Q. Tell us the first steps you take to design the fire- and life-safety system for a building that is going to be renovated for a completely different use.

A. I think the most important step is understanding what the impact of changing the use will be, especially when you are changing the building for healthcare use. There can be substantial code implications.

In other cases, if a building owner is making a lot of changes, the occupancy of a building could be altered. The owner might think of it as just tearing out a wall here or there, but you really have to consider the big picture and understand the overall scope and magnitude of the project.

The other thing that is really a key — and unfortunately, it is not done enough because it is very simple, especially related to fire-protection systems — is giving the local building department and fire department a call. Ask them not only what major codes they follow, but what ordinances they’ve adopted that might vary a little bit from major codes. That’s one of biggest stumbling blocks I see when engineers are not brought in for a job.

For example, the City of Chicago has things they like to have done in a certain way. City officials even wrote their own code about it. But outside of the city, every municipality has little variations of things that they require based on their ordinances.

Q. At what point in the project are your services required?

A. We’re normally brought in during the planning or pre-design stages when building owners are still brainstorming the big picture. I think that is the most important time in the project. During the planning stages when you’re trying to pull budgets together, before you get to a detailed design, you have to develop the right concepts and define the general scope. This way, everyone understands what the project is going to entail from the very beginning.

During the design phase, everything is just words and lines on a piece of paper. Changing the general scope can be very simple. You have the time to go to the authorities and review the plans with them. That’s when we can be influential by explaining to the code authorities what the plan is and how we will meet code.

As long as the plan and the code align, we have a project that should be successful. If there are gaps somewhere, or if there’s some point where the two aren’t on the same page, the design phase is the best time to make corrections. All it might cost is a few clicks on a computer to change things around.

If those errors continue and they are caught during construction, or worse, after the building has been built, a fix that could have been a few dollars in the beginning is now a very substantial change-order in the construction process.

Q. Does the emergence of more national players in the building industry present a problem in complying with local codes?

A. I think so. We’ll see property management companies come in and because they manage all these big buildings, they will have a good understanding of the national codes, but not the local code. Even if you did it that way in XYZ city, it doesn’t mean you can necessarily do those things the same way in the local area. This is true especially in large markets like Chicago or New York. While it may parallel the national code, there may be a lot of minor changes, mainly because that is what the local trades have seen and that is what they are comfortable with.

Q. How does the design-build process affect your work?

A. Design-build is advantageous, especially for building owners because what you are doing, then, is you are getting an engineer involved early. An engineer helps the building owner or property manager define the expectations of the project.

Obviously, you start with the code as a minimum. But a lot of times, there are elements that building owners want: small upgrades that could have big property impacts, but low dollar impacts if incorporated into the specifications.

From there, the design-builder takes the job and runs with it. They are able to create some efficiencies because they know the requirements of the project. They know what the code says, and they know what the owner is looking for beyond code. But how they get the end-result is really up to them and how they take advantage of the efficiencies. All the time, energy and money that a design-build contractor can save on a job while still meeting the requirements of the project is money in their pocket. That means they’re going to do the best they can to deliver the best product, but in the most efficient, cost-effective manner. Design-build is a good way to go. It gives the owner the most cost-effective solution.

Q. A functional, cost-effective building is always the goal, right?

A. It really is. It’s about maintaining that balance. The nice thing about being involved with the design is that sometimes there is a big wish list that owners want. There is sometimes a misconception about what fire protection systems can and cannot do. By working with the owner early, we can make sure there are no misunderstandings about what the final product will be. Again, when it’s words and lines on a piece of paper, changes are easy and cheap. But if the contractor installs the system, and then the owner says, “I thought this was going to happen, and that has to happen,” well, it’s a little late in the ball game to realize that.

Fire codes and standards are part of any commercial construction or renovation job, and the same is true for government work. While fire- and life-safety requirements differ slightly for government buildings, it is the process that can present the most challenges for a commercial fire-protection engineer who is unfamiliar with the ins and outs of working within the government system.

To date, the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) owns, operates and manages more than 400 million square feet of space in 9,000 owned and leased buildings, which are occupied by a million federal employees in 2,000 communities across the country. GSA is the government’s civilian landlord, responsible for meeting office and other space requirements of the federal workforce.

As the demand for government-operated space rises, so will the demand for fire-protection engineers who are experienced in this type of work. “There’s definitely some different terminology in government jobs that you have to be aware of and know how to deal with,” explains Paul Hayes, F.P.E. and vice president of American Fire Technologies, based in Wilmington, N.C. American Fire Technologies specializes in the integration of fire-protection and detection management and design. “It’s hard to take a commercial engineer, roll him over into government work and expect the same results. You have to have someone who knows what he’s doing on the government side.”

According to GSA, a registered fire-protection engineer is required to be a full participant of the architect/engineer (A/E) design team for each phase of a government project, from concepts through design, construction, final acceptance and occupancy. The fire-protection engineer must also have at least six years experience of which at least three consecutive years are directly involved in the fire-protection engineering field.

Finding an engineer who meets these specific requirements is not too difficult, according to Hayes. “Some teams push for either a P.E. (professional engineer) or a N.I.C.E.T. (National Institute for Certification in Engineering Technologies). NICET is the certification for fire system professionals. Basically, that’s what gives people credentials in this industry. If they are not an engineer, then NICET is what people shoot for.”

GSA requires the team’s fire-protection engineer to analyze and provide criteria for: building construction, occupancy classification, means of egress, fire-alarm systems, water-based fire-extinguishing systems, non-water-based fire-extinguishing systems and smoke-control systems. The fire-protection engineer must also perform calculations for: egress, water supply, smoke control (fire dynamics)/timed egress, audibility for fire alarm systems and design of all fire-protection and life-safety systems.

Qualifications aside, the fire-protection engineer must not only be able to work with the design team, but is also required by GSA to establish an ongoing dialog with the GSA regional fire-protection engineer, who is the Authority Having Jurisdiction for all technical requirements, fire-protection and life-safety code interpretations and code-enforcement requirements.

Commercial vs. Government Work

Once the A/E design team is established, the process — and challenges — begin. “It’s a different world dealing with government projects because you’re not there to please the individual; you’re there to honor the contract,” explains Hayes. “On the commercial side, a lot of times you’re there to make the client happy. But on the government side, it doesn’t matter whether the clients are happy; it matters whether you’ve met every letter of intent of the contract.”

Fire codes and standards are factors in any GSA contract and can vary from commercial requirements depending on the category. For example, in the Fire Protection & Life Safety section of GSA’s “Facilities Standards for the Public Buildings Service” guidelines (see www.gsa.gov),GSA states that smoke detectors shall be installed in accordance with the requirements in NFPA 72, the International Fire Code (IFC) and the International Mechanical Code (IMC), except in the following instances:

• Area smoke detectors shall not be installed in the following areas: mechanical equipment room, electrical closet, telephone closet, emergency generator room, uninterruptible power service and battery rooms, and other similar rooms.
• Smoke detection appropriate for the application shall be installed in each of the following rooms: electrical switch gear, transformer vaults and telephone exchanges (PABX).

In regard to audible notification appliances, GSA requires that the performance, location and mounting of the devices shall be in accordance with the requirements in NFPA 72. However, the following requirements take precedence over NFPA 72 requirements:

• To ensure audible signals are clearly heard, the sound level shall be at least 70 dBA throughout all office space, general building areas and corridors measured 1524 mm (5 feet) above the floor. The sound level in other areas shall be at least 15 dBA above the average sound level or 5 dBA above any noise source lasting 60 seconds or longer.
• The design for achieving the required minimum dBA levels shall take into consideration all building construction materials, such as carpeting, hard surfaces, walls, doors and any other materials that can cause sound-level attenuation and/or clarity problems due to the placement and location of the audible notification appliances. The SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering’s chapter on Design of  Detection Systems or other audio design guides should be used to provide guidance and methodology to achieve the required dBA levels.
• Where emergency voice/alarm communication systems are provided, fire alarm speakers shall be installed in elevator cars and exit stairways; however, they shall only be activated to broadcast live voice messages (e.g., manual announcements only). The automatic voice messages shall be broadcast through the fire alarm speakers on the appropriate floors, but not in stairs or elevator cars.

Modifying GSA Contracts

The design team must also be careful when making alterations to GSA contracts. Any modifications have to be made well in advance, with extensive documentation. This, according to Hayes, is one of the greatest differences between commercial and government work.

“You have to be on top of the paperwork. It is a paperwork shuffle that you have to be much more aware of than you would for a standard commercial building or a hotel,” says Hayes. “He who documents best, wins.”

GSA doesn’t necessarily discourage making modifications to the project, but doing so requires a lot more effort than simply brainstorming with the design team. “You can’t sit down with the design team and say, ‘Well, you know you’re right. This would make it a little bit better. We can make this modification,’” explains Hayes.

“You’ve got to do what the contract says unless a change is issued to that contract because somebody else will get a hold of it and call you on it. They’ll ask if you documented it, and if not, then it’s your problem. It doesn’t matter if it was better the way you did it. That’s not what the contract says, and you can get burned.”

The positive side is that a qualified fire-protection engineer who gains experience and learns to deal with the documentation can do well in government work, according to Hayes. “There’s a good opportunity if you know how to work the system within government.”

An interview with Gary W. Hunter, technical lead for NASA Glenn Research Center’s chemical species gas sensors team

The chemical species gas sensors team at NASA’s John H. Glenn Research Center in Cleveland works with government, industry and academia to develop gas-sensing technology for aeronautic, space and commercial applications. One type of sensor array, which is currently under development, detects fires, including those onboard space and commercial aircraft. The team is working to produce microsensors that measure a chemical signature of a fire, which would make fire-detection technology more reliable, such as by providing indications of conditions that produce false alarms in other detectors.

Q: NASA recently developed a prototype of a multi-criteria smoke detector that combines particulate detection with other input to confirm or deny the presence of fire. Why did NASA tackle this project?

A: The basic idea was that there was a significant false alarm rate associated with fire detection in cargo aircraft. The false alarm rate in aircraft, based on differing studies, ranges from 100 to 200 false alarms per real alarm.

The goal was to reduce the false alarm rate, so when a person saw a fire (indicated on the control panel), they would have more confidence it was an actual fire. The standard method of detecting fire was to look for particulates. There have been particulate detectors on the market for a number of years, and their false alarm triggers tended to be things such as humidity, dust or particles that could make the fire detector think that there was smoke when there wasn’t.

Q: How did you address this problem?

A: We approached this problem by complementing particulate detection with chemical species. That is, we tried to measure not only the particulates possibly associated with the fire, but also look for gasses at the same time. In particular, CO and CO₂ came out as species of interest,” but there were other species as well.

What we tested at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was a rather straight-forward method associated with watching trends of the different constituents we were measuring—for example, watching for particulate changes at the same time we were watching for humidity changes.

If you saw a rise in humidity at the same time you saw an increase of particulates, and you did not see any chemical species, that would tell you something. If you then saw stable humidity and an increase in particulates and CO or CO₂ hydrocarbons, that would tell you something else.

Q: Is this technology in place now in the field?

A: NASA develops things to a certain point. Admittedly, this system was tested in an FAA test facility under real fire conditions. But the maturation of the system in terms of the system being in a real cargo bay of real aircraft flying from city to city, those are some steps that would be necessary in the future in order to make this system accepted in a wider commercial market. There is now a product available for this type of testing and maturation. It’s done its job for NASA, as far as I understand things: to show the technology and show its ability.

Tenants come and go. One month, an area might be filled with a maze of cubicles, the next, it may be a suite of private offices. As each new company takes over space in a building and adapts it to their needs, there’s a completely different set of fire-protection guidelines. However, the same versatility of space that makes a building desirable for renters can also present challenges when it comes to fire protection.

To guard against hazards associated with changing uses for building space, it is important for a fire-protection system to provide “total coverage.” Defined by the National Fire Protection Association in NFPA 72 guidelines, total coverage is achieved with the proper type of detectors installed in appropriate locations.

Where to Install Detectors?

The goal of a fire-detection system is to provide an accurate, early warning of a developing fire in all areas of a building. Even pockets of unoccupied space require protection because detectors may not quickly sense a developing fire on the far side of a wall or behind a closed door, allowing damage to multiply needlessly.

The correct placement of detectors is also important for reliable operation. In general, when only one detector is required in a room or space, it is best to install a ceiling-mounted detector as close to the center of the room as possible. If a central ceiling location is not viable, for example, due to wiring constraints, the detector must have sufficient “open space,” with its edge no closer than 4 inches to a wall. Likewise, a wall-mounted detector must clear between 4 and 12 inches from the top of the detector to the ceiling.

Another consideration for a total coverage plan is the proximity of detectors to the air-handling system. NFPA 72 discusses the potential for detector malfunction if installation is in the path of an airflow supply or return duct. A smoke test to monitor particulate travel-direction and velocity is helpful in determining detector placement. Smoke tests reveal potential causes of unwanted alarms, such as an air stream directed at the detector, which could result in dust accumulation that alters sensitivity levels.

How to Space Detectors?

Spacing detectors 30 feet apart to protect 900 square feet is the NFPA 72 standard for areas with smooth ceilings and no physical obstructions between ceiling and room contents. An example of an obstruction is floor-to-ceiling shelving stacked with materials. Variables for ceiling height may also be calculated into spacing requirements based on the amount and nature of combustibles present.

To determine appropriate detector coverage for the standard 30-foot spacing, a simple technique is to map the shape and dimensions of an area. Then, draw a circle with a radius of 21 feet. A single detector may protect any square or rectangle that fits within the circumference of that circle. The same technique shows that in a hallway measuring 10 feet wide, two detectors can protect up to 82 feet of the length.

What Type of Detectors?

To answer that question is to understand the use and contents of a particular area. For example, ionization smoke detectors are quicker to detect flaming fires, such as those commonly found in chemical-storage areas, rather than slow, smoldering fires that most typically occur in offices. Ionization sensors almost immediately recognize fires characterized by combustion particles from 0.01 to 0.3 microns. However, ionization sensors offer limited or slower capabilities when installed in high-altitude locations or near high-humidity sources, such as kitchens or shower rooms.

Photoelectric smoke detectors, on the other hand, quickly respond to smoldering fires characterized by combustion particles from 0.3 to 10.0 microns. This type of detector will instantly identify visible white smoke, but will be slower to respond to black smoke produced by plastics or rubber.

A common solution to detect both types of stimuli quickly is to install a multi-criteria detector that monitors particulate detection in tandem with a thermal-sensor input. Together, the two signals are cross-referenced by an on-board microprocessor that uses algorithms to “process out” false alarms while enhancing the response time to real fires (see “NASA Researches Multi-Criteria Detectors”). By monitoring the current signal values of each sensor as well as their trends, such as increasing heat or a decreasing photoelectric signal, multi-criteria detectors actually “learn” the environment, which helps to better reject nuisance alarms and maintain heightened sensitivities.

Which Code to Follow?

The location, quantity and type of detector should be determined by the use, size and contents of the space. However, total coverage must ultimately coincide with the guidelines set by the Authority Having Jurisdiction.

Several independent organizations write model building and fire codes that are commonly adopted by local and state governments throughout the United States. While variances should be expected in individual municipalities, most regulations are based on three organizations’ codes:

• Building Officials and Code Administrators’ National Building Code (BOCA): Northeast and Midwest

• International Conference of Building Officials’ Uniform Building Code: West and Southwest

• Southern Building Code Congress International’s Standard Building Code: South and Southeast

The International Code Council Inc.’s International Building Code/International Fire Code combines the above codes into a single set of model building and fire codes. Some states have adopted the International Building Code and International Fire Code.

At System Sensor, we are committed to expanding the life-safety proposition, never accepting the status quo. This way of thinking led to the development of our ExitPoint™ directional sound product. By challenging the definition of life safety, we determined it’s not enough to just notify people of a fire — with our partners, we’ve done a good job of this for many years — but we should now guide building occupants to safety.

Ten years ago, this industry was not comprised of Fortune 50 companies. Today, with the entry of R&D-focused corporations like Honeywell, the expectations of end-users have heightened. Now, building owners, engineers and installers can expect to see an acceleration of new technology development. With access to a vast library of technological innovation, System Sensor is in a favorable position to address the issues facing the life-safety industry. Our reach now extends into monitoring gas (including carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide), wireless smoke detector systems and high-sensitivity smoke detection.

System Sensor will continue to look for avenues of growth.

Our best to you in 2006.

Jeffrey M. Klein

Commercial Business Line Leader