Report on Fire SuppressionResearch

for High-Density Storage Facilities

Roberta PiletteDirector, Preservation DepartmentYale 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

HD Library Facility vs Warehouse

Project Development

• June 2005 Informal gathering of preservation librarians to

determine next stepsColumbia University Harvard

UniversityLibrary of Congress University of

ChicagoUniversity of Michigan Yale UniversityUniversity 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 heads Transverse 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.

• By adding 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’

Slides from FM Global tests

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 Fuller

david.fuller@fmglobal.com

Thank you roberta.pilette@yale.edu