“System Sensor devices are working together in a networked fire alarm situation, thereby providing increased fire protection for one of the crown jewels of theSeattleschool district.”
— Dennis Lane, Sales Engineer at Chubb

Renovation of the 230,000-squarefoot Chief Sealth was completed with an emphasis on life safety issues and energy and environmental conservation, while revitalizing the school’s appearance inside and out. The objective was to create a superior educational environment, including classrooms with technology upgrades, new foreign language classrooms, a renovated auditorium and full Americans with Disabilities Act accessibility.

Catering to roughly 1,000 students, who comprise one of the most ethnically and culturally diverse student bodies in Washingtonstate, Chief Sealth has undergone periodic upgrades to its fire and life safety system prior to this renovation. Already equipped with NOTIFIER^® and System Sensor products, the newly designed system was required to maintain that standard and reuse as much as possible.

Because of its specific experience with NOTIFIER and System Sensor devices, Chubb Fire & Security, a UTC Fire & Security Company, worked with Tres West Engineers of Tacoma, Wash., to design and manage the installation of the fire and life safety system for the school renovation. Chubb is a fully licensed fire, life safety and security contractor with expertise at retrofitting properties to current safety standards.

Because Chief Sealth has serviced the community since its opening in 1957, the school district was concerned about maintaining its heritage and existing architecture, including its beautiful, arched ceilings. This was one of the factors that played into the fire and life safety system design.

“There were some complications in the actual design of the fire alarm system related to accommodating unblemished ceilings, which in turn created obstacles in installing the devices,” says Tony Bartling, Project Manager at Chubb. “The goal was to do as little exposed pipe work as possible, which caused some additional challenges in determining the locations of the smoke detectors and of the audible visible devices.”

Overall, detectors and notification devices were placed throughout the campus in accordance with the International Fire Code. But that didn’t always prove to be easy. “One of the challenges in the building was the number of beams that crossed corridors.” saysDennis Lane, Sales Engineer at Chubb.

The driving factor was to provide a code-compliant system. “The nice part about the current fire alarm system is it is easily expandable to accommodate additional notification devices or the smoke detectors, beam detectors, heat detectors, what have you. The device compatibility and expansion becomes a nonissue,” says Bartling.

“System Sensor devices are working together in a networked fire alarm situation, thereby providing increased fire protection for one of the crown jewels of theSeattleschool district,” says Lane.

A comprehensive fire- and life-safety design requires a cohesive blend of alarm/detection capabilities, an appropriate suppression system and a number of other building construction features that depend on occupancy, type of facility and use of space. An often overlooked component — planning — is integral to keeping occupants safe.

In buildings, like an apartment complex, the alarm and detection system is a critical component because occupants may be asleep. Alarm and detection features can provide functions such as early warning for occupants, fire department notification and unlocking of doors. In large public venues, like a shopping mall or arena, the notification system may integrate a voice-communication function to give emergency instruction.

For healthcare occupancies, correctional facilities, high-rise buildings or other places where evacuation would cause considerable disturbance or not be a desired option, suppression becomes the focus of the system.

“An automatic fire sprinkler system has the ability to control the situation, thereby limiting the effects of the fire, the generation of products of combustion, and in general, allowing additional time for occupants to move to a safe area,” said Solomon.“Of course, the presence of a well-thought-out means of egress, with adequate exits, stairs and doors, is also crucially important.”

In general terms, the means of egress should also be thought of as a “system,” as well. The number, type and arrangement of the egress components are important factors to consider.

Some construction options may require the integration of firewalls, fire barrier walls and smoke compartments, as well as protection schemes for vertical openings between floors.

“There are even criteria for interior finish materials such as floor, wall and ceiling coverings,” explained Solomon.“Each of these building construction features can be specified to achieve the desired level of fire resistance, which is usually measured in hours for a firewall based on the building’s structural system, or for flame spread and smoke-developed characteristics for an interior wall finish. The level of fire-safety performance intended for the building is contingent upon the use of the occupancy.”

Q. How do you manage fire safety in more than 270 facilities?

A. The size of the district does create challenges. South Florida is continually growing. We’ve added 20 new schools in the past eight years and expanded another 40.We also use more than 2,000 modular buildings for classrooms. Our facilities department oversees the majority of this new and renovated construction, and all aspects of life safety are managed through a coordinated effort among the physical plant operations, facilities, and internal building and safety departments.

Needless to say, it’s a large task and communication is the key. Maintaining multiple technologies is another constant challenge due to the diversity and age of the fire-alarm systems in our facilities. Fortunately, several of our department technicians are NICET certified, and all are factory trained on a variety of manufacturers’ technologies: Simplex, NOTIFIER, FCI and Fire-Lite. We have, therefore, become an all-inclusive service organization and can address the majority of service issues internally. Coordinating with all these departments, we formulate strategies that allow us not only to address current service issues, but also to move our fire- and life-safety systems into the 21st century.

Q. What are some of your team’s technical challenges?

A. One of the biggest technical obstacles is integrating multiple systems from various manufacturers so all systems function as a single unit. Staying current with ever-changing fire alarm technologies is also a challenge, so we work diligently with our equipment suppliers to identify trends to keep us current. We attempt to identify equipment that is nearing the end of its lifecycle so that we can upgrade to newer, more modern equipment.

An equally important issue is maintaining system integrity, which is paramount when you have multiple people working on the same system. In addition to our large staff, we have numerous vendors that work on our systems. Any time someone accesses our systems, we are responsible for ensuring the systems remain fully operational and that building occupants are safe at all times.

Q. What system features do you look for to meet those challenges?

A. It is important that the system is user-friendly; both school-based staff and maintenance personnel need to understand the life-safety systems. When we construct a new building at an existing campus, we might have to combine intelligent technology with hardwire technology, and it must appear seamless to the end user. We also have about eight to 10 networked fire-alarm systems and expect to install more of them. This technology seems to be the trend in the industry.

Q. Have Broward County Schools had any major fires?

A. We haven’t run into anything that we weren’t able to resolve with early detection. For example, there are certain areas of a building our systems cannot supervise through manpower or CCTV, such as restrooms. Actually, the highest fire incidents occur in restrooms because they are unsupervised by our systems. Based on this fire incident data, our safety department requires us to install detectors in all group restrooms with tamper-proof covers. We’ve had our group restroom incidents and end-of-year pranks, but we haven’t had any permanent damage to buildings, and nothing has gone undetected. We’ve been able to put out all small fires with minimal damage.

In fact, we’ve lost more time to hurricanes than any fire incident. When Hurricane Wilma hit (in 2005), Broward County looked like a war zone, but the schools were opened and occupied in less than two weeks. That’s a major accomplishment. Every fire-alarm system was checked and operable before students were permitted to return. We had to respond with, literally, truckloads of new batteries for the systems because the power had been out for several days.

Q. That must have taken a lot of time and energy to get back up to code, given the size of the district.

A. Due to the devastation that occurred countywide, there were many factors that needed to be addressed before the facilities could be reopened. The entire staff of physical plant operations came together and worked non-stop for 15 days until all buildings were deemed safe. I cannot say enough about all of the people who worked tirelessly until our district was re-opened and serving the community again.

Q. What are some of the ways your district exceeds code?

A. Being familiar with the tendencies of our students, we have installed pull station covers with sounders to deter any false alarms. In regard to notification appliances, System Sensor was instrumental in making the equipment vandal-resistant when we communicated our needs to them. We also put a smoke detector within 10 feet of all stoves that are in classrooms. It’s important for us to find new ways to become proactive. Exceeding minimum code is only one of those ways.

In addition to meeting NFPA guidelines, we developed a construction specification that includes other device requirements, and it is included in all new construction. One other way we exceed minimum code is by discontinuing the use of heat detectors and installing smoke detectors everywhere, except where environmentally prohibitive, which provides us with earlier detection.

Q. Are your fire systems integrated with other building systems, such as HVAC or security?

A. In regard to HVAC, we use general alarm control functions throughout all our buildings. We shut down all gas, air handlers, et cetera, on every alarm. We are, however, discussing more selective control. We have one high school with more than 5,000 students and four different buildings. We want to avoid releasing 5,000 students simultaneously due to security reasons and are looking into selective evacuation control with this particular facility. This has been approved by the local authority having jurisdiction in conjunction with our safety department.

Initially, there hasn’t been much integration of other building systems technologies, but as technology changes and bandwidth increases, we probably will include other systems, specifically security and CCTV. If Homeland Security puts a school in lock-down mode, and the fire-alarm system goes off, we are developing a process to follow. We need to refine and address this.

Q. Do schools in general receive the necessary resources to implement high-quality fire- and life-safety systems?

A. I know for a fact that Broward schools do. Our PPO management team and safety department are committed to ensuring the effectiveness of our systems – new and old. We are highly respected by neighboring school systems and have provided them direction on ways to improve their systems. As for Broward County schools, we are compliant in every way possible. We make repairs immediately and try to identify equipment that might become obsolete so that it can be upgraded before a critical failure occurs. There is no sense of avoidance on our part. We take whatever means necessary to exceed minimum code when possible. We have to protect a huge amount of property and people, and we all take it very seriously. Not repairing something related to fire safety is not an option.

Q. If you could offer one piece of advice to other districts, what would it be?

A. Establish and maintain strong relationships with manufacturers and their distributors. The equipment manufacturers are on the forefront of fire-alarm technology, and forging partnerships with them makes us better prepared to implement these new technologies. For example, we have been very well received by System Sensor and value that relationship. They help provide the resources we need to get the job done.

California

The enforcement process for school life-safety projects differs from the process required for private sector projects. Schools must still adhere to California Building Code Requirements; the difference is that several agencies, primarily the local school board, enforce code. The local fire department, for example, enforces fire flows, fire lanes and building fire-safety inspections. The Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, reviews projects, in cooperation with the State Fire Marshal, for structural, ADA and general fire-and life-safety requirements of the codes.
(Source: www.cde.ca.gov)

Minnesota

The Minnesota State Fire Code does not require that all fire-alarm systems be monitored by a central station or that automatic fire department response be initiated. Buildings or situations that require monitoring and automatic fire department response include automatic sprinkler systems exceeding 100 sprinklers (20 sprinklers in new buildings) and certain schools that use an automatic fire-alarm system in lieu of fire-rated egress corridors. In addition, school districts are required to submit a fire-protection plan for any addition to, or major renovation of, an existing building, including the installation of buildings to be relocated. As a minimum, the fire-protection plan must cover the following issues:

• Maintenance of exits from occupied portions of the existing building;

• Fire department access to both existing and new buildings;

• Maintenance of existing fire-protection systems (fire alarm, standpipes, etc.);

• Fire department water supply;

• Whether any fire separations will be provided between the new construction/remodeling and the existing building.
(Source: www.dps.state.mn.us)

New York

All buildings that are owned, operated or leased by private schools, public school districts or Boards of Cooperative Educational Services must be inspected annually for compliance with applicable sections of 8NYCRR155 Regulations of the Commissioner of Education and for compliance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code. A Public School Fire Safety Report must be completed as part of this process. This includes inspections of fire sprinklers and connected fire alarms, fire-hydrant systems, fire drills and evacuation procedures. A fire- and life-safety history of the school must be provided by a school official to determine whether fire drills were held in accordance with section 807 of the Education Law and F405 of the Fire Code of New York State, as well as state the average evacuation time. The history also details whether employee fire prevention, evacuation and fire safety training was provided, and records were maintained in accordance with Section F406 of the New York State Fire Code. Section 808 of the Education Law requires every school in the state to provide a minimum of 45 minutes of instruction in arson and fire prevention for each month school is in session.
(Source: www.emsc.nysed.gov)

Note: For complete information, consult specific fire codes and board of education guidelines for each state.

Q. What are the current life-safety requirements for educational facilities in Illinois?

A. It is mandated in Illinois that every 10 years schools are required to have life-safety surveys performed on their buildings. It often takes several years to get all the various school districts through the 10-year cycle. I’m sure there are a wide variety of programs designed to achieve the same goals in different states (see “Fire- and Life-Safety Requirements for K-12 Schools by State”).

Q. Is there a standard life-safety survey that you must follow?

A. Yes, Illinois has a standard protocol developed by the state board of education that we follow and submit (downloadable at www.isbe.state.il.us/construction/health_safety). Sometimes the district will ask us to go above and beyond what we’re doing in the life-safety survey. In other words, while we’re in looking for life-safety issues in the school building, we would also look for other issues that would not be funded by life-safety money, but require some attention and maintenance — for example, tuck-pointing on a building. Some districts want us to look at everything that they might be facing with their building in terms of future capital maintenance problems because there are a lot of other things that need attention in a building every year.

Q. How long do life-safety surveys usually take?

A. There is some field work involved because the architect is required to prepare a base plan for the school, which shows the location of all the exits and fire-safety devices. We have to research all that, and then we generally put the information in an AutoCAD (computer-aided design) electronic file. That’s the way most districts want it. If the district already has good drawings in hand, then it’s not that big of a time issue. Otherwise, it can create a lot of work measuring up the school and making a drawing of it.

It usually takes about 30 days to do the actual survey. Then it has to be presented to the owner for review and to the board of education for final approval. The whole process generally takes 90 days.

Q. At what point in the process do you make recommendations to the school?

A. After the board of education accepts the survey report, the next step is for the architect to specifically state what the recommended projects are. These recommendations are then submitted to the state to obtain approval for use of life-safety funds to proceed with the projects.

Q. How does a school typically address any life-safety problems discovered by your survey?

A. When items are discovered that need to be addressed, they are what we call amendments to the life-safety survey. In other words, the survey itself describes the condition of the school building. Then the architect writes amendments to identify items that need to be corrected. The life-safety survey is like a benchmark for the health of the facility — similar to your annual physical. It is part of a continuous process that includes interaction between the architect and the school district every year in between the years we survey.

Q. How are amendments prioritized for each school building?

A. An amendment is listed on the survey as either an A-, B- or C-level item. An A-level item requires immediate attention; B is a must-do item, but one that could be done within three years; and C is an item that is discretionary, funded by life-safety dollars, but not a threat to health or safety. An example of a C-level item is a roof-replacement project. A roof replacement might have other implications, however, because, what does a leaky roof mean in a school building? It means mold. And then that’s a health problem. So the roof project might move up in priority to a B-level item.

Q. Once life-safety funding is approved for a project, what is the next step?

A. At that point, we create the drawings, put the project out for bid and the lowest qualified bidder proceeds with the work. After the work is completed, we do the inspection and sign off on it. We don’t actually get involved in the project work; we’re involved in securing the contracting groups to do that work.

Q. What is the general condition of smoke detection and alarm systems in the schools you have surveyed within the past few years?

A. The facilities of our clients have been in compliance with rare minor exceptions. Most school districts recognize the importance of these systems and have made a good effort over the past five years to update these systems to current technology. We have seen a marked increase in the number of total system replacements in the past three years. Smoke detection and fire-alarm systems are annually tested and certified. Many are older systems that still function well. Coverage and location of the devices is prescribed per Health/Life Safety Code for Public Schools.

Q. What types of fire-safety issues have you encountered that are unique to school life-safety projects?

A. School facilities are generally similar and abide by the same requirements. One issue we have seen is the question of how many detectors are required in a library. This seems to be the topic of some debate among local code officials and engineers.

In a related issue, Illinois state legislation recently has required sprinkler systems to be installed in all new school buildings and major additions. For a long time, school buildings were not required to have sprinklers. That’s a major step forward and that happened within the past five years.

Q. How does your work with schools differ from that of an architect in the private sector?

A. As a school architect, you really have to be a specialist in school life-safety issues in order to keep up with the changes, understand the processes and advise the owners. It is distinctly different from what the private sector architect would be involved with. It truly is a specialty.

“Parents look for a good fire-alarm system and a good security system, and those things are important to them. If you have any common sense at all, you want that protection for your children,” says  Maxwell, who owns the Children’s Haven Child Care Center in Denver with her husband.

That’s why when Maxwell and her directors give tours at the center, they point out the new ExitPoint™ directional sound system that helps safeguard their young charges.

“It was a very smart move to do sounders versus horns and strobes,” says Efrain Cordova, an electrical contractor with Competitive Electric Inc. in Littleton, Colo. Efrain installed ExitPoint at the center, as well as a fire-alarm package that includes standard audible/visible devices.

Test Runs Prove System Effectiveness

Children’s Haven sets off ExitPoint during its monthly fire drills so that the children become accustomed to the sound and practice reacting to it. During their first ExitPoint drill, the center’s full building evacuation time dropped from about two minutes to one.

Although infants and toddlers are too young to evacuate the same way the older children do — and by law, their rooms must have their own outside exits — ExitPoint sounders are located above their exits to provide extra assistance for adult caregivers. “Even if the room filled with smoke and was in pitch-black darkness, they’d still get out,” says Cordova.

Sounders, in Cordova’s opinion, are “10-fold better than horns for a standard fire-alarm system” in helping people evacuate quickly.

The threat of fatal campus fires has caught the attention of federal lawmakers. Proposed laws have been written to improve campus fire safety by offering matching federal funds for retrofitting automatic sprinklers in residence halls that do not have them. In addition, on March 30, the U.S. House of   Representatives passed H.R. 609, the College Access and Opportunity Act, which reauthorizes programs under the Higher Education Act. Included in the legislation is a provision called the Campus Fire Safety Right-to-Know Act.

The bill, in its current form before the Senate, amends the Higher Education Act to require colleges and universities to provide prospective and current students fire-safety information for the school. The proposed legislation would also authorize a report from the Secretary of Education to Congress on the extent of the nation’s campus fire-safety problem. Using the same procedures as schools to compile and disclose crime statistics and other safety information, H.R. 609 would make information readily available to parents and students who are researching schools.

System Sensor supports these commitments to improve campus safety and share information.

Mike Berg

Business Unit Leader
System Sensor

A. According to the National Fire Protection Association, between 1999 and 2001, there was an annual average of 7,300 reported structure fires that caused one civilian death, 117 civilian injuries and $101 million in direct property damage per year. Overall, these fires accounted for 1.4% of the 516,600 structure fires reported during that same time period.

Q. What types of fires occur most often in educational settings?

A. Schools and universities pose many challenges. Educational property structure fires originate in a wide variety of areas. From 1999 to 2001, the leading area of origin was the lavatory or locker room, with 23% of the incidents. Intentional causes were responsible for 67%-93% of fires and associated losses in bathroom fires in educational facilities. Another 13% of the fires started in the kitchen. Seven percent started in classrooms or an assembly area for less than 100 people, and another 7% started in the corridor or hallway.

Q. Does student age have any correspondence to school fires?

A. It seems so. Disturbingly, 46% of the fires in educational properties were intentionally set. High school, junior high school and middle schools accounted for 3,100 incidents and $28.5 million in damage during fires that occurred from 1999 until 2001. In contrast, elementary schools, kindergartens, preschools and daycare settings saw just 2,000 incidents during the same period.

Q. Nationally, how well are our schools protected?

A. From 1994 to 1998, 44% of fires in educational facilities occurred in properties without smoke alarms or other fire alarms. Automatic fire sprinkler systems were present in only 24% of these fires.

Q. Does that include dormitories?

A. No, because this type of facility is considered residential. But during 2001, an estimated 2,530 reported fires in dormitory properties caused six civilian deaths, 82 civilian injuries and $48.5 million in estimated direct property damage. Fires in the dormitory occupancy group decreased 22% from 1980 to 2001.

However, this is a deceptive figure because, in comparison, structure fires of all types declined 48% during that same period.

Q. How can I can justify to my client or boss the additional cost of installing a sprinkler system?

A. The cost for installing fire sprinkler systems in buildings 6 to 8 stories high ranges from less than a dollar to about $2.00 per square foot in most new constructions and from about $1.50 to $2.50 per square foot for retrofitting fire sprinklers into existing buildings.

Along with reduced insurance rates, in 1999, 97.6% of educational properties that encountered fires and were equipped with sprinklers contained damage to the room of origin. This can be compared to the 88.4% containment rate of schools that did not have sprinkler systems. In terms of property damage, the average estimated direct property damage was almost five times as high when no automatic fire sprinkler system was present.

Q. What about life safety?

A. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) has no record of a fire killing more than two people in a completely sprinklered public assembly, educational, institutional, or residential building where the system was properly operating.

However, the fact remains that operating sprinkler systems in fires cannot prevent fatal injuries inflicted on someone very close to the starting point of a rapidly developing fire. Fires involving cigarettes discarded onto mattresses, bedding or clothing, for example, may cause fatal injury before a sprinkler can even react.

National and local safety standards and codes address the ability of air duct systems to transfer smoke, toxic gases and flame from area to area in educational facilities. It is this threat that is confronted with the use of duct smoke detectors, because oftentimes, in fire scenarios, smoke can be of such quantity that it poses a serious hazard to the safety of people several floors removed from the actual fire.

It is critical, therefore, that educational facility managers, engineers and architects understand that the primary purpose of duct smoke detection in schools is to prevent injury, panic and property damage by reducing the spread and recirculation of smoke.

Preventing Injury and Damage

A duct smoke detector is a device or group of devices used to detect the presence of smoke in the air stream of ductwork sections of the heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) air handling systems used in educational facilities.

Duct smoke detection is extremely useful in preventing injury and property damage in schools, universities or other types of educational facilities. It can serve to protect a school’s air conditioning system from fire and smoke damage, and can also be used to assist in equipment protection applications, for example, in the ventilation/exhaust duct work leading to the areas that house mainframe computers and tape drives in university settings.

Duct smoke detection can also be the first line of defense to shut down the system’s blowers and ensure dampers are actuated when there is a fire. For instance, should an HVAC fan motor overheat, the resulting smoke is sensed by the duct smoke detector installed in the main supply duct. The duct smoke detector is equipped with an auxiliary relay that immediately cuts power to the fan motor before significant amounts of smoke can be distributed to hallways and classroom areas.

Or, for example, if a fire starts on the second floor of a dormitory, and the HVAC system serving the second floor also serves floors one through four, the smoke will also spread to those floors. If area smoke detectors are not provided, the only means of automatic detection are the duct smoke detectors located in the return air ducts on each floor ahead of the main return plenum. The quantity of smoke in the duct eventually reaches proportions sufficient to alarm the second floor duct smoke detector, which transmits a signal to the dorm’s fire alarm system. Evacuation signaling and HVAC shutdown functions are then provided by the duct detector’s auxiliary relay contacts. In these and other situations, duct smoke detection devices are proven effective in helping prevent injury and property damage.

Installation, Maintenance and Testing

An HVAC system supplies conditioned air to virtually every area of a building. Thus, smoke introduced into this air duct system has the potential to reach the entire building. Because smoke detectors designed for use in air duct systems are used to sense the presence of smoke in the duct, it is critical that they are properly installed, maintained and tested.

NFPA 90A,“Standard for Air Conditioning and Ventilating Systems,” requires that smoke detectors listed for duct installations be installed at a suitable location in the main supply duct on the downstream side of the filters to automatically stop the supply fans in systems more than 2,000 cubic feet per minute (cfm). For systems more than 15,000 cfm, additional detectors are required in the return system of each floor, at the point of entry into the common return, or a system of smoke detectors is required to provide total area coverage.

Smoke detectors are designed to be as maintenance-free as possible. However, dust, dirt, and other foreign matter can accumulate inside a detector and change its sensitivity. This is especially true with duct-type smoke detectors in educational facilities. They can become more sensitive, which may cause unwanted alarms, or less sensitive, which may reduce the level of protection. Both are undesirable. According to Chapter 10 of NFPA 72, 2002 Edition, duct smoke detectors should be tested upon acceptance and re-tested annually. Always check your local code requirements to determine if more frequent testing is required.

Under normal conditions, detectors require routine maintenance at least twice a year, or more frequently in dirtier than normal environments. Notify the proper authorities that the smoke detector system is undergoing maintenance and that the system will be temporarily out of service. It is also imperative that the zone or system undergoing maintenance is disabled to prevent unwanted alarms and possible dispatch of the fire department.

Most duct smoke detectors have detector sensors that can be accessed for cleaning. To clean the sensors, remove dust from all openings on and around the sensor, the sampling tube and the exhaust tube. Some detectors can be removed for more thorough cleaning, if necessary.

It is also important to test each detector’s sensitivity. If a detector’s sensitivity is within specifications, nothing further needs to be done. If the detector’s sensitivity is outside its listed specifications, either clean or replace the detector according to the manufacturer’s recommended procedures. Upon completion of any testing or maintenance procedures, be sure to restore the system and notify the proper authorities that the system is back in service. Other duct smoke detector maintenance issues that should be routinely checked include:

• Holes or cracks in duct work near the vicinity of the detector
• Air leaks where the detector housing or sampling tubes are attached to the duct
• Wiring terminal screw tightness

Understanding the purpose of duct smoke detectors in educational facilities, as well as the importance of their proper installation and care, is the key to protecting property and saving lives.

Fires on campus and at off-campus student housing across the country reveal a dangerous trend. According to The Center for Campus Fire Safety, from January 2000 to April 2005, 57 off-campus and 18 on-campus fire fatalities occurred. No one wants to sound the alarm prematurely, but statistics involving 75 fatalities due to fires are hard to ignore — especially when almost all involved facilities without fire sprinkler protection.

Such trending of fire loss has produced a myriad of legislative initiatives. While fire sprinkler legislation is now pending in many states, only Wyoming, New Jersey, Delaware, Illinois and Wisconsin currently require sprinkler retrofits at residential facilities on campus.

On the federal level, lawmakers are considering actions that would require the U.S. Department of Education to gather information about the number and location of sprinklers in dorms and allocate $500 million over five years to help colleges install sprinklers in dormitories. In the U.S. Senate, a bill has been introduced to provide a depreciation tax break for automatic fire sprinkler system retrofits, which would be an incentive for owners of off-campus housing. Whether federally mandated or not, colleges across the country are now taking a serious look at installing fire sprinkler systems for the protection of their students.

System Sensor, a leader in the fire protection device industry, has been at the forefront of developing superior fire detection, fire sprinkler monitoring and notification products that protect property and save lives. This article offers a brief overview of System Sensor’s line of fire sprinkler monitoring devices for use in colleges, residences or any other facility where fire sprinkler systems are installed.

Monitoring Solutions for Wet and Dry Pipe Fire Sprinkler Systems

Industry-wide, wet pipe systems are the most common type of fire sprinkler system installed. By definition, wet pipe systems are constantly filled with water. When a sprinkler head opens during a fire, water immediately begins flowing through the fire sprinkler system pipe and out of the sprinkler head. Per the National Fire Alarm Code, NFPA 72, an alarm must then signal within 90 seconds of water flow. Waterflow detectors are, therefore, installed to initiate an alarm condition when there is a flow condition within the fire sprinkler system.

System Sensor offers waterflow detectors to accommodate installations for 2-inch through 8-inch risers, as well as 1-inch threaded waterflow detectors for residential fire sprinkler systems and branch line pipes that are often found in student apartments and fraternity houses. System Sensor WFD series waterflow detectors are NEMA 4  rated, making them ideal for indoor and outdoor use. And their field-replaceable terminal blocks and timer/retard assemblies are a real time saver.

For those cases where a wet pipe system may not be appropriate, such as a sprinklered area that may be prone to freezing, a dry pipe system may be used. In a dry pipe arrangement, the system is normally pressurized with air. This air pressure holds a clapper in place to prevent the water from entering the system. When a sprinkler head opens during a fire, the air is initially released. Once the system pressure can no longer hold back the water, the system pipes fill with water, which then discharges through the open sprinkler head. It is the change in air pressure, detected by a pressure switch, that initiates an alarm signal.

To accommodate dry pipe systems, System Sensor offers a complete line of EPS pressure switches. The EPS series is available in a variety of pressure ranges, including 4 to 20 PSI, 10 to 100 PSI, and 10 to 200 PSI, to accommodate virtually any application.

Another critical element of the fire sprinkler system that requires monitoring is the control valve. Regardless of whether the fire sprinkler system is wet or dry, control valve supervision is required to minimize the likelihood that the control valves are closed or opened by unauthorized personnel.

Fire sprinkler system control valves come in various styles and sizes. To accommodate the most common configurations, System Sensor offers OSY2 and PIBV2 supervisory switches. These are intended to monitor the open position of an outside screw-and-yoke gate valve and post indicator/butterfly valves. For other unique installations, System Sensor offers its PSP1 plug-in supervisory switch designed for applications where no other type of listed valve supervisory switch can be used, such as non-rising stem gate valves and ball and angle valves.

Although much more comprises a fire sprinkler system — just as the fire sprinkler system is a component of the overall life-safety system — the importance of the monitoring products that ensure the activation of the system is immense. Consequently, System Sensor’s waterflow products are essential to the proper protection of life and property.