The Return of the In-Rack Sprinkler

The Return of the In-Rack Sprinkler

By Steve Wolin, P.E. | Fire Protection Engineering

Why would anyone want in-rack sprinklers? The development of Early Suppression
Fast Response (ESFR) sprinklers by Factory Mutual Research Corporation, now FM
Global, more than 30 years ago1,2,3 revolutionized storage fire protection. Various
ESFR and Control Mode ceiling level sprinklers introduced since then have led to
ceiling-only protection dominating the storage sprinkler market. But as storage
buildings have evolved, the limitations of ceiling-only sprinkler protection have
become apparent.

LIMITS OF CEILING-ONLY SPRINKLERS

Height. The original ESFR sprinkler had a Nominal K-factor of 14.0 gpm/psi 1/2 and
was designed with a discharge pressure of 50 psi to protect Cartoned Unexpanded
Group A plastics stored up to 25 ft. high under ceilings up to 30 ft. in height. 1 That
same criterion still exists in the current edition of NFPA 13, 4 but the typical height of
a new storage building has generally increased since the introduction of the ESFR
sprinkler.5

Currently, NFPA 13 limits K14.0 ESFR sprinklers to ceiling heights of 35 ft. when
protecting rack storage, unless in-rack sprinklers are provided. Ceiling-only design
criteria to protect rack storage under ceilings up to 45 ft. tall are available with larger
orifice K22.4 and K25.2 ESFR sprinklers. Specific application criteria are also
available for certain ESFR sprinklers under ceiling heights up to 48 ft. Those are the
current limits of ceiling-only storage sprinkler protection. Eventually the challenges
associated with activating and delivering water to fires under taller ceiling heights
catches up to the ceiling sprinkler.

To be effective, an ESFR sprinkler must operate early in the development of a storage

fire. Even with a very sensitive operating element, ceiling-only ESFR sprinklers are
challenged to activate prior to a fire spreading across an aisle as ceiling heights
increase beyond 45 ft. The design criteria available for ESFR sprinklers under a 48 ft.
ceiling require minimum 6 ft. or 8 ft. aisles. For storage buildings taller than 48 ft., in-
rack sprinklers are likely to be required. Modern distribution facilities using either
multi-level work platforms (pick modules) or automated storage and retrieval systems
often gain efficiency by increasing the building height beyond the limits of ceiling-
only sprinkler systems.
Water Demand. Even if not required by height, the efficiency of ceiling sprinklers
decreases with height. As ceiling heights increase, the water demand required for
ceiling-only sprinkler systems also increases. The table below summarizes NFPA 13
or UL Specific Application ceiling-only sprinkler protection criteria for Cartoned
Unexpanded Group A plastics that results in the lowest basic sprinkler water demand.

Ceiling Height (ft) Sprinkler Basic Sprinkler Water Deman

30 K25.2 EC 828
35 K25.2 EC 1,275
40 K16.8 ESFR 1,454
45 K22.4 ESFR 1,700
48 K28.0 ESFR Specific Application 1,987
Table 1: Low Water Usage Ceiling-Only NFPA 13 Criteria for Cartoned
Unexpanded Plastics
Table 1 illustrates how the efficiency of ceiling-only sprinkler protection decreases
with ceiling height above 30 ft. Increasing the ceiling height by just 5 ft., 17%, from
30 ft. to 35 ft. increases the basic sprinkler water demand by more than 50%.
Increasing the ceiling height by 60%, from 30 ft. to 48 ft., increases the basic sprinkler
water demand by 140%. Thus, even in buildings that could be protected with ceiling
sprinklers, ceiling-only sprinkler protection may not be the most efficient use of
water.

Particularly in areas of the world where fresh water is not plentiful, the use of large
amounts of potable water for inspection, testing, and maintenance (ITM) of fire
protection systems is increasingly scrutinized. Sprinkler systems with high water
demands and design pressures can result in increased pipe sizes and the need for a fire
pump. Large pipes, which must be drained for service, and the use of a fire pump,
which requires periodic testing, both typically increase the quantity of water needed
for ITM. Thus, limiting the demand of a sprinkler system typically limits the amount
of water needed for ITM.

More Hazardous Commodities. The discussion above has referenced protection

criteria for Cartoned Unexpanded Group A plastics. More hazardous commodities
such as tires, Exposed Group A plastics, and aerosols present an increased challenge
to a sprinkler system. These commodities typically require in-rack sprinklers to be
provided at lower storage heights than would be required for a Cartoned Unexpanded
Group A plastic commodity.

For example, NFPA 13 limits storage of rubber tires on racks to 35 ft. of storage under
a 40 ft. ceiling with ESFR sprinkler protection at the ceiling. The criterion requires
more than 2,600 gpm of basic sprinkler water demand from K25.2 ESFR sprinklers.
A new design criterion, based on a project conducted by the Fire Protection Research
Foundation, is designed to protect Exposed Expanded Group A plastics stored in racks
up to 35 ft. tall under a 40 ft. ceiling. The criterion uses approximately 2,350 gpm of
basic sprinkler water demand from K25.2 ESFR sprinklers and requires the
installation of vertical barriers in the racks to assist the ceiling sprinkler system. This
new criterion is currently proposed to be included in the next edition of NFPA 13.

NFPA 30B provides a clear illustration of the enhanced protection that in-rack
sprinklers can provide. Rack storage of the most hazardous category of aerosols,
Uncartoned Level 3, requires in-rack sprinklers. Rack storage of Cartoned Level 2 and
Level 3 aerosols are limited to maximum storage heights of 20 ft. and 15 ft.,
respectively, with ceiling-only sprinkler protection, while unlimited storage heights
are permitted where in-rack sprinklers are provided.
Thus, while ceiling-only criteria are available for storage of Cartoned Unexpanded
Group A plastics under ceilings up to 48 ft. tall, other commodities have lower ceiling
height limits for ceiling-only protection. Even when ceiling-only protection options
are available, the water demand or other required features may make the installation
of in-rack sprinklers preferable.

WHY IN-RACKS
Location matters. Being located closer to a rack storage fire gives in-rack sprinklers
an advantage over ceiling sprinklers in terms of both activation and delivering water
to the burning commodity. Thus, in-rack sprinklers have the potential to activate when
a fire is smaller and requires less water to control.

A key feature of in-rack sprinklers is that they do not depend on the configuration of
the building enclosure. The tallest current listing for an ESFR sprinkler without in-
rack sprinklers is 48 ft. There are typically no limits on building height with in-rack
sprinklers.

Two of the biggest challenges with ESFR sprinklers do not affect in-rack sprinklers:
(1) sloped ceilings and (2) complicated ESFR obstruction rules. These issues have
been identified by the Fire Protection Research Foundation 6,7 and in Fire Protection
Engineering8 as requiring further research to develop improved guidance for ceiling
sprinklers. These are, however, not issues for in-rack sprinklers.

The ceiling configuration does not impact in-rack sprinklers. For years, sprinkler
designers have been challenged with roofs having slopes greater than 2 in 12, where
ESFR sprinklers are not permitted. A sloped ceiling changes the dynamics of the fire
gases traveling along the ceiling, impacting both the operation of ceiling sprinklers
and their spray pattern. In-rack sprinklers are not impacted by ceiling slope.
NFPA 13’s obstruction rules for ceiling sprinklers, including more complicated rules
for ESFR sprinklers, do not apply to in-rack sprinklers. In-rack sprinklers are intended
specifically for areas that have obstructions. While there are specific rules for the
placement of in-rack sprinklers, such as having the deflector at or below the load
beam, the rules are typically simpler than for ceiling sprinklers.

NEW OPTION FOR IN-RACK SPRINKLERS IN 2016 EDITION OF NFPA 13

The 2016 edition of NFPA 13 will likely include design criteria for in-rack sprinklers
and horizontal barriers that are intended to protect a wide variety of fire hazards. The
new NFPA 13 criterion is similar to FM Global Property Loss Prevention Data Sheet
8-9 Scheme 8-9A and is permitted to protect Group A plastics (expanded,
unexpanded, cartoned, or exposed) as well as Class I through IV commodity.

The new NFPA 13 design criterion uses K8.0 or K11.2 quick-response sprinklers in
the rack. The in-rack sprinklers are located directly below a horizontal barrier
constructed of nominal 3/8 in. plywood or 22 gauge metal. In-rack sprinklers and
horizontal barriers are required to be located at maximum intervals of 12 ft. vertically
in the rack. If solid shelving is provided, the in-rack sprinklers must be provided
below every level of solid shelving.

The in-rack sprinklers are located between each pallet load in a single-row rack. In
double-row racks, the in-rack sprinklers are located between each pallet load at the
face and between every other pallet load in the longitudinal flue. Multiple-row racks
require in-rack sprinklers between each pallet load at the face, and alternating rows of
in-rack sprinklers between every other pallet load and between every pallet load
provided within the rack.

Although potentially requiring a substantial number of in-rack sprinklers, the new

design criterion has a relatively low hydraulic demand. The in-rack sprinklers are
hydraulically calculated to discharge 60 gpm. The hydraulic calculations are required
to include six flowing in-rack sprinklers for single-row racks and eight flowing in-
rack sprinklers for double-and multiple-row racks. An important advantage of this
new in-rack criterion is that the in-rack sprinkler demand is not added to the ceiling
sprinkler demand.

The new in-rack protection scheme can be a useful option for existing storage
buildings where the ceiling protection is not adequate. The new in-rack system has a
basic sprinkler water demand of less than 500 gpm. Because the in-rack system
demand is separate from the ceiling sprinkler demand, the in-rack sprinkler system
can be used in many existing storage buildings where the ceiling sprinkler system is
not adequate, often without upgrading the water supply infrastructure.

The protection scheme can be used throughout a storage area, but it can also be used
where a higher hazard commodity is stored only in designated racks. In that
configuration, the in-rack sprinkler system and horizontal barriers must be extended
one pallet position beyond the higher hazard commodity or a vertical barrier must be
provided between the lower and higher hazard commodity.

While providing a potentially useful sprinkler protection option, the new in-rack
design criterion has at least two significant drawbacks:

 The installation can be costly due to the number of in-rack sprinklers and the
amount of piping required; and
 For double- and multiple-row racks, in-rack sprinklers are located between
each pallet load at the face of the aisle where they can be vulnerable to damage.

These two concerns are common with conventional in-rack sprinkler technology. The
next generation of in-rack sprinklers offers substantial improvements in both areas.

THE FUTURE OF IN-RACK SPRINKLERS

Further developments in in-rack sprinkler technology are intended to provide the
advantages of the new in-rack design criterion described above, while reducing the
system cost and the potential for damage. While not yet included in model sprinkler
system installation standards, research is being conducted to develop the patent-
pending concept of extended coverage in-rack sprinklers. Extended coverage in-rack
sprinkler systems are currently being installed to protect high-hazard commodities and
tall storage arrangements, including automated storage and retrieval systems, based on
performance-based design analysis using full-scale fire test data.

The extended coverage in-rack sprinkler system uses a sprinkler with a nominal k-
factor of 25.2 gpm/ psi1/2coupled with a pendent deflector that is designed to spray
within the relatively shallow space available in a rack. The sprinklers are designed to
allow an increased spacing, both horizontally and vertically, compared with
conventional in-rack sprinklers.

Conventional in-rack sprinklers are designed to surround a fire and typically have a
maximum k-factor of 11.2 gpm/psi1/2. This results in conventional in-rack sprinklers
being closely spaced, typically approximately 5 ft. or 10 ft. apart horizontally. In
addition, the relatively small k-factor of conventional in-rack sprinklers results in
droplet distributions, which are not ideal for penetrating through a fire plume over a
significant height. This limits the distance between levels of conventional in-rack
sprinklers.

A series of full-scale fire tests has been conducted to investigate the extended
coverage in-rack sprinkler system. Tests have included the following commodities:

 Cartoned Unexpanded Group A plastics

 Exposed Expanded Group A plastics
 Combustible Liquids
The first test was used to investigate protection for Exposed Expanded Group A
plastics stored in racks. The test setup included polystyrene meat trays stored on
pallets in doublerow racks up to 35 ft. high under a 40 ft. ceiling. The extended
coverage in-rack sprinklers were located only in the longitudinal flue. One sprinkler
was located in each bay, with the sprinklers spaced approximately 8 ft. 3 in. apart. A
horizontal barrier consisting of 3/8 in. plywood was provided immediately above the
in-rack sprinklers. In-rack sprinklers were supplied with an operating pressure of 30
psi.

Protection criteria are not currently provided in NFPA 13 for Exposed Expanded
Group A plastics stored in racks. Two criteria discussed above are likely to be
included in the next edition of NFPA 13, which would protect Exposed Expanded
Group A plastics as follows for a double-row rack:

 Ceiling-only K25.2 ESFR sprinklers hydraulically calculated for 12 sprinklers

at 60 psi, with vertical barriers provided in the racks at approximately every 16
ft. on center; or
 K8.0 or K11.2 in-rack sprinklers and horizontal barriers at a maximum of every
12 ft. vertically, with sprinklers provided at a maximum of every 5 ft. on center
at the face and a maximum of 10 ft. on center in the longitudinal flue.

The extended coverage in-rack sprinkler configuration eliminates the face sprinklers
that are required for the conventional system and significantly reduces the potential
for damage to the in-rack sprinkler system. The spray pattern from the extended
coverage sprinkler located in the longitudinal flue is adequate to wet not only the face
of the commodity at the aisle, but also to spray water into the aisle to protect adjacent
racks of commodity.

Because of the improved droplet distribution versus conventional in-rack sprinklers,

fewer levels of in-rack sprinklers were included. In the new NFPA 13 in-rack design
discussed above, levels of in-rack sprinklers are required at a maximum of every 12 ft.
The extended coverage in-rack sprinklers were tested with sprinklers and barriers at
20 ft. for Exposed Expanded Group A plastics. In tests of less hazardous Cartoned
Unexpanded Group A plastic commodity, extended coverage in-rack sprinklers were
spaced up to 30 ft. vertically.

The first fire test was ignited at the base of the commodity at the aisle, which was the
most remote location between the in-rack sprinklers. Test criteria were as follows
based on requirements in UL 199 for storage sprinklers: 9

 No sustained combustion at the outer edges of the target arrays

 No sustained combustion at the far end of the main test array
 No sprinklers should operate at the outer edges of the installed sprinkler system
 1,000°F (538°C) maximum 1 minute average steel temperature measured above
the fire.

The results of the first fire test demonstrated the performance of the extended
coverage in-rack sprinklers. The fire was contained within the two initial rack bays
that were ignited. Two in-rack sprinklers activated and, in part because the fire was
ignited at the face of the aisle, one ceiling sprinkler activated. No ignition of the target
array occurred and the maximum one-minute average steel temperature above the fire
was limited to 102°F. The success of the first test showed the performance and
potential advantages of extended coverage in-rack sprinklers.

Further fire testing has investigated not only additional commodities, but additional
storage configurations. For example, protection for 15 1/2 ft. deep multiple-row racks
of Exposed Expanded Group A plastics was investigated where in-rack sprinklers
were provided in the longitudinal flue and in the rack uprights nominally 18 in. from
the face. The sprinklers were able to contain the spread of the fire within the main
storage array through the activation of five in-rack sprinklers at an operating pressure
of 30 psi. Further fire testing is planned for additional commodities and storage
configurations.

Extended coverage in-rack sprinkler systems provide several potential advantages

over conventional in-rack sprinkler systems:

 Lower cost by reducing the amount of piping and number of sprinklers needed.
 Less piping and fewer sprinklers to coordinate with racking.
  Less piping and fewer sprinklers to interfere with loading and unloading of
commodity.

Compared with currently available ceiling-only sprinkler systems, extended coverage

in-rack sprinkler systems have the following potential benefits:

 Protection for high hazard commodities such as combustible liquids, aerosols,

and Exposed Expanded Group A plastics.
 Reduced water supply requirements.
 Unlimited storage and building heights.
 Limited impact on the building configuration, including sloped roofs and
ceiling-level obstructions.

The fire sprinkler industry must continue to evolve to address new storage fire
challenges. While many storage and distribution buildings could be protected with
ceiling-only sprinkler protection, an increase in the height of these buildings has led to
renewed research into more efficient in-rack sprinkler systems.

Steve Wolin is with the Reliable Automatic Sprinkler Co., Inc.

References:

1. C. Yao, "The Development of the ESFR Sprinkler System,” Fire Safety

Journal,
vol. 14, pp. 65-73, 1988.
2. C. Yao, "Overview of Sprinkler Technology Research,” Fire Safety Science—
Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium, Melbourne, Australia, 1997.
3. P. J. Chicarello, J. M. Troup and R. K. Dean, "National Quick Response
Sprinkler Research Project: Large-Scale Fire Test Evaluation of Early
Suppression
Fast Response (ESFR) Automatic Sprinklers,” National Fire Protection
Research
Foundation, Quincy, MA, 1986.
4. National Fire Protection Association, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler
Systems
NFPA 13, Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association, 2013.
5. D. Drickhamer, "Facility Design Trend: Changing Venue,” Material Handling
&
Logistics, 1 February 2006.
6. K. Almand, "Foundation Seeks Participants in Research Effort to Develop
Guidance
for Obstruction Rules for ESFR Sprinklers,” Research Foundation News,
 November/
December 2014.
7. Fire Protection Research Foundation, Project Summary—Protection of Storage
Under
Sloped Ceilings—Phase 1, Quincy, MA: Fire Protection Research Foundation,
2014.
8. K.E. Isman, "Challenges for the Fire Sprinkler Industry,” Fire Protection
Engineering,
9 May 2012.
9. Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., "UL Standard for Safety for Automatic
Sprinklers for
Fire-Protection Service UL 199,” Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., Northbrook,
IL,
14 March 2008.

Storage Protection Using Horizontal Barriers and Large K-Factor, Extended Coverage In-Rack Sprinklers