1. Smoke and Heat Venting in Sprinklered Facilities Dr. Craig Beyler

2. Value of S&HV’s in Sprinklered Facilities Improved visibility (and reduced heat and toxic gases) life safety/egress firefighter access Eliminates the need for manual venting by the fire department Reduced heat and smoke damage

3. Concerns with S&HV’s in Sprinklered Facilities Potential negative impact on sprinkler performance Cost effectiveness

4. Smoke and Heat Venting

5. Sprinklers Alone

6. Combined Sprinklers and Vents: Ideal Scenario

7. State of Knowledge S&HV’s in Sprinklered Facilities 1950’s to the present Full-scale fire tests Reduced-scale fire tests Mathematical modeling

8. Sprinkler/Vent Fire Tests 1.1955 Armor Research Foundation reduced scale testing (1:8), pool fires 2.1956 FM, 120’ X 60’, spray fires 3.UL 1964, wood cribs, cardboard, and plastics 4.1974 FM Reduced Scale (1:12.5), 20’ X 16’, vertical tri-wall cardboard array, ganged spray nozzles

9. Sprinkler/Vent Fire Tests 5.1977 IITRI, 75’ X 25’, pallet fires 6.1992 FRS/Colt, 150’ X 60’, controlled pool fire (Ghent) (ganged vent ops) 7.1997 NFPA RF, 100’ X 100’, UL ventilated facility, - spray fires (growing fires up to 10 MW) - rack commodity fires (20’ high Group A Plastics in double row racks)

10. Findings 1.Vents improve visibility and reduce exposure to smoke and heat (1-6) 2.Thermally activated vents do not open in large numbers so that manual operation of vents by FD is generally needed as well (3- 5, 7) 3.Venting does not interfere with sprinkler performance (2-7) 4.Full scale sprinkler tests with suppressible fuels are not reproducible (5,7) 5.FDS can predict well the thermo-fluidic environment and sprinkler operation, but not suppression (7)

11. FDS Prediction of Sprinkler Operations First ring operation time: ±15% Second ring operation time: ±25%

12. FDS Simulations of Performance of S&HV’s in Sprinklered Facilities Goal: Evaluate venting performance and effect on sprinkler operations Findings: 1. Venting had no effect on sprinkler operations 2. Venting improved smoke conditions 3. Additional vent area is beneficial

13. Plan View of the Modeled Building

14. No Smoke and Heat Vents Visibility Distance at 600 sec.

15. Four S & HV’s Operating Visibility Distance at 600 sec.

16. 16 S & HV’s Operating Visibility Distance at 600 sec.

17. Ganged Vent Operation Concept Operate all vents within a sprinkler system area (~40,000 sq ft) one minute after first sprinkler operation using a water flow alarm device Approach supports remote manual operation of vents by FD as well Model with FDS to evaluate system performance

18. Computational Domain (two 40,000 sq ft sprinkler systems)

19. Smoke Remaining in the Building No S&HV, No DC S&HV, No DC S&HC, with DC S&HV, with DC (Beams ) No S&HV, No DC S&HV, No DC S&HC, with DC

20. Visibility Distance (ft) at 10 Minutes Without smoke and heat vents and without draft curtains With smoke and heat vents and without draft curtains

21. Visibility Distance (ft) at 15 Minutes Without smoke and heat vents and without draft curtains With smoke and heat vents and without draft curtains

22. FDS Modeling Findings Ganged vent operation concept is highly effective in mitigating heat and smoke hazards Ganged vent operation has no impact on sprinkler effectiveness

23. Path Forward Incorporate new findings in NFPA 204, Standard for Smoke and Heat Venting in Fall 2009 cycle Propose adoption of NFPA 204 in IBC in next edition (as has already been done with NFPA 92B (atria etc.))