RE: I'm speechless (Steve Dobson Article)
I don't have time to tear it apart but here's some approximation: $65m spkr market in PA with IRC mandate We're a big state, so 40x this is nat'l market, divided by 3,000 home fire deaths a year = $866,666/life saved, once we work up to all homes sprinklered as stock rotates (we're a generation or 3 behind already). Now that may be cheap for the average cost of losing a house a wage-earner with $500k life insurance. However, what isn't reflected there is costs where there aren't a death. We just sprinklered a fire rebuild, and the insurance agent said he was approaching $1m in replacing the house, contents, replacement housing for a year, vehicles and garage that were near the fire and totaled, etc. and the family was out of state, unhurt. So Basing on the number of fire deaths alone doesn't reflect the savings to society, and cuts the $866k number by a good bit. I haven't had enough sleep to raise anyting to a power in a furmuler this AM. glc -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 8:21 PM To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: I'm speechless (Steve Dobson Article) James, At first glance there appears to be a lot of reasonable argument here. I'm going to re-visit it all and try to tear it apart. I hope I'm unsuccessful. On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Firestone, James james.firest...@fire.org.nz wrote: Ten years ago in New Zealand we started down the home sprinkler path. Interestingly enough almost twenty years earlier one of the research departments of one of the leading plumbing pipe manufacturers over here had designed a pre-action sprinkler system, charged with air using a simple pressure diaphragm valve and an alarm panel to alert the owner should the pressure reduce below what was required to keep the system dry - then just using a bike pump the owner could repressurize the system. Simple low cost kiwi ingenuity. Unfortunately it was an idea a little ahead of its time and didn't move out of the research room. Putting water on a fire has been around since we thought all of matter was composed in part from these two ingredients (earth and wind being the other two). The technology to do so automatically has been around for well over a 100 years so one would think that the time to bring this into homes where we experience most fires is a no-brainer! So why the resistance? I've had some time to ponder this question, so will lay out a roadmap for moving forward. 1) Some of it is ignorance - as I have yet to meet more than a handful of people who argue against the value and benefit of sprinklers. (once they understand them)! So clear, simple, progressive and concise educational targeted messages is key. 2) Cost will always be a barrier as someone has to pay and unless you could make sprinklers cost neutral by trade-ups/offs, insurance rebates etc. then individuals would rather choose what they buy - after all it is their dollar! Regulation can help here as the public on the whole don't want an anything goes society. The whole reason for creating laws is to have a just, safe, empowered and enabling community. Often however regulation is viewed as a bureaucracy, so again education which is simple, clear and promotes understanding of the why for the law can help. I've recently had the good fortune to meet many of the personalities in the home sprinkler industry in the Western world and all celebrate the successes which you have achieved in enabling the IRC to require home sprinklers. It is a fantastic step in the right direction - but as all involved in this fight have experienced much more work will need to be done. 3) System complexity. I know a lot of research money has gone into refining the sprinkler head droplet density, spray pattern, etc. But all the public really need to know is that it is a TAP. Sure you can clarify this by explaining it operates automatically from hot gases (given off by a fire), is located in the ceiling plane where the hot gases collect, has no moving parts, only works once, so wont leak. Looks nice, is out of sight, etc, etc. But what we should really be promoting is sprinkler technology, as the sprinkler head is the only unique addition to (what is already in a house). That's right plumbing! We need to connect with the homeowner to want to have the best plumbing they can afford - as few houses are not plumbed! Sprinkler technology is a natural and common sense addition to the evolution of (bringing) water into the home to increase its service and benefit to us. Just think about it. Plumbing was first brought into the home for the amenity of drinking, then cooking, then washing, then cleaning, then showering, then heating, then cooling, then flushing away waste, to this we can (with the humble heat TAP aka sprinkler head) add
RE: loose end 1 of 2
of course 2 of 2 will be the inevitable correction of this :( H*A*P*P*Y T*H*A*N*K*S*G*I*V*I*N*G -Original Message- From: Brad Casterline [mailto:bcasterl...@fsc-inc.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 4:24 PM To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org Subject: loose end 1 of 2 #calcs=(#hds(#hds-1))+1 If the order of activation does not matter. I am sure a mathematician could do it in a more elegant fashion. I do not have internet at home (so I did not have to learn a bunch of Greek first). I did it 'long division' for 5 heads (21 sets), then for 6 heads (31 sets), and found the equation that worked for both. I knew 1 head was one set and 2 heads was 3 sets, and it worked for them too. ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
RE: I'm speechless
It is off to the right where the guys picture is. He is obviously at the lower end of the gene pool. Todd Letterman Fire Prevention Engineer CFPS Riverside County Fire Department Fire never sleeps (951) 955-5273 FAX (951) 955-4886 todd.letter...@fire.ca.gov Life is not about waiting for the storm to pass but learning how to dance in the rain -Original Message- From: Matt Grise [mailto:m...@afpsprink.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 6:49 AM To: 'sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org' Subject: RE: I'm speechless I did not see any contact information on the website. Anyone know a phone number or email address for this guy? Matt Grisé PE*, LEED AP Sales Engineer Alliance Fire Protection *Licensed in KS MO 913.888.0647 ph 913.888.0618 f 913.927.0222 cell www. AFPsprink.com -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Reinhardt Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2010 8:38 AM To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org Subject: I'm speechless http://www.oceancitytoday.net/news/2010-11-19/public_eye IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended to be received only by persons entitled to receive the confidential information it may contain. E-mail messages may contain information that is confidential and legally privileged. Please do not read, copy, forward, or store this message unless you are an intended recipient of it. If you have received this message in error, please forward it to the sender and delete it completely from your computer system. ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
Sanding Booth
Hello, I wonder if anyone has experience with my situation and or thoughts on my assessment of it. We have a customer that built a sanding room and laid some beams spaced 4-0 apart on top. This would be open to the dry system above but they stapled visqueen to the beams for dust control. Our customer says it is not a problem because if there is a fire the plastic would burn away. I cannot find any code reference to support this. I think if they want dust control they need to put a proper lid on the beams and drop heads in to the booth. Thanks, Russell ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
Re: Sanding Booth
There is a complete Federal Standard for dust control. It is found both under the building code and the OSHA standards. The scenario you describe violates these standards. It is not just heads that are needed but a complete dust collection system with duct control etc... OSHA currently has combustible dust as an emphasis program and you always have the option of referring the facility to your local OSHA office for enforcement of these standards or the local AHJ which is also spelled out in the Federal standards as having the authority to enforce the dust standards. If you wish to discuss call and I can discuss easier on the phone then in an email (608.345.1412) Norm At 07:28 PM 11/24/2010, you wrote: Hello, I wonder if anyone has experience with my situation and or thoughts on my assessment of it. We have a customer that built a sanding room and laid some beams spaced 4-0 apart on top. This would be open to the dry system above but they stapled visqueen to the beams for dust control. Our customer says it is not a problem because if there is a fire the plastic would burn away. I cannot find any code reference to support this. I think if they want dust control they need to put a proper lid on the beams and drop heads in to the booth. Thanks, Russell ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
