Industrial fire protection is evolving to address emerging hazards with advanced detection strategies and specialized suppression technologies.
Fire and life safety insights
- Aspirating smoke detection, thermal imaging and specialized suppression systems can identify hazards earlier and protect high-risk manufacturing processes.
- Evolving codes and performance-based design are driving earlier collaboration among engineers, owners and authorities having jurisdiction to develop customized fire protection solutions.
Respondents:
- Jarron Gass, PE, CFPS, Principal, Fire Protection Discipline Leader, CDM Smith, Pittsburgh
- Matthew R. Merli, PE, Principal/Client Services Director, Fitzemeyer & Tocci Associates Inc., Woburn, Massachusetts
- Michael P. Walsh, PE, LEED AP, Senior Director of Industrial, IMEG, Cincinnati
What are some of the unique challenges regarding fire and life safety system design that you have encountered for industrial and manufacturing projects?
Michael Walsh: Fire and life safety design in industrial facilities is often driven by process-specific hazards, which can make hazard classification and system selection more complex. In many cases, traditional water-based systems are not appropriate due to the nature of the materials or processes involved.
For example, with lithium-ion battery manufacturing and storage, codes and best practices are still evolving, requiring consideration of enhanced detection, specialized suppression approaches and, in some cases, physical separation or isolation strategies. To address these challenges, engineers work closely with owners, process teams and authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs) to develop tailored solutions that prioritize safety while aligning with operational needs.
Jarron Gass: Industrial and manufacturing facilities present unique fire and life safety challenges, including high process loads, hazardous materials storage, flammable dusts or liquids and the need for uninterrupted production. Large open spaces, complex process equipment and high ceilings complicate sprinkler coverage and detection.
These challenges are addressed by conducting thorough hazard and risk analyses early; collaborating closely with owners, other stakeholders and AHJs; and applying performance-based design approaches where prescriptive codes fall short. Early integration of building information modeling (BIM) helps coordinate systems and avoid conflicts. Key references include the 2024 International Fire Code (IFC) and National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards.
What clean agent, aerosol, chemical, oxygen reduction or other specialty fire suppression systems are typically specified?
Jarron Gass: We frequently specify clean agent systems (such as Novec 1230 or FM-200 per NFPA 2001) for control rooms and electrical enclosures, and condensed aerosol systems (such as Stat-X) for machinery and battery-related hazards because of their minimal residue and effectiveness on lithium-ion fires.
In a recent advanced manufacturing project involving lithium battery assembly, I observed a total-flooding aerosol suppression system integrated with aspirating smoke detection (ASD). This approach provided rapid response while protecting sensitive equipment and supporting quick resumption of operations. These systems comply with NFPA 2001: Standard on Clean Agent Fire Extinguishing Systems and IFC requirements for special hazards. Recently, we have looked at more environmentally friendly solutions, with increased implementation of water mist systems in lieu of clean agents, providing similar results without potentially hazardous chemicals.
How are new manufacturing processes introducing unique fire and explosion risks, and how are these mitigated?
Jarron Gass: New processes such as lithium-ion battery manufacturing introduce risks of thermal runaway, flammable gas release and difficult-to-extinguish fires. Advanced materials can create combustible dust or vapor hazards. Mitigation includes early hazard identification using NFPA 855: Standard for the Installation of Stationary Energy Storage Systems, specialized suppression (clean agents or aerosol), enhanced detection and deflagration venting per NFPA 68: Standard on Explosion Protection by Deflagration Venting and NFPA 69: Standard on Explosion Prevention Systems (2024).
We incorporate gas detection, thermal imaging and increased sprinkler densities as required by the 2024 IFC. Close coordination with the AHJ and insurance carriers ensures robust, code-compliant designs that balance safety with operational uptime.
Michael Walsh: New manufacturing processes are introducing fire and explosion risks that are not fully addressed by traditional codes. For example, lithium-ion battery production presents challenges related to thermal runaway, while advanced materials and additive manufacturing can involve combustible dusts, metal powders or inert gas environments.
Mitigation strategies are highly process-specific and often include enhanced detection systems such as gas monitoring or ASD, along with specialized suppression approaches and explosion protection measures. In some cases, facilities incorporate physical separation or dedicated hazard zones. Engineers work closely with process teams and AHJs to apply performance-based design and evolving best practices to manage these risks effectively.
What role are detection technologies playing in earlier hazard identification?
Matthew Merli: ASD is becoming more popular in dirty industrial applications as normal smoke detectors sometimes have trouble handling the environment and working properly, especially over time.
Jarron Gass: ASD systems, gas detection and thermal imaging are playing increasingly critical roles in early hazard identification in manufacturing environments where traditional spot detectors may be compromised by dust, high airflow or large volumes. ASD provides very early warning of smoldering fires, while gas detectors identify flammable or toxic vapors from processes.
Thermal imaging cameras help monitor overheating equipment or other anomalies in each environment that deviate from normal conditions. These technologies enable faster response, reducing damage and downtime. We integrate them with NFPA 72: National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code systems and building management platforms for unified notification and shutdown sequences, significantly improving life safety and asset protection.
How has the cost and complexity of fire protection systems involved with industrial and manufacturing facility projects changed over the years?
Michael Walsh: The cost and complexity of fire protection systems in industrial facilities have increased as processes become more specialized and risks more nuanced. One notable shift is the move from traditional delegated design toward more fully engineered fire protection systems, particularly in facilities with unique hazards or strict performance requirements.
This has increased the need for early involvement of fire protection engineers to evaluate hazards, coordinate with process design and develop tailored solutions. As a result, fire protection is now more integrated into the overall design process, requiring closer collaboration across disciplines and more detailed coordination to ensure systems meet both code requirements and operational needs.
Jarron Gass: Over the past decade, fire protection system costs and complexity have increased because of higher sprinkler densities, specialized suppression for new hazards (e.g., lithium batteries), advanced detection and stricter energy storage requirements in the 2024 IFC and NFPA 855: Standard for the Installation of Stationary Energy Storage Systems, which have driven an increased need for research and development.
Battery production and high-hazard processes often require custom engineering and performance-based designs. This has shifted the design process toward earlier mechanical, electrical and plumbing and fire protection involvement during programming and schematic design. We now allocate more time for hazard analysis, AHJ coordination and integrated BIM, which helps control costs while delivering some degree of resilience and simultaneously providing code-compliant systems that support production goals.
How have changes to codes, BIM and wireless devices/systems impacted fire and life safety system design for these buildings?
Jarron Gass: Recent updates to the 2024 IFC, NFPA 13: Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems, NFPA 72 and NFPA 855 have expanded requirements for energy storage systems, lithium battery hazards and detection in manufacturing occupancies. BIM has transformed design by enabling clash detection, accurate hydraulic calculations and seamless coordination and integration with process equipment. Wireless fire alarm devices improve flexibility in retrofits and large plants with minimal conduit runs. These changes demand earlier interdisciplinary collaboration and increasingly sophisticated modeling, resulting in more accurate, cost-effective and maintainable fire and life safety systems that better align with fast-evolving industrial processes.
