Correction: January-February edition

On behalf of FPA Australia, I am writing to you in regard to an article, “Clearing away the smoke on fire system compliance for mobile equipment”, which was published in the January/February 2010 edition of The Australian Journal of Mining.
FPA Australia is the peak technical association for the fire industry in Australia and as such provides a large number of representatives on Australian Standards fire protection committees. Some Members of our association and industry have raised concerns that the above mentioned article contained a number of technical inaccuracies which should be corrected. The issues of concern are detailed in the following paragraphs.
The article purports that the “listing” of a system to AS 5062 can be made by “any body concerned with testing”. This is incorrect. What AS 5062 actually says (in clause 1.4.13) is that the listing body must be acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction. In addition, AS 5062 provides specific examples of recognized testing and approval bodies.
The author attests that their system is listed as an Engineered Foam Suppression System to NFPA 11. Whether the author's system is engineered rather than pre-engineered is debatable, but regardless of this, the system is, without question, a foam water spray system when compared against the definition provided in AS 5062. AS 5062 defines a foam water spray system as an automatic or manually actuated fixed distribution system connected to a foam-water supply and equipped with foam-water spray nozzles designed to provide a specific discharge pattern and distribution over the protected surfaces or area. Furthermore the referencing of NFPA 11 as a relevant standard for this type of system is misguided. NFPA 11 clearly states in clause 1.3 that NFPA is not applicable to deluge foam-water sprinkler or spray systems.
It is true that foam-water spray systems can also be categorised as low expansion foam systems but the low expansion foam systems as detailed in NFPA 11 are used to provide fire protection for hydrocarbon fuel pool or spill fires. They are not suitable for the protection of pressure fires (as may occur from a ruptured pressurised fuel line) hence the statement that NFPA 11 is not applicable to deluge foam-water sprinkler or spray systems.
The author asserts that the performance testing of fire systems other than pre-engineered foam water spray types is not defined in AS 5062. This statement is incorrect. The fire performance testing of foam water spray systems, be they pre-engineered or engineered, is specified in appendix E of the standard. Hence to claim compliance to AS 5062, manufacturers of foam-water spray systems must subject their system to the fire test methods specified in AS 5062.
The author also asserts that the fire testing on a one nozzle basis inadequate. Whilst he is entitled to this opinion, it does not negate the need for foam water spray systems manufacturers to complete the specified testing to demonstrate compliance to AS 5062.
For more information contact tel: +61 (0)3 9890 1544; or visit: www.fpaa.com.au