Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: mattress storage

[Ben Young via Sprinklerforum]

Bruce thanks for sharing. This was an interesting story and I appreciate
the extra details.

Ben

On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 1:10 PM BRUCE VERHEI via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I’ve seen what about 50 of these stored, on side in a non-sprinklered
> building can do, after fire. Furniture store, just opened up for day. Units
> behind a partial height storeroom wall. Old CMU, timber truss auto sales
> bldg from 1920’s. About 120’ x 100’. At first whiff of smoke the evacuated.
> In moments could see flame and dark smoke above partition to ceiling. Owner
> made call to Fire from pvt office on opposite side of building. When he got
> off phone he had to climb out window. Not even as big as normal bathroom
> window. He must have been fairly slim. HQ fire station half a block away.
> They went out door, kitty corner then wrong way on one way street, did a
> unique to me reverse hose lay.* Two lanes, with parking spots on both
> sides, not heavily occupied at 0830. Roomate-FF got light moderate 2nd
> degree burns on lt. shoulder- partial  back as he hunched across street
> with 2 1/2” waiting for water.
>
> For years you could see where the tar burned out out the asphalt on side
> of road crown towards fire building.
>
> I know wire glass seems to have gone out of style. In this intense fire
> several small panes in building across 10’ alley crazed and held.
>
> Roomate missed several weeks before cleared for work.
>
> Olympia Fire got one mattress and borrowed a video camera. The guy holds a
> burning tissue until it burns to fingers, turns, and says it didn’t light.
> Behind him you can see 4”, then 12”, the full height flame. They wrecked
> their office wall clock they’d set up in field of view, but saved the
> camera. Expensive back then. Changed minds of those who thought a full
> Gerry can of gasoline must have been poured in window off alley.
>
> As you have gathered over the years I am a big spk’s believer. Am rather
> proud of having reviewed or field inspected install of ca 1m heads. Maybe
> with today’s high k-factor hds. Old 1/2” hds at 16-18’ AFF? I’m skeptical
> fire outcome would have been much different.
>
> Still can hear Oly Fire Asst/Ch saying Temporarily Solidified, Highly
> Volatile Petrochemicals when describing the foam mattress they’d burned.
>
> Best.
>
> Bruce Verhei
>
> * Not spk’s. Firefighters might find of historical interest. 4 & 5” single
> jacket hose with working pressures that would be useful to fire haven’t
> always been available.  Olympia Fire had a hose load common in Seattle
> Fire’s sphere of influence. Two by 2 1/2” beds, about 600’ each. One bed of
> 3 1/2”, 600’, 3 1/2” x 2 1/2” x 2 1/2” x 2 1/2” distributor (Half Hanson),
> with 2 x 2 1/2” 50’ leads. Carry 2 x 2 1/2 x 100’ slot loads with nozzles.
> We had same configuration on a Seattle spec Kenworth. Oly had American
> LaFrance.
>
> Oly Fire stopped at one corner of building, laid a 2 1/2” from reverse
> bed, to cover one corner and alley exposure,  forward to mid-store, 3 1/2
> and portable monitor, forward to next corner, fwd 2 1/2” with nozzle.
> Enough working line for FF to advance past bldg to cover far corner and
> alley at other corner of bldg. End up with monitor into front of building.
> 2 1/2”’s covering opposite exposuresand into building at opposite corners
> of building off different streets at this large, corner building. Engine
> reversed out to hydrant so
> ‘Oly Fire didn’t burn the paint and plastic off Engine O-12. The single
> company hose evolution impressed me. 40 years later I think it still does.
>
> With 2 x  2 1/2” lines at about  and 2” solid bore master stream right
> from start roof still burned off. Exposure businesses all closed for day,
> but back open Monday.
>
> Moral of story. Go with biggest line you are going to use as your first
> line, always.
>
> Later engines supplied two trucks’ master streams as heavy car deck roof
> burned through.
>
> bv
>
> On June 4, 2020 at 11:20 AM John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> As others have already stated, exposed expanded, Group A, Table
> A.20.4.5.1.  Depending on the storage height, Table 4.3.1.7.1 might be
> applicable.
>
> References are to the 2019 edition of NFPA 13.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
> John August Denhardt, PE
> *Vice President, Engineering and Technical Services*
>
> *American Fire Sprinkler Association*
> m: p: 301-343-1457
> 214-349-5965 ext 121
> w: firesprinkler.org
> 
> 
> 
>
>
> *HelpAFSA “Sound the Alarm” about sprinklers!*
>
> AFSA’s charitable partner the American Red Cross is educating millions
> through its Home Fire Preparedness Campaign. Help us support the inclusion
> of fire sprinklers in their messaging.  Donate 

Re: Structural Load

[BRUCE VERHEI via Sprinklerforum]

Skyler

We used to see WSRB or FM jobs with 0.39 gpm/sf over 5,600 sf as standard 
warehouse design. Based on previous engineers comments we normally said 
structural plans had to reserve 2.5 lbs/sf for sprinklers where they were 
deferred permit, which was always. 

2.5 was conservative. Sometimes there was some concern where a designer wanted 
to run several 8” lines parallel to each other for a ways. 

The only problem that sometimes arose was attachment points and methods, and 
sometimes distributing the load. And convincing a spk designer that if the 
z-purloin engineer said 3” and larger supported every 10’, sway bracing every 
20’, that No, the fire inspector and NFPA 13 were not going to overrule the 
Structural P.E. of Record.

When designers told me to call P.E. and tell him it had to be 20’ & 40’ were 
they just angry they might be over their estimate, or did they really think a 
fire inspector just gets to make everything up? I always wondered. 

Best.

Bruce Verhei

> On June 3, 2020 at 2:15 PM Skyler Bilbo via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> The structure needs to support a larger point load (with a very complex 
> explanation, it probably does).  Otherwise, if a guy working on the roof were 
> to stand on one foot, the structure could potentially collapse.  Structural 
> engineering calculations are extremely complex (I would say more so than our 
> hydraulic calculations).
> 
> The answer I can give that would be most helpful: I have had a similar 
> situation on a project. Because of the complexities of structural 
> engineering, I let the structural engineer deal with it (as they should, by 
> law).  I sent over our drawings, showing piping layout, hanger locations, 
> with a table of pipe weight per foot, and section 9.1.1.2 (a), nice and big 
> on the drawing (five times the weight of the water-filled pipe plus 250 lbs 
> at each point of attachment).  In the email I sent, I asked nicely how they 
> would like us to hang it.
> 
> Oftentimes, the structural engineer will come right back and say it will 
> work.  I have also had them come back and require the mains to be trapezed, 
> or supported by primary members (girders, not trusses).  Sometimes they will 
> send the lovely note/detail we see on all Wal-Mart jobs about hangers being 
> at/near panel points of the bar joists, or send a detail describing hanger 
> attachments to purlins.
> 
> 
> Commentary: I went to school for Structural Engineering (I don't 
> practice, and I'm not a Structural Engineer).  For my senior design project 
> (about 10 years ago), I worked with a company that makes the metal connector 
> plates that hold together wood trusses, along with the structural design 
> software to design the trusses, and corresponding plate sizes.  I brought up 
> our rule about five times the weight of the water filled pipe plus 250 lbs in 
> a meeting one time.  The head engineer asked one of the other guys if they 
> designed for this.  The reply was a long way of saying no, and there would be 
> plenty of cases where real truss designs would fail the calculations, if they 
> took this into account.  The head engineer let out an audible "Hm", and we 
> moved on.  In my later work with them, I learned that their designs (per ASCE 
> 7) have a built in safety factor, such that the trusses can typically hold 2 
> to 3 times what they are designed for.  This could help explain why it seems 
> like such a large problem in the design phase of projects, and not as much of 
> a problem in the real world (I imagine you could easily take down a structure 
> if you hang some 12" main and turn the water on, without the structure being 
> designed for it).
> 
> There is a disconnect between how structures are designed and the point 
> load described by NFPA 13.  As Ken alluded to, our seismic bracing 
> calculations vs. the actual structural design is probably a much larger 
> disconnect.  I'm sure there are other people that can detail this disconnect 
> much better than I can (Ken), but I believe ASCE-7 takes our pipe/hangers 
> into account as a uniform dead load, which is usually accounted for as part 
> of a "miscellaneous load" or "mechanical system" dead load for all of the 
> mechanical systems across the entire structure, which is expressed as some 
> number of pounds per square foot.  This 1 to 15 lbs/sq ft (or so) is usually 
> a safe assumption, but it can often be an issue at mains, where the loads can 
> be higher than what they have accounted for.  I have also seen this being a 
> larger load than the structural engineer expected (and designed for) in tall 
> warehouses, where lines are 2-1/2" or 3".  Long story short: from what little 
> I know, structures are not designed the way most of us in the sprinkler world 
> probably think they are.  And somehow, this probably isn't an issue over 
> 99.9% of the time.
> 
> 
> Again, this is complex, and not our job, so send it to the structural 
> engineer, 

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: mattress storage

[BRUCE VERHEI via Sprinklerforum]

I’ve seen what about 50 of these stored, on side in a non-sprinklered building 
can do, after fire. Furniture store, just opened up for day. Units behind a 
partial height storeroom wall. Old CMU, timber truss auto sales bldg from 
1920’s. About 120’ x 100’. At first whiff of smoke the evacuated. In moments 
could see flame and dark smoke above partition to ceiling. Owner made call to 
Fire from pvt office on opposite side of building. When he got off phone he had 
to climb out window. Not even as big as normal bathroom window. He must have 
been fairly slim. HQ fire station half a block away. They went out door, kitty 
corner then wrong way on one way street, did a unique to me reverse hose lay.* 
Two lanes, with parking spots on both sides, not heavily occupied at 0830. 
Roomate-FF got light moderate 2nd degree burns on lt. shoulder- partial  back 
as he hunched across street with 2 1/2” waiting for water. 

For years you could see where the tar burned out out the asphalt on side of 
road crown towards fire building.

I know wire glass seems to have gone out of style. In this intense fire several 
small panes in building across 10’ alley crazed and held. 

Roomate missed several weeks before cleared for work.

Olympia Fire got one mattress and borrowed a video camera. The guy holds a 
burning tissue until it burns to fingers, turns, and says it didn’t light. 
Behind him you can see 4”, then 12”, the full height flame. They wrecked their 
office wall clock they’d set up in field of view, but saved the camera. 
Expensive back then. Changed minds of those who thought a full Gerry can of 
gasoline must have been poured in window off alley. 

As you have gathered over the years I am a big spk’s believer. Am rather proud 
of having reviewed or field inspected install of ca 1m heads. Maybe with 
today’s high k-factor hds. Old 1/2” hds at 16-18’ AFF? I’m skeptical fire 
outcome would have been much different. 

Still can hear Oly Fire Asst/Ch saying Temporarily Solidified, Highly Volatile 
Petrochemicals when describing the foam mattress they’d burned.

Best. 

Bruce Verhei 

* Not spk’s. Firefighters might find of historical interest. 4 & 5” single 
jacket hose with working pressures that would be useful to fire haven’t always 
been available.  Olympia Fire had a hose load common in Seattle Fire’s sphere 
of influence. Two by 2 1/2” beds, about 600’ each. One bed of 3 1/2”, 600’, 3 
1/2” x 2 1/2” x 2 1/2” x 2 1/2” distributor (Half Hanson), with 2 x 2 1/2” 50’ 
leads. Carry 2 x 2 1/2 x 100’ slot loads with nozzles. We had same 
configuration on a Seattle spec Kenworth. Oly had American LaFrance. 

Oly Fire stopped at one corner of building, laid a 2 1/2” from reverse bed, to 
cover one corner and alley exposure,  forward to mid-store, 3 1/2 and portable 
monitor, forward to next corner, fwd 2 1/2” with nozzle. Enough working line 
for FF to advance past bldg to cover far corner and alley at other corner of 
bldg. End up with monitor into front of building. 2 1/2”’s covering opposite 
exposuresand into building at opposite corners of building off different 
streets at this large, corner building. Engine reversed out to hydrant so 
‘Oly Fire didn’t burn the paint and plastic off Engine O-12. The single company 
hose evolution impressed me. 40 years later I think it still does. 

With 2 x  2 1/2” lines at about  and 2” solid bore master stream right from 
start roof still burned off. Exposure businesses all closed for day, but back 
open Monday.

Moral of story. Go with biggest line you are going to use as your first line, 
always. 

Later engines supplied two trucks’ master streams as heavy car deck roof burned 
through.

bv


> On June 4, 2020 at 11:20 AM John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> As others have already stated, exposed expanded, Group A, Table 
> A.20.4.5.1.  Depending on the storage height, Table 4.3.1.7.1 might be 
> applicable.
> 
> References are to the 2019 edition of NFPA 13.
> 
> Thanks,
> John
> 
> John August Denhardt, PE
> Vice President, Engineering and Technical Services
> American Fire Sprinkler Association
> m: p: 301-343-1457
> 214-349-5965 ext 121
> w:http://firesprinkler.org
> https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/
>https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/   
>  https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/
> 
> 
> HelpAFSA “Sound the Alarm” about sprinklers!
> 
> AFSA’s charitable partner the American Red Cross is educating millions 
> through its Home Fire Preparedness Campaign. Help us support the inclusion of 
> fire sprinklers in their messaging.  Donate today! 
> https://www.redcross.org/donate/cm/afsa-pub.html/  
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 10:07 AM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum < 
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
> mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org > wrote:
> 
>   

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: mattress storage

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

As others have already stated, exposed expanded, Group A, Table
A.20.4.5.1.  Depending on the storage height, Table 4.3.1.7.1 might be
applicable.

References are to the 2019 edition of NFPA 13.

Thanks,
John

John August Denhardt, PE
*Vice President, Engineering and Technical Services*

*American Fire Sprinkler Association*
m: p: 301-343-1457
214-349-5965 ext 121
w: firesprinkler.org



   

*Help AFSA “Sound the Alarm” about sprinklers!*

AFSA’s charitable partner the American Red Cross is educating millions
through its Home Fire Preparedness Campaign. Help us support the inclusion
of fire sprinklers in their messaging.  Donate today!



On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 10:07 AM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Todd: I wonder how the compressed foam mattresses behave when the box
> burns away?
>
>
>
> FM Global Engineer: … (comes to startling realization) … Mother of God…
>
>
>
>
>
> This had me chuckling. You’ve piqued my curiosity. Maybe we should start a
> ‘Go Fund Me’ for full scale fire testing of compressed foam mattresses.
>
>
>
> -Kyle M
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
> Behalf Of *Fpdcdesign via Sprinklerforum
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 4, 2020 6:44 AM
> *To:* Sprinklerforum 
> *Cc:* Fpdcdesign ; Matt Grise 
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: mattress storage
>
>
>
> I am actually working on a foam mattress manufacturer right now. Expanded
> Group A plastic. You would have to check if they are exposed or in
> cardboard boxes. Some mattresses are compressed and put into boxes. I’m not
> sure how a compressed foam mattress would behave in a fire situation when
> the box burns away. Ceiling height plays a big role in design requirements.
>
>
> Todd G Williams, PE
>
> Fire Protection Design/Consulting
>
> Stonington, CT
>
> 860-535-2080 (ofc)
>
> 860-554-7054  (fax)
>
> 860-608-4559 (cell)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 4, 2020 at 9:33 AM,  > wrote:
>
> Group A (not 1)
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
> Behalf Of *Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:32 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Cc:* Matt Grise 
> *Subject:* RE: mattress storage
>
>
>
> Usually exposed, expanded group 1 plastic. NFPA 13 and FM have some
> protection criteria.
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
> Behalf Of *Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. via Sprinklerforum
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:00 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Cc:* Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. 
> *Subject:* mattress storage
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I need opinions on mattress storage warehouse in furniture store. I have a
> furniture store with a 8000sqft storage area with mattresses stacked on the
> floor to a maximum height of 12 feet.
>
>
>
> Mostly foam mattresses.
>
>
>
> Any idea where I would start to look for the design criteria?
>
>
>
> Any guidance would be appreciated.
>
>
>
>
>
> Troy
>
> ___ 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
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: mattress storage

[Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum]

Todd: I wonder how the compressed foam mattresses behave when the box burns 
away?

FM Global Engineer: … (comes to startling realization) … Mother of God…


This had me chuckling. You’ve piqued my curiosity. Maybe we should start a ‘Go 
Fund Me’ for full scale fire testing of compressed foam mattresses.

-Kyle M

From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Fpdcdesign via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 6:44 AM
To: Sprinklerforum 
Cc: Fpdcdesign ; Matt Grise 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: mattress storage

I am actually working on a foam mattress manufacturer right now. Expanded Group 
A plastic. You would have to check if they are exposed or in cardboard boxes. 
Some mattresses are compressed and put into boxes. I’m not sure how a 
compressed foam mattress would behave in a fire situation when the box burns 
away. Ceiling height plays a big role in design requirements.

Todd G Williams, PE
Fire Protection Design/Consulting
Stonington, CT
860-535-2080 (ofc)
860-554-7054  (fax)
860-608-4559 (cell)




On Jun 4, 2020 at 9:33 AM, mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>> wrote:
Group A (not 1)

Matt


From: Sprinklerforum 
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>>
 On Behalf Of Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:32 AM
To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Matt Grise mailto:m...@afpsprink.com>>
Subject: RE: mattress storage

Usually exposed, expanded group 1 plastic. NFPA 13 and FM have some protection 
criteria.

Matt

From: Sprinklerforum 
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>>
 On Behalf Of Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:00 AM
To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. 
mailto:trilliumf...@cwisp.ca>>
Subject: mattress storage






I need opinions on mattress storage warehouse in furniture store. I have a 
furniture store with a 8000sqft storage area with mattresses stacked on the 
floor to a maximum height of 12 feet.

Mostly foam mattresses.

Any idea where I would start to look for the design criteria?

Any guidance would be appreciated.


Troy
___ 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: mattress storage

[Steele, Andrew via Sprinklerforum]

Also consider looking at the applicable fire code.  If the ICC fire code, then 
this might be a high-piled combustible storage situation beginning at six feet 
(see high-piled storage definition in ICC Fire Code Chapter 2, and then Chapter 
32).  Pillows and mattress are in section 3203.6, further classified as a 
“high-hazard commodities” presenting special fire hazards beyond those of Class 
I, II, III or IV…

Andrew Steele






From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On 
Behalf Of Fpdcdesign via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 9:44 AM
To: Sprinklerforum
Cc: Fpdcdesign; Matt Grise
Subject: Re: mattress storage

I am actually working on a foam mattress manufacturer right now. Expanded Group 
A plastic. You would have to check if they are exposed or in cardboard boxes. 
Some mattresses are compressed and put into boxes. I’m not sure how a 
compressed foam mattress would behave in a fire situation when the box burns 
away. Ceiling height plays a big role in design requirements.

Todd G Williams, PE
Fire Protection Design/Consulting
Stonington, CT
860-535-2080 (ofc)
860-554-7054  (fax)
860-608-4559 (cell)




On Jun 4, 2020 at 9:33 AM, mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>> wrote:
Group A (not 1)

Matt


From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:32 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Matt Grise 
Subject: RE: mattress storage

Usually exposed, expanded group 1 plastic. NFPA 13 and FM have some protection 
criteria.

Matt

From: Sprinklerforum 
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>>
 On Behalf Of Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:00 AM
To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. 
mailto:trilliumf...@cwisp.ca>>
Subject: mattress storage






I need opinions on mattress storage warehouse in furniture store. I have a 
furniture store with a 8000sqft storage area with mattresses stacked on the 
floor to a maximum height of 12 feet.

Mostly foam mattresses.

Any idea where I would start to look for the design criteria?

Any guidance would be appreciated.


Troy
___ 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: mattress storage

[Fpdcdesign via Sprinklerforum]

  
  

  I am actually working on a foam mattress manufacturer right now. Expanded 
Group A plastic. You would have to check if they are exposed or in cardboard 
boxes. Some mattresses are compressed and put into boxes. I’m not sure how a 
compressed foam mattress would behave in a fire situation when the box burns 
away. Ceiling height plays a big role in design requirements.   
  
  
  
 Todd G Williams, PE  
Fire Protection Design/Consulting
  
Stonington, CT
  
860-535-2080 (tel:860-535-2080)  (ofc)
  
860-554-7054 (tel:860-554-7054) (fax)
  
860-608-4559 (tel:860-608-4559)  (cell)
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
>   
> On Jun 4, 2020 at 9:33 AM,   (mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)>  wrote:
>   
>   
> 
>   
>
> Group A (not 1)
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>   
>
> Matt   
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>   
>   
>
> From:  Sprinklerforum On 
> Behalf Of  Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum
>   Sent:  Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:32 AM
>   To:  sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>   Cc:  Matt Grise  
>   Subject:  RE: mattress storage
>
>   
>   
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
> Usually exposed, expanded group 1 plastic. NFPA 13 and FM have some 
> protection criteria.
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>   
>
> Matt
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>   
>   
>   
>
> From:  Sprinklerforum   (mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org)>   On Behalf Of  
> Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. via Sprinklerforum
>   Sent:  Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:00 AM
>   To:   sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
> (mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)
>   Cc:  Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc.   (mailto:trilliumf...@cwisp.ca)>
>   Subject:  mattress storage
>
>   
>   
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
> 
>
>   
>
> 
>
>   
>
> 
>
>   
>
>  I need opinions on mattress storage warehouse in furniture store. I have a 
> furniture store with a 8000sqft storage area with mattresses stacked on the 
> floor to a maximum height of 12 feet.
>
>   
>
> 
>
>   
>
>  Mostly foam mattresses.
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
> Any idea where I would start to look for the design criteria?
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
> Any guidance would be appreciated.
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
>   
>
> Troy
>
>   
>  ___ 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: mattress storage

[Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum]

Usually exposed, expanded group 1 plastic. NFPA 13 and FM have some protection 
criteria.

Matt

From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:00 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. 
Subject: mattress storage






I need opinions on mattress storage warehouse in furniture store. I have a 
furniture store with a 8000sqft storage area with mattresses stacked on the 
floor to a maximum height of 12 feet.

Mostly foam mattresses.

Any idea where I would start to look for the design criteria?

Any guidance would be appreciated.


Troy
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: mattress storage

[Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum]

Group A (not 1)

Matt


From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:32 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Matt Grise 
Subject: RE: mattress storage

Usually exposed, expanded group 1 plastic. NFPA 13 and FM have some protection 
criteria.

Matt

From: Sprinklerforum 
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>>
 On Behalf Of Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:00 AM
To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. 
mailto:trilliumf...@cwisp.ca>>
Subject: mattress storage






I need opinions on mattress storage warehouse in furniture store. I have a 
furniture store with a 8000sqft storage area with mattresses stacked on the 
floor to a maximum height of 12 feet.

Mostly foam mattresses.

Any idea where I would start to look for the design criteria?

Any guidance would be appreciated.


Troy
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

mattress storage

[Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. via Sprinklerforum]

 

 

 

 

 

I need opinions on mattress storage warehouse in furniture store. I have a
furniture store with a 8000sqft storage area with mattresses stacked on the
floor to a maximum height of 12 feet.

 

Mostly foam mattresses.

 

Any idea where I would start to look for the design criteria? 

 

Any guidance would be appreciated.

 

 

Troy 

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org