RE: smooth ceiling
If it were why even say smooth ceilings but just say unobstructed.
I think that section of the standard (8.4.2) was written prior to when the
4 limit was added to obstructed and unobstructed.
Regardless, thanks Roland.
Ed Kramer
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Roland
Huggins
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 5:43 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: smooth ceiling
You have to take a convoluted path to get to the answer. To start with 4
is the break point between obstructed and unobstructed. I've been trying
for 4 cycles to get that clearly defined. You get there by the examples in
with the newly added Bar Joist in Obstructed where the chord is greater than
4 inches. Ignore the truss example in unobstructed that also says a chord
greater than 4 inches. That was fixed at the first draft for the 2016 ed.
We know that smooth is a SUBSET of unobstructed and it's definition says
free from significant irregularities, lumps, or indentation. Though being
irregular is no laughing matter, the amount is not quantified. The examples
in the annex still have pan construction (that's because the TC does not
believe that means construction with BIG INDENTATION despite the Handbook
showing it has an example (which I think they had that removed). Even then
the handbook said that one could not use sidewall or EC sprinklers with pan
construction so lets forget about that piece. The examples for beams and
trusses both use when spaced greater than 7-1/2 ft but that just applies to
the channel between the members and are required to be spaced that far apart
to qualify as unobstructed. Still no closer to an answer. Let's complicate
the issue further and point out that we also have to consider the impact on
the water discharge pattern from passing through multiple structural
members. Hopefully that makes you think of another type of spray sprinkle
that also requires a smooth ceiling - aka the extended coverage sprinkler.
Fortunately 8.4.3 explicitly states that they are required to be used with a
smooth ceiling AND allows them within trusses and bar joists if the web
member is not greater than 1 inch. That addresses the water discharge
question and the ability to use sprinklers listed for smooth ceilings.
Unfortunately, it does not define a maximum depth for the chord. I would
argue it is not up to 4 inches. If it were why even say smooth ceilings but
just say unobstructed. I would also say the narrow dimension of the 2x4 is
acceptable as typically oriented in trusses and angle iron on joists are
often around 1-1/2 inch.
As such, seems a good topic to have with your AHJ before the job begins.
As a member of the 13 technical committee, I should say that this is just my
opinion and should not be considered that of the NFPA or any of its over 200
technical committees.
Roland
Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering
American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives
Dallas, TX
http://www.firesprinkler.org
On Jan 29, 2014, at 12:45 PM, Ed Kramer kd...@knology.net wrote:
Another reality check, please.
I've got 14 deep exposed open-web wood trusses spaces 24 O.C. Top
bottom cords are 2x4s (hor dimension is 4, vert is 2). Light
hazard. The plywood decking on top the trusses is flat and horizontal.
Can standard-coverage sidewall sprinklers be used to protect this?
8.4.2 (1) ('13 edition) says ceiling must be smooth.
The definition for smooth ceiling given in 3.3.5.4 doesn't help.
I know there's been at least one attempt to provide a more definitive
definition of smooth ceiling, but it got shot down.
For what it's worth, obstructed truss construction (A.3.7.1(9)) has a
top cord greater than 4 deep, unobstructed truss construction
(A.3.7.2(5)) has a top cord 4 or less in depth.
Ed Kramer
Lawrence, KS
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
Re: NFPA 25 Antifreeze Comment(s) RETORT
Gosh, I really like this forum...so many different perspectives. I guess the first company to manufacture a listed antifreeze solution will make a gillizion dollars...and my bet is that it will be produced by either Coca Cola or Pepsi Cola. :) My apologies in advance. rick ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
Re: NFPA 25 Antifreeze Comment(s) RETORT
They'll use high fructose corn sweetener and it will burn like sugar also. If I'm not mistaken the food industry uses propylene glycol in orders of magnitude relative to the anti-freeze industry, much less anti-freeze for sprinkler systems. On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Matsuda, Richard richard.mats...@dallascityhall.com wrote: Gosh, I really like this forum...so many different perspectives. I guess the first company to manufacture a listed antifreeze solution will make a gillizion dollars...and my bet is that it will be produced by either Coca Cola or Pepsi Cola. :) My apologies in advance. rick ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ 253.680.7346 253.576.9700 (cell) Member: ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC, WFSC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) A problem well stated is a problem half solved. -Charles F. Kettering, inventor and engineer (1876-1958) ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
Re: NFPA 25 Antifreeze Comment(s) RETORT
Rick, my gut feeling it will be one of the sprinkler manufacturers to come out with the first listed AF. They do like to corner the market on new technologies. The new AF better be gluten-free as well, for the less glutinous fires we deal with now in modern construction. ;) Benjamin Young On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 10:24 AM, rongreenman . rongreen...@gmail.comwrote: They'll use high fructose corn sweetener and it will burn like sugar also. If I'm not mistaken the food industry uses propylene glycol in orders of magnitude relative to the anti-freeze industry, much less anti-freeze for sprinkler systems. On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Matsuda, Richard richard.mats...@dallascityhall.com wrote: Gosh, I really like this forum...so many different perspectives. I guess the first company to manufacture a listed antifreeze solution will make a gillizion dollars...and my bet is that it will be produced by either Coca Cola or Pepsi Cola. :) My apologies in advance. rick ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ 253.680.7346 253.576.9700 (cell) Member: ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC, WFSC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) A problem well stated is a problem half solved. -Charles F. Kettering, inventor and engineer (1876-1958) ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
RE: NFPA 25 Antifreeze Comment(s) RETORT
T-omorrow Y-our C-ornsweetener's O-urs Steve -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ben Young Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 9:05 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA 25 Antifreeze Comment(s) RETORT Rick, my gut feeling it will be one of the sprinkler manufacturers to come out with the first listed AF. They do like to corner the market on new technologies. The new AF better be gluten-free as well, for the less glutinous fires we deal with now in modern construction. ;) Benjamin Young On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 10:24 AM, rongreenman . rongreen...@gmail.comwrote: They'll use high fructose corn sweetener and it will burn like sugar also. If I'm not mistaken the food industry uses propylene glycol in orders of magnitude relative to the anti-freeze industry, much less anti-freeze for sprinkler systems. On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Matsuda, Richard richard.mats...@dallascityhall.com wrote: Gosh, I really like this forum...so many different perspectives. I guess the first company to manufacture a listed antifreeze solution will make a gillizion dollars...and my bet is that it will be produced by either Coca Cola or Pepsi Cola. :) My apologies in advance. rick ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl er.org -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ 253.680.7346 253.576.9700 (cell) Member: ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC, WFSC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) A problem well stated is a problem half solved. -Charles F. Kettering, inventor and engineer (1876-1958) ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl er.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler .org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
NFPA 13 Future Development
Perhaps a question for Roland or other committee members. What is the big picture with regard to the coordination of FM 2-0, 8-9, etc. with NFPA 13? Are we going to see two competing sprinkler standards in a few years? Will the sprinkler requirements in NFPA 30 be merged with NFPA 13 at some point? Bill Brooks ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
RE: NFPA 13 Future Development
They compete? And I don't see them coming together. NFPA and FM have different interests and priorities. Not vastly different. Can you see QR reduction going away or FM adding it? I don't see it anytime soon as one example. I hope 30 does not come in. Book is already too big IMHO. I think there should be one book that covers LH, OH, EH, calcs and plans and basics like size and spacing. Another book with NOTHING repeated that covers the specialties like tires, HPS, rolled paper.Then I might see 30 coming in to that book. Then a third book for ships, lol. Might even take out acceptance and testing and move to NFPA 3 or NFPA 25 or something like that. I was around in the 231C days, not suggesting going back to that but something between the two would be nice. I should say I'm not on a committee, so just my thoughts. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell 8201 Norman Center Drive Bloomington, MN 55437 Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com Proud to be one of FORTUNE's 100 Best Companies to Work For *Registered in: MN -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bill Brooks Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2014 11:25 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: NFPA 13 Future Development Perhaps a question for Roland or other committee members. What is the big picture with regard to the coordination of FM 2-0, 8-9, etc. with NFPA 13? Are we going to see two competing sprinkler standards in a few years? Will the sprinkler requirements in NFPA 30 be merged with NFPA 13 at some point? Bill Brooks ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
