Conservation DistList Archives [Date] [Subject] [Author] [SEARCH]

Subject: Fire suppression systems

Fire suppression systems

From: Thomas Dixon <dixon-tom<-a>
Date: Tuesday, October 25, 2011
On behalf of Matthew Siegal, Susanne Gansicke <sgansicke [at]
mfa__org> writes

>I would like to inquire if anyone is using a wet-pipe sprinkler
>system (versus a pre-action system) for fire suppression in
>exhibition galleries.
>
>Would you refuse loans on the grounds that the borrower had a
>wet-pipe system?

Wet pipe sprinkler systems are the gold standard because in most
cities in public buildings often crowded with visitors they are
required by law. No other system has 100+ years of history of
working every single time except where pipes were broken by freezing
or earthquake or valves turned off. The last time I checked the
statistics with Ton Cremer, a leading expert in this field, the best
pre-action systems had a 20% failure rate- slightly worse than
Russian Roulette. Gas systems cannot be relied upon in large areas
or those where public may be present. I witnessed the failure of a
gas system to put out a fire in a relatively small and enclosed
area.

The use of gas or other systems may be appropriate in non-public
areas such as small storage, electronics and I.T. rooms where if the
system fails to operate the fire and combustion products can be
contained by fire-rated construction or in the surrounding areas
sprinklers will function independently to contain the fire long
enough for people to escape. However, in public areas where 100's or
1000's of lives are at stake wet pipe sprinklers are the only
sensible choice- and due to building regulations, in most cases, the
only choice.  It is essential to knock the fire down before large
amounts of smoke can be generated- a matter of very few minutes- as
the smoke and volatilized materials can kill large numbers of people
very quickly. An early warning smoke detection system is critical-
if an alarm is raised and pinpoints the fire while it is still small
quick action with hand held fire extinguisher or fire blanket can
deal with it.

Wilbur Faulk, then head of security at Getty, some years ago showed
a film clip of the Director of a Historical Museum standing in front
of his building with flames coming out the windows being interviewed
by TV news: when asked why there weren't sprinklers he replied
because conservators said they might damage the works of art.  I
have since visited, among other fire sites, a university library
where the collection was largely destroyed by smoke and volatilized
materials and the vast amount of water poured into the building by
4" hoses from several fires trucks- a fire originating in a single
computer that would have been put out by one sprinkler keeping
damage to a limited physical area but for similar advice. Thankfully
both fires occurred after hours and no one was killed.

I would not only not refuse loans of art works on the grounds the
borrower had a wet pipe system, I'd require it along with a state of
the art early warning smoke detection system monitored 24/7 and for
very valuable works, 24/7 human attendance.

The comprehensive book on painting conservation to be published
early in 2012 has a section regarding this subject which I authored
in consultation with fire, security and insurance experts.

Thomas Dixon
former Chief Conservator, National Gallery of Victoria (retired)

Susanne Gansicke <sgansicke [at] mfa__org> writes

>I would like to inquire if anyone is using a wet-pipe sprinkler
>system (versus a pre-action system) for fire suppression in
>exhibition galleries.

Ellen Carllee has written a good comparison of fire suppressions
systems for the Alaska Museum.  See

    <URL:http://ellencarrlee.wordpress.com/
        2009/03/19/fire-suppression-systems/>

    **** Moderator's comments: The above URL has been wrapped for
    email. There should be no newline.

See also the Disaster preparedness and response page in CoOL:

    <URL:http://cool.conservation-us.org/bytopic/disasters/>


                                  ***
                  Conservation DistList Instance 25:22
                 Distributed: Monday, October 31, 2011
                       Message Id: cdl-25-22-003
                                  ***
Received on Tuesday, 25 October, 2011

[Search all CoOL documents]