![]() |
![]() |
Overcoming Water Leaks in Labs: a Common Costly ChallengeMitigating Potential Flood Damage in Wet Lab Research Facilities Published December 2007 The University of British Columbia's (UBC) Center for Disease Modeling, a 100,000-sf facility under construction since 2004, recently suffered more than $1 million in flooding damages and nine months of construction delay after a trade worker accidentally ruptured a water main in the facility's interstitial space. When Kymberley Sutton, vivarium manager of UBC's Life Sciences Center, relayed the details of the catastrophe at the Tradeline Science Buildings Canada 2007 Town Hall meeting and asked how many of those in attendance had also experienced flooding damage issues, approximately 50 percent of the hands went up—indicating that lab flooding hazards are a common concern.“Clearly this is a major issue for anyone involved in the design and management of labs. Anytime you’re dealing with wet labs, there is the potential for a flooding incident. So it is important to look at what can be done to minimize the risks,” says Sutton. The flooding damage at the Center for Disease Modeling was compounded by a number of factors. The water main break occurred in the facility’s interstitial space while the building was still under construction. Because the facility’s Q-Deck flooring was made of corrugated metal instead of concrete, water was funneled directly into the insulation which absorbed the moisture like a sponge and within two hours the ceilings were buckling from the weight, paint was bubbling, and screws were popping out of swollen gypsum board. In the end, more than 40 percent of the facility was severely damaged and had to be taken back down to the studs in order to eliminate potential mold issues. “Because the flood occurred in an interstitial space while the facility was still under construction there was not a lot we could have done to anticipate it. Now that the remediation process is complete, we’re looking at how it could have been prevented, and how to make sure something similar doesn’t occur after the facility is open,” says Sutton. Dave Melitz, the environmental health and safety coordinator at University of California, Irvine has encountered his fair share of flooding incidents over the past two decades. “Flexible-hose plumbing connections past their expected service life are replaced as they fail, but usually only after a flood has taken its toll. In one incident, an un-insulated water line in a cold room froze and ruptured. In another case, a safety shower was activated in an unoccupied building and wasn’t discovered until the following day after substantial water damage had been caused,” says Melitz. After other water incidents on the campus raised awareness of the potential threat, officials at Ontario’s University of Guelph budgeted $20,000 in pro-active measures to have their contractor seal all the penetrations above the core Advanced Analysis Center of the New Science Complex, which houses expensive NMR, mass spectrometers, and electron microscopes. “There were concerns about the possibility of flooding damage to the facility’s sensitive and expensive imaging equipment so, as the concrete was being poured, a change order was issued to install waterproof sleeves and curbs around all the penetrations above the imaging suite,” says Erik Andersen, senior associate with Young + Wright Architects in Toronto. Metal sleeves were installed at every pipe penetration, sealed with silicone caulking, and duct shafts were fitted with four-inch concrete curbs at the base of the shaft walls. “After construction, there was still one leak that occurred in that facility caused by a researcher who left a sink running overnight on the second floor. The contractor accidentally missed one of the hundreds of penetration seals and some water did make it down into the imaging suite. Luckily, the NMR equipment had not been installed yet, so it was a relatively easy fix,” says Andersen. Prevention and Design While the threat of water damage in wet lab facilities is difficult to eliminate entirely, a number of steps can be taken to minimize the potential risks. Because retrofitting solutions can be costly, most precautions must be incorporated early in a facility’s design and planning process. Vancouver, BC-based Kasian Architecture recently confronted the challenges of flood mitigation in containment labs while designing a facility with a highly sensitive animal vivarium located in the basement directly below a wet lab zone. Protecting the building’s sensitive data network from water was also a major concern. “Our initial strategy was to eliminate all penetrations and not put floor drains in the labs, but then we recognized that holes would need to be put in the slab in order to deliver the necessary data services. So we created a strategic servicing plan that minimized the number and location of floor penetrations,” says Andre Kroger, an associate with Kasian Architecture. Penetrations were strategically situated and services were brought into the labs through extended risers. Conduits were cast within the risers to protect data lines from water contact, with extra conduit installed for future expansion. “It’s like thinking of the floor as an outside surface even though it’s inside the building. You have to realize that wet work is going to happen there. It’s also important to remember that labs change over time, so the infrastructure needs to be flexible enough to accommodate changes in communications or services,” says Kroger. Designers of a fermentation lab located on the upper floors of a research facility at Brock University in Ontario devised an innovative layered floor system to prevent flood damage to lower levels. The floor’s pre-cast slabs were lowered slightly and covered with a rubber waterproof membrane, then finished with a sealed concrete topping. Penetrations were also minimized and sealed with silicone epoxy. “The facility has multiple fermentation experiments going on at all times, and the floors and benches get washed down regularly. Thus far that lab has remained leak proof, so it is possible if you take the time to develop good solutions,” says Jack Miller, special advisor on buildings and space at Brock University. Another common source for water damage are reheat coils and service items frequently located in the ceilings above labs. “Installation of HVAC equipment such as reheat coils in the ceiling above a lab can be problematic because of the accessibility issues and the potential for leaks from a frozen or damaged reheat coil,” says Don MacDonald, regional sales manager with Massachusetts-based Phoenix Controls. Facilities utilizing dual-duct technology—common in labs where precise air-flow and temperature control are required—resolve this problem by separating hot and cold airflow into different decks at the main air handling systems. “Another solution gaining ground, especially in vivarium applications, is the use of epistitial space for housing services. In that design, a service corridor runs around the vivarium so the only equipment above the ceiling is the duct work for air supply and exhaust,” says MacDonald. People and Planning Make the Difference Another key component to minimizing the potential for water damage is working with a highly experienced team of architects, engineers, and contractors. The innovative layered slab and waterproof membrane solution implemented at Brock University wasn’t suggested by the design engineers/architects, but by the engineer associated with the contract management firm who was involved from the outset of the project. “Having experienced people who are involved from the very beginning of the planning process is really important when it comes to minimizing these sorts of risks. You really need to work with people who have done this sort of thing before,” says Miller. Kym Sutton also stresses the importance of training and communication with subcontractors and trade-level construction workers to keep them informed of the potential issues and concerns. According to UC Irvine’s Dave Melitz, there are a number of commonsense measures that lab planners can implement to minimize potential water damage in labs. Solutions include installation of water-sensor alarms; installing shutoff valves in easily accessible locations; avoiding deluge type fire suppression systems; and using backflow preventers to protect water systems from laboratory faucets, instead of vacuum breakers which can limit minimum water flow. Preventive design measures include minimizing penetrations in floor slabs, delivering services overhead when possible or through extended risers, and eliminating the use of floor drains which can trap water and breed mold. “Many measures can be implemented after a facility is operational with varying associated costs, but there’s no substitute for solid preplanning, good communication, and working with an experienced team,” says Miller. By Johnathon Allen |
Circulate to:
[ ] [ ] [ ] For more information This report is based on a Town Hall discussion at the Tradeline Science Buildings Canada 2007 conference held in May.
Andre Kroeger Donald MacDonald David Melitz Jack Miller Kymberley Sutton Find this report valuable? Notes:The majority of Tradeline's Exclusive Reports evolve from sessions at one of Tradeline's facilities planning and management conferences. Click here to see a list of upcoming conferences and see what data you could benefit from first hand. |
Copyright 2008 Tradeline Inc. All Rights Reserved ISSN: 1096-4894 | |