Discussions about space policy





Re: KSC develops Earth-friendly fire suppression agent

<j.vano…@chello.nl> wrote in message

news:20031105224328.QPKE2463.amsfep12-

> NASA-KSC has filed a patent application for the dry powder substance that

combines the best properties of water and Halon fire extinguishing agents.
The agent is made of microencapsulated water, which means it’s not
evaporated into the atmosphere making it a more powerful suppressant that’s
also appropriate for the environment.

Sounds impressive. I wonder what the microcapsules that hold the water are
made of, though. If they’re made of some petroleum product, are they better
than Halon?

rgds
Neil

posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (6)






6 Responses to “Re: KSC develops Earth-friendly fire suppression agent”

  1. admin says:

    "Neil Gerace" <gera…@iinet.net.au> wrote in message

    news:3fa9ad72$0$1743$5a62ac22@freenews.iinet.net.au…

    - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -

    > <j.vano…@chello.nl> wrote in message
    > news:20031105224328.QPKE2463.amsfep12-

    > > NASA-KSC has filed a patent application for the dry powder substance
    that
    > combines the best properties of water and Halon fire extinguishing agents.
    > The agent is made of microencapsulated water, which means it’s not
    > evaporated into the atmosphere making it a more powerful suppressant
    that’s
    > also appropriate for the environment.

    > Sounds impressive. I wonder what the microcapsules that hold the water are
    > made of, though. If they’re made of some petroleum product, are they
    better
    > than Halon?

    Considering Halon is banned now, yes. :-)

    Actually I can see a real call for this in data centers.  They’ve been
    moving away from dry suppressants in some places simply because the room is
    so large that any people in it would risk suffocation before they could
    evacuate.  (not to mention the clean-up cost of triggering such a system.)

    The solution has been a dry pipe system with separate sprinklers over each
    rack and flooding the system in the event of a fire and then only releasing
    water over specific racks, ideally isolating the damage the suppressant
    might cause.

    - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -

    > rgds
    > Neil

  2. admin says:

    wow, powdered water! Like the Steven Wright joke; "I bought some powdered
    water, but I don’t know what to add".

  3. admin says:

    "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" <moor…@greenms.com> wrote:

    >Actually I can see a real call for this in data centers.  They’ve been
    >moving away from dry suppressants in some places simply because the room is
    >so large that any people in it would risk suffocation before they could
    >evacuate.  (not to mention the clean-up cost of triggering such a system.)

    Why not compartmentalize the data center, making multiple smaller
    rooms?

    D.

    The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
    at the following URLs:

    Text-Only Version:
    http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

    Enhanced HTML Version:
    http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

    Corrections, comments, and additions should be
    e-mailed to o…@io.com, as well as posted to
    sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
    discussion.

  4. admin says:

    "Derek Lyons" <derekl1963nos…@yahoo.com> wrote in message

    news:3fae0698.21945567@supernews.seanet.com…

    > "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" <moor…@greenms.com> wrote:
    > >Actually I can see a real call for this in data centers.  They’ve been
    > >moving away from dry suppressants in some places simply because the room
    is
    > >so large that any people in it would risk suffocation before they could
    > >evacuate.  (not to mention the clean-up cost of triggering such a
    system.)

    > Why not compartmentalize the data center, making multiple smaller
    > rooms?

    Cost.

    - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -

    > D.
    > —
    > The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
    > at the following URLs:

    > Text-Only Version:
    > http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

    > Enhanced HTML Version:
    > http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

    > Corrections, comments, and additions should be
    > e-mailed to o…@io.com, as well as posted to
    > sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
    > discussion.

  5. admin says:

    Derek Lyons <derekl1963nos…@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" <moor…@greenms.com> wrote:
    >>Actually I can see a real call for this in data centers.  They’ve been
    >>moving away from dry suppressants in some places simply because the room is
    >>so large that any people in it would risk suffocation before they could
    >>evacuate.  (not to mention the clean-up cost of triggering such a system.)

    >Why not compartmentalize the data center, making multiple smaller
    >rooms?

    Each partition needs its own environmental control system
    and fire suppression system (redundant, preferably).
    And the multiplicity of control systems introduces
    headaches and costs; larger A/C units and more bottles
    for the basic system are a lot cheaper than more systems…

    -george william herbert
    gherb…@retro.com

  6. admin says:

    gherb…@gw.retro.com (George William Herbert) wrote:

    >Derek Lyons <derekl1963nos…@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >>"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" <moor…@greenms.com> wrote:
    >>>Actually I can see a real call for this in data centers.  They’ve been
    >>>moving away from dry suppressants in some places simply because the room is
    >>>so large that any people in it would risk suffocation before they could
    >>>evacuate.  (not to mention the clean-up cost of triggering such a system.)

    >>Why not compartmentalize the data center, making multiple smaller
    >>rooms?

    >Each partition needs its own environmental control system
    >and fire suppression system (redundant, preferably).
    >And the multiplicity of control systems introduces
    >headaches and costs; larger A/C units and more bottles
    >for the basic system are a lot cheaper than more systems…

    Do civil architects and engineers lack knowledge of isolation flappers
    and valves?  They guys that build naval facilities certainly do, as
    *one* environmental control system,  and *one* fire suppression
    system, suffices for many thousand square feet with multiple labs,
    data centers, offices, etc in that zone.

    Yes, compartmentalization is more expensive than One Big Room, but n
    rooms in the same space won’t cost n times as much, but somewhat less.
    (And if the equipment is mission critical, or vital, you’ll save money
    and heartache.)

    D.

    The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
    at the following URLs:

    Text-Only Version:
    http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

    Enhanced HTML Version:
    http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

    Corrections, comments, and additions should be
    e-mailed to o…@io.com, as well as posted to
    sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
    discussion.