Fire Destroys Southampton Fibre-Optics Center

Sam Haine '95 writes "BBC News reports that a fire has burnt down a CS facility at the University of Southampton. It's notable because the facility was one of the best in the world." From the article: "Some of the most advanced research work in the country, and indeed the world was carried out in this facility ... We probably will have to start from scratch, and it will take a couple of years to rebuild the facility"

Comments

That is certainly unfortunate.

[Sheetrock]

The only two things that I can think of that might be of some consolation are that because this dealt with technology much of the research should be in electronic form and backed up and that many times you'll discover a more efficient way of doing things when you go back and design the same thing a second time (although one normally does not have the luxury/misfortune to do so).

Re:Backups?

[antifoidulus]

I wonder if they used gas, sprinklers, both, or neither? The gases they use to put out fires near computers tend to leave the computers unharmed, but the same can't be said for people...the sprinklers of course do the opposite. Then again, the article mentions that gas canisters exploded, so maybe they could have taken out a lot of the fire protection mechanisms with them...

Re:Mhmm and??

[seifried]

When cold stuff gets hot it expands! Expansion in an enclosed space leads to explosions when the container eventually fails.

OK people

[Y-Crate]

I think that after two examples (the other being the Ardman fire) of why you should invest in proper fire suppression equipment in one month's time in one nation should be enough to make people realize that such systems are a worthwhile investment.

Then again, such things are usually put low on the list of priorities whenever possible, because "it won't happen to us".

You can even get the upper hand when explosives are present, you can get systems that will have fire suppressants leaving the discharge head before the explosion is even visible (some systems are guaranteed to have the suppressant flowing in less than 50 milliseconds of onset of the event that triggers the release.)

I suppose it just comes down to a matter of deciding how much you value your operation and assets.

Re:Mhmm and??

[mrchaotica]

Hmm, not knowing that liquid nitrogen becomes gaseous nitrogen when you apply heat, and that very high pressure makes containers explode...? And after you've mocked someone else...? Even more priceless!

Worst case scenario more like couple of decades

[MMaestro]

More like couple of decades worst case scenario. Even assuming they backed up all their data off-site, its gonna take years to clean up and build a new building (~1 year for cleaning, estimate about 2~5 years to rebuild and bring the whole thing back up to speed). On top of construction, theres the loss of the machines, facilities and temporary unability to do work elsewhere for sometime (can't replicate that kind of research in your average college computer lab.) Theres also the now temporarily work-less researchers, the obvious political fallout and having to figure out how the fire started in the first place. Theres also the matter of who's gonna foot the bill for cleaning, construction and replacing all the lost material. On top of ALL that, I doubt theres a magic 'put everything back the way it was before button' on the backup servers which can instantly bring all the data back for researchers quickly and easily.

Combined, you're looking at an easy 5 years lost research time best case scenario. Worst case scenario you're looking at anywhere between 10~30 years lost time since some scientists may not want to wait for the facilities to be rebuilt and just take their expertise elsewhere and their not the sort you can replace easily. Theres always the distant (but unlikely) possibility, that they might not even rebuild the facilties and simply shelf or sell off the data to others.

And of course, this doesn't even touch the financial costs, the damage to the school's prestige and damage to the school's pride.

Re:I hope they're backing up data!

[wronskyMan]

Even with the data backed up, the major loss will be their equipment - this is not a computer lab, rather it is a hardware fabrication lab with likely millions of dollars worth of semiconductor and optical processing equipment, clean rooms, etc. - research samples taking months to grow may have been lost as well.

Re: Burn Baby Burn

[some guy I know]

I had the same reaction.
This is (uh, was) a multi-million dollar (OK, multi-million pound, sorry) facility.
Where was all of the fire-suppression equipment?
Why was the builing itself so flammable?

I can understand using wood in lower-cost construction (e.g., residential homes), but such a valuable facility should have been constructed out of concrete and steel.
In addition, it should have had many or all of the following characteristics:

• No wood in/on the walls, and no paper-coated drywall.
• Steel doors.
• No wooden floors (just tile and such).
• No wooden furniture (e.g., only steel desks, etc.).
• Flame-resistant paint.
• Flame-resistant fabric, where fabric is necessary (on chairs, curtains, etc.).
• Steel bookcases with doors of steel or tempered glass.
• Steel cases (instead of plastic) and aluminum (OK, aluminium, sorry) knobs on the scientific equipment, and sealed electronics wherever possible.
• Copper/steel/cast iron pipes, instead of PVC.
• Flame-resistant coatings on all wiring, etc.
• Dangerous experiments (e.g., those requiring explosive chemicals) conducted in outbuildings.
• And, most importantly, a working, effective, and periodically tested fire-suppression system.

This is all very expensive, and is probably not cost-effective in most situations.
However, since the "facility was one of the best in the world", and "Some of the most advanced research work in the country, and indeed the world was carried out in this facility", I think that the added expense would have been worth it.