Fire Sprinkers

[Dick Seibert]

For those who now have to install fire sprinklers in freezing climates, you now have to insulate your sprinkler pipes, you can't use antifreeze:

In discussions with ABI Investigator Tony Guevara it appears that Mr.
Wuliber Martinez was apparently cooking (frying) onions in a frying pan over the stove (electric) when it caught fire, and as he turned around (180-degrees) to the kitchen sink with the flaming frying pan to put water on the fire and the fire sprinkler activated directly over him and upon activation a violent explosion resulted. As a result of the fire and explosion it was noted that eight (8) of the ten (10) residential sprinklers within the unit activated.

In addition, his wife 27-year old lsela Minutti was apparently standing in the Dining Room/Living Room area (adjacent to the Kitchen counter) and the resulting burns/explosion caused her death. According to footprints on the rug in the Dining Room/Living Room she was approximately 5- to 7-feet from the initial sprinkler that activated over the kitchen sink. From where her body was found when rescuers arrived, she fell toward the window in the Living Room which was blown outward.

......while attempting to extinguish the flames, the fire sprinkler directly above him activated, discharging a solution of glycerine-based antifreeze which was ignited by the flames coming from the burning onions in the frying pan and the resulting explosion of the glycerine solution cause fatal burn injuries to his wife, Islesa Minutti, Age 27 -years; and burn and blast injuries to him and their three (3) children; ages 12-years, 7-years, and 10-days old.¹

In response the NFPA is now requiring all systems with antifreeze be drained and new installations be insulated pipe:

News release
July 6, 2010 – The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) today issued a safety alert recommending that residential fire sprinkler systems containing antifreeze should be drained and the antifreeze replaced with water. The alert follows a research study and an initial set of fire tests conducted after a fire incident raised concerns about antifreeze solutions in residential sprinkler systems. The incident involved a grease fire in a kitchen where a sprinkler with a high concentration of antifreeze deployed. The fire resulted in a single fatality and serious injury to another person.²

Apparently putting sprinklers over a fire with antifreeze in them is like filling the sprinkler system with gasoline. It's strange, the NFPA has consistently said "Never put water on a grease fire or use a fire extinguisher on a grease fire", even in this article telling us we can't use antifreeze but have to insulate our sprinkler pipes, yet the13D systems that they have promoted into the codes have sprinkler heads over stoves.



¹ http://www.sierrasun.com/assets/pdf/SS61631222.PDF
² http://www.nfpa.org/itemDetail.asp?c...4&itemID=48038

[BeachBoy]

Dick, a couple of comments on this story.

In kitchens, the sprinkers are not generally installed in proximity to the stove because of the issue of spraying water on a grease fire.

It would have taken a lot of heat over a period of time to set off the sprinkler. I'm not sure there would be enough grease in an 8" pan of onions to do that.

If he had gotten to the sink (which he apparently did, according to the report) with the burning pan and dumped water in it, there would have been an explosion. I wonder if this is what really happened. If you pour water in a burning pan of grease, as I understand it (and I'm not an expert...) the grease floats on the water, the water turns to steam in what is essentialy a steam explosion, the grease gets atmomized by the steam explosion, and it then ignites in a flash explosion. Not good.

I wonder what set off the other sprinkler heads? I wouldn't think it could have been heat, but it could have been the concussion from the steam / atomized grease explosion.

It does appear that spraying atomized antifreeze in an environment with a flame is a bad idea and can cause it to burn. Probalby was never a good idea. Sounds like a lack of good System Enginering to me! ;-)

(Fortunately it doesn't get cold enough here to need antifreeze in the sprinkler pipes. But I think I'll go look at my kitchen sprinkler heads and see where they are located!!!)

[BeachBoy]

P.S. In my kitchen the two sprinker heads are located at each end, not in close proximity to the stove. One is located almost above the sink. The heads are recessed. In order to set off the sprinkler, the bottom cover, which is soldered to the body, must get hot enough to melt the solder, then the bulb needs to get hot enough to boil what is inside to break the bulb.

Lesson to be learned:
- Understand how dangerous a grease fire can be and why you never put water on a grease fire.
- Have the correct fire extinguisher for a grease fire handy. Had the gentleman had and used the correct extinguisher, there would have been no explosion.

Personal Responsibility... Head out to HD today and pick one up if you don't have one

[Dick Seibert]

Beach:

Unfortunately a 13D system mandates a sprinkler head over the stove, I argued this back when we were fighting the sprinkler mandate, the fire people claimed that a "misting head" should be installed over the stove rather than a regular head; however, the code doesn't say anything about "misting heads.

If you read the entire report you will have seen that there was an alomst identical situation in New Jersey in 2001:

In researching the use of antifreeze solutions in fire sprinkler systems a similar activation and explosion occurred on October 28,2001 at 5:21 p.m. at the Windandsea (Wind and Sea) Restaurant, 56 Shrewsbury Avenue. Highlands, New Jersey. According to the Fire Investigation Report, prepared by the County of Monmouth Office of the Fire Marshal, 1027 Highway 33, East, Freehold, New Jersey 07728 [Phone (732-938-5323], the structure was a three (3) story wood frame building. The second and third floors were protected by an antifreeze type 2 fire sprinkler system.¹

I once built an Oakland school, in the cafeteria kitchen the steel sprinkler pipes were routed well around the halon protected huge gas range, I recall asking the FPE why even the steel pipes had to be diverted about 12' away from the range, he stated that it was so important that water not get on the range in the event of a grease fires that they couldn't take the chance that the black steel pipes would melt dumping water on a grease fire. Now we've come to a 13D mandate that plastic pipe and water heads be installed over ranges.

My purpose in posting this here on the estimating forum is to inform people estimating homes with sprinkler systems to figure pipe insulation in freezing areas.



¹ http://www.sierrasun.com/assets/pdf/SS61631222.PDF

[DonMirabito]

Dick,
This is both sad and interesting at the same time. The article doesn't really give us a definite picture of what really happened. Was there an explosion based purely on the grease fire water mix or did the sprinkler system activate and cause the fire/explosion? I'm sure some sort of forensics can determine what really happened.

An interesting question in my mind is that there are clearly some "engineering issues" that need to be worked out. Like perhaps its not such a good idea to put flammable antifreeze in your sprinkler system. I'm sure there are code interpretation issues, product installation issues, etc. that are also in need of being addressed and I don't want to re-hash all the old objections to sprinkler systems here as that is not entirely my point. My real question/point is given that the NFPA is basically operating as an industry trade group and they promoted what is now code mandated sprinklers to be included in new home construction despite objections from building trades groups, insurance companies, etc. isn't it possible/probable(?) that someone could bring a lawsuit against the NFPA for propagating a design/code without it being fully vetted by solid engineering and testing in a proper fire safety lab thus resulting in this horrible accident? If that were so, I'd bet that the NFPA would be a little more cautious in promoting such things until they have some real objective data to support their position.

Don

[Dick Seibert]

Don:

From what I get from reading the report, the man was frying onions and a grease fire started in the pan, he proceeded to take the pan to the sink, as he was walking with the flaming pan it set off a fire sprinkler above dumping water on the pan, the antifreeze solution exploded for chemical reasons having to do with the weight of antifreeze and the weight of water.

Building codes are initiated by "stakeholders" some of those stakeholders are commercial interests, in this case it was the fire sprinkler industry and their Residential Fire Sprinkler Coalition" , it was estimated by the NAHB that fire sprinkler sales would amount to $5.6 billion a year based upon 2005 building volume. The only organized opposition was the NAHB, their opposition was based upon added costs, a deal was cut trading off other building costs for tract homes, like reduced side yards to get more homes in subdivisions, elimination of fire walls, allowing roof trusses and I Joists to remain legal without the proposed fire proofing, etc.

The Coalition paid the expenses of fire people to represented communities, they flooded the convention hall, voted in fire sprinklers and ran off to the girls in the hospitality suites and rooms paid for by the Coalition, NAHB opposition was token at that point, their costs were actually going to be lower than if they didn't have to put sprinklers in.

I doubt that anybody can be sued on it, the FBI was supplied copies of the bribe offers, they sent out FOI requests to many fire people who accepted the bribes and apparently decided not to pursue it. So it's law, like it or not, several states are striking it from the code, Texas did the best job, they not only struck it they passed a law making existing fire sprinkler ordinances in communities illegal.

The 13D requirement was a minimum foot-in-the-door requirement, they will add now insulation to pipes, full coverage, separate meters etc. until they get them up to full 13 systems including routine professional maintenance.

[DonMirabito]

Dick,
You understand this legal stuff better than I do, but IMHO there is nothing more insidious than having a group posing as experts in fire prevention that in reality are nothing more than marketers for a given product industry who use their clout to enact laws/codes that force people to buy their products when there doesn't appear to be objective data to support the need for said products. I mean what a fantastic marketing scheme. Force people to buy your stuff whether they need it or not by making it the law!!!
So, if they are going to play that game where I don't have freedom of choice then why can't I bring suit against them when their product fails to do what it is supposed to do??? There are already various consumer product safety laws designed to protect people from unscrupulous marketers/vendors.

Don

[Dick Seibert]

Don:

Want to see something absurd, look at this chart, this from a Canadian government study addressing a cost benefit analysis for mandatory regulations, $38 million per life saved, vs. something like a $100,000 per life saved for automobile steering wheel protection. If the goal is to save lives there are much better places to put our money.

[DonMirabito]

Dick,
Thanks for that...sigh...we are sooooo screwed....the inmates are running the asylum.

Don

[Unforgiven]

In commercial environments we use a 'dry system' to sprinkle cold zones, like attics or porticos. This has to be a better approach than using anti-freeze. A dry system simply means that the pipes are filled with compressed air until a head is actuated, then the system fills with water. I don't know the NFPA rules behind dry systems, but again it has to be better than propylene glycol.