RE: Fire protection in ISPs and collocation facilities

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer () mhsc com>]

There are a lot of non-fire reasons that I like the presence of an EPO
switch and I would design one in regardless. However, its requirement in the
fire-code makes the expense easier to justify. I design framerooms with many
smaller UPS's distributed throughout the racks, as opposed to a central pile
of batteries. As a result, I have gel cells everywhere. I usually use
Liebert GT's, every two racks, with power pod and interlock, at the bottom
of the rack.

Some of the non-fire reasons;
Ground-faults placing 120VAC on the rack frames.
Flooding event.
Data intrusion prevention (Emergency SCRAM).


> From: Sean Donelan [mailto:sean () donelan com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 5:56 PM
>
> Several people have asked where can they obtain a copy of the US
> Air Force draft.
>
> Engineering Technical Letter (ETL) 00-3: Fire Protection Engineering
> Criteria - Electronic Equipment Installations
>
> http://www.afcesa.af.mil/Publications/Drafts/ETL00-3Draft.pdf
>
> I find it interesting how the designs created by people who have to
> operate an installation are different from the designs from 
> consultants
> and vendors, or even the National Fire Protection Association.  Or
> commercials on television like those being run by Janus.
>
> But back to my original question.  What is the real fire risk for
> ISPs and collocation operators.  Is it burned buttered popcorn in the
> microwave setting off the FM-200 system?  Is it home-made computers?
> Is it the Emergency Power Off switch?
>
> State Farm Insurance has started a project to change the 
> National Electrical
> Code for computer rooms and the requirement for an EPO 
> switch.  Is this
> something other ISPs and collocation providers would be interested in
> seeing changed?  If so, we need to collect data and evidence 
> to support
> the change.