Technical Committee on Foam (FOM-AAA) - NFPA · Page 1 of 1 Technical Committee on Foam (FOM-AAA) M...

of 1

Technical Committee on Foam (FOM-AAA)

M E M O R A N D U M

DATE: January 21, 2014

TO: Principal and Alternate Members of the Technical Committee on Foam (FOM-AAA)

FROM: Barry Chase, NFPA Staff Liaison

Office: (617) 984-7259 Email: [email protected]

SUBJECT: AGENDA – NFPA 11 Second Draft Meeting (Fall 2014) February 5-6, 2014, Fort Lauderdale, FL

1. Call to Order – February 5, 8:00am ET

2. Chairman Comments

3. Introductions and Attendance

4. Review Agenda

5. NFPA Staff Liaison Presentation and Review of Key Dates in Current Cycle

6. Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes

a. May 22-23, 2013 - NFPA 11 First Draft Meeting (F2014)

7. Act on Public Comments and Generate Second Revisions for NFPA 11

a. Task Group on Defining “Heavy” and “Light” Construction (Chair: R. Hendricksen)

b. Task Group on Galvanized Pipe (Chair: R. Kasiski)

c. Task Group on Floating Roofs (Chair: N. Ramsden)

i. Comments by J. Eickhoff and colleagues of HMT Inc., submitters of the related

Public Input

d. Task Group on Self-Expanding Foam (Chair: E. Norman)

i. Video Presentation on Self-Expanding Foam (submitted by Foam Fatale)

8. Other Business

9. Next Meeting

10. Adjourn Meeting

Please submit requests for additional agenda items to the chair at least seven days prior to the meeting,

and notify the chair and staff liaison as soon as possible if you plan to introduce any large-scale revisions

at the meeting.

All NFPA Technical Committee meetings are open to the public. Please contact me for information on

attending a meeting as a guest. Read NFPA's Regulations Governing the Development of NFPA

Standards (Section 3.3.3.3) for further information.

Additional Meeting Information: If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Elena Carroll, Project Administrator at 617-984-

7952 or by email [email protected]. C. Standards Administration

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF/CodesStandards/Directory/RegsGovDevStds_2013.pdf

http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF/CodesStandards/Directory/RegsGovDevStds_2013.pdf

mailto:[email protected]

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE

ADDRESS LIST

Address List No PhoneFoam FOM-AAA

Barry D. Chase01/21/2014

FOM-AAA

Fay Purvis

ChairVector Fire Technology, Inc.47 Sarahs WayCoatesville, PA 19320

SE 1/1/1987FOM-AAA

Joan M. Leedy

SecretaryDyne Technologies2357 Ventura Drive, Suite 108Woodbury, MN 55125Alternate: Megan Anderson

IM 1/16/2003

FOM-AAA

Jean-Pierre Asselin

PrincipalFireFlex Systems, Inc.1935 Lionel-Bertrand BoulevardBoisbriand, QC J7H 1N8 CanadaAlternate: Raymond Quenneville

M 1/15/2004FOM-AAA

V. Frank Bateman

PrincipalUTC/Kidde Fire Fighting1137 Rainbow DriveMartinez, CA 94553-4741

M 4/5/2001

FOM-AAA

Gene E. Benzenberg

PrincipalAlison Control Inc.35 Daniel RoadFairfield, NJ 07004

M 7/16/2003FOM-AAA

Jerald A. Borowski

PrincipalAmerex Corporation2701 Larsen Road, Suite BA 140Green Bay, WI 54303Alternate: Joseph M. Pada

M 03/05/2012

FOM-AAA

Laurence E. Fisher

PrincipalUS Coast GuardCommandant (CG-ENG-4)2703 Martin Luther King Jr Ave SEStop 7509Washington, DC 20593-7509Alternate: Louis Nash

E 03/07/2013FOM-AAA

Steven Fox

PrincipalSprinklerfitters U.A. Local 4832531 Barrington CourtHayward, CA 94545United Assn. of Journeymen & Apprentices of thePlumbing & Pipe Fitting Industry

L 03/07/2013

FOM-AAA

Robert A. Green

PrincipalPublic Service Electric & Gas CompanyCorporate Insurance & Risk Management Dept.80 Park Plaza, MC T6BNewark, NJ 07101Edison Electric Institute

U 4/1/1994FOM-AAA

Martin Hawkes

PrincipalHawkes Fire Ltd4 Cowton WayDurham Lane Industrial EstateStockton-on-Tees, TS16 0R3 United Kingdom

IM 10/23/2013

FOM-AAA

Randall Hendricksen

PrincipalTyco/ChemGuard, Inc.204 South 6th AvenueMansfield, TX 76063Alternate: Eric LaVergne

M 10/6/2000FOM-AAA

Edward G. Hugill

PrincipalJanus Fire Systems1102 Rupcich Drive, Millennium ParkCrown Point, IN 46307Fire Suppression Systems AssociationAlternate: Timothy Pope

IM 8/2/2010

1



FOM-AAA

William E. Janz

PrincipalXL Global Asset Protection Services301 Pine Ridge DriveWashington, IL 61571Alternate: Paul Hubrich

I 7/16/2003FOM-AAA

Robert Kasiski

PrincipalFM Global1151 Boston Providence TurnpikePO Box 9102Norwood, MA 02062-9102Alternate: Robert M. Cordell

I 7/26/2007

FOM-AAA

Ronald J. Mahlman

PrincipalThe RJA Group, Inc.Rolf Jensen & Associates, Inc.2125 Oak Grove Road, Suite 300Walnut Creek, CA 94598Alternate: John J. Foley

SE 10/6/2000FOM-AAA

Edward C. Norman

PrincipalAqueous Foam Technology, Inc.942 St. Matthews RoadChester Springs, PA 19425

SE 7/1/1994

FOM-AAA

David W. Owen

PrincipalExxonMobil CorporationResearch and Engineering2800 Decker Drive MOB 541Baytown, TX 77520American Petroleum InstituteAlternate: Clark D. Shepard

U 7/12/2001FOM-AAA

Austin G. Prather

PrincipalHayden and Company10328 IH-37Corpus Christi, TX 78410

M 8/5/2009

FOM-AAA

Niall Ramsden

PrincipalResource Protection InternationalWalker HouseGeorge StreetAylesbury, Bucks, HP20 2HU United Kingdom

SE 1/1/1990FOM-AAA

Gaston J. Santerre

PrincipalIntegrated Protection Services Inc.5431 Los Robles DriveCarlsbad, CA 92008

SE 1/15/2004

FOM-AAA

Joseph L. Scheffey

PrincipalHughes Associates, Inc.3610 Commerce Drive, Suite 817Baltimore, MD 21227-1652Alternate: Gerard G. Back

SE 10/1/1993FOM-AAA

Donald H. Seaman

PrincipalCSC Advanced Marine1220 12th Street SE, Suite 200Washington, DC 20003

SE 7/16/2003

FOM-AAA

Blake M. Shugarman

PrincipalUL LLC333 Pfingsten RoadNorthbrook, IL 60062-2096Alternate: Donald J. Ross

RT 11/2/2006FOM-AAA

John A. Toney

PrincipalDooley Tackaberry, Inc.1515 West 13th StreetDeer Park, TX 77536National Association of Fire Equipment DistributorsAlternate: Scott E. Herreth

IM 1/10/2002

2



FOM-AAA

Kevin D. Westwood

PrincipalBP International1 Glenfield RoadFairfieldStockton on Tees, TS19 7PN United Kingdom

U 11/2/2006FOM-AAA

Martin H. Workman

PrincipalThe Viking Corporation210 North Industrial Park RoadHastings, MI 49058Alternate: Shawn Feenstra

M 3/4/2009

FOM-AAA

Steven E. Younis

PrincipalSteven E. Younis PE, Inc.47 Stone Ridge RoadFranklin, MA 02038-3166Automatic Compressed Air Foam Systems

M 07/29/2013FOM-AAA

Jason C. Black

Voting AlternateFiretrol Protection Systems, Inc.4480 Halls Mall Road, Building 3, Suite AMobile, AL 36693American Fire Sprinkler AssociationVoting Alt. to AFSA Rep.

IM 10/27/2009

FOM-AAA

Megan Anderson

AlternateDyne Technologies2357 Ventura Drive, Suite 108Woodbury, MN 55125Principal: Joan M. Leedy

IM 07/29/2013FOM-AAA

Gerard G. Back

AlternateHughes Associates, Inc.3610 Commerce Drive, Suite 817Baltimore, MD 21227-1652Principal: Joseph L. Scheffey

SE 8/2/2010

FOM-AAA

Robert M. Cordell

AlternateFM Approvals1151 Boston-Providence TurnpikeNorwood, MA 02062-9102Principal: Robert Kasiski

I 10/29/2012FOM-AAA

Shawn Feenstra

AlternateThe Viking Corporation210 North Industrial Park RoadHastings, MI 49058Principal: Martin H. Workman

M 10/18/2011

FOM-AAA

John J. Foley

AlternateThe RJA Group, Inc.3384 Peachtree Road NE, Suite 550Atlanta, GA 30326Principal: Ronald J. Mahlman

SE 07/29/2013FOM-AAA

Scott E. Herreth

AlternateDooley Tackaberry, Inc.1515 West 13th StreetDeer Park, TX 77536National Association of Fire Equipment DistributorsPrincipal: John A. Toney

IM 7/23/2008

FOM-AAA

Paul Hubrich

AlternateXL Global Asset Protection ServicesW167 N10840 Carrington CircleGermantown, WI 53022Principal: William E. Janz

I 08/09/2012FOM-AAA

Eric LaVergne

AlternateTYCO621 SaybrookPort Neches, TX 77651Alternate: Randall Hendricksen

M 10/3/2011

3



FOM-AAA

Louis Nash

AlternateUS Coast GuardCommandant (CG-ENG-4)2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SEStop 7509Washington, DC 20593-7509Principal: Laurence E. Fisher

E 10/27/2009FOM-AAA

Joseph M. Pada

AlternateAmerex Corporation1520 Brookfield AvenueGreen Bay, WI 54313Principal: Jerald A. Borowski

M 10/23/2013

FOM-AAA

Timothy Pope

AlternateJanus Fire Systems1102 Rupcich Drive, Millennium ParkCrown Point, IN 60443Fire Suppression Systems AssociationPrincipal: Edward G. Hugill

IM 8/2/2010FOM-AAA

Raymond Quenneville

AlternateFireFlex Systems, Inc.1935 Lionel-Bertrand BoulevardBoisbriand, QC J7H 1N8 CanadaPrincipal: Jean-Pierre Asselin

M 1/15/2004

FOM-AAA

Donald J. Ross

AlternateUL LLC333 Pfingsten RoadNorthbrook, IL 60062-2096Principal: Blake M. Shugarman

RT 10/20/2010FOM-AAA

Clark D. Shepard

AlternateExxonMobil CorporationResearch & Engineering3225 Gallows Road, Room 3A2111Fairfax, VA 22037American Petroleum InstitutePrincipal: David W. Owen

U 7/12/2001

FOM-AAA

Barry D. Chase

Staff LiaisonNational Fire Protection Association1 Batterymarch ParkQuincy, MA 02169-7471

7/29/2010

4

MEETING MINUTES

May 22 – 23, 2013

of 4

NFPA Technical Committee on Foam

Fall 2014 (2015 Edition) First Draft Meeting Atlanta, GA

May 22-23, 2013

MEETING MINUTES ATTENDANCE:

Chairman: Fay Purvis Vector Fire Technology, Inc., PA SE

Secretary: Joan Leedy Dyne Technologies, MN IM

Staff Liaison: Barry Chase National Fire Protection Association, MA -

Principals: Jean-Pierre Asselin FireFlex Systems, Inc., QC M

V. Frank Bateman UTC/Kidde Fire Fighting, CA M

Jerald Borowski Amerex Corporation, WI M

Rick Coppola Fire Protection Industries, Inc., PA Rep. National Fire Sprinkler Association

M

Laurence Fisher US Coast Guard, DC E

Steven Fox Sprinklerfitters U.A. Local 483, CA Rep. United Association of Journeyman & Apprentices of the Plumbing & Pipefitting Industry

L

William Janz XL Global Asset Protection Services, IL I

Robert Kasiski FM Global, MA I

Niall Ramsden Resource Protection International, UK SE

Gaston Santerre Integrated Protection Services, Inc., CA SE

Joseph Scheffey Hughes Associates, Inc., MD SE

Blake Shugarman UL LLC, IL RT

David Sornsin Rapid Fire Protection, Inc., ND Rep. American Fire Sprinkler Association

IM

John Toney Dooley Tackaberry, Inc., TX Rep. National Association of Fire Equipment Distributors

IM

Kevin Westwood BP International, UK U

Alternates: (* voting)

Robert Cordell (Alt. to Robert Kasiski)

FM Global, MA I

Shawn Feenstra* (Alt. to Martin Workman)

The Viking Corporation, MI M

Randall Hendricksen (Alt. to Keith Olsen)

Tyco/ChemGuard, Inc., TX M

Scott Herreth (Alt. to John Toney)

Dooley Tackaberry, Inc., TX Rep. National Association of Fire Equipment Distributors

IM

Raymond Quenneville (Alt. to Jean-Pierre Asselin)

FireFlex Systems, Inc., QC M

NFPA Technical Committee on Foam Fall 2014 (2015) Edition Committee Meeting May 22-23, 2013

Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 4

Guests: Ryan Wong ExxonMobil, TX (Rep. David Owen)

Bob Kelly Trelleborg

Wally Barker Fire Safe Services, LLC

Joe Riordan Energy Professionals

Martin Hawkes Hawkes Fire

CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 8:07 AM EDT, May 22, 2013. Attendees introduced themselves, and the agenda was reviewed.

NFPA STAFF PRESENTATION

NFPA staff reviewed the meeting rules, the new standards development process, key dates in the revision schedule, and available resources.

CHAIR’S COMMENTS

The chair introduced himself to the committee and welcomed new members.

APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES

The minutes from the Fall 2009 ROC teleconference (May 8, 2009) were approved.

The minutes from the Fall 2014 Pre-First Draft teleconference (March 27, 2013) were approved.

NFPA 11 FIRST DRAFT

The committee resolved the public input and generated first revisions. (See First Draft Report)

Dry Foam Presentation – Bob Kelly (Trelleborg Offshore) & Joe Riordan (Energy Professionals)

Dry Foam Task Force

o Members

Joan Leedy, Chair – Dyne Technologies (IM)

Shawn Feenstra – The Viking Corporation (M)

Ronald Mahlman – The RJA Group, Inc. (SE)

Randall Hendricksen – Tyco/ChemGuard, Inc. (M)

Clark Shepard – ExxonMobil Corporation (U)

Kevin Westwood – BP International (U)

o Joan Leedy presented Task Group Report and recommended the committee reject the public input relating to Dry Foam.

Wally Barker (Fire Safe Services) – Presentation to clarify the intent of Public Input #29 and #30

Self-Expanding Foam Task Group



o Members

Edward Norman, Chair – Aqueous Foam Technology, Inc. (SE)

Raymond Quenneville – Fire Flex Systems, Inc. (M)

Niall Ramsden – Resource Protection International (SE)

John Toney – Dooley Tackaberry, Inc. (IM)

o Edward Norman presented Task Group Report and recommended the committee reject the public input relating to Self-Expanding Foam.

A task group was formed to define Heavy and Light Construction that is referred to in the standard.

o Construction Definitions Task Group Members

Randall Hendricksen, Chair – Tyco/ChemGuard, Inc. (M)

Jerald Borowski – Solberg (M)

David Sornsin – American Fire Sprinkler Association (IM)

A task group was formed to develop criteria that the committee could use in determining whether to accept or reject new types of floating roofs on storage tanks.

o Floating Roof Task Group Members

Niall Ramsden, Chair – Resource Protection International (SE)

Gus Santerre – Integrated Protection Services Inc., (IM)

David Owen – Exxon Mobil Corporation (U)

Galvanized Pipe Task Group

o Members

Bob Kasiski, Chair – FM Global (I)

Richard Coppola – Fire Protection Industries, Inc. (M)

Steven Fox – Sprinklerfitters U.A. Local 483 (L)

Gaston Santerre – Integrated Protection Services (SE)

David Sornsin – Rapid Fire Protection Inc. (IM)

Austin Prather – Hayden and Company (M)

Martin Workman – The Viking Corporation (M)

o Bob Kasiski presented the Task Group Report and recommended revisions to the requirements for pipe

Miscellaneous editorial and committee member items were addressed.

OTHER BUSINESS



The committee requested the task groups identified in these meeting minutes remain intact in order to handle any public comments related to the various groups.

The committee agreed to send a letter to Keith Olson – Tyco Suppression Systems to thank him for his many years of service to the Foam Committee. Keith recently retired from Tyco and the Foam Committee.

NEXT MEETING

The NFPA 11 Second Draft meeting will be scheduled for early February 2014. The committee requested to meet in Florida.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 3:12 PM EDT, May 23, 2013

Respectfully Submitted Joan Leedy Secretary

NFPA 11 PUBLIC COMMENTS

1/21/2014 TerraView™

http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ViewerPage.jsp 1/37

Public Comment No. 20-NFPA 11-2013 [ Section No. 1.1.1 ]

1.1.1

This standard covers the design, installation, operation, testing, and maintenance of low-,medium-, and high-expansion and , compressed air and self-expanding foam systemsfor fire protection.

Additional Proposed Changes

File Name Description Approved

FFGR_SYSTEM_COMPARISON.pdf FOAMFATALE SYSTEM COMPARISON

FFPV_inspection_en.pdf PRESSURE VESSEL INSPECTION EN

FFPV_inspection_hu.pdf PRESSURE VESSEL INSPECTION HU

HEMPEL_certification.pdf HEMPEL CERTIFICATION

SEF_labtest_en.pdf SEF LABTEST EN

SEF_labtest_hu.pdf SEF LABTEST HU

SEFS_Test_results.xls SEFS Tests

Statement of Problem and Substantiation for Public Comment

Self-Expanding Foam System is a different fire protection arrangement than prescribed in the current standard.

1. Committee Statement (CS): „Foam Fatale (FF) has proposed a dramatic decrease in the required discharge time(s) for application of foam to tank fires. The FF recommended application times are 2 or 3 minutes, depending on tank size, compared to 50-65 minutes depending on fuel type required by NFPA 11 Para. 5.4.2 and 60 minutes required by EN13565-2 Table 3. These times are for fixed systems on cone roof tanks.”

Public Comment (PC): The Public Inputs No. 49, 50, 53, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 were not just about to decrease the application times. I proposed a new patented system arrangement with associated patented foam introduction device (foam ring) among the others. The one-shot system arrangement, the ready-to-use foam with the unique pattern of foam introduction results in a breakthrough extinguishing performance, the system is capable to put out a 5370 ft2 gasoline storage tank fire in 40 seconds. As a safety factor, the proposed application time is three times higher than the extinguishing time. Please see the attached FFGR_SYSTEM_COMPARISON.pdf file as a comparision between the conventional technologies and the Self-Expanding Foam System (SEFS).

Committee Statement (CS): This recommendation is supported by only one fire test on an 82 ft diameter tank containing gasoline. In this test there was virtually no freeboard of tank wall above the fuel and foam application was started immediately after ignition. We believe that this does not replicate real world conditions and that much additional testing is needed to validate this system.

Public Comment (PC): The Public Input No. 70 included three cold foam spread and two fire



extiguishing test results. The second sheet of the attached „SEFS_Test_results.xls” might have not been considered. For further justification a DVD has been sent to Mr. Barry Chase as a video demonstration of this Public Comment about the extinguishing performance of the proposed Self-Expanding Foam System (SEFS). The video includes two fire tests, one foam spread test and two storage tank fire extinguishments simulating real world conditions. Please watch the video demonstration, which can also be found on youtube.com, title The Self-Expanding Foam System (SEFS). It can be seen on the videos that there is a freeboard of 0,65 meter, which exceeds the LASTFIRE recommendation. The foam application has not started immediately, in the fire extinguishments simulating real world conditions there was a 30 seconds pre-burn time, and during this time even middle-layer effect could develop. Please see pictures about the freeboard and middle layer effect.

Beside of the tests that have already been carried out, FoamFatale Greece contacted Underwriters Laboratories, FM Global for testing the Self-Expanding Foam System (SEFS). We received the following answers to our request: „This product is an innovative product and either by its design, use or features it does not currently fit within the scope of existing UL certification programs. UL has made the decision to not develop requirements to include this under our UL Listing, Classification or Recognition programs.”, „Unfortunately, we are unable to offer FM Approval since it doesn’t satisfy our Class 5130 Approval Standard. A new standard would need to be developed or the existing one would need to be modified in such a way that it would allow us to adequately test and certify your system.”

The Self-Expanding Foam System (SEFS) has been witness tested by TUV Germany and complies with EN-13565:2 European Standard of Fixed firefighting systems - Foam systems. Part 2: Design, construction and maintenance. Please see the attachment of Public Input No. 70, TUV_FF_en.jpg file.

2. Committee Statement (CS): FF supports the idea of immediate application by suggesting that the system will be actuated by detectors. No provision is made for backup manual actuation as required by NFPA 11 Para. 4.9.1.2 and EN 13565-2 Para. 4.7.2 Moreover, FF does not provide fire test data simulating a scenario in which detector driven automatic actuation fails and manual actuation is required. We believe that this is important because tank fires are often ignited by lightning that has the potential to disable detectors and/or automatic actuation systems, making it important to test with longer preburns and design systems for the longer run times that would be required in the case of long preburns caused by failure of automatic actuation.

Public Comment (PC): Please see Public Input No. 68 for manual actuation provision. Revision shall be made if the proposed language does not cover manual actuation. In the fire extinguishments when simulating world conditions the detector system was turned off with sufficient pre-burn time and the system was actuated manually. Please see the submitted storage tank fire extinguishment video at 5 min 04 sec.

3. Committee Statement (CS): In the fire test shown by FF the application rate is at the recommended application rate. There is no provision for a safety factor as is the case in UL and NFPA standards where design rates are much higher than the test rates. It is generally accepted by NFPA that typical critical application rates are approximately 50% of design rates.

Public Comment (PC): The attachment of Public Input No. 70 FFGR-PI-NFPA11-01.pdf mentions 12,8 L/min*m2 recommended min. application rate for a storage tank less than 30 meters in diameter, meanwhile the storage tank in fire was 25,2 meter in diameter and the application rates were less than 10 L/min*m2, which means a 25% safety factor was considered. Please see SEFS_Test_results.xls second sheet for the application rates.



The Committee Statement refers to UL standard, meanwhile UL does not carry out low-expansion foam system test, only for foam concetrates and other system components, moreover NFPA or NFPA 11 does not recommend any test rates for storage tank foam systems. It worths mentioning that the reduced application rate tests applied by UL is to test foam concentrates. According to the current edition of NFPA 11 the foam concentrate shall be listed so as to the Self-Expanding Foam System. The proposal is about a complete system which incorporates an already UL listed foam concentrate.

Furthermore I would like to mention that Mr. Fay Purvis Chair voted negative on CAF System with the following explanation: „this proposal states that the minimum acceptable discharge density shall be in accordance with the applicable occupancy standards and not less than 1.63 l/min/sq meter or 0.04 gpm/sq ft. This density is based on laboratory scale testing and does not include a safety factor to allow for unforeseen conditions that are experienced in field conditions.” (ref: NFPA, 2009 Fall Revision Cycle, Report on Proposals) The proposal of the Compressed Air Foam System has been voted by the Committee as „accepted” without safety factor.

The question is: which test is more adequate to validate a system? A reduced application rate foam concentrate test or a complete low-expansion foam system test simulating real world conditions with a safety factor?

One of the difference between the conventional systems and the Self-Expanding Foam System is that the first is designed to discharge on a given application rate for a certain period of time, while the Self-Expanding Foam System (SEFS) is engineered to extinguish. 4. Committee Statement (CS): Performing hydraulic calculations for the FF system appears to us to be quite a challenge. The foam solution is stored in a pressure vessel that is pressurized with carbon dioxide, a gas that is soluble in water. Whether there is any gas headspace or all of the carbon dioxide is in solution is not clear. The system relies on the pressure of the carbon dioxide to drive the solution through piping and the discharge device. It is obvious that as the solution is discharged the headspace in the pressure vessel will increase, reducing the pressure and, therefore, the flow rate. The pressure/temperature curve of carbon dioxide is quite steep, suggesting a large variation in discharge pressure and flow with variations in ambient temperature. Further, as the solution flows through the piping to the fire its pressure will decrease due to pipe friction. That will allow the solution to release more carbon dioxide that will then exist as bubbles in the solution increasing its volume and, therefore, its velocity and friction loss. At the same time the density of the solution is decreasing, decreasing friction loss. FF does not suggest a calculation method to handle these problems.

Public Comment (PC): FoamFatale Greece proposed the Self-Expanding Foam System, which system is a kind of improved Compressed Air Foam System. The patented Self-Expanding Foam System is one step ahead in the foam generation process, the last stage before the expanded foam. There is no need for mixing chamber, ready-to-use foam is stored in the pressure vessel. The foam flow characteristics downstream of the valve are similar to CAF System hydraulics. Foam flow instead of foam solution reduces the friction loss and increases the discharge. Pressure loss due to elevation is reduced also. The same hydraulic calculations shall be performed as with CAFS. The pressure in the pressure vessel shall be set according to the Operation and Instruction Manual of the manufacturer.

5. Committee Statement (CS): Solutions of carbon dioxide in water are quite acidic, having a pH value between 3 and 4, about the same as vinegar. FF proposes corrosion protection for the pressure vessel but does not suggest how this might be accomplished.



Public Comment (PC): Please see attached the 12-years pressure vessel inspection certificate of a FoamFatale installation (original FFPV_inspection_hu.pdf and translation to english FFPV_inspection_en.pdf). The corrosion protected vessel is intact and clean internally after twelve years of continuous operation. As one option for internal corrosion protection a certification is attached from HEMPEL (HEMPEL_certification.pdf).

6. Committee Statement (CS): FF suggests freeze protection in cold climates, but again does not suggest a practical method. Adding freeze point depressants to foam solution severely degrades fire extinguishing performance.

Public Comment (PC): Please see attached the 10-years foam laboratory test results (original language SEF_labtest_hu.pdf and english translation SEF_labtest_en.pdf). Glykol, as freeze point depressant did not degrade the quality of the foam with solidification point below -15 C degree. The foam solution is approved for further usage.

7. Committee Statement (CS): Most, if not all, of the AFFF, ARAFFF and F3 foam concentrates now on the market use alkyl sulfates and/or alkyl ether sulfates as foaming agents. These chemicals undergo rapid autocatalytic hydrolysis at acidic pH, destroying their effectiveness as foamers. Additionally, foam concentrates based on hydrolyzed protein i.e. FFFP, ARFFFP, FP and regular protein will also lose efficacy over time due to exposure to acidic conditions.

Public Comment (PC): Please see previous PC for foam laboratory test results after 10 years in acidic environment. The foam solution is approved for further usage. F3, FFFP, ARFFFP, FP and regular protein foam concentrates shall not be used to produce Self-Expanding Foam.

Submitter Information Verification

Submitter Full Name:CHRISTOS SIDEROPOULOS

Organization: FOAMFATALE GREECE LTD.

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Thu Nov 14 12:16:36 EST 2013

Copyright Assignment

I, CHRISTOS SIDEROPOULOS, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association

(NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the

Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a

joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in w hich this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative

form is used. I hereby w arrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full pow er and

authority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I aff irm that I am CHRISTOS SIDEROPOULOS, and I agree to be legally bound by the

above Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by

checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that w ill, upon my submission of this form, have the

same legal force and effect as a handw ritten signature

Unit Test No. 1 Test No. 2

m² 500 500

cm 1.5 1

sec 30 30

sec 25 40

n/a 5.8 6.5

sec 8 12

sec 110 122

m 0.1 0.1

m/min 30 16.2

m³ 9 9

l/min/m² 9.81 8.85

l/min/m² 16.8 15.1

Fire surface

Thickness of flammable liquid layer

Preburn time

(the automatic release system was turned off)

Measured foam expansion ratio

Average intensity estimated during

extinguishing time

FIRE EXTINGUISHING TEST RESULTS

Fire spreading time on the whole fire surface

Total time of foam introduction

Foam blanket thickness at the end of

foam introduction

Penetration velocity

Total foam solution amount used

Average foam solution intensity

Extinguishing time

Measured and calculated features


1.2.1

This standard is intended for the use and guidance of those responsible for designing, installing, testing,inspecting, approving, listing, operating, or maintaining fixed, semifixed, or portable low-, medium-, andhigh-expansion and , compressed air and self-expanding foam fire-extinguishing systems for interior orexterior hazards.


Self-Expanding Foam System is a different fire protection arrangement than prescribed in the current standard.


Submitter Full Name: CHRISTOS SIDEROPOULOS


Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Fri Nov 15 03:40:28 EST 2013


I, CHRISTOS SIDEROPOULOS, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights incopyright in this Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understandand intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this oranother similar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power andauthority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am CHRISTOS SIDEROPOULOS, and I agree to be legally bound by the above CopyrightAssignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronicsignature that will, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/ContentFetcher?commentPara...

5 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


3.3.3 Discharge Device.

3.3.3.1* General. A device designed to discharge water or foam-water solution in a predetermined, fixed,or adjustable pattern. Examples include, but are not limited to, sprinklers, spray nozzles, and hosenozzles.

3.3.3.1 2 Air-Aspirating Discharge Devices.

Devices specially designed to aspirate and mix air into the foam solution to generate foam, followed byfoam discharge in a specific design pattern.

3.3.3.2 3 Compressed Air Foam Discharge Device.

A device specifically designed to discharge compressed air foam in a predetermined pattern.

3.3.3.3 4 * Non-Air-Aspirating Discharge Devices.

Devices designed to provide a specific water discharge pattern.

A.3.3.3.1 Examples include, but are not limited to, sprinklers, spray nozzles, and hose nozzles.


This public comment is submitted on behalf of the NFPA Glossary Committee on Terminology. Examples that are lists should not be part of a definition but are best placed in the annex or in a different part of the document. The general definition should have a number and a title also. This comment needs to be tied in to a renumbering of an annex section for 3.3.3.3 now becoming annex section for 3.3.3.4.


Submitter Full Name: Marcelo Hirschler

Organization: GBH International

Affilliation: NFPA GOT

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Wed Oct 16 11:43:33 EDT 2013


I, Marcelo Hirschler, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright inthis Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend thatI acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similaror derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power and authority to enter intothis copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am Marcelo Hirschler, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and theterms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will,upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature


6 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM

Public Comment No. 23-NFPA 11-2013 [ New Section after 3.3.4 ]

3.3.5 Self-expanding Foam Introduction Device (foam ring). A torus shape devicepermanently attached along the inner shell of a tank to introduce self-expanding foam in apredetermined pattern.


A new device shall be introduced that releases self-expanding foam. This device has many advantages: a) capable to serve superintensive foam application rates, b) immediately starts to cool the inner tank shell, c) with the continuous, curtain-like foam flow from the first intorduction point, the oxigen is excluded, d) there are not uncovered surfaces like between the points of foam generation devices, e) the foam loss (dehydration and deconsumption) compared to point-like introduction, arising from fires between the uncovered surfaces, is negligible, f) the foam blanket is closing in the center of the surface, forming a reignition safe thickness. According to the current edition of NFPA 11 A.5.2.6.1, "foam generation equipment (foam chamber) disruption often arises as a result of an initial tank explosion or the presence of fire surrounding the tank". Therefore different foam introduction device shall also be recommended. The self-expanding foam introduction device is attached to the inner shell of the cone roof tank on the whole circumference under the weak seam and in case of an explosion, which is considered as one of the most frequent sources of cone roof tank fires, it acts also like a support frame. The self-expanding foam intoduction device directs foam to the tank shell and then the foam flows down on the whole surface of the inner tank shell cooling it very effectively. The one and only function of the self-expanding foam introduction device is to release foam, hence malfunction is excluded.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






7 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM

Public Comment No. 24-NFPA 11-2013 [ New Section after 3.3.9.1 ]

3.3.9.2 Self-expanding Foam (SEF). A homogeneous foam produced in advance of afire by the combination of water, foam concentrate, and carbon-dioxide or the gasmixture of carbon-dioxide and nitrogen under pressure, and stored in a location notexposed to the hazard.


Self-expanding Foam (SEF) shall be introduced. SEF is the fire extinguishing media of the Self-Expanding Foam Systems (SEFS). The SEF is a ready-to-use homogenous foam, can be alcohol-resistant or non alcohol-resistant, can be frost proof and non frost proof too. The physical and the chemical features of the SEF can be adjusted to the stored material. SEF is perfectly produced well in advance of a fire, there is no preparation, foam solution mixing and foam generation time in case of a given fire, and of course the equipment required for doing these steps are not needed also, the only thing that has to do to introduce the required foam volume to put out the fire.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






8 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


3.3.16.2 Self-expanding Foam System (SEFS). A system employing self-expandingfoam introduction device or monitors attached to a piping system through which foam istransported from a pressure vessel. Introduction of self-expanding foam begins withautomatic actuation of a detection system, or manual actuation that opens valvespermitting self-expanding foam stored in the pressure vessel, to flow through a pipingsystem and introduced over the surface or area served by the self-expanding foamintroduction device or monitors.


Self-Expanding Foam System has been brought to the market in Europe more than 10 years ago. The SEFS could not gained wide acceptance during these years because of the strict regulations coming from standard prescriptions that recommend 'flow-through' systems only. SEFS, a kind of improved CAF system, has a totaly different arrangement compared to the flow-trough systems. SEFS is a fully pre-engineered 'one-shot' fixed system with semi-fixed supplementary protection devices. No external water, seawater, water tanks are required, it has automatic operation with manual option, the maintenance of the system is low-to-zero. The ready-to-use foam, the one-shot system arrangement, the foam introduction pattern makes the Self-Expanding Foam System capable to put out a 500m2 gasoline fire in less than one minute. There is no NFPA standard addressing these systems which are substantially different technically from the flow-trough systems, currently covered and recommended by NFPA 11. In order to enable Self-Expanding Foam System to be listed, approved and accepted, listing organizations, approval bodies, regulatory authorities and others require some form of recognition and acknowledgement of the SEFS in NFPA 11 standard. Without the recognition of SEFS within NFPA standards and codes, this technology and system could not enter to the marketplace as NFPA is the most recognized body and its standards are the most adopted worldwide in fire protection. SEF system complies with EN-13565:2, European Standard of Fixed firefighting systems ― Foam systems. Part 2: Design, construction and maintenance.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






9 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM

Public Comment No. 6-NFPA 11-2013 [ Section No. 3.3.17.1 ]

3.3.17.1 * Compressed Air Foam-Generating Method.

A method of generating compressed air foam recognized in this standard using a mixing chamber tocombine air or nitrogen under pressure, water, and foam concentrate in the correct proportions.

A.3.3.17.1 The resulting compressed air foam flows through piping or hoses to the hazard being protected.


The second sentence is really explanation and not part of the definition. If the committee feels that this information needs to be enforced it should be moved to a different part of the document since definitions and annex material are not enforceable.





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






10 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM

Public Comment No. 9-NFPA 11-2013 [ Section No. 3.3.23.1.1 ]

3.3.23.1.1* In-Line Balanced Pressure Proportioning.

A foam proportioning system utilizing a foam concentrate pump or a bladder tank in conjunction with alisted pressure reducing valve. At all design flow rates, the constant foam concentrate pressure is greaterthan the maximum water pressure at the inlet to the in-line balanced pressure proportioner. A pressurebalancing valve integral to the in-line balanced pressure proportioner regulates the foam concentratepressure to be balanced to incoming water pressure.


All sentences following the first sentence are not really part of the definition and need to be moved, either to the annex (as suggested here) or to some enforceable portion of the standard.





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






11 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


3.3.27.3Self-expanding Foam Pressure Vessel. A self-expanding foam tank fitted with safetyvalve, pressure transmitter and pressure gauges that stores the self-expanding foam underpressure.


With the recommendation of the Self-Expanding Foam System, new type of foam storage shall be introduced.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






12 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


3.3.27.2* Pressure Proportioning Tank.

A foam concentrate tank with no bladder that uses waterflow through an orifice to displace the foamconcentrate in the tank with water to add foam concentrate through an orifice into a water line at a specifiedrate. This device is only suitable for foams having a specific gravity of at least 1.15.


The second sentence is not part of the definition but a requirement that needs to be somewhere else, for example added to the annex section or somewhere in the body of the standard, for example in chapter 4.





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






13 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


4.7.2.1

Foam solution pipe shall be made of one of the following materials:

(1) Galvanized steel

(2) Stainless steel

(3) Internal/external corrosion-resistant pipe in accordance with the foam manufacturer’s specification forcompatibility and acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction pipe

(4) Unprotected carbon steel pipe, when the discharge devices are closed to the atmosphere


I have a large aircraft hangar we are presently working on. The AHJ is adament about following NFPA #11 just because it says galvanized pipe? In 2010 they talk about deluge systems?? A system utilizing generators is a deluge system? Explain to me the difference in operation of a deluge water sprinkler system and a deluge system utilzing generators? Both are open ended systems. Tyco/Cheguard are adament that galvanized pipe should not be used but NFPA #11 says it has to be. This has put us in a very difficult position. All manufacturers are telling us that black pipe is the standard for installation in hangars. Even there technical data sheets clearly say black pipe is acceptable. We need to take the AHJ out of the picture and have a clear path what is acceptable and what is not. The manufacturer says there are many more issues if galvanized is used on solution pipe?? as opposed to using black?


Submitter Full Name: PAUL CHARETTE

Organization: ROYAL FIRE PROTECTION INC

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:

Submittal Date: Tue Sep 10 11:53:52 EDT 2013


I, PAUL CHARETTE, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyrightin this Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intendthat I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this or anothersimilar or derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power and authority toenter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am PAUL CHARETTE, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and theterms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will,upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature


14 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


4.7.2.1

Foam solution pipe shall be made of one of the following materials:

(1) Galvanized steel

(2) Stainless steel

(3) Internal/external corrosion-resistant pipe in accordance with the foam manufacturer’s specification forcompatibility and acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction

(4) Unprotected carbon steel pipe, when filled with foam solution and the discharge devices are closed tothe atmosphere


This corrects the contradiction from the First Revision substantiation to address the resulting corrosion and the condition when carbon steel pipe is permitted.


Submitter Full Name: Robert Kasiski

Organization: FM Global

Affilliation: FM Global

Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



I, Robert Kasiski, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright inthis Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend thatI acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similaror derivative form is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power and authority to enter intothis copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am Robert Kasiski, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the termsand conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon mysubmission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature


15 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


4.7.2.2

Pipe carrying foam concentrate shall not be galvanized.


This requirement is not appropriate for this section and is covered under as a requirement in Foam Concentrate piping in Section 4.7.1.3 as identified by Richard Coppola in First Revision ballot





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






16 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


4.7.2.5

Pipe with within the hazard area shall be able to withstand the anticipated exposure to fire.


Editorial error identified by Blake Shugarman in First Revision ballot





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






17 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


4.7.3.1.1

Foam concentrate piping shall use fittings made of the following materials, as appropriate to the foamconcentrate pipe material:

(1) Brass (red or naval)

(2) Bronze

(3) Stainless steel (304 or 316)

(4) Other material, in accordance with the foam concentrate manufacturer’s certification of compatibilityand with approval from AHJ .


We have to take the AHJ out of this because it leaves them to make decisions where in most cases they are not qualified to do so. Let's make the decision rather than let less competent people make these decisions. It is leaving us contractors in the middle and making it very difficult to do proper busines.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






18 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


4.7.3.1.2

Foam concentrate fittings shall not be carbon steel or galvanized. Design to manufacturers specification


Because NFPA and the manufacturers are far apart on there opinions on this subject. NFPA is saying ss steel and the manufacturers are saying bthere foam concentrate is fine going with carbon steel.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






19 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM

Public Comment No. 27-NFPA 11-2013 [ Section No. 5.2 [Excluding any Sub-Sections] ]

The following methods for protecting exterior fixed-roof tanks shall be included within this section and shallnot be considered to be in any order of preference:

(1) Foam monitors and handlines

(2) Surface application with fixed foam discharge outlets

(3) Surface application with self-expanding foam introduction device shall be designed according toChapter 8.

(4) Subsurface application

(5) Semisubsurface injection methods


According to the current edition of NFPA 11 A.5.2.6.1, "foam generation equipment (foam chamber) disruption often arises as a result of an initial tank explosion or the presence of fire surrounding the tank". Therefore different foam introduction device is recommended. The self-expanding foam introduction device is attached to the inner shell of the cone roof tank on the whole circumference under the weak seam and in case of an explosion, which is considered as one of the most frequent sources of cone roof tank fires, it acts also like a support frame. The self-expanding foam intoduction device directs foam to the tank shell and then the foam flows down on the whole surface of the inner tank shell cooling it very effectively. The one and only function of the self-expanding foam introduction device is to release foam, hence malfunction is excluded. NFPA 11 A.5.3.4.3 states: "Foam can fail to seal against the tank shell as a result of prolonged free burning to agent discharge". The recommended foam introduction device can eliminate this problem also.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






20 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


5.3.3.3 Full Surface Area Protection. Full surface area protection with self-expandingfoam introduction device shall be designed according to Chapter 8.


Because of the limitations of the flow-through systems, the available foam solution application rate limited by the fire pumps, and the foam discharge device, and the point-like arrangement of foam introduction, fixed systems were not considered as an effective way of open-top floating roof tank full surface fire protection, therefore mobile protection became the applied strategy to fight against these fires. Mobile applications need preparation time. During this preparation which takes a lot of time, the whole tank is exposed to the heat and flames of the fire, the terminal is exposed to the risk of fire escalation and even to boilover scenario. According to NFPA 11 A.5.6 "The speed of system operation is always critical in minimizing life and property loss". Self-expanding Foam System is a perfectly pre-engineered fixed system which is capable to put out a large scale full surface fire in minutes. The huge catastrophes, fatalities and unacceptable environmental pollution that happaned in the last decades can be avoided.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






21 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


5.3.4.1

The following methods for fire protection of seals in open-top floating roof tanks shall be as required in5.3.5 through 5.3.7:

(1) Fixed discharge outlets

(2) Foam handlines

(3) Foam monitors

(4) Self-expanding foam introduction device application shall be designed according to Chapter 8.


In case of a rim seal fire only, the curtain-like foam introduction of the Self-expanding Foam Introduction Device results in a very effective pattern of foam application. The design calculation shall be the same as for full suface fires. In case of a given fire, the released foam volume prevents escalation to full surface fire. The additional foam release method on the floating roof is an applied strategy in fire escalation prevention.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






22 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM

Public Comment No. 30-NFPA 11-2013 [ New Section after 7.20 ]

Insertion of a new Chapter 8 according to the attached FFGR-PC-NFPA11-01 file and renumbering thefollowing chapters



FFGR-PC-NFPA11-01.pdf FFGR-PC-NFPA11-01 - The Self Expanding Foam System Design

TUV_FF_en.jpg EN 13565-2 system compliance, TUV Germany

FoamFatale_manual.pdf FoamFatale Manual


Without the recognition of SEFS within NFPA standards and codes, this technology and system could not enter to the marketplace as NFPA is the most recognized body and its standards are the most adopted worldwide in fire protection. Listing and/or approval of the system or the components cannot be accomplished without NFPA recognition.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






23 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM




8.3.3

The plans shall include or be accompanied by the following information, where applicable:

(1) Name of owner and occupant

(2) Location, including street address

(3) Point of compass

(4) Full height cross section, or schematic diagram, includng structural member informationconstruction of dike and tank

(5) Size of supply main and whether dead end or circulating — if dead end, direction anddistance to nearest circulating main — and water flow test results and system elevationrelative to test hydrant

(6) Other sources of water supply with pressure or elevation

(7) Make, type, model, and model number of discharge devices

(8) Pipe type and schedule of wall thickness

(9) Nominal pipe size and cutting lengths of pipe (or center-to-center dimensions).

(10) Types of fittings and joints, and locations of all welds and bends. The contractor shallspecify on drawing any sections to be shop welded and types of fittings or formations tobe used.

(11) Types and locations of hangers, sleeves, braces, and methods of securing foamchambers or other discharge devices when applicable

(12) All control valves, check valves, drain pipes, and test connections

(13) Piping provisions for flushing

(14) For hydraulically designed systems, the information on the hydraullic data nameplate

(15) Graphic representations of the scale used on all plans

(16) Name and address of contractor

(17) Hydraulic reference points shown on the plan that correspond with comparable referencepoints on the hydraulic calculation sheets

(18) Information about backflow preventers (manufacturer, size, type)

(19) Sizes and locations of hydrants, showing sizes and numbers of outlets and whetheroutlets are to be equipped with independent gate valves. Whether hose houses andequipment are to be provided, and by whom, shall be indicated. Static and residualhydrants that were used in flow tests shall be shown

(20) Sizes, locations, and piping arrangements of fire department connections

(21) Physical details of the hazard, including the location, arrangement, and hazardousmaterials involved

(22) Type and percentage of foam concentrate

(23) Required solution application rate



(24) Submergence volume calculations

(25) Water requirements

(26) Calculations specifying required amount of concentrate

(27)

(28) Calculation specifying required amount of air

(29) CAFS flow calculations report

(30) SEFS flow calculations report

(31) Self-expanding foam volume and foam blanket thickness calculations

(32) Identification and capacity of all equipment and devices

(33) Location of piping, detection devices, operating devices, generators, discharge outlets,and auxiliary equipment

(34) Schematic wiring diagram

(35) Explanations of any special features


These calculations are necessary for the proper design of the Self-expanding Foam System (SEFS).


Submitter Full Name:CHRISTOS SIDEROPOULOS


Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



I, CHRISTOS SIDEROPOULOS, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)

all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of

Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any

publication of the NFPA in w hich this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I hereby

w arrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full pow er and authority to enter into this

copyright assignment.

By checking this box I aff irm that I am CHRISTOS SIDEROPOULOS, and I agree to be legally bound by the above

Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this

box, I am creating an electronic signature that w ill, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and

effect as a handw ritten signature

* Hydraulic calculations


11.2.5.3 All self-expanding foam system piping interiors shall be carefully visuallyexamined and, if necessary, cleaned during installation of the pipe.

11.2.5.4 Self-expanding foam system piping shall be flushed after installation. The foamflow shall be unobstructed in the piping system.


The way of the foam flow shall be unobstructed by the residues of the installation.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






28 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM


11.6.2.2 For self-expanding foam systems, the following data shall be recorded as part of anyfoam test:

(1) Self-expanding foam pressure vessel pressure

(2) System pressure at the control valve

(3) Self-expanding foam concentration


These data are necessary to collect ensuring proper system operation.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






29 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM

Public Comment No. 34-NFPA 11-2013 [ New Section after 12.6.3 ]

12.7 Self-Expanding Foam Inspection

12.7.1 At least annually, an inspection shall be made of self-expanding foam and its pressurevessels for evidence of excessive sludging or deterioration.

12.7.2 Samples of self-expanding foam shall be taken for quality condition testing.

12.7.3 Quantity of self-expanding foam in pressure vessel shall meet design requirements.


Regular inspection of the self-expanding foam shall be carried out in order to ensure that the extinguishing foam is in ready-to-use condition.




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






30 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM

Public Comment No. 5-NFPA 11-2013 [ Section No. A.3.3.3.3 ]

A.3.3.3.3 4 Non-Air-Aspirating Discharge Devices.

When discharging AFFF or FFFP solution, they generate an effective AFFF or FFFP with a dischargepattern similar to the water discharge pattern.


The section in chapter 3 is being renumbered.

Related Public Comments for This Document

Related Comment Relationship

Public Comment No. 4-NFPA 11-2013 [Section No. 3.3.3]





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






31 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM

Public Comment No. 10-NFPA 11-2013 [ Section No. A.3.3.23.1.1 ]

A.3.3.23.1.1 In-Line Balanced Pressure Proportioning.

A bladder tank in conjunction with a water pressure–reducing valve upstream of the proportioner can beutilized in place of the foam concentrate pump package. See Figure A.3.3.23.1.1(a) and FigureA.3.3.23.1.1(b).At all design flow rates, the constant foam concentrate pressure is greater than themaximum water pressure at the inlet to the in-line balanced pressure proportioner.A pressure balancingvalve integral to the in-line balanced pressure proportioner regulates the foam concentrate pressure to bebalanced to incoming water pressure.

Figure A.3.3.23.1.1(a) In-Line Balanced Pressure (Pump-Type) Proportioning with Multiple InjectionPoints.

Figure A.3.3.23.1.1(b) In-Line Balanced Pressure (Bladder Tank Type) Proportioning with MultipleInjection Points.


This just moves information from the definition, sentences 2 and 3. Alternately this information could be placed somewhere in the body of the standard where it would be enforceable.



Public Comment No. 9-NFPA 11-2013 [Section No. 3.3.23.1.1]



32 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM




Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






33 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM

This method employs water pressure as the source of power. This device is only suitable for foams having aspecific gravity of at least 1.15. With this device, the water supply pressurizes the foam concentrate storagetank. At the same time, water flowing through an adjacent venturi or orifice creates a pressure differential. Thelow-pressure area of the venturi is connected to the foam concentrate tank, so that the difference between thewater supply pressure and this low-pressure area forces the foam concentrate through a metering orifice andinto the venturi. Also, the differential across the venturi varies in proportion to the flow, so one venturi willproportion properly over a wide flow range. The pressure drop through this unit is relatively low. [See FigureA.3.3.27.2(a).]

A special test procedure is available to permit the use of a minimum amount of concentrate when the pressureproportioner system is testing.

The pressure proportioning tank has the following limitations:

(1) Foam concentrates with specific gravities similar to water can create a problem when mixed.

(2) The capacity of these proportioners can be varied from approximately 50 percent to 200 percent of theirrated capacity.

(3) The pressure drop across the proportioner ranges from 34 kPa to 207 kPa (5 psi to 30 psi), depending onthe volume of water flowing within the capacity limits of item (2).

(4) When the concentrate is exhausted, the system must be turned off, and the tank drained of water andrefilled with foam concentrate.

(5) Since water enters the tank as the foam concentrate is discharged, the concentrate supply cannot bereplenished during operation, as with other methods.

(6) This system proportions at a significantly reduced percentage at low flow rates and should not be usedbelow minimum design flow rate.

A diaphragm (bladder) pressure proportioning tank also uses water pressure as a source of power. This deviceincorporates all the advantages of the pressure proportioning tank with the added advantage of a collapsiblediaphragm that physically separates the foam concentrate from the water supply.

Diaphragm pressure proportioning tanks operate through a similar range of water flows and according to thesame principles as pressure proportioning tanks. The added design feature is a reinforced elastomericdiaphragm (bladder) that can be used with all concentrates listed for use with that particular diaphragm(bladder) material. [See Figure A.3.3.27.2(b) .]

The proportioner is a modified venturi device with a foam concentrate feed line from the diaphragm tankconnected to the low-pressure area of the venturi. Water under pressure passes through the controller, and partof this flow is diverted into the water feed line to the diaphragm tank. This water pressurizes the tank, forcingthe diaphragm filled with foam concentrate to slowly collapse. This forces the foam concentrate out through thefoam concentrate feed line and into the low-pressure area of the proportioner controller. The concentrate ismetered by use of an orifice or metering valve and mixes in the proper proportion with the main water supply,sending the correct foam solution downstream to the foam makers.

The limitations are the same as those listed for the pressure proportioning tank, except that the system can beused for all types of concentrates.

Figure A.3.3.27.2(a) Typical Arrangement of Pressure Proportioning Tank.

Figure A.3.3.27.2(b) Diaphragm (Bladder) Proportioning Tank.

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

3 of 4 1/21/2014 11:06 AM

kshea

Text Box

Public Comment No. 8 Section A.3.3.27.2 Pressure Proportioning Tank


This is a sentence that came from the definition and is being moved.



Public Comment No. 7-NFPA 11-2013 [Section No. 3.3.27.2]





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:



I, Marcelo Hirschler, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in thisPublic Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquireno rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivativeform is used. I hereby warrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power and authority to enter into this copyrightassignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am Marcelo Hirschler, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the termsand conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon mysubmission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature

National Fire Protection Association Report http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/C...

4 of 4 1/21/2014 11:06 AM

Public Comment No. 37-NFPA 11-2013 [ New Section after A.4.3.1.2 ]

A.4.3.1.4(4)

The method of measurement should be identified including the device used and parameters such asspindle speed and revolutions per minute, such as when using a Brookfield viscometer.


This text will provide clarification to the new requirement that has been proposed on the First Revision.





Street Address:

City:

State:

Zip:






38 of 42 1/21/2014 10:26 AM

Public Comment No. 35-NFPA 11-2013 [ Section No. D.5.2.2 ]

D.5.2.2 Surrogate Liquid Test Method.In this approach, surrogate test liquids are formulated specifically to simulate the flow behavior (viscosity characteristics) and approximate conductivity or refractive index ofthe foam concentrate used in the system. An example of a graph generated from the recorded data is shown in Figure D.5.2.2(a).Figure D.5.2.2(a) Plot of Real-Time Test Data Gathered from Surrogate Liquid Injection Rate Test.

For initial system commissioning, the surrogate liquid can be placed directly in the foam system tank for injection rate tests and then flushed out before filling the tank with foam concentrate. After the system has been filled with foam concentrate it can still be tested using a surrogate test liquid, but installation of some additional connections on the proportioning system piping are required. These additional connections enable the surrogate test liquid to be injected into the proportioning system in place of the foam concentrate already in the foam storage tank. Since there are many types of proportioning systems, the test set-up arrangement varies according to the system type.

Figure D.5.2.2(b) through Figure D.5.2.2(d) are illustrations of surrogate liquid test set-up arrangements for types of the most commonly used proportioning systems.

Figure D.5.2.2(b) Bladder Tank Proportioning System (Containing Foam) Setup for Surrogate Liquid Type Test.

Figure D.5.2.2(c) In-Line Balanced Pressure (Pump Type) System Using Surrogate Liquid Method.

Page 1 of 2National Fire Protection Association Report

1/21/2014http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/Content/11-2010.di...

Figure D.5.2.2(d) Balanced Pressure Pump System Using Surrogate Liquid Method.



Figure_D_5_2_2_a_edit.docx Edit to header - delete text after "Flow vs. Injection Rate" ✓


The text in the header referneces a specific commercial test - this should be deleted. Just describe the graphic as Flow vs. Injection Rate


Submitter Full Name: Joseph ScheffeyOrganization: Hughes Associates, Inc.Street Address: City:State: Zip: Submittal Date: Fri Nov 15 08:18:41 EST 2013


I, Joseph Scheffey, hereby irrevocably grant and assign to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) all and full rights in copyright in this Public Comment (including both the Proposed Change and the Statement of Problem and Substantiation). I understand and intend that I acquire no rights, including rights as a joint author, in any publication of the NFPA in which this Public Comment in this or another similar or derivative form is used. I herebywarrant that I am the author of this Public Comment and that I have full power and authority to enter into this copyright assignment.

By checking this box I affirm that I am Joseph Scheffey, and I agree to be legally bound by the above Copyright Assignment and the terms and conditions contained therein. I understand and intend that, by checking this box, I am creating an electronic signature that will, upon my submission of this form, have the same legal force and effect as a handwritten signature

Page 2 of 2National Fire Protection Association Report

1/21/2014http://submittals.nfpa.org/TerraViewWeb/FormLaunch?id=/TerraView/Content/11-2010.di...

Technical Committee on Foam (FOM-AAA) - NFPA · Page 1 of 1 Technical Committee on Foam (FOM-AAA) M...

Documents

Transcript of Technical Committee on Foam (FOM-AAA) - NFPA · Page 1 of 1 Technical Committee on Foam (FOM-AAA) M...