NFSA Bulletin  

Dealing With the Omega Sprinkler Issues

Central Sprinkler and UL Urging Omega Sprinkler Sample Testing
 
 
 
 

NFSA Bulletin

Subject:Omega Sprinkler

Click here for sprinkler information and facts!!!!

Click here to contact NFSA President (John Viniello)

Click here to contact NFSA Vice President of Engineering (Russ Fleming)

For future information, sign our guest book if you have not done so!!

 

Patterson, New York March 4, 1998 - The National Fire Sprinkler

Association (NFSA) has announced that today’s action of the U.S.

Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) demonstrates support for the

excellent record of fire sprinkler protection. This morning the CPSC

released its decision to sue for recall of all "Omega" model sprinklers

produced by Central Sprinkler Corporation, one of eight sprinkler

manufacturers in the U.S.

According to NFSA President John Viniello, "The CPSC action is aimed at

preserving the excellent reputation fire sprinklers have earned over the

past 100 years. Fire sprinklers are more than 99% effective in

controlling fires. Both Central Sprinkler and the Consumer Product

Safety Commission have indicated their commitment to address the problem

and to ensure that fire sprinklers maintain their reputation as the most

effective and reliable defense against unfriendly fire. We are confident

that the two organizations will reach an agreement on an appropriate

solution."

Of approximately 600 million sprinklers installed in the United States,

it is estimated that 10 million are Central Omegas. In the past two

years there have been reports of several fires in which at least one

Omega sprinkler did not operate at the available system pressure. No

injuries or deaths resulted, since in most cases adjacent sprinklers

operated properly to control the fire. The problem with the sprinklers

is believed to be an O-ring that sometimes sticks, binding the sprinkler

as it activates to distribute water over the fire. In June of 1996,

Central Sprinkler replaced the rubber O-rings with silicone O-rings in

an attempt to correct the problem. The CPSC action, however, affects

even newer Omega sprinklers, because the agency apparently does not

believe the problem has been fully resolved by the change in O-ring

material.

 
Viniello urges that the issue be kept in perspective. "The action on the

part of CPSC deals with only one product line of one manufacturer.

Unlike the safety issue with automobile air bags, no one has been

injured or killed by sprinklers failing to operate when needed.

Automatic sprinklers are proven life-safety devices, and their record of

success is unparalleled when matched against any fire safety device."

 
Individuals or organizations that have questions regarding Omega

sprinklers are encouraged to call Central Sprinkler at 800-523-6512 or

Underwriters Laboratories at 800-758-1794.

Established in 1905, the National Fire Sprinkler Association is a trade

association comprised of installers and manufacturers of fire sprinklers

and related equipment and services. Professional, Subscriber, and

International memberships are also available. NFSA provides

publications, seminars, representation in codes and standards-making

market development, labor relations, and other services to its

membership. Headquartered in Patterson, New York, NFSA has regional

offices throughout the country.

 

 

Dealing With the Omega Sprinkler Issues

The following article is reprinted from the NFSA publication Grassroots

- Volume XIV - Number 9 - September 1997, Russell P. Fleming, P.E.,

Editor
 

In April of 1997, NFSA Chairman Claude Chafin appointed a special

Contractor Liaison Committee to work with Central Sprinkler Corporation

on the Omega sprinkler problem. The purpose of forming the committee was

to provide a sounding board for Central Sprinkler and a conduit to other

fire sprinkler contractors as information became available on properly

addressing the problem.
 

The members of the committee include:

•Bill Oliver, Chairman Oliver Sprinkler Company, Philadelphia, PA •David

Dixon Security Fire Protection, Memphis, TN •Jay Livingston Livingston

Fire Protection, Hyattsville, MD •Wayne Gey Wayne Automatic Fire

Sprinklers, Ocoee, FL •Russ Fleming National Fire Sprinkler Association,

Patterson, NY
 

This special issue of GrassRoots constitutes an interim report of the

committee, an attempt to communicate to the entire NFSA membership what

has been determined so far to be the facts of the Omega sprinkler

situation, and suggestions on dealing with the issues from a contractor

perspective. In preparing this report, the Committee has met several

times with representatives of Central Sprinkler, and has attempted to

focus on the key questions facing sprinkler contractors. A question and

answer format has been selected for use in addressing the most

commonly-asked questions.
 

Background: Four instances have been reported in which an Omega model

sprinkler closest to a fire did not operate at the available system

pressure. Fortunately, no one was injured in any of the four fires,

which were controlled by adjacent sprinklers and responding

firefighters. In each case, the Omega sprinklers fused due to the heat

of the fire as expected, but did not fully operate due to sticking of an

O-ring assembly seal made of EPDM rubber. The first two incidents, which

took place in 1995 in a Veterans Administration hospital and a Marriott

hotel, were blamed on improper use of stop-leak products. Subsequent

testing has shown that there are various reasons why the O-ring assembly

might stick, including swelling of the O-ring due to reaction with

residual hydrocarbons from cutting oils. In the case of copper tube

systems or nonmetallic piping served by copper piping, there have been

cases found in which de-dezincification of the brass sprinkler body has

apparently permitted the formation of deposits that prevent the O-ring

from releasing freely.

Question: What changes have resulted from the identification of this

problem?

Answer: Beginning in June of 1996, Central changed the O-ring material

from EPDM to silicone so as to eliminate the hydrocarbon swelling

problem. In June of 1997, Underwriters Laboratories acted to add tests

to UL 199 to investigate the potential adverse effects of residual

cutting oils or antifreeze solutions on internal components of

sprinklers, as well as a test to check for potential dezincification of

brass parts.

 

 

Question: What is Central Sprinkler's policy for dealing directly with

building owners on Omega issues?

 

 

Answer: Central's position is that the key to identifying problem Omega

sprinklers is through the testing of random samples taken from

individual sprinkler systems. The initial contact for a given facility

with Omega sprinklers may be the building owner, the management company

of a given property, or the fire protection contractor that originally

installed the system or that has a service contract.

 

 

Individuals wishing to have Omega sprinkler testing completed for a

given facility should call the Omega Sprinkler Customer Service

Department at 1-800-523-6512. The contact person will be asked to

provide system specific information. Typically, a building owner letter

and questionnaire is then faxed or mailed to the building owner or

building representative to provide Central Sprinkler with information

regarding the sprinkler systems and the type of sprinklers installed.

 

 

Once this information is received by fax or by telephone, Central

Sprinkler will forward the appropriate test kits to the building owner

or designated representative. The test kits contains instructions,

replacement Omega sprinklers, wrenches for removal of sprinklers, female

threaded caps, and packaging for the return of the sprinklers, and water

bottles for the collection of sprinkler drop water, if required. Once

the sample sprinklers are returned, the testing as outlined in the test

protocol is conducted at no expense to the building owner or

representative.

 

 

After the test results are forwarded to the building owner or

representative, Central Sprinkler will offer resolution/remedy for

installed sprinklers that are identified to be impaired by hydrocarbon

contamination. The remedy proposed will be either the installation of

the UL listed spring collar or the replacement of sprinklers. Central

Sprinkler will determine if a remedy is required, the type of remedy and

time frame for the progress.

 

 

Although the sprinkler contractor can be designated as the owner's

representative, it is not expected. Central believes that, in most

cases, the contractor does not want to be informed of the resolution of

site specific issues given the complexity, time requirements, and the

desire to distance his/her company from the negative association with

remedial actions.

 

 

Question: What is the protocol used for sampling sprinklers?

 

 

Answer: Central Sprinkler is requiring that NFPA 25 be followed for the

random selection of sample sprinklers for testing, but specifically

recommending that two (2) percent of the installed sprinklers be removed

from any building containing Omega sprinklers manufactured between 1983

and June 6, 1996 and installed in steel pipe systems. The removed

samples must be returned with the sprinkler bodies capped and with the

system water maintained in the bore of the sprinkler to prevent the

O-ring assembly from drying during transit and test and to preserve the

water source from the sprinkler drops to identify, if required, the

presence of excessive hydrocarbons or other foreign substances.

 

 

Central Sprinkler logs every field return in its Return Authorization

system, approved to ISO 9000 quality standards, to allow for quick

computer tracking of test results. Once the sample sprinklers are

received, Central Sprinkler inspects the sprinklers for physical damage,

notes the condition and finish of the sprinklers, and collects the water

from the bores of the sprinklers for possible outside independent

laboratory testing. The sprinklers are then tagged and numbered and

pressure testing is conducted on the sprinklers per Central Sprinkler's

test protocol.

 

 

Test results are forwarded to the contact in the Return Authorization

file. This may be the building owner, the management company of a given

property, or the fire protection contractor who removed the sprinklers

for test. The time frame required to conduct pressure testing and

receive test results is approximately two (2) weeks, although this can

vary depending on the amount of diagnostic work the Engineering

Department has to complete. If outside independent testing is required,

the time to complete the test reports may be longer than the stated

two-week time frame.

 

 

Question: What is the universe of potentially affected Omega sprinklers

with EPDM O-rings?

 

 

Answer: Central Sprinkler has reviewed its sales history files and

reports that more than 8 million have been installed, with 2.5 to 3.5

million estimated to have been installed in steel piping systems. Of

these, Central Sprinkler has identified 850,000 units and has either

remedied or in the process of remedying those sprinkler systems

requiring corrective action. Central Sprinkler is continuing its search

for sprinklers installed in steel piping systems and continues to

increase the size of the population of sprinklers which have been

tested.

 

 

Question: What has been Central's experience with tested locations and

stop-leak contamination?

 

 

Answer: Central Sprinkler reports a reduced level of instances of

stop-leak contamination with installed Omega sprinklers in steel piping

systems as its universe of tested building increases. The level of

stop-leak contamination found within a specific type of building and

specific owner has proven to be higher than the percentage/level of

contamination found in the rest of the tested population. It is now

believed by Central that the use of stop-leak in steel piping systems is

a limited practice which, once identified, requires replacement of the

installed sprinklers given potential impairment. Central will not bear

the cost of such replacement, but will make sprinklers available at a

preferred price and may assist in arranging for field services crews if

requested by an owner.

 

 

Question: Is there a problem with brand new sprinklers as demonstrated

by testing of spare sprinklers?

 

 

Answer: No. Underwriters Laboratories reports that they have tested

unused Omega sprinklers from at least 20 different sources, and all have

operated at 5 psi inlet pressure. Some early test reports from an

independent laboratory indicated "spare" sprinklers requiring higher

pressures, but at least one such sample was reported as containing

residue, raising a question as to whether the sprinklers had been in

prior service.

 

 

Question: With respect to the EPDM O-ring installed in Omega sprinklers,

does EPDM continue to "get worse" over time given excessive hydrocarbon

contamination?

 

 

Answer: Central Sprinkler reports that it has worked with its O-ring

supplier and industry experts regarding effect on hydrocarbons on EPDM

rubber compounds. From the information that the company has gathered,

EPDM swells rapidly (within a few hours) when exposed to high

concentrations of hydrocarbons. Detection of this type of contamination

is readily possible since increased activation pressures are measured.

Once the O-ring/EPDM material is contaminated, the O-ring remains in a

swelled state. If the O-ring has not become contaminated by

hydrocarbons, the EPDM O-ring will not swell, and increased activation

pressures will not be created.

 

 

According to Central, the history of field returns and test results from

Omega sprinklers installed in steel piping systems does not indicate

that hydrocarbon contamination is time sensitive. Essentially, there are

two conditions: the EPDM O-ring is contaminated with hydrocarbons and

significant swell is noted or the EPDM O-ring is not contaminated with

hydrocarbons and the O-ring contains minimal swell or no swell at all.

EPDM rubber minimally swells in the presence of water (less than 5

percent). As such, all Omega EPDM O-ringed sprinklers will have some

measurable O-ring swell. The amount of O-ring swell created from the

absorption of water and small amounts of hydrocarbons reportedly does

not affect the performance of the sprinkler and does not create

increased activation pressures.

 

 

Factory Mutual has indicated that more information is needed in this

area before progressive deterioration can be ruled out.

 

 

Question: UL is recommending that all Omega sprinklers manufactured

prior to May 1996 be tested, including those in copper and plastic

piping systems. What test information is available on Omega sprinklers

installed in CPVC systems?

 

 

Answer: Central Sprinkler has received encouraging reports from

independent contractors in the State of Maryland (where CPVC systems are

prevalent due to residential codes) who tested sprinklers installed in

CPVC systems. Several of these tests were conducted by independent

laboratories without the knowledge of Central Sprinkler. For example,

Rothfus Engineering Company completed a study of Omega sprinklers

installed in five CPVC systems in Prince George's County in 1993 and

1994. All sprinklers removed operated at zero (0) psi. There have been a

few CPVC systems, however, in which dezincification apparently resulted

in higher minimum operating pressures. Such systems included those in

Sheraton hotels in Arizona and Hawaii.

 

 

Question: What is dezincification, and how commonly does it occur in

CPVC systems?

 

 

Answer: Dezincification is a corrosion process which requires copper

piping or other aggressive metals to come in contact with brass

components which contain certain levels of zinc. When copper piping is

installed with site specific system characteristics such as mineralized

water (which creates an acidic Ph in the piping system), chlorides from

the flux agents found in typical brazing compounds, and stagnated water

sources, a galvanic cell can be created which causes the breakdown of

the brass. Dezincification creates a porous copper base metal from the

brass since the zinc is leached from the alloy. This porous surface

usually creates leakage of the installed sprinkler. In advanced stages,

corrosion on the exterior of the sprinkler is typically white or

green-blue in color with a powdery appearance.

 

 

Dezincification is not found in CPVC products, but can occur in

combination copper and CPVC sprinkler systems. Dezincification in

combination CPVC and copper systems usually occurs in those brass

components closest to the copper underground or riser assemblies which

are installed with copper piping. CPVC is not conducive to

dezincification as it acts as a dielectric union in reducing the

conductivity of the water source. Dezincification has been found mainly

in pre-1990 Omega sprinklers, which had a high zinc content. Omega

sprinklers produced since 1990 are made of dezincification-resistant

brass alloys. Dezincification is a rare occurrence, since specific

characteristics must be present, including some copper alloy to initiate

the corrosion.

 

 

Question: Have any CPVC systems installed since 1990 experienced high

required operating pressures?

 

 

Answer: In one test series involving Omega sprinklers taken from a 1993

CPVC system, 23 sprinklers operated at 7 psi and one required 50 psi.

The tests were conducted by Hughes Associates for a Virginia copsi. The

tests were conducted by Hughes Associates for a Virginia contractor. It

sh

 

 

Question: What is the spring retrofit kit and for what situations is it

proposed as a solution?

 

 

Answer: The "Auxiliary Ejection Spring Retrofit Kit" consists of a

pre-compressed metal spring and housing and is intended to be installed

on-site only by personnel trained by Central. It has been listed by UL

for this purpose. The kit adds a mechanical advantage to the opening

process, but the advantage is not specifically quantified. If the

initial sample test results appear to be in the range where the retrofit

kit might provide a satisfactory remedy, additional samples are removed

from the system. These new samples are then fitted with the spring

mechanism and submitted for testing.

 

 

Question: What are NFPA 25 requirements regarding testing and

replacement of sprinklers?

 

 

Answer: Section 2-3.1.3 of the 1995 edition of NFPA 25 states: "Where

one sprinkler within a representative sample fails to meet the test

requirement, all sprinklers represented by that sample shall be

replaced." NFPA 25 does not, however, specify the "test requirement",

leaving that to the test laboratories instead.

 

 

Central Sprinkler has proposed that sprinklers should be considered

acceptable if their required operating pressure is less than the

available system pressure. Critics respond that the NFPA 25 sampling

mechanism may not identify the worst case sprinklers, and that property

owners could be receiving a false sense of security if Omega sprinklers

exhibiting any problems at all are permitted to remain in service.

 

 

The NFPA 25 Committee is currently preparing the 1998 edition of the

standard, and is struggling to deal with some of the issues raised as a

result of the Omega sprinkler problem. These issues include special

requirements for testing, the statistical validity of sampling methods,

pass/fail criteria, and consideration of conditions under which

sprinklers can be continued in use. More information on the NFPA 25

Committee decisions will be passed along to NFSA members as it becomes

available.

 

 

Question: Are efforts underway to further address these issues?

 

 

Answer: Central Sprinkler reports that it has retained statistical

experts to analyze the data resulting from sample testing. Our NFSA

Committee has asked Central to include the statistical validity of

sample testing among the issues to be addressed.

 

 

NFSA is also encouraging the NFPA 25 Committee to address some of the

specific issues regarding sample testing, even if it requires a

Tentative Interim Amendment (TIA) to the standard.

 

 

Question: How should contractors approach building owners to notify them

about the Omega sprinkler problem?

 

 

Answer: The NFSA Committee has recommended the following form letter:

 

 

Date

 

 

Name

 

Address

 

City, State, Zip

 

 

Dear ___________:

 

 

Central Sprinkler Company (the manufacturer of fire sprinklers) and

Underwriters Laboratories (the sprinkler approval agency) are

recommending a random representative sampling of Omega sprinklers. These

are specific models of automatic fire sprinklers, manufactured between

1983 and 1996.

 

 

We feel that it is incumbent on us, as your fire sprinkler

inspection/installing contractor, to make you aware of this

communication.

 

 

The manufacturer has recommended that a sample from each facility

protected by Omega model sprinklers be removed and tested by an approved

testing facility in accordance with recommendations of NFPA 25 (the

National Fire Protection Association's standard for the inspection,

testing, and maintenance of water-based fire protection systems). A

representative sample per NFPA 25 consists of a minimum of two

sprinklers per floor or riser, but no less than four or one percent of

the total, whichever is greater. Central is recommending at least a two

percent sample.

 

 

Please feel free to contact ______________________________of our company

for assistance or to answer questions you may have regarding this issue.

We stand ready to assist you in the removal of a representative sampling

of sprinklers for testing or in locating a qualified independent testing

agency.

 

 

Should you desire to speak directly with the manufacturer of the Omega

sprinkler, please feel free to call Central's customer service telephone

line at 800-523-6512. Underwriters Laboratories has also established a

toll-free number at 800-758-1794.

 

Central Sprinkler and UL Urging Omega Sprinkler Sample Testing

 

 

Central Sprinkler Corporation and Underwriters Laboratories are

publicizing the need to sample test "Omega" type sprinklers that were

manufactured prior to June of 1996 and installed in sprinkler systems.

Four incidents of non-activation of the sprinklers have been reported,

in which the sprinklers fused but did not operate due to sticking of the

o-ring assembly seal within the shaft of the device. In all four cases

adjacent sprinklers have operated, and the fires have not resulted in

any injuries.

 

 

The problems of possible non-activations of the Omega sprinklers at low

pressures have been attributed by Central to either reaction with

residual hydrocarbons in the water from cutting oils or from improper

use of stop leak products. For this reason, Central has been

recommending sample testing of all Omega sprinklers installed in steel

pipe systems. In June of 1996, the o-ring material was changed from EPDM

to silicone, reportedly eliminating the hydrocarbon reaction problem.

 

 

In both copper systems and CPVC systems with copper risers or feed

mains, there have also been isolated reports of higher required

operating pressures blamed on dezincification, where, in areas with

caustic water supplies, zinc may have leeched out of the high-zinc brass

sprinkler body. Although this phenomenon would normally make itself

evident by leaks in the sprinkler body, it might also have permitted the

formation of deposits potentially impairing sprinkler operation. Central

reports that it changed its alloy in 1990, eliminating the potential for

dezincification.

 

 

Underwriters Laboratories is recommending that samples be taken from all

existing sprinkler systems with Omega sprinklers manufactured prior to

June of 1996, and is providing sample testing free of charge.

 

 

The Omega sprinkler models are generally identified by their 3 circular

heat collection fins, although other manufacturers make similar-looking

models. Omega series models include the following: C-1, C-1A, C1A PRO,

C1A PRO ID, EC-20, EC-20A, EC-20 AID, HEC-12, HEC-12 ID, HEC-12 PRO,

HEC-12A PRO, HEC-12 RES, HEC-20, HEC-20 ID, R-1, R-1A, R-1M, AC, M, and

Flow Control.

 

 

Central is recommending that they be contacted for proper removal and

packaging procedures through Mr. Andy Post (215-362-0700 or

800-523-6512). Operational testing can then be completed if the samples

are shipped to Mr. Kerry Bell, Underwriters Laboratories, 333 Pfingsten

Road, Northbrook, IL 60062, USA.