Data centers in colleges and universities are crucial for supporting the extensive technological infrastructure required for modern education and research. These centers house critical servers and storage systems that manage vast amounts of data, ensuring reliable access to academic resources, administrative applications, and communication networks. They enable the secure storage and processing of sensitive information, including student records, faculty research, and institutional data.
Moreover, data centers facilitate advanced research by providing the computational power needed for data-intensive studies in fields like bioinformatics, climate science, and artificial intelligence. They support virtual learning environments and online course management systems, essential for the increasingly prevalent hybrid and online education models. Efficient data centers also contribute to campus sustainability goals by optimizing energy use through modern, eco-friendly technologies.
Additionally, robust data center infrastructure enhances the university’s ability to attract top-tier faculty and students by demonstrating a commitment to cutting-edge technology and resources. They also play a vital role in disaster recovery and business continuity, ensuring that educational and administrative functions can resume quickly after disruptions. Overall, data centers are integral to the academic mission, operational efficiency, and strategic growth of colleges and universities.
We have followed development of the technical standards that govern the success of these “installations” since 1993; sometimes nudging technical committees — NFPA, IEEE, ASHRAE, BICSI and UL. The topic is vast and runs fast so today we will review, and perhaps respond to, the public consultations that are posted on a near-daily basis. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
The steeplechase event requires a combination of speed, endurance, and jumping ability, as athletes must clear the barriers while maintaining their pace and negotiating the water jump. The rules and specifications for the steeplechase event are set by the International Association of Athletics Federations the governing body for the sport of athletics (track and field) worldwide; with minor adaptations by the NCAA for intercollegiate competition.
Emma Coburn | University of Colorado Boulder
The steeplechase is a distance race with barriers and a water pit that athletes must clear during the race. According to the NCAA Track and Field and Cross Country rulebook, the standards for the steeplechase water jump are as follows:
Length: The water pit must be at least 3.66 meters (12 feet) long.
Width: The water pit must be at least 3.66 meters (12 feet) wide.
Depth: The water pit must have a minimum depth of 0.7 meters (2 feet 4 inches) and a maximum depth of 0.9 meters (2 feet 11 inches).
Slope: The slope of the water pit must not exceed 1:5, meaning that for every 5 meters in length, the water pit can rise by no more than 1 meter in height.
Barrier: The water pit must be preceded by a solid barrier that is 91.4 cm (3 feet) high. Athletes are required to clear this barrier before landing in the water pit.
These standards may be subject to change and may vary depending on the specific NCAA division (Division I, Division II, or Division III) and other factors such as venue requirements. Therefore, it’s always best to refer to the official NCAA rules and regulations for the most up-to-date and accurate information on the steeplechase water jump standards in NCAA competitions.
ASTM F 2157-09 (2018) Standard Specification for Synthetic Surfaced Running Tracks
This specification establishes the minimum performance requirements and classification when tested in accordance with the procedures outlined within this specification. All documents referencing this specification must include classification required.
ASTM F 2569-11 Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Force Reduction Properties of Surfaces for Athletic Use
This test method covers the quantitative measurement and normalization of impact forces generated through a mechanical impact test on an athletic surface. The impact forces simulated in this test method are intended to represent those produced by lower extremities of an athlete during landing events on sport or athletic surfaces.
ASTM F 2949-12 Standard Specification for Pole Vault Box Collars
This specification covers minimum requirements of size, physical characteristics of materials, standard testing procedures, labeling and identification of pole vault box collars.
ASTM F 1162/F1162M-18 Standard Specification for Pole Vault Landing Systems
This specification covers minimum requirements of size, physical characteristics of materials, standard testing procedures, labeling and identification of pole vault landing systems.
ASTM F 2270-12 (2018) Standard Guide for Construction and Maintenance of Warning Track Areas on Sports Fields This guide covers techniques that are appropriate for the construction and maintenance of warning track areas on sports fields. This guide provides guidance for the selection of materials, such as soil and sand for use in constructing or reconditioning warning track areas and for selection of management practices that will maintain a safe and functioning warning track.
ASTM F 2650-17e1 Standard Terminology Relating to Impact Testing of Sports Surfaces and Equipment
This terminology covers terms related to impact test methods and impact attenuation specifications of sports equipment and surfaces.
ASHRAE 90.4 defines an alternate compliance path, specific to data centers, while the compliance requirements for “non-data center” components are contained in ASHRAE 90.1 . The 90.4 structure also streamlines the ongoing maintenance process as well ensures that Standards 90.1 and 90.4 stay in their respective lanes to avoid any overlap and redundancies relating to the technical and administrative boundaries. Updates to ASHRAE 90.1 will still include the alternate compliance path defined in ASHRAE 90.4. Conversely the 2022 Edition of 90.4-2022 refers to ASHRAE 90.1-2022; cross-referencing one another synchronously
Links to noteworthy coverage from expert agencies on the 2022 revisions:
This title resides on the standing agenda of our Infotech 400 colloquium; hosted several times per year and as close coupled with the annual meetings of ASHRAE International as possible. Technical committees generally meet during these meetings make decisions about the ASHRAE catalog. The next all committee conference will be hostedJanuary 20-24, 2024 in Chicago. As always we encourage education industry facility managers, energy conservation workgroups and sustainability professionals to participate directly in the ASHRAE consensus standard development process. It is one of the better facilities out there.
Proposed Addendum g makes changes to definitions were modified in section 3 and mandatory language in Section 6 to support the regulation of process heat and process ventilation was moved in the section for clarity. Other changes are added based on comments from the first public review including changes to informative notes.
Consultation closes June 4th
Update: February 10, 2023
The most actively managed consensus standard for data center energy supply operating in education communities (and most others) is not published by the IEEE but rather by ASHRAE International — ASHRAE 90.4 Energy Standard for Data Centers (2019). It is not required to be a free access title although anyone may participate in its development. It is copyrighted and ready for purchase but, for our purpose here, we need only examine its scope and purpose. A superceded version of 90.4 is available in the link below:
It is likely that the technical committee charged with updating this standard are already at work preparing an updated version that will supercede the 2019 Edition. CLICK HERE for a listing of Project Committee Interim Meetings.
We maintain many titles from the ASHRAE catalog on the standing agenda of our Mechanical, Energy 200/400, Data and Cloud teleconferences. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
Originally posted Summer 2020.
ASHRAE International has released four new addenda to its energy conservation consensus document ASHRAE 90.4-2016 Energy Standard for Data Centers. This document establishes the minimum energy efficiency requirements of data centers for design and construction, for the creation of a plan for operation and maintenance and for utilization of on-site or off-site renewable energy resources.
It is a relatively new document more fully explained in an article published by ASHRAE in 2016 (Click here). The addenda described briefly:
Addendum a – clarifies existing requirements in Section 6.5 as well as introduce new provisions to encourage heat recovery within data centers.
Addendum b – clarifies existing requirements in Sections 6 and 11 and to provide guidance for taking credit for renewable energy systems.
Addendum d – a response to a Request for Interpretation on the 90.4 consideration of DieselRotary UPS Systems (DRUPS) and the corresponding accounting of these systems in the Electrical Loss Component (ELC). In crafting the IC, the committee also identified several marginal changes to 90.4 definitions and passages in Section 8 that would add further clarity to the issue. This addendum contains the proposed changes for that aim as well as other minor changes to correct spelling or text errors, incorporate the latest ELC values into Section 11, and to refresh information in the Normative Reference.
Addendum e adds language to Section 11 intended to clarify how compliance with Standard 90.4 can be achieved through the use of shared systems.
Comments are due September 6th. Until this deadline you may review the changes and comment upon them by by CLICKING HERE
Education facility managers, energy conservation workgroups and sustainability professionals are encouraged to participate directly in the ASHRAE standard development process. Start at ASHRAE’s public commenting facility:
The ASHRAE catalog is a priority title in our practice. This title appears on the standing agenda of our Infotech sessions. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
The bookwheel, also known as a revolving bookcase, was invented by an Italian scholar and polymath named Agostino Ramelli. Ramelli was born in 1531 in Ponte Tresa, a town in present-day Italy, and he lived during the Renaissance period.
Ramelli’s invention, described in his work titled “Le diverse et artificiose machine del capitano Agostino Ramelli” (The Various and Ingenious Machines of Captain Agostino Ramelli), was published in 1588. This book showcased a collection of 195 mechanical devices.
Ramelli’s work contributed to the growing interest in mechanical inventions during the Renaissance period. His bookwheel design remains a fascinating example of early engineering and ingenuity, highlighting the desire for knowledge and practical solutions in the pursuit of learning and scholarly endeavors.
The standard of care for wiring safety for data centers — a continually expanding presence in education communities even before the pandemic — is established in National Electrical Code Articles 645 (Information Technology Equipment), Article 646 (Modular Data Centers) and Article 647 (Sensitive Electronic Equipment). You will notice that these articles cover the topic comprehensively and bear the imprint of competing Producer-Interest groups. There are no User-Interest representatives on Code-Making Panel 12 that represent the final fiduciary in education communities even though education communities are one of the largest markets for information and communication technology systems.
Transcripts of technical committee action during the 2026 revision (CMP-16) are linked below because they will inform our recommendations for the 2026 National Electrical Code. Keep in mind that the Technical Correlating Committee is moving content around the Code in order to make the NEC easier to use by experts.
The transcripts of technical committee action during the 2023 revision are linked below because they will inform our recommendations for the 2026 National Electrical Code.
The issues that have been in play in these articles of the NEC are familiar to veterans of the “food fight” – occupancy classification, cable specifications, fire protection, ventilation, energy consumption, surge protection, licensing of engineers. etc. We look for market-making excesses by opposing stakeholders that seek to limit their risk while raising the (financial) risk to education communities.
We encourage our colleagues to participate in the NFPA code development process directly. We also encourage stakeholders in education communities — students, faculty and staff to join us during any of the teleconferences we co-host with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee 4 times monthly in both European and American time zones. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting.
Abstract: This paper presents a broad view of management of design and implementation of power systems for Data Centers. The paper outlines many challenges that are present because of the demanding requirements of Data Centers both in design and management, then introduces opportunities that recent technological advances have made possible. This paper presents several new approaches of ownership and responsibilities that directly affect financial viability of the Data Center.
I’m in charge of dinner tonight, so Little Miss H and I are going to make Tomato Soup and Grilled Cheese sandwiches! It’s such an easy dinner that she can do almost all of it herself, I’ll just need to talk her through it. Find my recipe in the comments! pic.twitter.com/GVAi3t0I8f
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send [email protected] a request for subscription details.
Since so much of what we do in standards setting is built upon a foundation of a shared understanding and agreement of the meaning of words (no less so than in technical standard setting) that time is well spent reflecting upon the origin of the nouns and verbs of that we use every day. Best practice cannot be discovered, much less promulgated, without its understanding secured with common language.
Because electrotechnology changes continually, definitions (vocabulary) in its best practice literature changes continually; not unlike any language on earth that adapts to the moment and place.
The changes reflect changes in technology or changes in how the technology works in practice; even how the manufacturers create adaptations to field conditions by combining functions. Any smart electrical component has a digital language embedded in it, for example.
Consider the 2023 National Electrical Code. Apart from many others the NEC will contain a major change to Article 100 (Definitions); the subject of elevated debate over the past three years.
When we refer “language” we must distinguish between formal language, informal language, colloquial language and dialect which may differ the language spoken, language written at the office and language used on the job site. “Terms of art”
Are these terms (or, “terms of art”) best understood in context (upstream articles in Chapters 4 through 8) — or should they be adjudicated by the 14 Principals of Code Making Panel 1? The answer will arrive in the fullness of time. Many changes to the National Electrical Code require more than one cycle to stabilize.
Code Making Panel 1 has always been the heaviest of all NEC panels. As explained n our ABOUT, the University of Michigan held a vote in CMP-1 for 20+ years (11 revision cycles) before moving to the healthcare facilities committee for the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee. Standards Michigan continues its involvement on behalf of the US education facility industry — the second largest building construction market. There is no other pure user-interest voice on any technical committee; although in some cases consulting companies are retained for special purposes.
To serve the purpose of making NFPA 70 more “useable” we respect the Standards Council decision to make this change if it contributes to the viability of the NFPA business model. We get to say this because no other trade association comes close to having as enduring and as strong a voice: NFPA stands above all other US-based SDO’s in fairness and consideration of its constituency. The electrical safety community in the United States is a mighty tough crowd.
If the change does not work, or work well enough, nothing should prohibit reversing the trend toward “re-centralizing” — or “de-centralizing” the definitions.
Public comment on the First Draft of the 2026 Edition will be received until August 28, 2024.
Technical Committees meet during the last half of October to respond to public comment on the First Draft of the 2026 National Electrical Code.
New update alert! The 2022 update to the Trademark Assignment Dataset is now available online. Find 1.29 million trademark assignments, involving 2.28 million unique trademark properties issued by the USPTO between March 1952 and January 2023: https://t.co/njrDAbSpwBpic.twitter.com/GkAXrHoQ9T
