Jim Mickowski, an engineer with PSJ Engineering, has more than 25 years of experience in the design and installation of fire suppression systems. His experience ranges from working on stadiums, museums and office buildings to high-security, high-risk areas in correctional facilities and nuclear facilities where there is “no access allowed.”

Can you tell us about your company?

PSJ Engineering is a mechanical engineering company specializing in the design of fire protection building systems as well as heating, ventilating, air conditioning and plumbing. We have been designing fire protection systems for 25 years. PSJ is headquartered in Milwaukee with an office in Madison, Wisconsin. We’ve been fortunate to have a wide gamut of projects from stadiums to office buildings. The company has completed work for Miller Park (home of the Milwaukee Brewers) and the Milwaukee Museum.

How do you define a no-access-allowed area?

We have designed fire protection systems for penal and nuclear reactor control rooms and would consider these areas high-security, no-access-allowed areas. You can also classify control rooms and areas that house computer infrastructure, where computers need to be protected from water and vandalism, as no-access-allowed areas.

What types of fire safety systems and products do you recommend for these types of projects?

We recommend single and double interlock pre-action systems, because they have many benefits. They provide early warning. They are relatively low cost, simple to install, easy to operate and maintain, and you don’t have to consider room construction or HVAC, as is the case when using a clean agent system. We’ve had a lot of problems activating clean agent systems and getting them to work correctly. The envelope that those systems require depends on the HVAC and building construction. It’s very difficult to keep the building construction tight enough. The air has to go somewhere, so the HVAC system has to complement a clean agent system. It gets a little complicated.

A single or double pre-action with trouble alarms before the water actually enters the piping gives maintenance or supervisory personnel an opportunity to investigate and then take appropriate action. The best way to minimize impact is to provide early warning so people can investigate and take action.

How do you design for an area that is to remain off-limits to most?

Typically, no-access areas are small areas in relationship to the whole project. Those areas should not affect the overall impact of construction cost. We design each area as a pod. In that pod, we design the system so there has to be a smoke or heat detector activated before the water even enters the piping. And then you still have the final safeguard: the sprinkler head. The water doesn’t discharge until the sprinkler heads open up. We are trying to prevent accidental discharge.

For instance, a penal control room is a very small area with numerous cells. The cells obviously are vandal resistant but are not really high security. A lot of times, a prisoner will knock off a sprinkler head and get a discharge of water. Sure, it’s a pain to fix, but it’s not causing any catastrophic damage. The penal control room, however, is the no-access area. If the computers or the security hardware are damaged, you are talking about infrastructure issues that could cost large amounts of money.

I think money and cost to repair go hand in hand when designing a project with no-access-allowed areas. That is what you are trying to eliminate. You are trying to take the maximum safeguards to protect that equipment. Can you imagine if chaos erupted due to fire, and someone got into a penal control room? They could release the cells and doors. You need to protect the electronics and control mechanisms. Treating each of those areas as pods helps secure that area and minimize cost in the event of a fire.

“Can you imagine if chaos erupted due to fire, and someone got into a penal control room? They could release the cells and doors. You need to protect the electronics and control mechanisms.”
— Jim Mickowski, Engineer, PSJ Engineering

So why wouldn’t you use an aspiration system in these areas instead?

It’s not that we wouldn’t use it. We just prefer wet suppression. Aspiration is also a simple system; but it is smoke detection, not fire suppression. It certainly has its place. Incipient fire detection, if a project can afford it, is one of the nicest luxuries any owner can afford. The false alarms caused by dust are a thing of the past.

What types of challenges do you have with no-access-allowed areas?

There is always the challenge to protect the computers. Computers should not be subject to water exposure. We opt to design water suppression systems in a computer room all the time – and we put sprinkler systems in computer rooms all the time. The key in the computer room is to turn the power off before water is discharged. Computers can withstand getting wet provided the power is not on. It’s when the computer power is on and the water shorts them out that you have a problem. We use a combination of water flow switches that are in the piping; when the water comes into the piping, it turns off all power to the computers. And don’t forget the battery backup.

What specifics must you consider when designing fire suppression systems for no-access-areas?

In today’s economy, you want to open it up for every qualified individual to be able to maintain the system you are designing. It only benefits the owner’s maintenance budget. If you have a highly specialized system that only the factory can maintain, it can drive up costs. We are firm believers in keeping it simple; wet suppression is a simple system. It’s important for the maintenance people to understand the system and the operation of it. Typically, the maintenance staff has not been trained on high-tech fire protection systems, so we try to make sure we design the simplest system that will perform in accordance with the user’s requirements.

“Incipient fire detection, if a project can afford it, is one of the nicest luxuries any owner can afford. The false alarms caused by dust are a thing of the past.”
— Jim Mickowski, Engineer, PSJ Engineering

What advice do you have for others in your field when designing a fire safety system for high-security/no-access-allowed projects?

The fire protection engineer must look at it from the perspective of the person who has to maintain it. A sophisticated system is not good if there is no one who knows how to maintain it. Meet the user to verify that he understands the system and see if he has any comments. It has been our experience that if the user supports the design, you have a happy client. Have a colleague look at the design with a fresh set of eyes and get his comments. The building manager should be able to contract any fire protection contractor to maintain the system if they cannot do the maintenance themselves. Keep these questions in mind:

• Will maintenance personnel understand the way it works?
• Is it simple enough?
• Is there something that I can do to help the maintenance person understand?
• Does your client want to subcontract the maintenance?
• Will all fire protection contractors have the ability to maintain the system?

“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.

The Future of Fire Detection Technology

In their July 2011 webinar, The Future of Fire Detection Technology, System Sensor Research and Development Engineering Manager, Scott Lang and Marketing Manager, Todd Alford, discussed trends in fire detection technology, including ionization, photoelectric and multi-criteria detection. They also examined how the different technologies work and which are better suited for different fires and nuisances.

Intelligibility Code and Software

During the August webinar, Got Intelligibility? EASE Evac Voice Evacuation Design Software Can Help, Christa Poss, System Sensor Marketing Manager, discussed how EASE Evac voice evacuation design software from AFMG Technologies may help designers and installers save time and money on voice evacuation systems by enabling them to preplan the system to meet new intelligibility code requirements, reduce costly post-installation changes, and limit over-design. She also discussed new intelligibility code requirements.

Dan Ubelhor is the corporate engineering manager for Koorsen Fire & Security, headquartered in Indianapolis. He oversees design and engineering of fire protection for Koorsen, which has been in business since 1943. Dan implements design policies for the company and consults with branches around the country on their fire protection design and engineering projects.

How do you define an extreme condition?

Cold storage and large facilities with high ceilings are extreme conditions with many contributing factors that a fire protection designer needs to be aware of to determine the best solution. Another extreme condition may require a smoke detection system in an environment prone to external contaminant sources, such as a nearby highway where car exhaust can enter a building via fresh air intake ventilation systems. Such conditions may need an aspiration system to determine if it’s the contaminated environment or an incipient stage of a fire, which would be considered extreme.

An extreme condition goes beyond the environment. Because we also deal with fire suppression, we often design fire protection and suppression for industrial areas that house flammable liquids and various toxic chemicals. Hazardous chemicals require identifying, for instance, flash point or auto ignition temperature and other factors. Then we select the proper type of fire suppression system – whether a typical sprinkler system or a more specialized type of suppression system such as foam, dry powder, CO₂ or even a clean agent suppression system.

“When there may be a hazard upon a hazard, such as large drums of flammable inks…we place heat detectors above these areas and extend the piping network to these areas.”
— Dan Ubelhor, Corporate Engineering Manager, Koorsen Fire & Security

What do you consider when designing a system for an extreme environment?

Each environment has to be evaluated on its own merits to determine the best integrated solution. That being said, there are a lot of questions that I ask in the beginning of a project to determine the best application: Who is the local authority? What is the goal? Of course, it’s life safety, but I want to know the goal from the main players involved on the project. I work with the insurance companies to determine their requirements. Once that is defined, we find out what types of materials are involved. Is it prone to a highly flammable, fast-acting flame, or a slow, smoldering type of fire? What is the air movement? Air movement can be a challenge because it often affects placement and quantity of smoke detection systems. What are the temperatures in the environment? What are the extremes?

What is the normal condition of the environment? If it’s normally smoky, then that is where an aspirating system would come into effect. We can set it up in a smoky environment, just as long as we know what the normal smoky environment is going to be. If there is a fire, we know there is going to be more obscuration in that area. We can design around that. There are many different kinds of extreme environments; it doesn’t necessarily have to point to a hot or cold environment.

How do flammable liquids or equipment contribute to an extreme condition?

A printing press is a good example. We occasionally protect printing presses and the inks that are involved. Although many of today’s presses use much less flammable type and approved inks, on occasion, certain bearings on the printing press rollers overheat. We provide a fire protection system to detect and suppress any indication of fire. We also want to determine what could potentially spread a fire condition and shut them down: exhaust ventilation, conveyors and the press itself, for example.

What types of detection suit this type of extreme condition?

Oftentimes, on large printing presses, a piping network is designed to connect to a bulk, low-pressure CO₂ suppression system. The bulk storage unit – capacity can vary from 2 to 60 tons – stores the CO₂ fire extinguishing agent at a controlled low temperature of 0˚F. We design a discharge pipe system between the bulk tank and the press, and then split the pipe in many different directions, making its way to the outlet discharge nozzles. Discharge nozzles come in a variety of different shapes to provide various discharge spray patterns, depending on how the fire needs to be extinguished. Discharge nozzles are strategically placed in fire-prone areas. Flame and/or heat detectors are typical type fire detection devices designed into the system to sense fire.

When considering the building around the extreme hazard, a sprinkler system would come into play. You have to treat the building and the hazard inside the building separately. Where does aspiration come in? It depends on the situation and if the customer and insurance company want to detect smoke at the incipient stage.

“Each environment has to be evaluated on its own merits to determine the best integrated solution.”
— Dan Ubelhor, Corporate Engineering Manager, Koorsen Fire & Security

The same considerations would apply to any extreme environments with chemicals and flammables. Although there are many different means of detection, heat or flame detection often apply best to these environments. With heat detectors, there are a few choices: a fixed heat detector, a rate-of-rise heat detector, a rate compensation heat detector and linear cable heat detection. Rate-of-rise detectors sense heat; if the temperature rises more than 15 degrees in one minute, they will activate. Fixed heat detectors activate at their listed heat range. Sometimes we experience a thermal lag (depending on the fire capacity speed) with fixed heat detectors and opt to install a rate compensation heat detector.

We often use flame detectors on rapid-rate fire conditions. A flame detector responds to radiant energy visible to the human eye or outside the range of human vision. The detector senses the fire and signals a suppression control panel, which sends the command to sound the sirens, shut down equipment and discharge the CO₂ out of the bulk tank and through the piping network and discharge nozzles.

When there may be a hazard upon a hazard, such as large drums of flammable inks or ink pumping stations in the same building as the printing press, we place heat detectors above these areas and extend the piping network to these areas. On top of that, you may require sprinkler systems to protect the building structure. In any special application fire protection, we
must consider using a clean agent system first and only use CO₂ as a last resort due to the safety concerns. A clean agent system, as referenced and defined in NFPA 2001, is an electrically non-conducting, volatile, or gaseous fire extinguishant
that does not leave a residue upon evaporation. NFPA 2001 provides the standard we adhere to in assuring that safeguards are provided and safety to personnel is established.

Which codes address extreme environments?

It depends on the jurisdiction/municipality. Once we collect our data from the field, we check the codes. For example, for CO₂ applications, we follow NFPA 12. For other situations, it depends on the application and project location. You have to consider who the AHJ is, which may be the local fire department or insurance company. There may be more than one AHJ, so we adhere to both authorities’ rules. Then you might need to page through other adopted building codes, such as the International Building Codes, International Fire Codes, International Mechanical Codes, Life Safety 101 and all other adopted local codes, as well as NFPA standards.

What are your recommendations for engineers challenged with projects in extreme conditions?

Always remember that you play an important role in the safety of human lives. When you’re in an extreme environment hazard, go through as many scenarios as you can. Picture what would happen if a fire were to break out and then keep in mind these questions: How do I design a fire suppression system to put the fire out? Do I have adequate noisemakers to alert people in the area to evacuate the building? I use checklists all the time to help me remember what to look for. Once you have made your design, always have a second or third person review your work. Get to know the customer’s environment and don’t narrow your way of thinking that the extreme environment is relegated to a factory plant or steel mill. Extreme environments are everywhere. Collect data from the field, research, ask lots of questions, and pull from past experiences and case studies. Look at  every scenario to determine the best applications for the situation to provide safety and a safe evacuation.

Jonathan R. Hart, Associate Fire Protection Engineer with the National Fire Protection Association, is responsible for documents addressing information technology equipment, telecommunication facilities, wet and dry chemical extinguishing systems, explosion protection, commercial cooking systems, fire safety and emergency symbols, and water mist fire protection systems. Hart holds a B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering from Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) and is finishing work toward an M.S. degree in Fire Protection Engineering.

What fire and life safety codes relate to a mission-critical facility?

NFPA 75, Standard for the Protection of Information Technology (IT) Information Equipment, and NFPA 76, Standard for the Fire Protection of Telecommunications Facilities, are the standards that pertain specifically to the protection of IT equipment, IT equipment areas, and telecom facilities. The rest of the facility will be designed to the applicable codes and standards for hazards other than fire and life safety.

The purpose of NFPA 75 is to set forth the minimum requirements for the protection of IT equipment and IT equipment areas from damage by fire or its associated effects, namely smoke corrosion, heat, and water.

Chapter 4 of the standard addresses Risk Consideration. It states in section 4.1 that “the following factors shall be considered in determination of the need for protecting the environment, equipment, function, programming, records, and supplies: (1) Life safety aspects of the function (e.g., process controls, air traffic controls), (2) Fire threat of the installation to occupants or exposed property, (3) Economic loss from the loss of function or loss of records, (4) Economic loss from value of the equipment, (5) Regulatory impact, and (6) Reputation impact.”

The following chapters address building construction, materials and equipment permitted in the IT equipment area, the construction of IT equipment, fire protection and detection equipment, records kept or stored in IT equipment rooms, utilities, and finally, emergency and recovery procedures.

NFPA 76 provides the requirements for fire protection of telecom facilities where telecom services such as telephone (landline, wireless) transmission, data transmission, voice-over Internet protocol (VoIP) transmission, and video transmission are rendered to the public. Telecom facilities include signal-processing equipment areas, cable entrance facility areas, power areas, main distribution frame areas, standby engine areas used to run standby power, technical support areas, administrative areas, and building services and support areas occupied by a telecom service provider.

The purpose of the standard is to provide a reasonable level of fire protection in telecom facilities, to provide a reasonable level of life safety for the occupants, and to protect equipment and service continuity. NFPA 76 is intended to avoid requirements that could involve unnecessary complications for or interference with the normal use, occupancy, and operations of telecom facilities and equipment.

Chapter 4 of this standard also addresses Risk Considerations. Section 4.1 Risk Factors reads:

Fire protection programs for telecommunications facilities shall be determined based on an evaluation of the risks and hazards associated with the site and services provided from the facility and the business continuity planning and disaster restoration capabilities of the telecommunications service provider specific to the site.

4.1.1 Fire protection programs shall be established with consideration given to the following factors:

(1) Exposure threat to facility occupants, the general public, and exposed property from a fire occurring at, adjacent to, or within the facility.

(2) The importance of telecommunications service continuity in supporting public safety through emergency communications (such as 911), national defense communications requirements, video transmission of critical medical operations, and other vital data.

(3) Methods employed by a service provider, as part of a risk management or business continuity strategy, that allow service to remain viable during and after an event or to be replaced or restored within a reasonable period post-event.

(4) The potential for a given protection strategy to result in a service disruption or inhibit the ability of the service provider to restore service in a timely manner post-event.

Section 4.2 of the standard continues with this method of characterizing the risk considerations in order to provide the most suitable design.

The following three chapters address performance-based design approaches, prescriptive-based design approaches, and redundant-or-replacement-based design approaches, respectively. The subsequent chapters detail the requirements for fire protection elements, fire prevention, pre-fire planning, damage control, and emergency recovery.

“If you think of how many of our work and personal records, everyday use files and information are accessible online through centralized data repositories, you can quickly see the importance of NFPA 75.”
— Jonathan R. Hart, Associate Fire Protection Engineer, NFPA

Please explain the significance of NFPA 75 and 76.

These documents have and continue to become more and more important as society grows reliant on what these documents are designed to protect. If you think of how many of our work and personal records, everyday use files and information are accessible online through centralized data repositories, you can quickly see the importance of NFPA 75. Likewise, information sent via telephone, Internet and similar transmission methods bring to bear the need to keep the routes that information travels up and running, which is a main goal of NFPA 76.

A small sampling of what is protected by NFPA 75 and NFPA 76 includes data storage/retrieval systems, ranging from criminal and medical records, financial records and transactions, insurance and legal records, and registration databases. Data processing systems are protected, including background checks, prescription compatibility, weather modeling, and defense systems, among other critical information. Data communications that are protected include wired-line, wireless (GSM, WiFi, etc.), satellite, radio, Internet, cable, and air traffic control.

What are common elements of these standards that overlap with mission-critical facilities?

Both NFPA 75 and 76 contain a Chapter 4 titled “Risk Considerations,” as stated above. These risk considerations employ an analysis of the risk factors involved both from a fire as well as from an accidental failure of the protection strategies. The overall design of these facilities is required to consider such risks and the total impact of downtime.

In addition, each of these standards requires the facilities to have an emergency fire plan, a damage control plan, and emergency recovery procedures.

How do the standards apply to different areas within a mission-critical facility?

NFPA 75 only applies to the protection of IT equipment and IT equipment areas. The rest of the facility will be designed to the applicable codes and standards.

NFPA 76 simply requires that telecom facilities be separated from the rest of the building by two-hour fire resistance-rated partitions. The standard contains additional conditions for telecom facilities housed in multiple tenant buildings that require either specific building construction types AND require automatic suppression, or limit them to one story.

How do the standards address instances that go beyond traditional fire detection?

NFPA 75 requires the installation of automatic detection equipment to provide early warning of fire. This needs to be a listed smoke detection-type system installed and maintained in accordance with NFPA 72^®, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code. The automatic detection systems are required to be located at ceiling level throughout the IT equipment area, below raised floors containing cables, and above suspended ceilings that recirculate air.

NFPA 76 requires Very Early Warning Fire Detection (VEWFD) for rooms containing over 2,500 square feet of signal-processing equipment areas and Early Warning Fire Detection (EWFD) systems for facilities containing less than 2,500 square feet of signal-processing equipment. Raised floors require fire detection depending on their use and the detection used in the area above them. The standard requires that EWFD and VEWFD use sensors or ports with spacing that is less than normally required by NFPA 72. Specific requirements for each type of detector are contained in Section 8.5 of the standard.

Which emerging topics affect safety considerations in these facilities?

Trends that are driving some of the changes that occur in NFPA 75 and NFPA 76 protected facilities include increasing power densities, which produce greater amounts of heat and therefore require increased amounts of airflow through these areas for cooling. The movement toward making buildings more environmentally friendly is leading to innovative HVAC solutions to increase system energy efficiencies. A demand for faster speed of product from concept to market creates issues in keeping on top of the newest technologies. In general, information technology equipment and telecommunication facilities change at a very fast rate. This creates some challenging issues in determining exactly what is being used, what arrangements are being used, and how these can be protected.

The nature of electronic data and the potential for the important use of that data leads to an ever increasing “critical” nature of these services. The need for some combination of physical protection, detection and alarm, use of appropriate suppression systems, redundancy and a higher-than-average level of reliability for system performance results in improved chances of continuity of operations when something goes wrong and access to important data when it is needed.

For more information on NFPA Codes and Standards, including NFPA 72^®, NFPA 75^® and NFPA 76^®, visit www.nfpa.org/codes.

NFPA 72^®, NFPA 75^® & NFPA 76^® are registered trademarks of the National Fire Protection Association.

Fire protection for a mission-critical facility, such as the Science Museum of Minnesota, is not limited to the exhibit space; it extends to other buildings. For instance, maintaining a museum with irreplaceable and invaluable artifacts requires sophisticated equipment, many cleaning and maintenance supplies and a first-rate storage facility to service the museum.

“Because of the proximity of the storage facility to the museum, fire safety and protection have to be top rated,” says Don Hedin, Assistant Director of Facilities at the Science Museum of Minnesota in St. Paul, Minn. That led the museum to install System Sensor’s FAAST Fire Alarm Aspiration Sensing Technology in its storage facility.

“We recommended System Sensor’s FAAST system, for a primary reason, to ensure that the high nuisance dust factor in the storage area does not cause an alarm state.”
— Dan Westberg, VP of Low Voltage Contractors

“We store fuel and other volatile liquids in secured safety cabinets,” he continues. “We also store our tractors, garden and snow removal equipment, vehicles and other maintenance equipment there.” The 1,225 sq. ft. locked storage area is located in the museum’s adjoining 810-vehicle parking structure.

“The storage area’s unusual concrete ceiling,” Hedin says, “consists of 18 pre-cast double tee ceiling panels that are roughly 3 ft. x 4 ft. x 25 ft. each.” Smoke easily could collect in the concave-shaped ceiling before an alarm would be signaled. Further complicating fire detection, the storage facility can be a dirty and dusty environment.

“We researched various methods of detection and needed a very early warning system,” Hedin continues. “We didn’t want to trigger unnecessary false alarms, disturb our visitors or possibly endanger our priceless exhibits. We chose aspiration technology not only for the safety factor, but for cost savings. The museum couldn’t jeopardize its mission-critical exhibits by triggering nuisance false alarms because of the storage room’s dusty environment.”

Hedin relied on Dan Westberg, Vice President of Low Voltage Contractors (LVC) of Minneapolis, to select a fire alarm aspirating system. “We recommended System Sensor’s FAAST system for a primary reason, to ensure that the high nuisance dust factor in the storage area does not cause an alarm state,” Westberg says. The piping and system installation took only eight hours as only one unit was installed, as opposed to installation of multiple area detectors. The system was tested and approved by the city of St. Paul.

When designing the system, LVC used System Sensor PipeIQ™ software that is included with FAAST as a guide to the pipe layout. (Note: All pipes must be installed in accordance with local and national codes and regulations.) The software provides intuitive control over pipe design layout, system configuration and ongoing system monitoring. The FAAST system is monitored by a NOTIFIER^® control panel, which is in the museum’s security office. For quick read information, facility personnel can view the FAAST device display, which provides a clear indication of the system status, particulate levels, alarm levels, airflow and faults.

Because of FAAST’s tolerance to dusty and dirty environments, it reduces nuisance alarms while providing the very early warning of fires the museum requires. First, FAAST’s multi-stage filtering process helps to remove contaminants. After being drawn into the pipe network’s sampling ports, the air sample moves through a patented particle separator that removes larger nuisance contaminants. Then, a replaceable filter further removes nuisance particulate before the sample enters the detection chamber. This four-year filter is easily replaceable through the front panel door of the FAAST device.

Next, the detector utilizes a unique dual vision sensing technology that uses a high-sensitivity blue LED to detect incipient fire conditions (with particulate levels as low as 0.00046 %/ft obscuration) and an infrared laser to detect larger nuisance particulate. Advanced algorithms process data from both sensors to provide the facility with the earliest and most accurate fire detection available.

Finally, FAAST includes an Acclimate mode, which initially adapts to the environment in 24 hours. It then continuously adjusts to the environment, greatly reducing susceptibility to nuisance alarms. This is especially important if the storage facility’s environmental conditions fluctuate.

For anyone hesitant to use aspirating detection based on early generation products from other manufacturers that did not deliver as promised, the technology has been perfected to the point where it is now a “go to” system. According to Westberg, aspiration detection requests have been growing steadily. “Aspiration detection is a must in fire protection design,” he concludes.

By offering a diverse range of detection and notification products, System Sensor can be your one-stop source for protecting lives and property. While System Sensor has many fine products to choose from, it’s important to realize that some products are more appropriate than others in certain situations given the environmental conditions, occupancy, and structure, among other considerations. Thus, it’s imperative that fire protection engineers and other professionals make the right choices.

FAAST® Fire Alarm Aspiration Sensing Technology is a reliable and highly sensitive product able to detect a fire in its incipient stage. FAAST is invaluable for protecting mission-critical environments and irreplaceable items. Aspiration systems are not intended, however, to replace life safety systems.

In office buildings and facilities with public access areas, for instance, System Sensor spot-type smoke detection systems and notification products are ideal for protecting lives. Yet even within commercial buildings, the right choice for protection can vary. For example, BEAM detectors may be necessary in atriums to cover the peaks that typical spot-type detectors might not be able to effectively protect, or duct smoke detectors may be warranted to keep smoke from spreading through HVAC systems.

As our “Total Fire Detection” and “Intelligibility 101” stories in this issue demonstrate, fire and life safety technology choices are not only wise for covering your bases, they are critical.

By David George,

Dir. of Communications, System Sensor

Life-threatening carbon monoxide (CO) buildup can happen anywhere flame-fueled appliances or motors are used. Because CO is odorless and tasteless, there is no way for occupants to recognize its existence without CO detection. Although most incidents happen during cold months, it is not exclusively a seasonal precaution. CO detection saves lives because it detects, in very early stages, when the highly toxic gas is present.

This was the case in the summer of 2009, when one of Tasco Security’s customer’s alarms went off in her home. It was after a lightning storm when the customer lost power. A few hours after losing power, the CO detector alarm sounded.

When the fire department responded, the response team used their detection devices to determine that the CO was coming from a generator that had been installed next to the air conditioning unit. The air conditioning unit was drawing in the CO released from the generator into the home.

“This was an unusual case where the alarm sounded in the summer. Most times it happens in the winter when people place their generators in the garage or kitchen,” says Timothy Surprenant, President, Tasco Security, Inc. “In this situation, the homeowner was doing nothing wrong. The generator was installed improperly and that had a huge effect.”

Tasco Security, a professional alarm company in New England, has been providing a full-range of security systems for both commercial and residential customers since 1968. When the company installs state-of-the-art fire and security systems complete with CO detection, they use System Sensor CO1224T carbon monoxide detectors with RealTest®.

The CO1224T is a 4-wire, electrochemical carbon monoxide detector that works with both 12- and 24-volt fire and security panels and has central station monitoring capabilities. It is the first CO detector to include a test feature that verifies CO cell functionality.

In the residential security systems designed and installed by Tasco, the CO1224T detectors are installed, by trained professionals, on each level of the home and in sleeping areas. The detectors are then connected to the initiating circuit of the control panel that connects to the central monitoring facility. When CO is detected, the alarm signals in the home and at the central monitoring station, alerting both the resident and the monitoring facility. The resident can get out of the home, while the monitoring facility contacts the necessary emergency response teams to respond.

“We standardize to System Sensor mainly because the product gives a trouble signal at end-of-life. In the past, we have used systems that went to end-of-life, and then tripped the alarm, which is not a good situation,” says Surprenant.

The ability to provide real-time information to all building occupants or personnel on a business campus during emergency situations has become a critical concern for those who manage and safeguard facilities and their occupants. As a result, interest in ECSs and Mass Notification Systems (MNSs) is growing rapidly. But with this accelerated growth comes confusion.

The new Web site is dedicated to providing the latest information on all aspects of ECS, from its roots in military mass notification mandates to the latest solutions that meet communications, signaling, and intelligibility requirements for public and private applications.

A learning hub for building owners, facility managers, architects, engineers, and end users, the Web site provides links to downloadable white papers, articles, case histories, newsletters, webinars and more. You can also tap into the Honeywell Fire Systems Group Services capabilities for design and applications services.

A complete, integrated life safety solution has been shown to be a very effective means to notify occupants of the necessary response and appropriate action to take in the event of an emergency. By basing systems on its existing commercial Fire Alarm and Signaling platforms, Honeywell Life Safety provides timely, high-performing solutions to the marketplace. Significant solutions are provided on the www.emergency-communications-systems.com Web site and are available through NOTIFIER by Honeywell, Gamewell-FCI by Honeywell, and System Sensor.

Devices had to blend into the architecture throughout the capitol, including the Capitol Expansion (far left) that was completed in 1993, as well as in one of the original courtrooms.

Built in 1888, the Texas Capitol in Austin is the largest in gross square footage of all state capitols and is second in total size only to the National Capitol in Washington D.C., yet nearly 15 feet taller. Though heralded by preservationists for its 15th century Italian architecture, the Texas Capitol needed to update its fire and life safety protection by replacing its discontinued legacy systems that had reached the end of their lifecycle.

Koetter Fire Protection of Austin was responsible for retrofitting the fire and life safety system throughout the main capitol building, as well as the four-level, 667,000-square-foot underground extension that effectively doubled the floor space of the entire capitol complex upon its completion in 1993.

Besides being sensitive to preserving this historically significant building, the Koetter team understood that the Texas Capitol is also a high-profile, state facility that has to maintain strict security procedures. As an installer, that meant being accompanied by a security escort at all times and working at a busy facility with hundreds of daily occupants.

“You work by their schedule with the goal of ‘No impact to any of the operations of the state processes in the capitol,’” says Jason Ferguson, vice president of Koetter. “Also, the capitol systems have to stay online, so maintaining coverage is critical.”

The ease of detector replacement aided Koetter in maintaining proper fire and life safety protection at all times during the installation process. “Basically, the timeline challenge was to have the system minimally impacted as far as coverage,” says Ferguson, adding that compatibility between the old and new detection systems was the key to continuously maintaining appropriate coverage. The replacement included the fire alarm control panel and smoke, heat and duct detectors. Managing the replacement in phases met the capitol’s operations requirements and scheduling requests.

“The great thing about System Sensor and NOTIFIER^® is that the two companies have continued to design for the future of our existing customers,” says Ferguson. “A practice of remembering the ones who brought you to your level of business and giving them their due consideration allows for decades of a continued business relationship. Their business mindset assisted Koetter with moving this customer from their legacy equipment to today’s current equipment standards.”

Koetter replaced the legacy detectors while the capitol’s legacy NOTIFIER FACP equipment was still in place, and then swapped the NOTIFIER Model 2020 fire panel with a new Model 3030 panel. In all, Koetter installed about 1,300 System Sensor photoelectric smoke detectors (NOTIFIER Model FSP-851), 50 FST-851R heat detectors and 170 InnovairFlex™ duct smoke detectors, which work in conjunction with one another throughout the main building and the extension.

Although the installation was simplified by the technology compatibility and use of existing detection locations, Ferguson says that the unique nature of the building, which includes various atria, arches and other architecturally imposing building features, made maneuverability difficult at times. Some devices had been strategically located to blend into the look and feel of the building, which challenged installer access.

But Ferguson maintains: “The process was as much a challenge as the location. This type of retrofit requires long-term planning and studying of the customer’s requirements. You have to know them and their system.”