Dangers of Counterfeit and Other Noncertified Fire Sprinklers

By Russell P. Fleming, PE, FSFPE

Automatic fire sprinkler systems have been described as the most-important item in the fire protection engineer’s toolbox, but fire protection engineers recognize the need for the systems to be properly designed, installed and maintained to perform effectively. Product quality plays a key role. Product certification laboratories such as UL and FM Approvals in the United States, VdS in Germany, and LPCB in the United Kingdom have developed specific requirements and test methods aimed at ensuring the effectiveness of automatic fire sprinklers, and have cooperated in the development of international standards through the International Standards Organization (ISO) to make sure that other certification bodies worldwide also employ proper test measures.

Unfortunately, the growing use of fire sprinklers has encouraged some manufacturers to enter the market using counterfeit or other noncertified products. Lacking third-party testing and evaluation, as well as standard parts or materials, these systems may not operate properly when needed. Recognizing this as a public safety issue, the International Fire Suppression Alliance (IFSA) has sought to bring attention to the hazards of counterfeit and noncertified sprinklers.

The production of counterfeit versions of legitimate fire sprinklers appears to be a growing problem, especially in Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Middle East. Guarding the value of their certification marks, both UL and FM maintain active anti-counterfeit programs for a wide range of products, and have issued technical bulletins when counterfeit sprinklers are discovered. In the past two years, the number of counterfeit sprinkler alert bulletins issued by UL alone (10) exceeded the number issued in the 10 previous years.

Counterfeit sprinklers, however, are just a small subset of noncertified sprinklers, because some irresponsible manufacturers simply don’t bother to ensure that their products meet proper standards. In 2015, the IFSA issued a Safety Alert when noncertified sprinklers marked as ESFR (Early Suppression Fast Response) sprinklers were proposed for protection of a storage facility in China. At the request of IFSA, UL examined and tested samples of the sprinklers and discovered that they did not possess the essential properties of ESFR sprinklers, with major deficiencies in the areas of water distribution characteristics and long-term reliability. In other cases, noncertified sprinklers were found to be constructed of materials that simply could not withstand the heat of a fire.

Deficiencies in property protection can result in unnecessary loss, but deficiencies in life safety protection are an even greater concern. In 2016, the Brazilian Sprinkler Association ABSpk cooperated with IFSA in the extraction of hundreds of noncertified sprinklers from two buildings in São Paulo, Brazil. Brazil tracks its sprinkler imports, and has become aware of an increasing percentage of noncertified sprinklers reaching the market in recent years.

Of the two buildings from which noncertified sprinklers were taken for testing, one was a parking garage serving the public and the other was a high-rise office building. In both of these properties, fire sprinklers had been specified for public safety. In both cases, sprinklers were carefully removed and shipped to reputable fire sprinkler testing laboratories for examination and testing.

FM Approvals compared the sprinklers extracted from the high-rise office building against their test requirements in 13 areas, and found deficiencies in performance related to half of the areas examined: materials analysis, water distribution characteristics, resistance to rough use and abuse, potential hang-up of operating parts (lodgments), assembly load versus frame strength, and resistance to salt spray corrosion. The lodgment tests were of special concern, with a cumulative failure rate of 47.5% among 40 samples tested. Up to 100% of samples experienced a hang-up of operating parts in at least one combination of configuration and pressure. These hang-up results suggest that the sprinklers would not be able to develop an effective water distribution pattern in the event of a fire, severely compromising their effectiveness.

Figure 1: Although international standard ISO 6182-1 requires sprinkler frames to withstand a temperature of 800oC (1472oF) for 15 minutes, the frame of this counterfeit sprinkler melted away within 3 minutes.

The comparison of assembly load to frame strength was also of concern, since the tests showed that the load on the sprinkler bulbs was in excess of what would be considered to allow an adequate safety factor to prevent inadvertent water discharge in the absence of a fire. When such accidental discharges take place, it is more likely that the systems will be shut off to avoid water damage, and therefore be unavailable during a fire emergency.

UL reported two key areas of deficiencies in the parking garage sprinklers. The first was that the sprinklers, both upright and pendent models, used O-ring style water seals that have been banned from use since 2003 due to their potential not to permit the discharge of water after exposure to field installation conditions. They have a tendency to stick to the mating surfaces, preventing proper operation. Perhaps due to their O-ring seals, the sprinklers demonstrated a failure to operate at low water pressures, and showed unsatisfactory performance in a variety of other areas, including lodgment of operating parts, inadequate water distribution patterns, and inferior fire control capabilities. This final shortcoming involved failure to pass the standard wood crib fire test, considered the basic test of whether a fire sprinkler can perform the job of extinguishing or controlling a fire.

The noncertified sprinklers were proven to be a public safety hazard in both of the occupancies from which they were removed. Those sprinklers were replaced with properly certified sprinklers, but no one knows how many other buildings continue to present a danger to the public due to the existence of noncertified sprinklers.

The excellent reputation of fire sprinklers as the leading tool for fire safety can be undermined unless there is a worldwide effort to ensure product quality. The IFSA is encouraging all governmental authorities to require that sprinklers be tested and evaluated in accordance with appropriate product standards, evidenced by the product certification mark of a recognized fire sprinkler testing laboratory placed on every fire sprinkler.

Figure 2: A lodgment or hang-up of operating parts can severely distort a sprinkler spray pattern, compromising its ability to control or extinguish a fire.

To help publicize the issue, the IFSA has produced a six-minute video, available in English, Spanish, Portuguese and Mandarin Chinese, which can be viewed at: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwdqBIhe3bqy4dRxQOBfPWQ
Arabic and Turkish versions are currently in development.

Some efforts are proving successful. At the end of 2018, legislation had been passed in the State of São Paulo to require use of certified fire sprinklers. It is hoped that all of Brazil will soon follow in this regard.

How can fire protection engineers, fire protection contractors and authorities having jurisdiction ensure that only properly certified sprinklers are installed? The certification marks on the sprinklers should be cross-referenced with the online directories of approval from UL, FM, VdS or LPCB to ensure the legitimacy of the markings. Perhaps the most-basic precaution is a reliable product supply chain — purchases should only be made from reputable sources.

Lives are at stake when fire sprinkler systems are not provided, but lives can also be at stake if fire sprinklers do not perform properly. Product certifications are essential to ensuring fire sprinkler product quality.

Russell P. Fleming, PE, FSFPE is with the International Fire Suppression Alliance, Ltd.