report of the committee on nonvoting civil engr university, russia michael … · 2016-03-28 ·...

Report of the Committee on

Alternative Protection Options to Halon

Phillip J. DiNenno, Chair Hughes Assoc. Inc., MD

Jef f L Harrington, Secretary Harrington Group, Inc., GA

William M. Carey, Underwriters Laboratories Inc., IL Json S. Casler, Fike Protection Systems, MO

alvatore A. Chines, Industrial Risk Insurers, CT Rep. Industrial Risk Insurers

Logan T. Fidler, Ansul Fire Protection, FL Rep. Halon Alternative Research Corp.

John Fore.acre, St. Paul Companies, IL William J. Fries, Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., MA

Rep. The Alliance of American Insurers Ello Guglielmi, North American Fire Guardian Tech. Inc., Canada Alankar Gupta, Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, WA David H. Kay, U.S. Dept. of the Navy, DC George A. Krabbe, Automatic Suppression Systems Inc., IL Rep. Fire Suppression Systems Assn.

James D. Lake, Nat'l Fire Sprinkler Assn., NY Michelle Maynard-Collins, Nat'l Aeronautics & Space Admin., FL Robert C. Merritt, Factory Mutual Research Corp., MA Karen Metchis, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, DC Daniel W. Moore, The DuPont Company, DE William j . Pearson, Cerberus Pyrotronics, NJ

Rep. National Electrical Manufacturers Assn. John A. Piguato, Jr., 3M Co., MN W. Douglas Register, Great Lakes Chemical Corp., IN William J. Satterfield, Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection & Insurance Co., CT Joseph A. Senecal, Fenwal Safety Systems, MA Clifford IL Sinopoli, Baltimore Gas & Electric, MD Rep. Electric Light Power Group/Edison Electric Inst.

Louise C. Speitel, Federal Aviation Administration, NJ Steven W. Stone, CIGNA Loss Control Services Inc., "IX

Rep. American Insurance Services Group, Inc. Robert E. Tapscott, New Mexico Engr Research Inst., NM Tim N. Testerman, Procter & Gamble, OH Stephen B. Waters, Fireline Corp., MD

Rep. Nat'l Assn. of Fire Equipment Distributors Inc.

Alternates

Kerry M. Bell, Underwriters Laboratories Inc., IL (Alt. to W. M. Carey)

Robert L. Darwin, U.S. Dept. of the Navy, DC (Alt. to D. H. Kay)

William A. Froh, U.S. Dept. of Energy, DC (Vot. Alt. for DOE Rep.)

David B. Hampton, MCI Communications, TX (Vot./kit. to MCI Rep.)

Christopher P. Hanauska, Hughes Assoc., Inc., MN (Air. to P.J. DiNenno)

James P. Hebert, Universal Fire Equipment Co., TX (Alt. to S. B. Waters)

Lorne MacGregor, North American Fire Guardian Tech., Inc., Canada

(Alt. to E. Guglielmi) Jeffrey F. Moore, Fike Protection Systems, MO

(Alt. toJ. s. Casler) MichaelJ. Prowse, Cerberus Pyrotronics, NJ

(Alt. to W.J. Pearson) Paul E. Rivers, 3M Co., MN

(Alt. toJ. A. Pignato,Jr.) Todd E. Schumann, Industrial Risk Insurers, IL

(Alt. to S. A. Chines) David C. Smith, Factory Mutual Research Corp., MA

(Alt. to IL C. Merritt) Al Thornton, Great Lakes Chemical Corp. TX

(Alt. to W. D. Register) Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc., NC

(Alt. to G. A. Krabbe) Joseph A. Wright, Federal Aviation Administration Tech Ctr., NJ

(Air. to L. C. Speitel)

Nonvoting

Anatoly Baratov, Civil Engr University, Russia t i e Bjarnsholt, Ginge-Kerras, Denmark Michael John Holmes, Preussag Fire Protection Ltd., England Peter F. Jolmson, Scientific Services Laboratory, Australia DouglasJ. Pickers ga'B, Fire and Safety. Systems,. Australia. Fernando V'tgara, Vimpex - Security Dewses, SA, Spain

Staff Liaison: Mark T. Conroy

This list represents the membership at the time the Committee was balloted on the text of this edition. Since that time, changes in the membership may have occurred.

Committee Scope: This Committee shall have primary responsibil- ity for documents on alternative protection options to Halon 1301 and 1211 fire extinguishing systems. It shall not deal with design, installation, operation, testing, and maintenance of systems employing carbon dioxide, dry chemical, wet chemical, foam, Halon 1301, Halon 1211, Halon 2402, or water as the primary extinguishing media.

This portion of the Technical Committee Report of the Committee on Alternative Protection Options to Halon is presented for adoption.

This Report on Comments was prepared by the Technical Committee on Alternative Protection Options to Halon and documents its action on the comments received on its Report on Proposals on NFPA 2001-1993, Standard on Clean Agent Fire Extinguishing Systems as published in the Report on Proposals for the 1995 Fall Meeting.

This Report on Comments has been submitted to letter ballot of the Technical Committee on Alternative Protection Options to Halon, which consists of 30 voting members; of wlmm 22 voted affirmatively, 3 negatively (Messrs. Chines, Pignato, and Stone), 1 abstained (Mr. Fidler), and 4 ballots were not returned (Messrs. Foreacre, Hampton, Pearson, and Satterfield).

Mr. Chines voted negatively stating: "I have voted negatively on the ballot although I strongly believe

the bulk changes worked on would enhance the document and are needed at this time. There are several problems with die proposed update to this standard. The first is the lack of calculation information and the second is the committee's decision to allow design concentrations above the NOAEL An incapacitated person in an enclosure protected by any clean agent at appropriate design concentrations should be able to survive the approximate 10 minutes it takes for trained help to arrive and remove them. They should experience NO adverse effects from the agent.

In September of 1992 I presented appendix material to the cornmittee regarding calculation procedures. Paragraph 4-7.2.2.10 discourages discharge testing. At that time there was very little written information on the calculation procedures. The calculation procedure was supposed to be open and generic, in that the same procedure would be used for all agents if at all possible. The material I presented to the committee discussed the two-phase calculation method adopted by bod~ NFPA 12 and NFPA ] ZA. Since the new agent data needed for this method was not available to me during tits preparation, I substituted halon data for the purpose of discussion. The committee decided to remove the existing wording and to not include my prepared information because they did not have time to review the data. The original standard got published without a description of the calculation method.

Prior to the June 1995 meeting I prepared new material for the appendix. This was discussed with the chairman several weeks before the meeting. I brought 50 copies of the prepared text to the meeting since there was not time for submittal and distribution once the final draft was prepared. It was distributed by the chairman on the second day of the meeting at noontime and was discussed near the close of the meeting. This time the material discussed two methods; the new revised HFLOW method and the NFPA 12A method. It was suggested that the new revised HFLOW method be discussed as the design method and the NFPA 12A method be discussed as an alternative method that could be used by the authorities having jurisdiction to confirm designs performed by the listed design program. The committee rejected its insertion due to strong resistance from system manufacturers. This information can build user confidence rather than "trust me."

I believe the committee is remiss in not making this information available in the standard."

201

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

Mr. Pignato voted negatively statingz "3M is generally support ive of the s tandard a n d recognizes the

impor tance to the industry for the changes included in the p roposed document . We accept all the changes except the change that occurred in the very last hou r of the three day technical commit tee mee t ing allowing the use of agents up to their Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) for Class B hazards. This is a fundamen ta l change to the s tandard made in the last stages of the s tandard cycle, a change tha t has no t had the benefi t of scrutiny via the public c o m m e n t process. T he LOAEL is the lowest concentra- t ion tested where adverse effects were seen. It is probable tha t adverse effects also occur at concentra t ions lower than LOAEL (but h igher than NOAEL).

Regretfully, since no "line i tem veto" exists, we mus t ei ther accept or reject the changes in the p roposed d o c u m e n t in total. Therefore , 3M mus t reject the d o c u m e n t for the following reasons:

1. This new t r ea tmen t permi t t ing use of agents up to their LOAEL is contrary to normal toxicological practices in that there is no allowance for a safety factor. The p roposed new s tandard would allow agen t use up to mad perhaps in excess of known toxicological limits.

2. The action dismisses the possibility that the limits we presently use for halocarbons, cardiac sensitization, and for the inert gases, hypoxia, may in fact no t be the appropria te b e n c h m a r k limits. To 3M's knowledge, no significant CNS test ing has been pe r fo rmed generally on agents included in NFPA 2001.

3. This reduct ion in safety limits in unwarran ted and is contrary to the stated purpose o f the National Fire Protect ion Association to ' improve ' fire protect ion a n d prevent ion methods . Rather , we feel this act ion to be a degradat ion to the process.

4. The d o c u m e n t now contains inconsis tent t r ea tmen t o f toxicological l imitations d e p e n d i n g on fuel type. This is no scientific basis for differentiat ion between class of fuel f rom a toxicity s tandpoint .

5. Allowing agen t concent ra t ions up to LOAEL is no t suppor ted by good fire protect ion eng ineer ing practice, may raise significant legal liability risks for those who allow it, and would create poor public safety policy.

Any one of these reasons in itself would be g rounds for reject. Again, we regret having to reject this entire d o c u m e n t due to this

one change. We know significant work went into all the o ther impor tan t changes. However, given the ser iousness of this LOAEL change in creating an u n p r e c e d e n t e d increase of risk to heal th and potential liability for all who would suppor t it, we have no alternative but to reject the document . It is ant ic ipated if this d o c u m e n t is rejected, NFPA will immedia te ly schedule an addit ional technical commit tee mee t ing to resolve this toxicity issue."

Mr. Stone voted negatively stating: "The s tandard lacks consistency on at least one major point. Tests

were presented to the commit tee indicating severe decomposi t ion of agen t on high energy a n d / o r deep seated fires. These undesirable agen t decomposi t ion results were l imited to f luorocarbon type agents, with discharge times in excess of 5 seconds and less than 10 seconds. The products o f a g e n t decomposi t ion are numerous , inc luding HF which changes to hydrofluoric acid u p o n contact with moisture. These agents may represent a heal th hazard for personnel present if d ischarged on a fire in an enclosure using these minimal design specifications. Ano the r considerat ion w o u l d b e for the e q u i p m e n t in the room exposed to acids which have evolved fxom an agen t discharge. These significant problems are currently glossed over in the appendix of the s tandard. These issues should be resolved in the body of the s tandard. Many of the f luorocarbon type agents are be ing installed to protect f lammable liquid occupancies. If installed at the cur ren t m i n i m u m design t imes and concentrat ions a severe p rob lem will eventually occur. For this reason I mus t vote Negative on the ballot."

Mr. Fidler abstained stating: "The Ha~R.C. Board of Directors have been unable to reach a

consensus directing an affirmative or negative vote on this matter."

Mr. Gugliemi voted affirmative with the following comment : "While I am casting an affirmative ballot, I do so only after a lot of

considerat ion of the options. There is m u c h work that remains to the done on this s tandard -work that should be included in this cycle. The re are several content ious issues that are be ing dealt with outside the technical commit tee, a n d these issues shou ld be debated in f ront o f and del iberated by the entire technical commit tee. Not the least of these is the topic of acceptable h u m a n exposure limits to the agents covered in the s tandard. Logs #22 and #29 which are fairly similar proposals - were treated inconsistently by the committee. It is a pity tha t this subject, and o thers equally significant, could no t have been dealt with fully in this cycle. Or, alternatively, that the cycle could no t have been adjusted (slipped) to accommoda te a more complete presenta t ion of facts, allowed by a mo re tho rough considerat ion by the commit tee of these impor tan t matters."

Ms. Maynard-Collins voted affirmative with the following comment : "The commit tee mus t establish an acceptable delta between the

NOAEL and LOAEL."

202

N F P A 2001 - - F 9 5 R O C

(Log #45) 2001- 1 - (Various): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Ole Bjamsholt, Ginge-Kerr as COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: 1. Change column in Table 2-1.4.1 Storage Container Characteristics:

W~55 (2222)

N/A Maximum fill densiv¢ for conditions

listed below (lb/ft3)

Minimum container design level working pressure (psig) 2057+

Total pressure level at 70°F (psig) 2222

Cylinders for IG-55 shall be stamped: 2060+ DOT 3A or 3AA - or greater

2. Add two new columns to Table 2-1.4.1 Storage Container Characteristics:

IG-55(2962) W,-55(4443)

N/A N/A

2743+ 4114+

2962 4443

2750+ 4120+ [

Maximum fill densi~ for conditions listed below (Ib/ft3)

Minimum container design level working pressure (psig)

Total pressure level at 70°F (psig)

Cylinders for 1G-55 shall be stamped: DOT 3A or 3AA - or greater

NOTE: Total pressure level at 70°F is calculated from filling conditions:

IG-55 (2222): 2175 psig (15 MPa) and 59°F (15°C). IG-55 (2962): 2901 psig (20 MPa) and 59°F (15°G). IG-55 (4443): 4352 psig (30 MPa) and 59°F (15°C).

3. Change clause in 2-2.1.1(e): (e) For IG-55 normally charged to 2222 psig (15.318 MPa) at 70°F

(21°C), use an internal pressure 2475 psig (130°F) (54°C) for piping upstream of the pressure reducer and use an internal pressure of 950 psig (130°F) (54°C) for piping downstream of the pressure reducer. The pressure reducing device shall be readily identifiable.

4. Add a new clause as 2-2.1 (f): (f) For IG-55 normally charged to 2962 psig (20.424 MPa) at 70°F

(21°C), use an internal pressure of 3300 psig (130°F) (54 c) for piping upsteam of the pressure reducer anduse an internal pressure of 950 psig (130°F) (54°C) for piping downstream of the pressure reducer. The pressure reducing device shall be readily identifiable.

5. Add a new clause as 2-2.1 (g): (g) For IG-55 normally charged to 4443 psig (30.636 MPa) at 70°F

(21°C), use an internal pressure of 4950 psig (130°F) (54°C) for piping upstream of the pressure reducer and use an interal pressure of 950 psig (130°F) (54°C) for piping downstream of the pressure reducer. The pressure reducing device shall be readily identifiable.

6. Add a new line to Table 3-5.1 (a) as follows: °F °C

Agents K1 K2 K1 K2 I(7-55 10.0116 0,0218 0.6685 0.00245

7. Change Table 3-5.1 (k) to read as follows:

Table 3-5.1(k) IC~55 Total Flooding Quanlity [1]

IG-55 Specific Vapor

Temp. Volume -t- S

(oF) (cu ft/lb) [31 [41

IG-55 Volume Requirements of Hazard Volume V/V (cuft IG-55/cu ft) [2] Design Concentration (% byvolume) [5]

34% 38% --40 9,14038 0,524 0,603 -30 9,35818 0,512 0,589 -20 9,57598 0,501 0,576 -10 9,79378 0,489 0,563

0 10,01158 0,479 0,551 10 10,22938 0,469 0,539 20 10,44718 0,459 0,528 30 10,66498 0,449 0,517 40 10,88278 0,440 0,507 50 11,10057 0,432 0,497 60 11,31837 0,424 0,487 70 11,53617 0,416 0,478 80 11,75397 0,408 0,469 90 11,97177 0,400 0,461

100 12,18957 0,393 0,452 110 12,40737 0,386 0,444 120 12,62517 0,380 0,437 130 12,84297 0,373 0,429 140 13,06077 0,367 0,422 150 13,27857 0,361 0,415 160 13,49637 0,355 0,409 170 13,71417 0,350 0,402 180 13,95196 0,344 0,396 190 14,14976 0,339 0 390 200 14136756 0¢334 0t384

[1] [2] [3] [4]

[5]

42% 46% 50% 54% 58% 62% ' ~ ' - 0,688 0,778 0,875 0,980 1,095 1,221 0,672 0,760 0,854 0,957 1,069 1,193 0,656 0,742 0,835 0,935 1,045 1,166 0,642 0,726 0,816 0,915 1,022 1,140 0,628 0,710 0,799 0,895 1,000 1,115 0,614 0,695 0,782 0,876 0,978 1,091 0,602 0,680 0,765 0,857 0,958 1,068 0,589 0,667 0,750 0,840 0,938 1,047 0,577 0,653 0,735 0,823 0,920 1,026 0,566 0,640 0,720 0,807 0,902 1,006 0,555 0,628 0,706 0,791 0,884 0,986 0,545 0,616 0,693 0,777 0,868 0,968 0,535 0,605 0,680 0,762 0,851 0,950 0,525 0,594 0,668 0,748 0,836 0,935 0,516 0,583 0,656 0,735 0,821 0,916 0,506 0,573 0,644 0,722 0,807 0,900 0,498 0,563 0,633 0,710 0,793 0,884 0,489 0,553 0,623 0,698 0,779 0,869 0,481 0,544 0,612 0,686 0,766 0,855 0,473 0,535 0,602 0,675 0,754 0,841 0,466 0,527 0,592 0,664 0,742 0,827 0,458 0,518 0,583 0,653 0,730 0,814 0,451 0,510 0,574 0,645 0,718 0,801 0,444 0,502 0,565 0,633 0,707 0,789 0~437 0t495 0t557 01623 0~697 0~777

The manufacturers's shall specify the temperature range for operauon. For V/V [Agent Volume Requirements (cu ft/cu ft)], refer to 3-5.2. t [Temperature (°F)] - The design temperature m the hazard area. S [Specific Volume (cu ft/Ib) ] - Specific volume of superheated IG-55 vapor may be approximated by the formula:

S = 10.0116 + 0.0218"t where t = temperature (°F)

C [Concentration (%) ] - Volumemc concentration of IG-55 m air at the temperature mdlcated.

203

N F P K 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

8. Add a new table 3-5.1(1) as follows:

Table 3-5.1(!) IG-~; Total ]Flooding Q~L~.tlty [1]

IG-55 . Specific Vapor

Temp. Volume IG-55 Volume Requirements of Hazard Volume V/V (m 3 IC~55/m 3) [2] -t- S Design Concentration (% by volume) [5]

(°C) [3]

-40 -35 --30 -25 -20 -15 -10

-5 0 5

10 15 20 25 3O 35 4O 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 8O 85 9O 95

100

[11 [21 [3] [4]

[5]

(mS/kg) [4]

34% 38% 42% 46% 50% 54% 58% 62%

0,57O62 0,58285 0,59509 0,60735 0,61956 0,63180 0,64404 0,65628 0,66851 0,68075 0,69299 0,70522 0,71746 0,72970 0,74193 0,75417 0,76641 0,77865 0,79088 0,80312 0,81536 0,82759 0,83983 0,85207 0,86431 0,87654 0,88878 0,90102 0t91325

0,524 0,603 0,688 0,778 0,875 0,980 1,095 1,221 0,513 0,591 0,675 0,761 0,856 0,959 1,072 1,196 0,503 0,579 0,659 0,746 0,839 0,940 1,050 1,171 0,493 0,567 0,646 0,731 0,822 0,921 1,029 1,147 0,483 0,556 0,633 0,716 0,806 0,903 1,008 1,125 0,474 0,545 0,621 0,702 0,790 0,885 0,989 1,103 0,465 0,535 0,609 0,689 0,775 0,868 0,970 1,082 0,456 0,525 0,598 0,676 0,761 0,852 0,952 1,062 0,448 - 0,515 0,587 0,664 0,747 0,837 0,935 1,042 0,440 0,506 0,576 0,652 0,733 0,822 0,918 1,024 0,432 0,497 0,566 0,640 0,720 0,807 0,902 1,006 0,424 0,488 0,556 0,629 0,708 0,793 0,886 0,988 0,417 0,480 0,547 0,619 0,696 0,779 0,871 0,971 0,410 0,472 0,538 0,608 0,684 0,766 0,856 0,955 0,403 0,464 0,529 0,598 0,673 0,754 0,842 0,939 0,397 0,456 0,520 0,588 0,662 0,742 0,828 0,924 0,390 0,449 0,512 0,579 0,651 0,730 0,815 0,909 0,384 0,442 0,504 0,570 0,641 0,718 0,802 0,895 0,378 0,455 0,496 0,561 0,651 0,707 0,790 0,881 0,373 0,429 0,488 0,553 0,622 0,696 0,778 0,868 0,367 0,422 0,481 0,544 0,612 0,686 0,766 0,855 0,362 0,416 0,474 0,536 0,603 0,676 0,755 0,842 0,356 0,410 0,467 0,528 0,594 0,666 0,744 0,830 0,351 0,404 0,460 0,521 0,586 0,656 0,733 0,818 0,$46 0,398 0,454 0,513 0,578 0,647 0,723 0,806 0,341 0,393 0,448 0,506 ' 0,569 0,638 0,713 0,795 0,337 0,387 0,441 0,499 0,562 0,629 0,703 0,784 0,332 0,382 0,435 0,493 0,554 0,621 0,693 0,773 01328" 0t377 0t430 0#86 0t547 0t612 0r684 0t763

The manufacturers's shall specify the temperature range for operation. ForV/V [AgentVolume R-equirements (m 3/m3)], refer to 3-5.2. t [Temperature (°C)] -The design temperature in the hazard .area. S [Specific Volume (m 3/kg) ] - Specific volume of superheated IG-55 vapor may be approximated by the formula:

S = .6685 + 0.00245"t where t = temperature (°C)

C [Concentration (%)] - Volumetric concentration oflG-55 in air at the temperature indicated. /

9. Add a new column to Table A-14.1 (b) as follows:

Units IG-55

Molecular weight N/A 33.95

Boiling Point @760 mm Hg °C -190.1

Freezing point °C -199.7

Critical temperature °C -134.7

Critical Pre*sure kPa 41.5

Critical volume cc/mole N/A

Critical density kg/m ~, N/A

Specific heat liquid @ 25°C kJ/kg°C N/A

Specific heat, vapor @ constant kJ/kg?C . 0,782 pressure (1 atrrL) & 25°C

Heat of vaporization at boiling kJ/kg 181 point

Thermal eonducti~ty of liquid @ W/m°C N/A 25°C

Viscosity, liquid @ 25°C cenfipoise N/A

Relative dielectric strength @ 1 N/A 1101 atrrL @ 7M mmHg 25°C (N 2 = 1.0)

Solubilityofwater in agent@ 21°C ' N/A 0.006%

Vapor Pressure @ 25°C kPa N/A

10. Change Figure A-2-1.4.1 (k) as follows:

2600

2500 / /

2400 J /

2soo /

2200 ¢, o. /

2100 J - / - /

2000 /Y -/ 1900

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Temperature (°F) 140

Figure A-2-1.4.1(k) Isometric diagram of IG-55 [2175 psig (15 MPa) at 59°F (15°C].

204

1~. Add the newl~are,,&:~l~(~..ee'U~" (p) =~vll,~,,v=,

18,

17.:

=.

161 ~

i , I

-20 -10 0

/ ~. .|..| . . ,n ." P~

/

s '

. . . . . . , 3

10 '2~ 3 0 46 ' 5 0 : 6 0 Temperature (~C)

atSOgL~(~°C)]. . - , : - : . "

3300

100 .

2 ~ - 0

I!11

ui. i ; I I

l i n l l l l i ! lniinnl l lU l l | i l l i l l ~ | l l l l lei l l l l l l lU i lUi l i IU lUl i l l l i l l l i l l

20 40 60 80 1.00 120 140 .

TemperAture (°F)

i ! ! ~ lUUII l l

~_JmM

I l l n l • - 4 i l l m l m E p ml

i

,J I l i l l i l l l ~ l

lillllHIII I I I I l . | l l l l l IRHllllll ;lllnniiinl

--20 - 1 0 0 " , 1 0 ~ " T ~ 440 ~ " ~

TempemtlWs (°P)

st s r t ~ t l ~ ) ] ,

51~ " ~ u ~ - ~ . ~ . ~ . ~ . ~

,~: W E l H U l l I l l l i i l i l

~7~: I B R i l i l g l ~ I l l n l l B I I ~ - i | l l | l i l ' ,

. ~ . ~ INBRNNP~ll

n i i N m m l l m i ~ n m l

I g l i | l i n l i l m ~ I l l l i l i l l l l ~ d l I l i l l i l l l l ~ l i l I I I I I l i l l ~ l l l l i | l | B | i l ~ l i i l l I l N R N I P ~ I | B I I !

I I I I I I

t i ...... t' ' t " ' ' , . . . . . I ~" - I , I-1 ] ' ! 4 1 0 0 Z / ,

38o0( L ~ L I I I ' I 0 20 40 60 80 "l(JO ', 120" ' i40

T ~ (°F)

r~gure A~2-LtJ (oy' ~ d i a ~ a m ~f lc . .~ 14s~;2 psigOo M],a) ~ . . . . . . . . . . a t~q~ (t$°C)1 . . . . .

• NFPA .2001 -- F95 ROC

A

g : 3

0..

35

34 .

33

32 : / : / 31 : /

30 / : /

29 = /

/ 28 /

27 / / 26

-20 -10 0 10 20 30

Temperature (°F)

I#

/

/ /

40 50 60

lecture A-2-1.4.1(p) Isometric diagram of IG-55 [4352 psig (30 MPa) at 59°F (15°C)].

12. Change following sentences in A-2-2.1.1 point 4: "For IG-5~systems, the calculated pressure P, must be eual to or

g~eater than: 475, 3300 or 4950 psil~ for piping upstream of thepressure

reducer 950 psig for piping downstream of the pressure reducer. The pressure values are based on a maximum agent storage

temperature of 130°F (55"C)." - 13. Change A-2-2.3.1 (e) as follows:

(e) Fittings for IG-55 systems having charging pressures shown below at 70vF (21°C) should be, as a minimum:

Upstream of the pressure reducer:. 2222 and 2962 psig systems: 3000-1b class forged steel (in all sizes)• 4443 psi~ systems: 1 in. pipes or less: 3000-1b dass forged steel Above 1 m. pipes: 6000qb cl~s forged steel . Downstream of the pressure reducer: Class 300 lalleable or ductile

iron fittings through 3 in. NPS, and 1000.1b rated ductile iron or forged steel fittings in all larger sizes. Fiangedjoints should be Class 600.

The material itemized above do not preclude the use of other . materiasl and type and style of fittings that satisfy the requirements

of 2-2.3.1. 14. Change line in B-2.7.1.4 as follows: IG-55 1,39 kg/m3 (0,087 ib/ft3) [70°F (21.1°C)] 15. Add a new line to Table A-M.2.2(a) as follows: Investiwator v

LCr_~ Warrington gwe Research (UK) 33

16. Add a new Table A-$-4.2.2(d) as follows:

TableA-3-4.2.2(d) IG-55 Extinguishing Concentrations

Cup Burner Ext'~hlng Fuel concentra e % v/v

Acetone 26.8 Dieseloil 18.2 n-Heptane ~3.0 i-Propanol (lsopropanol) 31.1 Toluene 28.2

• NOTE: Information supplied by manufacturer (Ginge- Kerr).

2O6

17. Add new line to Table A:3-4.2.2(b) as follows!

Minimum Design Conceneratlon % by Volume

OassA Surface

Clemt Agent Acetone Fires Heptmze Isopropanol

IG-55 34(d ~ 35(d ]

T o h l ~ n e

42(d~

Change Note 1 in Table A-3.4.2.2(b) as follows: NOTE 1: This data has been verified by at least one of the

following organization: (a) Underwriters Laboratories (b) Factory Mutual (c) Underwriters Laboratories Canada, in accordance with the fire

test procedure described in UL-1058A. (d) Verband der Sachversicherere. V. (Germany)

SUBSTANTIATION: Proposal for revision is submitted in order to include a new agent IG-55 in the 2001 Standard. COMMITIT, E ACTION: Accept in Principle.

1. Move Table 2-1.4.1 to appendix. 2. Add new material for IG55 to table. 3. Combine IG55 isometrics into one graph and add to A-2-1.4.1

(Figures). 4. Revise Table 3-5.1(k) and change commas to decimal points. 5. Make two tables, one for inert gases and one for Halocarbon

a~ents (Table A-1-4.1 (b)). • Move last sentence of 2-1.4.1 to appendix "Consult manufac-

turer for superpressurization levels other than.. ." 7.. Accept item 3 of submitter's recommendation but make it all

part of existing item (e). 8. Existing 2-2.1.1 (e) change "2575" to "2475." 9. Make 2-2.1.1 (c), (d), and (e) into a table. 10. Accept items 7 and 8 ofsubmitter 's recommendation. 11. Accept item 9, 12, 13 ofsubmitter 's recommendation. 12. Reject item 15, 16, and 17 of submitter's recommendation until

manufacturer submits data and report. 13. Item 6 ofsubmitter 's recommendation use:

°F °C Aizents KI K2 K1 K2 K~-55 9,8809 0,0215 0.6598 0.00222

14. Item 14 ofsubmitter 's recommendation use "141 kg/m3? ' COMMITIT~ STATEMENT: Added criteria for IG55 to the standard.

(Log #101) 2001- 2 - (Entire Document): Accept SUBMITI'EI~ Paul E. Rivers, 3M Company Specialty Chemicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-53 RECOMMENDATION: Delete all references to and indusion of HBFC-22B1 from the standard. SUBSTANTIATION: 1. An agent must be approved for total flooding applications for inclusion in this standard.

2. HBFC-22B1 is no longer in production and will be banned from production and use by the time this new document is published.

3. Remove for clarity information that is neither useful nor relevant to the standard. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #99) 2O01- 3 - (1-3.1): Accept in Pnnciple SUBMITTEI~ Paul E. Rivers, 3M Company Specialty Chemicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-27, 2001-39 RECOMMENDATION: Add definitions similar to that written in NFPA 10 for Class A, B and C fires as follows:

Class A Fires. Fires in ordinary combustible materials, such as wood, cloth, paper, rubber, and many plastics.

Class B F'|res. Fires in flammable liquids, oils, greases, tars, oil-base paints, lacquers, and flammable gases.

Class C Fires. Fires that involve energized electrical equipment where the electrical nonconductivity of the extinguishing media is of importance. (When there is the capability for electrical equipment to be de-energized, design criteria as found in this Standard for Class A or B fire scenarios may be used.) SUBSTANTIATION: Three of the four stated "typical" hazards for the use of agents in this standard as outlined in paragraph 1-4.2.3 refer to electrical and electronic hazards, telecommunications

N F P A 2001 - - F 9 5 R O C

facilities, and "other high value assets." Many of these applications involve live electrical equipment that cannot be de-energ, ized requiring different trea-txn-ent from that of Class A or B fuels. Strong indications in the literature concerning clean agent performance off energized electrical fire scenarios and private testing point to the need to further recognize the differentiation betweer/classes of fires. As an example, it is ihe charter of the power and telecommunica-

tions industries to never leave their customers without service. This means systems are designed to remain energized at all times and are not shut down, even in the event of a fire. Rather, circuits remain energized for extended periods of time until service may be rerouted to other facilities or equipment. The clean agent fire protection must be appropriately designed for extreme conditions ~uch as these. Part of ihai is recognition of the difference between Glass C fuel fires and the others. - - COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. Add proposed text without parenthetical clause.

COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Parenthetical clause provides information that should not appear as part of a definition.

(Log #46) 2001- 4 - (1-3.1 Halocarbon Agent): Accept SUBMITTER: Stephanie R. Skaggs, Pacific Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-2 RECOMMENDATION: Change the current paragraph:

Halocarbon Agent. A clean agent that contains as primary components one or more organic compounds contmnlng one or mor~of the elements fluorin-e, chlorine-, bromine, or iodine. Examples are hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbous (HCFCs), and perfluorocarbons (PFGs). To Read: Halocarbon Agent. A clean agent that contains as primary

components one or more organic compounds contmning one or moreof the elements fluorine, chlorine, bromine, or iodine. Examples are hydrofluorocarbons (HFGs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs or FCs), and fluoroiodocarbons (FICs). SUBSTANTIATION: The NFPA 2001 does not address FIC-1311, an acceptable clean agent for normally unoccupied, total flood applications (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. 26, 1994). There- fore, the standard should be changed to include FIG-1311 by providing specific information about this agent (FIC-1311), and in some cases, about fluoroiodocarbons (FICs), in general. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #44) 2001- 5 - (Table 1-4.1.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITrER: Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Add:

HFC-236fa Hexafluoropropane CF3CH2GF 3 SUBSTANTIATION: HFG-236fa is currently under development for use as a fire extinguishing agent in normally occupied areas. It has low toxicity (10 percent NOAEL), low extinguishing concentration (5.3 percent cup burner) high stability and zero ozone depletion potential. Although not fully developed, commercialization could take place before completion of the next standards cycle.

Specific Vapor

Temperature Volume (deg F) (cu ft/lb)

+ -S- 5 6

30 2.2520 0.0234 40 2.3034 0.0228 50 2.3547 0.0224 60 2.4060 0.0219 70 2.4574 0.0214 80 2.5087 0.0210 90 2.5601 0.0206

100 2.6114 0.0202 110 2.6627 0.0198 120 2.7141 0.0194 130 2.7654 0.0190 140 2.8168 0.0187 150 2.8681 0.0184 160 2.9194 0.0180 170 2.9708 0.0177 180 3.0221 0.0174 190 3.0735 0.0171 200 3.1248 0.0168

COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. 1. Add: HFC-236fa Hexafluoropropane CF3CH2CF 3

to Table 1-4.1.2. 2. Add the following to Table 3-5.1(a) (see below). 3. Add a new flooding factor table for HFC236fa as follows on next

E ~ i M I T T E E STATEMENT: Added additional data submitted by manufacturer.

(Log #47) 2001- 6 - (Table 1-4.1.2): Accept SUBMITTER: Stephanie R. Skaggs, Pacifc Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO-." N/A RECOMMENDATION: Add the following information to Table 1-4.1.2: FIC-1311 Trifluoroiodomethane CF3I

NOTE: This should be added after the row for HFC-23 and before the row for IG-01. SUBSTANTIATION: Table 1-4.1.2 does not address FIC-1311, an acceptable clean agent for normally unoccupied, total floor apphcations (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. 26, 1994). There- fore, the table should-be changed to include FIC-1311. COMMITrEE ACTION:~ Accept.

(Log #2) 2001-7- (Table 1-4.1.2 Note 2 and Note 3 (New)): Accept in Principle SUBMrITER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-4, 2001-5, 2001-6 RECOMMENDATION: 1. Revise Note 2 to read: NOTE 2: Composition of IG-01, IG-541 and IG-55 are given in

percent by volume. Composition of HCFC Blend A is given in percent by weight.

2. Add a new NOTE 3 to read: NOTE 3: Certain HCFCs and HBFCs are controlled substances and

scheduled for production phase out under the Montreal Protocol. SUBSTANTIATION: Note 2 revised to provide editorial clarification on the new inert gas agents added into this table. Note 3 NFPA 2001 shouldstrive to inform users that certain clean

ents have been regulated and subject to phase out. MMI'ITEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

1. Revise Note 2 to read as follows: "Composition of inert gas agents are given in percent by volume.

Composition of HCFC Blend A is given in percent by weight." 2. Do not add Note 3 as submitted.

COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Other inert gas agents may be added in the future. The composition will be given in percent by volume. Note 3 as submitted is inappropriate in an NFPA standard.

HFG-236fa Weight Requirements of Hazard Volume W/V (lb/cu ft) English Units

Design Concentration (% byVolume) 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

0.0283 0.0334 0.0386 0.0439 0.0493 0.0549 0.0606 0.0664 0.0723 0.0784 0.0277 0.0327 0.0378 0.0429 0.0482 0.0537 0.0592 0.0649 0.0707 0.0766 0.0271 0.0320 0.0369 0.0420 0.0472 0.0525 0.0579 0.0635 0.0691 0.0749 0.0265 0.0313 0.0361 0.0411 0.0462 0.0514 0.0567 0.0621 0.0677 0.0733 0.0260 0.0306 0.0354 0.0402 0.0452 0.0503 0.0555 0.0608 0.0662 0.0718 0.0254 0.0300 0.0347 0.0394 0.0443 0.0493 0.0544 0.0596 0.0649 0.0703 0.0249 0.0294 0.0340 0.0386 0.0434 0.0483 0.0533 0.0584 0.0636 0.0689 0.0244 0.0288 0.0333 0.0379 0.0425 0.0473 0.0522 0.0572 0.0623 0.0676 0.0240 0.0283 0.0327 0 .0371 0.0417 0.0464 0.0512 0.0561 0 .0611 0.0663 0.0235 0.0277 0.0320 0.0364 0.0409 0.0455 0.0502 0.0551 0.0600 0.0650 0.0231 0.0272 0.0314 0.0358 0.0402 0.0447 0.0493 0.0540 0.0589 0.0638 0.0227 0.0267 0.0309 0.0351 0.0394 0.0439 0.0484 0.0530 0.0578 0.0626 0.0223 0.0262 0.0303 0.0345 0.0387 0 .0431 0.0475 0.0521 0.0568 0.0615 0.0219 0.0258 0.0298 0.0339 0.0381 0.0423 0.0467 0.0512 0.0558 0.0604 0.0215 0.0253 0.0293 0.0333 0.0374 0.0416 0.0459 0.0503 0.0548 0.0594 0.0211 0.0249 0.0288 0.0327 0.0368 0.0409 0.0451 0.0494 0.0539 0.0584 0.0208 0.0245 0.0283 0.0322 0.0362 0.0402 0.0444 0.0486 0.0530 0.0574 0.0204 0 .0241 0.0278 0.0317 0.0356 0.0396 0.0436 0.0478 0.0521 0.0565

2001-5 (Log #44)

207

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

Specific Vapor

Temperature Volume (deg C) (cu m/kg)

-t- -S- 5 6

0 0.1413 0.3725 0.4517 5 0.1442 0.3650 0.4427

10 0.1471 0.3579 0.4340 15 0.1499 0.3510 0.4257 20 0.1528 0.3444 0.4177 25 0.1557 0.3380 0.4100 30 0.1586 0.3319 0.4025 35 0.1615 0.3260 0.3953 40 0.1643 0.3203 0.3884 45 0.1672 0.3147 0.3817 50 0.1701 0.3094 0.3752 55 0.1730 0.3043 0.3690 60 0.1759 0.2993 0.3630 65 0.1787 0.2945 0.3571 70 0.1816 0.2898 0.3514 75 0.1845 0.2853 0.3460 80 0.1874 0.2809 0.3406 85 0.1903 0.2766 0.3355 90 0.1931 0.2725 0.3305 95 0.1960 0.2685 0.3256

HFC-236fa Weight Requirements of Hazard Volume W/V (kg/cu m) Metric Units

Design Concentration (% byVolume) 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

0.5327 0.6154 0.6999 0.7863 0.8747 0.9651 1.0575 1 .1521 1.2489 0.5220 0 .5031 0.6860 0.7706 0.8572 0.9458 1.0364 1 .1291 1.2240 0.5118 0.5913 0.6725 0.7555 0.8404 0.9273 1 .0161 1.1070 1.2000 0.5020 0.5799 0.6596 0.7410 0.8243 0.9095 0.9966 1.0857 1.1769 0.4925 0.5690 0.6472 0.7271 0.8088 0.8923 0.9778 1.0652 1.1548 0.4834 0.5585 0.6352 0.7136 0.7938 0.8758 0.9597 1.0455 1.1334 0.4746 0.5483 0.6237 0.7007 0.7794 0.8599 0.9423 1.0266 1.1128 0.4662 0.5386 0.6125 0.6882 0.7655 0.8446 0.9255 1.0082 1.0930 0.4580 0.5291 0.6018 0 .6761 0.7521 0.8298 0.9092 0.9906 1.0738 0.4501 0.5200 0.5914 0.6645 0.7391 0.8155 0.8936 0.9735 1.0553 0.4425 0.5112 0.5814 0.6532 0.7266 0.8017 0.8785 0.9570 1.0375 0.4351 0.5027 0.5717 0.6423 0.7145 0.7883 0.8638 0 .9411 1.0202 0.4280 0.4945 0.5624 0.6318 0.7028 0.7754 0.8497 0.9257 1.0035 0.4211 0.4865 0.5533 0.6216 0.6915 0.7629 0.8360 0.9108 0.9873 0.4144 0.4788 0.5445 0.6118 0.6805 0.7508 0.8227 0.8963 0.9716 0.4080 0.4713 0.5360 0.6022 0.6699 0.7391 0.8099 0.8823 0.9565 0.4017 0.4641 0.5278 0.5930 0.6596 0.7277 0.7974 0.8688 0.9418 0.3956 0.4570 0.5198 0.5840 0.6496 0.7167 0.7854 0.8556 0.9275 0.3897 0.4502 0.5121 0.5753 0.6399 0.7060 0.7737 0.8429 0.9137 0.3840 0.4436 0.5045 0.5668 0.6305 0.6957 0.7623 0.8305 0.9003

2001-5 (Log #44)

(Log#71) 2001- 8- (1-5.1.1): Reject SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidler, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-7 RECOMMENDATION: Add paragraph:

"Agent use in any country shall be defined by the health effects established through the international health authority having UUBriSdiction ."

STANTIATION: Expands the scope of the standard to include international environmental and healtfi regulatory agencies as equivalent bodies in evaluating clean agents. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The intent is already met by the existing text.

(Log #97) 2001-9- (1-5.1.1): Reject SUBMITTER: Thomas Moskaluk, Pem All Fire Extinguishers Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-7 RECOMMENDATION: Revise second paragraph onl~ "To keep oxygen concentration above-16 percent, the point at

which onset of-impaired personnel function occurs, no c-lean fire extinguishing a~eht add/essed in this standard shall be used in normally occupmd area in concentration greater than 24 percent." SUBSTANTIATION: Supplied CGA and Ansul Wormald state a problem in the range of 15-19 percent impaired coordination perception and judgment. May]mpair coordination and may induce early symptoms with

heart, lung or circulatory problems. NOTE: Supporting material is a~ailable for review at NFPA

Headquarters. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The U.S. EPA's review and the committee's review of the submitter's concerns have determined that the use of inert gas agents should not be restricted as proposed.

(Log #3) 2001- 10- (1-5.1.2.1): Reject SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-7 RECOMMENDATION: Revise paragraph 1-5.1.2.1 in its entirety to read as follows:

1-5.1.2.1 Unnecessary exposure ~o all halocarbon clean agents and their decomposition products shall be avoided. For normally occupied areas the following personnel exposure limits shall be observed:

* For design concentrations not exceeding the NOAEL, there are no exposure time limits. * For design concentrations not exceeding the LOAEL, exposure

shall be limited to one minute. Design concentrations greater than the LOAEL are only permitted

in areas not normally occupied, provided that any personnel in the area can evacuate within 3Oseconds.

SUBSTANTIATION: EPA, in their letter to NFPA of 20 September, 1994, expressed their opinion that NFPA 2001 is overly conservative with respect to exposure limits for halocarbons in normally occupied areas, and that the standard should be changed to allow design concentrations up to the LOAEL values. The proposed changes to this paragraph incorporates the EPA recomm~ncLitions. - NOTE: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA

Headquarters COMT~TI'EE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Insufficient information to make this substantive change.

(Log #29) 2001- 11 - (1-5.1.2.1): Reject SUBM]TTER: Karen Metchis, U.S. Environmental Protection

c fi NT ON PROPOSAL NO- 2001 7 RECOMMENDATION: Revise 1-5.1.2.1 to read as follows:

"Unnecessary exposure to all halocarbon clean agents and their decomposition products shall be avoided. Halocarbon agents for which the design concentration is equal to or less than the LOAEL

shall be permitted for use in normally occupied areas. Where normally occuoied soaces can be evacuated within three minutes, a~ents may tie nse~l at the LOAEL concentration. Where evacuation~takes longer than three minutes, a~ents may only be used

• v v i I v , e 71 " , 1 , ' ~ 1 , , at the NOAEL concentration . . . . . . . . . . . "~s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

~UBSTANTIATION: The limitation of design concentration to the NOAEL value is overly restrictive. The cardiac sensitization (CS)

~ rotocols provide conservative values of CS thresholds in humans; ence, restriction on the use of agents to the NOAEL, particularly

where the exposure time does not exceed 3-5 minutes, is not justified. The revised text more accurately reflects the conservative nature of the NOAEL and LOAEL determinations.

The main point is that cardiac sensitization (GS) requires priming with epinephrine. In the absence of epinephrine, the levels at which CS occur in the dog are much higher than when there is exogenous epinephrine given. Without that extra epinephrine, dogs could be exposed to a higher amount of agent with no effecf. The CS test is meant to force the most dire acute effects, but it doesn't mean animals can't be exposed to the atmosphere without exogenous adrenaline. In addition, extended exposure to an agent does not increase the likelihood or extent of effects. In fact, animals without exogenous epinephrine can stay in an acute atmosphere for extended lengths of time without cardiac effect. The conditions at which the dogs are assayed are not likely to

happen in humans. Even under stress, the catecholamines adrenaline) secreted endogenously by the body's own mechanisms o not usually reach the levels necessary to render the heart

sensitive. Because we are trying to be circumspect and prudent, we have recommended that the LOAEL in the dog with extra epinephrine is an appropriate and conservative benchmark level for setting safe exposure conditions for use of a fire suppressant.

208

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

With Central Nervous System (CNS) effects, the lower the concentration, the longer the time before CNS effects occur. Conversely, the higher the exposure the shorter the time it takes to see a CaNS effect. It is highly unlikely that full C.2qS effects, if the potential exists, would occur within the 3 minutes that it takes to leave an area during the fire. However, we do r ecommend that self- contained breathing apparatus be available should someone be caught in an area beyond 3 minutes. The use of 30 seconds for dais type of effect level implies impending death, and this is not the situation, except impending death f rom the fire.

We believe that for brief periods of time, e.g. 3 minutes, people could be exposed up to the LOAEL during exit from a fire situation. The egress times of 30 seconds appear to be too stringent and act against the proper use of a fire suppressant. A full review of the research literature and discussion of CS and

CNS data will be provided to the committee in the near future to fur ther elucidate these concepts. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITI'EE STATEMENT: Insufficient information to make this substantive change.

(Log #72) 2001- 12- (1-5.1.2.1): Reject SUBMITTEI~ Logan T. Fidier, Ha/on Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Add paragraph:

"Agent use in any country shall be defined by environmental limitations and health effects as established through the international environmental and health authority having jurisdiction." SUBSTANTIATION: Expands the scope of the standard to include international environmental and health regulatory agencies as equivalent bodies in evaluating clean agents. COMMIT'ITEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-8 (Log #71).

(Log #92) 2001- 13- (1-5.1.2.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Robert L. Darwin, Naval Sea Systems Command (U. S. Navy) COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-7 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following words at the end of the paragraph following "in normally occupied areas"

"Unless a time delay and pre<llscharge alarm is provided to facilitate evacuation of occupants prior to system discharge." SUBSTANTIATION: The proposed wording would be consistent with the provisions of NFPA 12 and 12A and would be in agreement with the EPA SNAP. COMMITrEEACTION: Accept in Principle.

1. Add the following exception to 1-5.1.2.1: Exception: For class B hazards and where acceptable to the

Authority Having Jurisdiction, concentrations up to the LOAEL are permit ted in normally occupied areas when a predischarge alarm and time delay are provided. The time delay shall be set to ensure that the occupants of the enclosure under consideration have time to evacuate prior to the start o f discharge.

2. Add the following exception to 1-5.1.3: Exception: For class B hazards and where acceptable to the

Authority Having Jurisdiction, concentration up to 53 percent which corresponds to an oxygen concentrat ion of 10 percent (Sea Level Equivalent), are permit ted in normally occupied areas when a predlscharge alarm and time delayare provided. The time delay shall be set to ensure that the occupants of the enclosure under consideration have time to evacuate prior to the start of discharge.

3. Revise 2-3.5.6.1 as follows: 2-3.5.6.1 Where systems are designed to concentrations above

NOAEL and up to LOAEL, a predischarge alarm and time delay shall be provided. For systems designed to the NOAEL, where a discharge delay does not significantly increase the threat to life or property, clean agent extinguishing systems shall incorporate a predischarge alarm with a time delay sufficient to allow personnel evacuation prior to discharge. Where inert gas clean agent systems are designed to concentra-

tidons between 43 percent and 53 percent a prediscllarge alarm and time delay shall be provided. For inert gas clean agent systems designed to a concentrat ion up to 42 percent, where a discharge delay does not significantly increase the threat to life or property, inert gas clean agent extinguishing systems shall incorporate a predischarge alarm with a time delay sufficient to allow personnel evacuation pri or to discharge.

4. Add the following definition: Lowest Observable Adverse Affect Level (LOAEL). The lowest

concentrat ion at which an adverse physiological or toxicological effect has been observed. CO MITI 'EE STATEMENT: The committee agrees with the submitter 's substantiation.

(Log #4) 2001- 14- (1-5.1.2.2): Reject SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-7 RECOMMENDATION: Delete pmagraph 1-5.1.2.2 in its entirety. •

Revise paragraph A-1-5.1.2 as required. SUBSTANTFATION: EPA in thefr letter of September 14, 1994 expressed that the health concerns for halocarbons is hear arrhythmias as measured by cardiotoxic effect levels (the NOAEL and LOAEL). Since this is dealt within paragraph 1-5.1.2.1, paragraph 1-5.1.2.2. is redundant and its removal clarifies the standard and does not reduce the level of safety prescribed in the standard. NOTE: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA

Headquarters COMMITrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: Insufficient information provided to support making the change. Also see Committee Action on Comment 2001-9 (Log #97).

( Log #5) 2001- 15 - (1-5.1.3): Reject SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-7 RECOMMENDATION: Revise paragraph 1-5.1.3 in its entirety to read as follows:

1-5.1.3" Inert Gas Clean Agents. Unnecessary exposure to inert gas agents and reduced oxygen concentrations shall be avoided. For normally occupied areas the following personnel exposure limits shall be observed:

• For design concentrations not exceeding 43 percent, which corresponds to an oxygen concentration of 12 percent (see level equivalent), there are n o exposure time limits.

• For design concentrations not exceeding 53 percent, which corresponds o an oxygen concentration o f l 0 percent (sea level equivalent), exposure shall be limited to one minute.

Design concentrations greater than 53pe rcen t are only permit ted in areas not normally occupied, provided that any personnel in the area can evacuate within 3Osecohds. SUBSTANTIATION: The 13r%posed changes to this paragraph incorporate the recommendat ions expressed by EPA in their September 14, 1994 letter to chairman P. DiNenno.

NOTE: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters. COMIMI'FFEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITFEE STATEMENT: Insufficient information to make this substantive change.

(Log #73) 2001- 16 - (Table 2-1.2(b)): Accept SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidler, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-13 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text as follows:

C02 8% + 1%, -0% Delete, -1% SUBSTANTIATION: Editorial to delete -1% as there is no negative tolerance for carbon dioxide. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #48) 2001- 17 - (Table 2-1.4.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Stephanie 1L Sk_aggs, Pacific Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Add the following infornlation pertaining to FIC-1311 to Table 2-1.4.1:

FIC-1311

104.7 Maximum fill density for

conditions listed below (lb/ft3)

Minimum container design level working pressure (psig) 500

Total pressure level at 70°F (psig) 360

NOTE: This column for FIC-1311 should be added after tile column for HFC-23 and before the column for IG-OI.

209

NFPA 2001 - - F95 ROC

SUBSTANTIATION: Table 1-4.1.2 does not address FIG-1311, an acceptable clean agent for normally unoccupied, total floor applications (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. 26, 1994). There- fore, the table should be changed to include FIC-1311. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #68) 2001- 18- (Table 2-1.4.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Charles F. Wilims, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-15, 16, 57 RECOMMENDATION: Revise Table 2-1.4.1 as follows:

1. Revise "Minimum Container Design Level Working Pressure (psig)" to read: "Minimum Container Design Working Pressure (psig) ." 2. Revise "Total Pressure Level at 70°F (psig)" to read: "Total

Pressure at 70°F (psig)." 3. Add additional column for HFC-227ea (600 psi systems) to read:

Maximum fill density (lb/ft3): 72.0 Min. Container Design W.P. (psig) 1800 Total Pressure at 70°F (psig) 600

4. Add additional column for IG-55 system (4550 psi @ 70°F; 4850 psi @ 130°F) to read:

Maximum flU density (Ib/ft3): N /A Min. Container Design W.P. (psig) 3880 Total Pressure at 70°F (psig) 4350

5. Revise note at bottom of Table 2-1.4.1 to read: "The maximum fill density requirements are not applicable to inert

~ as agents." UBSTANTIATION: Editorial. Add additional colurrms to Table

2-1.4.1 for HCF-227ea (600 psi) and IG-55 to reflect the new data submitted. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The Committee feels that its action on other comments related to this table should satisfy the intent of the submitter.

(Log #74) 2001- 19 - (Table 2-1.4.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidier, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Move table to appendix. SUBSTANTIATION: Normative information. Storage container characteristics are defined by agencies recognized in regulating interstate and international commerce. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-1 (Log #45).

(Log #75) - 2001- 20 - (Table 2-1.4.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidler, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-14 RECOMMENDATION: Revise table to include a column for IG-541 200 Bar Systems:

Max. Fill Pressure N/A Minimum Container Design Level (psig) 2900 Total Pressure Level @ 70°F N /A

SUBSTANTIATION: Sets the requirement for a 200 Bar System. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. Revise table to include a column for IG-541 200 Bar Systems: Max. Fill Pressure N/A Minimum Container Design Level (psig) 2746 Total Pressure Level @ 70°17 2900

COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Corrected pressures provided by submitter at meeting.

(Log #104) 2001- 21 - (Table 2-1.4.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Paul E. Rivers, 3M Company Specialty Chemicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Change the SI units conversion equations so they are correct as follows:

ForSI units: 1 lb/ft3 = 16.018 kg/m3; 1 psig= 6895 Pa; T(F) = [T(C)]9/5 + 32. SUBSTANTIATION: Editorial.

COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept_

(Log #14) 2001-22- (Figure 2-1.4.1 (e) (New)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: 1. Add two (2) new metric isometric diagrams for HFG-227ea pressurized with Nz at 25 and 42 bar at 21 °C.

9. Add new metric isometric diagrams for all of the other clean Sagl.~nsts (if available).

TANTIATION: At die last NFPA 2001 meeting, it was requested that this standard be metricated, and that the agent and equipment manufacturers provide the necessary data to accomplish this objective. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

160

14O

120

~'- 100

~ 8o

~ 60

a- 40

20

0 -20 -10

F

I I I 1200 kg/cu m

//:

] l l l l I I I I I l l l l I I l l I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I i i I I i I I I I I i i I I i I i i i i

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Temperature (°C)

i Zz

-10

180

160

140

120

I00

80

60

40

20

I / / / "z:.--.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Temperature (°C)

COMMITrEE STATEMENT: Added updated isometric diagrams submitted at meeting.

210

N F P A 2001 - - F 9 5 R O C

(Log #76) 2001- 23 - (2-1.4.3): Reject SUBMITI'ER: Logan T. Fidier, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Revise text as follows:

"The containers used in these systems shall be designed to meet the storage requirements of an internationally recognized transportation authority for maximum expected storage pressure. Such an authority should include, but not be limited to, the U.S. Department of Transportation, Canadian Transport commission, TUV, SDM, Apragaz and Stoomwezen." SUBSTANTIATION: As NFPA 2001 is recognized on an international scope, the standard must recognize other regulatory agencies within the international community. COMMITrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The standard is written around U.S. and Canadian transportation authorities and the committee did not have the information to review the criteria of the other organizations.

(Log #77) 2001- 24- (2-Zl . l (d)) : Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidier, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-19 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text as follows:

"For IG-541 normally charged to 2175 psig at 70°F (21°C) use an internal pressure of 2575 psig (130°F) (55°C) or if normally charged to 2900 psig at 70°F (21°C) us an internal pressure of 3433 psig (130°F) (55°C) for piping upstream of the pressure reducer, and use an internal pressure of 1000 psig (130°F) (55°C) for piping downstream of the pressure reducer..." SUBSTANTIATION: This clearly states the requirements for IG-541 200 Bar Systems. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-1 (Log #45).

(Log #6) 2001- 25 - (2-2.1.1(e) (New)): Accept in Principle SUBMITrER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-20 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new paragraph 2-2.1.1 (e) to read:

(e) For IG-55 normally charged to 4350 psig at 70°F (21°C), use an internal pressure of 4850 psig at 130°F (55°C) for piping upstream of the pressure reducer, and use an internal pressure of xxxx psig at 130°F (55°C) for piping down su-eam of the pressure reducer. The pressure reducing device shall be readily identifiable.

(Comment: Pressure for IG-55 to be verified by Securiplex Tech., Inc.) SUBSTANTIATION: Proposal is submitted in order to provide pipe pressure requirements for higher pressure levels used with inert gas agent IG-55. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-1 (Log #45).

(Log #7) 2001- 26 - (2-2.1.1(0 (New)): Accept SUBMITI'ER: Gharles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-19, 2001-20 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new paragraph 2-2 1.1 (f) to read'

(f) For HFC-227ea having a charging pressure of 600 psig (4,137 kPa) at 70°F (21°C), use an internal pressure of 1000 psig (6,895 kPa) at 130°F (55°C). SUBSTANTIATION: Proposal ts submitted in order to provide pipe pressure re uirements for higher pressure levels used ~ath HFC-227ea COMMI~qEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #8) 2001- 27- (2-2.5.1)' Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-26 RECOMMENDATION: Revase first sentence to read as follows:

"Discharge nozzles shall be listed for the intended use including flow characteristics, area coverage, height limits and minimum pressures."

SUBSTANTIATION: Rigorous testing has shown that the additional nozzle parameters, addedto the first sentence, are also important to assure uniform distribution of clean agents throughout all portions of the hazard enclosure. COMMrFrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Revise first sentence to read as follows: "Discharge nozzles shall be listed for the intended use. Listing

criteria shall include flow characteristics, area coverage, height limits and minimum pressures." COMMITrEE STATEMENT: Accepted recommendation with editorial clarification.

(Log #78) 2001- 28- (2-2.5.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidler, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-26 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text as follows:

"Discharge nozzles shall be listed for the intended use, including flow characteristics as defined by area coverage, height limitation and minimum pressure." SUBSTANTIATION: Discharge nozzle definition provides consistency with the practice accepted in the listing process as found in UL 1058A and as defined in Section 1-3.1 of this standard. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-27 (Log #8).

(Log #26) 2001- 29- (2-3.1.2). Reject SUBMITTER: Vic D. Humm, Vic Humm & Associates COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-25 RECOMMENDATION: Revise recommendation to match format of other NFPA publications. Text should read:

"In accordance to requirements of section 2-3, when an approved Pthrotective signaling system is installed in the building, the outputs of

e systems or its control units shall be monitored by the building fire alarm system in accordance with the provisions of NFPA 72. SUBSTANTIATION: This complies with other NFPA publications that have already been voted on and accepted by the entire body for at least two code cycles. See NFPA 17, 1990 edition, paragraph 2-6 5, NFPA 17A, 1990, paragraph 2-5.2.3, or NFPA 90A, 1993 edition, in paragraph 4-4.4.2. This provides proper direction for life safety and property protection in order to notify building occupants and comply with Federal Laws such as ADA. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Reject. COMMITI'EE STATEMENT: This subject is already adequately covered by the requirements NFPA 72, which is referenced in paragraph 2-3.1.1. It is not the committee's intent to always require that the signaling system be connected to the building alarm system.

(Log #9) 2001- 30 - (3-4.2.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-27,2001-69 RECOMMENDATION: Revise section 3-4.2.2 in its entirety to read as follows:

3-4.2.2* Flame Extinguishment. 3-4.2.2.1" The minimum design concentration for each clean

agent shall be a demonstrated heptane extinguishing concentration plus a 20 percent safety factor. The extinguishing concentration used shall be a demonstrated heptane cup burner value, or higher, that has been verified by a listing organization using the Fire Extinguishment/Area Coverage Fire Test Procedure detailed in A-3- 4.2.2.1.

3-4.2.2.2* The minimum design concentration for various other Class B flarm~able liquids shall be a demonstrated extinguishing concentration plus a 20 percent safety factor. The extinguishing concentration shall be demonstrated by a cup burner test for each Class b flammable liquid being evaluated. In no case shall the minimum design concentration be less than the minimum design concentration established for heptane.

3-4.2.2.3* The extinguishing concentration for Class A surface fires shall be determined by test as part of a listing program using file fire test procedure described in A_3-4.2.2.1. The minimum design concentration for Class A fires shall be the extinguishing concentration plus a 20 percent safety factor. In no case shall the minimum

211

N F P A 2001 ~ F95 ROC

design concentration be less than the minimum design concentration established for heptane. SUBSTANTIATION: 1. It has been found through testing and experience, acquired by working with the new clean agents, for the necessity to develop rigorous engineering criteria to assure the reliability, performance, and capability o'f clean agent systems. In addition, the engineering knowledge acquired during these evaluations has shown the critical nature of nozzle designs. It has been determined that the fire test methods, detailed in ROP 2001- 69, are critical to the establishment of the minimum engineering test criteria necessary in order to evaluate:

** Extinguishing capability of the agent. Min/Max nozzle height limits.

• Max nozzle area coverage. s Nozzle agent distribution efficiency. The successful completion of these tests provides the assurance of

clean agent capability and the ability of the system to deliver a uniform distribution of agent throughout the hazard enclosure. It is therefore recommended that all of the clean agents be subjected to the same test parameters in order to assure a uniform leve/of performance.

2. It is the opinion of several recognized experts in the field of cup burnek testing that this method produces consistent reliable results for gaseous agents, including mixtures having more than one componenL

It is recommended that the cup bur'her test be adopted as the method to be used in this standard to establish minimum flame extinguishment values for all of the clean agents. Because of the \ proliferation of different agents irmluded in this standard it becomes readily apparent that each clean agent should be required to meet the same criteria in order to establish a common level of performance. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Revise section 3-4.2.2 to read as follows: 3-4.2.2* Flame Extinguishment. 3-4.2.2.1" The minimum design concentration for Class B

flammable and combustible liquids and flammable gases, shall be a demonstrated cup burner extinguishing concentration value, for each Class B fuel, plus a 20 percent safety factor. For hazards involving multiple fuels the value for the fuel requiring the greatest design concentration shall be used.

3-4.2.2.2* The minimum design concentration for Class A surface fires shall be an extinguishing concentration determined by test, as part of a listing program, plus a 20 percent safety factor.

3-4.2.2.3* As a minimum, the listing program shall conform to UL 1058, Standard for Halogenated Agent Extinguishing System Units, and UL procedure rifled "Fire Extinguishment/Area Coverage Fire Test Procedure for Engineered and. Preengineered Clean Agent Extinguishing System Units," or equivalent. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The design concentration should be based on the Class B fuel o f thepro tec ted hazard. The design concentration for Class A hazards will be determined by test during the listing process.

(Log #67) 2001- 31 - (3-4.2.2.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Carla Pizzareilo, Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Removing wording in 3-4.2.2.1 beginning from: "If reliable clean agent cup burner test data is not obtainable,..." SUBSTANTIATION: Reliable cup burner data is available on all new clean agents discussed in this standard. One agent for which cup burner data had not been provided was HCFC Bletad A (commercial name is NAF S-i 11). Cup burner data has been published for this agent in the December 1994 report of the Halon Fire Extinguishing Agents Technical Options Committee of UNEP. The cup burner extinguishing concentration reported for HCFC Blend A is "> 11%~ in Table 2.2.1-B on page 14 of that report.

NOTE: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters. " • COMMITIT~ACTION: Acceptin Principle. COMMITIT, E STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-30 (Log #9).

(Log #94) 2001- 32 - (3-4.2.2.1): Reject SUBMITTE~ Ronald S. Sheinson, Naval Research Laboratory COMMENTON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Substitute "If reliable clean agent cup burner...System Units, or equivalent. (ROP 2001-69)" with:

"Only if reliable clean agent cup burner test data is not obtainable, the extinguishing concentration shall be determined by realistic full scale testing performed by the listing organization as part of a complete listing investigation. As a minimum the testing shall conform to UL 1058, Standard for Safety Halogenated Agent Extinguishing System Units. Preferably a realistic full scale test representative of the compartment/obstacle geometries and fire scenarios to be protected should also be performed." SUBSTANTIATION: Use of design concentrations below Cup Burner values can successfully extinguish fires if transient concentration peaks occur from preferential direction of agent flow due to nozzle/space geometries a n d / 0 r due to oxygen depleted levels. Once agent is distributed and results in less than the "peak" concentration reflash hazard potential exists in the presence of fuel and ignition source.

NRL experiments in total flooding tests in a 56m3 chamber demonstrated fire extinctions with'less than 2 /3 Cup Burner values with nozzles over 3 meters above the fires. Reflash attempts demonstrated, however, that reignitions will occur. Specifically, for example, with HBFC 22B1, 6 tests with concentrations of 2.0-2.9 percent (Cui~ Burner 5.9-4.4 percent), measured by Gas Chromato- graph analysts, extinguished n-heptane fires in less than 10 seconds. The spray fire reignited, however, upon spark initiation.

Oxygen concentrations can significandy affect the amount of agent required to exting#tish afire. NRL Cup Burner experiments have shown that an increase from 19 percent to 21 percent oxygen yields an over 1/3 increase in agent concentration required for fire suppression (reference (a)).

Reference: (a): Ronald S. Sheinson and Samuel P. Baldwin, "Fire Suppression

Agent Effectiveness Prediction and Implementation for Fire Extinguishment Tests," Proceedings of the Eastern States Combus- tion Institute, Princeton, NJ, October 25-27, 1993 (Available from the Combustion Institute, Pittsburgh, PA). COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject.

See Committee Action on Comment 2001-30 (Log #9). COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The committee has determined that the cup burner test is the appropriate basis for determining minimum extinguishing concentration.

(Log #96) 2001- 33 - (3-4.2.2.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Peter Clark, Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Remove wording in 3-4.2.2.1 beginning from "If reliable clean agent cup burner test data is not obtainable,..." SUBSTANTIATION: Cup burner data are available on all new clean agents discussed in this standard. One agent for which cup burner data had not been reported to the committee was HCFC Blend A (commercial name is NAF S-III). Cup burner data has bee published for this agent as follows: "11.6%" Ref. (1): ">11%". Ref2 References: (1) Moore, TJL, et al, "Intermediate-Scale (635 ft3) Fire Suppression evaluation of NFPA 2001 Agents." Proceedings of the Halon Alternatives Technical Working Conference, pp. 115-127 (see footnote of Table 2.), Albuquerque, lqM, May 11-1~,, 199~; (2) December 1995 report of the Halon Fire Extinguishing Agents Technical Options Committee of UNEP, Table 2.2.1-B. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-30 (Log #9).

212

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

(Log #33) 2001- 34 - (Table 3-5.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Add a new flooding factor table for HCFG- 124 based on metric units from -10°C to 95°C in 5 degree increments using the S values (cu metersper Kg) in the following to calculate weights as Kg/cu meter at 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 percent design concentrations.

H CFC-124 Temperature Specific Vapor Volume

°C S, cu meters/Kg

-10 0.1500 -5 0.1536

0 0.1572 5 0.1606 10 0.1640 15 0.1674 2O 0.1708

25 0.1741 30 0.1774 35 0.1806 40 0.1839 45 0.1871

50 0.1903 55 0.1934 60 0.1966 65 0.1998 70 0.2029

75 0.2061 80 0.2092 85 0.2123 90 0.2154 95 0.2185

SUBSTANTIATION: Values for S were calculated by NIST using tile modified Benedict-Webb-Rubin equation of state.

Publication of metric data will enhance the value of the standard. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Specific Vapor

Temp Volume (deg C) (cum/kg)

+ -S-

-I0 .1500 0.3509 -5 .1536 0.3427 0 .1572 0.3348 5 .1606 0.3277

10 .1640 0.3209 15 .1674 0.3144 20 .1708 0.3081 25 .1741 0.3023 30 .1774 0.2967 35 .1806 0.2914 40 .1839 0.2862 45 .1871 0.2813 50 .1903 0.2766 55 .1934 0.2721 60 .1966 0.2677 65 .1998 0.2634 70 .2029 0.2594 75 .2061 0.2554 80 .2092 0.2516 85 .2123 0.2479 90 .2154 0.2443 95 .2185 0.2409

HCFC-124 Weight Requirements of Hazard Volume W/V (kg/cu m) Metric Units

Design Concentration (% byVolume) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

0.4255 0.5018 0.5797 0.6593 0.7407 0.8240 0.9091 0.4156 0.4900 0 . 5 6 6 1 0.6439 0.7234 0.8047 0.8878 0.4060 0.4788 0.5532 0 . 6 2 9 1 0.7068 0.7862 0.8675 0.3974 0.4687 0.5414 0.6158 0.6919 0.7696 0.8491 0.3892 0.4590 0.5302 0.6031 0.6775 0.7536 0.8315 0.3813 0.4496 0.5195 0.5908 0.6637 0.7383 0.8146 0.3737 0.4407 0 . 5 0 9 1 0.5790 0.6505 0.7236 0.7984 0.3666 0.4323 0.4995 0.5681 0.6382 0.7099 0.7832 0.3598 0.4243 0.4902 0.5575 0.6263 0.6967 0.7687 0.3534 0.4168 0.4815 0.5476 0.6152 0.6844 0.7551 0.3471 0 . ' 1 0 9 3 0.4728 0.5378 0.6042 0 . 6 7 2 1 0.7415 0.3412 0.4023 0.4648 0.5286 0.5939 0.6606 0.7288 0.3354 0.3955 0.4569 0.5197 0.5839 0.6495 0.7166 0.3300 0.3892 0.4496 0.5114 0.5745 0.6391 0.7051 0.3247 0.3829 0,4423 0.5031 0.5652 0.6287 0.6936 0.3195 0.3767 0.4352 0.4950 0.5561 0.6186 0.6825 0.3146 0.3710 0.4286 0.4874 0.5476 0.6091 0.6721 0.3097 0.3652 0.4219 0.4799 0 . 5 3 9 1 0.5997 0.6616 0.3051 0.3598 0.4157 0.4728 0.5311 0.5908 0.6518 0.3007 0.3545 0.4096 0.4659 0.5234 0.5822 0.6423 0.2963 0.3494 0.4037 0.4592 0.5158 0.5738 0.6331 0.2921 0.3445 0.3980 0.4526 0.5085 0.5657 0.6241

COMMITrEE STATEMENT: Additional corrections were made by the committee to reflect the proper metric measurements.

213

N F P A 2001 - - F95 R O C

(Log #35) 2001- 35 - (Table 3-5.1 ): Accept in Principle SUBMITI'ER: Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Add a new flooding factor table for HFC- 125 based on metric units from -45°C to 95°(:: in 5 degree increments using the S values (cu meters/Kg) in the following to calculate weights as Kg/cu meter at 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 percent design concentrations.

HFC-125 Temperature Specific Vapor Volume

°C S, cu mete~/Kg

-45 0.1497 -40 0.1534 -35 0.1572 -30 0.1608

-25 0.1645 -20 0.1682 -15 0.1719 -10 0.1755 -5 0.1791

0 0.1828 5 0.1864 10 0.1900 15 0.1935 2O 0.1971

25 0.20O7 30 0.2042 35 0.2078 40 0.2113 45 0.2149

50 0.2184 55 0.2219 60 0.2254 65 0.2289 70 0.2324

75 0.2358 80 0.2393 85 0.2428 90 0.2463 95 0.2498

SUBSTANTIATION: Values for S were calculated by NIST using the modified Benedict-Webb-Rubin equation of state.

Publication of metric data will enhance the value of the standard. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

(see Table below) COMMITrEE STATEMENT: Additional corrections were made by the committee to reflect the proper metric measurements.

S•,a ecific por

Temperature Volume ((leg C) (cu m/kg)

-t- -S-

-45 .1497 -40 .1534 ~5 .1572 -30 .1608 -25 .1645 -20 .1682 -15 .1719 -10 .1755

.1791 0 .1828 5 .1864

10 .1900 15 .1935 20 .1971 25 .2007 3O .2O42 35 .2078 40 .2113 45 .2149 50 .2184 55 .2219 60 .2254 65 .2289 70 .2324 75 .2358 80 .2393 85 .2428 90 .2463 95 .2498

HFC-125 Weight Requirements of Hazard Volume W/V (kg/cu m) Metric Units

Design Concentration (% by Volume) 7 8 9 1 0 11 12 13 14 15 16

0.5028 0.5809 0.6607 0.7422 0.8256 0.9109 0.9982 1.0874 1.1788 1.2724 0.4907 0.5669 0.6447 0.7243 0.8057 0.8889 0.9741 1.0612 1.1504 1.2417 0.4788 0.5532 0.6291 0.7068 0.7862 0.8675 0.9505 1.0356 1.1226 1.2117 0.4681 0.5408 0.6151 0.6910 0.7686 0.8480 0.9293 1.0124 1.0975 1.1846 0.4576 0.5286 0.6012 0.6754 0.7513 0.8290 0.9084 0.9896 1.0728 1.1579 0.4475 0.5170 0.5880 0.6606 0.7348 0.8107 0.8884 0.9678 1.0492 1.1324 0.4379 0.5059 0.5753 0.6464 0.7190 0.7933 0.8693 0.9470 1.0266 1.1081 0.4289 0.4955 0.5635 0 .6331 0.7042 0.7770 0.8514 0.9276 1.0055 1.0853 0.4203 0.4855 0.5522 0.6204 0.6901 0.7614 0.8343 0.9089 0.9853 1.0635 0.4118 '0.4757 0.5410 0.6078 0,6761 0.7460 0.8174 0.8905 0.9654 1.0420 0.4038 0.4665 0.5506 0.5961 0.6631 0.7316 0.8016 0.8733 0.9467 1.0219 0.3962 0.4577 0.5205 0.5848 0.6505 0.7177 0.7864 0.8568 0.9288 1.0025 0.3890 0.4494 0.5111 0.5742 0.6387 0.7047 0.7722 0.8413 0.9120 0.9844 0.3819 0.4412 0.5018 0.5637 0.6271 0.6919 0.7581 0.8259 0.8953 0.9664 0.3750 0.4333 0.4928 0.5536 0.6158 0.6794 0.7445 0.8111 0.8793 0.9491 0.3686 0.4258 0,4843 0.5441 0.6053 0.6678 0.7318 0.7972 0.8642 0.9328 0.3622 0.4185 0.4759 0.5347 0.5948 0.6562 0.7191 0.7834 0.8492 0.9166 0.3562 0.4115 0 .4681 0.5258 0.5849 0.6454 0.7072 0.7704 0.8352 0.9014 0.3503 0.4046 0.4602 - 0.5170 0.5751 0.6345 0.6953 0.7575 0.8212 0.8863 0.3446 0.3982 0.4528 0.5088 0.5659 0.6244 0.6842 0.7454 0.8080 0.8721 0.3392 0.3919 0.4457 0.5007 0.5570 0.6145 0.6734 0.7336 0.7953 0.8584 0.3339 0.3858 0.4388 0.4930 0.5483 0.6050 0.6629 0.7222 0.7829 0.8451 0,3288 0.3799 0.4321 0.4854 0.5400 0.5957 0.6528 0.7112 0.7710 0.8321 0.3239 0.3742 0.4256 0.4781 0.5318 0.5868 0.6430 0.7005 0.7593 0.8196 0,3192 0.3688 0.4194 0.4712 0.5242 0.5783 0.6337 0.6904 0.7484 0.8078 0.3145 0.3634 0.4133 0.4643 0.5165 0.5698 0.6244 0.6803 0.7374 0.7960 0,3100 0 .3581 0.4073 0.4576 0.5090 0.5616 0.6154 0.6705 0.7268 0.7845 0.3056 0.3531 0.4015 0.4511 0.5018 0.5536 0.6067 0,6609 0.7165 0.7734 0.3013 0.3481 0.3959 0.4448 0.4948 0.5459 0.5982 0.6517 0.7064 0.7625

214

N F P A 2001 - - F 9 5 R O C

(Log #37) 2001- 36 - (Table 3-5.1 ): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Add a new flooding factor table for HFC-23 based on metric units from -60°C to 70°C at 5 degree increments using the values (cu meters/Kg) in the following to calculate weights as Kg/cu meter at 10, 12, 14, 115, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22 and 24 percent design concentrations.


°C S, cu meters/Kg

-60 0.2428 -55 0.2492

-50 0.2555 -45 0.2617 -40 0.2680 -35 0.2742 -30 0.2803

-25 0.2865 -20 0.2926 -15 0.2987 -10 0.3047 -5 0.3108

0 0.3168 5 0.3229 10 0.3289 15 0.3349 20 0.3409

25 0.3468 30 0.3528 35 0.3588 40 0.3647 45 0.3707

50 0.3766 55 0.3826 60 0.3885 65 0.3944 70 0.4004

SUBSTANTIAl'ION: Values for S are calculated from the Martin- Hou equation of state. See "Physical and Thermodynamic Proper- ties of Trifluoroethane" (A.I.Ch.E.Journal 5:125-29) byY. C. Hou andJ.J. Martin.

Publication of metric units will enhance the value of the standard. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

(see Table below) COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Additional corrections were made by the committee to reflect the proper metric measurements.

Specific Vapor

Temperature Volume (deg C) (cu m/kg)

-t- -S-

HFC-23 Weight Requirements of Hazard Volume W/V (kg/cu m) Metric Units

Design Concentration (% byVolume) 10 12 14 1 ~ 16 17 18 20 22 24

-60 -55 -50 -45 -4O -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10

-5 0 5

10 15 20 25 3O 35 4O 45 50 55 6O 65 70

.2428 0.4576 0.5616 0.6705 0.7268 0.7845 0.8436 0 .9041 1.0297 1.1617 1.3006

.2492 "0.4459 0.5472 0.6533 0.7081 0,7644 0.8219 0.8809 1.0032 1.1318 1.2672

.2555

.2617

.2680

.2742

.2803

.2865

.2926

.2987

.3047

.3108 ,3168 .3229 .3289 .3349 .3409 .3468 .3528 .3588 .3647 .3707 .3766 .3826 .3885 .3944 .4004

0.4349 0.5337 0.6371 0.6907 0,7455 0,8016 0 .8591 0.9785 1.1039 1.2360 0,4246 0 ,5211 0 ,6221 0.6743 0.7278 0.7826 0.8388 0.9553 1.0778 1.2067 0.4146 0.5088 0.6074 0.6585 0.7107 0.7643 0.8191 0.9328 1.0524 1.1783 0.4052 0.4973 0.5937 0.6436 0.6947 0.7470 0.8006 0.9117 1.0286 1.1517 0.3964 0.4865 0.5808 0.6296 0.6795 0.7307 0 .7831 0.8919 1.0062 1.1266 0.3878 0.4760 0.5682 0.6160 0.6648 0.7149 0,7662 0.8726 0.9845 1.1022 0.3797 0.4660 0.5564 0 .6031 0.6510 0.7000 0,7502 0,8544 0.9639 1.0793 0.3720 0.4565 0.5450 0.5908 0.6377 0.6857 0.7349 0,8370 0.9443 1.0572 0.3647 0.4475 0.5343 0.5792 0 .6251 0.6722 0,7204 0,8205 0.9257 1.0364 0.3575 0.4388 0.5238 0.5678 0.6129 0.6590 0.7063 0.8044 0.9075 1.0161 0,3507 0.4304 0,5139 0,5570 0,6013 0,6465 0,6929 0.7891 0.8903 0.9968 0.3441 0.4223 0.5042 0.5465 0.5899 0.6343 0.6798 0,7742 0,8735 0.9780 0.3378 0.4146 0.4950 0.5365 0 .5791 0.6227 0.6674 0.7601 0,8576 0.9601 0.3318 0.4072 0 .4861 0.5269 0.5688 0.6116 0.6555 0.7465 0.8422 0.9429 0.3259 0.4000 0.4775 0.5177 0.5587 0.6008 0.6439 0.7334 0.8274 0.9263 0.3204 0.3932 0.4694 0.5089 0.5492 0.5906 0.6330 0.7209 0.8133 0.9106 0.3149 0.3865 0.4614 0.5002 0.5399 0.5806 0.6222 0.7086 0.7995 0,8951 0.3097 0 .3801 0.4537 0.4918 0.5309 0.5708 0.6118 0.6968 0 .7861 0.8801 0.3047 0.3739 0.4464 0.4839 0.5223 0.5616 0.6019 0.6855 0.7734 0.8659 0.2997 0.3679 0.4391 0.4760 0.5138 0.5525 0.5922 0.6744 0.7609 0.8519 0.2950 0.3621 0.4323 0.4686 0.5058 0.5439 0.5829 0.6638 0.74489 0.8385 0.2904 0.3564 0.4255 0.4612 0.4978 0.5353 0.5737 0.6534 0.7372 0.8254 0.2860 0.3510 0.4190 0.4542 0.4903 0.5272 0.5650 0.6435 0.7260 0.8128 0.2817 0.3457 0.4128 0.4474 0.4830 0.5193 0.5566 0.6339 0 .7151 0.8007 0.2775 0.3406 0.4066 0.4407 0.4757 0.5115 0.5482 0.6244 0.7044 0.7887

215

N F P A 2001 - - F 9 5 R O C

( Log #11) 2001- 37 - (Table 3-5.1 (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Charles E Willms, Fire Suppress ion Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: 1. Add new metr ic Flooding Factor Table for HFC-227ea per the following table:

2. Add new metric F loodingFactor Table for all of the o ther clean agents (ff available). SUBSTANTIATION: At the last NFPA 2001 meet ing, i twas reques ted tha t this s tandard be metr icated, a n d tha t the agen t a n d e q u i p m e n t manufac tu re r s provide the necessary data to accomplish this objective. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

Table 3-5.1( ) HFC-227ea Total Flooding Quantity[1 ]

HFC-227ea Temp. S~edfic

Vol. vapor t Volume

(°C) S (cu m/kg)

[31 [4]

HFC-227ea Weight Requirements of Hazard Volume W/V (kg/cu m) [2]

Design Concentration (% per volume) [5]

6 7 8 9 1O 11 12 13 14 15 -10 0.1215 0.5254 0.6196 0.7158 0.8142 0.9147 1.0174 1.1225 1.2301 1.3401 1.4527

-5 0.1241 0.5142 0.6064 0.7005 0.7987 0.8951 0.9957 1.0985 1.2038 1.3114 1.4216 0 0.1268 0.5034 0.5936 0.6858 0.78 0.8763 0.9748 1.0755 1.1785 1.2839 1.3918 5 0.1294 0,4932 0.5816 0.6719 0.7642 0.8586 0.955 1.0537 1.1546 1.2579 1.3636

10 0.132 0.4834 0.57 0.6585 0.749 0.8414 0.936 1.0327 1.1316 1.2328 1.2264 15 0.1347 0.474 0.5589 0.6457 0.7344 0.8251 0.9178 1.0126 1.1096 1.2089 1.3105

• 20 0.1373 0.465 0.5483 0.6335 0.7205 0.8094 0.9004 0.9934 1.0886 1.1859 1.2856 25 0.1399 0.4564 0.5382 0.6217 0.7071 0.7944 0.8837 0.975 1.0684 1.164 1.2618 30 0.1425 0.4481 0.5284 0.6104 0.6943 0.78 0.8676 0.9573 1.049 1.1428 1.2388 35 0.145 0.4401 0.519 0.5996 0.6819 0.7661 0.8522 0.9402 1.0303 1.1224 1.2168 40 0.1476 0.4324 0.5099 0.5891 0.6701 0.7528 0,8374 0.9230 1.0124 1.1029 1.1956 45 0.1502 0.425 0.5012 0.579 0.6586 0.7399 0,823 0.908 0.995 1.084 1.1751 50 0.1527 0.418 0.4929 0.5694 0.6476 0.7276 0,8093 0.8929 0.9784 1.066 1.1555 55 0.1553 0.4111 0.4847 0.56 0.6369 0.7156 0.796 0.8782 0.9623 1.0484 1.1365 60 0.1578 0.4045 0.477 0.551 0.6267 0.7041 0.7832 0.8641 0.9459 1.0316 1.1183 65 0.1604 0.398 0.4694 0.5423 0.6167 0.6929 0.7707 0.8504 0.9318 1.0152 1.1005 70 0.1629 0.3919 0.4621 0.5338 0.6072 0.6821 0.7588 0.8371 0.9175 0.9994 1.0834 75 0.1654 0.3859 0.455 0.5257 0.5979 0.6717 0.7471 0.8243 0.9033 0.9841 1.0668 80 0.1679 0.3801 0.4482 0.5178 0.0589 0.6617 0.736 0.812 0.8898 0.9694 1.0509 85 0.1704 0.3745 0.4416 0.5102 0.5803 0.6519 0.7251 0.8 0.8767 0.9551 1.0354 90 0.173 0.369 0.4351 0.5027 0.5717 0.6423 0.7145 0.7883 0.8638 0.9411 1.0202

HFC-227ea Concentration Flooding Factors: Metric Units

To find the total quantity of HFC-227ea required at a specific temperature and concentration, multiply the hazard area volume by the multiplier on this table that corresponds to the design temperature and concentration desired.

[1] The manufacturer's listing shall specify the temperature range for operation. [ 2] For W/V [Agent Weight Requirements (kg/cu m) ] - Kilograms of agent per cubic meter of protected volume to produce indicated concentration at temperature specified.

W = c/(100-c) (V/s)

-7 . = 10-dd-2"g- ~

[3] t[Temperature (°C)] -The design temperature in the hazard area. [ 4] S[Speciflc Volume (cu m/kg)] - Specific volume of superheated HFCr227ea vapor may be approximated by the formula:

S= 0.1269 + 0.0005131t where t = temperature (°C).

[5] C[Concentradon (%)] - Volumetric concentration of HFe-227ea in air at the temperature indicated.

216

N F P A 2001 - - F 9 5 R O C

(Log #109) 2001- 38 - (Table 3-5.1 ( ) (New)): Accept in Principle SUBMITYER: Paul E. Rivers, 3M Company Specialty Chemicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Add new metr ic f looding factor table for FC-3-1-10 per the following:

Table 3-5.1( ) E-3-1-10 Total Flooding Quantity [1]

FC-3- I - I 0 S~eclfic

Temp vapor -t- Volume

4- [31 (m3/kg) (°C) [4]

FC-3.1-10 Weigh t Requirements of Hazard Volume W/V (kg/m 3) [2] Design Concentration (% by Volume) [5]

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

-55 0 0751 0 7008 0.8499 1 0022 1 1579 1 3169 1.4795 1 6457 1 8157 -50 0.0768 0 6850 0 8308 0 9797 1 1318 1 2873 1.4462 1 6087 1.7749 -45 0.0786 0 6700 0 8125 0 9581 I 1069 1 2590 1 4144 1.5733 1 7359 -40 0 0803 0 6556 0.7950 0 9375 1 0831 1.2319 1 3840 1 5395 1 6985 -35 0 0820 0 6418 0 7783 0 9178 1 0603 1 2059 1 3548 1 5071 1 6627 -30 0 0837 0 6285 0 7622 0 8989 1 0384 1 1811 1 3269 1 4760 1 6284 -25 0 0855 0 6158 0 7468 0 8807 1 0174 1 1572 1 3001 1.4461 1 5955 -20 0 0872 0 6036 0 7320 0.8632 0 9973 1 1343 1 2743 1 4175 1 5639 -15 0 0889 0 5919 0 7178 0 8465 0 9779 1 1122 1.2495 1 3899 1 5335 -10 0.0906 0 5806 0 7041 0 8303 0 9593 1 0910 1.2257 1.3635 1 5043

-5 0 0924 0 5698 0 6910 0 8148 0 9413 1 0706 1 2028 1 3380 1 4762 0 0 0941 0 5593 0 6783 0 7998 0 9240 1 0510 1.1807 1.3134 1 4491

10 0 0976 0 5395 0.6543 0 7715 0.8913 t 0138 1 1389 1 2669 1 3978 15 0 0993 0 5301 0 6429 0 7581 0 8758 0 9961 1.1191 1 2448 1.3734 20 0 1010 0.5210 0.6319 0 7451 0 8608 0 9791 1 1000 1 2235 1 3499 25 0 1027 0 5123 0 6213 0 7326 0 8464 0 9626 1 0815 1 2030 1 3272 30 0 1045 0 5058 0.6110 0.7205 0.8324 0 9467 1 0636 1 1831 1 3053 35 0.1062 0 4956 0 6011 0.7088 0.8188 0.9313 1 0463 1 1638 1 2841 40 0 1079 0 4877 0 5914 0 6974 0 8057 0 9164 1 0295 1 1452 1 2635 45 0.1097 0 4800 0 5821 0 6864 0.7980 0.9020 1 0133 1 1272 1 2436 50 0.1114 0.4725 0 5731 0 6758 0 7897 0.8889 0 9976 1 1097 1 2243 55 0.1131 0 4653 O 5643 0 6655 0 7688 0.8744 0 9824 1 0927 1 2056 60 0 1148 0 4583 0 5558 0 6555 0 7572 0 8613 0 9676 1 0763 1 1875 65 0 1166 0 4515 0 5476 O 6457 0 7460 0 8485 0 9532 1 0603 1 1699 70 0 1183 0 4449 0 5396 0 6363 0.7351 O 8361 0.9393 1 0449 1 1528 75 0 1200 0 4385 0 5318 0 6272 0 7245 0.8241 0 9258 1 0298 1 1362 80 0 1217 0 4323 0 5243 0.6183 0 7143 0.8124 0 9127 1.0152 1 1201 85 0 1235 0 4263 0 5170 0 6096 0 7043 0 8010 0 8999 1.0010 1 1044 90 0 1252 0 4204 0 5098 0 6012 0 6945 0 7900 0 8875 0 9872 1 0892 95 0 1269 0 4147 0 5029 0 5930 0 6851 0 7792 0 8754 0 9738 1 0744

100 0 1287 0.4091 0 4961 0 5850 0 6759 0 7687 0 8636 0 9607 1 0599

[1] The manufacturer's hstang shall specify the temperature range for operaUon 3 [2] W/V [Agent Weight REquirements kg/m )] - galograms requtred per cubic meter of protected volume to produce mdmated cone at

temperature specffied w = (v/s) (C/(lOO-C))

[3] T [Temperature (F)] -The demgn temperature m the hazard area S 3 [4l S [ pemfic Volume (m /kg)] - Speofic Volume of superheated FC-3-1-10 vapor may be approxamated by the formula

S- 094104 + 00034455 (T) where T- temperature (C)

[5] C [ConcentraUon (%)] - Volumetrm concentraUon ofFC-3-1-10 m mr at the temperature specified

SUBSTANTIATION: Provided per the last NFPA 2001 meet ing request tha t the s tandard be metricated. C O M M I T r E E ACTION: Accept in Principle.

1. Delete negative tempera tures f rom submit ted table. 2. Delete entries below boi l ing po in t fi'om all tables.

COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Dele ted material is unnecessary and not used.

(Log #49) 2001- 39 - (Table 3-5.1 (a)): Accept SUBMITTEI~ Stepbanie R. Skaggs, Pacific Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Add the following informat ion to Table 3-5.1 (a):

°F °C K1 K2 m K2

FIG-1311 1.683 0.0044 0.1138 0.0005

NOTE: The row for FIC-1311 should be added after the row for HFG-23 and before the row for IG-01. SUBSTANTIATION: Table 3-5.1 (a) does not address FIG-'1311, an acceptable clean agent for normal ly unoccupied, total f lood applicat ions (Fed.Reg. , Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. 26, 1994). There- fore, the table should be changed to include FIC-1311.

C O M M I T r E E ACTION: Accept.

(Log #CC3) 2001- 40 - (Table 3-5.1 (a)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commit tee on Alternative Protection Options to Ha[on, COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-33 RECOMMENDATION: Change Table 3-5.1 (a) with the following information:

Eng. (°F) IG-541

K1 = 9.8579 K2 = 0.02143

Metric (°C)

K1 = .65799 K2 = .00239

SUBSTANTIATION: Updated table with informat ion suppl ied by manufacturers. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept~

217

NFPA 2001 - - g95 ROC

(Log #13) 2001- 41 - (Table 3-5.1 (b) through 3-5.1 (I)): Reject SUBMITTER: Charles F. Wiilms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Delete all w/v values for concentrations below the minimum design concentration. SUBSTANTIATION: Several inddents has been reported where end users have mistakenly selected flooding factor valves (w/v) from the tables that were below the minimum design concentration values; only because they were listed in the Tables. Deleting these values should eliminate this problem. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The information has value and should not be deleted.

SUBbWANTIATION: NIST chose the modified Benedict-Webb- Rubin equation of state because it provided the most accurate fit over the entire range of temperatures and pressures. The change in W from the previodsly listed data will be on the order of one or two units in the fourth decimal place at 70°F and minimum design concentrations. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.


(Log #32) 2 0 0 1 - 4 2 - (Table 3-5.1 (e)): Accept in Principle SUBMITrER: Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Amend flooding factor table to reflect revised specific volume values developed by The National Institute of Standards and Technology in the range of 20°F to 200°F. Delete the data from -.70°F to +10°F. See following for S values in cu f t / Ib for calculating the weights in Ib/cu ft at the listed concentrations of 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 percent.

HCFC-124 Tem~i~rature

20 3O 40

50 6O 7O 80 90

100 110 120 13O 140

150 160 170 180 190

200

Specific Vapor Volume S, cu f t / lb

2.4419 2.5049 2.5667

2.6277 2.6878 2.7471 2.8059 2.8642

2.9219 2.9795 3.0363 3.0931 3.1494

3.2059 3.2616 3.3176 3.3729 3.4283

3.4840

Temperature (deg F)

-t-

2O 3O 4O 5O 6O 7O 8O 9O

100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 2OO

S•o•p• ecific

(cu f t / lb) -S-

2.4419 2.5049 2.5667 2.6277 2.6878 2.7471 2.8O59 2.8642 2.9219 2.9795 3.0363 3.0931 3.1494 3.2059 3.2616 3.3176 3.3729 3.4283 3.4840

HCFG-124 Weight Requirements of Hazard Volume W/V (lb/cu it) English Units

Des!gn Concentration (% by Volume) 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

0.0216 0.0261 0.0308 0.0356 0.0405 0.0455 0.0506 0.0210 0.0255 0.0300 0.0347 0.0395 0.0444 0.0493 0.0205 0.0249 0.0293 0.0339 0.0385 0.0433 0.0482 0.0200 0.0243 0.0286 0.0331 0.0376 0.0423 0.0470 0.0195 0.0237 0.0280 0.0324 0.0368 0.0413 0.0450 0.0!92 0.0232 0.0274 0.0317 0.0360 0.0404 0.0450 0.0188 0.0227 . 0.0268 0.0310 0.0352 0.0396 0.0440 0.0184 0.0223 0.0263 0.0304 0.0345 0.0388 0.0432 0.0180 0.0218 0.0258 0.0298 0.0338 0.0380 0.0423 0.0177 0.0214 0.0253 0.0292 0.0332 0.0373 0.0415 0.0173 0.0210 0.0248 0.0286 0.0326 0.0366 0.0407 0.0170 0.0206 0.0243 0.0281 0.0320 0.0559 0.0400 0.0167 0.0203 0.0239 0.0276 0.0314 0.0353 0.0392 0.0164 0.0199 0.0235 0.0271 0.0308 0.0347 0.0386 0.0161 0.0196 0.0231 0.0267 0.0303 0.0341 0.0379 0.0159 0.0192 0.0227 0.0262 0.0298 0.0335 0.0373 0.0156 0.0189 0,0223 0.0258 0.0293 0.0329 0.0366 0.0154 0.0186 0.0220 0.0254 0.0288 0.0324 0-.0361 0.0151 0.0183 0.0216 0.0250 0.0284 0.0319 0.0355

12

0.0558 0.0544 0.0531 0.0519

0.0507 0.0496 0.0480 0.0476 0.0467 0.0458 0.0449 0.0441 0.0433 0.0425 0.0418 0.0411 0.0404 0.0398 0.0391

2001-42 (Log #32)

218"

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

(Log #34) 2001- 43 - (Table 3-5.1 (f)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Amend flooding factor table to reflect revised specific volume values developed by The National Institute of Standards and Technology in the range of-50°F to 200°F. Delete the data at -60°F and -70°F. See following for S values in cu ft/Ib for calculating the weights in lb/cu ft at the listed concentrations of 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16.


°F S, cu ft / lb

-50 2.3912 -40 2.4576 -30 2.5240 -20 2.5893 -10 2.6553

0 2.7203 10 2.7855 20 2.8506 30 2.9146 40 2.9789

50 3.0432 60 3.1075 70 3.1706 80 3.2342 90 3.2971

100 3.3602 110 3.4223 120 3.4855 130 3.5486 140 3.6101

150 3.6724 160 3.7341 170 3.7965 180 3.8595 190 3.9200

200 3.9825

SUBSTANTIATION: NIST chose the modified Benedict-Webb- Rubin equation of state because it provided the most accurate fit over the entire range of temperatures and pressures. Change in W from the previously listed data will be on the order of one or two units in the fourth decimal place at 70°F and minimum design concentrations. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.


Specific Vapor

Temperature Volume (deg F) (cu ft/lb)

-t- -S-

-50 2.3912 -40 2.4576 -30 2.524O -20 2.5893 -10 2.6553

0 2.7203 10 2.7855 20 2.8506 30 2.9146 4O 2.9789 50 3.0432 60 3.1075 7O 3.1706 80 3.2342 90 3.2971

100 3.3602 110 3.4223 120 3.4855 130 3.5486 140 3.6101 150 3.6724 160 3.7341 170 3.7965 180 3.8595 190 3.9200 200 3.9825

HFC-125 Weight Requirements of Hazard Volume W/V (lb/cu ft) English Units

Design Concentration (% by Volume) 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

0.0315 0.0364 0.0414 0.0465 0.0517 0.0570 0.0625 0.0681 0.0738 0.0797 0.0306 0.0354 0.0402 0.0452 0.0503 0.0555 0.0608 0.0662 0.0718 0.0775 0.0298 0.0345 0.0392 0.0440 0.0490 0.0540 0.0592 0.0645 0.0699 0.0755 0.0291 0.0336 0.0382 0.0429 0.0477 0.0527 0.0577 0.0629 0.0682 0.0736 0.0283 0.0327 0.0372 0.0418 0.0465 0.0514 0.0563 0.0613 0.0665 0.0717 0.0277 0.0320 0.0364 0.0408 0.0454 0.0501 0.0549 0.0598 0.0649 0.0700 0.0270 0.0312 0.0355 0.0399 0.0444 0.0490 0.0536 0.0584 0.0634 0.0684 0.0264 0.0305 0.0347 0.0390 0.0434 0.0478 0.0524 0.0571 0.0619 0.0668 0.0258 0.0298 0.0339 0.0381 0.0424 0.0468 0.0513 0.0559 0.0605 0.0654 0.0253 0.0292 0.0332 0.0373 0.0415 0.0458 0.0502 0.0546 0.0592 0.0639 0.0247 0.0286 0.0325 0.0365 0.0406 0.0448 0.0491 0.0535 0.0580 0.0626 0.0242 0.0280 0.0318 0.0358 0.0398 0.0439 0.0481 0.0524 0.0568 0.0613 0.0237 0.0274 0.0312 0.0350 0.0390 0.0430 0.0471 0.0513 0.0557 0.0601 0.0233 0.0269 0.0306 0.0344 0.0382 0.0422 0.0462 0.0503 0.0546 0.0589 0.0228 0.0264 0.0300 0.0337 0.0375 0.0414 0.0453 0.0494 0.0535 0.0578 0.0224 0.0259 0.0294 0 .0331 0.0368 0.0406 0.0445 0.0484 0.0525 0.0567 0.0220 0.0254 0.0289 0.0325 0.0361 0.0398 0.0437 0.0476 0.0516 0.0557 0.0216 0.0249 0.0284 0.0319 0.0355 0 .0 3 9 1 0.0429 0.0467 0.0506 0.0546 0.0212 0.0245 0.0279 0.0313 0.0348 0.0384 0.0421 0.0459 0.0497 0.0537 0.0208 0.0241 0.0274 0.0308 0.0342 0.0378 0.0414 0.0451 0.0489 0.0528 0.0205 0.0237 0.0269 0.0303 0.0337 0 .0371 0.0407 0.0443 0 .0481 0.0519 0.0202 0.0233 0.0265 0.0298 0 .0331 0.0365 0.0400 0.0436 0.0473 0.0510 0.0198 0.0229 0 .0261 0.0293 0.0326 0.0359 0.0394 0.0429 0.0465 0.0502 0.0195 0.0225 0.0256 0.0288 0.0320 0.0353 0.0387 0.0422 0.0457 0.0494 0.0192 0.0222 0.0252 0.0283 0.0315 0.0348 0 .0381 0.0415 0.0450 0.0486 0.0189 0.0218 0.0248 0.0279 0.0310 0.0342 0.0375 " 0.0409 0.0443 0.0478

2001-43 (Log #34)

219

N F P A 2001 - - F95 R O C

(Log #36) 2001- 44- (Table 3-5.1 (h)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Amend flooding factor table to reflect revised specific volume values derived from the Martin-Hou equation of state. New values for S from -70°F to 190°F at 10 degree increments follow. The values for W are calculated from the formula V + S x C + 100-C.


°F S, cu ft / lb

-70 3.9575 -60 4.0700

-5O 4.1817 -4O 4.2926 -30 4.4029 -20 4.5125 -10 4. 6216

0 4.7302 10 4.8384 20 4.9463 30 5.0538 40 5.1610

50 5.2680 6 0 . 5.3748 70 5.4814 80 5.5878 90 5.6940

100 5.8001 110 5.9061 120 6.0119 130 6.1176 140 6.2233

150 6.3289 160 6.4343 170 6.5398 180 6.6451 190 6.7504

SUBSTANTIATION: The previous values for S came from an internal program. The new values are in the public domain. See "Physical and Thermodynamic Properties of Thifluoromethane" (A.LCh.E.Journal 5:125-29) byY.C. Hou andJ.J. Martin. changes in W will be on the order of one or two units in the fourth decimal

lace over anticipated temperatures and design concentrations. PCOMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.


Specific Vapor

Temperature Volume (deg F) (cu ft/Ib)

-t- -S- 10

-70 3.9573 0.0281 -60 4.0700 0.0273 -50 4.1817 0.0266 -40 4.2926 0.0259 -30 4.4029 0.0252 -20 4.5125 0.0246 -10 4.6216 0.0240

0 4.7302 0.0235 10 4.8384 0.0230 20 4.9465 0.0225 30 5.0538 0.0220 40 5.1610 0.0215 50 5.2680 0.0211 60 5.3748 0.0207 70 5.4814 0.0203 80 5.5878 0.0199 90 5.6940 0.0195

100 5.8001 0.0192 110 5.9061 0.0188 12.0 6.0119 0.0185 130 6.1176 0.0182 140 6.2233 0.0179 150 6.3289 0.0176 160 6.4343 0.0173 170 6.5398 0.0170 180 6.6451 0.0167 190 6.7504 0.0165

HFG-23 Weight Requirements of Hazard Volume W/V (lb/cu ft) English Units

Design Concentration (% by Volume) 12 14 1 5 16 17 18 20 22 24

0.0345 0.0411 0.0446 0.0481 0.0518 0.0555 0.0632 0.0713 0.0798 0.0335 0.0400 0.0434 0.0468 0.0503 0.0539 0.0614 0.0693 0.0776 0.0326 0.0389 0.0422 0.0455 0.0490 0.0525 0.0598 0.0674 0.0755 0.0318 0.0379 0.0411 0.0444 0.0477 0 .0511 0.0582 0.0657 0.0736 0.0310 0.0370 0.0401 0.0435 0.0465 0.0499 0.0568 0.0641 0.0717 0.0302 0.0361 0.0391 0.0422 0.0454 0.0486 0.0554 0.0625 0.0700 0.0295 0.0352 0.0382 0.0412 0.0443 0.0475 0.0541 0.0610 0.0683 0.0288 0.0344 0.0373 0.0403 0.0433 0.0464 0.0529 0.0596 0.0668 0.0282 0.0336 0.0365 0.0394 0.0423 0.0454 0.0517 0.0583 0.0653 0.0276 0.0529 0.0557 0.0585 0.0414 0.0444 0.0505 0.0570 0.0638 0.0270 0.0322 0.0349 0.0377 0.0405 0.0434 0.0495 0.0558 0.0625 0.0264 0.0315 0.0342 0.0369 0.0397 0.0425 0.0484 0.0547 0.0612 0.0259 0.0309 0.0335 0.0562 0.0389 0.0417 0.0475 0.0535 0.0599 0.0254 0.0303 0.0328 0.0354 0.0381 0.0408 0.0465 0.0525 0.0588 0.0249 0.0297 0.0322 0.0347 0.0374 0.0400 0.0456 0.0515 0.0576 0.0244 0.0291 0.0316 0.0341 0.0367 0.0393 0.0447 0.0505 0.0565 0.0239 0.0286 0.0310 0.0355 0.0360 0.0386 0.0439 0.0495 0.0555 0.0235 0.0281 0.0304 0.0328 0.0353 0.0378 0.0431 0.0486 0.0544 0.0231 0.0276 0.0299 0.0323 0.0347 0.0372 0.0423 0.0478 0.0535 0.0227 0.0271 0.0294 0.0317 0.0341 0.0365 0.0416 0.0469 0.05')5 0.0223 0.0266 0.0288 0.0311 0.0335 0.0359 0.0409 0.0461 0.0516 0.0219 0.0262 0.0284 0.0306 0.0329 0.0353 0.0402 0.0453 0.0507 0.0215 0.0257 0.0279 0.0301 0.0324 0.0347 0.0395 0.0446 0.0499 0.0212 0.0253 0.0274 0.0296 0.0318 0.0341 0.0389 0.0438 0.0491 0.0209 0.0249 0.0270 0.0291 0.0313 0.0336 0.0382 0.0431 0.0483 0.0205 0.0245 0.0266 0.0287 0.0308 0.0330 0.0376 0.0424 0.0475 0.0202 0.0241 0.0261 0.0282 0.0303 0.0325 0.0370 0.0418 0.0468

2001-44 (Log #36)

220

NFPA 2001 ~ F95 ROC

(Log #50) 2001- 45 - (Table 3-5.1 (i)): Accept SUBMITTER: Stephanie R. Skaggs, Pacific Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: The table shown following needs to be added between the existing Table 3-5.1 (h) HFG-23 Total Flooding Quantity and Table 3-5.1 (i) IG-01 Total Flooding Quantity. The new table should become Table 3-5.1 (i) and the remaining tables for IG- 01, IG-541, and IG-55 should follow the proposed new Table for FIC- 1311. Table numbers should be changed accordingly for the IG agents.

SUBSTANTIATION: The standard does not address FIC-1311, an acceptable clean agent for normally unoccupied, total flood applications (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. 26, 1994). There- fore, the table should be added so as to include FIC-1311. COMMIT'FEE ACTION: Accept.

Table 3-5.1(i) FIC-13II Total Flooding Quantity [1]

Temp. -T-

(°F) [31

FIC-1311 Specific Vapor

Volume S

(cu ft/lb) [4]

FIG-1311 Weight Requirements of Hazard Volume W/V (lb/cu ft) [2]

Design Concentration (% byvolume) [5]

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

-40 1.5071 0.0205 0.0276 0.0349 0.0424 0.0499 0.0577 0.0656 0.0737 -30 1.5510 0.0199 0.0269 0.0339 0.0412 0.0485 0.0561 0.0638 0.0716 -20 1.5948 0.0194 0.0261 0.0330 0.0400 0.0472 0.0545 0.0620 0.0697 -10 1.6387 0.0189 0.0254 0.0321 0.0390 0.0459 0.0531 0.0604 0.0678

0 1.6826 0.0184 0.0248 0.0313 0.0379 0.0447 0.0517 0.0588 0.0660

10 1.7264 0.0179 0.0241 0.0305 0.0370 0.0436 0.0504 0.0573 0.0644 20 1.7703 0.0175 0.0235 0.0297 0.0361 0.0425 0.0491 0.0559 0.0628 30 1.8141 0.0170 0.0230 0.0290 0.0352 0.0415 0.0479 0.0545 0.0612 40 1.8580 0.0166 0.0224 0.0283 0.0344 0.0405 0.0468 0.0532 0.0598 50 1.9019 0.0163 0.0219 0.0277 0.0336 0.0396 0.0457 0.0520 0.0584

60 1.9457 0.0159 0.0214 0.0270 0.0328 0.0387 0.0447 0.0508 0.0571 70 1.9896 0.0155 0.0209 0.0265 0.0321 0.0378 0.0437 0.0497 0.0558 80 2.0335 0.0152 0.0205 0.0259 0.0314 0.0370 0.0428 0.0486 0.0546 90 2.0773 0.0149 0.0201 0.0253 0.0307 0.0362 0.0419 0.0476 0.0535

100 2.1212 0.0146 0.0196 0.0248 0.0301 0.0355 0.0410 0.0466 0.0524

110 2.1650 0.0143 0.0192 0.0243 0.0295 0.0348 0.0402 0.0457 0.0513 120 2.2089 0.0140 0.0189 0.0238 0.0289 0.0341 0.0394 0.0448 0.0503 130 2.2528 0.0137 0.0185 0.0234 0.0283 0.0334 0.0286 0.0439 0.0493 140 2.2966 0.0135 0.0181 0.0229 0.0278 0.0328 0.0379 0.0431 0,0484 150 2.3405 0.0132 0.0178 0.0225 0.0273 0.0322 0.0372 0.0423 0.0475

160 2.3843 0.0130 0.0175 0.0221 0.0268 0.0316 0.0365 0.0415 0.0466 170 2.4282 0.0127 0.0172 0.0217 0.0263 0.0310 0.0358 0.0407 0.0458 180 2.4721 0.0125 0.0169 0.0213 0.0258 0.0304 0.0352 0.0400 0.0449 190 2.5159 0.0123 0.0166 0.0209 0.0254 0.0299 0.0346 0.0393 0.0442 200 2.5598 0.0121 0.0163 0.0206 0.0249 0.0294 0.0340 0.0386 0,0434

[1] [2]

The manufacturers's shall specify the temperature range for operation. W/V [Agent Weight Requirements (lb/cu ft) ] = Pounds of agent required per cubic foot of protected volume to produce indicated concen tradon at temperature specified.

V c W---

s 1 0 0 - c

[3] [4)

[5]

T [Temperature (F)] - Tile design temperature in the hazard area. S [Specific Volume (cu ft/lb) ] - Specific volume of superheated FIC-1311 vapor may be approximated by the formula:

S = 1.683 + 0.0044 T where T = temperaiure (F)

C [Concentration (%)] - Volumetric concentration of FIC-1311 in air at the temperature indicated.

221

N F P A 2001 - - F95 R O C

(Log #79) 9001- 46 - (Table 3-5.1 (i)): Accept in Prindple SUBMITrER= Logan T. Fidler, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 9001-34 RECOMMENDATION: Add metric conversion to IG-541 flooding factor table.

IG-541 IG-541 Sgecific Sgecific

Temperature_T. va_~r Temperature.T_ va.~or

(OF) (cu ft/lb) (°C) (cu m/kg)

-40 8.8787 -40 0.5544 -$0 9.0906 -$4.4 0.5676 -20 9.3024 -28.9 0.5808 -10 9.5143 -Z%3 0.5941 0 9.7262 -17.8 0.6073 10 9.9381 -12.2 0.6205 20 10.1499 -6.7 0.6338 30 10.3618 -1.1 0.647 40 10.5737 4.4 0.6602 50 10.7856 10 0.6734 60 10.9975 15.6 0.6867 70 11.2093 21.1 0.6999 80 11.4212 26.7 0.7131 90 11.6331 32.2 0.7264 1 O0 11.845 37.8 0.7396 110 12.0569 43.3 0.7528 120 12.2687 48.9 0 366 130 12.4806 54.4 0.7793 1 40 12.6925 60 0.7925 150 12.9044 65.6 0.8057 160 13.1163 71.1 0.819 170 13.3281 76.7 0.8322 180 13.54 82.2 0.8454 190 13.7519 87.8 0.8586 200 13.9638 93.3 0.8729

IG-541 Volume Requirements of Hazard Volume V/V (cu M IG-541/cu M) Design Concen~ation (% by Volume)

34% 38% 42% 46% 50% 54% 58% 62% 0.525 0.604 0.688 0.778 0.875 0.981 1.096 1.222 0.513 0.59 0.672 0.76 0.855 0.958 1.07 1.194 0.501 0.576 0.657 0.743 0.836 0.936 1.046 1.166 0.49 0.563 0.642 0.726 0.817 0.915 1.022 1.14 0.479 0.551 -0.628 0.71 0.799 0.895 1 1.116 0.469 0.539 0.615 0.695 0.782 0.876 0.979 1.092 0.459 0.528 0.602 0.681 0.766 0.858 0.958 1.069 0.45 0.517 0.59 0.667 0.75 0.84 0.939 1.047

0.441 0.507 0.578 0.653 0.735 0.824 0.92 1.026 0.432 0.497 0.566 0.641 0.721 0.807 0.902 1.006 0.424 0.487 0.555 0.628 0.707 0.792 0.885 0.987 0.416 0.478 0.545 0.616 0.693 0.777 0.868 0.968 0.408 0A69 0.535 0.605 0.681 0.762 0.852 0.95 0.401 0.461 0.525 0.594 0.668 0.749 0.836 0.933 0.393 0.453 0.516 0.583 0.656 0.735 0.821 0.916 0.386 0.445 0.507 0.573 0.6745 0.722 0.807 0.9 0.38 0.437 0.498 0.563 0.634 0.71 0.793 0.884

0.373 0.43 0.489 0.554 0.623 0.698 0.779 0.869 0.367 0.422 0.431 0.544 0.612 0.686 0.766 0.855 0.361 0.415 0.473 0.535 0.602 0.675 0.754 0.841 0.355 0.409 0.466 0.527 0.593 0.664 0.742 0.827 0-$5 0.402 0.458 0.518 0.583 0.653 0.73 0.814 0.344 0.396 0.451 0.51 0.574 0.643 0.718 0.801 0.339 0.39 0.444 0.502 0.565 0.633 0.707 0.789 0.334 0.384 0.437 0.495 0.557 0.624 0.697 0.777

SUBSTANTIATION: Standardization of graphs and tables to metric units. COMMITTEE AC1"ION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-47 (Log #65).

222

NFPA 2001 --- F95 ROC

O

(Log #65) 2001- 47 - (Tables 3-5.1 (i), (j), (k)): Accept in Principle S ~ Joseph A. Senecal, Fenwal Safety Systems COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Change in Table 3-5.1(i), (j), (k) specific volume values to make agree with ideal gas values or substantiate

-why values given are different than expected for ideal gases.

Ideal Gas Specific Volume vs T at 14.7 psia

Argon IG-01 Inergen 1G-541 Algonite IG-55 N2 - 0 . 0 0 % . 52.00% 50.00% Ar 100.00% 46.00% 50.00%

C02 0.oo% 8.oo% 0.oo% Avg MW 39.95 34.07 33.98

Temp., F S, fl3/Ib S ft3/Ib S, ft3/Ib

--40 7.675 9.001 9.023 -$0 7.858 9.215 9.238 -20 8.041 9.429 9.453 -10 8.224 9.644 9.668

0 8.406 9.858 9.883 10 8.589 10.072 10.097 20 8.772 10.286 10.312 30 8.954 10.501 10.527 40 9.137 10.715 10.742 50 9.320 10.929 10.957 60 9.503 11.144 11.172 70 9.685 11.358 11.386 80 9.868 11.572 11.601 90 10.051 11.787 11.816

loo 10.234 12.001 12.031 110 10.416 12.215 12.246 120 10.599 12.429 I2.461 130 10.782 12.644 12.675 140 10.965 12.858 12.890 150 11.147 13.072 13.105 160 11.330 13.287 13.320 170 11.513 13.501 13.535 180 11.696 13.715 13.750 190 11.878 13.930 13.965 200 12.061 14.144 14.179

Specific volumes calculated from ideal gas law as: S = RT/PM = specific volume R = ideal gas law constant ffi 8.31451J/mol/K (Ref. NIST) R ffi ideal gas law constant ffi 1545.4 ft-lb/Ibmol/R Mffi molwt T ffi absolute temp P ffi absolute pressure

S as Listed and Difference from Ideal Gas Values

Table No. Table No. 3-5.1(i) 3-5.1 (k)

IG-01 IG-55

8.14344 9.57598 1.28% 1.30%

9.81038 , 11.5362 1.29% 1.31%

10.9217 12.843 1.S0% 1.32%

Table No. 3-5.1¢j)

IG-541 T = -20°F

9.~0243 -1.34%

% = 70°F

11.2093 -1.31%

T ffi 130°F

12.4806 -1.29%

SUBSTANTIATION: The inert gas products are all exhibit ideal gas behavior at 1 atmosphere pressure (14.7 psia) in the temperature range of interest (--40 to 200°F) yet the specific volume values listed deviate consistently by about +13 percent (IG-01 and IG-55) or -1.3 percent (IG-541). Listed in tables above are specific volume values calculated by the ideal gas equation of state and also deviations of the presently listed values from ideal gas expectations. The submitter knows of no basis to support deviation of the actual gas specific volume values from those given in the above table by amounts of the order of 1 percent as presently listed. COMMITYEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

(~see Tables on following 3 pages) COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The committee agrees with the submitter's substantiation.

225

N F P A 2001 - - F95 R O C

IG 01 Total Flooding Quantity y [1 ]

IG 01 Volume Requirements of Hazard Volume V/V (cu ft/cu ft) [2]

Design Concentration (% byvolume) [51 ~o ecific

lume

r T,d,. s (euft/ra) [3] [4] 34% 37% 40% 42%

-40" 7.671761 0.524 0,585 0.645 0.688 -30 7.854571 - 0.512 0.570 0,630 0.672 -20 8.037381 0.501 0.557 0,615 0.656 -10 8.220191 0.489 0.544 0.602 0.642

0 8.402991 , 0.479 0.532 0.589 0.628 10 8.585801 0,489 0.521 0.576 0.614 20 8.768611 0.459 0.510 0.564 0.602 30 8.951421 0.449 0.500 0.553 0.589 40 9.134221 0.440 0.490 0.541 0.577 50 9.317031 0.432 0.480 0.531 0.566 60 ~.499b~41 0.424 0.471 0.521 0.555 70 9.682651 0.416 0.462 0.511 0.545 80 9.865451 0,408 0.453 0.501 0.535 90 10.048261 0.400 0.445 0.492 0.525 100 10.231071 0.393 0.437 0.483 0.516 110 10 .419881 0.386 0.430 0,475 0.506 120 10 .596681 0.380 0.422 0.467 0.498 130 10.779491 0.373 0.415 0.459" 0.489 140 10.962301 0.367 0.408 0.451 0.481 150 11.145111 0.361 0.401 0.444 0.473 160 11.327911 0.355 0.395 0.437 0.466 170 11.510721 0.350 0.389 0.430 0.458 180 11.693531 0.344 0.383 0.423 0.451 190 11.876341 0.339 0.377 0.416 0.444 200 12.059141 0.334 0.371 0.410 0.437

47% 49% 58% 62% 0.801 0.850 1.095 1.221 0.783 0.830 1.069 1.193 0.765 0.811 1.045 1.166 0.748 0.793 1.022 1.140 0.732 0.776 1.000 1.115 0.716 0.759 0.978 1.091 0.701 0.744 0.958 1,088 0.687 0.728 0.938 1.047 0.873 0.714 0.920 1.026 0.660 0.700 0.902 1.006 0.647 0.686 0.884 0.986 0.635 0.673 0.868 0.958 0.623 0.661 0.851 0.950 0.612 0.649 0.836 0.932 0.601 0.637 0.821 0.916 0.590 0.626 0.807 0.900 0.580 0.615 0.793 0.884 0.570 0.605 0.779 0.869 0.561 0.595 0.766 0.855 0.552 0.585 0.754 0.841 0.543 0.576 0.742 0.827 0.534 0.586 0.730 0.814 0.526 0.558 0.718 0.801 0.518 0.549 0.707 0.789 0.510 0.541 0.697 0.777

[1] The manufacturer's listing shall specify the temperature range for operation. [2] -W/a/[Agent weight Requirements ( lb/cu ft) = Pounds of agent required per cubic foot of protected volume to produce indicated concentration at temperature specified.

V 100 W = ~ *In [6]

S 100 - C

[4] S [Specific Volume (cu ft/lb)] - Specific volume of superheated IG 100 vapor may be approximated by the formula:

S = 8.402993 + 0.01828t where t = temperature (F)

[5] C [Concentration (%)] -Volumetric concentration oflG-01 in air at the temperatue indicated at 1013 mbar

100 [6] The term W = In

100 - C

gives the volume at a rated concentration (%) and temperature to reach an air-agent mixture at the end of flooding time in a volume of 1 cu ft.

(continued from Committe Action on 2001-47 (Log #65).

224

NFPA 2001 - - F95 ROC

Temperature -T-

(Deg F)

-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 2O 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200

IG-541 eCific lume -S-

(cu. f i~b I

9.001 9.215 9.429 9.644 9.858 10.072 10.286 10.501 10.715 10.929 11.144 11.358 11.572 11.787 12.001 12.215 12.429 12.644 12.858 13.072 13,287 13.501 13.715 13.93

14.144

Temperature . T o

(Deg C)

-40 -34.4 -28.9 -23.3 -17.8 -12.2 -6.7 -1.1 4.4 10

15.6 21.1 26.7 32.2 37.8 43.3 48.9 54.4 60

65.6 71.1 76.7 82.2 87.8 93.3

IG-541

~Po eCific IG-541 Volume Requirements of Hazard Volume V/V (cu M IG-541/cu. M) lume Design Concentration (% by Volume) -S-

I~a. m/k~) 34% 38% 42% 46% 50% 54% 58%

0.562 0.525 0.604 0.688 0.778 0.875 0.981 1.096 0.576 0.513 0.59 0.672 0.76 0.855 0.958 1.07 0.589 0.501 0.576 0.657 0.743 0.836 0.936 1.046 0.603 0.49 0.563 0.642 0.726 0.817 0.915 1.022 0.616 0.479 0.551 0.628 0.71 0.799 0.895 1 0.629 0.469 0.539 0.615 0.695 0.782 0.876 0.979 0.643 0.459 0.528 0.602 0.681 0.766 0.858 0.958 0.656 0.45 0.517 0.59 0.667 0.75 0.84 0.939 0.669 0.441 0.507 0.578 0.653 0.735 0.824 0.92 0.683 0.432 0.497 0.566 0.641 0.721 0.807 0.902 0.696 0.424 0.487 0.555 0.628 0.707 0.792 0.885 0.710 0.416 0.478 0.545 0.616 0.693 0.777 0.868 0.723 0.408 0.469 0.535 0.605 0.681 0.762 0.852 0.736 0.401 0.461 0.525 0.594 0.668 0.749 0.836 0.750 0.393 0.453 0.516 0.583 0.656 0.735 0.821 0.763 0.386 0.445 0.507 0.573 0.645 0.722 0.807 0.777 0.38 0.437 0.498 0.563 0.634 0.71 0.793 0.790 0.373 0.43 0.489 0.554 0.623 0.698 0.779 0.803 0.367 0.422 0.481 0.544 0.612 0.686 0.766 0.817 0.361 0.415 0.473 0.535 0.602 0.675 0.754 0.830 0.355 0.409 0.466 0,527 0.593 0.664 0.742 0.844 0.35 0.402 0.458 0.518 0.583 0.653 0.73 0.857 0.344 0.396 0.451 0.51 0.574 0.643 0.718 0.870 0.339 0.39 0-444 0,502 0.565 0.633 0.707 0.884 0.334 0.384 0.437 0.495 0.557 0.624 0.697

62% 1.222 1.194 1.166 1.14 1.116 1.092 1.069 1.047 1.026 1.006 0.987 0.968 0.95

0.933 0.916 0.9

0.884 0.869 0.855 0.841 0.827 0.814 0.801 0.789 0.777

Table 3-5.1 (k) IG-55 Total Flooding Quantity [1]

IG-55 Temp. Specific Vapor

-t- Volume (°F) S

(cu ft/lb) [3) [4]

IG-55 Volume Requirements of Hazard Volume V/V (cuft IG-55/cu ft) [2]


34% 38% 42% 46% 50% 54% 58% 62% -40 9,02108 0.524 0 , 6 0 3 0,688 0,778 0,875 0,980 1 , 0 9 5 1,221 -30 9,23603 0,512 0 , 5 8 9 0,672 0,760 0,854 0,957 1 , 0 6 9 1,193 -20 9,45099 0,501 0,576 0,656 0 , 7 4 2 0 , 8 3 5 0 , 9 3 5 1 , 0 4 5 1,166 -10 9,66594 0,489 0,563 0,642 0,726 0,816 0,915 1 , 0 2 2 1,140 0 9,88090 0,479 0 , 5 5 1 0,628 0,710 0,799 0,895 1 , 0 0 0 1,115 10 10,09586 0,469 0 , 5 3 9 0,614 0,695 0 , 7 8 2 0,876 0,978 1,091 20 10,31081 0,459 0,528 0 , 6 0 2 0,680 0 , 7 6 5 0,857 0,958 1,068 30 10,52577 0,449 0,517 0,589 0,667 0,750 0,840 0,938 1,047 40 10,74073 0,440 0,507 0,577 0,653 0,735 0,823 0,920 1,026 50 10,95568 0,432 0,497 0,566 0,640 0,720 0,807 0,902 1,006 60 11,17064 0,424 0,487 0 , 5 5 5 0,628 0,706 0 , 7 9 1 0,884 0,986 70 11,38560 0,416 0,478 0,545 0,616 0 , 6 9 3 0,777 0,868 0,968 80 11,60055 0,408 0 , 4 6 9 0,535 0,605 0,680 0 , 7 6 2 0 , 8 5 1 0,950 90 11,81551 0,400 0 , 4 6 1 0 , 5 2 5 0,594 0,668 0,748 0,836 0,932 100 12,03046 0,393 0 , 4 5 2 0,516 0 , 5 8 3 0,656 0 , 7 3 5 0 , 8 2 1 0,916 1 lO 12,24542 0,386 0,444 0,506 0,573 0,644 0,722 0,807 0,900 120 12,46038 0,380 0,437 0,498 0,563 0,633 0,710 0 , 7 9 3 0,884 130 12,67533 0,373 0,429 0 , 4 8 9 0 , 5 5 3 0,623 0,698 0,779 0,869 140 12,89029 0,367 0 , 4 2 2 0 , 4 8 1 0,544 0,612 0,686 0,766 0,855 150 13,10525 0,361 0 , 4 1 5 0 , 4 7 3 0,535 0,602 0,675 0,754 0,841 160 13,32020 0,355 0,409 0,466 0,527 0 , 5 9 2 0,664 0 , 7 4 2 0,827 170 13,53516 0,350 0,402 0,458 0,518 0 , 5 8 3 0 , 6 5 3 0,730 0,814 180 13,75012 0,344 0,396 0 , 4 5 1 0,510 0,574 0,643 0,718 0,801 190 13,96507 0,339 0,390 0,444 0 , 5 0 2 0,565 0 , 6 3 3 0,707 0,789 200 14,18003 0,334 0,384 0,437 0,495 0,557 0,623 0,697 0,777

[1] The manufacturer's shall specify the temperature range for operation. [2] For V/V [Agent Volume Requirements (cu ft/cu ft)], refer to 3-5.2. [3] t [Temperature (°F)] -The design temperature in the hazard area. [4] S [Specific. Volume (cu ft/Ib) ] - Specific volume of superheated IG-55 vapor may be approxamated by the formula=

S = 9.8809 + 0.0215"t where t = temperature (°F).

[5] C [Concentration (%) ] - Volumetric concentration of IG-55 in air at the temperature indicated.

(continued from Gommitte Action on 2001-47 (Log #65).

225

N F P A 2001 - - F95 R O C

Table 3-5.1 (1) IG-55 Total Flooding Quantity [1]

IG-55 Temp. Specific Vapor

-t- Volume (°C) S

(m3/kg) [31 [4]

1G-55 Volume Requirements of Hazard Volume V/V (m 3 IG-55/m 3) [2]


-40 0,56317 0,524 0,603 0,688 0,778 0,875 0,980 1,095 1,221 -35 0,56324 0,513 0,591 0,673 0,761 0,856 0,959 1,072 1,196 -30 0,58732 0,503 0,579 0,659 0,746 0,839 0,940 1,050 1,171 -25 0,59940 0,493 0,567 0,646 0,731 0,822 0,921 1,029 1,147 -20 0,61148 0,483 0,556 0,633 0,716 0,806 0,903 1,008 1,125 -15 0,62355 0,474 0,545 0,621 0,702 0,790 0,885 0,989 1,103 -10 0,63563 0,465 0,535 0,609 0,689 0,775 0,868 0,970 1,082 -5 0,64771 0,456 0,525 0,598 0,676 0,761 0,852 0,952 1,062 0 0,65979 0,448 0,515 0,587 0,664 0,747 0,837 0,935 1,042 5 0,67186 0,440 0,506 0,576 0,652 0,733 0,822 0,918 1,024

10 0,68394 0,432 0,497 0,566 0,640 0,720 0,807 0,902 1,006 15 0,69602 0,424 0,488 0,556 0,629 0,708 0,793 0,886 0,988 20 0,70810 0,417 0,480 0,547 0,619 0,696 0,779 0,871 0,971 25 0,72017 0,410 0,472 0,538 0,608 0,684 0,766 0,856 0,955 30 0,73225 0,403 0,464 0,529 0,598 0,673 0,754 0,842 0,939 35 0,74433 0,397 0,456 0,520 0,588 0,662 0,742 0,828 0,924 40 0,75641 0,390 0,449 0,512 0,579 0,651 0,730 0,815 0,909 45 0,76848 0,384 0,442 0,504 0,570 0,641 0,718 0,802 0,895 50 0,78056 0,578 0,435 0,496 0,561 0,631 0,707 .0,790 0,881 55 0,79264 0,373 0,429 0,488 0,553 0,622 0,696- 0,778 0,868 60 0,80471 0,367 0,422 0,481 0,544 0,612 0,686 0,766 0,855 65 0,81679 0,362 0,416 0,474 0,536 0,603 0,676 0,755 0,842 70 0,82887 0,356 0,410 0,467 0,528 0,594 0,666 0,744 0,830 75 0,84095 0,351 0,404 0,460 0,521 0,586 0,656 0,733 0,818 80 0,85502 0,346 0,398 0,454 0,513 0,578 0,647 0,723 0,806 85 0,86510 0,341 0,393 0,448 0,506 0,569 0,638 0,713 0,795 90 0,87718 0,337 0,387 0,441 0,499 0,562 0,629 0,703 0,784 95 0,88926 0,332 0,382 0,435 0,493 0,554 0,621 0,693 0,773 100 0,90133 0,328 0,377 0t430 0,486 0,547 0,612 0~684 0,763

[ 1 ] The manufacturer's shall specify the temperature range for operation. [2] For V/V [Agent Volume Requirements (m 3/m3)], refer to 3.5.2. [3] t [Temperature (°G)] - The design temperature in the hazard area. [4] S [Specific Volume (m 3/kg) ] - Specific volume of superheated IG-55 vapor may be approximated by the formula:

S = 0.8598 + 0.00242"t where t = temperature (°G).

[5] G [Concentration (%)] -Volumetric concentration of IG-55 in air at the temperature indicated.

(continued from Gommitte Action on 2001-47 (Log #65).

(Log #12) 2001- 48 - (Table 5-5.1 (j)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-35 RECOMMENDATION: Review new Flooding Factor Table for IG-55 from units of weight (Ib/cu ft) to units of volume (cu ft IG-55/cu ft).

(This data to be supplied by the submitter of ROP 2001-35). SUBSTANTIATION: Editorial. To provide consistency ofunitswith the other inert gas agents in this standard. COMMITFEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-1 (Log #45).

(Log #91) 2001-49- (3-5.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Joseph A. Senecal, Fenwal Safety Systems COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: t. Change the equation as written from: X = 2.303 (Vs/S) Logl0 (100/(100-G)) to: X = 2.303 [530/(460 + t)] Log10 [100/(100-C)] 2. Eliminate references to kl, k2, S, and Vs. 3. Replace definition o fT with "t = Minimum design temperature

of the protected volume, °F."

4. Change "Note" to read: "NOTE: This calculation includes an allowance for leakage of

agent and air from the protected volume during discharge." SUBSTANTIATION: This form of the design equation, as given, is confusing to the user. The term "S" has long been used to designate the specific volume of halocarbon agents at the design temperate and pressure. The term "Vs" is used to refer to agent specific volume at 70°F. The ratio Vs/S is equal to the absolute temperature (Rankine) ratio 530/(460 + t). It would be much simpler o avoid the use of "S" and "Vs" by use of the proposed equation which uses the design temperature, "t," only. This avoids table look-up and interpolation errors. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

1. Replace definition o fT with "t = Minimum design temperature of the protected volu me, °F."

2. Add the following: An alternative equation for calculating the inert gas clean agent concentrations is shown below: X = 2.303 [530/(460 + t)] Logl0 [100/(100-C)]

COMMITI~E STATEMENT: Provided alternative equation for calculating the inert gas clean agent concentrations.

226

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

(Log #22) 2001- 50 - (Table 3-6): Accept SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Revise Table 3-6 to correct the metric values (Kin) for equivalent altitude as shown below.

Table 3-6 Atmospheric Correction Factors

Atmospheric Correction

Equivalent Altitude Enclosure Pressure Factor

-3,000 ft (--0.92 kin) 16.25 psia (84.0 cm Hg) 1.11 -2,000 ft (--0.61 kin) 15.71 psia (81.2 cm Hg) 1.07 -1,000 ft (--0.30 kin) 15.23 psia (78.7 cm Hg) 1.04

0 ft (0.00 km) 14.71 psia (76.0 cm Hg) 1.00 1,000 ft (0.30 kln) 14.18 psia (73.3 cm Hg) 0.96 2,000 ft (0.61 kin) 13.64 psia (70.5 cm Hg) 0.93 3,000 ft (0.91 km) 13.12 psia (67.89 cm Fig) 0.89 4,000 ft (1.22 kin) 12.58 psia (65.0 cm Hg) 0.86 5,000 ft (1.52 kin) 12.04 psia (62.2 cm Hg) 0.82 6,000 ft (1.83 kin) 11.53 psia (59.6 cm Hg) 0.78 7,000 ft (2.13 kin) 11.03 psia (57.0 cm Hg) 0.75 8,000 ft (2.45 kan) 10.64 psia (55.0 cm Hg) 0.72 9,000 ft (2.74 km) 10.22 psia (52.8 cm Hg) 0.69

10,000 ft/3.05 kin) 9.77 psia 150.5 cm HI~ ) 0.66

SUBSTANTIATION: Editorial revision to correct metric values (Kin) for altitude. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

SUBSTANTIATION: Tests have shown that for certain Class A hazards longer discharge times result in inconsistent performance. Tests also show that longer discharge times afford no advantage with regard to the amount o f combustion products formed.

NOTE: Support ing material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-51 (Log #28).

(Log #66) 2001- 53 - (3-8.1.2.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITYER: Carla Pizzarello, Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-39 RECOMMENDATION: The recommendat ion to change the length of discharge from 60 to 90 seconds for Class A fires be rejected and that the maximum discharge time to achieve the design concentration for inert gas systems be 60 seconds. SUBSTANTIATION: The data submitted by Ansul to substantiate their public comment was obtained on a different scale, 1/Sth full scale, than the test scale required to obtain UL listing. The effects of scale on fire behaviors are important. The effects of scale in these exdnguishing tests are not well established and there is no basis for accepting that the conclusion of the 1/Sth-scale tests are applicable to the full-scale test, COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-51 (Log #28).

(Log #28) 2001- 51 - (3-8.1.2.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: J o n Casler, Fike Corporation COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-39 RECOMMENDATION: Revise 3-8.1.2.2 to read as follows:

3-8.1.2.2 For inert gas agents, discharge time shall no t exceed 60 seconds. SUBSTANTIATION: Substantiation of the original proposal is no t adequate. We have no record of independen t testing done in this area. The only ment ion of combustion products made in the argument was that of carbon monoxide. There are many other forms of combustion products that are of concern.

Further, the data submitted by Ansul in an at tempt to substantiate their public proposal was obtained in much smaller enclosure (256 cuf t ) than used in the U L / F M / U L C (1200 cu ft) tests. In the smaller enclosure, the effects of turbulence can contribute greatly to extinguishment. The observation o fveryshor t extinguishing dines compared to the discharge times suggest that the fire is being blown out in the small enclosure tests. In one example, a test was designed to achieve 90 percent of the design concentrat ion in 90 seconds and the repor ted extinguishing dme was 34 seconds. The fire was extinguished well before design concentrat ion was even approached.

In addition, not only are the scale effects of these tests no t well established, our testing has shown that this type of comparison is unreliable. There is no technically substantiated basis for extrapolat- ing the data from these small scale tests to full scale.

It has been repor ted by the manufacturers of these systems that there is no problem achieving a 60 second discharge time and that they have been installed this way. In keeping with the requirements on halocarbon agents, file discharge time should be kept to a minimum in order to minimize exposure to products of combustion in fire scenarios. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Revise 3-8.1.2.2 to read as follows: 3-8.1.2.2 The discharge time for inert gas agents shall not exceed

60 seconds to achieve 95 percent of the design concentrat ion or as otherwise required by the authority having jurisdiction. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: To minimize combustion products systems are being listed to the above criteria.

(Log #62) 2001- 52 - (3-8.1.2.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Mark L. Robin, Great Lakes Chemical Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Replace current textwith:

"The discharge time for inert gas agent shall not exceed 60 seconds, or as otherwise required by the authority having jurisdiction."

(Log #105) 2001-54- (3-8.1.2.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Paul E. Rivers, 3M Company Specialty Chenlicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Delete this paragraph. Revise paragraph 3- 8.1.2.1 text as follows:

3-8.1.2.1 The agent discharge shall be completed as quickly as possible to suppress the fire and limit the formation of decomposition and combustion products. In no case shall the discharge time exceed 10 seconds for halocarbon agents or 60 seconds for inert gas agents to achieve design concentration, or as otherwise required by the authority having jurisdiction. SUBSTANTIATION: In the test report data submit ted by the manufacturer, the conditions under which the tests were conducted for a Glass A fuel were such that the nozzle had to be in relative close proximity to the fuel. Because of this close proximity, i twould appear that discharge of the agent will "fan' the flames and embers present on the fuel such that more fuel mass loss would be expected and, in fact, would occur. This being the case, the premise for the change to the original document that has been included in this ROP is at best inconclusive.

The vast majority of clean agent applications involve rooms bf much larger volume creadng a greater relative distance of the nozzle away from the fuel, thus eliminating the fanning condition. Additional testing in a full scale room would be warranted to show that mass loss would be similar to the small scale room used in the submitted test report and used as the premise for the change. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-51 (Log #28).

(Log #23) 2001- 55 - (4-7.2.4.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-43 RECOMMENDATION: Revise paragraph 4-7.2.4.1 to read:

4-7.2.4.1 All wiring systems shall be properly installed in raceways in compliance with the system drawings. AC and DC wiring shall not be combined in a common raceway unless properly shielded and grounded.

(Reference: NEC 1993, Article 100 for definition of raceway). SUBSTANTIATION: It is virtually important that unwanted discharges be reduced to a minimum. Experience with suppression systems has shown many incidents where the unprotected initiator or release circuit wires have shor ted and caused a discharge since the wiring was unprotected.

227

¢

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. Add the following new text: 2-3.1.3 Initiating and releasing circuits shall be installed in

raceways. AC & DC wiring shal lnot be combined in a common conduit or raceway unless shielded and grounded. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The committee agrees with the submitter's substantiation.

(Log #51) 2001- 56 - (A-1-4.1.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Stephanie R. Skaggs, Pacific Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Change the current sentence: "The designations for perfluorocarbons (FCs), hydrobromoflnorocarbons (HBFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) follow designations in a standard prepared by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Condition- ing Engineers (ASHRAE):"

To Read: "The designations for perfluorocarbons (FCs),

bydrobromofluorocarbons (HBFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and fluoroiodocarbons (FICs) are an extension of halocarbon designations in a standard prepared by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Condition- ing Engineers..." SUBSTANTIATION: The NFPA 2001 does not address FIC-1311, an acceptable clean agent for normally unoccupied, total flood applications (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. 26, 1994). There- fore, the standard should be changed to include FIC-1311 by providing specific information about this agent (FIC-1311), and in some cases, about fluoroiodocarbons (FICs), in general. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Revise to read: "The designations for perfluorocarbons (FCs),

hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC~), and fluoroiodocarbons (FICs) are an extension of halocarbon designations in a standard prepared by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers..." COMMITrEE STATEMENT: Hydrobromofluorocarbons are not addressed.

(Log #25) 2001-57- (A-1-4.1.2 (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-44 RECOMMENDATION: Add the following sentence to the end of paragraph A-1-4.1.2.

"The designation IG-55 is used in this standard for a blend of two inert gases: nitrogen and argon (50 percent and 50 percent respectively) ." SUBSTANTIATION: Editorial. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #43) 2001- 58 - (Table A-l-4.1 (a)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER= Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Add a column for HFC-236fa showing the following data:

MW 152.04; B.P. 29.3; F.P.-136.5; C.T. 267.1; C.P. 459.8; C.V .0373; C.D. 26.84; Heat at vaporization 69.61 and vapor pressure at 77°F 39.9. SUBSTANTIATION: To provide known physical properties for agent listed in Table 1-4.1.2 COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

FE-36 (HFC236fa) Fire Extinguishing Agent (English Units)

Physical Properties

Formula

Units

Molecular Weight N/A

Boiling Point @ 760 mm Hg °F

Freezing Point °F

Critical Temperature °F

Critical Pressure psia

Critical Volume ft3/Ibm

Critical Density lbm/ft 3

Specific heat, liquid @ 77°F BTU/Ib °F

Specific heat, vapor @ BTU/Ib °F constant pressure (1 attn.) & 77°F

Heat of Vaporization @ BTU/Ib Boiling Point

Thermal Conductivity of BTU/h ft °F Liquid @ 77°F

Viscosity, liquid @ 77°F Ib/ft hr

Relative dielectric strength N/A @ 1 atm. @ 734mm Hg, 77°F (N2-1.0)

Solubility of water in agent N/A @ 70°F

Vapor Pressure @ 77°F psi

Value

1,1,1,3,3,3- hexafluoropropane CF3CH2CF 3

152

29.4

-136.5.

256.9

464.1

0.0283*

35.29*

0.3022

0.2007

68.97

0.04025

0.7014

unknown

unknown

39.51

Source: National Institute of Standards and Technology, REFPROP "beta" version 4.27 * DuPont estimated values

COMMITrEE STATEMENT: Added updated values provided at meeting.

228

NlgPA,Ie01 - - 1~$ ROC

2001- 59 - (Table A-I-4.1 (a)): Accept $ ~ Stephanie R. Skaggs, Pacific Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO:. N/A ~ A T I O N : The informa,~ion shown folio,sing for FIC- 1511 nee& to be added into Table A-1-4.1 (a):

FIGI311

Molecular weight

Boiling Point @760 mm Hg

Freezing point

Critical temperam~

Critical Pressure

Critical volume

Critical density

Specific heat liquid @ 77°F

Specific heat, vapor @ constant - pressure (1 aun.) & 77°F

Heat of vapori'zation at boiling point

Thermal conductivity of liquid @ 77°F

Viscosity, liquid @ 77°F

Relative dielectric strength @ 1 atm. @ 734 mm Hg 77"F (N- 2 ffi 1.0)

Solubility of water i~n agent @ 77°F

Vapor Pressure @ 77OF

195.91

--8.5

-166

252

586

.0184

54.38

0.1414

0.0864

48.44

0.04

0.473

1.41

0.0062% by weight

63.70

NOTE: The columu for FIC-1311 should be added after the column for HFC-23 and before the column for IG-01. SUBSTANTIATION: Table A-1-4.1(a) does not address FIC-1311, an acceptable dean agent for normally unoccupied, total flood applications (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. 26, 1994). There- fore, the table should be changed to include FIG1311. COMMITrRR ACTION: Accept.

(Log#24) 200L 60 - (Tables A-l-4.1 (a) and (b)): Accept S ~ Charles F. Wd[ms, F'we Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO:. 2001-~,2901-47,2001-48

[ RECOMMENDATION: Delete the word "HalocarbonSin the fide. SUBSTANTIATION: Editorial. Deletion ofthisword~isnecessary since the inert gas agents are also inducted in thisTable. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #53) 2001- 61 - (A-1-4.1(b)): Accept SUBMITTRR: Stephanie R. Skaggs, Pacific Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO:. N/A ~ T I O N : The infmmation shown following for FIG 1311 needs to be added into Table A-l-4.1 (b):

(

. . . . . nc, m i 1

Molecular weight 195.91

Boiling Point @760 mm Hg -22.5

Freezing point -110

Critic~ temperature 122 TM

Critical Pressure 4041

Critical volume 225

Critical density 871

Specific heat liquid @ 25°C 0.592.

Specific heat, vapor @ constant 0.3618 pressure (1 aun.) & 25°C

Heat of vaporization at boiling point 112.4-

Thermal conductivity of liquid @ 25°C 0.07

Viscosity, liquid @ 25°C 0.196

Relative dielectric strength @ 1 arm. @ 1.41 734 mm Hg 25°C (N 2 = 1.0)

Solubility of water in agent @ 25°C 0.0062% by Weight

Vapor Pressure @ 25°C 439.2

NOTE: The column for FIC-1311 should be added after the column for HFC~23 and before the column for I~01. SUBSTANTIATION: Table A-l-4.1(b) does not address FIC-I311, an acceptable clean agent for normally uu0ccupjed, total flood applicaflom (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. LP6, 1994). Tl~ere- fore, the table should be changed to include FIC-1311. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept.

L~29

N F P A 2001 - - 1¢95 RO C

(Log#42) 2001-,62 - (TableA-l-4.1 (h)): Accept in Principle SUBMITrEI~ Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Add a column for HFC-236fa showing the following data:

MW 152.04; BP -15; F.P. -93.6; C.T. 130.6; C.P. 3170; C.V. 354; C.D. 430; Heat at vaporization at B.P. 150; vapor pressure at 25°C 275.1. $uI~rANTIATION: To provide known physical properties for agent listed in Table 1-4.1.2 COMMIITEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

FE-$6 (HFC236fa) Fire Extinguishing Agent (Sl Units)

Physical Properties Units

Formula

Molecular Weight N /A

Boiling Point @ 760 nun Hg" °C

Freezing Point °G

Critical Temperature °C

Critical Pressure kPa

Critical Volume cc/mole

Critical Density kg/m 3

Specific heat, liquid @ 25°C kJ/kg °C

Specific heat, vapor @ constant pressure (1 atm.) & 25°C kJ/kg °C

Heat of Vaporization @ Boiling Point kJ/kg

Thermal Conductivity of Liquid @ 25°C W/m °C

Viscosity, liquid @ 25°G centipoise

Relative dielectric strength @ 1 aun. @ 734 mm Hg, 25°C (N~I.0) N/A

Solubility of water in agent @ 21°C N/A

Vapor Pressure'@ 25°C kPa

Source: National Institute of Standards and Technology, REFPROP "beta" version 4,27 * DuPont estimated values

Value

1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoropropane CF3CH2CF3

152

-1.4

-93.6*

124.9

3199.9

268.5*

565.3*

1.2653

0.8403

160.4

0.0697

0.2923

unknown

unknown

272.4

COMMITIT.E STATEMENT: The above table adds updated values provided at the meeting.

2001- 63 - (Table A-I-5.1.1): Accept SUBMITI'ER: Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company . COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-53 RECOMMENDATION: Add:

(Log #41)

A~em36 ~ AUC ~ >18.9% 10% 15%

SUBSTANTIATION: To provide known toxicity information for agent listed in Table 1-4.1.2 COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #54) 2001- 64 - (Table A-1-5.1.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Stephanie i~ Skags, Pacific S-dentific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO- N/A RECOMMENDATION: The information shown following needs to be added to Table A-I-5.1.2 before the row for Halon 1301:

Agent LC50 or ALC >12.8%

FIG1311 27.4%

No Lowest Observable Observable

Adverse Adverse Effect Level Effect Level (NOAEL) (LOAEL)

0.2% 0.4%

The follow~ng sentence should be added after NOTE 3: NOTE 4: The LCs0 exposure period for FIC-1311 was 15 minutes. The current NOTE 4 should be renumber to NOTE 5.

SUBSTANTIATION: Table A-1-5.1.2 does not address FIC-1311, an acceptable clean agent for normally unoccupied, total flood applications (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. 26, 1994). There- fore, the table should be changed to include FIC-1311. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Revise to read as follows: 1-5.1.4 Safety Requiremenm. 1-5.1.4.1 Remains as is. 1-5.1.4.2 Consideration shall be given to the possibility of a clean

agent migrating to adjacent areas outside of the protected space. Ad-5.4.2 A certain amount of leakage from a protected space to

adjacent areas is anticipated during and following agent discharge. Consideration should be given to agent concentration [when above (NOAEL) ] decomposition products, products of combustion, and relative size of adjacent spaces. Additional consideration should be given to exhaust' paths when opening or venting the enclosure after a discharge. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Provided safety considerations similar to NFPA 12.

230

N F P A 2 0 0 1 m F 9 5 R O C

(Log #100) 2001- 65 - (Table A-1-5.1.2): Accept SUBMITTER: Paul E. Rivers, 3M Company Specialty Chemicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: In the informational table, provide latest submitted value of the LOAEL for HFC-227ea figure of 10.5 percent instead of >10.5 percent. SUBSTANTIATION: Data submitted to the committee to date by the manufacturer does not suggest that the LOAEL value for HFC- 227ea be changed from the present edition of the document. Also, if the value for the LOAEL for HFC-227ea were in fact >10.5 percent, that would suggest that the NOAEL for HFC-227ea is 10.5 percent instead of 9.,0 percent, which it is not. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #110) 2001- 66 - (Table A-1-5.1.3): Reject SUBMI'VI~Pa Paul E. Rivers, 3M Company Specialty Chemicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-7 RECOMMENDATION: Delete the table in its entirety. SUBSTANTIATION: Based on the data supplied by the Com- pressed Gas Association, In~ regarding the effects of oxygen deficient atmospheres (less than 19.5 percent) on people, it is preposterous that the committee accept the notion of reducing the level of oxygen to that approaching asphyxiation in occupied spaces. This is a special concern where impaired individuals may remain in the protected enclosure for an indeterminate period of time. It is true for all inert gas agents which drop the oxygen to unsafe levels while in the process of extinguishing the fire.

NOTE: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The U.S. EPA's review and the committee's review of the submitter's concerns have determined that the use of inert gas agents should not be restricted as proposed.

(Log #39) 2001- 67- (Figure A-2-1.4.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: For HCFC-14 add isometric diagrams in English and metric units. See following:

2500

Q.

e 2o00 j .=

1500

1000 ~ -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40

Temperature (°C) 50 60

325

300

275

,~ 250

~ 225

200 Q_

175

150

125

J

o 20

. /

, , / i I

40 60 80 lO0

Temperature (°F)

/

/ /

120 140

SUBSTANTIATION: This information was requested but not available for the 1994 edition. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #63) 2001- 68 - (Figure A-2-1.4.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Mark I_. Robin, Great Lakes Chemical Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Replace Figure A-2-1.4.1 with updated version following:

2600

2400

22O0

2000

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

2O

n

I J 7. ~ Ib/cu tt

= /

/ 72 i / 70

/ / / / / /

1~if I/7 / /

i l l l

40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Temperature (°F)

SUBSTANTIATION: Isometrics at a fill density of 72 Ib/ft3 have been determined and added to the previous figure. NOTE: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA

Headquarters. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-22 (Log #14).

(Log#81) 2001- 69 - (A-2-1.4.1 (1)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidler, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-58 RECOMMENDATION: Add isometric diagram for 1G-541 at 20 MPa and 21°C in metric units. SUBSTANTIATION: Standardization of graphs and tables to metric units. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

18

17.5

17

16.5

16

15.5

15

14.5

14

13.5

13

/ /

/ /

/

-10 0 10 20 30 Temperature

/ /

/ f

40 50 60

231

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

M P a

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

/

, / /

. / /

t

/

/

-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Temperature

COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Isometric diagrams were provided at meeting.

(Log #98) 2001- 70 - (Figure A-2-1.4.1 (a) and Figure A-2-1.4.1( ) (New)): Accept SUBMI'VrER: Paul E. Rivers, 3M Company Specialty Chemicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Replace the existing pressure temperature isometric diagram with a revised diagram for FC-3-1-10 per the following.

2. Add a new pressure temperature isometric diagram for FC-3-1-10 per the following.

7.00 I1~ ~

6.50 /

6.00 //,~ ] 5.50 0 kg/cu m

~" 5.00

~4,oo ..~_~u~__~ 3.50

3.oo i I

2.5o I

2.00

27.00 37.00 47.00 57.00 67.00 77.00 87.00

Temperature (°C)

F'tgure A-2-1.4.1( ) Isometric diagram of FC-3-1-10 (for 360 psig containers).

232

26

25

24

23

22

21

2o / t~ / 18 /

17 -10 0

/ /

/ /

/ /

10 20 30 40 50 60 Temperature

F'~eA-2-1.4 .1( ) Isometric diagram of FC-3-1-10 (for 360 psig containers).

SUBSTANTIATION: 1. Additional actual laboratory testing has been completed since the issue of the original NFPA 2001 document. The new diagram more accurately depicts the conditions to be expected.

2. Provided per the last NFPA 2001 meeting request that the Standard be metricated. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #38) 2001- 71 - (Figure A-2-1.4.1(0): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Add a copy oft.his figure with metric coordinates. SUBSTANTIATION: Publication of this data will enhance the value of the standard. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-72 (Log #95).

(Log #95) 2001- 72 - (Figure A-2-1.4.1(f) (New)): Accept SUBMITrER: Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Gompany COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Add following isometric diagram for HFC- 23 to compliment same diagram in English unit - Figure A-2-1.4.1 (f).

~oo / / 275 A . /

2,o # ,/ /

200 3 s ~ ' / / . .#1,4 ' t ,

175 o 7 1 / g & "6 q I t l " t 50 o / / / / ~ tn v

• ~ 100

• ~ 75

" ~o / t , / / /~ ; " ~, / i Z/-~'o~°"'F°'°' o l ' ' ' - I I -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

N F P A 2001 - - F95 R O C

SUBSTANTIATION: Metric plots were requested by the committee, COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #55) 2001- 73 - (Figure A-2-1.4.1 (h) (New) and Figure A-2-1.4.1 (i) (New)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Stephanie IL Skaggs, Pacific Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: The figures shown following need to be added after the existing Figure A-2-1.4.1 (g) Isometric diagram of HFC-23. The new figures shown should become Figure A-2-1.4.1 (h) Isometric diagram of FIC-1311 [English Units] and Figure A-2-1.4.1 (i) Isometric diagram ofFIC-13II [SI Units]. The remaining figures after the new Figure A-2-1.4.2(i) should be renumbered to reflect the addition of the two figures for FIC-1311.

!

...... m FI ~V.y

/ /

/ J /

/

.°

/

., /°

,,"" /

,." /, /

,f'

/

"I : °" " /

-50 -2S 0 25 50 7S 100 125 150 175

' r e m e . , t ~ rF)

Figure A-2-1.4.1(h) Isometric diagram of FIC-1311 [English Units].

. . . . . . CO'J4 FII Oem~

- - a o , ~ m oe ,=~ =oo;

32S0

|

22~o

2 9 0 0

/ J /

J ..

/ , /

/

/

." /°"

/ :"" /

/

.;f /

.° . / - F

Y /

- ~ -4o .3o .2o .10 0 10 2o 3o 4o so eo 70 8o

T e m ~ m m (*C)

Figure A-2-1.4.1(i) Isometric diagram ofFIC-1311 [Sl Units].

SUBSTANTIATION: The standard does not address FIG-1311, an acceptable clean agent for normally unoccupied, total flood applicadons (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. 26, 1994). There- fore, isometric diagrams for FIG-13II should be included. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. Add the following two graphs:

233

CF31 Pressure Versus Temperature at 1467 & 1677 kg/cu m

80 ~

70-

60-

~' 50- <

o

4o-

30-

10-

I I 0 -40 -20

--e-- PSI at 94 Ib/eu ft PSI at ~05 Ib/cu ft

I I l i I 20 40 60 80 100

Temperature (°C)

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

CF31 Pressure Versus Temperature at 97 & 105 Ib/cu t t

1200

1000

~" 800

e~

400

-5O

_ . @ . . _ ~ / PSt at 94 b/cu fl PSI at 105 Ib/cu ft

I I I I 50 100 150 200

Temperature (°F)

COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Added updated isometric diagrams provided at comittee meeting.

(Log #82) 2001- 74- (A-2-1.4.1(k)): Accept SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidier, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-58 RECOMMENDATION: Renumbering of A-2-1.4.1 (k) to A-2-1.4.1 (m). SUBSTANTIATION: Renumbering due to insertion of new text. COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #80) 2001- 75 - (A-2-1.4.1(k) (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidier, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-58 RECOMMENDATION: Add isometric diagram for IG-541 at 15 MPa and 21°C in metric units. SUBSTANTIATION: Standardization of graphs and tables to metric units. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

( Log #15) 2001- 76 - (Figure A-2-1.4.1 (k)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-16,2001-54 RECOMMENDATION: 1. Add pressurization level to tide of Figure A-2-1.4.1(k) for IG-55 (ROP 2001-54).

2. The isometric diagram for IG-55 (ROP 2001-54) does not agree with pressure values for IC,-55 shown in Table 2-1.4.1 (ROP 2001-16). SUBSTANTIATION: Editorial clarification. These values need to be verified by the submitter of ROP's 2001-16 and 2001-54. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-1 (Log #45).

(Log #16) 2001-77- (A-2-2.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Charles F. WUlms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-20,2001-63 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text:

There appears to be conflicts for the calculated pressure P to be used for IC,-55 as compared to Table 2-1.4.1, Figure A-2-1.4.1 (k) and as specified in ROP 2001-20 and 2001-63. SUBSTANTIATION: Editorial Clarification. These values need to be verified by the submitter of ROP 2001-20 and 2001-54. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-1 (Log #45).

(Log #83) 2001- 78 - (A-2-2.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidier, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Change the end of the second paragraph under. Minimum Piping Requirements to'.

"...m schedule 40, schedule 80 and schedule 160 wall thickness." SUBSTANTIATION: Schedule 160 pipe will be required for 2900 psi systems if threaded pipe is used and2175 psi systems using grades other than A-l-6. Grade C may need schedule 160 for 1.5 in. and larger. COMMITYEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

1. Revise sentence to read as follows: "Tables A-2-2.1 (a) and (b) provide pressure ratings for pipe sizes

1/2 in. through 8 in. NPS, in Schedule 40, Schedule 80, Schedule 120, and Schedule 160 wall thickness.

2. Move tables closer to text. COMMITI'EE STATEMENT: Schedule 120 pipe can also be used. Also see Committee Action on Comment 2001-79 (Log #84).

234

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

(Log #84) 200L 79 - (A-2-2.1.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidler, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Add schedule 160 charts for threaded and welded pipe to text. SUBSTANTIATION: Requirement for 200 Bar IG-541 systems.

COMMITI'EE ACTION: Accept in Principle. Add tables for Schedule 120 and Schedule 160:

COMMIq[TEE STATEMENT: Added acceptable piping criteria.

MAXIMUM PRESSURE SCHEDULE 120, THREADED

GRADE

TYPE SE

A-53B A-53A A-106C A-106B A-5$B A-106A A - 5 3 A A-53F SMLS S M L S ERW S M L S ERW FURN. 21000 18000 15360 14400 12240 8160

NOM, DIA. O.D. WALL=t A

4 4.5 5 5.563 6 6.625 8 8.625

0.437 0.1 3145 2696 2301 2157 1833 1222 0.5 0.1 3020 2589 2209 2071 1760 1173

0.562 0.1 2929 2510 2142 2008 1707 1138 0.718 0.1 3009 2579 2201 2064 1754 1169

MAXIMUM PRESSURE SCHEDULE 120, WEI£)ED

GRADE

TYPE SE

A-533 A-53A A-106C A-106B A~SB A-106A A-53A A-53F SMLS S M L S ERW S M L S ERW FURN. 21000 18000 15360 14400 12240 8160

NOM. DIA. O.D. WALL=t

4 4.5 0.437 5 5.563 0.5 6 6.625 0.562 8 8.625 0.718

4079 3496 2983 2797 2377 1585 3775 3236 2761 2589 2200 1467 3563 3054 2606 2443 2077 1384 3496 2997 2557 2397 2038 1359

MAXIMUM PRESSURE SCHEDULE 160, THREADED

GRADE

TCPE SE

A-533 A-53A A-106C A-106B A-533 A-106A A-53A A-53F SMLS S M L S ERW S M L S ERW FURN. 21000 1 8 0 0 0 1 5 3 6 0 1 4 4 0 0 1 2 2 4 0 8160

NOM. DIA. O.D. WALL=t A

0.5 0.84 0.75 1.05

1 1.315 1.25 1.66 1.5 1.9

2 2.375 2.5 2.875

3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.563

0.187 0.057 6500 5571 4754 4457 3789 2526 0,218 0.057 6440 5520 4710 4416 3754 2502 0.25 0.07 5749 4928 4205 3942 3351 2234 0.25 0.07 4554 3904 3331 3123 2654 1770

0,281 0.07 4664 3998 3412 3198 2719 1812 0.343 0.07 4828 4138 3531 3310 2814 1876 0.375 0.1 4017 3443 2958 2755 2542 1561 0.457 0.1 4044 3466 2958 2773 2357 1571 0,531 0.1 4023 3448 2942 2758 2545 1563 0,625 0.1 3964 3397 2899 2718 2310 1540

6 6.625 .0.718 0.1 $918 3358 2866 2687 2284 1522 8 8.625 0.906 0.1 3925 3564 2871 2691 2288 1525

MAXIMUM PRESSURE SCHEDULE 160, WELDED

GRADE

TYPE SE

NOM. DIA. O.D. WALL=t

0.5 0.84 0.187 0.75 1.05 0.218

1 1.315 0.25 1.25 1.66 0.25

1.5 1.9 0.281 2 2.375 0.343

2.5 2.875 0.375 3 3.5 0.437 4 4.5 0.531 5 5.563 0.625 6 6.625 0.718 8 8.625 0.906

A-533 A-53A A-106C A-106B A-533 A-106A A-53A A-53F SMLS S M L S ERW S M L S ERW FURN. 21000 1 8 0 0 0 1 5 3 6 0 1 4 4 0 0 1 2 2 4 0 8160

9350 8014 6839 6411 5450 3633 8720 7474 6378 5979 5083 3388 7985 6844 5840 5475 4654 3103 6325 5422 4627 4337 3687 2458 6212 5324 4543 4259 3620 2414 6066 5199 4437 4159 3535 2357 5478 4696 4007 3757 3193 2129 5244 4495 5836 3596 3057 2038 4956 4248 3625 3398 2889 1926 4719 4045 3451 3256 2750 1834 4552 3902 3329 3121 2653 1769 4412 3782 3227 3025 2571 1714

235

N F P A 2 0 0 1 ~ F 9 5 R O C

(Log #87) 2001-80- (A-2-2.1.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTERa Logan T. Fidler, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: 1. Change title to: "IG-541, IG-01, and IG- 55 Systems - With Charging Pressures P to and Inc luding 2175 psig (15 MPa) Upstream of Pressure Reducer." 2. Add a table: "IG-541, IG-01, a nd IG-55 Systems - With Charging

Pressures Up to and Inc lud ing 2900 psig (20 MPa) Upstream of Pressure Reducer."

3. Change title to: "IG-541, IG4)I, and IG-55 Systems -Downst ream of Pressu re Reducer." SUBSTANTIATION: States the requi rements for all IG systems. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

1. Add the following note to table: "NOTE: Downstream pressure does no t exceed 1000 psi a t 130°F. " 2. Change title ( i tem 1 of comment ) to the following: "IG-55

Systems - With Charging Pressures, P, Up To and Inc luding 2175 PSIG (15 MPa) Upstream of Pressure Reducer."

3. Add Schedule 120 and 160 pipe schedules:

Threaded Connect ions - Add (in appropr ia te locations) ASTM A-106 Seamless, Grade C - Schedule 120 - 4 in. thru 8 in.,

NPS ASTM A-106 Seamless, Grade C - Schedule 160 - 1 /2 in. thru 8 in.,

NPS ASTM A-106/A-53 Seamless, Grade B - Schedule 120 - 4 in. thru 8

in., NPS ASTM A-106/A-5?, Seamless, Grade B - Schedule 160 - 1 / 2 in. thru

8 in., NPS ASTM A-106/A-53 Seamless, Grade A - Schedule 160 - 1 / 2 in. thru

8 in., NPS

ASTM A-53 ERW, Grade B - Schedule 120 - DO NOT USE ASTM A-53 ERW, Grade B - Schedule 160 - 1 / 2 in. thru 8 in., NPS ASTM A-53 ERW, Grade A- Schedule 120 - DO NOT USE ASTM A-53 ERW, Grade A - Schedule 160 - 1 / 2 in. thru 2 in., NPS ASTM A-53 Furnace Weld Class F -Schedule 120 - DO NOT USE ASTM A-53 Furnace Weld Class F - Schedule 160 - DO NOT USE

Steel Pipe - Welded ASTM A-106 Seamless, Grade C - Schedule 120 - 4 in. thru 8 in.,

NPS ASTM A-106 Seamless, grade C - Schedule 160 - 1 /2 in. thru 8 in.,

NPS ASTM A-106/A-53 Seamless, Grade B- Schedule 120- 4 in. thru 8

in., NPS ASTM A-106/A-53 Seamless, Grade B - Schedule lif0 - 1 /2 in. thru

• 8 in., NPS ASTM A-106/A-53 Seamless, grade A - Schedule 160 - 1 /2 in. thru 8

in., NPS ASTM A-53 ERW, Grade B - Schedule 120 - 4 in. thru 6 in., NPS ASTM A-53 ERW, Grade B - Schedule 160 - 1 / 2 in. thru 8 in., NPS ASTM A-53 ERW, Grade A- Schedule 120 - DO NOT USE ASTM A-53 ERW, Grade A - Schedule 160 - 1 / 2 in. thru 6 in., NPS ASTM A-53 Furnace Weld Class F - Schedule 120 - DO NOT USE ASTM A-53 Furnace Weld Class F - Schedule 160 - 1 / 2 in. thru I in.,

NPS

4. Add tables shown following and on the next page. C O M M I T r E E STATEMENT: Provided p ip ing crlteria for systems similar to that appear ing in NFPA 12A.

IG-541 @ 2900 psig (3433 psig) Th readed Sch 40 Sch. 80 Sch. 120 Sch. 160 A-106C, SMLS Do Not Use 1 / 2 in - 1 in., NPS Do Not Use 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS A-53B/A-106B, SMI_,S Do Not Use 1/2 in.,NPS Do Not Use 1 / 2 in. - 4 in., NPS A-53B, ERW Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use 1 / 2 in. - 2 in.,NPS A-53A/A-106A, SMLS Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use 1/2 i n / - 1 in., NPS A-53A, ERW Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use 1 /2 in. -3 /4 in., NPS A-53F, FW Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use

Welded A-106C, SMLS Do Not Use 1 / 2 in., NPS 4 in. - 8 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS A-53B/A-106B, SMLS Do Not Use 1/2 in., NPS 4 in. NPS 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS

• A-53B, ERW Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use 1 / 2 in. - 5 in., NPS A-53A/A-106A, SMLS Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use 1/2 in. - 3 in., NPS A-53A, ERW Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use 1/2 in. - 2 in., NPS A-53F, FW Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use 1/2 in., NPS

IG-01 @ 2370 psig (2650 psig) Th readed Sch 40 Sch. 80 Sch. 120 Sch.160 A-106C, SMLS Do Not Use 1/2 in.-1-1/2 in., NPS 4 in. - 8 in., NPS 1/2 in. - 8 in., NPS A-53B/A-106B, SMLS Do Not Use 1 / 2 in.-1 in., NPS 4 in., NPS 1/2 in. - 8 in., NPS A-53B, ERW Do Not Use 1/2 in.-3/4 in., NPS Do Not Use 1/2 in. - 8 in., NPS A-53A/A-106A, SMLS Do Not Use 1 / 2 in.-3/4 in., NPS Do Not Use 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS A-53A, ERW Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use 1 / 2 in. - 2 in., NPS A-53F, FW Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use

Welded A-106C, SMLS Do Not Use 1 / 2 in. - 1-1/2 in., NPS 4 in. ? 8 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS A-53B/A-106B, SMLS Do Not Use 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS 4 in. - 8 in., NPS 1/2 in. - 8 in., NPS A-53B, ERW Do Not Use 1/2 in. - 3 / 4 in., NPS 4 in. - 5 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS A-53A/A-106A, SMLS Do Not Use 1/2 in. - 3 / 4 in., NPS 4 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS A-53A, ERW Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use 1/2 in. - 6 in., NPS A-53F, FW Do Not Use Do Not Use Do Not Use 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS

236

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

T h r e a d e d A-106C, SMLS A-53B/A-106B, SMLS A-53B, ERW A-53A/A-106A, SMLS A-53A, ERW A-53F, FW

W e l d e d A-106C, SMLS A-53B/A-106B, SMLS A-53B, ERW A-53A/A-106A, SMLS A-53A, ERW A-53F, FW

IG-55 @ 2222 ps ig (2475psig) Sch 40 1 / 2 in., NPS Do N o t Use Do No t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use

1 / 2 in. - 3 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 1 -1 /2 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 1 -1 /4 in., NPS 1/2 in. - 1 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS Do N o t Use

Sch. 80 1 / 2 in. - 2 -1 /2 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 1 -1 /4 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 3 / 4 in., NPS 1 / 2 in., NPS Do N o t Use

1/2 in. - 6 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 4 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 3 in., NPS 1/2 in. - 2 - 1 / 2 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 1 -1 /2 in., NPS 1 / 2 in., NPS

Sch. 120 4 in. - 8 in., NPS 4 in. - 8 in., NPS Do N o t Use Do No t Use Do N o t Use Do Not Use

4 in. - 8 in., NPS 4 in. - 8 in., NPS 4 in. - 8 in., NPS 4 in. - 5 in., NPS Do N o t Use Do No t Use

Sch.160 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS 1 / 2 in., NPS

1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 2 in., NPS 1 / 2 in. - 3 / 4 in., NPS

T h r e a d e d A-106C, SMLS A-53B/A-106B, SMLS A-53B, E R W A-53A/A-106A, SMLS A-53A, ERW A-53F, FW


IG-55 @ 2962 ps ig (3300 psig) Sch 40 Do No t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do No t Use

" 1 / 2 in. - I - 1 / 4 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 3 / 4 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in., NPS" Do N o t Use Do N o t Use

Sch. 80 " 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 3 / 4 in., NPS" Do No t Use Do No t Use Do No t Use Do No t Use

" 1 / 2 in. - 3 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 2 -1 /2 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 1 -1 /4 in., NPS" "1/2 in. - 1-1/4 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS"

Sch. 120 Do N o t Use Do No t Use Do No t Use Do No t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use

"4 in. - 8 in., NPS" "4 in., NPS" Do No t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do No t Use

Sch.160 " 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 6 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 4 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 2 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS"

" l / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 8 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS"

T h r e a d e d A-106C, SMLS A-53B/A-106B, SMLS A-53B, ERW A-53A/A-106A, SMLS A-53A, ERW A-53F, FW


IG-55 @ 4443 ps ig (4950 psig) Sch 40 Sch. 80 Sch. 120 Do No t Use " 1 / 2 in., NPS" Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do No t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do No t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do No t Use Do No t Use Do N o t Use Do N o t Use

Sch. 160 " 1 / 2 in. - 1 -1 /2 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS" Do N o t Use Do No t Use Do No t Use Do N o t Use

" 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS . . . . 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS" Do N o t Use " 1 / 2 in. - 4 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in. - 5 / 4 in., NPS . . . . 1 / 2 in. - 3 / 4 in., NPS" Do N o t Use " 1 / 2 in. - 2 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in., NPS . . . . 1 / 2 in., NPS" Do No t Use " 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS" " 1 / 2 in., NPS . . . . 1 / 2 in., NPS" Do N o t Use " 1 / 2 in. - 1 in., NPS" Do N o t Use Do No t Use Do N o t Use " 1 / 2 in. - 3 / 4 in., NPS" Do N o t Use Do N o t Use Do No t Use Do No t Use

2001-80 ( L o g # 8 7 )

237

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

(Log #17) 2001- 81 - (A-2-2.1.1 (New)): Accept SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppress ion Systems Assoc. COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 2001-57 RECOMMENDATION: Add new m i n i m u m piping requ i rements table for HFG-227ea systems charged to 600 psig.

Minimum Piping Requiremenm HI~-227ea System~ - - 600 psi Charging Pressure

Steel Pipe--Threaded Connections

ASTM A-106 Seamless, Grade C ASTM A-106/A-53 Seamless, Grade B

ASTM A-106/A-53 Seamless, Grade A

ASTMA-53 ERW Grade B

ASTM A-53 ERW Grade A

ASTM A-53 Furnace Weld Class F

Steel Pipe--Welded Connections

ASTM A-106 Seamless, Grade C ASTM A-106/A-53 Seamless, Grade B ASTM A-106/A-55 Seamless, Grade A ASTM A-53 ERW Grade B ASTM A-55 ERW Grade A

ASTM A-53 Furnace Weld Class F

Copper Tubing---Compression Fittings

ASTM B-88 Seamless, Drawn ASTM B-88 Seamless, Drawn ASTM B-88 Seamless, Drawn ASTM B-88 Seamless, Annealed ASTM B-88 Seamless, Annealed ASTM B-88 Seamless, Annealed

Schedule 40----1/8 in. thru8 in. NPS Schedule 40---1/8 in. thru 5 in. NPS Schedule 80---6 in. thru 8 in. NPS Schedule 40~1/8 in. thru 2 1/2 in. NPS Schedule 80---3 in. thru 8 in. NPS Schedule 40---1/8 in. thru 3 in, NPS Schedule 80--4 in. thru 8 in. NPS Schedule 40-1/8 in. thru 1 1/4 in, NPS Schedule 80--1 1/2 in. thru 8 in. NPS Schedule 40~1/8 in. thru 1/2 ha. NPS Schedule 80~3/4 in. thin 2 1/2 in. NPS Schedule 120---3 in. thin 8 in. NPS

Schedule 40--1/8 in. thru 8 in. NPS Schedule 40--1/8 in. thru 8 in, NPS Schedule 40----1/8 in. thru 8 in. NPS Schedule 40---1/8 in. thru 8 in. NPS Schedule 40--1/8 in. thru 6 in, NPS Schedule 80--8 in. NPS Schedule 40----1/4 in. thru 3 in. NPS Schedule 80~4 in. thsu 6 in. NPS Schedule 120--8 in. NPS

Type K1/4 in. thru 1 i/4 in. Type L 1/4 in. dalai 3/4 in. Type M 1/4 in. thru 3/8 in. Type K 1/4 in. thru 3/8 in. Type L DO NOT USE Type M DO NOT USE

SUBSTANTIATION: Provide the da ta for HFC-227ea 600 psi systems so tha t the user can easily select the p roper s t rength piping. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #85) 2001- 82 - (A-2-2.1.1 2(a)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidler, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Change test to:

"For p ip ing ups t r eam of the pressure reducer in IG-541, IG-01 and IG-55 systems, 2575 psig (17.8 MPa) when us ing an initial charging pressure up to and inc luding 2175 psig (15 MPa) and 3433 psig (23.7 MPa) when us ing an initial cha rg ingpres su re of 2900 psig (20 MPa); and 1000 psig (6.9 MPa) for p ip ing downst ream of the pressure reducer in IG-541, IG-01 andIG-55 systems." SUBSTANTIATION: States the r equ i rements for 200 Bar Systems. COMMITI 'EE ACTION: Accept in Principle. C O M M I T r E E STATEMENT: See Commi t t ee Action on C o m m e n t 2001-83 (Log #86).

(Log #86) 2001- 83 - (A-2-2.1.1 4): Accept in Principle SUBMITTEI~ Logan T. FidIer, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Change text to:

"For piping ups t r eam of the pressure reducer in IG-541, IG-01 and IG-55 systems, the calculated pressure, P, mus t be equal or greater than 2575 pslg (17.8 MPa) for p ip ing ups t ream of the pressure

reducer in systems normally charged to 2175 psig (15 MPa) at 70°F (21°C), 3433 psig (23.7 MPa) for p ip ing ups t r eam of the pressure reducer in systems normally charged to 2900 psig (20 MPa) at 70°F (21°C) and 1000 psig (6.9 MPa) for p iping downst ream of the reducer ." SUBSTANTIATION: States the requ i rements for 200 Bar Systems. C O M M I T r E E A C T I O N : Accept in Pr indple .

1. Delete paragraphA-2-2.1.1 2(a). 2. Delete paragraph A-2-2.1.1 4 - except keep first an d last

sentences. Also add "The m a x i m u m allowable pressure P mus t exceed the

m i n i m u m claculated pressure provided in Table X."

Clean Agent

All HFC-227ea I-IFC-2$ IC,-541

IC.-01

IG-55

Minimum Calculated Pressure (up to and Iadadi~o)

360psig. (2482kPa) 600psig. (4137kPa)

2,175psig.(14997kPa) Upstream of thepressure reducer Downstream of the pressure reducer 2,900psig(19996Pa) Upstream of the pressure reducer Downstream of the pressure reducer 2,370psig(16341kPa) Upstream of the pressure reducer Downstream of the pre~ure reducer 2,222psig. (15521kPa) Upstream of the pressure reducer Downstream of the pressure reducer 2,962pslg(20424kPa) Upstream of the pressure reaucer Downstream of the pressure reducer 4,443psig(30636kPa) Upstream of the pressure reducer Downstream of the pressure reducer

Initial C ~ i a g Pre.~ure

620psig. (4275kPa) 1,000psig. (6895kPa) 2,250psig. ( 15514kPa)

2,575psig.(17755kPa) 1,000psig. (6895kPa)

3,433psig.(23671kPa) 1,000psig. (6895kPa)

2,650psig. (18972kPa) 975psig. (6723kPa)

2,475psig. (15318kPa) 950pstg. (6550k.Pa)

3300psig. (22754kPa) 950psig. (6550kPa)

4950psig(34130kPa) 950psig. (6550kPa)

Note: The calculated pressure value, P, are based on a maximum agent storage temperature of 130°F(55°C).

C O M M I T r E E STATEMENT: Provided p ip ing criteria for systems similar to that appear ing in NFPA 12A,

(Log #18) 2001- 84 - (A-2-2.3.1 (b) (New)): Accept SUBMITrER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 2001-57 RECOMMENDATION: Add new paragraph A-2-2.3.1 (b) to add fitt ing requ i rements for HFC-227ea systems charged to 600 psig to read as follows:

"Fittings for HFC-227ea systems charged to 600 psig ( ~ kPa) at 70°F (21°C) should b e , as a m i n i m u m : Class 300 malleable or ductile i ron fittings t h r o u g h 3 in, NPS, a n d 1000 lb ra ted ductile iron or forged steel fittings in all larger sizes. Flanged jo in ts should be Class 600."

( R e n u m b e r subsequen t paragraphs accordingly). SUBSTANTIATION: Provide the data for HFC-227ea 600 psi

Sotems so tha t the user can easily select the p roper s t rength fittings. M M I T r E E ACTION: Accept.

(Log #88) '2001- 85 - (A-2-2.3.1 (c)): Accept in Principle $UBMITTER: Logan T. Fidler, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Change test to:

(c) Fittings for IG-541, IG-01, and IG-55 systems should be, as a m i n i m u m : Ups t ream of the pressure reducer: 2000.1b Class forged steel, in all sizes, for systems charged to 2175 psig (15 MPa) at 70°F (21°C); 3000-1 Class forged steel, in all sizes, for systems charged to '2900 psig (20 MPa) at 70°F (21°C).

2S8

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : Sta tes t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s fo r all IG systems. C O M M r I ' r E E A C T I O N : A c c e p t in Pr inc ip le .

Rep l ace A-2-2.3.1 (a) t h r o u g h (e) wi th the fo l lowing tab le

Inittal Charging Pressure Clean Agent (up to and Indud~ng )

All Haloncarbon 360 psig (2482 kPa) Agents

Acceptable Fittings

Class 300 malleable or ductile Iron fittings

1000-1b rated ductde iron or forged steel fittings Class 300 Flanged Joints

Maxtmum Pipe Size

3 m NPS

>3 m NPS All

HFC-227ea 600 pstg (4137 kPa)

HFC-23 609 psig (4199 kPa)

IG-541

IG-OI

IG-55

2,175 psig (14997 kPa) Upstream of the pressure reducer Downstream of the pressure reducer

2,900 psig (19996 Pa) Upstream of the pressure reducer Downstream of the pressure reducer

2,370 pstg (16341 kPa) Upstream of the pressure reducer Downstream of the pressure reducer




Class 300 malleable or ductile tron fittings 1000-1b rated ductile iron or forged steel fittmgs Class 600 Flanged Joints

Class 300 malleable or ductile iron fitrmgs 1000-1b rated ductile i ron or forged steel fittings Class 300 Flanged Joints

Class 600 Flanged Joints

3 in. NPS >3 m NPS

All

2 m NPS >3 m. NPS

All - Downstream of any stop valve or in systems w~th no stop valve All - Upstream of any stop valve

2000-1b forged steel Class 300 malleable tron or ductde Iron 1000-1b rated ductile won or forged steel Class 600 Flanged Joints

All 3 m NPS

> 3 in. NPS All

3000-1b forged steel Class 300 malleable iron or ductile iron 1000-1b rated ductde iron or forged steel Class 600 Flanged Joints

3000-1b forged steel Class 300 malleable iron or ductde tron 1000-1b rated ductile iron or forged steel Class 600 FlangedJomts

3000-1b forged steel Class 300 malleable iron or ducti le iron 1000-1b rated ductile tron or forged steel Class 600 Flanged Joints

All 3 m. NPS

> 3 in, NPS All

All 3 m NPS

>3 in . NPS All

All 3 in, NPS

> 3 m NPS All

3000-1b forged steel Class 300 malleable iron or ducule iron 1000-1b rated ductile iron or forged steel Class 600 FlangedJomts

3000qb forged steel 6000-1b forged steel Class 300 malleable tron or ductile tron 1000-1b rated ductile tron or forged steel Class 600 Flanged Joints

All 3 m NPS

> 3 m. NPS All

l m NPS >1 m NPS 3 m NPS

> 3 m NPS All

NOTE: The materials itermzed above do not preclude the use of other materials and type a n d / o r style of fittings that saufy the requtrements of 2-2.3 1.

C O M M I ' I T E E S T A T E M E N T : T h e r e f e r e n c e s h o u l d be to the p e r s o n in l ieu of t he o rgan iza t ion .

239

NFPA 200l: - - F95 RO C

(Log #51) 2001- 86 - (Table A-3-4.2.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Elio Guglielmi, North American Fire Guardian Technology Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Add new text as follows:

Vol % inerting Concentration

Fud Agent Laboratory Field Scale Reference \

Propane H-1301 6.2 6.2-6.5 NMERI HFC-227F-.A 11.7 11.5 NMERI HFC-23 20.2 20.5 NMERI FC-~-I-1O 9.9 10.6 NMERI HCFC Blend A - 15.0 NMERI

SUBSTANTIATION: Expand Table A-$-4.2.1 to include new field scale data from NMERI. A complete report will follow. COMMITIT.E ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Fuel

Propane

Vol % Inerting Agent Concentration Reference

H-I$O1 6.2 Moore HFC-227EA 11.7 Moore HFC-2$ 20.2 Moore FC-$-I-10 9.6 Moore HCFC Blend A 18.5 Moore

COMMITrEE STATEMENT: Field scale data is often variable and should not be relied on. The reference Should be to the person in lieu of the organization.

(Log #56) 2001- 87 - (Table A-$-4.2.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITrER: Stephanie R. Skaggs, Pacific Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMI~NDATION: The following information needs to be added to Table A-$-4.2.1:

, Vol % Inerting

Fuel Agent Concentration Reference

Propane FICA311 6.5 NMERI

NOTE: The above information pertaining to HC-1311 should be added to the end of the table (after FC-5114). SUBSTANTIATION: Table A-$-4.2.1 does not address FIC-1311, an acceptable dean agent for normally unoccupied, total flood apphcations (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185; Sept. 26, 1994). There- fore, the table should be changed to include FIG-1311. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accej~t in Principle.

Change reference to "Moore. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The reference should be to the person in lieu of the organization.

(Log #107) 2001- 88 - (Table A-3-4.2.1 ): Accept in Principle SUBMITIT_~ Paul E. Rivers, ~M Company Specialty Chemicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Addition to Table A-3-4.2.1:

F FG-$-I-10 Inerting Concentrations

Inert Concentration

• Fuel Agent (vol. %) Reference

Methane FG-$-I-10 7.8 Heinonen Propane FC-$-1-10 9.6 Heinonen

SUBSTANTIATION: Additional inertifig pertormance datawith various fuels for FC-$-I-10.

COMMITIT..E ACTION: Accept in Principle. Add the following to Table A-~4.2.1:

FC-$-I-IO Inerting Concentrations

Inert Concentration

Fuel Agent (vol. %)

Propane Halon 1301 6.2 Methane Halon 1501 4.9 Propane HFC-23 20.4 Propane* HgC-227ea 11.7 Propane FG-3-1-10 9.9

COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Added additional test data.

Reference

SKAGGS SKAGGS SKAGGS SKAGGS SKAGGS

(Log #10) 2001- 89 - (A-$-4.2.2 (New)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTE~ Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-27,2001-69 RECOMMENDATION: Add Appendix material for Section 3-4.2.2 to read as follows:

1, A-3-4.2.2 (Retain same wording as currently in NFPA 2001, 1994 edition).

2. A-3-4.2.2.1 Insert newA-3-4.2.2.1 from committee action on ROP 2001-69.

3. Add newA-3-4.2.2.2 to read as follows: A-3-4.2.2.2 In the case where the minimum design concentration

for a particular Class B flammable liquid is less than that established for heptane, the value established for heptane should be used.

In the case where the minimum design concentration for a particular Class B flammable liquid is greater than at established for heptane, the greater value should be used.

Class B flammable liquid mixtures can be evaluated on the basis of the component requiring the highest extinguishing concentration.

4. A-3-4.2.2.3 (Retain same wording as currendy in NFPA 2001, 1994 edition). SUBSTANTIATION: Appendix material added to support comments submitted for changes to Section 3-4.2.2. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

l . A-5-4.2.2.2 Retain same wording as currentiyin NFPA 2001-F95 ROP section A-3-4.2.2.3~ and add new second sentence to read as follows:

"Hazards containing both Class A and Class B fuels should be evaluated on the basis of the fuel requiring the highest design c o n c e n t r a t i o n . "

2. A-3-4.2.2.3 Insert the fire test procedure as currendyin NFPA 2001-F95 ROP, Section. A-3-4.2.2.1, except that the wording should be updated to the wording in the November, 1994 issue of the procedure. COMMITrEE STATEMENT: The above revisions and additions were made in light of the changes to Comment 2001- 30 (Log #9).

' (Log #108) 2001- 90 - (A-3-4.2.2() (New)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Paul E. Rivers, 3M Company Specialty Chemicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-29 RECOMMENDATION: Add new table as follows:

Cupburner Concentrations for Various Agents in the Standard.

Fuel H~G-227ea HFC-25 HCFC Blend A

Heptane 7.48 12.91 11.12" IPA 7.65 12.43 Acetone 7.07 11.50 Toleune 5.49 9.96 Methanol 10.10 Ethanol 8.65 n:Butanoi 7.94 Benzyl-alcohol 5.80 Hexane 7.19 Cyclo-hexane 6.95 Iso-octane 6.49 JP-4 6.91

240

N F P A 2 0 0 1 - - F 9 5 R O C

provided at the as requested by the committee. Also, see the following procedure used for testing.

Cup Burner Procedure 1. Extinguishing concentrat ions were obtained using the accepted

cup burner procedure described in Section A-3-4.2.2 of NFPA 2001. 2. To assure a gaseous discharge into the cup burner apparatus,

the HCFC Blend A sample was heated up. To do this, the pressure regulator (attached to the liquid side of the cylinder valve) was Pclaced in a 50C water bath.

OMMITTEEACTION: Accept in Principle. Integrate heptane data into Table A-3-4.2.2(a) only.

COMMITTEESTATEMENT: Table A-3-4.2.2(c) was deleted. See Committee Action on Commen t 2001-104 (Log #CC1).

(Log #50) 2001- 91 - (Table A-3-4.2.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Daniel P.'Verdonik, U.S. Army ODC Elimination Program COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Remove Note (d) and add the value of 7.2 percent for HCFC Blend A into the table if it is a validated cupburner value, ff it is no t a validated cup-burner value it does not belong in this table entitled "Cup-Burner Heptane Flame Extin- guishing Data." The note should be dele ted and no change to the table is recommended , ff the 7.2 percent is obtained from a different but equally valid me thod then a separate table should be created, with the values for as many of the other Agents (e.g., FC~-I- 10, HFC-124, etc.) as is available, ff only HCFC Blend A has this other me thod then a full description of the test and validation me thod needs to be incorporated into the body of the standard. SUBSTANTIATION: The values listed in Table A-3-4.2.2 will be used by U.S. Army personnel to de termine the most cost effect retrofit of Halon 1501 systems currently installed. It is confusing as to whether or no t the value of 7.2 percent for HCFC Blend A is on the same par with the other values listed in the table, f l i t is a cupburner value then evaluation of "applies against apples" is apparent. ff it is a different test then we would need to know what the test is so that we can equilibrate "applies agmnst oranges" to evaluate the options.

With the value of 7.2 percent written only as a note it is not apparent if this value should or should not be used in calculating the destgn of a system. Before any new chemica l /b lend can be added into the Army supply system it must obtain a Toxicity Clearance from the Army Surgeon General. In evaluating such a clearance Army Enwronmental Health staff vail look at the exposure scenarios to de termine risk to Army personnel, both military and civilian. The concentrat ion to extinguish the fire is a key value in this risk assessment. As it stands now, it is difficult to de termine the actual risk and is, therefore, of no value to the U.S. Army. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-50 (Log #19).

(Log #106) 2001- 92 - (Table A-3-4.2.2( ) (New)): Reject SUBMITTER: Paul E. Rivers, 3M Company Specialty Chemicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Add new table as shown:

FC-3-1-10 Extinguishing Concentrations

Cup Burner Extinguishing Fuel Concentrauon (vol. %)

Acetone 5.5 Benzyl Alcohol 5.5 n-Butyl Alcohol 6.7 Cyclohexane 5.5 Ethanol 6.8 Heptane 5.9 Hexane 5.6 Isoctane 5.5 Isopropanol 6.2

JP-4 5.0 Methanol 9.4 Methyl Ethyl Keytone 5.9 Methyl Isobutyl Keytone 5.5 Toluene 4 2

SUBSTANTIATION: Additional extinguishing performance data with various fuels for FG-3-I-10. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-104 (Log #CC1).

(Log #19) 2001- 93 - (Table A-3-4.2.2(a)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-27, 2001-69 RECOMMENDATION: Revise Table A-3-4.2.2 Cup Burner Heptane Flame Extinguishing Data to read:

1. Add new column to the table for HCFC Blend A. 2. Add the following Heptane Cup Burner Values for HCFC Blend

A.

Investigator HGFG Blend A 3 ~ 11.2

NMERI 11.6

5. Delete note (d) to the table.

NOTE: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarters. SUBSTANTIATION: It is the opinion of several recognized experts in the field of cup burner testing that this method produces consistent reliable results for gaseous agents, including mixtures having more than one component .

It is r ecommended that the cup burner test be adopted as the me thod toe used in this standard to establish minimum flame extinguishment values for all of the clean agents Because of the proliferation of different agents in this standard tt becomes readily apparent that each clean agent should be required to meet the same criteria in order to establish a common level of performance COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

1. Add the following to Table A-3-4.2.2(a):

Investigator HCFC Blend A NME~RI 10.5

2. Delete notes (b), (c), and (d). COMMITI'EE STATEMF.NT: NMERI provided cup-burner heptane flame ext inguishment data for HCFC Blend A.

(Log #40) 2001-94- (Table A-3-4.2.2(a)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Daniel W. Moore, DuPont Company COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Add new column headed "HG-236fa" under investigator list "DuPont." Show value of"5.3." SUBSTANTIATION: To provide cup burner information for agent listed in Table 1-4.1.2. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. Add the following data to Table A-3-4.2.2(a):

Agent Investigator HC-236fa HFC227ea 410 HCFC124 HFC23 HFC125 Halon 1301 CF31

NMERI 5.6 FENWAL 5.3 NIST 6.5 6.2 5 3 7.0 12 8.7 3.1 3.2

COMMITTEE STATEMENT: NMERI, Fenwal, and NIST provided additional cup-burner heptane flame ext ingmshment data for the above agents.

241

N ~ P A 2001 - - F95 RO C

\

(Log #57) 2001, 95 - (Table A-3-4.2.2(a)): Accept SUBMITTER: Stephanie R. Skaggs, Pacific Sdentific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: The following information needs to be added to Table A-3-4.2.2(a):

Agent Investigator FIC-I M I

NRL ~.2 3M NMERI 3.0 Fenwal GLCC Ansui

SUBSTANTIATION: Table A-S-4.2.1 does not address FIC-1311, an acceptable dean agent for normally unoccupied, total flood apphcafions (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept 26, 1994). There- fore, the table should be changed to include FIC-1311. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Also see Committee Action on Comment 2001-94 (Log #40).

COMMrr rEE STATEMENT: Referenced data available from Underwriters Laboratories Canada.

(Log #58) 2001- 97 - (Table A-3-4.2:2(b)): Accept SUBMITTER: Stephanie IL Skaggs, Pacific Sdentific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO- N /A RECOMMENDATION: A rOw should be added into Table A-3- 4.2.2(b) for FIC-1311. The row for FIC-1311 should be added after the row for HFC-23 and before the row for R-595. The boxes corresponding to Acetone, Class A Surface Fires, Heptane,

anol, and Toluene should all be left blank. T I A T I O N : Table A-3-4.2.1 does not address FIC-1311, an

acceptable clean agent for normally unoccupied, total flood applications (Fed. Reg., Voi. 59, No. 185, Sept 26, 1994). There- fore, the table should be changed to include FIC-IM1. COMMIIWEE ACTION: Accept A ow for CF3L

STATEMENT: Used chemical name for FIC-1311

(Log #'20) 2001- 06 - (Table A-3-4.2.2(b)): Accept in Principle SUBMITrER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-29 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new Table A-~4.2.2(b) With minimum design concentrations for flame extinguishment including design concentration values for FE-$-I-10, HFC-227ea, and IG-541.

Table A-$-4.2.2Co ) Clema Ab~eat Minimum Design Coae.~mtraflom for Flame E x t l n ~ t (at 25°C at I arm)

Mhflmttm Design Coneenlration ~ byVolume

Class A Cleffia Ab, ent Acetone &arface

FC~3-1-10 6.6(a) (h) 6.9(a~ (b) HBFG-22B1 HC, P~I24 HFC-125 HFC-227ea 8.1 (a~b~ 7.0(a~ (b~ HFC-23 " HC, FG Blend A IG-01 IG-541 S7'Sqa~ (b) IC-55

Heptane lmprol:,anol Toluene

6.0(a~ (b~ 7.5(a)lb~ 6.0(a~ fb~

7.0 (a~ ~b~ 8"7(a~ (b~ 7.0 (~ (b)

S7.5(a~ ~

NOTE I: This data h ~ been verified by at least one of the following o v g a . , ~ o r ~ (a) Underwriters Laboratories (b) Factory Mutual (c) Underwriters Laboratories Canada, in accordance with the fire test procedure de~ribed in UI_r1058A. NOTE 2: Data pre~ntly not available for empty table entrieL NOTE 8: Theae data are equipment manufacturer specific and are the lowest reported values at this time.

SUBSTANTIATION: This information is necessary to the user in order to apply this standard. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Prindple.

Update table as follows:

(Log #64) 2001- 98 - (Table A-3-4.2.2(b)): Reject SUBMrrTER: Mark L Robin, Great Lakes Chemical Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N /A RECOMMENDATION: Under column entitled "Class A Surface Fires," add a note "(d)" to the IG-541 Figure of 37.5. Then, under NOTE 1, add:

"(d) BaWed fires may require greater than 37.5% byvolume to ensure extinguishment." SUBSTANTIATION: Tests have shown that for certain Class A fires, consistent extinguishment is not obtained at a design concentration of 37.5 percent

NOTE: Supporting material is available for review at NFPA Headquarter~ COM/~flTrEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: In appropriate as item (d) to Note 1. These are test laboratories.

(Log #7O) 2001- 99 - (Table A-3-4.2.2 (b)): Accept in Part SUBMITIT_~ Lorne MacGregor, North American Fire Guardian Technology, Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-29 RECOMMF.JqDATION: "R-595" should be changed to "HCFC Blend A" and "8.6%c" should be inserted under Heptane. SUBSTANTIATION: The name is consistent with the rest of the document

Supporting data for the 8.6 percent value has previously been submitted to the committee. - COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept in Part. •

Change "R-595" to "HCFC Blend A" only. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Agent designation was corrected. Tests were not conducted in accordance with UL 1058 for listing productes.

Table &&4.2.2(b) CJeam Agmt MTmimsm D e ~ Coacenwatlom for Flame E~tlalp~damest • (at 1 ~ : at I a t - )

I hfmimma Deaip Uome~wation % by Volume ' '

aeaa &gear Aceto~ ~ A H e p t l m e Imoproplmol T o h t e l ~ Surface lemm

6.6La1 (bl 5-0(al (bl ~0in~ Lb~ 7.5(a) tbl 6-0(a~(~) F~3-8-1-|0 H B ~ B I HgM~-I24 HFC-125 ~ 2 2 7 e a

Wend A IG-01

H'fiTI,'}Tt"4N l fAuff f l ,3 l f ' - in [~LI" ITI ; 'Hr4i IL~TI-f3Tl,")lf'4n iULnflTI,"ITF,,

IG-541 3"/.5in~ fb~ $7"5fal ~bl 1G-55

NOTgI: Thisdatahubec~averifiedbyatleastoneofthefollowmgorganizatiom: (a) Underwrim= Laboratories Co) Factory Mutual (c) Undermiters Laboratocies Canada. i~ accordance with the fire teat procedure deacribed in UL-] 058. NO'rg 2." l)aga pfeaenttynot ava~able for empty table entrle& NOTE 3:. These data are equipm~t manufacturer specific and are the lowest reported ~ lu~ ~ this time.

242

N F P A 2001 m F95 R O C

(Log #89) 2001- 100 - (Table A-3-4.2.2(b)): Accept SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidler, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Add to IG-541 extinguishing concentrations, Acetone, 37.5%(a, b, c); Isopropanol, 37.5%(a, b, c); Toluene, 37.5%(a,b, c)- . . -

(Subscrip~ signify uL, FM and ULC in that order.)

Table A-3-4.2.2(b) Clea~a Agent Minimum Deign Concentrations for Flame 1,3~ingtfisimaent (at 25°C at I arm)

Minimum Deign Concentration % by Volume

Clean Ap[ent Acetone Class A Surface Fires Heptane Isopropanol Toluene

FC-$-1-10 6.6 (a) (b) 6.0 (a) (b) 6-0(a) (b) 7.5(a) (b) 6.0 (a) (b) HBFC-~BA H CFC-124 H ~ - 1 2 5 HFC-227ea 8-1(a) (b) 7.0 (a) (b) 7.0(a) (b) 8.7(a) (b) 7-0(a) (b) HF~23 HCFC Blend A IG-O1 IG-541 37-5(a) (b) (c) 37.5(a) (b) (c) 37-5(a) (b) (c) 37.5(a) (b) (c) 37.5(a) (b) (c) IG-55

NOTE 1: This data has been verified by at least one of the following organizations: (a) Underwriters Laboratories (b) Factory Mutual (c) Underwriters Laboratories Canada, in accordance with the fire test procedure described in UL-1058A. NOTE 2: Data-presently not available for empty table entries. NOTE 3: These data are equipment manufacturer specific and are the lowest reported values at this time.

SUBSTANTIATION: UL, FM, and ULC verified minimum design concentrations for flame extinguishment of Acetone, IPA, and Toluene. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #103) 2001-101 - (Table A-$-4.2.2(b)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Paul E. Rivers, 3M Company Specialty Chemicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Add the following minimum design concentration values to the table in the appropriate spaces for FC-3- 10-10:

Acetone 6.6% (a) (b) Class A Surface Fires 6.0%(a) (b) Heptane 6.0% (a) (b) Isopropanol 7.5% (a) (b) Toluene 6.0% (a) (b)

SUBSTANTIATION: Provided as useful design data based on actual Listing testwork. Submitted as requested by the committee. " CoMMrFrEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. • COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-96 (Log #20).

(Log #59) 2001- 102- (A-3-4.2.2(c)): Reject SUBMITrER: Stephanie R. Skaggs, Pacific Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO" N / A RECOMMENDATION: Table A-$-4.2.2(c) should be changed to incorporate information pertaining to FIC-1311. The proposed change is shown following:

Cup Bin-her Extinguishing Fuel Concen~mtiom~, % v/v

~ c A s n • Acetone 6.8 Acetonitrile 3.7 1-7 AV Gas 6.7 3.7 n-Butanol 7.1 3.3 n-Butyi Acetate ~ 6.6 2.5 D~iClopentanone 6.7

esel No. 2 6.7 3-3 Ethane 7.5 - Ethanol 8.1 3.0 Ethyl Acetate 5.6 3.0 Ethylene Glycol 7.8 2.4 Gas (unleaded, 7.8% Ethanol) 6.5 3.6 n-Heptane 5.8 3.0 Hydraulic Fluid No. 1 5.8 2.3

JP-4 6.6 3.3 ~vPeSthan e 6.6 3.2

6.2 2.0 Methanol 10.0 3.8 Methyl Ethyl Ketone 6.7 4.4 Methyl Isobutyl Ketone 6.6 2.9 Morpholine 7.3 - Nitzomethane 10.1 Propane 6.3 3-0 i-Propanol 7.3 - e~trahOllidine 7.0 2.8

ydrofuran 7.2 - Toluene 5.8 - Transformer Oil 6.9 Turbo Hydraulic Oil 2380 5.1 2-1 Xylene 5.3 5.5

NOTE: Information on HFC-227ea supplied by manufacturer (GLCC). NOTE: lntormation on FIC-1311 suplied byNMERL

SUBSTANTIATION: Table A-3-4.2.1 does not address FIC-1311, an acceptable clean agent for normally unoccupied, total flood applications (Fed.Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. 26, 1994). There- fore, the table should be changed to include FIC-1311. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reiect. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-104 (Log #CC1).

243

N F P A 2001 - - F 9 5 R O C

(Log #102) 2001- 103- (Table A-3-4.2.2(c)): Accept SUBMITTER: Paul E. Rivers, 3M Company Specialty, Chemicals Division COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Change the Heptane cupburner value of HFC-227ea to 5.9 percent. SUBSTANTIATION: Conforms with manufacturer's original submitted data in Table A-3-4.2.2 (a). COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #CC1) 2001- 104- (Table A-3-4.2.2(c)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Committee on Alternative Protection Options to Halon, COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-68 RECOMMENDATION: Delete Table A-3-4.2.2(c). SUBSTANTIATION: Original intent of table was to provide some guidance where none existed. It now appears to be irrelevant. COMMITFEE ACTION: Accept.

2001-105 -Unused

(Log #90) 2001- 106- (Table A-3-4.2.2(d)): Reject SUBMITTER: Logan T. Fidler, Halon Alternative Research Corp. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Add IG-541 extinguishing concentrations.

SUBSTANTIATION: New data on additional Class B fuels. COMMITITEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITIT.E STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-104 (Log #CC1).

(Log #93) 2001-107 - (Table A-3-4.2.2(d)): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Ronald S. Sheinson, Naval Research Laboratory COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N / A RECOMMENDATION: Add new text as follows:

The NRL HCFC Blend A Cup Burner value is greater than 11% (reference (a)). The NRL IG-01 Cup Burner value is 41% (reference (b)). The NRL Nitrogen Cup Burner value is 30% (reference (b)). The NRL IG-55 CupBurner value is 35% (calculation based on

values in reference (b)). (a): Sheinson, R.S., Maranghides, A., "Halon Replacement n-

Heptane Cup Burner Values, Naval Research Laboratory Ltr Rpt 6180/0222, April 1995, in progress.

(b): Sheinson, R.S., Penner-Hahn,J.E., and Indritz, D. "The Physical and Chemical Action of Fire Suppressants,: Fire Safety Journal, Vol. 15, pp. 437-450, 1989. SUBSTANTIATION: Cup Burner values for the above are not listed and are relevant. The values for HCFC Blend A, IG-01 and Nia'ogen are from direct experiments. The value for IG-55 is calculated from results of the two components and the verified validity of such calculations for physical agents. The HCFC/HFC chemical coml?0sition of HCFC Blend A flowed into the Cup Burner was momtored by gas chromatography and remained constant over the length of the testing. COMMrlTEE ACTION: Accept in Prindple. Add data to Table A-3-4.2.2(a) with the exception of nitrogen.

COMMITI'EE STATEMENT: Nitrogen is not recognized in the standard as an extinguishing agent.

IG-541 Extinguishing C~ncentrations

Cup Burner Extinguishing Fuel Concentration, % V/V

Acetone 31.1 Acetoniwile 26.7 AAVgas 100 35.8

ur (Jet A) 36.2 1-Butanol 37.2 Cyclopentanone 42.1 Diethyl Ether 34.9 Ethane 29.5 Ethanol 35.0 Ethyl Acetate 32.7 Ethylene 42.1 n-Heptane 29.1 Hexane 34.4 Isopropyl Alcohol 31.1 Methane 15.4 Methanol 44.2 Methylethyl Ketone 35.8 Methylisobutyl Ketone 32.3 Octane 35.8 Pentane 37.2 Petroleum Ether 35.0 Propane 32.3 Regular Gasoline 35.8 Toluene 31.1 Vinyl Acetate 34A Vacuum Pump Oil 32.0

(Log #1) 2001- 108 - (Table A-3-4.2.2(x) (New)): Reject SUBMITTER: Joseph A. Senecal, Fenwal Safety Systems COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Add Table A-3-4.2.2(x) to Appendix:

TableA-3-4.2.2(x) HFC-23 Extinguishing Concentrations

Cup Burner Exting. Fuel Cone., vol %

Heptane 12 Toluene 9.2 Acetone 12 Isopropyl alcohol 12 Methyl alcohol 21

SUBSTANTIATION: New data are supplied on extinguishing concentrations for HFC-23 as determined by the cup burner method for flames offire flammable liquids. Reported valuesare supported by data reported in Fenwal Safety Systems CRC Technical Note No. 405, rev. 1, March 17, 1995. The measured values, or averages of multiple measured values, were rounded to the nearest two significant figures for use herein.

NOTE: Supporting material'is available for review at NFPA Headquarters. COMMITTEE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Committee Action on Comment 2001-104 (Log #CC1).

244

N F P A 2001 - - F 9 5 R O C

(Log #69) 2001- 109 - (A-3-4.2.2.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Lorne MacGregor, No~h American Fire Guardian Technology, Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Change as follows:

w _ Z + c w=_V,, c X 100 S 1 0 0 - C

SUBSTANTIATION: This is consistent with the rest of the document and better reflects reality. For rigorous mathematical derivation see paper presented by Senecal at committee meeting September 1994. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

(Log #21 ) t

2001- 110 - (A-3-4.2.2.1 (New)): Accept in Principle [ SUBM/TTER: Charles F. Willms, Fire Suppression Systems Assoc.

I COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 2001-69 RECOMMENDATION: Revise paragraph A-3-4.2.2.1 (KIV), first sentence to read:

"Ignition of the crib is to be achieved by the burning of 0.25 gallon (0.95 liter~ of commercial grade heptane..." SUBSTANTIATION: This sentence was revised to add the quantity of fuel required to conduct this test. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Replace item 15 with the following: "15 The heptane is to be ignited and the crib is to be allowed to

burn freely for approximately 6 minutes outside the test enclosure. The heptane fire is to burn for 3 to 2-1/2 min. Approximately 1/4 gal of heptane will provide a 3 to 3-1/2 min. burn time. Just prior to I the end of the preburn period, the crib is to be moved into the test [ enclosure andplaced on a stand such that the bottom of the crib is I between 20 and28 in. above the floor. The closure is then to be sealed." COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Reflects the latest listing criteria.

(Log #60) 2001- 111 - (A-3-8.1.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Stephanie 1L Skaggs, Pacific Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Change the paragraph starting: "Limited data on decomposition product..."

To read: "Limited data on decomposition product formation indicate that

the quantity of decomposition products formed is driven by the size of the fire at the time of discharge and, to a lesser extent, the discharge time. There is insufficient data to quantify the relation- ship between discharge time or fire size and the quantity of decomposition products produced. All non-brominated and non- iodinated clean agents produce more decomposition products than Halon 1301. Data available on FIC-1311 indicates that its production of HF is comparable to that of Halon 1301." SUBSTANTIATION: FIC-1311, an acceptable clean agent for normally unoccupied, total flood applications (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. 26, 1994), is not addressed in the current text. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. Accept the submitter's recommendation but change the third

sentence to read as follows: "HFC, HCFC, and PFC clean agents produce more HF than Halon

1301." COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Provides accurate pertinent information.

(Log #61) 2001- 112 - (B-2-7.1.4): Accept SUBMITTER: Stephanie R. Skaggs, Pacific Scientific COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: N/A RECOMMENDATION: The information for FIC-1311 should be added to Section B-2.7.1.4 as shown below

FIC-1311:8.051 kg/m3 (0.503 lb/ft3) SUBSTANTIATION: Section B-2.7.1.4 does not address FIC-1311, an acceptable clean agent for normally unoccupied, total flood applications (Fed. Reg., Vol. 59, No. 185, Sept. 26, 1994). There- fore, the information should be included on FIC-1311. COMMITrEE ACTION: Accept.

245

report of the committee on nonvoting civil engr university, russia michael … · 2016-03-28 ·...

Documents