Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
2-1
May 2001 Page 1 of 19
Table of Contents
Page 1.0 SCOPE ................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Changes .......................................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Superseded Information .................................................................................................................. 3 2.0 LOSS PREVENTION RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................... 3 2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Operation and Maintenance ............................................................................................................ 3 2.2.1 Existing Sprinkler Systems .................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Protection ......................................................................................................................................... 4 2.3.1 New Sprinkler Systems ......................................................................................................... 4 3.0 SUPPORT FOR RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................... 5 3.1 Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion (MIC) .................................................................................. 5 3.1.1 What is MIC? ......................................................................................................................... 6 3.1.2 How MIC Affects Sprinkler Systems ..................................................................................... 6 3.1.3 Telltale Signs of MIC in Sprinkler Piping ............................................................................... 8 3.1.4 Industry Position and NFPA Requirements ........................................................................... 8 3.2 Test Data ......................................................................................................................................... 8 3.3 FM Global UT Protocol for In-Situ Examination of Pipe Internal Corrosion ................................... 9 3.4 Loss History ................................................................................................................................... 12 3.5 Illustrative Losses .......................................................................................................................... 12 3.5.1 Sprinkler Leakage Due to Corrosion in Pipe Coupling ....................................................... 12 3.5.2 Pinhole Leaks From Sprinkler System Over Data Processing Center ............................... 12 4.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 12 4.1 FM Global ...................................................................................................................................... 12 4.2 NFPA .............................................................................................................................................. 12 APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF TERMS ..................................................................................................... 12 APPENDIX B DOCUMENT REVISION HISTORY ..................................................................................... 12 APPENDIX C ADVISORY GUIDELINES FOR MIC MITIGATION ............................................................ 12 C.1 Mitigation Plan ............................................................................................................................... 13 C.2 MIC Prevention: Advice for New Sprinkler Systems .................................................................... 13 C.2.1 STEP 1 Diagnosis of water supply .............................................................................. 13 C.2.2 STEP 2 Assessment of possible alternatives ............................................................. 14 C.2.3 STEP 3 - Treatment of the local water with disinfectants or biocides ....................... 14 C.2.4 STEP 4 Installation of clean pipe and care during system acceptance .................. 15 C.3 MIC Control: Advice for Existing Sprinkler Systems ..................................................................... 15 C.3.1 STEP 1 Diagnosis of the corrosion and of the condition of the piping .................. 15 C.3.2 STEP 2 Assessment of possible alternatives ............................................................. 16 C.3.3 STEP 3 Cleaning of piping ........................................................................................... 16 C.3.4 STEP 4 Treatment of local water with disinfectants and biocides .......................... 17 C.3.5 STEP 5 Recharging of the system and acceptance .................................................. 17 C.4 Some Currently Available Mitigation Tools ................................................................................... 17 C.4.1 MIC Test Kits ....................................................................................................................... 17 C.4.2 Chemical Treatment Automatic Delivery Systems .............................................................. 17 C.4.3 Chemical Cleaning of Pipe ................................................................................................. 19
2001 Factory Mutual Insurance Company. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission of Factory Mutual Insurance Company.
2-1
Page 2
List of Figures
Fig. 1. Sample arrangement of wet sprinkler piping to prevent air accumulation in branchlines and other high points of the system. ................................................................................................. 5 Fig. 2. Schematic development of MIC. ....................................................................................................... 7 Fig. 3. Corrosion at roll groove in a wet pipe system. ................................................................................. 7 Fig. 4. Pinhole leak site in cut-away section of pipe. ................................................................................... 8 Fig. 5. Pinhole leak site on outside surface. ................................................................................................ 9 Fig. 6. Localized nodule formation below water line. ................................................................................. 10 Fig. 7. Heavy tubercle formation in a 8 in. (200 mm) sprinkler pipe. ......................................................... 11 Fig. 8. MIC test kit and automatic delivery system courtesy of Bio Industrial Technologies Inc. ........... 18
List of Tables
Table 1. Guideline for Retaining Pipe Based on Extent of Corrosion Damage ............................................ 4
2-1
Page 3
1.0 SCOPE This document addresses prevention and control of corrosion in automatic sprinkler system piping with particular emphasis on Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion (MIC). 1.1 Changes This is a new document. 1.2 Superseded Information The guidelines for MIC provided in Data Sheet 2-8N, Installation of Sprinkler Systems, and Data Sheet 2-81, Fire Safety Inspections and Sprinkler System Maintenance, are superseded by this new document. 2.0 LOSS PREVENTION RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 Introduction The following recommendations are intended to: Provide proper diagnosis of corrosion cases involving sprinkler systems; Attempt to keep existing sprinkler systems affected by corrosion free of piping obstructions; Minimize the exposure from possible water leakage losses resulting from MIC affected sprinkler systems; Provide advisory guidance on possible corrosion prevention measures that can be considered for any new wet, dry and preaction sprinkler system. Recommendations for new systems should be considered based on the occupancy and exposure present. Locations wishing to pursue further corrosion mitigation than what is being recommended in sections 2.2 and 2.3 should follow the guidelines given in Appendix C of this document; these guidelines are advisory in nature and provide a systematic approach to corrosion mitigation. While these advisory guidelines may increase the chances of success in mitigating corrosion, and in particular MIC, they are not intended to represent a complete solution to the problem. Their primary goal is to ensure that the integrity of the sprinkler system is not further compromised and to prevent loss of protection or further impairments to the sprinkler system. 2.2 Operation and Maintenance
2-1
Page 4
2.2.1.2 Conduct metallurgical examination on a sample of the affected component to determine the type and extent of corrosion mechanism involved. 2.2.1.3 Where the extent of corrosion damage to remaining pipe needs to be determined, use the FM Global protocol for in-situ UT examination of piping given in section 3.3 below. Consider replacement of any section of pipe exhibiting pit sites with remaining wall thickness less than shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Guideline for Retaining Pipe Based on Extent of Corrosion Damage Pipe Schedule Schedule 40 Schedule 10 Schedule 5 Hybrid Schedule % Wall Remaining in Any Single Pit 25 or more 50 or more 75 or more 75 or more
Note: The information in Table 1 provides a working guide for determining whether piping should be retained or replaced. It is based on engineering judgement and on several cases of corrosion examined by Factory Mutual Research. This guidance is intended to identify those sections of pipe which, because of the depth of the pit, a pinhole leak could develop in a relatively short period of time. However, it does not reflect the remaining useful life of a pipe.
2.2.1.4 Further mitigation in the form or cleaning of the piping or treatment of the water is not presently being recommended. However, in locations where these are being considered, follow the MIC Mitigation Guidelines in Appendix C. 2.3 Protection
2-1
Page 5
to absorb pressure increases caused by thermal expansion. Set the relief valve to operate at pressures not greater than 175 psi (12.1 bars) or 10 psi (0.7 bars) in excess of the maximum system pressure when the maximum system pressure exceeds 165 psi (11.4 bars).
Fig. 1. Sample arrangement of wet sprinkler piping to prevent air accumulation in branchlines and other high points of the system.
2.3.1.3 In dry-pipe and preaction systems: Avoid the use of roll grooved joints. Roll grooved joints in a dry sprinkler system promote water accumulation that can result in preferred corrosion sites. Install pipe with proper pitch to promote drainage of all testing water and water vapor condensate within piping. For additional corrosion protection, pressurize the system using dry Nitrogen (from cylinders or plant supply) and provide air supply as back up. Alternatively, install an air drying system so that the dew point temperature of the supply air is 20F (-6C) below the lowest expected room temperature for the location where the systems will be installed. Check air-drying systems at regular intervals as needed, to prevent saturation of the drying media and excessive humid air from entering the system. Keep low point drains clean and drain condensate as needed to prevent water accumulation. Fix air leaks to keep system as tight as possible. 2.3.1.4 Further mitigation in the form or cleaning of the piping or treatment of the water is not presently being recommended. However, in locations where these are being considered, follow the MIC Mitigation Guidelines in Appendix C. 3.0 SUPPORT FOR RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion (MIC) Over the past years an increasing number of leaks and other corrosion related problems have been associated with microbial or bacterial activity in fire protection piping. Corrosion influenced by the action of bacteria is a widely recognized phenomenon in the oil, nuclear, chemical and sewage industry. This type of corrosion also occurs in domestic water systems. MIC is not a new corrosion mechanism; however, its association to fire protection piping is relatively new. Because of its nature and the complexity of fire protection piping, MIC is not easily controlled in fire protection systems. Until very recently, except for pipe replacement, no other mitigation or treatment options were available that could be viably applied to fire protection systems. In the last few years, the emergence of new
2-1
Page 6
alternatives in cleaning of pipe and a better understanding of treatment options have made MIC mitigation attempts possible. However, mitigation efforts in fire protection systems are still evolving and remain largely empirical at present with no conclusive available field data on their long-term success. Conversely, severe cases of MIC left unchecked in sprinkler systems can progress over time leading to an increased number of leaks and possible obstruction of pipes and sprinkler heads.
2-1
Page 7
2-1
Page 8
Given the nature of some of the aerobic bacteria, MIC generally results in the growth of biofilms and nodules within the piping. The biofilm produced will generally present itself as a black slime that, in certain cases, can be flushed out. Nodules, on the other hand, are hard, well adhered to the pipe wall, and will not flush out. Nodules and biofilm may result in increased friction loss, and affect the ability of the pipe to carry the necessary flow. Figures 6 and 7 show typical nodules and tubercles formation in a sprinkler pipe sample. In addition to the above, MIC also may affect sprinklers and valves, and block water motor gongs and alarm lines and other components of a fire protection system.
2-1
Page 9
Evidence of MIC was present in about 40% of all the cases involving sprinkler system components. The data collected shows no indication that MIC is restricted to a particular geographical area, as MIC was evident in components sampled from different geographical areas within North America and abroad. Also, there is no evidence that MIC is restricted to certain types of pipes or sprinkler components. MIC was found in corrosion cases involving both black steel pipe and galvanized pipe of different pipe schedules as well as in cooper piping. MIC also has been found in some cases involving corrosion of sprinkler heads, flexible steel hoses and other sprinkler components. 3.3 FM Global UT Protocol for In-Situ Examination of Pipe Internal Corrosion Objective: Nondestructive, in-situ investigation of both wet and dry pipe systems with the objective of identifying potential sites within the piping systems with advanced pitting corrosion. Ultrasonic Thickness (UT) surveys of wet and dry pipe systems in-situ should be conducted in accordance with the following protocol: 1. Make Ultrasonic Thickness surveys of sprinkler piping systems with Ultrasonic (UT) Examination Systems that incorporate a cathode ray tube or similar display. These UT instruments are regularly referred to as Flaw Detectors. They are designed to detect small flaws within a material. They are capable of displaying information from a reflector that enables an experienced operator to judge the shape, depth, and size of the flaw. 2. Do not use UT thickness devices that display thickness measurements only as a digital numerical reading. These instruments cannot be relied upon to detect and measure pits in a sprinkler pipe. Digital thickness gauges that display only a numeric reading are suitable only for thickness surveys where there is an overall thinning of the piping wall. Such overall thinning can be caused by erosion, or corrosion. However in the
2-1
Page 10
case of corrosion in sprinkler pipes, the condition of the affected surface is more irregular, and usually involves pitting. In sprinkler piping, corrosion pits are usually localized, and can sometimes be quite deep in relation to their diameter. The evidence of pits is indicated by a numerical digital UT thickness gauge (if at all) as instability of the numerical read out. Because the UT beam is being reflected irregularly by the shape of a pit, a numerical digital thickness gauge does not receive a coherent reflection. In such cases, the reading by an experienced operator of such a device might strongly suspect that a pit is being indicated. There is no information obtainable regarding the size, shape, or depth of the pit, unless it is quite large or large areas of the surface are affected. 3. Remove outside paint from the pipe prior to UT scanning. 4. Scan the entire circumference of the pipe in search for pits, with particular focus on the bottom of the pipe between three oclock and nine oclock position. 5. Use any of the following modes of UT flaw detector display: A SCAN, B SCAN or C SCAN. Ultrasonic examination instruments with cathode ray tubes, and more recently developed digital screens, can display the information from a reflector in a variety of ways. Modes of UT Flaw Detector Display: A SCAN A SCAN displays are the most commonly used with portable UT flaw detectors. Ultrasonic reflectors are displayed on the rectangular screen as base line deflection spikes. The horizontal axis represents material thickness, and the vertical axis represents the amplitude of the reflected energy. Other controls and options enable an operator to precisely locate and measure small flaws.
2-1
Page 11
B SCAN B SCAN displays are becoming very popular for monitoring thickness of tank and pressure vessel walls. The rectangular screen displays a profile view of a walls thickness, and the shape and depth below the surface of a flaw. In tank and vessel examinations, ultrasonic reflection data from all points scanned are recorded and usually stored electronically. C SCAN C SCAN displays data in a plan view. Images of pits would be displayed as round shadows on a flat surface, similar to a radiograph. Any one of these flaw detector displays would be sufficient for sprinkler pipe thickness survey/pit detection examinations. 6. While using a flaw detector system to scan a section of piping, continuously monitor its relative thickness and search for pits. Once pits are detected, stop and measure the pit depth, diameter and the concentration of pits in a given area. Mark the location of the pit in the pipe with an indelible marker or paint. 7. Prepare a final report with the results of the survey indicating regions of the pipe scanned; location and depth of the pits in the sprinkler plan.
2-1
Page 12
3.4 Loss History A study of sprinkler leakage losses for the period between 1988 and 1997 shows corrosion as the fifth largest cause of sprinkler leakage losses by dollar loss, preceded by mechanical injury, freezing, defective equipment and accidental discharge. While loss history has been favorable, it shows internal corrosion of fire protection piping is a potential source of sprinkler leakage losses and a potential factor aggravating fire losses. 3.5 Illustrative Losses
3.5.2 Pinhole Leaks From Sprinkler System Over Data Processing Center
Pinhole leaks developed in a schedule 10 sprinkler piping system protecting a data processing center. The leaks damaged records and computer equipment. This location was not insured with FM Global. 4.0 REFERENCES 4.1 FM Global Data Sheet 2-8N, Installation of Sprinkler Systems. Data Sheet 2-81, Fire Safety Inspections and Sprinkler System Maintenance. 4.2 NFPA NFPA 13, Installation of Sprinkler Systems. NFPA 25, Standard for Inspection, Testing and Maintenance of Water-based Fire Protection Systems. APPENDIX A GLOSSARY OF TERMS
2-1
Page 13
where the water supply is known to be contaminated with MIC-causing bacteria and microbes. The second group includes those activities to help mitigate or control MIC in existing sprinkler systems that are suspect or known to have MIC-related problems. C.1 Mitigation Plan All mitigation efforts should be under the direction of a registered professional engineer and performed in accordance with a detailed work plan addressing: Complete diagnosis of the corrosion problem. Overall objectives of the mitigation effort. A complete evaluation of the extent of corrosion damage to the piping, including identification of what sections of pipe will require replacement. A detailed description of the processes to be used to mitigate corrosion, identifying suppliers, chemicals and dosages to be used. A detailed cleaning and treatment plan as outlined in this guideline. Expected downtime of the sprinkler system. Plans for periodic monitoring and expected results at monitoring intervals. Environmental impact assessment of the proposed effort. Periodic monitoring reports should be kept on file for review. C.2 MIC Prevention: Advice for New Sprinkler Systems New sprinkler systems offer a unique opportunity for cost-effective MIC prevention. Such measures also are in line with the requirements of NFPA 13, Installation of Sprinkler Systems, as discussed above. MIC prevention should include some or all of the following steps: Step 1 Diagnosis of the water supply. Step 2 Assessment of possible alternatives. Step 3 Treatment of the local water with disinfectants or biocides. Step 4 Installation of clean pipe and care during system acceptance.
2-1
Page 14
2-1
Page 15
10. Plan should identify what measures should be taken when system is flooded with untreated water after a fire or accidental trip. 11. Records detailing the treatment agents, concentration, injection process for the initial treatment as well as for all periodic monitoring should be kept on file and on a summary record sheet displayed on the riser of each system undergoing water treatment.
C.2.4 STEP 4 Installation of clean pipe and care during system acceptance
The last step in MIC prevention for new sprinkler systems is to ensure that all piping installed is disinfected, and that proper hydrostatic test procedures are used. This step should be taken to minimize the possibility that bacteria or microbes are present in the new piping to be installed or are introduced into the system accidentally during hydrostatic test or other acceptance procedure. Regardless of the condition of the water supply, all piping to be installed should comply with recommendation 2.3.1.1 above. Piping that is rusted or weathered should not be installed. Where the water supply is treated, all hydrostatic tests and other acceptance test procedures should be done using treated water in accordance with the guidelines established in Step 3 above. C.3 MIC Control: Advice for Existing Sprinkler Systems Mitigation of MIC in existing sprinkler systems can be complex and costly. Because nodules, tubercles and other deposits on the internal surfaces of the pipe can shield microbial colonies and corrosion cells, biocide treatment of the incoming water alone may not suffice to control MIC. Therefore, before treatment is applied to the water, the piping should be thoroughly cleaned. Cleaning of pipe should be aimed at removing all deposits to bare metal. Cleaning existing pipe to bare metal can be challenging depending on the amount and type of deposits. Where only partial or non-uniform cleaning of the pipe can be achieved, microbes can re-colonize in the pipe from these partially cleaned areas. Subsequent water treatment to partially cleaned pipe may be able to control the bacteria count, keeping the corrosion in check and helping extend the life of the piping system. Mitigation activities in existing sprinkler systems should include one or all of the following steps: Step 1 Diagnosis of the corrosion and of the condition of the piping. Step 2 Assessment of possible alternatives. Step 3 Cleaning of piping. Step 4 Treatment of the local water with disinfectants and biocides. Step 5 Recharging of the system and acceptance.
C.3.1 STEP 1 Diagnosis of the corrosion and of the condition of the piping
The first step involves determining the nature of corrosion in the piping and conducting a corrosion damage assessment of the piping to determine extent of corrosion damage and feasibility of further treatment. Diagnosis of the corrosion should be conducted per recommendation 2.2.1 above. Preferably, piping should be sent in for metallurgical examination in the as removed condition, without any cleaning or removal of internal deposits or substances, so that a metallurgical lab can analyze the nature of the residuals found in the piping. Assessment of the condition of remaining piping should be conducted per recommendation 2.2.2 above. Any sections of piping that are damaged or that do not meet the criteria given in Table 1 should be replaced prior to cleaning. Remaining piping should then be cleaned as outlined in Step 3 below.
2-1
Page 16
2-1
Page 17
5. Cleaning agents should circulate throughout the system to promote complete cleaning of all piping, including all branchlines, pipe drops and sprig-ups, all risers, feedmains and crossmains. 6. After cleaning, metallurgical examination should be conducted on at least three more samples of piping removed from the riser, mid-branchlines and inspector test connection. This examination should determine the extent and uniformity of cleaning performed. 7. Chemical cleaning solutions should be NSF approved. 8. Cleaning agents should not result in damage to any of the metals present in sprinkler piping or damage to natural or synthetic rubber, silicone, or any other elastomeric products used in gaskets, valve seats, o-rings and other nonmetallic parts in a sprinkler system. 9. No residual cleaning agents or solutions should be left in the system after cleaning. 10. Any cleaning should be immediately followed by a treatment of the water. The treatment plan should be in accordance with FM Global Guidelines for Water Treatment for Sprinkler systems, given above.
2-1
Page 18
prescribed dosage of treatment solution to the system automatically upon flow in the system. The cost of these delivery systems varies but should be in the range of US $3,500 for well-equipped delivery systems uninstalled.
Fig. 8. MIC test kit and automatic delivery system courtesy of Bio Industrial Technologies Inc.
2-1
Page 19