There is widespread recognition that foam fire-suppression systems are an invaluable weapon in the armoury of facility operators as they seek to prevent and kill off serious fires.

Nevertheless, selecting the appropriate types of foam and discharge services is crucial for the best results.

Understanding the options with discharge services

Foam fire-suppression systems are usually deployed at sites such as petrochemical plants, aircraft hangars and warehouses where there is a significant risk from flammable or combustible liquids.

The ability to not only extinguish fires, but also smother flames in a way that prevents reignition, makes foam the suppression solution of choice. The key difference with foam systems and other traditional wet-sprinkler systems is the addition of the foaming agent, which is generally stored separately from the water and the two are mixed within the piping system before discharge.

After a facility has been evaluated for its fire risks, either anspiratingr or non-aspirating discharge device will be recommended. Aspirating devices produce a more viscous foam that is highly effective for minimising burn back and keeping the foam contained. They are discharged through foam-making devices such as branchpipes, top pourers, foam cannons, foam sprinklers or high-expansion generators.

Non-aspirating devices are best used when there is a need to spread the foam over a large area. They are typically discharged through water nozzles, sprinklers or deluge nozzles.

Weighing up the appropriate foam for a site

Fire-suppression foams are an extinguishing agent that cool and separate the ignition source of a fire. They are designed to smother the fire and any associated vapours, while they can also prevent ignition.

There is a science to choosing the right foam for the right site. The key is to know and understand the risk product you are trying to protect and conduct performance testing to ensure that the foams are suitable with system designs for fixed and portable firefighting equipment.

Firefighting foams fit into two broad categories aqueous film-forming foams (AFFFs) and protein foams which contain fluorinated surfactants; and fluorine-free foams. They are subject to strict management and containment rules because of the risk of toxin compounds such as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) entering waterways.

AFFFs were originally developed in the 1920s and 1930s and have evolved over many years. They should only be used on hydrocarbon-based fuels because the film applied to the surface will not keep the alcohol-based fuels from mixing with water in the foam. When this occurs, it destroys the foam. For alcohol-based fuels, an alcohol-resistant aqueous film forming foam (AR AFFF) should be used.

Some of the newer synthetic foams are increasingly in favour because they are a fluorine-free product, which means that they are more environmentally friendly and safer. In short, they can protect sites from fires without contaminating the surrounding land and waterways.

While they are suitable for scenarios such as wildfires, aviation and marine events, the fluorine-free foams have historically not been suitable for use in portable fire extinguishers or non-aspirated spray that is used to protect large machines.  However, in recent times as these foams have continued to be developed and tested, it is now starting to be accepted that these foams can be used and seen as a suitable alternative to the historically more common types.

Insist on experience when commissioning foam-dosing solutions

Given the complexity of the discharge services and the foams, it is essential to engage experienced firefighting specialists when deploying foam fire-suppression systems. Doing so will ensure that at-risk sites have the right foams that meet industry standards and which perform properly when needed most.

There is no room for cutting corners when rolling out and maintaining such complex fire-suppression systems. Opting for an inappropriate discharge service and foam could result in catastrophic fires that jeopardise the safety of employees and the site itself.

Major facilities should deal with fire-suppression experts when it comes to installing foam dosing systems. So,find out more and contact Australia's leading provider of foam suppression solutions.

Also read : Ensuring fire safety in commercial kitchens the importance of fire-suppression systems

Petrochemical sites are a perfect storm when it comes to fire risks.

Typically storing combustible liquids such as fuel, diesel, oil and gas, they are vulnerable to random threats such as electrical faults and lightning strikes.

Fortunately, technological advances are aiding the fight against such fire threats. Synthetic and biodegradable protein firefighting foam concentrates can put out or contain a wide variety of fires in tandem with the use of quality extinguishers and hoses. An aqueous foam targets flammable or combustible liquid fires through the combined effects of cooling, separating the ignition source from the surface of the blaze, suppressing vapours and smothering the fire.

Water, on the other hand, is much heavier than foam and can sink when applied to the fuel surface, which hinders vapour suppression and extinguishment of the fire.

Foam Induction Technology

When considering their fire-suppression efforts, petrochemical site operators have to weigh up a range of choices.

The international trend in fire suppression favours fluorine-free foams because they are the newer technology, as well as being a fluorine-free product that is safer for the environment.

Another key development is the rise in popularity of water-driven pump proportioners for fire-fighting because they are a reliable and easy-to-use system. In the past, traditional bladder tanks, balance pressure proportioners and in-line inductors have been used, but they have often come in for criticism because they are complicated including set up, ongoing maintenance etc.  In addition, it is not possible to test some of these systems without consuming foam concentrate and having to then incur the cost of clean-up and disposal.

The popular Firemiks range is an example of the water-driven systems, which have some clear advantages with regard to testing and efficiency. A foam return valve can enable fast testing of the Firemiks model without consuming foam, and it offers an uninterrupted system as long as water and foam concentrate are available. By contrast, bladder tanks must be stopped for refilling when they are empty.

The consensus, too, is that the water-driven proportioners are a greener alternative to bladder tanks, balance pressure proportioners and inline inductors, with the former using an efficient system for dispensing foam that makes it cheaper and greener.

 Seek specialist advice when choosing foams

Firefighting foams are now subject to strict management and containment rules because of the risk of toxin compounds such as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) entering waterways.

These fluorinated foams have been linked with poor health and environmental outcomes and are progressively being phased out and banned. Any foams being used on petrochemical sites should pass performance and characteristic testing to ensure they are compatible with system designs for fixed and portable firefighting equipment. Accidental contamination, dilution, or unfavourable storage conditions can also adversely affect the firefighting foam performance, so international standards highly recommend that foam stocks be tested at least annually.

Given the complexity of the issue, overhauling firefighting-foam systems may require time and some cost because the older foams have to be safely removed and destroyed. As a result, facility managers are advised to seek the assistance of experienced fire-protection services to ensure their sites comply with all regulations and that they benefit from the latest in fire-suppression technology.

There is no doubt that foam concentrates can put out fires faster and with lower product volumes than similar agents, which can substantially lessen property damage on petrochemical sites.

So, with the right foams and the right advice, site owners can rest more easily knowing that their properties and staff are as safe as possible. So, get started - schedule a call with one of our expert consultants.

For the supply and installation of foam systems, you need to deal with industry experts.  Learn more.

 

 

In the battle to contain fires on industrial sites around the world, foam has long been the go-to suppressant. For good reason.

Unlike other extinguishing agents such as water, a stable aqueous foam can quickly put out a flammable or combustible liquid fire thanks to the combined effects of cooling, separating the ignition source from the surface of the blaze, suppressing vapours and smothering the fire. Water, by contrast, is much heavier than foam and can sink when applied to the fuel surface, resulting in minimal effect in terms of extinguishment or vapour suppression.

However, not all foam-suppressant solutions are created equal, with products and their efficacy varying dramatically.

In general terms, industrial site operators have to make a choice between various types of dosing models. On one side are traditional bladder tanks, balance pressure proportioners and in-line inductors that have been used for many years, and on the other side are newer solutions such as water motor-driven pump systems that are increasingly seen as the industry standard in fire-fighting installations. The popular Firemiks range is an example of the latter.

Following is a comparison of the two broad options:

1.      In the industrial sector, bladder tanks have come under criticism because they are often complicated to set up and maintain. Likewise, balance pressure proportioners and in-line inductors can be difficult to commission. Due to its relatively low weight and compact design, installation of a Firemiks product is comparatively easy.

2.      Bladder tanks are a time-limited system. So when the foam bladder is empty, the system must be stopped for refilling, whereas Firemiks offers an uninterrupted system as long as water and foam concentrate are available. If the foam tank is empty with a Firemiks, additional foam concentrate can be supplied from a separate source fairly quickly via pales, drums, IBC's etc without interrupting the water flow and fire-fighting.

3.      With bladder tanks, the rubber bag inside the pressure tank may deteriorate over time, but no rubber bag is required with Firemiks. With balance pressure proportioners, a separate ratio foam controller is needed to create the right pressure balance.

4.      Significantly, it is not generally possible to test proportioners and inductors without consuming foam concentrate, whereas with Firemiks a foam return valve can enable fast testing of the system without consuming foam concentrate. This can result in significate cost savings with both replacing the used concentrate and also the disposal costs for the generated solution.

The market consensus is that Firemiks offers a greener alternative to bladder tanks, balance pressure proportioners and inline inductors, too, with the former using an efficient proportioning system for dispending foam that makes it economically and environmentally viable. As they are driven by the water flow which goes through the motor, they also do not require an external energy source. The system works with virtually all types of foaming agents, and there is no need for complicated pressure balancing or calibration.

On the safety front, the Firemiks also performs well. Since the foam concentrate is stored in regular atmospheric containers, the firefighter can fill up or switch tanks during operation, thus providing an increased safety margin should the fire extinguishing take longer than anticipated.

The upshot of all these advantages is that the Firemiks system gives industrial sites the best possible chance to extinguish potentially devastating fires, while at the same time being more cost-effective and environmentally friendly than other options.

It is a compelling list of benefits - and one that managers of industrial sites need to consider carefully when considering their fire-fighting systems.

Delta Fire Australasia specialises in the design, installation and servicing of fire-suppression systems on petrochemical and other industrial sites. Visit www.deltafire.com.au for more details.

Sophisticated foam technology solutions can stop blazes in their tracks, but the input of fire-safety experts is crucial in the setup phase.

Fires at petrochemical sites are often frightening in their scale and potential for destruction.
The presence of gas and petroleum tanks at such facilities adds an especially volatile element to the danger, while the environmental fallout from such blazes can be significant. A reminder of the possible fallout came in March 2019 courtesy of a large fire at a Houston-area petrochemicals terminal in the United States which burned for days, sending a plume of toxic smoke 1200m into the air, with the fire spreading to seven storage tanks holding gasoline components.

The key with such fires is to douse or contain them as quickly and efficiently as possible. Encouragingly, an extensive array of firefighting foam concentrates can counter petrochemical fire risks. Foam deluge systems are commonly used to safeguard gas and petroleum tanks, while provision of quality extinguishers and hoses that distribute foam is also part of the safety mix.

The foam systems mix a foam concentrate at specific proportions with water to, in essence, create a foam blanket that smothers the fire and cuts off its oxygen supply.

Seek professional advice
While foam may seem like a relatively simple fire-suppression tool, it is part of a sophisticated system and requires intelligent use.

The best fixed and mobile high-volume foam delivery systems are required when fighting hazardous chemical fires. Two broad categories of foam are typically used - aqueous film-forming foams (AFFFs), FluoroProtein (FP) etc, which contain fluorinated surfactants; and fluorine-free foams. Both foams should pass performance and characteristic testing to ensure they are compatible with system designs for firefighting equipment.

Expert advice is required to choose the most appropriate type of foam for the relevant fire given that some foams may now be subject to strict management and containment requirements due to the risk of toxin compounds such as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) impacting the environment. Highly publicised issues at airports around Australia have put the spotlight on the use of PFOAs and PFOs, leading to the introduction of new environmental protection policies in some jurisdictions.

Bans on foams may have significant consequences for high-hazard facilities because they have traditionally relied on AFFFs, which contain PFOs or PFOAs. They have long been considered to be more effective than fluorine-free alternatives, so any decision should be made in consultation with fire-suppression specialists.

How it is delivered
Firefighting foam is typically applied in two ways - non-aspirated, through water nozzles, sprinklers or deluge nozzles; and aspirated, through foam-making devices such as branch pipes, top pourers, foam cannons, foam sprinklers or high-expansion generators.

Again, getting advice on the best combination of solutions is critical, while an ongoing maintenance program is also important. Such fire-suppression systems must be able to withstand a hostile and highly corrosive environment while also being easy to maintain.
There is no doubt that foam concentrates can put out fires faster and with lower product volumes than similar agents, which can substantially lessen property damage on petrochemical sites.

However, it takes considerable expertise and experience to design an effective foam-suppression system. Given the high stakes for petrochemical sites as they seek to protect their people and commercial assets, there is no room for complacency or amateurs.

Delta Fire specialises in the fire protection of high-risk, high-hazard environments such as petrochemical and industrial sites. Visit www.deltafire.com.au for more details.

Health and environmental concerns linked with some firefighting foams have put operators of hazardous sites on notice and highlighted the importance of getting reputable advice.

There is no room for error when battling fires on high-hazard sites such as airports and petrochemical plants - especially at a time when restrictions are being imposed on controversial firefighting foams.

Highly publicised issues at Sydney Airport, Brisbane Airport, the Army Aviation Centre at Oakey in Queensland and the RAAF Base at Edinburgh in South Australia, and elsewhere, have put the spotlight on the use of foams containing the compounds perfluorooctane sulphate (PFOs) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOAs). The fallout has led to the introduction of new environmental protection policies in some jurisdictions.

Fire-suppression foams containing PFOs and PFOAs have been used internationally for decades to fight fires, but such foams are now subject to strict management and containment rules because of the risk of toxins polluting soil and entering waterways.

The South Australian Government has introduced a ban on the use of fluorinated firefighting foams due to concerns about the chemicals' environmental impacts. The ban covers both C8 types of foam and more modern ≤C6 types. C8 foam may contain PFOs or PFOAs, while ≤C6 types may contain lower amounts or trace elements of PFOAs.

In 2016, Queensland introduced a ban on C8 foams and restrictions on ≤C6 foams. There is pressure on other states to follow suit.

Choose foams carefully

Bans on foams may have significant consequences for high-hazard facilities because they have traditionally relied on what are known as aqueous film-forming foams (AFFFs) which contain PFOs or PFOAs. They have long been considered to be more effective than fluorine-free alternatives.

The reality is that different types of fires require different suppression methods, so foams should pass performance and characteristic testing to ensure they are compatible with system designs for fixed and portable firefighting equipment. It is important to note, too, that protein firefighting foam concentrates can put out or contain a wide variety of fires, including airport and petrochemical blazes.

Partner with experts

All firefighting foams have associated risks which must be managed appropriately. Indeed, the complexity around the choice of foams and their potential impact on the environment means it is more crucial than ever to partner with a reputable fire-suppression expert.

Given the high stakes associated with possible accidents, downtime and maintenance costs at airports and industrial plants, in particular, it is wise to develop specific protection measures for such environments.

Delta Fire specialises in the fire protection of high-risk, high-hazard environments such as airports and petrochemical sites. Visit www.deltafire.com.au for more details.