SEARCH Archives
Loading
Sponsored by:

Retro-commissioning guidance: Fire and life safety

While starting from scratch on a not-yet-built structure can be taxing, engineering systems on existing buildings presents a unique set of challenges. Here, experts in the field offer advice on how to best make such systems fall into place, particularly fire and life safety systems.

08/20/2012


Participants (left to right):


Kenneth D. Hahn, CxA

Division Manager 

RMF Engineering

Baltimore 

David J. LeBlanc, PE

Vice President

Rolf Jensen & Assocs. Inc.

Framingham, Mass.

Ali Mahmood, PE 

Manager, Chicago Operations Group 

Stanley Consultants 

Chicago 

Stephen R. Wiggins

Associate Partner, Commissioning Group

Newcomb & Boyd

Atlanta


CSE: What unique fire suppression systems have you specified in retro-commissioning projects?

LeBlanc: For existing buildings we have designed and commissioned various fire protection and life safety systems: fire alarm, sprinkler, standpipes, special suppression systems, special detection systems, hazardous material monitoring systems, fire pumps, water mist systems, and smoke control system modeling and performance criteria. 

CSE: How have the costs and complexity of fire protection systems changed in recent years? 

LeBlanc: The cost and complexity of the fire protection and life safety changes have been on the rise over the recent years, due to increased complexities of the buildings, which have necessitated more integrated and complex fire protection and life safety systems. The building codes continue to allow more performance-based solutions, which allows greater flexibility in the design of the buildings but oftentimes requires more complex fire protection and life safety system solutions. Furthermore, new fire protection and life safety products are ever increasing, along with an increase in the allowable communication pathways for fire protection systems. Development of an integrated test plan, in accordance with NFPA 3, is critical in outlining the test scenarios to verify proper performance of the various integrated fire protection and life safety systems in meeting the owner/project goals and objectives.

CSE: What are some important factors to consider when designing a fire and life safety system? What things often get overlooked? 

LeBlanc: Many fire protection and life safety systems sit there for months or years waiting for an event to happen, and when it does you want that previously idle system to perform as originally designed and intended. [You need to perform a] detailed review of when systems activate, but also a review when systems are not supposed to activate. For example, activation of an atrium smoke control system upon a non-atrium sprinkler water flow can have the disastrous effect of pulling remote smoke from a fire through your entire building to the atrium. Obviously, this is not the intended or desired goal, but these types of scenarios have happened in buildings due to the lack of coordination and oversight. During design and construction phases, independent third-party review and special inspection of smoke management/control systems are commonly overlooked. Other common oversights include proper system supervision, timing and feedback of sequences, and the requirement for automated weekly self-testing of dedicated smoke control systems. The proper coordination, integration of the various fire protection and life safety systems, commissioning, and integrated testing of these systems still remains the biggest challenge in meeting the owner/project goal and objective.

CSE: Has NFPA 3 affected your retro-commissioning projects? How so? 

LeBlanc: First, this document is the first time integrated fire protection and life safety systems have to actually be commissioned at the same time and the integration tested. The industry and owners were very inconsistent with these integrated systems and the commissioning of these systems. Use of NFPA 3 for fire protection and life safety systems has started standardization of terminology, process, expectations, and roles. Large property owners, universities, and various U.S. federal government agencies are increasingly adopting NFPA 3 for commissioning of their fire protection and life safety systems. Currently under development is the new NFPA 4, which will further change commissioning in both existing and new buildings. 

Wiggins: No, our practices pretty much matched up well with the new guide.



No comments
The Top Plant program honors outstanding manufacturing facilities in North America. The 2012 Top Plant winners have been named.
In 2012, Plant Engineering's Product of the Year program will celebrated its 25th anniversary. Read about the 2012 winners and nominate for 2013.
The Leaders Under 40 program features outstanding young people who are making a difference in manufacturing. View the 2012 Leaders here.
Investment in excellence: One plant's improved productivity and quality was repaid when their company expanded the facility
Strategic uptime, Increased capacity goes right to the bottom line
2013 Forecast Issue: A shift in manufacturing
Case Study Database

Case Study Database

Get more exposure for your case study by uploading it to the Plant Engineering case study database, where end-users can identify relevant solutions and explore what the experts are doing to effectively implement a variety of technology and productivity related projects.

These case studies provide examples of how knowledgeable solution providers have used technology, processes and people to create effective and successful implementations in real-world situations. Case studies can be completed by filling out a simple online form where you can outline the project title, abstract, and full story in 1500 words or less; upload photos, videos and a logo.

Click here to visit the Case Study Database and upload your case study.

Alarm management tips, Power management, Building automation
Estimating data center PUE, Design tips for cost savings, Networked controls, NFPA 70E
Attacking Energy Costs: Strategies for showing financial return on energy management investments

2012 Salary Survey

In a year when manufacturing continued to lead the economic rebound, it makes sense that plant manager bonuses rebounded. Plant Engineering’s annual Salary Survey shows both wages and bonuses rose in 2012 after a retreat the year before.

Average salary across all job titles for plant floor management rose 3.5% to $95,446, and bonus compensation jumped to $15,162, a 4.2% increase from the 2010 level and double the 2011 total, which showed a sharp drop in bonus.

2012 Salary Survey Analysis

2012 Salary Survey Results


Poll of the Week

What category most helps you select new products?
Recommendation from colleagues
Product of the Year winners
Supplier information
Trade show visit


Click Here for Poll Archives
Sponsored by:

About Us | Contact Us | Advertise | Subscribe to Magazine | Site Map | Privacy Policy
Home | Channels | New Products | Media Library | Connect | Industry News | Events and Awards | Newsletters | Blogs | Magazine
Control Engineering | Plant Engineering | Consulting-Specifying Engineer
All content copyright © 2010-2013 CFE Media. All rights reserved.