High Challenge Warehouse case study

Zurich Risk Engineering

High challenge warehouse case study – Summary

February 19, 2010Richard GallagherMichael GollnerZurich Services Corporation

Zurich Risk Engineering© Z

uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Objectives

Review the results of the high challenge warehouse workshopRecognize participantsExplain the project backgroundReview case – Given information– QuestionSummarize the eight presentationsRecap the overall findings


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Case study participants

Schirmer Engineering Dan O’Connor, Garner PalenskeRolf Jensen and Associates Richard BukowskiFPI Consortium Warde ComeauxTelgian Tracy BellamySummit Fire Protection Sean Merkel, Ryan BierwerthHughes Associates Jerry Back, Joe Scheffey,

Dan GottukUCSD Michael Gollner WPI Ali RangawalaCreative FPE Solutions Jonathan PerriconeXL GAPS John Frank


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Background

NFPA 13 basis: Automatic sprinklers control or suppression a fireFinal fire extinguishment by the fire service

Today’s warehousesHigh challenges to both sprinklers and fire service

Recent fire experienceNot always reasonable to expect manual intervention

FoundationAddressing research to support potential changes to NFPA standards.


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Workshop approach

Basis for workshopTheoretical Case Study

PresentationsSix leading FPE companies share innovative design conceptsOne presentation on novel approach to manual fire suppressionOne presentation addressing need to step back further and understand commodities and storage

Format20 minute presentationsPanel Q&A

Zurich Risk Engineering

Case Study Warehouse

2/4/2010 6High Challenge Warehouse Case Study


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng


General conditions

Who - XYZ CompanyWhat - New warehouseWhere - Rural region of US


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng


Facility parameters

Two attached buildingsLow Bay– 100’ x 150’ x 35’ tallHigh Bay– 55’ x 150’ x 65’ tall


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng


Facility construction

Roof –Noncombustible steel deck on steel bar joistHigh bay rack supported roof

Exterior walls – Insulated metal panel

Interior wallsBetween Low Bay and High Bay150’ longReinforced concrete block– Up to Low Bay roof

Floors – Reinforced concrete


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng


Public protection

Public fire serviceVolunteer departmentXYZ Company is first storage facility in district

Public waterExtending main 3 miles to siteLimited flow– 60 psi static / 20 psi residual / 800 gpm flowing


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng


Private protection

Water supplyTwo fire pumps – one electric, one dieselGround water suction tankDetached fire pump house 300 feet from building


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng


Storage commodity

Group A plasticsUnexpandedIn cartonsNonencapsulatedConventional wood palletsPallet loads 4’ x 4’ x 4’


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng


Storage configuration

Workshop focusThe High Bay warehouse

High bayMultiple row rack (4 pallets deep) flanked by double row racksRacks are separated aisles– 5 ft wideArray 23 pallets long & 13 pallets highNominal 6” flues around each pallet loadTiers 5’ tall

Elevation View


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng


Stock handling

Low BayIndustrial trucks

High BayAutomatic storage and retrieval system (ASRS)Two ASRS systemsOperate in 5 ft wide aisles Photo source: FEMA


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng


The challenge

Local fire chief has made it clear thatin the event of a fire -

Will enter building to save peopleWill not enter building to save property

Question: As the fire protection engineer of record, what fire protection design will be proposed to achieve final fire extinguishment without fire service intervention?

Photo source: FEMA


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Summary of case study presentations


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Summary format

Ignition - Sources of ignitionAgent - Extinguishing mediaDetection/Release - Method of detection and releaseASRS - Uses for ASRSFailure - Noted failure concerns for methodComments - Additional comments

Where no data provided – marked “NA” and grayed-out


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Schirmer Engineering

Ignition - Arson, electrical, etc.Agent - Water - ESFR high zone at intersection of flues & over aisles

ESFR low zone at intersection of fluesOne level in-racks in each zone1600 gpm either zoneHorizontal barrier between high and low zones

CO2 - Low zone for redundancy (higher exposure area)

Local application, can pipe long distances, can handle flammable liquids and electrical fires, no pumps,

Use a 30-60 second dischargeDivide low zone into sections (CO2 volume

calculations)Detection/Release - Sprinkler fusible element, In-rack linear/spot heat detectionASRS - NAFailure - NAComments - Test ESFR configuration, locate in flues, avoid water ricochet Test low zone detection concept

Develop CO2 nozzleTechnology proven and can implement today


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Rolf Jensen and Associates

Ignition -NAAgent - Water mist

Zoned vertically (vertical risers)Spray either side of pallet and one side of adjacent palletHigh velocity exhaust fans on outside walls - Produce airflow perpendicular to aisles to distribute water mist- Maintain visibility

Detection/Release - In-rack linear heat detection to locate fire ASRS - Use self-contained foam skid IR camera guided nozzle

Not for primary suppression due to response time Failure - NAComments - Low bay is typical for ESFR

Critical to maintain longitudinal and transverse fluesHigh bay ceiling sprinklers to protect building


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

FPI Consortium

Ignition - ASRS (lights not usually in use) electrical rails top and

bottom, fires involve ASRS unit and spreads to storageAgent - High expansion foam – submerge in 4 min

13 foam generators30 minute duration100,000 gallons water for 30 minutes

Detection/ - Heat detection - ceiling & in-rack spot heat detection Release Ceiling 15’ x 15’, in-rack 10’ vertical & 8’ horizontalASRS - Not used, returned to home base and shutdownFailure - Doors and openings must close

False release of foam (cross-zone possible)Comments - Sprinklers not considered due to environment impact


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Telgian

Ignition - ASRS or lighting at elevated locationAgent - Water

Design an in-rack sprinklers, quick responseNeed horizontal barriers above in-racks, perhaps each tierUse waterflow to locate fire vertically

Detection/Release - Fusible sprinkler elementsASRS - Locate fire using thermal imaging

Relocate stock to safe areaHandle wet and damaged loads (enclosed unit)

Failure -NAComments - Need in-rack sprinkler design guidance

- In-rack response time- In-rack water distribution


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Summit Fire Protection

Ignition - NAAgent - Water

Develop suppression mode in-racksIncreased clearance for larger orifice in-rack

sprinklersFire barriers to provide fire confinement300,000 gallons – 2 hour duration

Detection/Release - Fusible sprinklers elementsASRS - Under fire conditions, ASRS not availableFailure -NAComments - Introduce ESRF into racks

Evaluate all changes over time (personnel turnover,

commodities, maintenance, etc.


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Hughes Associates

Ignition -NAAgent - High expansion foam

Zoned system, 4 quadrants, barriers wire mesh/noncombustible fabric

Curtains strips to allow ASRS passage Safety factors of 2+ compared to NFPA requirements20,000 gallons water – 30 minute duration

Detection/ - In-rack linear heat detectionReleaseFlame detection for open spacesASRS - Apply skid mounted fire suppression system

Remove pallets of stock around fireEvaluate extinguishment – video monitoringRemove pallets of damaged stock

Failure -Fire at zone interface, Openings between zones,Collateral damage to stock remote from fire

Comments - Goals include low complexity, reasonable cost, rapid control,

extinguishment, minimum fire damage, and minimum collateral damage


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

WPI, UCSD, Creative FPE Solutions

Ignition -NAAgent - NADetectionRelease - NAASRS - NAFailure - NA

Comments - Must start at a more fundamental levelDevelop method to quantify warehouse fire

control, suppression, or extinguishmentLimits to “modeling” and “small scale testing”Need new intermediate-scale test- Determine water application rate for

suppression- Will discuss further in a few slides


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

XL GAPS

Ignition -NAAgent - Water

Mobilize remote special fire fighting teamNeed 12 hours (remote response, size-up, extinguish, overhaul)Sprinklers controlling fire during this timeNeed 900,000 gallons water

Detection/Release - Fusible sprinkler elementsASRS - Fire fighter access to upper tiersFailure - NAComments - Interim solution until an engineered solution available

Specialized fire team responding from central locationSimilar to private emergency services such as urban search and rescue, oil wells, oil tanks Skills to verify building stability, locate fire, work vertically, apply agent


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Summary of work

Ignition scenariosProposed solutionsDesign challengesGapsManual intervention


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Identified ignition scenarios

ASRS equipmentPower rails top and bottomPower on stacker craneCan introduce ignition source at any level

LightingIgnition exposure at roof

ArsonAnticipate low level exposure



uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Solutions

Manual fire suppression – an immediate solutionXL Gaps

Test & validate current sprinkler suppression practicesWPI, UCSD, Edinburgh, and Creative FPE Solutions.

Sprinklers – modify current designs – ESFR inracksSummit Fire ProtectionTelgian

Sprinklers (2 levels ESFR) & CO2

Schirmer

High expansion foamFPI ConsortiumHughes Associates

Water mistRJA



uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Design challenges

Water sourcesReliability / redundancyVolume / durationCost of system due to rural location

Environmental concernsRelease of contaminated waterRecycling of used water

Hazard of commodityDefining the hazard of a commodityCommodities changing or introducing unknown commodities

In-rack sprinkler placement and type (ESFR) highly specific to fuel type, configuration

Avoiding complex designs Can collateral damage be limited to limit business impact



uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

GapsTest methodologies

There are no methods, currently, to quantify warehouse fire control, suppression or extinguishment. A test methodology is needed to ensure adequacy of current and new design concepts

How much suppressant?Length of discharge?Limitations in full scale, small scale testing and modeling demand a new approach – small scale commodity classification verified by intermediate scale testing and large scale modeling/testing for validation


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

GapsDesign approach – WPI et al


Determine limits of current sprinkler protection systemsAnalyze the warehouse fire problem in pieces1. Characterize sprinkler spray2. Droplet losses from geometry, plume,

radiation, etc.3. Suppression/Extinction interaction between

film/drops and fire

Benefits:Design fixed system to provide suppression or extinction for any tested materialsUtilize current sprinkler infrastructure and modify deficient systems if necessary

FIRE

PLUME

Sprinkler Spray


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Small Scale Testing Commodity -type

classification

Intermediate Scale Testing

(Proof of concept)

Large/Full Scale Modeling

(Proof of concept)

Engineering Approach to Warehouse Fire Protection Design

32

GapsDesign approach – WPI et al


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

GapsTechnology

In-rack sprinkler designNo sprinkler designed to respond quickly in a rackNo sprinkler designed to distribute water in a rackNo suppression mode in-rack sprinkler

Hardening of ASRS for use during fire eventCarry self-contained extinguishing system skidIdentify fire location within arrayVerify fire control/suppression progressRemove adjacent stock to isolate fireRemove wet or damaged stock


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

GapsManual intervention - the immediate solution

Water suppliesAre durations sufficient (2 hours vs. 12 hours)

Thorough pre-emergency planningSafe work plan


uri

ch R

isk

En

gin

eeri

ng

Questions or comments?


Documents

High Challenge Warehouse case study