Are sports 'fans' tampering with design loads? - Editor's Note

Engineered Systems, July, 2003 by Robert Beverly

If you watched the NBA Finals last month, you might have experienced a brief ES flashback. The victorious San Antonio Spurs play their home games in the SBC Center, which was the subject of Joanna Turpin's cover story several months ago. Her article focused on the controls, the life safety system, and the integration of the two.

Coming across a facility previously covered in ES is a fringe benefit of this job (although it must pale beside the feeling of seeing the fruits of your design or maintenance labor in such a high-profile or important setting). As the Spurs reeled off a 19-0 run that unraveled the Nets, my mind drifted to recalling the zone capabilities of the smoke management system and the building's overall preparedness in case of emergency (or excessive rodeo dust).

However, as I watched the Spurs fans beat their pairs of inflatable "Thunderstix" --the preferred noisemaker of spectators these days -- I couldn't help but wonder: how would all that fan-made turbulence change the airflow? What effect could twenty thousand stick-beating fans have on the path of smoke? And as far as room temperature, does that extra air propulsion have a cooling effect on the occupied area at all, or does the additional body heat generated by the exercise more than offset it?

I can't wait to see the first design software program that includes a "stick noisemakers" factor for arena ventilation.

CHILLING WITH THE FAMOUS

The advent of summer reminds me of one more entertainment-related note. Before I started working here, my range of writing included the occasional interview, including a pleasant conversation with legendary singer Emmylou Harris. Our chat rolled around to her quarter century of live performances, including this tidbit:

"I've had laryngitis once," she remembers, "and I'll tell you what it was. We played outside in the summer when it was about 100[degrees]. Someone was tying to be nice to me and cranked up the air conditioning in my dressing room. So I walked in and it was about 40[degrees], and I lost my voice mid-sentence. So it's really difficult in the summer, everyone thinks it has to be frigid to be comfortable, when all we need is a bit of shade!"

OK, it probably wasn't quite 40[degrees] in the dressing room, but you get her point. Managers constantly attuned to the price of climate control don't allow themselves to be swayed by such impulses, but we've all been in rooms where the logic seems to be, "Normally, you would think this temperature is uncomfortably chilly, but you'll like it now since it's so hot outside, where you used to be but aren't anymore."

It's obvious to this audience how much more cost-effective it is to provide a cold glass of water and a 72[degrees] environment on a 90[degrees] day as opposed to providing a 67[degrees] environment, but I'd think that Ms. Harris is correct that the former also makes for a much more natural transition for the body. (Ruining Emmylou's voice is a sure sign your strategy is in need of revision, in any event.) Have you encountered a stunningly large difference in outdoor and indoor temperatures?

A LIFE SAFETY RESOURCE, MADE BETTER AND SIMPLER

Speaking of stunning differences in temperature, the worst reason is fire. Last month, the National Fire Protection Association (www.nfpa.org) announced that its 2003 edition of NFPA 1, Uniform Fire Code[TM] could be viewed online in PDF form. Visitors must register to gain access, but that's a small inconvenience to tolerate for good information. The NFPA reports that the publication "integrates the two most widely adopted fire codes in the country -- NFPA 1, Fire Prevention Code and the Uniform Fire Code."

The result is meant to help users prescribe minimum requirements to achieve adequate protection from fire in any occupancy. If it's not relevant at the moment, go to www.nfpa.org/catalog/home/OnlineAccess/UFC/ufc.asp and give it a quick bookmark in case you can use it later.