180 likes | 328 Views
Report on Fire Suppression Research for High-Density Storage Facilities Roberta Pilette Director, Preservation Department Yale University Library. Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services. HD Library Facility vs Warehouse. HD Library Facility
E N D
Report on Fire Suppression Research for High-Density Storage Facilities Roberta Pilette Director, Preservation Department Yale University Library Hosted by ALCTS The Association for Library Collections and Technical Services
HD Library Facility vs Warehouse HD Library Facility • Solid shelves spaced 12”-18” apart • Narrow aisles due to size of materials being retrieved • Long-term, homogeneous collections Warehouse • Open rack shelving • Large, open aisles to facilitate palletized delivery & retrieval • Short-term, ever-changing materials
Project Development • June 2005 • Informal gathering of preservation librarians to determine next steps Columbia University Harvard University Library of Congress University of Chicago University of Michigan Yale University University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign • The informal gathering became an informal consortium
Survey Results • Identified 51 institutions with high density facilities • Survey conducted February 2006; 51% responded • Questions asked regarding: • Type of facility • Environmental conditions • Age of facility • Construction details regarding the roof, exterior & interior walls and overall size with regards to length, height, width • Tier/shelving configuration • What materials are stored in the facility and how stored • Sprinkler/fire suppression systems
Survey Results • What is stored and how • Bound items directly on shelf 68% • Mss & archival collections, non-plastic containers 88% • Analog audio disks, mechanical recordings, non-plastic containers 54% • Microfilm/fiche, non-plastic containers 47% • Magnetic media in trays on shelf 67% • Oversize maps & drawings in flat files & shelves 56%
Survey Results • Storage within the a module • Interfile format types within a module 54% • Mixed formats within a section of shelving, the shelf, or within the range/aisle >33% • Fire Suppression systems • In-rack sprinklers 50% • No in-rack sprinklers 50%
Project Timeline • July 2006 • Survey results in • Meeting at Yale to establish goals and expected outcomes • May 2007 • FMGlobal approves project • Project and testing design begins; research engineer assigned • Feb 2008 • Update on first set of tests • Lessons learned & reaffirmation of goals • March 2010 • All testing complete • Preliminary results & recommendations presented to consortium • June 2011 • Final Report
Project Goals • Provide fire protection options for a typical high-bay, high-density storage arrangement • Develop loss mitigation methods to reduce non-thermal damage • If necessary, make recommendations for the future design of high density storage modules
Terminology & Test Array Longitudinal flue Aisle Rack Sprinkler headsTransverse flue Overhead view of the shelving arrangement for tests.
The Tests • Test #1 • In-rack sprinklers at 10 & 19 ft level at each transverse & longitudinal intersection • Ceiling sprinklers • Books in trays on shelves • Test #2 • Sprinklers same as #1 • Books in trays & Archive boxes on shelves • Test #3 • Sprinklers same as #1 BUT add face sprinklers at 10 & 19 ft level • Books in trays & Archive boxes on shelves
Results & Conclusions • Smoke detectors in all tests went off prior to the first sprinkler head release. • The combination of in-rack and ceiling sprinklers provides adequate fire protection. • Additionally, in-rack sprinklers are effective in reducing the temperature of the racks thereby limiting the possibility of rack collapse. • Byadding face sprinklers it is estimated that there is 50% less damage to materials due to fire and water.
Other Findings Along the Way • Narrow aisles make fire fighting difficult • Amount of material affected even in a small incident is large—remember this is ‘high-density’
Other Findings Along the Way • Cardboard trays failed quickly • -Create falling book hazard • -Front of tray with barcode info is lost • -Weakened trays could not be used to pull books off shelf
Final Recommendations • Early detection devices mean faster response and less damage • In-rack & ceiling sprinklers are good but adding face sprinklers provides the best protection • Local fire department needs to be familiar with facility and its potential challenges and hazards • Response & recovery plan are necessary • Considering replacing corrugated trays with something that is non-combustible and will not fail when wet
Many thanks to David Fuller, Kristin Jamison & Mary Breighner at FMGlobal; Tom Gaitley at Copper Harbor Consulting, Inc; and fellow consortium members on this project.For copies of the FM Global report contact:David Fullerdavid.fuller@fmglobal.com Thank you roberta.pilette@yale.edu