Connecting to Collections Care

Hi Jodi,
I am familiar with your site, and I agree with you that you are lucky to have a functional fire system and to tackle other issues. While I am not an expert, I have heard that fire systems are very reliable (when it comes to accidental discharges). While it does happen, it is not the sprinkler heads generally.

I used to work at Minuteman Missile out near Philip, SD and we had a dry pipe system. When installed, the contractor used too thin a gauge pipe and it failed about 5 years ago. We were getting pinhole leaks about once a year when I was still there, releasing the air pressure and coming close to flooding the pipes. This incident happened after I left but it did flood the hallway of the historic structure and damaged paneling and other architectural features of the site. I saw a couple of photos and it was sad to see the damage that incident caused. What I have been told is that dry pipe systems can lead to corrosion in the pipe since it is flooded during testing, and you cannot get all of the water out. They replaced the system with another dry pipe system, but it is now filled with nitrogen to prevent corrosion. I don't know what the added expense for maintenance and upkeep of the system is but I suspect it will cost more than what you currently have.

Simply, I agree that you should not fix what is not broken. This system has a life span, and you should be aware of that. Have your institution budget for that but until then keep what you have. Until then, tackle some of your other preservation issues, especially light. That was a question that I had going through your spaces in 2022. Best of luck.

Hope I can help with my perspective. In my State, I help libraries and their staff manage their special collections materials.

Wet pipe fire suppression systems have their issues but very well accepted in collections facilities. Fire risk is never zero and is potentially catastrophic to your collections. The general thinking about fire suppression is that you cannot recover ashes, but you can at least recover wet collections to some extent. So having fire suppression (potentially leaky and all) mitigates catastrophic risk even as it comes with other challenges. So those challenges have to be managed in order to further lower your overall risks.

More broadly, preservation is all about risk management. Identifying what your biggest risks are, informally, even before a preservation assessment is performed, will be helpful to foster alignment among your staff. Consider recapping what you know and what you worry about (but don't yet know) in an informal, but documented, way, like a one-pager or shorter. There's a lot of risk assessment frameworks out there (see two links below) but they may be too much for you right now. 
- risk_assessment_process_manual.pdf (arcsinfo.org)
- Risk Evaluation Planning Program (REPP) (culturalheritage.org)

What I might do, maybe, is make a preliminary report that describes in 2 paragraphs the risks for each and every room where collections are stored or exhibited, as best as you can figure. Essentially a running list of the risks to the collections in those rooms. Documenting them will help you think about how to balance them more professionally, and will welcome staff perspectives at the same time. Is there one room very prone to fire risk (next to a kitchen maybe)? Does another room have a history of leaks from the fire-suppression pipes? Do you have nitrate films in one room (where fire risk would be higher, and where temp control would be high priority)? What data do you need to make better decisions? 

Putting this stuff to paper will also help you be more be more systematically pro-active in preservation - for example, with regard to a leaky pipe in a room, instead of wholesale building renovation to dry pipe systems (which aren't perfect either, and are not within the realm of near-term possibility, often), what about planning non-complicated room-specific measures, like simply moving collections away from the area, and/or making sure you have a small disaster-response/recovery kit on hand? Another example: do you worry about mold in a particular space but lack data? Identifying that "unknown" will help you realize that gap - to get better monitoring capability for that space. Enumerate the UV risks room by room - but also consider options to mitigate the damage - could you put collections in boxes, put up film, set up schedules, etc.?

I share the following with my constituents, who tend not to be trained in archive/museum/rare book management, to help them think about preservation. Hope it's useful, even though you probably already know it, it's library-centric, and still sort of a work in progress. The 2 Preservation Priorities - Preservation in Massachusetts Libraries - Resource Guides at Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners (state.ma.us).

Best regards,
Evan

Hope I can help with my perspective. In my State, I help libraries and their staff manage their special collections materials.

Wet pipe fire suppression systems have their issues but very well accepted in collections facilities. Fire risk is never zero and is potentially catastrophic to your collections. The general thinking about fire suppression is that you cannot recover ashes, but you can at least recover wet collections to some extent. So having fire suppression (potentially leaky and all) mitigates catastrophic risk even as it comes with other challenges. So those challenges have to be managed in order to further lower your overall risks.

More broadly, preservation is all about risk management. Identifying what your biggest risks are, informally, even before a preservation assessment is performed, will be helpful to foster alignment among your staff. Consider recapping what you know and what you worry about (but don't yet know) in an informal, but documented, way, like a one-pager or shorter. There's a lot of risk assessment frameworks out there (see two links below) but they may be too much for you right now. 
- risk_assessment_process_manual.pdf (arcsinfo.org)
- Risk Evaluation Planning Program (REPP) (culturalheritage.org)

What I might do, maybe, is make a preliminary report that describes in 2 paragraphs the risks for each and every room where collections are stored or exhibited, as best as you can figure. Essentially a running list of the risks to the collections in those rooms. Documenting them will help you think about how to balance them more professionally, and will welcome staff perspectives at the same time. Is there one room very prone to fire risk (next to a kitchen maybe)? Does another room have a history of leaks from the fire-suppression pipes? Do you have nitrate films in one room (where fire risk would be higher, and where temp control would be high priority)? What data do you need to make better decisions? 

Putting this stuff to paper will also help you be more be more systematically pro-active in preservation - for example, with regard to a leaky pipe in a room, instead of wholesale building renovation to dry pipe systems (which aren't perfect either, and are not within the realm of near-term possibility, often), what about planning non-complicated room-specific measures, like simply moving collections away from the area, and/or making sure you have a small disaster-response/recovery kit on hand? Another example: do you worry about mold in a particular space but lack data? Identifying that "unknown" will help you realize that gap - to get better monitoring capability for that space. Enumerate the UV risks room by room - but also consider options to mitigate the damage - could you put collections in boxes, put up film, set up schedules, etc.?

I share the following with my constituents, who tend not to be trained in archive/museum/rare book management, to help them think about preservation. Hope it's useful, even though you probably already know it, it's library-centric, and still sort of a work in progress. The 2 Preservation Priorities - Preservation in Massachusetts Libraries - Resource Guides at Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners (state.ma.us).

Best regards,
Evan

Hope I can help with my perspective. In my State, I help libraries and their staff manage their special collections materials.

Wet pipe fire suppression systems have their issues but very well accepted in collections facilities. Fire risk is never zero and is potentially catastrophic to your collections. The general thinking about fire suppression is that you cannot recover ashes, but you can at least recover wet collections to some extent. So having fire suppression (potentially leaky and all) mitigates catastrophic risk even as it comes with other challenges. So those challenges have to be managed in order to further lower your overall risks.

More broadly, preservation is all about risk management. Identifying what your biggest risks are, informally, even before a preservation assessment is performed, will be helpful to foster alignment among your staff. Consider recapping what you know and what you worry about (but don't yet know) in an informal, but documented, way, like a one-pager or shorter. There's a lot of risk assessment frameworks out there (see two links below) but they may be too much for you right now. 
- risk_assessment_process_manual.pdf (arcsinfo.org)
- Risk Evaluation Planning Program (REPP) (culturalheritage.org)

What I might do, maybe, is make a preliminary report that describes in 2 paragraphs the risks for each and every room where collections are stored or exhibited, as best as you can figure. Essentially a running list of the risks to the collections in those rooms. Documenting them will help you think about how to balance them more professionally, and will welcome staff perspectives at the same time. Is there one room very prone to fire risk (next to a kitchen maybe)? Does another room have a history of leaks from the fire-suppression pipes? Do you have nitrate films in one room (where fire risk would be higher, and where temp control would be high priority)? What data do you need to make better decisions? 

Putting this stuff to paper will also help you be more be more systematically pro-active in preservation - for example, with regard to a leaky pipe in a room, instead of wholesale building renovation to dry pipe systems (which aren't perfect either, and are not within the realm of near-term possibility, often), what about planning non-complicated room-specific measures, like simply moving collections away from the area, and/or making sure you have a small disaster-response/recovery kit on hand? Another example: do you worry about mold in a particular space but lack data? Identifying that "unknown" will help you realize that gap - to get better monitoring capability for that space. Enumerate the UV risks room by room - but also consider options to mitigate the damage - could you put collections in boxes, put up film, set up schedules, etc.?

I share the following with my constituents, who tend not to be trained in archive/museum/rare book management, to help them think about preservation. Hope it's useful, even though you probably already know it, it's library-centric, and still sort of a work in progress. The 2 Preservation Priorities - Preservation in Massachusetts Libraries - Resource Guides at Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners (state.ma.us).

Best regards,
Evan

Jodi,
I agree with both of the earlier answers. At my State University museum we have a wet pipe system in our 12,000 square foot climate-controlled storage archive that holds more than 35,000 objects.Over the last few years our fire inspection reviewers made the recommendation to switch to a dry pipe system on a couple of occasions. Our facilities director and architect each explored the project with me at least twice based on the inspector's recommendation.  Each time I was able to demonstrate to them that the project could not be done with all of the museum objects on shelves in the archive and that the cost of packing, moving and storing all of the objects off site would be prohibitive. Installing the system is not the only cost.

I agree with Michael. Don't fix what is not broken.

Jodi,
I agree with both of the earlier answers. At my State University museum we have a wet pipe system in our 12,000 square foot climate-controlled storage archive that holds more than 35,000 objects.Over the last few years our fire inspection reviewers made the recommendation to switch to a dry pipe system on a couple of occasions. Our facilities director and architect each explored the project with me at least twice based on the inspector's recommendation.  Each time I was able to demonstrate to them that the project could not be done with all of the museum objects on shelves in the archive and that the cost of packing, moving and storing all of the objects off site would be prohibitive. Installing the system is not the only cost.

I agree with Michael. Don't fix what is not broken.