We have mentioned before we are somewhat obsessive about fire (which is why we have never had one). Watching chafe, good systems installation, and a rigorous cleaning and maintenance schedule reduce the risks to the minimum. Still, you want to be prepared for the worst, which brings us to the photo above.
These three Morse control handles are located adjacent to the viewing port on the engine room door. The left handle is the manual trigger for the fire suppression system. The center handle is the air intake dampener, and the right handle shuts off fuel out of the day tank.
The suppression system is normally automatic. When it disburses there is an auto stop wired to the engine, genset, and diesel boiler, which shuts these down.
Posted by Steve Dashew (February 20, 2010)
February 21st, 2010 at 10:43 pm
Hi Steve & Linda,
As a fire fighter, I know that putting out the flames is just the beginning of fire suppression. You have to keep the flames from starting up again; and, to do that, you need to find the cause of the fire and eliminate it. So after the Fireboy’s discharge of its inert gas, you have to get back into the engine room, find out what happened and keep it from happening again. But now you’ve got a closed-off engine room full of toxic smoke and gas from the fire. What does Fireboy suggest you do AFTER you activate their system?
February 22nd, 2010 at 9:44 am
Hi Bob:
Great question from a professional standpoint, and something we have never asked. But I can tell you our own assumptions of what we would do and then we’d love to get your feedback.
First as to cause. We assume the highest probability is going to be a fuel or hydraulic leak onto a hot surface, such as the dry exhaust stack on the engine ahead of the water injection elbow or diesel heater exhaust. Next would be electrical, although fusing and breakers should minimize this. When the Fireboy discharges it shuts down all three diesel consumers, so except for the autopilot, sources of oil spray should be eliminated.
Our assumed reaction to a fire event is to shut down DC power, close the fuel supply valve and air intake dampener, and then wait for things to cool down. The engine room door would remain sealed until we were certain the source of ignition – perhaps a hot exhaust line – had cooled.
We’d love to get your professional opinion of the correct procedure and how long to wait before allowing the engine room to vent and entering it.
February 25th, 2010 at 11:55 am
I contacted Dave Blice, sales and marketing manager at Fireboy, who supplied the following comments.
“Our recommended plan if a Fireboy Clean Agent Extinguisher discharges, is to wait 15 minutes to enter the space. This time delay in entering is designed to minimize any flash-back from a heat source.The source of the 15 minute requirement is the NFPA 2001. It is addressed in section 7.8.5. Our systems are Factory Mutual Approved and meet NFPA 2001 standards.”
“Regarding the shutting down of equipment, all engines, generators, louvers, and dampers, and fuel supplies should be automatically shut down when the extinguisher discharges. The engine shutdown relay is designed to accommodate all of these.”
February 22nd, 2010 at 5:46 pm
Hi Steve & Linda,
Certainly waiting for “things to cool down” is appropriate; but, if the room is full of smoke and toxic fumes, how do you see inside to learn what was on fire so you can calculate when it might cool down enough to enter? The basic problem with Fireboy is that the system keeps all that stuff in the room (along with all the heat), so it could be a good long time before it is safe for humans in there. Meanwhile, you are at sea. And eventually, you have to vent the room to get inside, which may cause a rekindle. I’d love to hear Fireboy’s thoughts and I bet they’ve got some good ones.
Strangely, the solution that comes to mind is a water mist system that uses tiny amounts of de-ionized water (1-2 quarts max) under high pressure. It’s what computer companies use to protect their mainframes. The water mist absorbs heat and turns to steam, which expands it exponentially and bursts out of the confined space carrying off the heat, smoke and fumes as well as the oxygen the fire needs. Google “NFPA Committee on Water Mist Suppression Systems” to see what I’m talking about. The bad news is that nobody I know is building these systems for boats.
Thanks for a great site; I learn a lot here.
February 23rd, 2010 at 6:42 pm
Actually, water mist fire suppression systems are very common on large yachts and ships. The problem for smaller yachts is that the equipment needed to pump water at the extremely high pressure required to generate fine mist is quite large and you rarely see water mist systems on yachts less than 130′ or so.
February 24th, 2010 at 9:24 pm
Steve,
I was trained as a Fire Marshall in the Navy, and have fought shipboard fires. We used Oxygen Breathing Apparatuses (OBAs)that chemically generated oxygen into a full face mask (although I doubt these are available to civilians). We would be directly in the burning space getting water / foam / chemical powder on the base of the flames, and immediately overhaul the scene to ensure all hot spots were out. As Bob says, you would be waiting a long time for the engine room to cool down and air out enough to safely enter without breathing assistance / risk of re-flash. I would personally want a breather like land borne firefighters use (an air tank on your back, feeding a full face mask), and to get into the engine room BEFORE VENTING THE INERT GAS / SMOKE to clean up any spilled fuel or other necessary damage control while there is NO chance of re-flash. This will also minimize your time dead in the water, being a hazard to navigation.
Love your website – it helped me to finally take the plunge, and I have now been a liveaboard for 4 1/2 years on a 40′ fiberglass trawler. I met Linda and got a mini tour of Windhorse here in Ventura – what a fantastic boat !!
Gary
February 25th, 2010 at 7:02 pm
This is very good topic of discussion.
Working for a builder of NFPA compliant Fire-Rescue vessels, I can tell you that the “pre-engineered” Fireboy (and the virtually identical SeaFire) systems are accepted as the best option for small vessels. These systems are also accepted for ABS inspected vessels if you use an “engineered” system which just means there is a vessel specific design, even though it uses the same components.
I am sure that we all understand that “approved” or “accepted” don’t always mean best. This leads me to the question of whether or not a small storage vessel could be charged with the pressure required to deliver a mist just like a chemical system is charged. Watermakers have high pressure pumping systems that are feasible on small vessel. I wonder if these type of pumps would provide the pressure required for a mist suppression system.
I look forward to others’ opinions.
Cheers.
March 5th, 2010 at 9:18 pm
Hi!
Take a look at http://www.fogmaker.se for water mist systems for smaller (and larger) yachts. They are quite popular here in Sweden.
Thank you for a good site.
Regards, Victor