FEATURE: CAN I OMIT SPRINKLER PROTECTION IN SERVER ROOMS?
Many building owners provide clean agent systems to extinguish fires in high-value content
areas, such as server rooms, data centers, archival storage, and many other applications.
Decades ago we used Halon systems, which were phased out and replaced by ECARO-25
(HFC-125) and FM-200 (HFC-227ea) before we realized how those hurt the atmosphere. For
much of the last decade many have seen and used NOVEC 1230 as a green alternative to
ECARO-25 and FM-200 with a dramatically smaller global warming potential.
Well that's now changed as well. In December, 3M announced it will stop production of PFAS
(which includes NOVEC 1230) by the end of 2025.
Just like the phase-out of foams for aircraft suppression in many places worldwide, this too
will have a big impact on how we deal with fires in server rooms.
There will be much to talk about on that topic. For today - we get back to the age-old
question that seems to come up from architects and building owners every time we use an
alternative fire-extinguishing system (clean agent, inert gas or otherwise), and that
is:
"If we use an alternative system, do we still need sprinklers?"
There's nothing wrong with having sprinkler protection in server rooms, however, building
owners and operators are particularly sensitive to any loss in downtime, for any reason,due
to the extremely high importance and value of maintaining server uptime.
MYCODE CALL QUESTION
Early in my career I often asked fire marshals, when doing code calls, something like:“does
your jurisdiction require sprinklers to be installed in rooms that are protected by a clean
agent system?”
I would get a mixed response. Some jurisdictions considered clean agent systems to be an
equivalent for sprinkler protection, others would not.
Acouple of years after asking this question on every applicable project I had a fire marshal
shoot me straight.
“If you don’t have sprinklers in the room, you don’t have a fully-sprinklered building. Check the
IBC.” This was news to me. I was under the impression that use of clean agent systems could
be used as a substitute for fire sprinklers and still be effectively “fully-sprinklered”.
BACK TO THE BOOK
So, I went back to the book.
There is a path for this approach – the International Building Code (2018) Section 904.2
states that:
“Automatic fire-extinguishing systems (ie: clean agent) installed as an alternative to the
required automatic sprinkler systems of Section 903 shall be approved by the fire code
official.”
This was the foundation on which I had been asking the question.
The big kicker was the code section just a paragraph later:
“904.2.1 Restriction on using automatic sprinkler system exceptions or reductions.
Automatic fire-extinguishing systems shall not be considered alternatives for the purposes
of exceptions or reductions allowed for automatic sprinkler systems or by other
requirements of this code.”
Outside of the lawyer-phrasing, this section simply states “no sprinklers in the room – no
sprinkler reductions or exceptions for your building.”
The commentary by the International Code Council goes further, stating that while the
authority has the ability to approve alternative systems in lieu of sprinklers, doing so
invalidates the “fully-sprinklered” status of a building.
WHY DOES IT MATTER?
Why is this important? There is a long list of code kickbacks that sprinklers offer a building.
Before on this blog we've diagramed a cheatsheet for all of the major code benefits a “fullysprinklered” NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system offers by comparing it to NFPA 13R and NFPA
13D. You can download it free here.
Code benefits include allowable building heights, building areas, number of stories, egress
benefits, passive rating reductions, Draftstopping reductions, fire alarm reductions, and a
handful of other benefits.
I realized after that code call that the question affected well more than just my isolated “fire
sprinkler” silo. Omitting sprinklers in just one server room would have code implications
throughout the complex.
Now, should building owners ask about omitting in these rooms we often look at other
strategies – such as concealed sidewall sprinklers, use of dry sprinklers, drip pans, routing
pipe to avoid running over racks, use of pre-action systems, or pipe without joints and
sprinklers with heavy-duty cages.
Some of these solutions can be painless, without great cost and satisfy code as well.
Some require a lot more effort.
Either way, the important takeaway I had here was that the 'sprinkler decision' cannot be
made in isolation. We can't all collect the code benefits for a fully-sprinklered building
under NFPA 13 if we omit sprinklers in the server room. Why? Well, because it's not a fullysprinklered building.
The things I learn sometimes...
Hope you've found this insightful in some way, and that you have a great rest of your week!
- Joe