January 6, 2011, 10:00 PM | #26 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 28, 2009
Posts: 107
|
Quote:
Here is a media safe with the highest rating I could find class 125F - 3 hour. http://www.fireking.com/adesco_safes_data_3hour.html It's external dimensions are 59 3/4" x 32 1/16 x 31 " and internal dimensions are 43 5/8" x 18 5/8" x 16 1/16". So the amount of insulation is the difference between the total volume of the safe verses the volume of protected material. So external volume = 59.75" x 32.0625" x 31" = 59,387 Cu Inches and internal volume 43.625" x 18.625" x 16.0625" = 13,051 Cu Inches. That makes the amount of insulation = external volume - internal volume = 59,387 - 13,051 = 46336 cu inches of insulation protecting 13,051 Cu Inches of material for a ratio of 13,051/46,336 = 0.2817 which says you need about 4 times of volume of insulation as compared to volume of protected material. So looking at the media vault that uses exclusively ceramic fiber. I couldn't find dimensions for a 3 hour rated vault so I had to use the higher rated vault with a 4 hour rating. Here's a quote from Firelock http://www.firelock.com/mediasecurity3.htm "FIRELOCK is also unique in that our vaults provide a Class 125 Fire Rating for a minimum of two hours, but as vaults increase in size, the vault rating increases in duration. Our 28' x 28' x 8' vault will deliver a Class 125 Four-Hour Rating. This is four times the protection that a typically constructed data safe can provide." So from the photo shown earlier, it appears that the vault walls are around 6" deep; that would make the exterior dimensions 29' x 29' x 9'. So the volume of the entire structure - the interior volume is (29' x 29' x 9') - (28' x 28' x 8') = 1297 Cu Feet of insulation material. So interior protected volume divided by insulation volume = (28' x 28' x 8') / 1297 Cu Feet = 4.836 This says that per cubic volume of ceramic fiber almost 5 times that volume can be protected. That would mean it is 4.826/0.2817 = 17.13 times better than the media safe with the cast insulation and inner liner of something else.
__________________
...probably the greatest concentration of talent and genius in the white house except for perhaps those times when Thomas Jefferson ate alone. John F. Kennedy, Describing a dinner for Nobel Prize winners, 1962 Last edited by Adirondack; January 6, 2011 at 10:07 PM. |
|
January 6, 2011, 10:44 PM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 496
|
As always, you try to make things much more difficult than they really are. I don't know if this is intended to confuse people or not.
Let's start with the surface area exposed to heat, and the volume of air inside of the unit. I will use your two specific examples. I'm not going to post all of the math (feel free to double check my figures), just the important parts. I'm also going to round off the numbers a bit to make it easier to see. The safe you mentioned has an outside surface area (not counting the floor, because we're not going to count the floor of the vault either) of 59.5 square feet. This surface is the amount of surface exposed to heat. The interior has a volume of 7.6 cubic feet. This means each square foot of surface exposed to heat is keeping .13 cubic feet of space cool. The vault you mention has a surface area of 1,885 square feet exposed to heat. The interior volume (28x28x8) is 6,272 cubic feet. This means each square foot of surface exposed to heat is keeping 3.3 cubic feet of space cool. I'm going to stop you now before you say "look, the vault has to keep much more space cool", because that's the opposite of the truth. A smaller air space will heat up much faster than larger air space when exposed to the same level of heat. A .13 cubic foot space will heat much faster than a 3.3 cubic foot space. The vault has 25 times the air inside of it in a direct comparison of surface area. This means the safe has to do 25 times the work the vault does. To put this into real simple terms. Try turning your oven on to 400 degrees, opening the door, and seeing how long it takes to heat your kitchen to 400 degrees. Then to compare, with your oven at room temperature, burn your house down, and see how long it takes the interior of the oven to reach 400 degrees.
__________________
www.zykansafe.com Last edited by a1abdj; January 6, 2011 at 11:56 PM. |
January 7, 2011, 06:42 AM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 28, 2009
Posts: 107
|
Quote:
I know the example is an apples to oranges comparison but you asked to see it. Steam especially a high pressure superheated steam that's likely to be in a gun safe protected by gypsum or even concrete can damage the contents as well so it should be a consideration when selecting a gun safe or any safe/vault for that matter.
__________________
...probably the greatest concentration of talent and genius in the white house except for perhaps those times when Thomas Jefferson ate alone. John F. Kennedy, Describing a dinner for Nobel Prize winners, 1962 |
|
January 7, 2011, 10:27 AM | #29 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
Instead of the safe having to perform 25 times better in the previous example, it only has to perform 20 times better if heat is applied to all 6 sides instead of 5. Quote:
In your examples, the safe has about 3.5" of cast fill on each wall, in addition to 3.5" of ceramic insulation. The vault has 6" of insulation. This means that the 3.5" of fill in the safe is now doing the job of 2.5" of ceramic in the vault. We know that by your very own example, that the safe is doing 20 times the work, and the ceramics are doing the same job, therefore I can make a wild guess that it's the cast insulation doing the heavy lifting (as I have always said). 3.5" of cast insulation (in this case) is 20 times as effective as 2.5" of ceramic. If my math is correct, it would take 14" of ceramic insulation to accomplish the same task as 1" of cast insulation. Of course all of these numbers aren't based on much fact, just your examples. The do however prove what I have been saying all along. Cast insulations are more effective than ceramic insulations which is why every UL listed safe uses them, and very few manufacturers use it at all, except as a secondary insulation. Quote:
You can also get external moisture into a safe during a fire. The insulation isn't your only enemy when you have fire hoses involved.
__________________
www.zykansafe.com |
|||
January 7, 2011, 06:47 PM | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 28, 2009
Posts: 107
|
I guess I'm not following your logic a1abdj. The volume of both containers is published so you can figure out how much is liner, shell and insulation of each and how efficient they are at protecting the volume within each container. To me it appears that the vault with the ceramic fiber is 17 times better than the safe based on how much material is needed to protect each volume. I couldn't find any specifications on the materials used on that fire safe so if you say it's ceramic fiber in the inner liner and it's 3.5" thick I guess I'm going to have to trust you on that but at least from the photo it doesn't appear to be much more than 2" thick at best.
Of course all of this is a moot point since the specifications of ceramic fiber, high temperature glass and other insulation materials including insulating concrete type materials are published so it's easy to figure out what insulation is better for preventing heat transfer.
__________________
...probably the greatest concentration of talent and genius in the white house except for perhaps those times when Thomas Jefferson ate alone. John F. Kennedy, Describing a dinner for Nobel Prize winners, 1962 |
January 7, 2011, 08:19 PM | #31 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
In both situations, we are looking at the same heat source. 1 square foot of surface area. The safe has a small volume of air inside, the vault has a large volume of air inside. Let's say you take 2 identical candles. Place one inside of a shoe box, and the other inside of a refrigerator box. Which box will heat faster? A small space will heat much, much faster than a large space. The insulation on a large container has to work less than the insulation on a small container (even though most safes are build the same regardless of their size). The vault is not better because it protects more volume. The safe is better because it offers the same protection to much, much less.
__________________
www.zykansafe.com |
|
January 8, 2011, 12:24 AM | #32 |
Member
Join Date: January 23, 2010
Posts: 29
|
I'm going to chime in on this discussion, not because I feel I'm and expert in any way, but because I find it very interesting. I value both point of views and your expertise.
Just because safe manufacturers stick with a certain type of insulation does not automatically preclude its better or best. Just doing something for many years also does not mean its the best way. This applies to all facets of life. If you assume fiber insulation is better, why would companies not make the switch? I can think of many, but heres a few. #1. Old habits die hard. Maybe an overused expression but true. #2. They are already set up and tooled to do it this way and change costs money. #3. The marketplace is not screaming for change. Heck the average Joe doesn't even take that much notice of fire ratings. #4. Why change and admit someone else was doing it better all along. I'm sure their are more reasons and I bring these up because I see resistance to change all the time in my occupation--agriculture. People plowed for years until finally no-till took over. Combines used conventional threshing systems for years until a few changed to rotary combines and now its very hard to find a combine with a cylinder. I could go on and on. I think we all could in relation to our own areas of expertise. |
January 8, 2011, 01:07 AM | #33 | ||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
Your other questions have different answers, depending on whether you're talking about real safes with UL ratings, or gun safes that are unrated. Quote:
Real safe companies haven't, because a ceramic insulated safe will not pass the test in the form of a marketable safe. Quote:
Gun safes have been around since the 1980s, and originally, were not insulated against fire at all. Many of the manufacturers act as if they are doing things that have never been done, when in fact, they have all been done many times before by real safe manufacturers. Quote:
Ceramic insulations may cost more for the actual material, but the process is very easy, requires little or no equipment, and is very fast. Quote:
As far as gun safes go, this is a bad thing. Many people are relying on their gun safes to provide protection that they simply can't offer. Real safes are a different story. Not only are consumers interested in the fire ratings, but if the safe carries any sort of commercial insurance, the insurer will definately be interested. Quote:
On the flip side, changes are constantly being made to security features, especially burglary barriers. They have to. As new and better tools are designed, and burglars gain knowledge, new features must be used to maintain security levels.
__________________
www.zykansafe.com |
||||||
January 8, 2011, 02:06 AM | #34 |
Member
Join Date: January 23, 2010
Posts: 29
|
Thanks alabdj for your reply. You certainly have convincing arguements. I perhaps worded some of my response poorly. I think most people do give up on the fire rating debate and simply decide on price, ease of installation or availability. I have to say I have been put off by the quality of all the safes I have seen first hand. I won't mention names but they represent the top manufacturers of gun safes. Have not been able to put my hands on a amsec or sturdy but the specs seem to support that they are better made. Safes I have looked at sure are purtiy but when really looking close you can tell they are cheaply and poorly made. I just will not settle for this.
Wouldn't it be great if some independent entity put a few gun safes in the same environment and compared their heat resistance and burgular proof abilities. Would it really be so hard to provide a subjective test? |
January 8, 2011, 02:16 AM | #35 |
Staff
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 21,838
|
Thanks a1adbj. I'm getting an education here.
__________________
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. Molon Labe! |
January 8, 2011, 04:39 AM | #36 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 28, 2009
Posts: 107
|
Quote:
I do admit that the natural air convection in the much larger vault does help delay the temperature rise within the chamber but I did say it is an apples to oranges comparison. The interior of the vault can hold everything used in its construction 4 times over but the safe can't even hold a quarter of it's own constructing material so for efficient fire protection of a large collection, the ceramic fiber lined vault is far better than the safe. Quote:
Even Amsec admitted when asked by someone who called from an earlier discussion that they don't use the same insulating material on their fire safes as they do for their other safes. Their fire safes use a vermiculite concrete mix whereas their other security or burglary and fire safes use a denser mix which is great for security but bad for preventing heat transfer. So to your point about the average Joe not taking much notice to the fire rating, I think these safe companies likely recognize that and are building their products with that in mind.
__________________
...probably the greatest concentration of talent and genius in the white house except for perhaps those times when Thomas Jefferson ate alone. John F. Kennedy, Describing a dinner for Nobel Prize winners, 1962 Last edited by Adirondack; January 8, 2011 at 04:48 AM. |
||
January 8, 2011, 10:42 AM | #37 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
The vault is better than the safe. It's better than the safe because it uses one of the best insulations available. Air. Smaller safes have to use better man made insulations, because they do not have the air volume inside. Using the same ceramic insulation, exclusively, in a smaller safe would yield faster and higher temperature rises than the exact same test performed on the large vault. This is exactly the same when other insulations are used, and is why many of those insulations are moisture bearing. Behind air, steam is also a great natural insulator. In a nutshell, this is why the ceramics will not pass the UL test, and is why many other dry insulations will not pass it either. Quote:
The cements are goin to vary in price depending on how complex they are, but you are right in that they are not expensive (when talking about the fire rated versions). But lets look at their construction. Sturdy builds a safe, puts in ceramic, and rivets in a liner. In a safe using cement, the body must be built in a hollow form. This form must prevent the wet cement from leaking out. This is a bit more complex than the Sturdy. The cement must be mixed (cement plant on site), moved from the plant to the safe (pumps), placed into the safe properly (vibrating tables), then cured (large ovens). All of this equipment is expensive, requires maintenance, uses expensive power, requires labor to use each piece, and takes time. Quote:
Dense insulating materials aren't always bad for preventing heat transfer. Even heavy plate steel safes, with no insulation at all, have survived fires.
__________________
www.zykansafe.com Last edited by a1abdj; January 8, 2011 at 10:56 AM. |
|||
January 8, 2011, 12:29 PM | #38 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 28, 2009
Posts: 107
|
Quote:
Ceramic fiber is mostly air which is good for preventing conductive heat transfer. The fiber also blocks radiant heat transfer and prevents air from moving within the insulation layer to reduce convection heating. I don't believe you are entirely accurate with your statement that safes don't use air in their fire safe insulation. Both expanded Vermiculite and Perlite which are the aggregates most often used in concrete to give them good insulation properties are mostly air. Also, these manufacturers (safe and builders) will use an aeration process to introduce air into their concrete mixes to reduce density and improve the insulation properties. The moisture bearing insulation is used because of the phase change that has to occur with water to change to steam. When water changes to steam at atmospheric pressure, the temperature of the water will stay at 212F until the water if fully changed to steam. Do the experiment yourself, put a pot of water on the stove with a thermometer in the water and watch what happens to the temperature when it starts to boil, it won't rise above 212F until the water is gone. Gun safe manufacturers use gypsum drywall because it is 21% water and will go through a similar process when exposed to high heat the problem is the pressure will rise in a sealed gun safe making it less effective.
__________________
...probably the greatest concentration of talent and genius in the white house except for perhaps those times when Thomas Jefferson ate alone. John F. Kennedy, Describing a dinner for Nobel Prize winners, 1962 |
|
January 8, 2011, 01:08 PM | #39 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
Quote:
Gyspum based insulations are used (in their cast form) on some UL rated products. The problem with gypsum board is that it is not as consistent as cast. There are gaps, cuts, etc. that reduce its effectiveness. I am sure you could get a gypsum board lined safe to pass UL testing. I am also sure you could get a ceramic lined safe to pass. The walls would simply have to be much thicker. Since the interior volume of the safe is at a premium, it simply doesn't make sense to build a safe with 10" walls when they can use the same materials they have been using for over a century to build walls half as thick.
__________________
www.zykansafe.com |
||
January 8, 2011, 02:30 PM | #40 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 25, 2008
Location: California
Posts: 1,951
|
Don't rely on the F.D being 6 miles away, if the house is out on another call you get the house farther away.
__________________
http://www.armsmaster.net-a.googlepages.com http://s239.photobucket.com/albums/f...aster270/Guns/ Retired LE, M.P., Sr. M.P. Investigator F.B.I. Trained Rangemaster/Firearms Instructor & Armorer, Presently Forensic Document Examiner for D.H.S. |
January 9, 2011, 12:09 AM | #41 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 28, 2009
Posts: 107
|
Quote:
ZerO, sorry to have taken your thread off on a tangent. There are a few good choices in the price range as mentioned. I happen to think Sturdy is the best but that's based on what I find important in a gun safe which might be different than other people. If weight isn't an issue and you think you might want a little more security than these provide, there are some reasonable priced TL rated safes such as AMSEC AMVAULT composite safe but the shipping and placement might prove to be a bit pricey and of course you'll have to deal with a 3000LBS safe if you ever need to move it.
__________________
...probably the greatest concentration of talent and genius in the white house except for perhaps those times when Thomas Jefferson ate alone. John F. Kennedy, Describing a dinner for Nobel Prize winners, 1962 Last edited by Adirondack; January 9, 2011 at 12:26 AM. |
|
January 9, 2011, 12:49 AM | #42 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Although the contents of both safes "survived", look closely at the contents of each. The Sturdy gun safe has some fire damaged contents. That little UL rated Sentry (which could have been bought at Walmart for $150), even has thin plastic baggies that survived, and very little damage to the contents. You can disagree all that you want, but again, the proof is right there in front of you. Cast insulations do a better job of protecting contents against fire. It's not just my opinion. It's the opinion of UL, the major safe manufacturers, and although I can't speak for everybody, most of us in the business.
__________________
www.zykansafe.com |
|||
January 9, 2011, 03:32 PM | #43 |
Member
Join Date: February 22, 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 40
|
what can be added to space around a safe to increase fire protection
a1abdj
I have an inch or two on all sides of my Liberty safe in the garage. What would you recommend as an extra little of fire protection to just set aside the safe. I selected the Liberty for gun protection, but mostly for paper and valuables from fire, which I feel is the more likely thing to hit. I did not have enough money to get a real "theft" safe with real fire protection. Just thinking that some extra something along side might actually extend the fire protection. |
January 9, 2011, 07:26 PM | #44 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
If you park your car in the garage, you could expect higher temperatures than you would within a house. Safes in garages also tend to have more combustible items placed next to them.
__________________
www.zykansafe.com |
|
January 10, 2011, 04:19 AM | #45 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 28, 2009
Posts: 107
|
Well since it still is being discussed and is generally the theme of the thread, I'll respond a1abdj.
Of those two photos, the one that appears to have damaged content is the Sentry safe. It looks to me like that plastic bag melted and also some charring on that folded envelope where it made contact with the side wall. In the Sturdy safe photo, it might appear that the files to the far left are darker but that's just because they are in a shadow. You can see there are plastic pistol cases that touch the side of the safe where the insulation is thinnest. Here is a picture of that plastic pistol case and pistol: http://www.sturdysafe.com/fireliner.htm Yes that Sentry fire safe is made of a cast (concrete) mix which does allow it to evaporate water much like the drywall so it will do okay as long as there is still water to evaporate, once the water is gone or the pressure is too high for the water to boil; the heat will rise rapidly. Also, those Sentry safe can only pass a 1/2 hour test to 1550 Degrees F which as you likely know is due to the long cool down period with concrete type insulation. Quote:
But here it is again which is a comparison for what Sturdy does for fire protection to what is in an AMSEC BF as a best case scenario as I see it and you are welcomed to have AMSEC show why I am wrong a1abdj. Quote:
__________________
...probably the greatest concentration of talent and genius in the white house except for perhaps those times when Thomas Jefferson ate alone. John F. Kennedy, Describing a dinner for Nobel Prize winners, 1962 |
||
January 10, 2011, 10:24 AM | #46 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
Disregard the photos for a minute. How many safes have you personally seen opened after a fire? I have probably seen around 100, so I have some experience when it comes to seeing what is fire damaged and what is not. Quote:
Those plastic bags in the Sentry will usually melt in the 220 to 240 degree range. The plastic gun case in the Sturdy will usually melt in the 420 degree range. However, paper begins to change color at +/- 300 degrees, and will ignite at just over 400 degrees. You can claim the photo is dark because it is a shadow, and then show a plastic gun case as your evidence. However, based on the numbers I just showed you, the paper could have been charred (which is probably was), and the plastic gun case could have still been in prstine condition. Quote:
How long do you think that safe was in the fire for it to burn into the basement? That safe performed beyond its rating. Not only did it survive an exposure longer than its rating, but it also maintained a lower temperature. Quote:
Why would you choose a material that they use in the fire lined safes? That's not the material that they are using in their BF line. I suppose you could do a bunch of math to prove something, if you actually knew the real numbers. But since you don't, I suggest a more simple method. Let's just look at what has a UL tag and what doesn't. I'll show you an AMSEC BF safe with a UL fire tag. Go ahead and show me a safe using ceramic insulation (solely) with a UL tag.
__________________
www.zykansafe.com Last edited by a1abdj; January 10, 2011 at 11:37 AM. |
||||
January 10, 2011, 07:34 PM | #47 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 22, 2009
Posts: 6
|
Ask someone who would really know...
Quote:
Spreading misinformation on UL's behalf to sell safes (seeing as how your a 30 yr old safe salemen) will get you in deep trouble with UL, and they don't take these things lightly. No one needs to take our word, or any other salesmans word for it, just contact people who would know. In this case, it would be Michael B. Koepke (Customer Service Engineer Elements with Underwriters Laboratories Inc. aka "the man to actually ask these questions to"). 877-854-3577 ext. 42902 When I asked Michael if he thought your statement quoted above is true when it came to cast vs. ceramic insulations, he said NO. I asked Michael if there really are safes lined with ceramic with a UL Fire/Class# rating on them, and he said YES. When I asked Michael if he could give the name and other details of these UL Fire/Class# safes lined with ceramic, he said he couldn't give out that info, and said I would need to contact the safe manufacturers direct so they could tell me what they used. |
|
January 10, 2011, 08:02 PM | #48 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 22, 2009
Posts: 6
|
Quote:
Frank, I encourage you to do your homework before posting anymore incorrect information about us. We went ahead and recorded this evidence in our records, amongst all the other incorrect information you have said about us here (and on other forums). Last edited by Sturdy Gun Safe, Mfg; January 10, 2011 at 08:20 PM. |
|
January 10, 2011, 08:17 PM | #49 | ||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 28, 2005
Location: St. Charles, MO
Posts: 496
|
Quote:
I find this curious, as UL isn't in business to promote any product or type of product. They merely exist as an independent testing facility. Quote:
So what kind of misinformation are you talking about? What kind of trouble? I dont' think either exists. Quote:
Of course there are safes using ceramics. Just about every data safe uses them. We've already discussed that here. I'm talking about primary insualtions, not secondary inserts. I also find it odd that he won't tell you what products have their labels. As you have said, they are very particular about the use of their label, or more specifically the misuse of their label. I don't think that there's any secrets involved with who's had their safes tested and who hasn't. Perhaps you need to know the secret handshake or something. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
www.zykansafe.com |
||||||
January 10, 2011, 08:28 PM | #50 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: January 22, 2009
Posts: 6
|
You don't need to be on a first name basis, anyone can call!
Quote:
Your myspace says age 31, so that is where I got the age from. Last edited by Sturdy Gun Safe, Mfg; January 10, 2011 at 09:01 PM. |
|
|
|