Computer Operations Bulletin #0600

CHEmETROn
Fire Systeml;
CARBON DIOXIDE FIRE PROTECTION -

co2 Protection of Spaces

Beneath Raised Floors

The use of raised floors in computer rooms and similar facilities has
been the practice for many years. These spaces have traditionally been
used as areas in which to run cables point to point, interconnecting
power and control. They are also often the main means of distributing
cooling air to the equipment. When listed or approved cables are used?
the fire hazard from these is very small. However, fires at connecting
points have been reported. These areas can also become the repository
for extraneous material, and fires from this source have also been re-
ported.

By its very nature, a fire beneath a raised floor can be especially

serious as the products of combustion can reach the equipment quickly
through their close proximity and by being carried by the air which
flows through the sub-floor to the equipment. There is no other place
in a computer room where a fire can expose more key equipment more
quickly. So even though the prospect of a fire is remote, many feel they
cannot accept the risk of not protecting this space.

When FM-200 total flooding is used, the protection of this space is

best accomplished by flooding it, along with the room above. But when
sprinklers are used in the room, good sprinkler coverage cannot be pro-
vided in the raised floor space and gaseous agent protection is needed,
as, again, few want to run the risks of partial protection.

Protecting just the space beneath a raised floor with a gaseous

CARDCBlX system is not easy. It was particularly difficult with Halon 1301 due to
the rapid discharge and relatively low concentration used. Loss of agent
became more acute.

This is not so with carbon dioxide. The 50% design concentration

4801 Southwick Drive used is at least twice that required to extinguish open burning, so the
Third Floor time required to ensure complete extinguishment is reduced. Remember,
Matteson, IL 60443 the higher the concentration, the shorter the soaking period needs to be.
Telephone: 708/748-l 503
Fax: 7081748-2847
D 1996 CHEMETRON FIRE SYSTEMS, all rights reserved. (9196)
CHEmETROn
Fire System; co2 Application Bulletin
Computer Operations Bulletin #0600 Page 2

The carbon dioxide can be applied gently in a Application Methods

manner and with equipment that will minimize loss
from the space as described below.
Per NFPA No. 12, underfloors are classified as
miscellaneous electrical hazards and require a mini-
mum design concentration of 50%. It is vital to point
out that since underfloors are usually a smaller vol-
ume (under 2,000 cubic feet), a flooding factor of 0.1
pound of CO, per cubic foot (10 cubic feet per pound
of CO,) must be used. Even in those cases where the
underfloor is larger than 2,000 cubic feet, it is advis-
able to use the 0.1 pound of CO, per cubic foot fac-
tor.
Due to the inherent problem of excessive leakage
associated with underfloors, it is best to be generous
when calculating the CO, quantities required. An
additional 20% of CO, should be added to compen-
sate for leakage.
Due to particular problems associated with under-
floors, a special approach must be used when flood-
ing them with CO,. There are two methods of apply-
ing CO, into underfloors. These methods are called
by the type of nozzle used in the application - the
radial nozzle method and the spot nozzle method.
Spot Nozzle Method: The spot nozzle method is
used in almost every case where the underfloor being
protected constitutes the entire protected hazard, and
is not part of a total hazard consisting of the under-
floor and the room above it. This approach was
developed to offset the effect of the perforate< floor
tiles, as well as equipment and cable openings.
The sketch below shows a typical underfloor
system using spot nozzles.

- A Note About Detection

With the computer room ventilated at a

rate of 60 to 75 air changes per hour and with
most of this air passing through the raised
floor space, the use of detectors in this space
presents many problems of selecting type,
spacing, and location. A fire in an underfloor
r
c,(2

1
could be detected first by the room detectors
or by detectors in the equipment. NFPA Stan-
dard No. 75, Protection of Electronic Com-
puter/Data Processing Equipment, calls for an -L I
early war&g smoke detection system to alert
personnel to a fire problem. Its design param-
eters would be different from a system used The purpose of using spot nozzles in underfloors
for extinguishing system release. Therefore, is to achieve a good circulation of the CO, with a low
we shall not discuss this problem here as it is velocity discharge. This is accomplished by using
one that transcends the scope of this bulletin. 5 Yz nozzles mounted horizontally and, in effect,
However, most of the underfloor CO, flooding gently laying the CO2 into the underfloor.
systems use the required smoke detection for
warning and use manual release for the CO,
flooding. Rate compensated thermal detectors
can provide back-up automatic detection.
CHEmETROn co 2 Application Bulktin
Fire Systems

Computer Operations Bulletin HI600 Page 3

This sketch shows the proper installation of In those situations where the underfloor is of
spot nozzles in underfloor areas. an irregular shape, it is best to divide the under-
floor into a separate volume per nozzle and use
teach volume to calculate its particular nozzle flow
r-ate.

The sketch below illustrates a typical under-

floor system in an irregularly shaped space.

The following guidelines are used whenever

spot nozzles are used in underfloors.

The nozzles shall be aimed so that the dis-

Ll
1
tance from any nozzle to a wall, cable bun-
dle, or any other impediment shall be a minimum
of 20 to 25 feet.

The nozzles shall be aimed so that a gentle

cl
2
circulation of CO, is achieved throughout
the hazard. / i
I

The nozzles shall be slighty angled down

cl
3
from the horizontal and mounted just below
the floor.
The nozzle discharge rate should be be-
I4
tween 35 and 45 pounds per minute.
Based on an underfloor height of 1 foot, the
I6 nozzle spacing should be approximately 30
feet between nozzles and 15 feet from a wall.
All underfloor areas will not be of a size and
shape to allow the recommended spacing to be
used. In instances where the nozzle spacing must
be closer than that recommended, the flow rates
should be changed proportionately.
60 p_/
It must be stressed that even though the rec-
ommended nozzle spacing and flow rates cannot
always be followed, it is important to achieve a
low velocity discharge that will allow for a gentle
circulation of CO, throughout the hazard.
Radial Nozzle Method: Where there are
minimal openings, or when the room above is also
protected with a gaseous system, radial nozzles
can be chosen.
The recommended flow rate for radial nozzles
used in underfloors is 25 pounds per minute per
nozzle orifice. Therefore, a 4-port radial nozzle
should have a maximum discharge rate of 100
pounds per minute.
CHEmETROn
Fire Svstems co2 Application Bulktin
Computer Operations Bulletin #0600 Page 4

The nozzles should be spaced approximately When the room above and the underfloor are
40 feet apart and 20 feet from a wall. flooded simultaneously, the discharge rate per
nozzle orifice may be increased. However, it is
The most commonly used radial nozzle will be suggested that the rate not exceed 50 pounds per
the 4-port, although 2-port and l-port radial noz- minute per orifice. At this rate, a $-port radial
zles will be used in situations where the shape of nozzle would flow 200 pounds per minute, which
the underfloor shows it to be practical. In those would still fall within the flow capacity of 1 inch
underfloor areas where the recommended nozzle pipe.
spacing cannot be followed due to size andlor
shape, the radial nozzles may be placed closer Raised floor stanchions may be used to sup-
together and the discharge flow rate adjusted port the CO, piping only if they are securely fas-
proportionately. tened to the subfloor and are of sufficient
strength.
The radial nozzle affords the opportunity to
orient the orifices to direct the CO, discharge most This sketch shows the installation of a radial
effectively. If there are openings in the floor near nozzle in the underfloor area.
the perimeter of the room, a CO, discharge aimed
directly at the wall will be deflected up and out - RAISED FLOOR
the openings into the room, causing excessive loss
of agent. The orifices should be directed to strike
the wall at an angle.

The sketch below illustrates a typical under- STAF\ICHION

floor system using radial nozzles.

SUBFLOOR

/- SINGLE

FOUR
PORT

PORT
RADIAL

RADIAL
NOZZLE

NOZZLE

No matter which method is used in underfloor

protection, the key to an efiective system is a
low velocity discharge. If the recommendations
set forth are followed, a low velocity discharge will
1 be achieved, resulting in a thorough mixing of CO,
60 within the underfloor without causing excessive
losses through openings in the raised floor.
ICHEmETROn Fire Systems co 2 Application Bulktin

Computer Operations Bulletin #0600 Page 5

Ventilation Safety Considerations: If the protection

Obviously, for the underfloor flooding system
to be effective, the ventilation must be shut down.
For most systems, it is mandatory that the venti-
lation be shut down first and the discharge de-
layed to ensure a near static condition before the
CO, is applied.
Remember the fans in the equipment will
exhaust the gas from the underfloor If
Ly ;:::::,;.,.,..I
system is well designed, little CO, will escape from
the underfloor space into the room and a reduced
oxygen level will not be a problem. Since the CO,
is 1.5 times heavier than air, any leakage from the
underfloor space to the room above should remain
near floor level.
However> it is recommended that the same
safety precautions be used as for any other CO,
system. See NFPA Standard No. 12 for a discus-
slon of same.
Remember that after a discharge, it will be
necessary to exhaust the gas from under the floor
after the fire has been extinguished. The building
ventilation system is generally not the best nor
safest way to do this. A plan for this should be
included in your fire protection planning.
CHErnETROII
Computer Operations Bulletin #0605

Fire System;
CARBON DIOXIDE FIRE SUPPRESSION -

co2 Automated
Systems For Computer
Information Storage
Operations

In trocfuc tion

The introduction of computer tape storage in cartridges and the

automated handling of same has substantially changed the method of
storing data off line and the time required to access it. Such a system
is the Storage-Tek 4400 Automated Cartridge System by Storage Tech-
nology Corporation, illustrated in the accompanying drawing. Other
systems such as the Memorex Telex 5400 Automatic Tape Library
perform similar functions.

The key to the ready customer acceptance of such systems is the

tremendous amount of data that can be stored for quick access at low
cost. The Storage Tek 4400 System, for example, can store approxi-
mately 6000 cartridges in each library storage module (LSM). With
200 megabytes of data on each cartridge, each LSM can store 1,200
gigabytes of vital information. Several LSMs can be coupled together

a
CL for larger operations.

It is suggested that the non-computer professional, who is inter-

ested in fire protection planning for such a system, familiarize him/her-
self with the system by obtaining copies of the manufacturers bro-
chures, which are very well done.

With the very large amount of data located in one concentrated

enclosure, the potential for substantial monetary loss in case of a fire
is very high, even though the likelihood of fire is very small. Some
units require as much as 19 KVA of power (Memorex Telex Large
Unit) and are not built for easy access in the event of a fire. Manual
cARDo!x fire fighting would be difficult. Therefore, the manufacturers have
recommended internal fire protection systems.

It is preferable to locate the tape storage units, which represent

4801 Southwick Drive a significant fire loading, outside of the computer room. The units
Third Floor are designed to allow for remote storage and can even operate in the
Matteson, IL 60443 dark.
Telephone: 7081748-I 503
Fax: 7081748-2847
Q 1996 CHEMETRON FIRE SYSTEMS, all rights reserved. (S/96)
CHEmETROn
Fire Systemi
Computer Operations Bulletin #0605
However, since cable access is through a raised
floor and some units (i.e., 4400 ACS) require instal-
lation in a computer type environment (controlled
temperature and humidity), locating this equipment
in the computer room is common.
Fire Pro tee tion Choices
Because it was common practice to protect
computer rooms with Halon 1301 total flooding sys-
tems, together with the usual proximity of computer
and ACS equipment, and the similarity of the inter-
nal fire hazard, it was only natural that Halon 1301
internal flooding systems be chosen when this equip-
ment was first offered.
That was before the Montreal Protocol and sub-
sequent events. Protection now requires the use of
halon alternatives. As of this writing (1994) CO, or
FM-200 are logical alternatives to consider. The
CO, approach is more cost effective.
Storage Technology Corporation has indicated
that, as far as the equipment is concerned, use of
carbon dioxide (CO?) for fire protection should pre-
sent no problems.
Since the units contain some semi-enclosed
equipment and many nooks and crannies, the use of
a 3-dimensional agent has a big advantage over
water, which is 2-dimensional.
Reducing the risk of releasing water in a com-
puter environment is another reason for using a
gaseous extinguishant.
However, if the area in which this equipment is
installed is sprinklered, sound fire protection practice
would be to extend coverage inside the storage
modules to back up any gaseous agent protection.
Remember that a gaseous agents primary function
is to protect continuity of operation of the facility,
while sprinklers are to protect the equipment and
facility from a catastrophic loss. Therefore, they are
not mutually exclusive of one another.
co 2 Application Bull&in
Page 2
CO, As A Fire Extinguishant
The type of combustible protected in this appli-
cation is solid surface burning, which tests have
shown does not become deep-seated burning. In
true deep-seated burning, the fire burrows into the
combustible, covering itself with the ash of the
burned material. For such a fire to be extinguished
with a gaseous agent, the agent has to penetrate the
burning material mass to reduce the oxygen level at
the combustion to a point where the generation of
new heat from ongoing burning is less than the heat
loss from the burning mass to surrounding materials.
At this point cooling occurs, with eventual extin-
guishment. If the open burning (flaming) is just sup-
pressed, not totally extinguished, then some form of
overhaul must be a part of the fire system planning.
Most systems are best designed to allow for extin-
guishment by the system. However, tests have
shown that the higher the extinguishing concentra-
tion, the faster solid burning materials, deep-seated
or not, will be extinguished. While it is impractical
to design FM-200 protection with higher concentra-
tions than those needed for flame extinguishment, it
is not so with CO:. Higher CO, concentration levels
will accelerate extinguishment.
This is not new technology. For years many
other CO1 applications used higher CO, levels (thus
reducing 0: levels) to effect quicker extinguishment.
For example, the standard CO, design method for
internal protection of metal clad switchgear calls for
a 3 minute discharge with high CO, levels. The
combustibles in these cabinets are cables, arc guides,
molded plastics, etc., not dissimilar to the combusti-
bles we are discussing here.
CO, Calculation Method Recommended For
The Library Storage Modules
For a typical unit, we have a gross volume of
approximately 688 cubic feet for the LSM. There
are some ventilation openings on the side, small
cable openings in floor, and openings to adjacent
LSMs if two or more are coupled together.
CHEmErRon
Fire System;
Computer Operations Bulletin #0605
Based on tests and considerable experience de-
signing CO, extinguishing systems, we have deter-
mined the CO, discharge required to flood the mod-
ule to a satisfactory level for suppressing surface
fires. involving solid materials when this level is held
for 3 minutes or more.
The 3 minute discharge approach is consistent
with the IRI Interpretive Guide P-6.2 Para. 2-3.5.5.
Reasons For An Extended Discharge
If it is necessary to maintain an extinguishing
concentration for some time, i.e. if the power cannot
be cut off, and the enclosure being flooded cannot be
sealed well enough to hold the initial discharge, the
answer is an extended discharge. This normally
involves two separate gas supplies (initial and ex-
tended) and separate discharge piping and nozzles,
an extra expense. But is an extended gas concentra-
tion holding time necessary?
The reasons for needing an extended holding
time are:
l A continuing source of ignition. Often, if a fire
is of an electrical nature, malfunctioning electri-
cal protective devices are involved. If they do
not clear an electrical fault, protection must be
continued until some other method of power
disconnect is used. During this time total extin-
guishment is not possible and the gaseous agent
serves as a fire stop to prevent fire from spread-
ing from the source of the electrical fault to
other equipment.
l There is a tight bundling of cables or similar
material, requiring some time for the agent to
penetrate the bundle; or time is needed for the
fire supporting oxygen in the air spaces between
the cable components to be consumed by the
fire.
l There is a desire to ensure a full level of protec-
co2 Application Bulletin
Page 3
tion until operating personnel have time to re-
spond to the system actuation.
Our analysis of the equipment protected here is
that deep-seated fires are unlikely. Power cut-off
can be accomplished through the fire system control
panel and/or a pressure operated switch. And there
is little bundling of combustibles to be concerned
about.
Therefore, our approach here is to extend the
initial discharge for a time period longer than nor-
mal. rather than use a separate extended discharge.
Therefore, rather than discharging CO2 for 1 minute,
it is continued for 3 minutes.
All that this arrangement necessitates is adding
CO1 in storage, while eliminating the need for addi-
tional equipment and added piping.
For those wanting an extended discharge this
can. of course, be provided and Chemetron would
provide such in an appropriate design.
Safety Considerations
The big concern with CO, is that the non-toxic
but inert gas will reduce the oxygen level in occu-
pied spaces to the point where it would be hazardous
to personnel.
The safety aspects of the protection must be
fully considered. NFPA Standard No. 12 Carbon
Dioxide Extinguishing Systems is an excellent
reference source for this.
In this case, we consider that the worst case
condition is that the CO, discharged inside the mod-
ule will totally leak from same, be picked up by the
room air conditioning and then circulated and mixed
in the air that serves the room in which the module
is installed.
CHEmETROn
Fire System; co2 Application Bulletin

Computer Operations Bulletin #0605 Page 4

There is really no difference here than if the
space under the raised floor were to be protected by
C02, which has been done for many years. (For this
application refer to Chemetron Bulletin #0600, Pro-
tection of Spaces Beneath Raised Floors.)
It is recommended that the CO, discharge be
odorized. It is also recommended that the system be
arranged to prevent automatic discharge without
warning when someone is inside a module.

The NFPA Electric Generating Stations Com- S ys tern Arrangement

mittee voted to accept CO1 for underfloor protection
A CO, flooding system is illustrated on the ac-
in control rooms when calculations showed that CO,
companying drawing.
discharged underfloor could not contaminate the
control room due to the relative volumes involved.
The recommended practice of protecting each
module with a separate system would be unaffected.
A CO, safety level calculation is as follows:
However, a group of interconnected modules could
be protected as a common hazard to save costs of
Per Figure A-2-1(B) of NFPA Standard No.
duplicate controls. (We would calculate the safe
12, 19% 0, is 9 % COZ, obtained by a flooding
CO, level accordingly.)
factor of .012 lb. per cu.ft.
Chemetron Fire Systems will be pleased to
Therefore, 100 lbs. of CO, could develop a 5%
discuss details of controls, provide a description on
CO, level if totally and completely mixed in a room
how a CO? discharge can be odorized with a winter-
and module totaling 8,333 cubic feet (32.3 x 32.3
green smell. help make the CO? calculations required
x 8).
above, or assist in evaluating this type protection.
An 0, monitor could be provided to monitor
room conditions.
CHEmETROn
Computer Operations Bulletin #06 7 0

Fire System;
CARBON DIOXIDE FIRE PROTECTION -

Computer Room Fire

co
2 Protection for the 1990s

While the development of new computer equipment and associated

software programs has placed a greater burden on the central computer
to maintain continued operation of businesses and vital processes, fire
protection for these facilities has been forced to undergo a radical
change due to environmental concerns.

The incidence of major fires in such facilities is rare, but the ability
to continue vital operations without the aid of the computer continues
to diminish. Chemetron Fire Systems has addressed the problem of
providing active fire protection for the central computer with a scheme
that not only prevents the possibility of catastrophic loss, but is also
people compatible and environmentally acceptable.

Code documents outlining electronic computer protection recom-

mendations and requirements, such as National Fire Protection Associa-
tion (NFPA) Standard No. 75 and British Standard Code of Practice
BS6266, are also being revised to reflect current concerns. Chemetron
Fire Systems has addressed the requirements and recommendations
outlined in these documents as well.

Protection requires concern for the occupancy of the room in which

the computer is installed. It is important to ensure that it is not a
victim of a fire involving its host building. The success of fire sprin-
klers in the control of office, plant, and laboratory fires is being proven
every day. Such protection dictates full building sprinkler coverage,
not spot protection.

4801 Southwick Drive Fires involving computer equipment, starting small and evolving
Third Floor slowly, require early detection that can result in their extinguishment
Matteson, IL 60443 simply by removal of power or use of a hand-held fire extinguisher.
Telephone: 708/748-l 503
Fax: 7081748-2847
0 1996 CHEMETAON FIRE SYSTEMS, all rights reserved. (9196)
CHEWlETROll
Fire Systemi
Computer Operations Bulletin #06 10
Relatively inaccessible portions of the computer
room and its facilities, such as the space beneath the
raised floor, the interior of automated information
storage systems, and possibly some equipment enclo-
sures, necessitate special fire protection.
This bulletin details the innovative advantages
and features of the solutions that Chemetron Fire
Systems recommends for these protection needs.
Sprinkler Pro tee tion for Computer Areas
Providing automatic sprinklers throughout the
computer area ensures against a catastrophic loss.
The reliability of sprinkler systems is well established
and incidents of accidental water discharge from such
systems are extremely rare. However, Chemetron
Fire Systems has recognized that computer operations
managers are concerned about the effects of water on
computer equipment. This is addressed by incorpo-
rating a Double Interlock Pre-Action Sprinkler Sys-
tem as part of the Protection for the 1990s concept.
Sprinklers are installed to light hazard occupancy
standards or to the requirements of the Authority
Having Jurisdiction. A separate fire detection sys-
tem, electrically operated and utilizing Chemetronics
Series 600 heat detectors, is designed to detect a fire
before a sprinkler head has operated. Electrical detec-
tion of the fire releases water to the first stage of the
pre-action valving while manual extinguishment of the
fire is attempted. If the fire progresses to where a
head operates, the air in the sprinkler piping (which
serves to supervise the piping) is released; water
flows into the sprinkler piping and is discharged from
the open sprinkler(s).
Neither accidental operation of the pre-action sys-
tem valving nor accidental operation of the heat
actuated fire detection system can result in release of
water. But a significant fire can be quickly control-
led by the sprinklers when both electrical detection
and sprinkler heads are operated, thus ensuring
against a major loss.
co2 Application Bull&in
Page 2
Under floor Pro tee tion
In the 1960s, the popular choice for protecting
the space beneath the raised floor of a computer room
was total flooding with carbon dioxide. This was re-
placed with the advent of Halon systems, which
totally flooded the entire room, underfloor included.
However, in the concept of Protection for the
1990s as outlined here, protection of the underfloor
space by gaseous agent flooding is vital.
W/r]) the need for protection ? Fire incidents in-
volving wiring, cables, debris, etc., in the underfloor
space are rare. But tests have shown that if ignited,
the combustibles beneath the floor can generate sig-
nificant fires. With the vital computer equipment in-
stalled directly over, and often receiving its cooling
air from, the underfloor space, this exposure without
some form of fixed fire suppression is unacceptable.
Installation of an early warning detection system
will provide early identification of a problem under
the raised floor. But what to do about it? Shut down
the room ventilation and possibly shut off the power?
Yes, but how do you find and deal with a fire in a
smoke filled space thats often thousands of square
feet in area? Hand portable extinguishers would only
be effective if the agent could be applied directly to
the seat of the fire. Its unlikely this could be easily
located.
However, if carbon dioxide flooding fills the
entire underfloor space to an extinguishing level and
this inerted atmosphere is maintained to ensure extin-
guishment of any deep-seated burning material,
theres no need to pinpoint the exact location of the
fire. The entire space is protected.
W@ Carbon Dioxide? While total flooding of a
normally occupied space with CO, is to be avoided,
the amount of CO, used to flood just the raised floor
space, even if distributed throughout the computer
room, should not present a personnel risk.
CHEmETROn
Fire Systems
Computer Operations Bulletin #06 10
CO, is the most efficient gaseous agent avail-
able for extinguishing deep-seated burning materi-
al fires. It is dry, three dimensional, and will sur-
round and easily penetrate cable bundles. It will
not break down in an electrical fire and it is a
nonconductor
Good design of the CO, underfloor flooding
system will ensure that most of the CO2 discharg-
ed is retained under the floor.
Why be concerned with system design? A to-
tally effective CO, underfloor flooding system is
one where the CO, discharged is properly distrib-
uted, effectively applied, and retained in the space
as long as possible. Since the gas is much heavier
than air and the underfloor space resembles a
large tub, why should this be difficult?
To achieve the flooding concentration within
the code-specified time period, high discharge
velocities have often been used. This fast moving
stream of CO, gas can deflect off cables, structure,
walls, etc., and exit through the myriad of ventila-
tion openings in the floor. Too much of the gas
ends up in the room and not under the floor, re-
sulting in inadequate protection. This, however,
is not necessary. Chemetron Fire Systems and its
predecessor companies have developed innovative
techniques to ensure efficient gas application and
retention in the protected space. This is covered
by Computer Operations Bulletin #0600, Protec-
tion of Spaces Beneath Raised Floors.
Cabinef & Specialized Enclosure Protection
The presence of ultra-important cabinetized
computer components and modern automated in-
formation storage systems in the computer room
may necessitate specially designed protection.
Automatic sprinklers, while excellent backup pro-
tection cannot operate quickly enough to prevent
major damage in case of fire. Equipment cabinets
or enclosures prevent room sprinkler water dis-
charges from reaching internal fires.
Cabinet or enclosure configurations may pre-
co 2 Application Bulktin
Page 3
vent effective portable extinguisher use, or their
size may necessitate agent requirements that
exceed the extinguishing capacity of portables.
Internal gaseous agent flooding, with detection
matching the protection needs, is the answer. For
environmental reasons, carbon dioxide is the agent
of choice.
Cabinet Protection: A question usually
raised with CO, cabinet flooding is: Is it effective
and would an inadvertent CO, discharge have a
detrimental effect on the protected equipment?
The best published tests verifying CO,s effec-
tiveness and lack of detrimental side effects were
those done at the Allianz Centre for Technology,
Mumch, Germany2.
Designing cabinet protection, due to varied
cabinet openings and extensive ventilation require-
ments, involves factors not properly covered by the
CO, system standards. Chemetron Fire Systems
Engineering has the experience to help develop
proper design parameters for effective cabinet
protection. For further information, see Computer
Operations Bulletin #0615, Critical Computer
and Electrical Control Cabinets.
Automated Information Storage Systems:
These systems, mounted on the raised floor and
configured so that a number of units can be nested
together, centralize the storage of large amounts
of data. The loss of this data in a fire could be
catastrophic for the business owner. Internal
protection utilizing carbon dioxide flooding sys-
tems is particularly effective in quickly extinguish-
ing expected internal fires.
Testing of a typical unit to establish the CO,
discharge requirements, verify lack of detrimental
effects on the equipment or stored data, and estab-
lish proper safety procedures has been done. Ap-
propriate information on the use of CO2 to protect
these units is covered by Computer Operations
Bulletin #0605, Automated Information Stor-
age Sys terns.
CHEmETROn
Fire Systems
Computer Operations Bulletin #06 10
Good fire protection practice dictates that the
computer room sprinkler system be extended into
the automated information storage system (AISS)
modules to back up the CO, flooding system. The
CO, system utilizes its own smoke detection sys-
tem for actuation. Actuation of the CO, system
will also initiate release of the water in the sprin-
kler piping within the protected area. The sprin-
kler system design is usually based on Ordinary
Hazard, Group 1 occupancy.
When no gaseous agent room flooding system
is installed in the computer room, it is especially
important to identify critical equipment requiring
special attention to ensure that proper protection
measures are provided. Such protection may be
an essential part of Protection for the 1990s.
Detection
Early detection of fire in the computer room
is another essential part of the Protection for
the 1990s concept. If a fire, such as one involv-
ing smoldering electrical equipment, is detected in
its incipient stage, it can often be extinguished
simply by cutting off the electrical power source,
or by the application of CO, from a hand portable
extinguisher.
An early warning detection system in accor-
dance with NFPA Standard No. 72 is required.
New technology to identify and pinpoint the loca-
tion and type of fire is constantly evolving. Cheme-
tron Fire Systems remains on the leading edge of
this technology.
co2 Application Bulktin
Page 4
Use of aspirating type detection, such as the
Cirrus IFD with its ability to function in high air
flow situations, can be an important part of the
detectlon scheme. However, we do not recom-
mend using this type of detection to actuate the
fire protection system.
Smoke detectors, cross-zoned ionization and
optical detectors can serve as the actuating meth-
od for the underfloor flooding and automated in-
formation storage system automatic protection. It
may or may not be as a part of the overall early
warning detection scheme.
The development of the detection plan by an
experienced and qualified professional is mandato-
ry to ensure proper detection without false actua-
tions.
Critical Facilities
A fire risk analysis of critical facilities that
must be occupied may indicate the need for a peo-
ple compatible gaseous agent room flooding sys-
tem. -4 Chemetron system using FM-200 will fulfill
this need. Detailed information is available on
same from Chemetron Fire Systems or one of our
engineered systems distributors.
Underfloor Studies, Hazards Control Depart-
men t, Cniversity of California Lawrence Liver-
more National Laboratory.
Fire and Extinguishing Tests on Computer
Equipment, Allianz Loss Control Service, Mu-
nich, Germany, September 1987.
 Computer Operations Bulletin #06 15

Fire System6
CARBON DIOXIDE FIRE SUPPRESSION -

co2 Protecting Critical

Electrical Control Cabinets

Computer &

For many years, recognition of the importance of the continuous

operation of critical computer and electrical control facilities has placed
a high priority on the fire protection planning of same. The result has
been very few major fire losses.

Much of this success can be traced to the use of better fire detec-
tion, as well as the universal acceptance of protecting these facilities with
Halon 1301 flooding systems, backed up by pre-action sprinklers.

Although the use of Halon 1301 is now being phased out due to
environmental concerns, there is no need for these critical operations to
accept a significantly lower level of fire security.

When halon was used, the entire computer room was flooded,
including the space beneath the raised floor. This ensured that the three-
dimensional gas reached all potential points of fire origin, especially
those within the cabinets of the computer equipment. Without room
flooding, how can these critical internal areas be protected? Sprinkler
discharges on the outside of the cabinets wont do the job.

Since very little of the actual volume of the room is occupied by

the equipment itself, if a fire protection gas application could be confined
to just the interior of critical component cabinets, much less gas would
be needed. Room flooding would not be necessary to maintain the
higher level of protection.

CARIX!X It should be noted that cabinet flooding systems were used before
halon room flooding systems proved their worth. These utilized carbon
dioxide (CO,), and they were combined with carbon dioxide flooding of
the space under raised floors. This resulted in using little enough CO,
that concentrations throughout the occupied portion of the room were not
4801 Southwick Drive
high enough to create a personnel hazard. At the same time, critical
Third Floor
components, such as central processors and hard-to-reach areas in
Matteson, IL 60443
underfloor spaces, had engineered fixed fire suppression.
Telephone: 7081748-I 503
Fax: 708/748-2847
D 1996 CHEMETRON FIRE SYSTEMS, all rights reserved. (9196)
CHEmETROn
Fire System;
Computer Operations Bulletin #06 15
A major user of such protection was the U.S.
Navy, whose design standard (Tech Note 38) called
for CO, flooding of cabinets over 100 cu.ft. and
underfloors over 2,000 cu.ft.
The use of CO, for cabinet flooding was not
without problems, however. One concern was the
inherent cooling caused by a CO, discharge. When
a cylinder of COZ, stored at 70F, is discharged,
approximately 18% of its contents will be discharged
as dry ice particles at -109F. These very cold parti-
cles - although they quickly sublime to gas - will
refrigerate the air in the cabinets. If the components
are cooled below the dew point, moisture (distilled
water) will precipitate on their surfaces, requiring that
the equipment be de-energized and dried before re-
turning it to service. On a number of installations,
this was dealt with by adding heat to the CO, dis-
charge to have it vapor only; however, this vaporiz-
ing equipment added substantially to the cost and
maintenance of the system. Managing the inherent
cooling and its effects is a more practical approach.
Another concern was the possibility of a buildup
of static electricity. As it is well known that dis-
charging an ungrounded CO, fire extinguisher can
create a high potential for static electricity, there was
also fear that this could be the case on a fixed pro-
tection system discharge. However, extensive expe-
rience on grounded, fixed CO, systems has shown
this to be an unfounded concern.
Determining the basis for the system design for
CO, cabinet flooding was another problem. The
NFPA Standard for carbon dioxide extinguishing
systems specified a 50% CO, design concentration for
Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment, with a need to
hold this concentration long enough to ensure total
extinguishment. Some interpreted the combustibles
involved to be of a deep-seated burning nature, re-
quiring the CO, holding time to be the minimum 20
minute time specified in Standard 12 for deep-seated
fires. Holding 50% CO, in a cabinet for 20 minutes
obviously would result in an impractical system.
co2 Application Bulktin
Page 2
In the last 20 years, we have fortunately learned
many things that make CO, cabinet flooding more
practical today. The problems have not all gone
away, but most have become manageable.
We owe a debt in this regard to a test program
done in Europe by Allianz Loss Control Services,
Munich, with the report, Fire and Extinguishing
Tests on Computer Equipment, as published by
TELA Versicherung AG, Munich, reporting on same.
They tested extinguishment of computer equip-
ment fires in a number of configurations, demon-
strating that CO, discharges quickly extinguished the
fires with concentrations well under 50%, and in a
very short time period as well. The result: A devel-
oping consensus that the combustibles present are
more surface burning and that reasonable CO, appli-
cation times will suffice.
A major insurer has indicated that holding a 50%
CO: concentration for 3 minutes, with the power shut
down, is a reasonable basis of design. We agree.
Ideally, we would like to be able to put just
enough CO, in a cabinet to reach 50% and then have
it stay there. However, with the equipment setting on
a raised floor, cooling air discharging into the cabinet
bottom, and cabinet ventilation openings at the top
and sides, the task of flooding the cabinet with CO,
gas in such a way that most of the gas is kept inside
is not easy.
In the recent testing of a component of an auto-
mated information storage system, we were faced
with cooling air from the floor and component fans
on the sides, plus significant uncloseable openings
near both the top and the bottom. The only hope of
retaining the CO, within the enclosure was a gentle,
billowing discharge that distributed the CO, cooling
as much as possible without forcing the CO2 out the
openings.
CHErnETROII
Fire Systemg co 2 Application Bull&in
Computer Operations Bulletin #06 1.5 Page 3

We found a way to dissipate energy from the dis-
charge and use air flow to help retain the discharge.
This was possible because of new nozzles developed
since the earlier days of cabinet flooding.
The results obtained in full discharge testing indi-
cated good CO, retention. Metal components cooled
only to where they were cool to the touch, but show-
ed no moisture condensation. No damage to equip-
ment, tapes, or data was detected.
Evaiua ting Pro tee tion of
Specific Equipment
To properly evaluate the protection of a specific
piece of equipment, the operator should obtain the
following:
I. Drawing or photographs of equipment showing ar-
rangement of internal components, cabinetry. and
ventilation openings in the cabinet.

This is just one example. Cabinet designs vary 2. Dimensions (overall).

so much that there can be no canned approach to
protection. Proven techniques can be employed, but 3. Amount and direction of forced ventilation.
testing may be necessary to finalize a design.
Then identify any specific conditions which must
We are planning to test the protection of a critical be met or dealt with in the protection, such as:
cabinet with one side of the enclosure missing -
again using another new nozzle technique. A contin- Power cannot be shut down, even in an emergen-
CJJ.
uous discharge should result in CO? retention in the
enclosure. A 3 minute discharge will undoubtedly
result in substantial cooling, but will be more than Electrical clearances that must be maintained.
adequate for fire protection.
Special conditions of equipment operation.

This information, together with an overall room

Fire De tee tion
plan showing location of the unit(s) to be protected,
A very important component to cabinet protection should be referred to the Chemetron Fire Systems
is a revision in the approach to fire detection. Earlier Engineering Department. whose staff is experienced
cabinet flooding systems were dependent on smoke in this phase of carbon dioxide fire protection.
detectors mounted at the room ceiling for detection.
This resulted in slow, nonselective responses, with
extinguishment of unnecessarily large fires. Now, TELA American, 1500 Summer Street,
with the sophisticated sampling type detectors, selec- Stamford, CT 06905 l-203-359-9927
tive detection in the very early fire development
stages is possible. The result: Early gas application
with easier extinguishment and less damage to equip-
ment .

In summary, the marriage of new detection tech-

niques with new CO, application methods offers the
potential to provide practical, cost-effective cabinet
protection.
 Computer Operations Bulletin #0620

FM-200 FIRE SUPPRESSION

-

Automated Information

FM-100 Tape Storage Systems

The desire to use FM-200 for the protection of Auto-

mated Information Storage Systems usually results from owner
preference and often relates to the use of FM-200 for protec-
tion of other parts of the computer complex. A Chemetron
bulletin on the use of carbon dioxide in this application is
available for comparison. A properly designed system can be
provided using either agent. FM-200 flooding of the interior
of the storage enclosure will not create an atmosphere within
that is hazardous to personnel.

Need for Fire Protection

In the development of NFPA Standard No. 75, Fire Pro-

tection for Electronic Systems, there was a concern
Computer
over the increased fire-loading in a computer room when the
storage of computer tapes was done using a modern auto-
mated storage system. The Standard had made a point of
reducing records storage in this area. As a result of appropriate
study, the Standard Committee accepted this method of
storage provided the units were protected as follows:

b Per Paragraph 6.1.4: AISS units containing combustible

media shall be protected by automatic sprinklers within
each unit.

. Exception No.1 : This

requirement does not apply to an
AISS unit or units that have an aggregate storage capacity
of 27 cu. ft. or less.

. Exception No. 2: Where the unit is protected by a gaseous

agent extinguishing system with an extended discharge.

Note the need for an extended discharge when using a

4801 Southwick Drive gaseous agent system. Guidelines for such a discharge were
Third Floor established previously for other agents and are applicable here
Matteson, IL 60443 as discussed below.
Telephone: 7081748-l 503
Fax: 708/748-2847

0 1998 CHEMETRON FIRE SYSTEMS, all rights reserved. (6/98)

FM-200 IS A REGISTEREDTRADEMARK OF GREAT LAKES CHEMICAL CDRPORATION
 CHEmETROn
Fire Systemi
Computer Operations Bulletin #0620
Design Requirements
The FM-ZOO gas requirement is figured on
the basis of Chemetrons FM-200 Total Flood-
ing System approvals. Initially, it is necessary
to do normal flooding of the enclosure with
FM-200.
This requirement works out to be 23 Ibs.
to establish this initial fire extinguishing con-
centration. This initial discharge must be aug-
mented with additional gas to establish the
soaking period required to ensure total extin-
guishment.
The initial flooding will take place over 10
seconds time, but with protected enclosures
having uncloseable openings near the top and
the bottom, the gas will not be retained. There-
fore, an extended discharge is needed. (Refer-
ence NFPA 2001, Paragraph 3-7 as follows.)
Paragraph 3.7 - Duration of Protection: lt
is important that an effective agent concentra-
tion not only shall be achieved, but also shall
be maintained for a sufficient period of time to
allow effective emergency action by trained
personnel. This is equally important in all class-
es of fires, since a persistent ignition source
(e.g., an arc, heat source, oxyacetylene torch,
or deep-seated ftre) can lead to resurgence of
the initial event once the clean agent has
dissipated.
In order to determine the extended dis-
charge rate, we used the loss rate that had
been determined by testing for Halon 1301.
Then adjusting for the greater gas density of
FM-200, we calculated the loss rate at 7% FM-
200. This turns out to be 43.7 Ibs. per minute.
(Reference Paragraph A-4-7.2.3 of NFPA 2001
as follows.)
FM-200Application Bulletin *
Page 2
Paragraph A-4-7.2.3 - Enclosure Integrity
Testing: If the authority having jurisdiction
wants to quantify the enclosures leakage and
predicted retention time, Appendix 9 of NFPA
12A, Standard On Halon 1307 Fire Extinguish-
ing Systems, may be used. Adjustment to the
existing formulas must be made to account for
differences in gas density between Ha/on 130 7
and the proposed alternate extinguishing agent.
Specifically, Equation 8 in paragraph B-2.7.1.4
of NFPA 72A (7997 edition) must be modified
by substituting the alternate agents gas
density (in kg/m3) for the existing value of
6.283, which is the value for Halon 130 1. See
Appendix B of this Standard.
Following the guidelines of holding a con-
centration in this type of equipment for 3
minutes with the power shut off, or 10 min-
utes with the power on, proper design would
be an initial discharge of 29 Ibs. followed by an
extended discharge of 132 Ibs. over 3 minutes.
Power shutdown, normally expected by built-in
smoke detectors provided for this purpose,
would also be initiated by the FM-200 system.
Whereas paragraph 4-7.2.2.10 of NFPA
2001 does not recommend a discharge test,
such a test on one unit, when multiple units
are involved, is recommended.
References to ensure a proper system are
paragraphs 3-3.2 and 3-3.3 of NFPA 2001, as
follows.
Paragraph 3.3.2: The area of uncloseable
openings shall be kept to a minimum. The
authority having jurisdiction may require
pressuriza tion/depressurization or other tests to
assure proper performance as defined by this
Standard.
 CHElllETROn
Fire System;
- I
Computer Operations Bulletin #ID620
Paragraph 3.3.3: To prevent loss of agent
through openings to adjacent hazards or work
areas, openings shall be permanently sealed or
equipped with automatic closures. Where rea-
sonable confinement of agent is not practica-
ble, protection shall be extended to include the
adjacent connected hazards or work areas.
A major source of loss could be the pass-
throughs where tapes can be transferred from
one silo to that adjacent. Units abut each other
so a pass-through becomes an opening for
each enclosure. Beyond the concern expressed
in reference Paragraph 3.3.3 above, design for
the gas loss is mandatory. The design figures
given above are based on a worst case sce-
nario, where there will be three (3) such open-
ings. Even if a unit is installed by itself, or with
one or two adjacent units, and thus there are
less than 3 openings, the system should still be
designed to allow for future facility expansion
without the need for redesign of the FM-200
system.
IMPORTANT
The type and placement of nozzles is
important. The sidewall nozzle, located
below the ventilation openings and placed
so that the discharges impinge on one
another, will help retain the gas inside the
enclosure during the discharge.
FM-200 Application Bulletin
Page 3
Inter-Exposing Hazards:
If a fire should occur in one AISS unit, it
is entirely likely that products of combustion
will pass through the interconnecting openings
to the adjacent unit(s). This would activate the
protection in the other unit(s) also. If a com-
mon FM-200 supply with selector (directional)
valves was to be used, the discharge would be
split, resulting in an inadequate amount of gas
in either unit. Fire suppression would be un-
likely.
Therefore, separate systems for each unit,
are required.
As an alternate, if multiple units are
nested together, a single system can be em-
ployed to flood all simultaneously. One of our
customers has four modules connected to one
another and protected them as a common
hazard. The FM-200 gas requirement would be
the same as for 4 individual systems, with only
larger cylinders required and but a single set of
controls. The disadvantage would be recharge
costs if the system would ever actuate.
The accompanying drawing illustrates the
protection system recommended and described
herein.
NOTE
The specific information in this bulletin
refers to the Storage Tek 4400 Tape
Storage Silo. Protection of other similar
storage systems will require an analysis
similar to that contained herein, resulting
in larger or smaller systems. Chemetron
Fire Systems Engineering group is avail-
able to assist in this analysis.