist
- Maintain visibility
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Detection/
Release ASRS -
In-rack linear heat detection to locate fire
Use self-contained foam skid IR camera guided nozzle
Not for primary suppression due to response time
Failure -
NA
Comments -
Low bay is typical for ESFR
Critical to maintain longitudinal and transverse flues
High bay ceiling sprinklers to protect building
Zurich Risk Engineering
FPI Consortium
Ignition Agent -
ASRS (lights not usually in use) electrical rails top and
bottom, fires involve ASRS unit and spreads to storage
High expansion foam – submerge in 4 min
13 foam generators
30 minute duration
100,000 gallons water for 30 minutes
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Detection/ Release
ASRS Failure -
Heat detection - ceiling & in-rack spot heat detection
Ceiling 15’ x 15’, in-rack 10’ vertical & 8’ horizontal
Not used, returned to home base and shutdown
Doors and openings must close
False release of foam (cross-zone possible)
Comments - Sprinklers not considered due to environment impact
Zurich Risk Engineering
Telgian
Ignition Agent -
ASRS or lighting at elevated location
Water
Design an in-rack sprinklers, quick response
Need horizontal barriers above in-racks, perhaps each tier
Use waterflow to locate fire vertically
Detection/
Release ASRS -
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Failure -
Fusible sprinkler elements
Locate fire using thermal imaging
Relocate stock to safe area
Handle wet and damaged loads (enclosed unit)
NA
Comments - Need in-rack sprinkler design guidance
- In-rack response time
- In-rack water distribution
Zurich Risk Engineering
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Summit Fire Protection
Ignition -
NA
Agent -
Water
Develop suppression mode in-racks
Increased clearance for larger orifice in-rack sprinklers
Fire barriers to provide fire confinement
300,000 gallons – 2 hour duration
Detection/
Release ASRS -
Fusible sprinklers elements
Under fire conditions, ASRS not available
Failure -
NA
Comments - Introduce ESRF into racks
Evaluate all changes over time (personnel turnover,
commodities, maintenance, etc.
Zurich Risk Engineering
Hughes Associates
Ignition -
NA
Agent -
High expansion foam
Zoned system, 4 quadrants, barriers wire mesh/noncombustible fabric
Curtains strips to allow ASRS passage
Safety factors of 2+ compared to NFPA requirements
20,000 gallons water – 30 minute duration
Detection/ Release
ASRS -
Failure -
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Comments -
In-rack linear heat detection
Flame detection for open spaces
Apply skid mounted fire suppression system
Remove pallets of stock around fire
Evaluate extinguishment – video monitoring
Remove pallets of damaged stock
Fire at zone interface, Openings between zones,
Collateral damage to stock remote from fire
Goals include low complexity, reasonable cost, rapid control,
extinguishment, minimum fire damage, and
minimum collateral damage
Zurich Risk Engineering
WPI, UCSD, Creative FPE Solutions
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Ignition Agent Detection
Release ASRS Failure -
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Comments - Must start at a more fundamental level
Develop method to quantify warehouse fire control,
suppression, or extinguishment
Limits to “modeling” and “small scale testing”
Need new intermediate-scale test
- Determine water application rate for suppression
- Will discuss further in a few slides
Zurich Risk Engineering
XL GAPS
Ignition -
NA
Agent -
Water
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Mobilize remote special fire fighting team
Need 12 hours (remote response, size-up, extinguish, overhaul)
Sprinklers controlling fire during this time
Need 900,000 gallons water
Detection/
Release ASRS -
Fusible sprinkler elements
Fire fighter access to upper tiers
Failure -
NA
Comments -
Interim solution until an engineered solution available
Specialized fire team responding from central location
Similar to private emergency services such as
urban search and rescue, oil wells, oil tanks
Skills to verify building stability, locate fire, work
vertically, apply agent
Zurich Risk Engineering
Summary of work
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Ignition scenarios
Proposed solutions
Design challenges
Gaps
Manual intervention
Zurich Risk Engineering
Identified ignition scenarios
ASRS equipment
Power rails top and bottom
Power on stacker crane
Can introduce ignition source at any level
Lighting
Ignition exposure at roof
Arson
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Anticipate low level exposure
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
27
Solutions
Manual fire suppression – an immediate solution
XL Gaps
Test & validate current sprinkler suppression practices
WPI, UCSD, Edinburgh, and Creative FPE Solutions.
Sprinklers – modify current designs – ESFR inracks
Summit Fire Protection
Telgian
Sprinklers (2 levels ESFR) & CO2
Schirmer
© Zurich Risk Engineering
High expansion foam
FPI Consortium
Hughes Associates
Water mist
RJA
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
28
Design challenges
Water sources
Reliability / redundancy
Volume / duration
Cost of system due to rural location
Environmental concerns
Release of contaminated water
Recycling of used water
Hazard of commodity
Defining the hazard of a commodity
Commodities changing or introducing unknown commodities
In-rack sprinkler placement and type (ESFR)
© Zurich Risk Engineering
highly specific to fuel type, configuration
Avoiding complex designs
Can collateral damage be limited to limit business impact
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
29
Gaps
Test methodologies
There are no methods, currently, to quantify warehouse fire
control, suppression or extinguishment.
A test methodology is needed to ensure adequacy of current and
new design concepts
© Zurich Risk Engineering
How much suppressant?
Length of discharge?
Limitations in full scale, small scale testing and modeling demand a
new approach – small scale commodity classification verified by
intermediate scale testing and large scale modeling/testing for
validation
Zurich Risk Engineering
Gaps
Design approach – WPI et al
Determine limits of current sprinkler protection
systems
Analyze the warehouse fire problem in pieces
1. Characterize sprinkler spray
2. Droplet losses from geometry, plume, radiation, etc.
3. Suppression/Extinction interaction between film/drops
and fire
Benefits:
Sprinkler
Spray
PLUME
FIRE
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Design fixed system to provide suppression or
extinction for any tested materials
Utilize current sprinkler infrastructure and modify
deficient systems if necessary
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
31
Gaps
Design approach – WPI et al
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Engineering Approach to Warehouse Fire Protection Design
Small Scale Testing
Commodity -type
classification
Intermediate
Scale Testing
(Proof of
concept)
Large/Full Scale
Modeling
(Proof of concept)
32
Zurich Risk Engineering
Gaps
Technology
In-rack sprinkler design
No sprinkler designed to respond quickly in a rack
No sprinkler designed to distribute water in a rack
No suppression mode in-rack sprinkler
Hardening of ASRS for use during fire event
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Carry self-contained extinguishing system skid
Identify fire location within array
Verify fire control/suppression progress
Remove adjacent stock to isolate fire
Remove wet or damaged stock
Zurich Risk Engineering
Gaps
Manual intervention - the immediate solution
Water supplies
Are durations sufficient (2 hours vs. 12 hours)
Thorough pre-emergency planning
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Safe work plan
Zurich Risk Engineering
© Zurich Risk Engineering
Questions or comments?
Zurich Risk Engineering
2/4/2010
High Challenge Warehouse Case Study
35