[SML] Foam Fire Retardant

[e-mail frank.wood95]

My test was simply to determine whether it was suitable for its
purpose, given the proposed set and lighting design. Obviously, if
attacked by a naked flame, the conditions would be wholly different.
Mine was an ad hoc test, to see if there were problems in its intended
use. There have been one or two recent cases where fires have been
started by sunlight focussed on flammable materials by something as
simple as a bottle of water. In the past, there have been many cases
where polystyrene ceiling tiles, insecurely fixed, have contributed to
a disastrous spread of fire.

In the show to which I refer, the foam was being used to make gothic
arches, through which strong moonlight was to shine.

This sort of thing is where AHJs fall down. They are tied down by
written rules and regulations. As a scientist and engineer, I tend to
go back to the principles behind them, in novel situations.

On 11 March 2015 at 21:03, Dougherty, Jim via Stagecraft
<stagecraft at theatrical.net> wrote:
> Changing from my Troll hat to my Firefighter hat, Dan Sheehan has it right
> - those stores size their sprinkler heads for the fire load.  Case in
> point - I heard a story of a local tractor dealership that put up a metal
> utility building, installed basic sprinklers then proceeded to store fuel
> and fertilizer in there.  If there was a fire the sprinklers wouldn¹t keep
> up.  If extruded polystyrene catches fire it¹s no joke.  Frank¹s test,
> placing the material outside with a 1k light focused on it, is misleading.
>  The material is a good insulator (obviously) so yes, the heat damage was
> minimal and localized.  But doing it outside, with a lot of ventilation,
> also cools the material.  Try doing it inside, with the same light focused
> on a newspaper or untreated drape next to the foam (footlight next to the
> set, newspaper left as a prop or by a passerby - not inconceivable) .  Now
> the other material is on fire and the unprotected foam can catch from
> that.  Very different outcome.
>
> I think there¹s a place for this material in what we do, but that it can
> and should be treated (encapsulation, etc.) rather than left as-is, and
> not thought of as an unexploded bomb in the scene shop. Kristi brought up
> another point that shouldn¹t be ignored - wear the right PPE when working
> with the stuff, because it can be toxic in other ways.
>
> - Jim Dougherty
> ATD, Middlebury College Theatre Dept.
> (also, FF/EMT)
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> For list information see <http://stagecraft.theprices.net/>
> Stagecraft mailing list
> Stagecraft at theatrical.net
> http://theatrical.net/mailman/listinfo/stagecraft_theatrical.net



-- 
Frank Wood