FOCUS
Lessons to learn In the final part of a two part series,Gary Howe provides examples of challenges faced when considering watermist for building protection
A
N INSIGHT into the real challenges faced by myself and other authorities having jurisdiction when considering the
suitability of watermist for building protection is provided by the examples detailed below. These are examples of actual cases in which solutions have been proposed or in some cases have already been installed. They seek to highlight some of the issues faced
when reviewing design schemes and related test protocols to obtain acceptance for property insurance purposes. Misunderstandings and lack of knowledge have led to and continue to lead to inappropriate application of fixed fire protection systems.
Educational premises It is common for watermist to be proposed for educational facilities without fi rst being backed up by suitable robust fi re test data. This should include all the challenging features of this type of building, such as external canopies; sports halls; atriums; ceiling voids; plenums; acoustic barriers; high ceilings; open cell ceilings; obstructions; storage areas; car parks; and
plant rooms. In most cases, partial fi re test data is being provided for only one or two areas of the premises and the fi re protection contractor hopes that the absence of a full suite of fi re test data will go unnoticed, despite the fact that the system installed cannot be proven for the risk.
Intensive hanging garment storage There has been no independent fi re testing to date for this application. Watermist schemes for this are now commonplace and fire consultants are putting forward watermist as a fi re protection solution without there being any fire test data to support its use in such applications. Annex G in BS EN 128455 has a method of protecting such a risk using sprinkler protection. Once again, this highlights the fact that systems are being installed to protect applications for which they have not been tested or proven.
Data centres Developments in the configuration of data centres in recent years provide a number of very challenging issues, including the following:
48 DECEMBER 2019/JANUARY 2020
www.frmjournal.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
