FIRE LIFE SAFETY COMMISSIONING - · PDF fileFIRE LIFE SAFETY COMMISSIONING 21st National Conference on Building Commissioning. ... • Required duct leakage test was never conducted

Dave LeBlanc, RJA; Doug Fisher, Fisher Engineering; Matt Klaus NFPA

FIRE LIFE SAFETY COMMISSIONING

21st National Conference on Building Commissioning

AIA Quality Assurance

The Building Commissioning Association is a Registered Provider with The American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems (AIA/CES). Credit(s) earned on completion of this program will be reported to AIA/CES for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for both AIA members and non-AIA members are available upon request.

This program is registered with AIA/CES for continuing professional education. As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product.

Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will be addressed at the conclusion of this presentation.

21st NCBC Conference

Presentation Description

Commissioning of fire and life safety systems is still in its infancy. With the recent adoption of NFPA 3, “Recommended Practice on Commissioning and Integrated Testing of Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems,” an industry guideline is now available for owners and commissioning providers. Actual project examples will highlight the effectiveness and benefits of the commissioning process, pitfalls to watch out for, and the differences between standard industry practices such as acceptance testing and the NFPA 3 commissioning process.


Session Overview• NFPA 3 Update• What is NFPA 4• New Fire Protection Systems

• Importance of Commissioning Slide• Commissioning vs. Acceptance

Testing• Lessons learned, new systems

• Existing Systems• Re-Cx vs. Retro-Cx review• Why Re-Cx or Retro-Cx• Lessons learned, existing systems

• Wrap-Up/Questions .


At the end of this session, participants will be able to:

1. Understand the NFPA 3 Cx process for Fire Protection and Life Safety (F&LS) Systems, the role of the Fire Commissioning Agent (Fix) and how it integrates to a full building commissioning process.

2. Understand the difference between NFPA 3 and proposed NFPA 4.

3. Understand the difference between Commissioning and acceptance testing for fire protection and life safety systems.

4. Compare and apply lessons learned from F&LS commissioning examples to real-world commissioning process.

Learning Objectives


NFPA 3– 2015 EDITIONUPDATE

SESSION AGENDA

7

•A2014 Code Cycle•Proposed Changes to NFPA 3•What is NFPA 4?•What Isn’t Happening•What You Can Do

8

A2014 CODE CYCLE 100+ Public Inputs 28 First Revisions Public Comments Closed on

5/3/13 Last of 4 Technical Committee

Meetings July 2013 (Indianapolis, IN)

9

NFPA 3 - 2015 PROPOSED REVISIONS Eliminated all reference to Integrated Testing (CH 7 Removed) Redefined Re-Cx and Retro-Cx Enhanced the Re-Cx and Retro-Cx recommendations Enhanced Data Sharing Recommendations Integrated Systems Commissioning Enhancements

10

NFPA 3 - 2015 PROPOSED REVISIONS

The fire protection and life safety commissioning team should document the following: Where data sharing systems occur in

the project Compatibility of data sharing systems Where gateways or interfaces are

recommended between data sharing systems

The responsible parties for each portion of the interconnection

Degrade mode for each data sharing system upon loss of communication

11


6.3.1 Construction Phase. The recommendations for installation of

integrated systems should include, but not be limited to, the following: Conformance to the approved drawings and specifications Compliance with the manufacturers’ published instructions Compliance with applicable codes and standards Review of material and equipment submittals of proper rating for the

use Coordination of all contractors’ submittal drawings, sequence of

operation, and procedures

12


When should Re-Cx occur: When specified in the FCx plan Upon change of occupancy Upon change of hazard of the facility Upon a change of fire protection and life safety systems

13


The following should be achieved during Re-Cx: A fire protection and life safety team should be established and

responsibilities assigned in accordance with 5.2.2.

The original OPR and BOD should be reviewed by the FCx team against current facility operational conditions. If the OPR and/or BOD do not match the current facility operational conditions, the OPR and/or BOD should be updated to meet current conditions. This should include any updates to the sequence of operation.

The original design and installation drawings should be reviewed to gain familiarity with the individual systems and overall fire protection and life safety sequence for the facility.

The original FCx plan should be reviewed and modified based on any revisions to the OPR and/or BOD.

14


The original construction checklists and functional performance tests should be reviewed and modified based on any revisions to the OPR and/or BOD.

Functional performance testing of the existing fire protection and life safety systems should be performed as described in the FCx plan. This testing should include verification of the sequence of operation matrix.

The original systems manuals and record drawings should be reviewed for completeness and quality of materials.

Knowledge of the operation and maintenance of fire protection and life safety systems by on-site personnel should be assessed to determine if additional training is required.

15

NFPA 3 - 2015 PROPOSED REVISIONS When should Retro-Cx be

performed:

When design, installation, or operational issues are revealed during inspection, testing, and maintenance

Upon change of occupancy

Upon change of hazard of the facility

Upon a change of fire protection and life safety systems

16

NFPA 4 – STANDARD ON INTEGRATED SYSTEM TESTING

17

NFPA 4

New Standard Sibling Document to NFPA 3 Pulls out CH 7 – Integrated Testing New Committee Draft to Public April 2012

NFPA.org/4

NFPA 4 SCOPE (DRAFT)

Addresses Integrated Systems Testing Procedure, Protocol and Personnel

Does Not Deal With Individual System Testing or Performance

Does not Require Test To Be Conducted

NFPA 4 KEY CONCEPTS

Establish Test TeamIs Cx Required for ITx?Depth and Breadth of ITx

(Critical Choice)Periodic Integrated

System Testing (tentatively utilizing the acronym as PISTx)

WHAT’S NOT HAPPENING (FOR NOW)

NFPA 3 Will Not Become a Standard…Why?Cost?Fear of the Unknown?Loss of Market Share?Quantifiable Long

and Short Term Value?

21

GET INVOLVED Second Draft Meeting

Be Our Guest Apply to Join the Technical Committee Too Late for Formal Comments but Thoughts on Standardization:

[email protected]

Who should require Cx and Integrated System Testing? Building Code Life Safety Design Standards

Let them know about it!!!!

• Many fire protection systems sit dormant until emergency conditions

• Life safety systems are essential in protecting occupants, contents of, and the building itself and notifying occupants during emergency conditions

• Owners are legally obligated to have properly functioning fire protection systems and to maintain and test these systems.

• The complex integration of fire protection systems is at an all time high

• Non-commissioned or improperly commissioned fire protection systems are a liability for owners and commissioning firms.


Importance of Commissioning Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems

• In Fire Protection Industry, buzzword of “Commissioning” utilized incorrectly.

• Acceptance Testing with Engineer or local Building/Fire Department is often incorrectly termed “Commissioning”.

• Acceptance Testing does not equal Commissioning.• Commissioning is a more comprehensive systematic

process than just an acceptance test.• NFPA3 should help with Terminology.


Terminology

• Emergency generator was tested prior to all the systems were completed and connected to the emergency generator and signed off.

• Generator was properly sized to accommodate load• As part of life safety systems test a full load on emergency

generator was done with the smoke control system, fire pump, fire alarm system, emergency lighting, and other systems running.


Importance of Commissioning & Integrated Testing as Systems First Come On-Line and After All Systems On-LineNew High-Rise Hotel with Pressurized Stairs, Fire Pump, Fire Alarm System, Emergency Lighting, and other Systems on the Emergency Generator

• During life safety test transfer to emergency generator the generator tripped out.

• All systems in the building went down with no power and dark –no lighting (night test)

• Generator had capacity but not properly balanced and configured as other systems were added to the emergency generator load.


Result

1. Need to commission systems when they are first brought online, but also after other systems are finished.

2. Importance of Commissioning to identify and resolve problems.


Lessons Learned

• Fire Protection Life Safety Commissioning Team brought in late to the project after much of the system were installed.

• Systems and smoke control shafts were constructed, sealed, and painted.

• Required duct leakage test was never conducted prior to sealing shafts.


Importance of Commissioning Team Brought In EarlyNew Construction Mixed-Use High Rise Project with A Smoke Control System

• Smoke control system could not meet performance of .05 inch water gauge pressure differential.

• Leaky duct was the culprit, which would have been identified if the duct test was conducted.

• Had to take down the drywall shaft for entire building to fix the duct work, conduct duct test, and replace shaft and paint.

• Additional cost and schedule impact.


Results

1. Best to bring in Commissioning Team during the design phase.2. Need to conduct commissioning testing and component

verification at the proper installation point during construction.3. Skipping Commissioning or improperly delaying steps most

likely will cost you significantly more financially and impact schedule.


Lessons Learned

• Relatively new Low-rise large building with Atrium smoke control system.

• Actual fire outside of Atrium activated non-atrium sprinkler water flow in a remote area of building

• Atrium smoke control system activated in real life (not supposed to per basis of design and project/owner objective).


Need for Comprehensive Test Scenarios and Proper Commissioning

• Smoke from remote area of building was dragged through the building causing extensive damage and clean-up.

• Improperly configured smoke control sequence did much more harm


Result

1. Improperly configured systems not only not helpful, can cause more problems.

2. Need comprehensive test scenarios and when systems should activate, but also when they should not activate.

3. Proper Commissioning of fire protection and life safety systems critical for proper orientation.

4. Non-Commissioned systems have significantly increased rate of not properly functioning and possibly doing more harm putting occupants, property, and the building at risk from fire and life safety.


Lessons

• Office/residential building shaped like a 10 legged spider• Legs were three story residential • Body was one story office• Fire alarm system included mass notification and interface

with HVAC, smoke dampers and door release• Limited FP & LS commissioning (mainly integrated systems

testing) performed after acceptance testing and sign off by fire department

• Test scenarios developed using real world conditions


New Building CommissioningOffice/Residential

• Activation of smoke detectors caused vertical coiling doors to shut in smoke partitions and activated the MNS system

• MNS utilized LED message boards which plugged into standard receptacle

• Power was shut off to building and test scenarios run again• No power was available for motorized coiling doors or MNS

message boards• Fire alarm sub, electrical contractor and RDP pointed fingers


Results

• Design needs to incorporate OPR and look at real world use of FP & LS systems

• Testing should be performed for ALL integrated systems, not just individual systems• Include test scenarios that have real world application

• Solution was to provide small UPS at each message sign and coiling doors

• Full commissioning would have revealed deficiency during design• Allowed a dedicated emergency circuit for all devices fed

by a UPS


Lessons Learned

• Why is it important?• Re-Cx• Retro-Cx


Existing Building Commissioning

• Many FP & LS systems only go through acceptance testing• Systems are getting more integrated and more complicated• If commissioning was not performed…

• Establish baseline performance• If commissioning was performed

• Verify integration and sequence are still valid


Why Existing Building Commissioning?

• For existing fire protection and life safety systems that were previously subject to FCx, the process of verifying system performance continues to meet the OPR and BOD.


Re-Commissioning (Re-Cx)

• For existing fire protection and life safety systems that were not previously subject to FCx, the process of verifying system performance and operation meet the original design intent, current owner requirements, and applicable laws, regulations, codes, and standards.


Retro-Commissioning (Retro-Cx)

• Three story educational building• Atrium utilizing smoke exhaust• Automatic horizontal sliding door (Won Door) used to

separate atrium from adjacent spaces• All FP & LS systems “tested” and “accepted” by AHJ and RDP

within past year• Fix hired for Retro-Cx as part of Total Building Retro-Cx• Detailed test scenarios were developed


Existing Building CommissioningEducation Building

• Fix activated smoke detector• Won Door closed, smoke exhaust fan started• Fix pushed the Won Door release to open the door • Won Door tried to close after preset time• Door would not fit back into guide rail• Why?


Results

• Acceptance testing looks at individual systems and how they function individually.

• Detailed test procedures should be developed that look at real world scenarios.

• Garbage in, garbage out applies to testing as well as computers.

• Atrium exhaust was oversized by 50%.• Owner decided to abandon ½ the fans in place.


Lessons Learned

• One story aircraft hangar for commercial aircraft maintenance

• High-expansion foam system utilizing abort stations• All FP/LS systems “tested” and “accepted” by AHJ and EOR

within past year• Fix hired for Retro-Cx to give owner peace of mind• Detailed test scenarios were developed


Existing Building CommissioningAircraft Hangar

• Fix activated foam system, system released• Activated abort and water flow stopped• Reset system• Activated abort, nothing happened• Released abort, system released• Why?


Results

• Simple programming error of computer code• If, then, else statement

• If manual release station is active and abort is pushed, stop water flow

• If abort is released, start water flow• What is missing?• Acceptance testing did not look at real world scenario

• Somebody simply pushing the abort• Detailed test procedures should be developed that look at

real world scenarios


Lessons Learned

• Multiple hangar bay facility used for corporate jet major repair and painting

• Deluge foam-water sprinkler system activated by cross-zone heat detectors

• During annual testing, maintenance techs were testing individual detectors

• Heat detector in one bay discharged foam-water system in different bay

• Fix retained to determine cause, establish baseline performance and verify proper sequence


Existing Building CommissioningAircraft Hangar

• Cause was due to improper initial programming of control panel

• Complete Retro-Cx was performed, including developing the OPR and BOD

• Sequence was completely kattywampus • Complete reprogramming of control panel required• Control panel EMI/RF protection did not meet OPR


Results

• Similar theme….• Acceptance testing does not ensure OPR, BOD and

sequence are met• Ensure testing of integrated systems is performed

• Each system was tested independently and integration only checked once or twice due to “cost”

• OPR is critical to FP & LS systems• Individual system contractors never asked about EMI/RF

issues and Owner did not know to tell anyone


Lessons Learned

Existing High Rise Building with an Atrium Smoke Control System and Stair Pressurization System.• Building occupied for years with areas of the

building were getting renovated.• Lack of documentation and no evidence it

was commissioned resulted in a thorough test of the system to verify installation, operation, and performance.

• One test scenario was to simulate a transfer to emergency power for entire building during heavy load, including smoke control systems, fire pumps, and fire alarm systems all running under normal power to verify it continued to perform and that the transfer to emergency generator worked.


Importance of Commissioning Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems

• Under normal power systems activated properly, but on emergency power transfer all of the dampers closed, even though some were suppose to be open.

• Smoke control fans were on emergency power, but all the dampers were on normal power and failed safe close upon loss of power.


Result

1. Emergency/Standby power critical for fire protection and life safety systems.

2. Showcased importance of proper Commissioning and Retro-Commissioning

3. Highlighted importance of integrated test plans

4. Systems need to properly function in various conditions, not only ideal normal conditions.

5. Existing fire protection and life safety systems are many times not properly configured, coordinated, integrated, or commissioned.


Lessons Learned

• FP & LS Commissioning still in its infancy• NFPA developed Standard #3 to formalize FP & LS

Commissioning process• NFPA 4 developed to focus on testing of integrated systems• We need your comments & feedback!• FP & LS Commissioning plays an important role in both new

and existing buildings• Common theme…

• Acceptance testing does not ensure systems will function as intended by the OPR.


Summary

THANK YOUDavid LeBlancVice [email protected]

Doug Fisher, PE, LEED [email protected]

Matt Klaus Sr. Fire Protection [email protected]

Documents

FIRE LIFE SAFETY COMMISSIONING - · PDF fileFIRE LIFE SAFETY COMMISSIONING 21st National Conference on Building Commissioning. ... • Required duct leakage test was never conducted