[Sprinklerforum] Re: Multiple sprinkler spacings

[Dewayne Martinez]

I think Todd is right too.  No different than finding the spacing of a head 
next to the wall.  Use the greater distance of either 2x the distance of the 
head off the wall or the spacing between that head and the next head in the 
line.

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[cid:image002.png@01DA7C2D.084D7F00]



From: John Denhardt 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 6:15 PM
To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers 

Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Re: Multiple sprinkler spacings

Todd - I'm with you.  I was taught each sprinkler has to be individually 
checked and verified.  We use the actual spacing per sprinkler for hydraulic 
calculation purposes,

The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal interpretation 
in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects. This is 
provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no liability for this 
opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be considered the official 
position of the AFSA, and/or NFPA or its technical committees.AFSA cannot 
provide design or consulting engineering services, and this opinion should 
therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as such.

Thanks,
John

[https://www.dropbox.com/s/g4h8r7hdtsr6154/AFSA_L.png?raw=1]
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<https://link.edgepilot.com/s/a7a93a02/x2dwAiEI-0KnGtpXRcTBsQ?u=http://firesprinkler.org/>

Treat Your Apprentices Like VIPs!
AFSA’s Virtual Instruction Program (VIP) for Apprentices is training that comes 
straight from our expert instructors. They lead the way to ensure your men and 
women are trained, letting you focus on OJT. Click 
here<https://link.edgepilot.com/s/d7ee130c/k1KQjqAq70SM3epPrGJS6w?u=https://www.firesprinkler.org/sprinkler-apprentice-training/>
 to learn more and enroll.


On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 4:58 PM Fpdcdesign 
mailto:fpdcdes...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I am working on a project which is a retail store being renovated for a new 
tenant. The previous retail tenant had been in the space for at least 20 years. 
The existing sprinklers below the ceiling (to remain) are spaced at 10 ft in 
one direction and alternate 10 ft and 14 ft (10-14-10-14…) in the other. I made 
the comment that the sprinkler spacing exceeds the 130 max requirement of NFPA 
13 and it needs to be modified. The architect (and his “value engineer”) 
decided that 1/2 the distance on one side is 7 ft and on the other side is 5 
ft, which equals 12, times 10 ft in the other direction equals 120 sqft and all 
is fine. The Fire Marshal is kind of buys into it because he is new and his 
department blew it 20 years ago. Unfortunately 13 doesn’t address their being 
to possibility of different spacings between sprinklers (such as ‘maximum’ 
distance between sprinklers when determining S and L). Any thoughts, ideas or 
references I am missing as I walk into this battle?

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

_
SprinklerForum mailing list:
https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org<https://link.edgepilot.com/s/e919d08a/XJKcGQovaUCZTzxIawXb5A?u=https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org>
To unsubscribe send an email to 
sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org<mailto:sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org>

_
SprinklerForum mailing list:
https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
To unsubscribe send an email to sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org

[Sprinklerforum] Re: Exposed BlazeMaster

[Dewayne Martinez]

>From the Tyco BlazeMaster handbook
[cid:image001.png@01DA7C2B.3D04E5A0]
I know this isn't a system riser but the concept is the same.  Maybe reach out 
to BlazeMaster and see what they say.

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[cid:image003.png@01DA7C2B.3D0B9C60]



From: Brian Harris 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 10:41 AM
To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers 

Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Re: Exposed BlazeMaster

Matt-
I was thinking I'd be ok based on that, just wanted an expert opinion.

Thank you,

Brian Harris, CET
BVS Systems Inc.

From: matthew.will...@ferguson.com<mailto:matthew.will...@ferguson.com> 
mailto:matthew.will...@ferguson.com>>
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 11:35 AM
To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org<mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Re: Exposed BlazeMaster

>From description, vertically, no.

Horizontally, subject to stipulations on page 10.

R/
Matt

Please rate our customer 
service<https://link.edgepilot.com/s/e1e81110/5YQO6nV_ZEyauWoRbzCNTA?u=https://survey.medallia.com/?emailsignature%26fc=3539%26bg=Fire%2520and%2520Fabrication>

Matthew J. Willis, CWBSP, CET
Engineering Manager - Southwest Region
FERGUSON FIRE DESIGN, LLC
A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Ferguson Fire & Fabrication, LLC
3508 Hwy. 557
West Monroe, LA. 71292
C: 307-236-8249
matthew.will...@ferguson.com<mailto:matthew.will...@ferguson.com>
www.FergusonFire.com<https://link.edgepilot.com/s/bb0e8831/aowCLYD_oEGnAnOBtGtNaw?u=http://www.fergusonfire.com/>


From: Brian Harris mailto:bhar...@bvssystemsinc.com>>
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 9:31 AM
To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org<mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Exposed BlazeMaster

Caution:  This email originated from outside of the organization.  DO NOT click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize and trust the sender.

Quick question;
Doing a retrofit to an apartment (13R) and was wondering if we could run 
BlazeMaster exposed in a closet that has the hot water tank and a sidewall 
head. I've read the product manual and some places it seems ok exposed and some 
not so much.

Thank you,

Brian Harris, CET
BVS Systems Inc.
bvssystemsinc.com<https://link.edgepilot.com/s/2a955fc2/9oxjCIMoT0W80mWzuy79dg?u=http://bvssystemsinc.com/>
Phone: 704.896.9989
Fax: 704.896.1935


_
SprinklerForum mailing list:
https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
To unsubscribe send an email to sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org

[Sprinklerforum] Re: FDC for Standpipe

[Dewayne Martinez]

Would a 5”x4” Storz be 750gpm because of the Storz connection size or 500gpm 
because of the pipe?

From: John Denhardt 
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2024 10:39 AM
To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers 

Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Re: FDC for Standpipe

Here is the reference:
NFPA 14 - 2024
10.7.3.1.1

Where a 4 in. (100 mm) inlet is used, the assumed flow per inlet shall be 500 
gpm (1900 L/min).
10.7.3.1.2

Where a 5 in. (125 mm) inlet is used, the assumed flow per inlet shall be 750 
gpm (2850 L/min).

The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal interpretation 
in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects. This is 
provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no liability for this 
opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be considered the official 
position of the AFSA, and/or NFPA or its technical committees.AFSA cannot 
provide design or consulting engineering services, and this opinion should 
therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as such.

Thanks,
John

[https://www.dropbox.com/s/g4h8r7hdtsr6154/AFSA_L.png?raw=1]
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


Treat Your Apprentices Like VIPs!
AFSA’s Virtual Instruction Program (VIP) for Apprentices is training that comes 
straight from our expert instructors. They lead the way to ensure your men and 
women are trained, letting you focus on OJT. Click 
here
 to learn more and enroll.


On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 11:25 AM John Denhardt 
mailto:jdenha...@firesprinkler.org>> wrote:
To all - review NFPA 14 -2024 as it has new requirements for 4" and 5" storz 
connections.
4" is limited to 500 GPM per connection
5" is limited to 750 GPM per connection

Unfortunately, I'm at a conference where my internet connection is very 
limited, otherwise I would give you a section reference.


The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal interpretation 
in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee Projects. This is 
provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no liability for this 
opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be considered the official 
position of the AFSA, and/or NFPA or its technical committees.AFSA cannot 
provide design or consulting engineering services, and this opinion should 
therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as such.

Thanks,
John

[https://www.dropbox.com/s/g4h8r7hdtsr6154/AFSA_L.png?raw=1]
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


Treat Your Apprentices Like VIPs!
AFSA’s Virtual Instruction Program (VIP) for Apprentices is training that comes 
straight from our expert instructors. They lead the way to ensure your men and 
women are trained, letting you focus on OJT. Click 
here
 to learn more and enroll.


On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 11:09 AM Ken Wagoner 
mailto:k...@parsleyconsulting.com>> wrote:
Brian,

Yes, I have been required to provide such a connection in the past.  It has 
been rare, and it was a gorilla sized high rise building.

For me arguing with the AHJ over this seemed pointless.

sincerely,
Ken Wagoner, SET
Parsley Consulting
500 West Mechanic Street
Harrisonville, Missouri 64701-2235
Phone: (760) 745-6181
Visit the 
website


On 3/14/2024 10:01 AM, Brian Harris wrote:
Anybody ever had an AHJ required a 4-way FDC with (4) Storz connections to feed 
a standpipe? I get the (1) 2-1/2” connection per 250 gpm but you’re also 
allowed a “large diameter” hose connection. In this case the current FDC is a 
5” Storz on 6” underground.

Thank you,

Brian Harris, CET
BVS Systems Inc.
bvssystemsinc.com
Phone: 704.896.9989
Fax: 704.896.1935



_

SprinklerForum mailing list:

[Sprinklerforum] Re: Backflow In Stairwell

[Dewayne Martinez]

I think that the only pipe allowed in a stairwell has to be associated with the 
stairwell IE: standpipe or piping supplying sprinklers for the stairwell.  We 
are on the 2015 IBC and I was flagged by the state reviewer for running a bulk 
pipe in the stairwell. Had to move it out into a closet.

From: Brian Harris 
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2024 1:03 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Backflow In Stairwell

Is there anything inherently wrong with putting the backflow & riser in a 
stairwell as along as all clearance requirements are met? I don't see anything 
in NFPA-13 and don't currently have access to the Building Code.

Thank you,

Brian Harris, CET
BVS Systems Inc.
bvssystemsinc.com
Phone: 704.896.9989
Fax: 704.896.1935


_
SprinklerForum mailing list:
https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
To unsubscribe send an email to sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org

[Sprinklerforum] Re: Braded Flex Drops

[Dewayne Martinez]

If braided flex and we can just swing the into a new tile then we reuse, 
otherwise we replace with new.

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[cid:image002.png@01DA318A.811C62E0]



From: Jamie Seidl 
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2023 7:50 AM
To: Sprinklerforum 
Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Braded Flex Drops

Just wanted to take a quick pole on the forum from contractors.
When you go into an existing building that has previously been renovated with 
flex drops, are you reusing them to swing to a new tile (not removing from the 
existing outlet)?
Are you reusing and removing from an existing outlet?

Thanks,
Jamie Seidl



_
SprinklerForum mailing list:
https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
To unsubscribe send an email to sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org

[Sprinklerforum] NFPA 13 (2022ed) sections 28.2.4.2.4 vs 28.2.4.2.5

[Dewayne Martinez]

When do you apply one vs the other?  If I am interpreting correctly you apply 
28.4.2.4 when you don't have the available floor area and 28.2.4.2.5 when you 
have the available floor area but not the minimum flow?

Thanks,
Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/





_
SprinklerForum mailing list:
https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
To unsubscribe send an email to sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org

[Sprinklerforum] Re: [External]Re: Vertical lift modules

[Dewayne Martinez]

Thanks for the info.  Gives me a place to start looking.

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[cid:image001.jpg@01D95AFC.CB8BDE60]

From: Nicky Marshall 
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2023 2:21 PM
To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers 

Subject: [External][Sprinklerforum] Re: Vertical lift modules

I did a vertical lift recently that was a parts store. 'Modula' brand.
If that is what you have, see FMDS 08-33 for vertical carousel storage.
With the configuration we had (non-combustible containers), we ended up in FMDS 
08-34 treating as a vertically enclosed ASRS storage unit with storage 
sprinklers at the top on reduced spacing and an interface for automatic 
shutdown.
The manufacturer had an information page on the places we were permitted to 
penetrate the top of the unit.

Hope that helps

Kind regards

[cid:image002.jpg@01D95AFC.CB8BDE60]Nicky Marshall
Southern Regional Manager

PROTECH DESIGN LIMITED
Specialist Fire Protection Consultants
Mobile Phone: +64 (0)21 433 488  Email: 
ni...@protechdesign.co.nz<mailto:ni...@protechdesign.co.nz>  Web: 
www.protechdesign.co.nz<https://link.edgepilot.com/s/af6a0eec/3LfIpn6JekWA3UFgtI4FcQ?u=http://www.protechdesign.co.nz/>
Address:105A Alabama Rd, Redwoodtown, Blenheim 7201, NZ
[A close up of a signDescription automatically generated]
"I always wondered why somebody doesn't do something about that. Then I 
realised I was somebody" Lily Tomlin

From: Dewayne Martinez 
mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>>
Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2023 5:15 AM
To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org<mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
Cc: Dewayne Martinez 
mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>>
Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Vertical lift modules

I have a customer who will be installing 2 VLM in there facility.  Is there any 
guidance in NFPA or FM for sprinkler protection in these?  All I can find 
online is for gas systems.

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/<https://link.edgepilot.com/s/fb5c5c15/nCtUDd9f5Ui6G14j8c6Q1w?u=http://www.total-mechanical.com/>

[cid:image004.jpg@01D95AFC.CB8BDE60]

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.


_
SprinklerForum mailing list:
https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
To unsubscribe send an email to sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org

[Sprinklerforum] Vertical lift modules

[Dewayne Martinez]

I have a customer who will be installing 2 VLM in there facility.  Is there any 
guidance in NFPA or FM for sprinkler protection in these?  All I can find 
online is for gas systems.

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[cid:image003.jpg@01D958C1.B3221CF0]


_
SprinklerForum mailing list:
https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
To unsubscribe send an email to sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org

[Sprinklerforum] NFPA 22 minimum tank fill line size

[Dewayne Martinez]

NFPA 22, 2013 ed - Section 14.4
Tank will be filled by a well pump.
Does the tank fill line have to be 2" minimum per 14.4.6.2 or can it be smaller 
if it meet the requirements of 14.4.2?

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[cid:image003.jpg@01D94822.87302E70]


_
SprinklerForum mailing list:
https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
To unsubscribe send an email to sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org

[Sprinklerforum] Re: [External]RE: Can OH II listed EC sprinklers be used for storage application?

[Dewayne Martinez]

Thanks Travis,
I was just trying to convince myself that if it was still at or under the OH2 
curve and I am allowed to design anywhere along that curve it could still be 
called OH2.

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[cid:image001.jpg@01D941CF.FD15F290]

From: Travis Mack 
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2023 3:49 PM
To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers 

Cc: Dewayne Martinez 
Subject: [External]RE: Can OH II listed EC sprinklers be used for storage 
application?

The EC sprinklers are listed at a specific density, so you can't change that.  
You can calculate 2000 sq ft, but it will still be the minimum flow / pressure 
at a given spacing per the data sheet.  Also, they are not listed for storage.  
So, they can not be used for storage applications.


Travis Mack, SET
M.E.P.CAD |
181 N. Arroyo Grande Blvd. #105 I Henderson, NV 89074
www.mepcad.com<https://link.edgepilot.com/s/82879486/cWBkTDBhYECX8h7rQfqBSg?u=http://www.mepcad.com/>
 | m: 480.547.9348

AutoSPRINK  |  AutoSPRINK FAB  |  AutoSPRINK RVT  |  AlarmCAD

Book appointment time in my calendar
https://calendly.com/t_mack_mepcad<https://link.edgepilot.com/s/c6c1baa9/-yDGAv1XmECNIm1IGeQsnQ?u=https://calendly.com/t_mack_mepcad>

From: Dewayne Martinez 
mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2023 2:46 PM
To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org<mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
Cc: Dewayne Martinez 
mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>>
Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Can OH II listed EC sprinklers be used for storage 
application?

I have a customer that wants to store non-encapsulated ,Class II on 
single/double row racks with 8ft aisles. to 15ft high.  When I work out the 
numbers and apply Fig  16.2.1.3.4.1 (NFPA 13, 2013ed)  I get a density of 
0.189/2000 for high temperature sprinklers. The original system was designed 
using extended coverage K14 sprinklers, 18x18 at  OH 2 density.  If I go up the 
OH2 curve to 2000 sq ft I get a 0.19/2000 density.  Can I pick up the 
additional EC sprinklers for the 2000 sq ft at the required EHP for the OH 2 
spacing and call it good if the calcs work?

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/<https://link.edgepilot.com/s/199820fc/wuTebtA6o0GSgxVwMTxYxw?u=http://www.total-mechanical.com/>

[cid:image004.jpg@01D941CC.736A9940]

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.


_
SprinklerForum mailing list:
https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
To unsubscribe send an email to sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org

[Sprinklerforum] Can OH II listed EC sprinklers be used for storage application?

[Dewayne Martinez]

I have a customer that wants to store non-encapsulated ,Class II on 
single/double row racks with 8ft aisles. to 15ft high.  When I work out the 
numbers and apply Fig  16.2.1.3.4.1 (NFPA 13, 2013ed)  I get a density of 
0.189/2000 for high temperature sprinklers. The original system was designed 
using extended coverage K14 sprinklers, 18x18 at  OH 2 density.  If I go up the 
OH2 curve to 2000 sq ft I get a 0.19/2000 density.  Can I pick up the 
additional EC sprinklers for the 2000 sq ft at the required EHP for the OH 2 
spacing and call it good if the calcs work?

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[cid:image002.jpg@01D94154.75E17B30]


_
SprinklerForum mailing list:
https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
To unsubscribe send an email to sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org

RE: [External]RE: Exposed CPVC pipe and residential upright sprinklers

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

I just received information from the Blazemaster rep that we should follow the 
rules for quick response upright sprinklers when using residential upright 
sprinklers.

Thank you,
 
Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager
 
TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/ 
   


-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2022 1:35 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Matt Grise 
Subject: [External]RE: Exposed CPVC pipe and residential upright sprinklers

They are a newer product... maybe have not been added to the install guide yet? 
Have you called a manufacturer?



Matt Grise
Alliance Fire Protection
130 w 9th Ave
North Kansas City, MO
913.526.7443

sent from mobile device



 Original message 
From: Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum 

Date: 1/21/22 12:34 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Dewayne Martinez 
Subject: Exposed CPVC pipe and residential upright sprinklers

I don't see an option for using residential upright sprinkler on exposed CPVC 
pipe in any of the manufactures installation manuals.  Am I missing something 
or is QR uprights my only option?


Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/a78b9ae2/DFvmkjjXJk_YMzdspaPGvA?u=https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%253a%252f%252fwww.total-mechanical.com%252f%26c=E%2C1%2CI79na4vKieqBXg17CUMFaePStL2KXgTmBoYikkWtWeTtJqyhOiHQLHhQ2rtupf4r38iP9BHKPW0hbJzkUVKbAxh6xRxyjVUqHAtLtFRyAfhm8_QzwLBhzg%2C%2C%26typo=1



___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/0c5365bd/Tze7eVTIMkqdlgPEZTx_Ow?u=https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%253a%252f%252flists.firesprinkler.org%252flistinfo.cgi%252fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org%26c=E%2C1%2Cxt49ULo4tYlgvw1vORviyWzmlujjY-48Ho1ZcNNth-NanVn_BNMx1jespAVxgSbR4bzvjHcrpEb8Ri99uEu-OzE4enl9EIFnCoRYu3-F7DSnj-zP%26typo=1
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/e7314454/xby0LHgqp0iS4EBBnhC1bQ?u=http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.

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

RE: [External]RE: Exposed CPVC pipe and residential upright sprinklers

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

I also sent the question to Blazemaster to get their opinion.  I figured it was 
because there was only one manufacture that makes them as far as I know so it 
doesn't pay to do the testing yet.  I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss 
something that pointed me to use the same rules as QR upright  sprinklers  with 
exposed CPVC.


Thank you,
 
Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager
 
TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/ 
   


-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Cary Webber via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2022 12:48 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Cary Webber 
Subject: [External]RE: Exposed CPVC pipe and residential upright sprinklers

This will be an interesting discussion. Could it be that since fire would be 
expected from below, uprights are not permitted? Or is it simply an oversight 
since there are so few residential upright sprinklers available? Or is it that 
the piping would generally be expected to be installed high and one wouldn't 
use uprights?  I don't know but am curious to see where this goes. Definitely a 
question for the CPVC manufacturers though.



Cary Webber CFPS Director, Technical Services Reliable Automatic Sprinkler Co., 
Inc.
1470 Smith Grove Road, Liberty, SC  29657
Tel: 864-843-5161



-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2022 1:34 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Dewayne Martinez 
Subject: Exposed CPVC pipe and residential upright sprinklers

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the 
content is safe.


I don't see an option for using residential upright sprinkler on exposed CPVC 
pipe in any of the manufactures installation manuals.  Am I missing something 
or is QR uprights my only option?


Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/b1dcef04/tMTP38wVY0SSkKbG91IZ5A?u=https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.total-mechanical.com%252F%26amp%3Bdata=04%257C01%257Ccwebber%2540reliablesprinkler.com%257C74532029a96c4873531908d9dd0ca5a7%257C361f92efbca442cdaf0d8099acee2244%257C0%257C0%257C637783869220977474%257CUnknown%257CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%253D%257C3000%26amp%3Bsdata=ITFKJtFWotaU%252BKUSri2wSlOAUY8P2I6MNbo1WZ53KNA%253D%26amp%3Breserved=0



___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/b09a76a1/uYgWeW-bTkmNTQq1JvzopA?u=https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%253A%252F%252Flists.firesprinkler.org%252Flistinfo.cgi%252Fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org%26amp%3Bdata=04%257C01%257Ccwebber%2540reliablesprinkler.com%257C74532029a96c4873531908d9dd0ca5a7%257C361f92efbca442cdaf0d8099acee2244%257C0%257C0%257C637783869220977474%257CUnknown%257CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%253D%257C3000%26amp%3Bsdata=%252Fs0sUxohyRM99%252FFrUdnUwdCBcCW1lWxhyHLORMjeK6c%253D%26amp%3Breserved=0
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/2c719d7b/dK-oSGvHd0KTRNYektL3uw?u=http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click 
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content 
is safe.

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

Exposed CPVC pipe and residential upright sprinklers

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

I don't see an option for using residential upright sprinkler on exposed CPVC 
pipe in any of the manufactures installation manuals.  Am I missing something 
or is QR uprights my only option?


Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/



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

CMSA spacing obstruction rules

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

NFPA 13 (13ed) section 8.11.5



Is it just me or do these rules seem even more restrictive that ESFR?
There also appears to be some gaps on how to treat certain obstructions.

Here are some of the areas I need some clarification from the forum on…..

8.11.5.2- How do you treat an obstruction >8in but <24in in width with the
bottom of the obstruction located within 24in of the sprinkler deflector?

8.11.5.3.2-. Does this table mean that if my deflector is greater than 6in
above the obstruction bottom the sprinkler must be located at lease 36”
away from the edge of the obstruction?

8.11.5.3.4 – apply this for obstructions located >24in below the deflector
unless they fall under 8.15.5.2.1.3

8.11.5.3.5 – Does this section supersede the requirements of 8.11.5.2.1.3
and  8.11.5.3.4 for anything running parallel  to the branch lines?







Thank you,



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

RE: Does a remote free standing FDC require a valve pit?

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

Do you wrap the ball drip in landscaping fabric to keep it from getting
clogged with sediment?

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/



-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Jamie Seidl via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 11:27 AM
To: Sprinklerforum 
Cc: Jamie Seidl 
Subject: Re: Does a remote free standing FDC require a valve pit?

We've typically installed a ball drip in gravel similar to a french drain
at the low point.

On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:17 AM Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I see a trend starting in our area where the architect is specifying a
> remote free standing FDC without a valve pit when the check valve can
> be placed inside the building. Upon talking to my field superintendent
> he was concerned that some check valves let multiple gallons of water
> through whenever a system is drained and refilled and that the remote
> pipe may eventually fill up and freeze.  We were toying with the idea
> of installing a return bend in the FDC pipe downstream of the check
> before it leaves the building to help prevent this.  A  ball valve
> would be installed between the return bend and check to drain out the
> pipe.  Anyone else have insight on this?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Dewayne Martinez
> Fire Protection Design Manager
>
> TOTAL Mechanical
> Building Integrity
>
> W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
> Pewaukee, WI  53072
> dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
> Ph:  262-522-7110
> Cell: 414-406-5208
> http://www.total-mechanical.com/
> ___
> 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.o
rg
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Does a remote free standing FDC require a valve pit?

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

I see a trend starting in our area where the architect is specifying a
remote free standing FDC without a valve pit when the check valve can be
placed inside the building. Upon talking to my field superintendent he was
concerned that some check valves let multiple gallons of water through
whenever a system is drained and refilled and that the remote pipe may
eventually fill up and freeze.  We were toying with the idea of installing
a return bend in the FDC pipe downstream of the check before it leaves the
building to help prevent this.  A  ball valve would be installed between
the return bend and check to drain out the pipe.  Anyone else have insight
on this?

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: ESFR and Obstructed Construction

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

How does the forum treat ESFR sprinklers when there is a wall added in the 
warehouse which creates the heads on one side to be too far away but when you 
add a new line it puts the ESFR sprinklers too close together?  Some times 
there is that perfect storm where you can’t move the existing line over because 
over spacing / under spacing.  In the past we have staggered the ESFR 
sprinklers on the new line to make the 8ft away on the diagonal. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 6, 2020, at 5:17 PM, James Crawford via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> Rack storage is what the building is being used for.
> 
> Thank You
> 
> James Crawford
> Phaser Fire Protection Ltd.
> Phone 604-888-0318
> Cel: 604-790-0938
> Email jcrawf...@phaserfire.ca
> Web: www.phaserfire.ca
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On 
> Behalf Of Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 3:16 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Prahl, Craig/GVL ; Gregg Fontes 
> 
> Subject: RE: ESFR and Obstructed Construction
> 
> What is the ESFR system design basis?  Racks or other storage or what?
> 
> Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME - Fire Protection | 864.676.5252 | 
> craig.pr...@jacobs.com | www.jacobs.com
> 1041 East Butler Road   Greenville, South Carolina  29606
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On 
> Behalf Of Gregg Fontes via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2020 5:27 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Gregg Fontes 
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: ESFR and Obstructed Construction
> 
> With a 36' high building, the max spacing would be 10' apart and the esfr is 
> 6' apart due to the beams. This is a 60 sq. ft. coverage area.  The esfr cut 
> sheet state a minimum area of 64 sq. ft.,  64 sq. ft.  x (12) esfr is 768 sq. 
> ft. minimum design area, would you have to add an esfr fire sprinkle in the 
> calc to meet the 768 sq. ft. area or esfr are not allowed due to not meeting 
> the 64 sq. ft. minimum per esfr sprinkler?
> 
> Thanks,
> Gregg Fontes
> Cen-Cal Fire Systems, Inc.
> 209-334-9119
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On 
> Behalf Of James Crawford via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2020 12:54 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: James Crawford 
> Subject: ESFR and Obstructed Construction
> 
> I am looking at a building 36" high that is using beams for the roof 
> construction, they are spaced at 6'-0" on center and are 24" deep.
> 
> The sprinkler design is asking for ESFR but I am not sure if this will work, 
> I know we can use ESFR in obstructed construction but my understanding is the 
> heads location still needs to comply with the listing.
> 
> So based on this I would need a head in every bay created by the beams and 
> the head would need to be 14" or 18" max from the deck.
> 
> Am I missing something?
> 
> Thank You
> 
> James Crawford
> Phaser Fire Protection Ltd.
> Phone 604-888-0318
> Cel: 604-790-0938
> Email jcrawf...@phaserfire.ca
> Web: 
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.phaserfire.ca__;!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!WcMRZYppn9kmV5oFARjwAqlBq5CE0sTpGJgxpJA7c8cwcK8WS6lYKvzRFFPOKhMVAQ$
>  
>   >
> 
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org__;!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!WcMRZYppn9kmV5oFARjwAqlBq5CE0sTpGJgxpJA7c8cwcK8WS6lYKvzRFFM31opSgA$
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org__;!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!WcMRZYppn9kmV5oFARjwAqlBq5CE0sTpGJgxpJA7c8cwcK8WS6lYKvzRFFM31opSgA$
> 
> 
> 
> NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged 
> information that is for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any viewing, 
> copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by unintended 
> recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in 
> error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting 
> it from your computer.
> ___
> 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

Re: Uprights in non combustible concealed space

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

In Wisconsin we have done several NFPA 13 condo projects where the
architect received approval to not sprinkler the attic when smoke and heat
detection were installed. So not every state is interpreting it the same.

On Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 12:51 Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I’ve had this conversation with state agencies in CA and we’re all square
> on the interpretation as I stated it.   I have spoken with fire and
> building officials from other states about this over the years and I’m
> pretty sure that your issues are regional because we’re not hearing about a
> wave of sprinklered non-combustible attics industry-wide.The exemptions
> in 903.3.1.1.1 go beyond the language of NFPA 13, which is why they are
> codified, but as written they do not supersede the exceptions in 13.   If
> it was the intent of the code to unconditionally require sprinklers in any
> area not equipped with detection, that provision would be in the NFPA 13
> standard by now.   Taking another look at 903.3.1.1, I would also proffer
> that if it was the intent of the code to require sprinklers in
> non-combustible concealed spaces and attics, those would be specifically
> listed in 903.1.1.1 but they are conspicuously not addressed, because it’s
> not the intent of that section to undo the exceptions in 13 (903.1.1) for
> those spaces.
>
>
>
> This is likely an excellent section to propose amending in the next code
> cycle, because the way it’s written, it gives some credence to the
> interpretation you’ve seen from “some building departments…”
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Anthony [mailto:anth...@archerconstruction.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 15, 2020 10:38 AM
> *To:* Steve Leyton ;
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org; 'Cary Webber' <
> cweb...@reliablesprinkler.com>
> *Subject:* RE: Uprights in non combustible concealed space
>
>
>
> Steve,
>
> In the PNW it has been an issue ever since the 2006 edition came out. Some
> building departments and or the fire prevention department has made
> comments on our plans review stating that based on this section in the code
> unless  some type of detention is installed in this *Area* then
> sprinklers would be required.
>
> We have had to take the steps to qualify in our sprinkler bids that we
> assume these areas are being protected by a detection system and thus
> sprinklers are not included in these areas.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> *Anthony Carrizosa *
>
> Project Manager *| *Fire Protection
>
> 7855 S 206th St Kent, WA 98032
>
> Cell: *206-679-5283* | Office: *253-872-7222*
>
>
>
> https://archerconstruction.com
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Steve Leyton 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 15, 2020 10:30 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org; 'Cary Webber' <
> cweb...@reliablesprinkler.com>
> *Cc:* Anthony 
> *Subject:* RE: Uprights in non combustible concealed space
>
>
>
> Anthony:
>
> The code has never been enforced this way – sprinklers are required to be
> installed per NFPA 13, with its exceptions noted.  (Regarding attics, the
> term “Attic” is defined in the IBC as, “The space between the ceiling
> framing of the top story and the underside of the roof.”  An attic is not a
> room in that regard.)   I think you’re “reading further than necessary”.
> 903.3.1.1 states that where sprinklers are required to be installed per
> this section, sprinklers shall be installed per NFPA 13.  13 includes very
> specific exceptions for non-combustible concealed spaces such as attics and
> floor/ceiling interstitial spaces.  So, where sprinklers are required,
> follow 13 and the building is considered “fully sprinklered” per the code.
>
>
>
> 903.3.1.1.1 goes further, and clarifies the language in both 13 and the
> IBC that states “all areas” of the building must be protected with
> sprinklers.  In that context, this section expands on the rooms and areas
> where sprinkler protection can be excluded, but ONLY if detection is
> provided.   I don’t believe it has ever been the intent of 903.1.1.1 to
> supersede the exceptions in 13 for non-combustible concealed spaces.   If
> that was the intent, we would have been putting sprinklers into concealed
> spaces for years and the NFPA 13 committee would have already harmonized
> the standard with the code.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [
> mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
> ] *On Behalf Of *Anthony
> via Sprinklerforum
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 15, 2020 6:57 AM
> *To:* 'Cary Webber' ;
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Cc:* Anthony 
> *Subject:* RE: Uprights in non combustible concealed space
>
>
>
> All, in the IBC it says in section *903.3.1.1 NFPA 13 sprinkler systems*.
>
> *Where the provisions of this code require that a building or 

RE: NFPA 13, 2013 ed - hangers and pressures above 100psi

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

Thanks everyone for the input.  My fitter brought this up to me and after I
read the sections I was still not sure.  John’s comment makes perfect
sense.



Thank you,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/





*From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
Behalf Of *John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
*Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2020 10:41 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* John Denhardt 
*Subject:* Re: NFPA 13, 2013 ed - hangers and pressures above 100psi



In my opinion, no.  The flexible drop assembly is anchored to the ceiling.
The point of this requirement is to keep the pendent sprinkler from moving
upwards during activation.  The flexible drop assembly accomplishes this
requirement.



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

<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/>

*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!
<https://www.redcross.org/donate/cm/afsa-pub.html/>





On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:28 AM Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

Is the hanger on the pipe supplying a flexible drop to a pendant sprinkler
in a ceiling still required to one that prevents upward movement?

Sections 9.2.3.4.4.1,9.2.3.5.2.2



Thank you,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/





___
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, 2013 ed - hangers and pressures above 100psi

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

Is the hanger on the pipe supplying a flexible drop to a pendant sprinkler
in a ceiling still required to one that prevents upward movement?

Sections 9.2.3.4.4.1,9.2.3.5.2.2



Thank you,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

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

RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Combustible dust collector

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

Thanks everyone for the information.  I figured it couldn’t be as simple as
a paint spray booth.  I will check with the specifying engineer for more
information.  They didn’t mention the dust collector on their initial basis
of design.  It was added as an alternate to our contract.  My first concern
was that the collector itself was outside the building which would require
a dry system which wasn’t figured.



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: cid:image003.png@01D4F47B.AA7F2100]



*From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
Behalf Of *Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum
*Sent:* Monday, February 24, 2020 11:04 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* Prahl, Craig/GVL 
*Subject:* RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Combustible dust collector



When NFPA 654 refers back to NFPA 13, the only section dealing with
protection of ducts conveying hazardous material is in the Special
Occupancy section under *Spray Application Using Flammable or Combustible
Materials* as you mentioned.



It also wasn’t stated what type of dust as that can also play a role in the
protection scheme.  Sprinklers might not be feasible or of any value, an
explosion prevention/suppression system may be more of what is proper.



I typically throw it back to the process engineers to analyze the material
being conveyed, the system design, design conditions and along with the
system manufacturer, they provide a recommendation on how best to protect
the system.  The ductwork is not the only part that may need sprinklers,
the bag house is quite often filled with filter material that is
combustible regardless of what is being conveyed through it.



Also, be sure the material being conveyed won’t adversely react to water.
I had an issue where a contractor and the owner chose sprinklers in the
duct, no one asked about system temperatures or material being conveyed and
sprinklers went off during a high temp event (not fire) and mixed with the
accumulated dust material which basically turned to glue.  Shut down the
system and rendered it irreparable.



Gotta do some homework with these kinds of systems, it’s not just a
“install sprinklers per NFPA 13” kind of deal.



Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME – Fire Protection | 864.676.5252 |
craig.pr...@jacobs.com | www.jacobs.com

1041 East Butler Road   Greenville, South Carolina  29606



*From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
Behalf Of *Bruce Verhei via Sprinklerforum
*Sent:* Monday, February 24, 2020 11:35 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* Bruce Verhei 
*Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: Combustible dust collector



Flamex has been around for several decades, I believe under a couple
different corporate ownerships. It is not a new technology.



I’m more used to seeing as part of an overall dust explosion control
system. Usually I’ve worked with a mechanical engineer whose specialty is
dust explosion control.



Most common is the pair of spark detection, spark suppression, then
downstream again, spark detection. Second detection series releases abort
gate.



Current retroactive standards for dust systems are going into effect.
Expect more discussion.



.



Stay back from abort gates. Anything that you need to reset with a come
along, and trips too fast for eye to see is hazardous in its own right.



Best.



Bruce Verhei




On Feb 24, 2020, at 08:03, Skyler Bilbo via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

I have a little experience with this.  I have seen a system brand called
"Flamex" on the dust collection ducts.  This system uses flame sensors and
solenoids to extinguish a fire in the duct, which is a better system than
just installing sprinklers in there.  I can say that installing sprinklers
in the top of the filter units is a good idea.  I have seen fires in these
at a couple of facilities, and the employees on one of the sites later
admitted "it was a whole lot cheaper to buy the filters that aren't flame
resistant, like the manufacturer recommends..."  The Flamex people can be
helpful if you give them a call (it is what they do).  Be very careful
about your liability with these systems (speaking of which, this email is
by no means a substitute for an engineered fire protection system), and it
is important to mention these usually have a high explosion (read:
deflagration) risk, which needs to be addressed.  Also, you might consider
some kind of physical protection for any heads you install.  I hope this
was helpful, because I know how I felt when I first started going through
these systems.




- Skyler



On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 9:46 AM Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

I am trying to figure out the proper design criteria for a combustible dust
collector and a

Re: Combustible dust collector

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

Thanks, I will check there. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 24, 2020, at 4:38 PM, Russell Gregory via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> I have done many Dust Collectors and find FM Data Sheet 7-73 as a good guide.
>  
> Russell Gregory
> Christchurch
> New Zealand
>  
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] 
> On Behalf Of Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, 25 February 2020 4:45 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Dewayne Martinez
> Subject: Combustible dust collector
>  
> I am trying to figure out the proper design criteria for a combustible dust 
> collector and associated duct work.
>  
> NFPA 654-2020ed section 9.3.5.2
> NFPA 652-2019ed section 9.8.5.3
> Both refer you back to NFPA 13
>  
> There is no section on NFPA 13-2013 for dust collectors.  The closest I can 
> find is section 22.4 – spray applications using flammable or combustible 
> materials.
> Anyone else have experience with this?
> Thanks,
>  
> Dewayne Martinez
> Fire Protection Design Manager
>  
> TOTAL Mechanical
> Building Integrity
> 
> W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
> Pewaukee, WI  53072
> dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
> Ph:  262-522-7110
> Cell: 414-406-5208
> http://www.total-mechanical.com/ 
>   
> 
>  
> ___
> 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

Combustible dust collector

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

I am trying to figure out the proper design criteria for a combustible dust
collector and associated duct work.



NFPA 654-2020ed section 9.3.5.2

NFPA 652-2019ed section 9.8.5.3

Both refer you back to NFPA 13



There is no section on NFPA 13-2013 for dust collectors.  The closest I can
find is section 22.4 – spray applications using flammable or combustible
materials.

Anyone else have experience with this?

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: cid:image003.png@01D4F47B.AA7F2100]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

NFPA 13 - 2013ed ceiling pockets

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

I have a situation where I have a condo unit where the owner is requesting
to have “custom wood coffer ceilings”.  This creates small ceiling pockets
(4’x4’x8”) throughout the area in question.  The total areas in question
would be between 80 cu ft and 200 cu ft in size.  What are my options to
sprinkle this properly?

   1. Could I use a residential HSW that was listed for 4-12” down and keep
   it within 12” of the upper ceiling?  I don’t know of any residential
   pendant sprinklers listed for up to 12” down.
   2. Use QR pendant sprinklers at the lower elevation and since the top of
   the pockets are within the listed deflector distance of 12” they are
   considered protected and I can still apply the QR reduction.



Anything other ideas……

Thanks,

Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: cid:image003.png@01D4F47B.AA7F2100]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Existing Dry system testing- chapter 25

[Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum]

NFPA 13 – 2013 ed



We have a multi-tenant building that is entirely fed off one dry system.
We are doing some work on in one tenant.  Just you basic arm-over
relocates.  The AHJ wants us to hydrostatic test and air test the entire
building.  Since we can’t isolate the area of work we would be responsible
for hydrostatic testing at system working pressure (in the spring time now)
but I am concerned with taking the dry system out of service for an
occupied building for the 24hr air test.  Is there any way around this that
I am missing?  Does code require a fire watch for this 24hr period or is it
up to the AHJ?



Thanks,

Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: cid:image003.png@01D4F47B.AA7F2100]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: NFPA 13D (13ed) exposed basements

[Dewayne Martinez]

I should note that the basement compartment is larger than 600 sq ft and
the span of the TJI’s are over 20ft.



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: cid:image003.png@01D4F47B.AA7F2100]



*From:* Dewayne Martinez 
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 12, 2019 9:34 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* Dewayne Martinez 
*Subject:* NFPA 13D (13ed) exposed basements



We have a couple of houses with exposed basements and 12” TJI construction.

   1. Is this considered “beamed ceiling” construction?
   2. What is the best way to protect this space?



Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: cid:image003.png@01D4F47B.AA7F2100]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

NFPA 13D (13ed) exposed basements

[Dewayne Martinez]

We have a couple of houses with exposed basements and 12” TJI construction.

   1. Is this considered “beamed ceiling” construction?
   2. What is the best way to protect this space?



Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: cid:image003.png@01D4F47B.AA7F2100]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

NFPA 13 (2013ed) figure 15.2.2

[Dewayne Martinez]

Group A plastics, 5-12ft of storage, 15 to 20ft ceiling

Figure 15.2.2 / table 15.2.6(a)



Why is Group A, Expanded, Cartoned, Stable (Column E) less of a hazard then
Group A, nonexpanded, stable, cartoned  (Column C)?

One would think that since the expanded has a higher heat release rate so
it would be higher density.  Can anyone help me understand this?



Thanks,

Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: cid:image003.png@01D4F47B.AA7F2100]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: PRV By-pass

[Dewayne Martinez]

I have never done this before but we were just tossing ideas around to save
some cash on projects.  We use the 2 ½” Wilkins ZW4004 globe model which is
good up to 500 gpm.  I would calculate the valve for 250gpm flow and use
these numbers for both the system and fire hose valve.   What is the
PReIV/PRedV?



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: A close up of a sign Description generated with high confidence]



*From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
Behalf Of *Travis Mack, SET, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G
*Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2019 10:34 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: PRV By-pass



*Do you have the room for that?  It sounds acceptable, but will be a large
assembly, presumably in a stair.  Are you selecting a PRedV that works at
lower flows of a single sprinkler and at the higher flows of the standpipe
or sprinkler design area?  I believe the Tyco PRV-1 allows for flows from 0
– xxx.  That would work for you.  Also, make sure you get the properly
sized PRelV installed downstream of the PRedV.  Check the PRedV data sheet
for size of PRelV.*



[image: MFP_logo_F]

Travis Mack, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G, SET

MFP Design, LLC

3356 E Vallejo Ct

Gilbert, AZ 85298

480-505-9271

fax: 866-430-6107

email:tm...@mfpdesign.com



http://www.mfpdesign.com
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mfpdesign.com%2F=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=HJ8OA4xyeHAoxXNz5mu%2FYfycgtd5nsFrrpvzulZiNkQ%3D=0>

https://www.facebook.com/pages/MFP-Design-LLC/92218417692
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fpages%2FMFP-Design-LLC%2F92218417692=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=H%2BwdcgK8DLGBcNoqJEvUrzsXngySwkX56Vgf9gM9EGk%3D=0>

Send large files to us via: https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hightail.com%2Fu%2FMFPDesign=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=eGdMZGu2wXhUupGwgGTrqF3b54OP5%2BAZvlHhABSexWY%3D=0>

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/travismack
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Ftravismack=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=tT5E7LsZjSmyreKi4gDCa70EWN%2BZodi%2FhbeCbHNRijI%3D=0>



*“**The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low
price is forgotten.**”*





*From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
Behalf Of *Dewayne Martinez
*Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2019 9:28 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* Dewayne Martinez 
*Subject:* RE: PRV By-pass



I know this is an old thread but from what I am interpreting it would be ok
on a combined standpipe / sprinkler system to have a PRV valve that reduces
pressure for both the floor control and the hose valve, correct?

I was thinking after the point of connection to the standpipe it would be a
PRV valve(with gauges on each side), tee down to a 2 ½” FHV, then a system
control valve, check valve, riser manifold.  I will probably just go with a
globe UMC to simplify things.  Sound ok?

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: A close up of a sign Description generated with high confidence]



*From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
Behalf Of *Steve Leyton
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 6, 2017 1:34 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: PRV By-pass



Read 7.2.4 closely:  “Where more than two hose connections are used
downstream of a pressure-regulating device …”



A floor control assembly or a single hose connection with integral PR
device does not require redundancy or a bypass because that section of the
standard only applies to multiple hose connections influenced by a single
PR device.



My opinion only, but the standard clearly says what is says …



SL



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
] *On Behalf Of *Tony Silva
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 06, 2017 11:27 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* PRV By-pass



NFPA 14, 2010, 7.2.4 (4) requires a bypass across a prv. Is it only when
multiple smaller prv's are used instead of a larger prv, or whenever any
prv is used?

My application is there is a prv at the floor control stations supplying
combined sprinkler/standpipe. Would this prv need a by-p

RE: PRV By-pass

[Dewayne Martinez]

I know this is an old thread but from what I am interpreting it would be ok
on a combined standpipe / sprinkler system to have a PRV valve that reduces
pressure for both the floor control and the hose valve, correct?

I was thinking after the point of connection to the standpipe it would be a
PRV valve(with gauges on each side), tee down to a 2 ½” FHV, then a system
control valve, check valve, riser manifold.  I will probably just go with a
globe UMC to simplify things.  Sound ok?

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: A close up of a sign Description generated with high confidence]



*From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
Behalf Of *Steve Leyton
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 6, 2017 1:34 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: PRV By-pass



Read 7.2.4 closely:  “Where more than two hose connections are used
downstream of a pressure-regulating device …”



A floor control assembly or a single hose connection with integral PR
device does not require redundancy or a bypass because that section of the
standard only applies to multiple hose connections influenced by a single
PR device.



My opinion only, but the standard clearly says what is says …



SL



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
] *On Behalf Of *Tony Silva
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 06, 2017 11:27 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* PRV By-pass



NFPA 14, 2010, 7.2.4 (4) requires a bypass across a prv. Is it only when
multiple smaller prv's are used instead of a larger prv, or whenever any
prv is used?

My application is there is a prv at the floor control stations supplying
combined sprinkler/standpipe. Would this prv need a by-pass?

The other question is will every prv need control valves upstream and
downstream?

I know it is good engineering practice to have the valves and by-pass, but
very often there is not much space inside the stairs. What is the general
industry practice?

Thanks,

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

NFPA 13 - mixing residential and QR sprinklers in dwelling units

[Dewayne Martinez]

NFPA 13 (13ed)

Many times we have run into surface mounted lights in the bathrooms of
dwelling units where residential pendant sprinklers need to be too far away
to miss the obstruction to be practical.  If we installed QR standard spray
sprinklers pendants in the bathrooms and residential sprinklers thought the
dwelling unit else where would we need to pick up a 900sq ft remote area to
account for the QR sprinkler?

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: A close up of a sign Description generated with high confidence]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Assisted living facility - residential sprinklers in corridors

[Dewayne Martinez]

NFPA 13 (13ed)

I am designing a multi-story assisted living facility where some of the
floors have a dwelling units on the external perimeter connected by a
common corridor.  Connected to the corridor is a group kitchen / eating /
lounge and similar areas.  There is also a mixture of offices for the staff
to use.  I was going to use residential sprinklers in the dwelling units,
corridor and group areas and QR sprinklers in the offices and similar
non-residential areas.  Sound alright?



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: A close up of a sign Description generated with high confidence]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: CPVC pipe passing thru ordinary interstitial space

[Dewayne Martinez]

I ran into this recently and it was pointed out to me that the floor assembly 
itself was UL rated fire assembly and if I ran the CPVC in the interstitial 
space it would have to comply with the OH rules of 400sf or less.  I thought 
the same at first about it being protected per LH that it would be ok. 


Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 13, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Steve Leyton  wrote:
> 
> How are the sprinklers supplied in the Ordinary Hazard compartments below?   
> In earlier editions of NFPA 13, you cannot run CPVC piping to Ordinary Hazard 
> sprinklers covering areas greater than 400 ft².   (For 2019 there is an 
> allowance for up to 1000 ft² in private residential parking garages.)  Even 
> though the attic area is Light Hazard, it would be considered an Ordinary 
> Hazard sprinkler system if you were protecting both up-and-down with that 
> piping complement.   If you have an Ordinary Hazard piping complement and the 
> pipe that you are describing is separate and apart from that, serving only 
> the Light Hazard above, then you could make a case for it, I think.  
> 
> If your goal is to run plastic up the walls to the Light Hazard sidewalls, 
> then do that but connect those risers to a conventional OH system in the 1st 
> floor interstitial spaces.
> 
> 
> 
> Steve Leyton 
> 
> (Sent from my phone; please excuse typos and voice text corruptions.)
> 
> 
> 
>  Original message 
> From: "off...@afpfiresprinkler.com" 
> Date: 12/12/18 9:59 PM (GMT-08:00)
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Subject: Re: CPVC pipe passing thru ordinary interstitial space
> 
> I missed to explain this part…. Thanks Steve.
>  
> The concealed space will be sprinklered and yes I am proposing to install the 
> sprinklers in the concealed space of the CPVC piping an as per the listing 
> for CPVC pipe (i.e. piping max 6” above ceiling or insulation etc.)
>  
> I’m also pointing to NFPA 13 [2013] section 8.15.1.3 “Concealed Space Design 
> Requirements. Sprinklers in concealed spaces having no
> access for storage or other use shall be installed in accordance with the 
> requirements for light
> hazard occupancy.”
> 
>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 12:32 AM Steve Leyton  
>> wrote:
>> Is the interstitial space combustible?   If so, are  you proposing to 
>> sprinkler the space with sprinklers that satisfy the listing limitations of 
>> the CPVC?  Does the CPVC also supply the OH space below?
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] 
>> On Behalf Of off...@afpfiresprinkler.com
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 9:29 PM
>> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> Subject: CPVC pipe passing thru ordinary interstitial space
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I have a job that’s a 2 story building with an A truss roof, 1st floor is 
>> retail and 2nd floor is residential, the entire building is being 
>> sprinklered as per NFPA 13.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> We want to install sidewalls with multiple CPVC risers and tie everything in 
>> 1st floor interstitial space, Question is if there are any limitations of 
>> using CPVC pipe in the interstitial above an OHII occupancy.?
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> My initial taught is that since its protecting a light hazard occupancy it 
>> should be ok also the pipe is not exposed to the OHII (floor truss is being 
>> covered with 1 HR. rated assembly)
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Does it matter that CPVC passes thru the ordinary space?
>> 
>> ___
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> Joel Chaim
> Active Fire Protection Inc.
> Phone: 845-782-7494
> Cell: 845-781-3075
> Fax: 866-903-9949
> ___
> 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

buried fdc ball drip?

[Dewayne Martinez]

I have a contractor that is telling me that it is ok to run FDC piping
trapped under ground and burying the drain 90 w/ ball drip at the bottom of
the vertical pipe going up to the FDC above ground.  I was always taught
that a pit was needed for the ball drip but I can’t verify it in NFPA 13
(13ed).

Can it be buried?

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: A close up of a sign Description generated with high confidence]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: multi-height standpipes

[Dewayne Martinez]

Thanks for the information.  I will do one set of calcs to size my PRV hose
valves from floors 1-4 with the 3 standpipes flowing a total of 1000gpm and
an additional set of calcs for floors 5-25 with 2-standpipes flowing a
total of 750gpm.



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: A close up of a sign Description generated with high confidence]



*From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
Behalf Of *MFP Design, LLC
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 19, 2018 2:12 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: multi-height standpipes



*I believe this is spelled out in the NFPA 14 handbook.  You will need to
do 2 sets of calculations.  Where you only have 2 standpipes, you calculate
the 750 gpm.  When you get down to the level with 3 standpipes, you do
another calc that goes to 1000 gpm.*



[image: MFP_logo_F]

Travis Mack, SET

MFP Design, LLC

3356 E Vallejo Ct

Gilbert, AZ 85298

480-505-9271

fax: 866-430-6107

email:tm...@mfpdesign.com



http://www.mfpdesign.com
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mfpdesign.com%2F=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=HJ8OA4xyeHAoxXNz5mu%2FYfycgtd5nsFrrpvzulZiNkQ%3D=0>

https://www.facebook.com/pages/MFP-Design-LLC/92218417692
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fpages%2FMFP-Design-LLC%2F92218417692=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=H%2BwdcgK8DLGBcNoqJEvUrzsXngySwkX56Vgf9gM9EGk%3D=0>

Send large files to us via: https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hightail.com%2Fu%2FMFPDesign=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=eGdMZGu2wXhUupGwgGTrqF3b54OP5%2BAZvlHhABSexWY%3D=0>

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/travismack
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Ftravismack=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=tT5E7LsZjSmyreKi4gDCa70EWN%2BZodi%2FhbeCbHNRijI%3D=0>



*“**The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low
price is forgotten.”*



*From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
Behalf Of *Dewayne Martinez
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 19, 2018 12:09 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* Dewayne Martinez 
*Subject:* multi-height standpipes



I have a high rise which contains 3 standpipes.  Two of them go up 25
stories and the third only 4 stories.  When I calculate them do I pick up 2@
250gpm on the most remote high standpipe followed by 250 on the remaining
stairwells including the low one or just the two high ones?  To complicate
the matter even more the high standpipes would not have a pressure reducing
hose valves in the calculation but the low standpipe would need one.

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: A close up of a sign Description generated with high confidence]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

multi-height standpipes

[Dewayne Martinez]

I have a high rise which contains 3 standpipes.  Two of them go up 25
stories and the third only 4 stories.  When I calculate them do I pick up 2@
250gpm on the most remote high standpipe followed by 250 on the remaining
stairwells including the low one or just the two high ones?  To complicate
the matter even more the high standpipes would not have a pressure reducing
hose valves in the calculation but the low standpipe would need one.

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: A close up of a sign Description generated with high confidence]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

[Dewayne Martinez]

I think replacing the impeller for damage with the same one is fine.
Replacing one with another size and making the unit not listed is not fine.

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/



-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Mark.Phelps
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 2:31 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

Hi Dwayne,
I'm curious what your pump rep would recommend if the impeller is damaged by
a stone or other foreign object.

Mark at Aero
602 820-7894


-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
On Behalf Of Dewayne Martinez
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 11:35 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Dewayne Martinez 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

My pump rep confirmed that changing the impeller was a no-go.  He also had
mentioned the VFD controller but was quoting a huge cost (108K...ouch).

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.total-2Dmechanical.com_=DwIGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=dLwiR71i_XhSFqam3ZLeaFLiQJ3cDTUB0ReB4-yDDcg=vTzH4xLmwi_JebyhzQ8JsSbD4pfPN1pw-D3WazUeisg=e-zvHq7lcl9_vWoWoV7zIeQKdMmFrFvSNcUV8_8E0qA=



-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Steve Leyton
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 2:20 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

I thought of it too, but it's expensive and they've got a janky service
record so far (high maintenance, very expensive parts and service, parts
availability issues).   I think the reducing valve is the way to go, with
special emphasis on the system being ITM'd per the book.

SML

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
On Behalf Of Mitchell, Scott
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 12:18 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

I too was thinking of a Variable Frequency Pressure Limiting Controller
(VFPLC), but hesitated for fear of ridicule.  Mr. Denhardt has no fear.

J. Scott Mitchell, P.E.

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
On Behalf Of John Denhardt
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 1:55 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

What about looking at a pressure limiting driver fire pump system?  These
are increasing more commonly available and Listed from the factory for this
application.

In my humble opinion, the cost involved in modifying an impeller and the
liability associated with it, makes this approach not practical.

John

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Strickland Fire Protection Incorporated
4011 Penn Belt Place
Forestville, Maryland 20747-4737
301.474.1136 - Office
301.343.1457 - Mobile

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Kyle.Montgomery
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 2:47 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

I found the formula interesting.

Also, I didn't think that Brad was suggesting the fitter would modify the
impeller (were you?). I assumed he was just showing that it was another
possibility to explore (to be performed by pump rep). You wouldn't modify
the existing impeller, but replace it with a new one.

I do know it is possible (and not entirely uncommon) to have the pump
manufacturer "trim" the impeller to make small modifications to the pump
curve, to dial in the pressure. Not sure if it would work for the kind of
pressure differences the O.P. is looking at.

If it is feasible, I think that (generally speaking) it might be considered
a preferable approach to the PRV. Less parts and pieces, etc. However, the
nice thing about a PRV is you can really dial in the pressure and you get
that wide, flat pressure curve. But there are drawbacks as well.

Kyle Montgomery

Aero Automatic Sprinkler Co.
21605 N. Central Ave.
Phoenix, AZ 85024
Direct: 623.580.7820
Cell: 602.763.4736
kmontgom...@aerofire.com



-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
On Behalf Of John Denhardt
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 10:36 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

I agree with Steve.  No manufacturer or Listing agency would accept this
approach.  This is a purely academic exercise which it my opinion has no
basis for real world application.  My 

RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

[Dewayne Martinez]

43psi static now, 78(low tower) to 84psi static future.  Need 100psi @
1500gpm to make the system work now. 6x4x2 1/2" grid with 9psi cushion.
One option I can work on is to see if I can make it work with both water
supplies if I go with a smaller pump to keep the churn pressure under
175psi and bump up the pipe sizes to 8x6x3" grid.

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/



-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Matt Grise
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 3:41 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

Just out of curiosity -how much boost are you starting with? What is the
projected need in the future?

Matt

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Tom Duross
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 3:33 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

You start bending the listings when playing with different impellers in
the field.  In the old days these were listed assemblies and if you swap
out an impeller, there does the listing.  Some still hold that to be true.
You might try a model series that meets both designs but with different
pump ends.  Keep the base and driver.  A new pump end will have a new
serial and new listing.  Most pumps, electric split case anyway are
usually pit tested as a pump end only before leaving the plant using one
of their adjustable drivers.  When you have an inline, the impeller and
case are bolted to the motor, and diesels historically have most times
been tested as a complete pump too.  Not sure of the demands but this
might be a question for you pump rep that maybe they can answer.
TD


Thank you Kyle, it means a great deal to me for you to say.
I was curious about the application too, and saw a 1250 gpm, 2600 rpm with
a range of 69 psi based solely on impeller diameter.
Both impellers would need to be purchased and certified up front, and
every one having signed off on the idea.
I even imagined a note on the enlarged pump room plan, "mount future
impeller and name plate in locked cabinet next to spare sprinkler
cabinet".

Brad


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

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

RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

[Dewayne Martinez]

My pump rep confirmed that changing the impeller was a no-go.  He also had
mentioned the VFD controller but was quoting a huge cost (108K...ouch).

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/



-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Steve Leyton
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 2:20 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

I thought of it too, but it's expensive and they've got a janky service
record so far (high maintenance, very expensive parts and service, parts
availability issues).   I think the reducing valve is the way to go, with
special emphasis on the system being ITM'd per the book.

SML

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
On Behalf Of Mitchell, Scott
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 12:18 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

I too was thinking of a Variable Frequency Pressure Limiting Controller
(VFPLC), but hesitated for fear of ridicule.  Mr. Denhardt has no fear.

J. Scott Mitchell, P.E.

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
On Behalf Of John Denhardt
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 1:55 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

What about looking at a pressure limiting driver fire pump system?  These
are increasing more commonly available and Listed from the factory for this
application.

In my humble opinion, the cost involved in modifying an impeller and the
liability associated with it, makes this approach not practical.

John

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Strickland Fire Protection Incorporated
4011 Penn Belt Place
Forestville, Maryland 20747-4737
301.474.1136 - Office
301.343.1457 - Mobile

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Kyle.Montgomery
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 2:47 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

I found the formula interesting.

Also, I didn't think that Brad was suggesting the fitter would modify the
impeller (were you?). I assumed he was just showing that it was another
possibility to explore (to be performed by pump rep). You wouldn't modify
the existing impeller, but replace it with a new one.

I do know it is possible (and not entirely uncommon) to have the pump
manufacturer "trim" the impeller to make small modifications to the pump
curve, to dial in the pressure. Not sure if it would work for the kind of
pressure differences the O.P. is looking at.

If it is feasible, I think that (generally speaking) it might be considered
a preferable approach to the PRV. Less parts and pieces, etc. However, the
nice thing about a PRV is you can really dial in the pressure and you get
that wide, flat pressure curve. But there are drawbacks as well.

Kyle Montgomery

Aero Automatic Sprinkler Co.
21605 N. Central Ave.
Phoenix, AZ 85024
Direct: 623.580.7820
Cell: 602.763.4736
kmontgom...@aerofire.com



-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
On Behalf Of John Denhardt
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 10:36 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

I agree with Steve.  No manufacturer or Listing agency would accept this
approach.  This is a purely academic exercise which it my opinion has no
basis for real world application.  My suggestion is to move on.

John

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Strickland Fire Protection Incorporated
4011 Penn Belt Place
Forestville, Maryland 20747-4737
301.474.1136 - Office
301.343.1457 - Mobile


-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Steve Leyton
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 12:42 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: PRV after pump discharge control valve

As with some of your previous posts, I've read and re-read this one and
taken a few days to process it before responding.  And having given this
some thought, I have to ask:  what is the point of undertaking this?
Obviously, no fitter or service tech is going to change out an impeller -
what do you think the cost of a factory-certified or an actual factory tech
doing such a service might be?   What cost benefit could there possibly be
that justifies the hassle and risk of having someone rebuild a listed pump
on site, especially when there are other "conventional" resolutions
available?

Unless ... you just have an uncontrollable compulsion to post equations on
line?  Perhaps we can (should?) change the name of this list-server to the
"AFSA Sprinkler Formulae" ...

Steve Leyton
Keepinit Simple, CA

-Original Mes

Re: PRV after pump discharge control valve

[Dewayne Martinez]

This is going to be for a ESFR warehouse so no standpipes involved. FDC could 
be connected before or after the PRV.  Thanks for everyone confirming that I 
can install a PRV at a later date. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 14, 2018, at 3:12 PM, bcasterl...@fsc-inc.com wrote:
> 
> This is very interesting Dewayne!
> You need a high pressure pump now--low pressure pump later, but since you 
> have to keep the original pump you are thinking PRV on the discharge later.
> 
> There might be another way:
> 
> Replace the big impeller now with a small impeller later. I know how to make 
> it work in theory but I'm not sure if it works in application, but the pump 
> rep would.
> I know it works in theory because I figured out quite a few years ago how to 
> calculate the impeller diameter based on the rated psi and rpm ONLY.
> I do know it is not unheard of to 'trim' an installed impeller to tamp down 
> on the psi.
> 
> v=2*pi*r*f, where,
> 
> v is velocity (ft/s) calculated from feet of head (h). v=SQRT(2gh), g is 32.2 
> ft/s/s.
> r is the impeller radius (ft).
> f is radian/s (rpm/60).
> 
> So knowing v and f, it's easy to rearange to solve for r!!!
> 
> You should still install a spool piece I guess, but to pump it up only to let 
> the air out a couple feet later never has made sense to me.
> 
> Maybe Nicky in NZ knows of something in the European Code that might shed a 
> different light?
> 
> Brad
> 
> 
> Quoting Dewayne Martinez :
> 
>> Is there anything that restricts the use of a PRV after the discharge
>> control valve on a fire pump?
>> 
>> I have a ESFR storage building where I am designing to a “future” water
>> supply which is much higher than the existing water supply.
>> 
>> The fire pump must satisfy both existing and future conditions and I
>> thought about leaving a space for a PRV to be installed downstream of the
>> pump discharge valve to account for the future higher pressures.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Dewayne Martinez
>> 
>> Fire Protection Design Manager
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> *TOTAL* *Mechanical*
>> 
>> *Building* *Integrity*
>> 
>> 
>> W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
>> Pewaukee, WI  53072
>> 
>> dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
>> 
>> Ph:  262-522-7110
>> 
>> Cell: 414-406-5208
>> 
>> http://www.total-mechanical.com/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> [image: A close up of a sign Description generated with high confidence]
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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

PRV after pump discharge control valve

[Dewayne Martinez]

Is there anything that restricts the use of a PRV after the discharge
control valve on a fire pump?

I have a ESFR storage building where I am designing to a “future” water
supply which is much higher than the existing water supply.

The fire pump must satisfy both existing and future conditions and I
thought about leaving a space for a PRV to be installed downstream of the
pump discharge valve to account for the future higher pressures.

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/



[image: A close up of a sign Description generated with high confidence]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: ESFR closer than 8'

[Dewayne Martinez]

Ok, I understand the need to maintain the 8ft minimum spacing.  What has
everyone been doing when they get a tenant finish in a ESFR building where
they put the demising walls in such a way that there is no way to maintain
the 8ft minimum between sprinklers when you have to add some for the
walls?  It’s great to say to insist that the walls are placed so this
doesn’t happen but ½ of the time the wall is already built or can’t be
placed conveniently because of outside windows.



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]



*From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
Behalf Of *Kyle.Montgomery
*Sent:* Wednesday, May 30, 2018 1:12 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: ESFR closer than 8'



JD,



Would it be possible to avoid this situation altogether by pushing the
lines the other direction? If you go 3 feet off of the beam (8 feet from
the branch line on the other side of the beam) then 8 feet from that line,
you would be 11 feet from the beam with your second line, which should put
you at 6” from the wall, right?



I wouldn’t normally want to be that close to a wall, but that might be an
easier argument to defend.



I still think that you would be OK as previously discussed, but I
definitely think it could be a difficult argument. And I would only want to
apply this in a condition like yours, where we’re talking about one branch
line being potentially “under-spaced”… you certainly would want to
reconsider if you had some type of construction where every other branch
line had this condition or something.



These other guys make some good points, and the commentary in the handbook
doesn’t exactly help my argument. But I would contend that we shouldn’t
have to eliminate the option of ESFR protection in a building due to one
bay or area that doesn’t comply with the letter of the law (my opinion
only) and that this is a case where the code does it’s best to provide
guidance, but there is some gray area to work in. Every building can’t be a
perfect square.



-Kyle M



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
] *On Behalf Of *JD Gamble
*Sent:* Wednesday, May 30, 2018 9:58 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: ESFR closer than 8'



Points well taken.  Thanks Kyle (insert letters here at will)



*Life Safety Solutions of Sheridan*



*JD Gamble*

jgam...@lssofsheridan.com

(307) 763-3361



*From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
Behalf Of *Kyle.Montgomery
*Sent:* Wednesday, May 30, 2018 10:47 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: ESFR closer than 8'



JD,



Disclaimer: When considering my opinion, please keep in mind the lack of
letters after my name. My opinion is simply my interpretation of the code,
and not necessarily a definitive answer on whether the system will work as
intended.



That being stated, my argument is that the spacing of sprinklers is as
measured to the nearest head, wall, or obstruction, as appropriate. So, I
would say “no” there is no need for an additional baffle if the beam is an
obstruction (and if it is not an obstruction, then I don’t think we even
have this issue, right?).



Now, in an attempt to convince Mr. Mack and others, I will offer this
circumstantial evidence:



8.12.5.1.2 – This section states that the distance from the centerline on
the obstructions to the sprinklers does not exceed one-half the allowable
distance between the sprinklers, but does not say anything about a minimum
distance. (admittedly, not a strong argument)



8.12.3.3 Minimum distance from walls is 4 inches… If you have sprinklers
this close to a wall, doesn’t that potentially cause a similar issue, i.e.
more sprinklers discharging in a given area? (also kind of a poor argument)



But the real argument that I can make is when you look at how we deal with
obstructions in 8.12.5.2 and 8.12.5.3. What do we do in these cases? We add
more sprinklers under the obstruction. Wouldn’t this create the same
potential issue of too many sprinklers opening? How is this different?



-Kyle M



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
] *On Behalf Of *MFP
Design, LLC
*Sent:* Wednesday, May 30, 2018 9:25 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* [EXTERNAL] RE: ESFR closer than 8'



*My understanding is the same as Don stated.  It is not skipping or cold
soldering.  It is too many sprinklers opening.  The baffle or curtain will
do little, if anything, to alleviate that.*



[image: MFP_logo_F]

Travis Mack, SET

MFP Design, LLC

3356 E Vallejo Ct

Gilbert, AZ 85298

480-505-9271

fax: 866-430-6107

email:tm...@mfpdesign.com



http://www.mfpdesign.com
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com

RE: exterior roof overhang - omitting sprinkler protection

[Dewayne Martinez]

Thanks Brad,
We are coming up with options.  WI has just switch to the 2013ed but this
one falls under 2007.


Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/


-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> On
Behalf Of bcasterl...@fsc-inc.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 2:16 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: exterior roof overhang - omitting sprinkler protection

I'm tired of my own voice Dewayne but I hate to see a brother flapping in
the forum breeze.
Too bad it's such an old edition.
If you have to sprinkler it, and the attic system is dry, you could stub 1"
(sloped slightly up) into the space to a regular sidewall.
At least that would get rid of the lift.

Brad

Quoting Dewayne Martinez <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>:

> NFPA 13 (07ed)
>
> We have an attic where there is a combustible concealed roof overhang
> that extends 3’-6” away from the building (a-frame attic trusses) and
> the overhang is completely cut off from the main attic by the exterior
> wall with the exception of 1 ½” deep baffles at the roof deck to
> transfer air
> IE: acting like a vent soffit.  We need to provide sprinkler
> protection in this space unless one of the exceptions for concealed
> spaces 8.15.1 can be met right?  Just wanted to confirm because it is
> 30ft up in the air and will require a boom lift to get to, which was
> not included in the estimate…….
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dewayne Martinez
>
> Fire Protection Design Manager
>
>
>
> *TOTAL* *Mechanical*
>
> *Building* *Integrity*
>
>
> W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
> Pewaukee, WI  53072
>
> dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
>
> Ph:  262-522-7110
>
> Cell: 414-406-5208
>
> http://www.total-mechanical.com/
>
> [image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]



___
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

exterior roof overhang - omitting sprinkler protection

[Dewayne Martinez]

NFPA 13 (07ed)

We have an attic where there is a combustible concealed roof overhang that
extends 3’-6” away from the building (a-frame attic trusses) and the
overhang is completely cut off from the main attic by the exterior wall
with the exception of 1 ½” deep baffles at the roof deck to transfer air
IE: acting like a vent soffit.  We need to provide sprinkler protection in
this space unless one of the exceptions for concealed spaces 8.15.1 can be
met right?  Just wanted to confirm because it is 30ft up in the air and
will require a boom lift to get to, which was not included in the
estimate…….



Thanks,

Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Drop In Anchors for Seismic

[Dewayne Martinez]

I believe Powers “snake” was also approved in cracked concrete.



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]



*From:* Sprinklerforum <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> *On
Behalf Of *Kyle.Montgomery
*Sent:* Monday, May 7, 2018 9:56 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Drop In Anchors for Seismic



Now that looks promising. Thanks guys.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Rocci 3
Cetani
*Sent:* Monday, May 7, 2018 7:41 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Drop In Anchors for Seismic



Was just about to recommend this one! Only one I can seem to find that’s
rated for cracked concrete, lots of help on those PT jobs there the anchor
wasn’t set correctly or changes are needed



*Rocci Cetani III, **CET*

*Senior Designer*

*Water-Based Fire Protections Systems Layout, Nicet Level III*



*Northern California Fire Protection Services Inc.*

16840 Joleen Way Bldg. A

Morgan Hill, CA 93037

P-(408) 776-1580 EXT.111

F-(408) 776-1590





roc...@norcalfire.com

www.norcalfire.com
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.norcalfire.com_=DwMGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=wfwlRznhjdLZAIf7BikjmnzEd5-ExjFyJP97xB__amY=ilbMYdUfDRlK1-PWm7RceuVQVBWbgVi6amwntJKzIWA=>



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message and any document accompanying it may
contain confidential information

belonging to the sender. The information is intended only for the use of
individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, or
the employee or agent responsible to deliver this message to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying or taking
of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify us by telephone to arrange for return of the documents.



*From:* Sprinklerforum <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> *On
Behalf Of *cw bamford
*Sent:* Monday, May 07, 2018 7:37 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Drop In Anchors for Seismic



Have you looked at

DeWalts

Mini-Undercut+ anchor is an internally threaded, self-undercutting anchor
designed for performance in cracked and uncracked concrete



On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 7:25 AM, Kyle.Montgomery <kmontgom...@aerofire.com>
wrote:

So, what did you find, Brad? I've not had luck being able to use drop-ins
in seismic areas. Seems like there is always a roadblock with lack of ICC
report, or not being acknowledged in COLA (for Los Angeles), or not being
appropriate for 'cracked concrete' scenarios. Did you find an avenue that
allows them?

-Kyle M

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
On Behalf Of bcasterl...@fsc-inc.com
Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 2:43 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Drop In Anchors for Seismic

Hello again. I found was I was looking for and it appears my fears were
unfounded -- I didn't want to go through all the calculations satisfying 13
only to discover 'nobody makes it'.
Like the chicken / egg question -- tc members write rules / manufacturers
make things to satisfy rules.
I think with sway bracing it is egg / chicken.

Brad

Quoting bcasterl...@fsc-inc.com:

> Hello!
>
> This is not a pressing issue.
>
> I am having trouble finding manufacturer's literature for above subject.
> I want to know if, for example, listed for Seismic requires minimum
> 4000 psi medium concrete and minimum diameter and length to see if I
> can eliminate some of the options in 13 for prying factor and max
> loads.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brad
>
>
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.firesprinkle
> r.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__r.org-5Flistinfo.cgi-5Fsprinklerforum-2D2Dfiresprinkler.org=DwMGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=wfwlRznhjdLZAIf7BikjmnzEd5-ExjFyJP97xB__amY=l1b7tGLjtMM9V0sxPreuVVBo8C7LC9AOIL6ZXLWeTL4=>
=DwICAg=wn3mZ
> QLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=yrdN
> X83d8MbcZv8lzu7dg6zwjeaZ428y9qO9kIoWV0E=ks_1O-FpbukfZQZe5xBgbSung2IY
> MLzznH0dcU6T0z0=



___
Sprink

RE: Supply calculation for manual-wet standpipe

[Dewayne Martinez]

I am not used to seeing this calc program so I may be looking at this wrong
but I don’t see a water supply on this graph.



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]



*From:* Dewayne Martinez <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
*Sent:* Tuesday, April 17, 2018 6:42 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* Dewayne Martinez <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
*Subject:* RE: Supply calculation for manual-wet standpipe



I initially put in a supply of 150psi at 1000gpm and then modify it until I
get a 0 PSI cushion.



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]



*From:* Sprinklerforum <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> *On
Behalf Of *Matt Grise
*Sent:* Tuesday, April 17, 2018 6:26 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Supply calculation for manual-wet standpipe



When you say that  you tweak it to find the actual demand – does your
software not tell you the psi input required to supply the hose demand you
request at the standpipe outlets? I usually see ‘required pressure’ as an
output of the software no matter what the input is.



Matt





*From:* Sprinklerforum <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> *On
Behalf Of *Dewayne Martinez
*Sent:* Tuesday, April 17, 2018 6:02 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* Dewayne Martinez <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
*Subject:* Supply calculation for manual-wet standpipe



One of my free lancers sent me a *supply* calculation for a manual wet
standpipe.  I have always put in a “pumper connection” supply at the FDC,
did a demand calc and tweaked it until I ended up with a zero pound cushion
to see what was really required.  His way looks to be good.  Have I been
taking the hard way around to solve what PSI is required at the FDC?

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Supply calculation for manual-wet standpipe

[Dewayne Martinez]

I initially put in a supply of 150psi at 1000gpm and then modify it until I
get a 0 PSI cushion.



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]



*From:* Sprinklerforum <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> *On
Behalf Of *Matt Grise
*Sent:* Tuesday, April 17, 2018 6:26 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Supply calculation for manual-wet standpipe



When you say that  you tweak it to find the actual demand – does your
software not tell you the psi input required to supply the hose demand you
request at the standpipe outlets? I usually see ‘required pressure’ as an
output of the software no matter what the input is.



Matt





*From:* Sprinklerforum <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> *On
Behalf Of *Dewayne Martinez
*Sent:* Tuesday, April 17, 2018 6:02 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* Dewayne Martinez <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
*Subject:* Supply calculation for manual-wet standpipe



One of my free lancers sent me a *supply* calculation for a manual wet
standpipe.  I have always put in a “pumper connection” supply at the FDC,
did a demand calc and tweaked it until I ended up with a zero pound cushion
to see what was really required.  His way looks to be good.  Have I been
taking the hard way around to solve what PSI is required at the FDC?

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Supply calculation for manual-wet standpipe

[Dewayne Martinez]

One of my free lancers sent me a *supply* calculation for a manual wet
standpipe.  I have always put in a “pumper connection” supply at the FDC,
did a demand calc and tweaked it until I ended up with a zero pound cushion
to see what was really required.  His way looks to be good.  Have I been
taking the hard way around to solve what PSI is required at the FDC?

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Remote additional FDC

[Dewayne Martinez]

Not very easily.



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]



*From:* Sprinklerforum <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> *On
Behalf Of *Matt Grise
*Sent:* Tuesday, April 3, 2018 8:16 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Remote additional FDC



Could you revise the FDC to also attach beyond the control valve?



Matt





*From:* Sprinklerforum <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> *On
Behalf Of *Jeff Garrison
*Sent:* Tuesday, April 03, 2018 7:15 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: Remote additional FDC



I see many buildings with 3 or 4 FDC's.

Often there is an FDC for Sprinkler and another for Standpipes.

Just AHJ approval and good signage.


*Jeff Garrison*

*248-331-6164 - cell*



On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 7:13 AM, Dewayne Martinez <
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com> wrote:

I have an existing hospital where they are building a new 4 story addition
that will require manual-wet standpipes.  The problem arises is that we are
using an existing common feed riser which has a control valve on it in the
fire pump room.  I know this violates section 6.4.1 (NFPA 14 – 2010ed)  for
no control valves between the FDC and standpipe system.  Is there anything
the precludes me from installing an additional FDC on the new addition to
use the existing feed and satisfy 6.4.1?

Thank you,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110 <(262)%20522-7110>

Cell: 414-406-5208 <(414)%20406-5208>

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]




___
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: Remote additional FDC

[Dewayne Martinez]

Thanks



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]



*From:* Sprinklerforum <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> *On
Behalf Of *Mike B Morey
*Sent:* Tuesday, April 3, 2018 6:43 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: Remote additional FDC



I would say this situation would be covered by NFPA 13 2016 8.17.2.4.5,
which is also referenced in Table A.6.9 in NFPA 14 2016.


--


*Mike Morey*
*CFPS 3229 • NICET S.E.T. 123677*
*Project Manager* • Fire Protection Group
*Shambaugh & Son, LP **an EMCOR Company*
7614 Opportunity Drive • Fort Wayne, IN • 46825
*direct *260.487.7824* /  cell *260.417.0625* /  fax *260.487.7991
*email *mmo...@shambaugh.com







From:    Dewayne Martinez <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
To:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc:Dewayne Martinez <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Date:04/03/2018 07:13 AM
Subject:Remote additional FDC
Sent by:"Sprinklerforum" <
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>
--




BE ADVISED - This email originated outside EMCOR.


I have an existing hospital where they are building a new 4 story addition
that will require manual-wet standpipes.  The problem arises is that we are
using an existing common feed riser which has a control valve on it in the
fire pump room.  I know this violates section 6.4.1 (NFPA 14 – 2010ed)  for
no control valves between the FDC and standpipe system.  Is there anything
the precludes me from installing an additional FDC on the new addition to
use the existing feed and satisfy 6.4.1?
Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

*TOTAL* *Mechanical*
*Building* *Integrity*

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.total-2Dmechanical.com_=DwMFaQ=GKdB6-XpYq_0W-WluyVHtw=z4t2hrRBa-JsS06T4X_uuYOSJoclVWgSRO8Nq6TDdsg=ZOxRRaZgf_AM3xCvRTnuDxTRxPttJJdJxk2c4fexLYA=yavv4Zee55Ow3pDpBxztkUy-WA9Ay3v-uSGu-K-gX7Q=>

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
 ___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org=DwICAg=GKdB6-XpYq_0W-WluyVHtw=z4t2hrRBa-JsS06T4X_uuYOSJoclVWgSRO8Nq6TDdsg=ZOxRRaZgf_AM3xCvRTnuDxTRxPttJJdJxk2c4fexLYA=J_oppKbRPdkBZJc4SXO1kTyit03JWUIDIs4wVB8c75o=

This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain
confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No
confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If
you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all
copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the
sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute,
print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended
recipient.
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Remote additional FDC

[Dewayne Martinez]

I have an existing hospital where they are building a new 4 story addition
that will require manual-wet standpipes.  The problem arises is that we are
using an existing common feed riser which has a control valve on it in the
fire pump room.  I know this violates section 6.4.1 (NFPA 14 – 2010ed)  for
no control valves between the FDC and standpipe system.  Is there anything
the precludes me from installing an additional FDC on the new addition to
use the existing feed and satisfy 6.4.1?

Thank you,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Existing 3/4" outlets

[Dewayne Martinez]

That’s a thought.The problem is the original shell with 3/4" uprights
with a pipe centerline of 12" below deck.  No residential uprights in 3/4"
and I thought residential pendant heads are not  listed to be installed
exposed?

Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity

W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/


-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> On
Behalf Of Mike B Morey
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2018 9:57 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Existing 3/4" outlets

You say bushing, I say sprinkler head extension less than 2" per 6.4.8?


Mike Morey
CFPS 3229 • NICET S.E.T. 123677
Project Manager • Fire Protection Group
Shambaugh & Son, LP an EMCOR Company
7614 Opportunity Drive • Fort Wayne, IN • 46825 direct 260.487.7824 /  cell
260.417.0625 /  fax 260.487.7991 email mmo...@shambaugh.com







From:   Dewayne Martinez <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Dewayne Martinez <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Date:   03/15/2018 06:43 PM
Subject:Existing 3/4" outlets
Sent by:"Sprinklerforum"
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>




BE ADVISED - This email originated outside EMCOR.


I have a project that was originally designed as a OH II space that will now
be turned into a light hazard residential exposed “loft” space.  The
existing ¾” K8.0 sprinklers over discharge like crazy.  Can I bush the 3/4'”
outlets down to ½” to use K5.6 sprinklers?  If not any suggestions?



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.total-2Dmechanical.com_=DwIGaQ=GKdB6-XpYq_0W-WluyVHtw=z4t2hrRBa-JsS06T4X_uuYOSJoclVWgSRO8Nq6TDdsg=B1gjGjTnf7-Ej9T8PcnuSRVFemMqu2U1aEPDQxrOPHo=RuZ6bsVtOYaDGrG_UfPQiu-9SlgO6obtB79V-_fi8X8=


[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_private.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org_attachments_20180315_41e14879_attachment.html=DwIGaQ=GKdB6-XpYq_0W-WluyVHtw=z4t2hrRBa-JsS06T4X_uuYOSJoclVWgSRO8Nq6TDdsg=B1gjGjTnf7-Ej9T8PcnuSRVFemMqu2U1aEPDQxrOPHo=6cdt-sQIacSh7qM78kH-MF2ygexAPpze5AppEvB6NWY=
>
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8202 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_private.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org_attachments_20180315_41e14879_attachment.jpg=DwIGaQ=GKdB6-XpYq_0W-WluyVHtw=z4t2hrRBa-JsS06T4X_uuYOSJoclVWgSRO8Nq6TDdsg=B1gjGjTnf7-Ej9T8PcnuSRVFemMqu2U1aEPDQxrOPHo=b2vPc9rxHD40k3ZkHc9JYKjhqeCngJKY6_kzQNoy5EM=
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org=DwIGaQ=GKdB6-XpYq_0W-WluyVHtw=z4t2hrRBa-JsS06T4X_uuYOSJoclVWgSRO8Nq6TDdsg=B1gjGjTnf7-Ej9T8PcnuSRVFemMqu2U1aEPDQxrOPHo=eLw-8Ymu6_DIM_XseIvcGIrkA6vCiJ168TukvdOr5j4=




This message is for the named person's use only.  It may contain
confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No
confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission.  If
you receive this message in error, please  immediately delete it and all
copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the
sender.  You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute,
print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended
recipient.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.firesprinkler.org/private.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org/attachments/20180316/cde5a3c9/attachment.html>
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 47302 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.firesprinkler.org/private.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org/attachments/20180316/cde5a3c9/attachment.jpe>
___
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

Existing 3/4" outlets

[Dewayne Martinez]

I have a project that was originally designed as a OH II space that will
now be turned into a light hazard residential exposed “loft” space.  The
existing ¾” K8.0 sprinklers over discharge like crazy.  Can I bush the
3/4'” outlets down to ½” to use K5.6 sprinklers?  If not any suggestions?



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.firesprinkler.org/private.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org/attachments/20180315/41e14879/attachment.html>
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8202 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://lists.firesprinkler.org/private.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org/attachments/20180315/41e14879/attachment.jpg>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: FDC & Pump

[Dewayne Martinez]

No,

I have had to put an extra control valve for the standpipe feed at point of
connection to the riser manifold in addition to the standpipe isolation
valves.  The AHJ’s reasoning was that if work was required on the feed pipe
it could be isolated and wouldn’t affect the other systems on the manifold.



Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Steve Leyton
*Sent:* Friday, February 02, 2018 9:39 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: FDC & Pump



What valve are you referring to as “standpipe feed” control?  Are you
talking about the isolation valves required in 6.3.2?   If that’s the valve
you’re referring to, then no you do not have to pump downstream of that
(those) valve(s).



The foregoing is my opinion only and is not intended to represent the NFPA
14 Technical Committee, nor serve as an interpretation of the standard.



SL



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dewayne
Martinez
*Sent:* Friday, February 02, 2018 4:29 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: FDC & Pump



Tom,

Are you saying that if I put a control valve for the standpipe feed at the
riser manifold and the FDC is connected to the riser manifold that I must
also connect the FDC downstream of the standpipe feed control valve?  Is
that in 14?  I have had a couple of AHJ’s make me put a control valve in
over the years and I didn’t know it was wrong.  I thought it was just like
the individual system control valves on the manifold.

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Tom Duross
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 31, 2018 4:36 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: FDC & Pump



What Larry said..

And there can’t be any valves between the FDC and the FDV’s on the
standpipe unless you have more than one standpipe and have isolation valves
at the base of each standpipe so you can’t take them off the riser
manifold, for example.

TD





The requirement is from NFPA 13, not from NFPA 20. Here is the text from
NFPA 13-2013:



8.17.2.4.8  Fire department connections shall not be connected on the
suction side of fire pumps.



Larry Keeping





I have always installed FDC's on the discharge side of fire pumps.  Looking
through 2013 NFPA 20, I don't see anything precluding the instillation on
the supply side.  Is the FDC allowed to be installed on the supply?

I have a contractor that has installed the FDC on the supply run-in,
instead of stubing up a secondary line from the remote FDC.

Thanks,

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

RE: FDC & Pump

[Dewayne Martinez]

Tom,

Are you saying that if I put a control valve for the standpipe feed at the
riser manifold and the FDC is connected to the riser manifold that I must
also connect the FDC downstream of the standpipe feed control valve?  Is
that in 14?  I have had a couple of AHJ’s make me put a control valve in
over the years and I didn’t know it was wrong.  I thought it was just like
the individual system control valves on the manifold.

Thank you,

Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*


W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Tom Duross
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 31, 2018 4:36 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: FDC & Pump



What Larry said..

And there can’t be any valves between the FDC and the FDV’s on the
standpipe unless you have more than one standpipe and have isolation valves
at the base of each standpipe so you can’t take them off the riser
manifold, for example.

TD





The requirement is from NFPA 13, not from NFPA 20. Here is the text from
NFPA 13-2013:



8.17.2.4.8  Fire department connections shall not be connected on the
suction side of fire pumps.



Larry Keeping





I have always installed FDC's on the discharge side of fire pumps.  Looking
through 2013 NFPA 20, I don't see anything precluding the instillation on
the supply side.  Is the FDC allowed to be installed on the supply?

I have a contractor that has installed the FDC on the supply run-in,
instead of stubing up a secondary line from the remote FDC.

Thanks,

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

RE: RE: Floating Ceilings

[Dewayne Martinez]

The attachment from this email is a virus so don’t click on it.  I received
one in my personal email.

Thanks,

Dewayne



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Bobby
McCullough
*Sent:* Friday, December 15, 2017 2:58 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: RE: Floating Ceilings



Good Morning,

I have a proposal for you. Please see attached and confirm.







Thank you,



Bobby McCullough, Atlanta Sprinkler

Office: 770-867-5790  ext. 224 Mobile: 678-898-7404

bo...@atlantasprinkler.com   www.atlantasprinkler.com

--

*From:* tay...@sfsprinkler.com
*Sent:* Thu, 14 Dec 2017 17:03:41 +
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Floating Ceilings



Buzz through 8.15, especially 8.15.22, for the other areas. But, if your
sprinkler is within the allowable distance to the ceiling, I can’t think of
a reason why you would need protection above.





*Taylor Schumacher, CET*

Security Fire Sprinkler 

P.O. BOX 7308 | St. Cloud, MN 56302-7308

3308 Southway Drive | St. Cloud, MN 56301

Office: 320.656.0847 | tay...@sfsprinkler.com



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
] *On Behalf Of *Jerry Van
Kolken
*Sent:* Thursday, December 14, 2017 10:49 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Floating Ceilings



In most case yes.



Jerry Van Kolken

*Millennium Fire Protection*

(760) 722-2722



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
] *On Behalf Of *Taylor
Schumacher
*Sent:* Thursday, December 14, 2017 4:30 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Floating Ceilings



Can the pendent be less than 12” from the main ceiling?





*Taylor Schumacher, CET*

Security Fire Sprinkler 

P.O. BOX 7308 | St. Cloud, MN 56302-7308

3308 Southway Drive | St. Cloud, MN 56301

Office: 320.656.0847 | tay...@sfsprinkler.com



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
] *On Behalf Of *Jerry Van
Kolken
*Sent:* Wednesday, December 13, 2017 6:03 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Floating Ceilings



I have some floating ceilings that will possible have a space greater than
6” from the framing to the deck above. On 2 sides they are roughly 6” from
a soffit and ranged from 18” to 48” from the far wall. It seems very
impractical to install sprinkler above these ceiling, but I’m not sure what
exclusions would allow me to not have to install the sprinkler above this
ceiling arrangement. The ceilings are of limited combustibility under a
concrete deck.



Any suggestions would be appreciated.



Thanks





Jerry Van Kolken

*Millennium Fire Protection Corp.*

2950 San Luis Rey Rd.

Oceanside, CA 92058

(760) 722-2722 FX 722-2730
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: High-Rise with Secondary Water Supply

[Dewayne Martinez]

In Wisconsin the pipe before the BFP is plumbing if it’s a combined
domestic/fire main otherwise it is all fire protection.  If it’s fire
protection we could use either brass, copper, stainless steel or galvanized
steel (ASTM53 IE:Sch40) for our exposed metal pipe choices before the BFP.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Ron Greenman
*Sent:* Wednesday, December 06, 2017 11:20 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: High-Rise with Secondary Water Supply



Galvanized is not considered to a potable piping per the USC guidelines.
Water purveyors determine where backflows need to be per the Yellow Book
 (AWWA M14) and their own interpretations/requirements to it. Some are very
sensitive to long runs of static lines. Some consider 8 feet to be the max
before a backflow is required even in potable piping. Last I heard all
piping from the property line to the building needs Backflow protection.
They do freeze so the device needs to be in a vault. Some Puget Sound
purveyors want it outside in a vault, some want it as soon as possible
inside the building. Some allow it to be where you want it as long as all
piping before it is potable.



Crazy Washington law for all backflows. The health and plumbing codes allow
only licensed plumbers to install backflows within the building perimeter
but the sprinkler contractor can install it if outside the building
footprint. A BAT can certify and repair one but can't install it. A plumber
can install and repair one but not certify it. Install means connect it to
the upstream piping. Just to get one into a sprinkler lead-in requires
three trades and three different inspectors. And of course three sets of
fees. Of course, enforcement of all this is only as good as the enforcers
and so you'll find a lot of non-potable piping where potable is supposed to
be, and approved by the FM but, never seen by the water quality guy, and
uncertified backflow devices.





On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Steve Leyton 
wrote:

We’re subordinate to the water purveyor in CA and there isn’t a water
district I know that won’t require the BFP to be installed as close to the
PL as possible because we’re almost universally NOT subject to freezing.



SL



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Roland
Huggins
*Sent:* Wednesday, December 06, 2017 5:49 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: High-Rise with Secondary Water Supply



What’s your foundation for basing the requirements assigned to the private
main (not municipal mains) as being only the plumbing code until reaching a
BFP.  Isn’t the private main before the BFP also supplying the fire
protection system thus its the same as the underground after the BFP.



What’s everybody else doing on this?





Roland Huggins, PE - Senior VP Engineering

American Fire Sprinkler Assn.

Dallas, TX

http://www.firesprinkler.org



Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives







On Dec 6, 2017, at 1:47 PM, Prahl, Craig/GVL  wrote:



This section of pipe would not be a fire main, it would be part of the
domestic water service, installed under the plumbing code by the plumber,
not the sprinkler contractor until it gets to the BFP.


*Craig L. Prahl*
Fire Protection Group Lead/SME




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





-- 

Ron Greenman


rongreen...@gmail.com

253.576.9700



The Universe is monstrously indifferent to the presence of man. -Werner
Herzog, screenwriter, film director, author, actor and opera
director (1942-)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Fabric Ductwork - ESFR obstruction?

[Dewayne Martinez]

Received a unofficial response from NFPA that the collapsible fabric ducts
do need ESFR sprinkler heads underneath if they don’t comply with the ESFR
obstruction rules.

Thanks,

Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]











*From:* Dewayne Martinez [mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com]
*Sent:* Thursday, November 09, 2017 7:31 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
*Subject:* RE: Fabric Ductwork - ESFR obstruction?



Yes, it is the collapsible type.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Prahl,
Craig/GVL
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 08, 2017 4:29 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Fabric Ductwork - ESFR obstruction?



Some of the fabric duct is designed not to collapse.  I’m assuming this has
been verified as not being that type?





*Craig L. Prahl *Fire Protection Group Lead/SME
*CH2M*
200 Verdae Blvd.
Greenville, SC  29607
Direct - 864.920.7540

Fax - 864.920.7129

CH2MHILL Extension  77540
craig.pr...@ch2m.com



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dewayne
Martinez
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 08, 2017 5:06 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
*Subject:* Fabric Ductwork - ESFR obstruction? [EXTERNAL]



NFPA 13, 07ed



ESFR System

What are the obstructions rules concerning a fabric supply duct installed
below an ESFR system.

The RTU will shut down and collapse the duct under any of the following
conditions – Flow switch activation, heat detector and pull stations.

I don’t think it should be considered an obstruction but we have a AHJ that
is concerned that there could be up to a 60sec delay if the collapse is
triggered by the flow switch and is requiring sprinklers below unless we
can show otherwise.

Thanks,

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

RE: Fabric Ductwork - ESFR obstruction?

[Dewayne Martinez]

Yes, it is the collapsible type.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Prahl,
Craig/GVL
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 08, 2017 4:29 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Fabric Ductwork - ESFR obstruction?



Some of the fabric duct is designed not to collapse.  I’m assuming this has
been verified as not being that type?




*Craig L. Prahl*
Fire Protection Group Lead/SME
*CH2M*
200 Verdae Blvd.
Greenville, SC  29607
Direct - 864.920.7540

Fax - 864.920.7129

CH2MHILL Extension  77540
craig.pr...@ch2m.com



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dewayne
Martinez
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 08, 2017 5:06 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
*Subject:* Fabric Ductwork - ESFR obstruction? [EXTERNAL]



NFPA 13, 07ed



ESFR System

What are the obstructions rules concerning a fabric supply duct installed
below an ESFR system.

The RTU will shut down and collapse the duct under any of the following
conditions – Flow switch activation, heat detector and pull stations.

I don’t think it should be considered an obstruction but we have a AHJ that
is concerned that there could be up to a 60sec delay if the collapse is
triggered by the flow switch and is requiring sprinklers below unless we
can show otherwise.

Thanks,

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

Fabric Ductwork - ESFR obstruction?

[Dewayne Martinez]

NFPA 13, 07ed



ESFR System

What are the obstructions rules concerning a fabric supply duct installed
below an ESFR system.

The RTU will shut down and collapse the duct under any of the following
conditions – Flow switch activation, heat detector and pull stations.

I don’t think it should be considered an obstruction but we have a AHJ that
is concerned that there could be up to a 60sec delay if the collapse is
triggered by the flow switch and is requiring sprinklers below unless we
can show otherwise.

Thanks,

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

RE: Electric unit heaters

[Dewayne Martinez]

You are correct Ron.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *rongreenman .
*Sent:* Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:09 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: Electric unit heaters



If the heaters were to start a fire what would be the fuel source? What
would actually be on fire? From the description I’m guessing the only
combustible would be the insulation on the units’ wiring.



On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 12:51 PM Dewayne Martinez <
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com> wrote:

NFPA 13 07ed



Noncombustible parking garage where they are adding a non-combustible
ceiling and 3 electric unit heaters above the ceiling to keep this space
warm for plumbing drain pipes.  Do I need sprinkler protection in the space
above the ceiling?  My instinct tells me yes, at least local protection by
the UH’s but I can’t find it in NFPA 13.

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]





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

-- 

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

Electric unit heaters

[Dewayne Martinez]

NFPA 13 07ed



Noncombustible parking garage where they are adding a non-combustible
ceiling and 3 electric unit heaters above the ceiling to keep this space
warm for plumbing drain pipes.  Do I need sprinkler protection in the space
above the ceiling?  My instinct tells me yes, at least local protection by
the UH’s but I can’t find it in NFPA 13.

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL** Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: NFPA 13 edition in Wisconsin

[Dewayne Martinez]

WI follows the 2009ed of the IBC so 2007ed of NFPA 13 is what we follow.

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]









*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Reed A.
Roisum, SET
*Sent:* Tuesday, October 17, 2017 1:02 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* NFPA 13 edition in Wisconsin



I am finding conflicting answers as to what edition of NFPA 13 is
applicable in Wisconsin.  It appears as though IBC 2009 is the applicable
building code, which references NFPA 13, 2007 edition.  However, I have in
my notes that NFPA 13, 2010 edition is the applicable edition for some
reason.  It may be because I believe NFPA 1, 2012 edition is the adopted
fire code and that would reference NFPA 13, 2010 edition??



Can anyone point me to something definitive for Wisconsin’s applicable
edition of NFPA 13?



Thank you.



Reed





Reed A. Roisum, SET *|* *Karges-Faulconbridge, Inc.* *|* Senior Fire
Protection Designer *|* Fargo, ND *|** direct: *701.552.9903* | **mobile:*
701.388.1352 *|* *KFIengineers.com* <http://www.kfiengineers.com>


__
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
__
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Central sprinkler butterfly valve

[Dewayne Martinez]

Does anyone have a cut sheet for an old Central sprinkler butterfly valve.

I’m looking for parts for it.

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL** Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Schedule 10 vs Schedule 40 pipe

[Dewayne Martinez]

I like what Ryan suggests.  I have also  seen it requested that if sch 40
is required it will be cut grooved for pipe 2” and larger and that all
installed piping shall either be seamless or must be fabricated with the
seam not on the bottom.  My fabricator said this would not be a problem as
long as they knew about it prior to fabrication.



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL* *Mechanical*

*Building* *Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]







*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Hinson, Ryan
*Sent:* Tuesday, October 03, 2017 1:18 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Schedule 10 vs Schedule 40 pipe



I would say to use nitrogen in lieu of shop air and then use schedule 10
for sizes larger than 2”.



*Ryan L. Hinson**, PE*, SET***  \  Burns & McDonnell

Senior Fire Protection Engineer

*O* 952-656-3662 \  *M* 320-250-5404  \  *F* 952-229-2923

*rhin...@burnsmcd.com <rhin...@burnsmcd.com>*  \  burnsmcd.com
<http://www.burnsmcd.com/>

8201 Norman Center Drive, Suite 300  \  Bloomington, MN 55437

*Registered in: LA, MD, MN, PA, TX, & UT

**NICET IV - Water-Based Systems Layout



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Mike
Stossel
*Sent:* Tuesday, October 03, 2017 12:50 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Schedule 10 vs Schedule 40 pipe



In my opinion if the schedule 40 is going to be grooved than it would
probably be worth it, but if they are going to thread the schedule 40 than
schedule 10 will most likely outlast the 40. I am basing this on schedule
10 grooved piping having a better corrosion resistance ration than threaded
schedule 40.



Mike Stossel *SET*

[image: 400dpiLogoCropped]

36 Barren Road

East Stroudsburg, PA 18302

Office: 973-670-2627

m...@knssprinkler.com



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *John
Paulsen
*Sent:* Tuesday, October 3, 2017 1:34 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Schedule 10 vs Schedule 40 pipe



Hello Forumites:



We are working to develop a bid package for a pair of large freezers and
coolers used for food stuffs storage on racks to 35’. The freezers are to
be -10 degrees and the coolers will be 31 degrees. The sprinklers systems
will be double interlock pre-action with Protecto-wire detection and CMSA
sprinklers.



My question: The owner is asking for a recommendation on whether to
spec schedule 10 or schedule 40 piping. The concern is long term
serviceability of the piping system. My initial thought is that due to the
constant low ambient temperatures corrosion would be seriously inhibited
for two reasons; any condensate in the pipe would be in frozen form and the
low temps would inhibit microbial growth. So my thought is that schedule 10
pipe would last the 20 year expected service life of the system. However, I
would like to get the thoughts of the forum participants, is the cost of
schedule 40 warranted or would schedule 10 service just as well in this
application?



Thanks in advance for your responses.



John Paulsen – SET

Crown Fire System Design

6282 Seeds Rd.

Grove City, OH 43123

P – 614-782-2438

F – 614-782-2374

C – 614-348-8206
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Radiant heat panels

[Dewayne Martinez]

Is there any guidance on the distance away from radiant heat panels (180F)
for ordinary and intermediate temperature sprinklers in NFPA?

We follow the 2007 edition of 13.  I told my designer to treat them as a
horizontal discharge diffuser for right now but wanted to see if there was
more information available.

Thank you,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL** Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Outrigger BL off mains - NFPA 13 (07ed)

[Dewayne Martinez]

Makes perfect sense Steve, thanks.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Steve Leyton
*Sent:* Friday, August 11, 2017 11:33 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Outrigger BL off mains - NFPA 13 (07ed)



What I’ve always tried to do in that situation was put the main on the “in”
side of the truss or beam it was hanging from, pass the tail-backs under
the same member and catch a hanger on the “out” side.  If the pipe to the
last sprinkler had to be longer, just increase the pipe size.



Steve L



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dewayne
Martinez
*Sent:* Friday, August 11, 2017 9:12 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
*Subject:* Outrigger BL off mains - NFPA 13 (07ed)



I had a AHJ question recently why we didn’t have hangers on our branch
lines coming off the backside of the main.  They are 2 ½” supplying one
sprinkler and are 36” long.  I was taught to use the lengths specified in
9.2.3.4.1 (unsupported lengths) and consider my main pipe as the “hanger”
required.  Have I been wrong all these years?

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: [EXTERNAL] Outrigger BL off mains - NFPA 13 (07ed)

[Dewayne Martinez]

It’s comes off the tee on a RN.  The sprinkler is a upright.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *
Kyle.Montgomery
*Sent:* Friday, August 11, 2017 11:17 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: [EXTERNAL] Outrigger BL off mains - NFPA 13 (07ed)



Well, if they are only supplying one head, then “technically” they are an
armover, right? Are they attached directly to the main, or on a tee at the
top of a riser nipple?



-Kyle M



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dewayne
Martinez
*Sent:* Friday, August 11, 2017 9:12 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
*Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Outrigger BL off mains - NFPA 13 (07ed)



I had a AHJ question recently why we didn’t have hangers on our branch
lines coming off the backside of the main.  They are 2 ½” supplying one
sprinkler and are 36” long.  I was taught to use the lengths specified in
9.2.3.4.1 (unsupported lengths) and consider my main pipe as the “hanger”
required.  Have I been wrong all these years?

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Outrigger BL off mains - NFPA 13 (07ed)

[Dewayne Martinez]

I had a AHJ question recently why we didn’t have hangers on our branch
lines coming off the backside of the main.  They are 2 ½” supplying one
sprinkler and are 36” long.  I was taught to use the lengths specified in
9.2.3.4.1 (unsupported lengths) and consider my main pipe as the “hanger”
required.  Have I been wrong all these years?

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL** Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: 10" pipe with 1.0 CRR

[Dewayne Martinez]

We can only  find cut sheets for 10” sch 40 that show a CRR of 1.0

We have reached out to our suppliers and they have nothing either and the
EOR wants a cut sheet….



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Richard Carr
*Sent:* Friday, August 11, 2017 8:22 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: 10" pipe with 1.0 CRR



I thought that as a manufacturing standard all steel pipe regardless of
schedule had to have a CRR of 1 or greater.



Richard Carr, SET

Branch Manager

Cox Fire Protection, Inc

6555 Grace Lane.

Jacksonville, Fl. 32205

rc...@coxfire.com

904-781-8227



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Mark.Phelps
*Sent:* Friday, August 11, 2017 9:00 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: 10" pipe with 1.0 CRR



Isn't the CRR based on the actual remaining wall thickness at the root of
the first exposed thread outside of a fitting? So if you're not threading
it, it should theoretically have a CRR greater than 1.0. Also, I believe
the term Standard wall pipe in 10" diameter refers to schedule 30.

Mark at Aero

602 820-7894



Sent from my iPad


On Aug 11, 2017, at 5:49 AM, Mike Stossel <m...@knssprinkler.com> wrote:

It has always been my understanding that the corrosion resistance ratio
benchmark of (1) is based on threaded schedule 40 steel, so I believe any
other pipe type would have a better or worse ratio, but not the same.



Mike Stossel *SET*



36 Barren Road

East Stroudsburg, PA 18302

Office: 973-670-2627

m...@knssprinkler.com



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dewayne
Martinez
*Sent:* Friday, August 11, 2017 8:39 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
*Subject:* 10" pipe with 1.0 CRR



Anyone know of 10in non-sch40 pipe that has a CRR of 1?  Have a project
where the EOR is insisting on this.  They also have a 100lb maximum point
load per hanger…..but that is a conversation for another day!

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*









___
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

10" pipe with 1.0 CRR

[Dewayne Martinez]

Anyone know of 10in non-sch40 pipe that has a CRR of 1?  Have a project
where the EOR is insisting on this.  They also have a 100lb maximum point
load per hanger…..but that is a conversation for another day!

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL** Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

ESFR with solid shelve racks

[Dewayne Martinez]

NFPA 13 (16ed) sections 16.1.6.6 and 16.1.6.8



I have a customer that installed solid shelve racks in part of a warehouse
protected with ESFR sprinklers.  NFPA 2016 allows this provided we follow
section 16.1.6.  What overhead density would I use for the ESFR
sprinklers?  Is 16.1.6.8 saying that I should use the same overhead density
as the original design (K14 @ 50psi) balanced with the in rack sprinklers?


Does 16.1.6.6 allow a calculation to be run only for the demand of the in
rack sprinklers without the overhead system?

Thanks,

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

Galvanized pipe before backflow

[Dewayne Martinez]

Wisconsin requires when using steel pipe on the potable water side of the
backflow preventer that it be ASTM A53 galvanized.  Does ASTM A53 only come
in Sch 40?

Thanks,



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

RE: Potter WLS

[Dewayne Martinez]

We use a lot of buried concrete tanks up here and typically use 2 sump
floats (one for high and one for low alarms).  The low one also operates a
solenoid valve for the auto fill.

Dewayne



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Richard Mote
*Sent:* Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Potter WLS



Looking for an alternative to the Potter Electric Tank *W*ater *L*evel
*S*witch.
For whatever reason Potter has this item on backorder until the end of
July. We have to be done and off the job by the end of June. Looking for an
alternative, or maybe someone has one setting around they want to sell.



*Richard Mote*

Design Manager

[image: http://www.rowesprinkler.com/emailsig/Email_Sig_Logo.jpg]

*P:* 570.837.7647  ·  *W:* 877.324.ROWE  ·  *F:* 570.837.6335

PO Box 407 · 7993 US Route 522, Suite 1 · Middleburg, PA 17842

*RoweSprinkler.com  *·  rich...@rowesprinkler.com



*** Confidentiality Notice ***

This email and any attachments thereto may contain information that is
privileged and confidential and is intended only for the use of the
addressee. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an
authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
us immediately by e-mail at *rich...@rowesprinkler.com
* or by telephone at *570-837-7647* and delete
the message and any attachments permanently from your system.
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Pump pads

[Dewayne Martinez]

I was taught it was a requirement of the pump manufactures for horizontal
split case pumps.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *John Irwin
*Sent:* Monday, June 12, 2017 11:11 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Pump pads



We have a client who wants us to install our pumps directly to the floor
with no maintenance pads. We can't find a requirement in 20 that says we
must have pads.



What say you?







John Irwin

Division Manager - Fire Sprinklers

Critical System Solutions

jir...@criticalsystemsolutions.com

813-618-2781





Sent from a mobile device. Please forgive brevity, spelling errors and
punctuation gaffes.
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Golf simulator

[Dewayne Martinez]

I have a room with a 10’2” ceiling where a self-contained golf simulator is
to be place in.  The simulator is 10’0” high which will leave 2in clearance
between it and the ceiling.  The simulator will be situated so that there
will be 18” of clearance between itself and the 3 walls surrounding it.
The footprint of the simulator is 9’6”x16’6”.

1)  Do I need  sprinklers in the simulator?

2)  Since there is only two inches of space above the simulator do I
even need sprinklers in the ceiling above it?



My thought was to provide ceiling protection for the pockets created on the
sides of the simulator and put sprinklers in the simulator itself.



Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL** Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: Consecutive Honors 2012-2017]
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Racks wider than 4ft...sprinklers needed below?

[Dewayne Martinez]

Update….These are racks that are in front of the loading docks which have
“high lift “ overhead doors so there is a clear area in front of each door
under the rack level.  The AHJ wants HSW sprinklers under the racks in
these areas because they are over 4ft wide and if they are full of product
will act like an overhead door.  I don’t feel we need additional
protection  here….Who Is right?



*From:* Dewayne Martinez [mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com]
*Sent:* Friday, April 21, 2017 7:01 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
*Subject:* RE: Racks wider than 4ft...sprinklers needed below?



Never mind, I found it in the definition of single row rack – 6ft wide.



*From:* Dewayne Martinez [mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com]
*Sent:* Friday, April 21, 2017 6:54 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
*Subject:* Racks wider than 4ft...sprinklers needed below?



NFPA 13 (07ed)

I have an inspector that is requesting in-rack sprinklers for a single row
rack located along an outside wall because the rack shelves are wider than
4ft (open shelve).  The OHS is capable of protecting the racks W/O in-rack
sprinklers.  Is there something in NFPA to address this either way?

Thanks,

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

RE: Racks wider than 4ft...sprinklers needed below?

[Dewayne Martinez]

Never mind, I found it in the definition of single row rack – 6ft wide.



*From:* Dewayne Martinez [mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com]
*Sent:* Friday, April 21, 2017 6:54 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
*Subject:* Racks wider than 4ft...sprinklers needed below?



NFPA 13 (07ed)

I have an inspector that is requesting in-rack sprinklers for a single row
rack located along an outside wall because the rack shelves are wider than
4ft (open shelve).  The OHS is capable of protecting the racks W/O in-rack
sprinklers.  Is there something in NFPA to address this either way?

Thanks,

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

Racks wider than 4ft...sprinklers needed below?

[Dewayne Martinez]

NFPA 13 (07ed)

I have an inspector that is requesting in-rack sprinklers for a single row
rack located along an outside wall because the rack shelves are wider than
4ft (open shelve).  The OHS is capable of protecting the racks W/O in-rack
sprinklers.  Is there something in NFPA to address this either way?

Thanks,

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

RE: Sensing line fittings

[Dewayne Martinez]

We have used them and haven’t run into any problems.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Ben Young
*Sent:* Monday, April 17, 2017 5:50 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Sensing line fittings



Is there any reason I couldn't use ProPress (PressFit) fittings on hard
copper tube for fire pump sensing lines?

They are listed and approved for fire protection use by 13, and are
pressure rated for 175 PSI, so as long as my pump doesn't exceed that at
churn it should be OK based on my reading of 20 which only talks about the
piping materials.


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

RE: NFPA 13 dry system - residential sprinklers

[Dewayne Martinez]

Thanks Ed, I missed the one about the K-factors.  I took a look at the
inspections tags and the dry system has 70sec trip times so it looks like a
wet system is the way to go.  We could retrofit the valve with an
electronic accelerator but Tyco states to only expect the trip time to get
about 20sec better.

Dewayne



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Ed Kramer
*Sent:* Thursday, April 06, 2017 11:47 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: NFPA 13 dry system - residential sprinklers



A couple of things to consider:

-Section 8.4.5.2 – can’t use residential sprinks on a dry system
unless specifically listed for dry systems.

-Section 8.3.4.1(2) – Unless the pipe is galvanized or otherwise
corrosion resistant, minimum K-factor is 5.6.



So you’ll need a residential sprink that is listed for dry systems and is
K5.6 or greater.



Ed Kramer



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dewayne
Martinez
*Sent:* Thursday, April 06, 2017 8:13 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
*Subject:* NFPA 13 dry system - residential sprinklers



NFPA 13 (07ed)



I have an existing 5th floor shell space that is installed as a light
hazard dry system that has pipe in the shell space and in the attic.  They
are turning this floor into a dormitory (R-2).

1)Can I use listed residential heads on return bends and only pick up 4
heads per 11.3.1.1 or will I need to pick up 1950SF?  What if there are
incidental areas such as a laundry room, ect. in the same areas as the dorm
rooms?

2)What would be the required trip time be per Table 7.2.3.6.1?  15sec for
residential or 60sec for light hazard?



Thanks,

Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: cid:image001.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0] [image:
cid:image002.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0] [image:
cid:image003.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0] [image: Top Workplaces 2015]



*TOTAL Mechanical voted “Top Workplace” for a 4th consecutive year. *
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: NFPA 13 dry system - residential sprinklers

[Dewayne Martinez]

That was one of my concerns also. R-2 floor occupancy, calculating it per
light hazard but using residential heads.  If the R-2 occupancy is what
would dictate the 15sec delivery time then it wouldn’t matter what type of
heads I used in the residential areas.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Travis Mack
*Sent:* Thursday, April 06, 2017 8:58 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: NFPA 13 dry system - residential sprinklers



Double check delivery times. I think you need a 15 second delivery time in
residential areas.

Travis Mack, SET

MFP Design, LLC

"Follow" us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/MFP-Design-LLC/92218417692

Send large files to MFP Design via:

https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign



Sent from my iPhone


On Apr 6, 2017, at 6:31 AM, Dewayne Martinez <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
wrote:

The dry portion below the attic was laid out at max 15x15 spacing with the
lines at 15ft above the floor.  The way the rooms layout there are long
runs with 8ft ceilings so I was going to drop down once to feed all these
rooms with one line but I still need to size it.  This reviewer will still
make us calculate the residential build out portion.  I can get by with a
1 1/4" line calculating  4 heads.

-Original Message-
From: Mark Phillips [mailto:markphill...@webolton.com
<markphill...@webolton.com>]
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 8:17 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Subject: Re: NFPA 13 dry system - residential sprinklers

If I'm understanding
The roof system is unchanged and your adding a lower supply to be rooms.

Use standard qr heads and same pipe sizes

The roof is still most demanding

Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Droid
On Apr 6, 2017 9:14 AM, Dewayne Martinez <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
wrote:
NFPA 13 (07ed)

I have an existing 5th floor shell space that is installed as a light
hazard dry system that has pipe in the shell space and in the attic.  They
are turning this floor into a dormitory (R-2).
1)Can I use listed residential heads on return bends and only pick up 4
heads per 11.3.1.1 or will I need to pick up 1950SF?  What if there are
incidental areas such as a laundry room, ect. in the same areas as the
dorm rooms?
2)What would be the required trip time be per Table 7.2.3.6.1?  15sec for
residential or 60sec for light hazard?

Thanks,
Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
<dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[cid:image001.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0] [cid:image002.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0]
[cid:image003.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0]  [Top Workplaces 2015]

TOTAL Mechanical voted "Top Workplace" for a 4th consecutive year.
___
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 13 dry system - residential sprinklers

[Dewayne Martinez]

The dry portion below the attic was laid out at max 15x15 spacing with the
lines at 15ft above the floor.  The way the rooms layout there are long
runs with 8ft ceilings so I was going to drop down once to feed all these
rooms with one line but I still need to size it.  This reviewer will still
make us calculate the residential build out portion.  I can get by with a
1 1/4" line calculating  4 heads.

-Original Message-
From: Mark Phillips [mailto:markphill...@webolton.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 8:17 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
Subject: Re: NFPA 13 dry system - residential sprinklers

If I'm understanding
The roof system is unchanged and your adding a lower supply to be rooms.

Use standard qr heads and same pipe sizes

The roof is still most demanding

Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Droid
On Apr 6, 2017 9:14 AM, Dewayne Martinez <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
wrote:
NFPA 13 (07ed)

I have an existing 5th floor shell space that is installed as a light
hazard dry system that has pipe in the shell space and in the attic.  They
are turning this floor into a dormitory (R-2).
1)Can I use listed residential heads on return bends and only pick up 4
heads per 11.3.1.1 or will I need to pick up 1950SF?  What if there are
incidental areas such as a laundry room, ect. in the same areas as the
dorm rooms?
2)What would be the required trip time be per Table 7.2.3.6.1?  15sec for
residential or 60sec for light hazard?

Thanks,
Dewayne Martinez
Fire Protection Design Manager

TOTAL Mechanical
Building Integrity
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com<mailto:dmarti...@total-mechanical.com>
Ph:  262-522-7110
Cell: 414-406-5208
http://www.total-mechanical.com/

[cid:image001.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0] [cid:image002.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0]
[cid:image003.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0]  [Top Workplaces 2015]

TOTAL Mechanical voted "Top Workplace" for a 4th consecutive year.
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

NFPA 13 dry system - residential sprinklers

[Dewayne Martinez]

NFPA 13 (07ed)



I have an existing 5th floor shell space that is installed as a light
hazard dry system that has pipe in the shell space and in the attic.  They
are turning this floor into a dormitory (R-2).

1)Can I use listed residential heads on return bends and only pick up 4
heads per 11.3.1.1 or will I need to pick up 1950SF?  What if there are
incidental areas such as a laundry room, ect. in the same areas as the dorm
rooms?

2)What would be the required trip time be per Table 7.2.3.6.1?  15sec for
residential or 60sec for light hazard?



Thanks,

Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL** Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: cid:image001.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0] [image:
cid:image002.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0] [image:
cid:image003.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0] [image: Top Workplaces 2015]



*TOTAL Mechanical voted “Top Workplace” for a 4th consecutive year. *
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Fire pump removal

[Dewayne Martinez]

This is a historical building that has been sinking for the last 50 + years
because it was built on a filled in swamp. Original footings are wood that
are now being replaced with concrete.  The entire lower level has to be
gutted and dug up hence the removal of the fire pump.  There is no option
to put the pump on the 1st floor because it is fully occupied.  The current
pump is an electric and will be eventually replaced with a new electric
pump.  They want to use the existing city water lead to supply a temporary
pump outside the building for around 6 months while they do the work.  Just
seeing if there is a better option.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Steve Leyton
*Sent:* Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:38 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Fire pump removal



I guess “a little more information” would be helpful.   The implication is
that the fire pump room and the equipment located there is being displaced
by these improvements but the building is intended to be at least partially
occupied during the impairment.Why didn’t anyone point out to them that
they need to create a temporary pump room or relocate the pump room as part
of the project? When you say “long-term removal”, is the program to put
the same pump back into service?   Is it electric- or diesel-driven?



Steve L.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dewayne
Martinez
*Sent:* Thursday, March 16, 2017 6:35 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Cc:* dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
*Subject:* Fire pump removal



I have a project in which there will be long term removal (3-6months)of the
existing fire pump for building improvements.  We need to keep the systems
in service and this building is considered a high rise (110ft).  What are
some of my options?  I thought possibly just using the incoming city water
supply and asking the fire department for permission but based upon the
available static of 42psi we would have a negative pressure for the top
floor.  We could rent a portable fire pump but would still need to get
water to and from the outside unit and it gets cold up here in Wisconsin.

Thanks,

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

Fire pump removal

[Dewayne Martinez]

I have a project in which there will be long term removal (3-6months)of the
existing fire pump for building improvements.  We need to keep the systems
in service and this building is considered a high rise (110ft).  What are
some of my options?  I thought possibly just using the incoming city water
supply and asking the fire department for permission but based upon the
available static of 42psi we would have a negative pressure for the top
floor.  We could rent a portable fire pump but would still need to get
water to and from the outside unit and it gets cold up here in Wisconsin.

Thanks,

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

Dry system return bend - aux drain needed?

[Dewayne Martinez]

NFPA 13 (07ed)



Section 8.16.2.5.3.3 states that aux drains are not required for pipe drops
supplying dry-pendant sprinklers installed per 7.2.2

7.2.2 address both listed dry type sprinklers and pendant sprinklers
installed on a return bend in a heated space



I have someone questioning if aux drains are required for pendant
sprinklers on return bends because they not specifically “dry-pendant”.  I
have always figured that if they were in section 7.2.2 then no aux drain
would be needed.  What say’s the forum on this?

Thanks,



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

RE: Dwelling Unit Sprinkler Calc

[Dewayne Martinez]

NFPA 13 (10) section 11.3.1.1 also includes “adjacent”.  What does this
mean actually?  4 heads on the same line regardless of the walls or 4 heads
in the same area but may be supplied from different lines?  The pictures in
the appendix are not very clear.

Thanks,

Dewayne



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *
wmens...@comcast.net
*Sent:* Friday, July 08, 2016 9:13 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum
*Subject:* Re: Dwelling Unit Sprinkler Calc



In response to the original question, is it just me or are we over-thinking
this?

NFPA 13 says that when using residential heads, you calculate the 4 heads
that produce the greatest hydraulic demand.  No mention of units, rated
walls, corridors, type of construction, etc.



I didn't know George Church, but I would have liked him.


--

*From: *"Travis Mack" 
*To: *b...@firebyknight.com, "sprinklerforum" <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
*Sent: *Tuesday, July 5, 2016 3:44:35 PM
*Subject: *Re: Dwelling Unit Sprinkler Calc



I'd probably grab the adjacent sprinkler in the adjacent room.







Travis Mack, SET

MFP Design, LLC

"Follow" us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/MFP-Design-LLC/92218417692

Send large files to MFP Design via:

https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign



Sent from my iPhone


On Jul 5, 2016, at 12:34 PM, Bob  wrote:



I have a NFPA 13 building with Dwelling Units.  They each have three
Residential Sprinklers.  13 requires a four head calc.  Can I calc the 3
residential sprinklers and pick up one QR sprinkler in the corridor and
still satisfy the 4 head requirement?  Or, should I pick up one residential
sprinkler from an adjacent dwelling room?



Thank you,



Bob Knight, CET III

208-318-3057





___
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: Yard FDC Supply Line

[Dewayne Martinez]

See NFPA 13 (07ed) A8.17.2.3



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *John Paulsen
*Sent:* Tuesday, February 14, 2017 2:31 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Yard FDC Supply Line



Afternoon all!



I am trying to respond to a project engineers review letter questioning the
size of the supply line for the FDC connection.



First, the facts:



Hazard –  Big Box Grocery Store

Systems -3 Wet Grid systems fed
by 2, 3” risers and a 4” riser for the stock room area which is .39 for
2,000 and is the  greatest demand.

FDC - 5” Stortz yard
connection in the parking lot in front of the store. The risers are located
in the rear. The site contractor has run 6” ductile

>From the FDC to a spigot piece at the front of the building and we are
proposing to connect to the spigot piece and run 4” through the store to
the riser manifold.

Fire

Department -I contact the local FD and obtained their standard response
pumper pressures – 150 PSI / 1,500 GPM



I have reviewed NFPA-13 8.17.2 and I am trying to determine the proper
procedure for calculating the FDC line size. I can configure the source of
supply as the FDC with the pumper output as the supply curve, remove the
municipal water supply and the results show that this meets the demand for
2 of the 3 systems. The greatest demand system (the Stock Room) is 13 PSI
over the curve for the FDC supply.



I have always sized the FDC Connection as 4” or the size of the largest
riser pipe and as a “supplemental supply” to be used in conjunction with
the city water supply, not an alternative source independent of the
municipal supply. The only thing that I can find that would seem to support
the Engineer’s position is 8.17.2.4.7.2 which calls for a sign at the FDC
telling the responders the required inlet pressure (above 150 PSI) required
to meet the greatest demand. There is nothing in 8.17.2.3 that says the
size is determined by the greatest system demand.



The way I am seeing this right now, I have two choices:



1.)Increase the interior 4” to 6” as the engineer wants.

OR

2.)Have a sign installed on the FDC asking for 175 PSI inlet pressure
(After getting AHJ blessing of course) and hope the engineer will accept
it.



Now I ask for other opinions from my learned colleagues.



Thanks,



John Paulsen – SET

Crown Fire System Design

6282 Seeds Rd.

Grove City, OH 43123

P – 614-782-2438

F – 614-782-2374

C – 614-348-8206
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Commodity class upgrade?

[Dewayne Martinez]

Travis,

There is a section in the appendix which shows milk going from a Class I to
Group A plastic with the addition of plastic crates.  Maybe that’s where
you saw it.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Roland
Huggins
*Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2017 11:34 AM
*To:* SprinklerFORUM
*Subject:* Re: Commodity class upgrade?



There is guidance in the annex about when the definition of Class IV for
the allowed amount of plastics does not apply.  That being location within
the load.  Look at A.5.6.1.1 and Table A.5.6.3 (2013 edition) for plastic
jars  and more specifically Plastic Crates and note C.  Note C points out
that openings in the crates reduces the classification (using the
non-quantified statement of - as the openings become larger).





Roland Huggins, PE - Senior VP Engineering

American Fire Sprinkler Assn.

Dallas, TX

http://www.firesprinkler.org



Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives









On Feb 11, 2017, at 11:33 AM, Travis Mack  wrote:



I have a project where they are storing class III commodities in plastic
totes. The product is stored on racks with 12' to top of storage.



Does the plastic totes cause me to increase / modify the commodity class? I
swear I read something about that in the storage chapters but I can't seem
to locate it. This jurisdiction is under the 2013 edition of NFPA 13.



Travis Mack, SET

MFP Design, LLC

"Follow" us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/MFP-Design-LLC/92218417692

Send large files to MFP Design via:

https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign



Sent from my iPhone

___
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: Combustible concealed space under stair

[Dewayne Martinez]

It’s just a dead space under the stairs with exposed 2x4 studs but no
access.  It is well under 55SF.  What originally brought this up was a call
from my fitter asking why I had designed sprinklers in for this space but
another contractor did not for similar buildings in the complex.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Art Tiroly
*Sent:* Wednesday, February 08, 2017 12:49 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: Combustible concealed space under stair



Is this an enclosure.

Access door like a closet.?

Electrical equipment?





Art Tiroly

ATCO Fire Protection/Tiroly

24400 Highland Rd CLE 44143

216-621-8899

216-570-7030 cell







*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dewayne
Martinez
*Sent:* Wednesday, February 08, 2017 10:08 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Combustible concealed space under stair



NFPA 13 (07ed) section 8.15.1.2.9



Could this section be applied to a small combustible concealed space under
stairs that is under 55 SF?

Thanks,

Dewayne




--

[image: Avast logo]
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient>

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Combustible concealed space under stair

[Dewayne Martinez]

NFPA 13 (07ed) section 8.15.1.2.9



Could this section be applied to a small combustible concealed space under
stairs that is under 55 SF?

Thanks,

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

RE: NFPA-13R

[Dewayne Martinez]

I can see why the AHJ might want it on the 2nd floor corridor because of
the “occupied” space above.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Travis Mack,
SET
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:26 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: NFPA-13R



This is a good example of where you have to follow the code first.  If you
are under the IFC, then the requirement for sidewalls on the balconies of R
occupancy and Type V construction has been around since I think the 2003
edition of the IBC/IFC.  So, regardless of the direction of NFPA 13R, you
will need to have the sidewall per the IBC/IFC requirement if that is your
building code that is enforced.

Travis Mack, SET

MFP Design, LLC

2508 E Lodgepole Drive

Gilbert, AZ 85298

480-505-9271

fax: 866-430-6107

email:tm...@mfpdesign.com



http://www.mfpdesign.com

https://www.facebook.com/pages/MFP-Design-LLC/92218417692

Send large files to us via: https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/travismack

On 1/25/2017 8:23 AM, Brian Harris wrote:

Thank you for the info.



*Brian Harris, CET*

BVS Systems Inc.

bvssytemsinc.com 



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
] *On Behalf Of *John Irwin
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 25, 2017 10:17 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* RE: NFPA-13R



Pretty much what Travis said.



I usually provide break-out pricing for the corridors because a lot of AHJs
will ask for them regardless.



Regarding the balconies, we are in 2010 edition of 13R so they would not be
required, however Florida has adopted the requirement for them in type V
construction. Again, I break out the pricing for these because most people
miss them.







*John Irwin - CET*

*Division Manager – Fire Sprinklers*

*Critical System Solutions, LLC*


*Licence Number: FPC16-53*Cell: 813.618.2781

Email:  jir...@criticalsystemsolutions.com



[image: certifiedmark300 - small]



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
] *On Behalf Of *Brian
Harris
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 25, 2017 10:12 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* NFPA-13R



NFPA-13R (2002) 6.8.4 “Sprinklers shall not be required in any porches,
balconies, corridors, and stairs that are open and attached…”. I’m checking
over some plans of a (3) story apartment building, on the 2nd & 3rd floor
there is a hallway down the center length of the building with apartments
on both sides. The plan shows sidewall heads down the length of the
corridor but both ends are open to the outside, are these heads really
needed? While I’m at it what about the attached balconies on the back of
each unit? I guess what exactly does “open & attached…” mean?



*Brian Harris, CET*

BVS Systems Inc.

Design Manager

bvssystemsinc.com

Phone: 704.896.9989

Fax: 704.896.1935






___

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

Pitot flow test kits

[Dewayne Martinez]

Anyone else have a problem with these new pitot flow test kits with the air
“quick” couplings for the gauge rusting up and giving inaccurate readings?

If so what have you done about it?  I am thinking we should remove the
gauge from the coupling after every use and blast it with WD-40 or the
equivalent.

Thanks,

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

Static pressure after backflow preventer

[Dewayne Martinez]

Is there really a pressure loss at 0gpm flow for backflow preventers like
the curves show?  I am trying to figure out my static pressure on a floor
level with a fire pump at churn and it needs to be accurate.

Thanks,



Dewayne Martinez

Fire Protection Design Manager



*TOTAL** Mechanical*

*Building** Integrity*
W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
Pewaukee, WI  53072

dmarti...@total-mechanical.com

Ph:  262-522-7110

Cell: 414-406-5208

*http://www.total-mechanical.com/ <http://www.total-mechanical.com/>*



[image: cid:image001.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0] [image:
cid:image002.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0] [image:
cid:image003.jpg@01D09EDA.87B946F0] [image: Top Workplaces 2015]



*TOTAL Mechanical voted “Top Workplace” for a 4th consecutive year. *
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: How many standpipes do I calculate?

[Dewayne Martinez]

These are automatic dry standpipes because the building is considered a high 
rise. They are fed from a dry pipe valve which is supplied from the wet 
standpipe feed. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 27, 2016, at 12:11 PM, Roland Huggins <rhugg...@firesprinkler.org> 
> wrote:
> 
> IT does present an interesting nuance.  You answered the question that it IS 
> one system so naturally when doing the FDC calc, you assign the total flow 
> regardless of whether portions are automatic per manual.  On the automatic 
> side though, how can you flow more than actually connected.  Sure you could 
> assign whatever you want but does that make any sense?  I’d say no.  Until 
> the FDC is pressurized, they can’t use the manual standpipes.  Needless to 
> say, ensure the AHJ concurs.
> 
> SO how often do these hybrid systems occur?
> 
> Roland
> 
> Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering
> American Fire Sprinkler Assn.   ---  Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives
> Dallas, TX
> http://www.firesprinkler.org
> 
> 
> 
>> On Dec 27, 2016, at 7:04 AM, Dewayne Martinez 
>> <dmarti...@total-mechanical.com> wrote:
>> 
>> There is one FDC that supplies both so I will calculate 1000GPM.  
>> Thanks,
>> Dewayne
>>  
> 
> ___
> 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: How many standpipes do I calculate?

[Dewayne Martinez]

There is one FDC that supplies both so I will calculate 1000GPM.

Thanks,

Dewayne



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Travis Mack,
SET
*Sent:* Monday, December 26, 2016 11:54 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: How many standpipes do I calculate?



I was picturing them with a single FDC supply.  I guess more information
would be needed.

Travis Mack, SET

MFP Design, LLC

2508 E Lodgepole Drive

Gilbert, AZ 85298

480-505-9271

fax: 866-430-6107

email:tm...@mfpdesign.com



http://www.mfpdesign.com

https://www.facebook.com/pages/MFP-Design-LLC/92218417692

Send large files to us via: https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/travismack

On 12/26/2016 10:52 AM, Tom Duross wrote:

Even if they’re separate systems Travis?  Probably have separate FDC’s.



*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Travis
Mack, SET
*Sent:* Monday, December 26, 2016 12:46 PM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: How many standpipes do I calculate?



If all of the the stairs are on the same level then you calculate up to
1000 gpm (3 standpipes if sprinklered) or 1250 gpm (4 standpipes if
unsprinklered).  Dry or wet does not change that requirement.

Travis Mack, SET

MFP Design, LLC

2508 E Lodgepole Drive

Gilbert, AZ 85298

480-505-9271

fax: 866-430-6107

email:tm...@mfpdesign.com



http://www.mfpdesign.com

https://www.facebook.com/pages/MFP-Design-LLC/92218417692

Send large files to us via: https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/travismack

On 12/26/2016 10:42 AM, Dewayne Martinez wrote:

I have a building that has two automatic wet standpipes and two automatic
dry standpipes.  Do I calculate them separately on the top floor or all
together?  My initial thought was all together because any of the hoses
could be used to fight the fire on the top level.

Thanks,

Dewayne





___

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

How many standpipes do I calculate?

[Dewayne Martinez]

I have a building that has two automatic wet standpipes and two automatic
dry standpipes.  Do I calculate them separately on the top floor or all
together?  My initial thought was all together because any of the hoses
could be used to fight the fire on the top level.

Thanks,

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

RE: pipe heat trace

[Dewayne Martinez]

So I can heat trace the sectional valves since they are not specifically
excluded per NFPA 13 and 14?



*From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Roland
Huggins
*Sent:* Thursday, December 01, 2016 10:23 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* Re: pipe heat trace



NFPA 14 has similar requirements for the dry pipe valve but this is a
sectional control valves (another term from 13 since 14 does not
differentiate by name but it helps focus the discussion).





Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering

American Fire Sprinkler Assn.   ---  Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives

Dallas, TX

http://www.firesprinkler.org







On Nov 30, 2016, at 12:11 PM, craig.pr...@ch2m.com wrote:



Heat trace systems for fire protection are to be Listed for their intended
purpose.  You need to look at the listing to see what the system’s
installation limitations are.  Some systems may only be used for pipe up to
a certain size for example.



No you cannot use heat tape on system valves.



The systems are also to be electrically supervised, typically accomplished
through the fire alarm system.



See 2013, NFPA 13, 8.16.4.1.4 – 8.16.4.1.4.2 for more info.



NFPA 13, 2013: 7.2.5.2.3 Heat tape shall not be used in lieu of heated
valve enclosures to protect the dry pipe valve and supply pipe against
freezing.

This is under Dry Pipe Valves, there is also similar verbiage under
preaction and deluge valves in 7.3.1.8.2.3 since dry, preaction or deluge
would be the most likely systems used where the system could be subject to
freezing.  it would be assumed that a wet pipe system valve would
automatically be located in a heated area.








*Craig L. Prahl*
Fire Protection Group Lead/SME
*CH2M*
200 Verdae Blvd.
Greenville, SC  29607
Direct - 864.920.7540

Fax - 864.920.7129

CH2MHILL Extension  77540
craig.pr...@ch2m.com




*From:* Sprinklerforum [
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
<sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dewayne
Martinez
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 30, 2016 11:17 AM
*To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
*Subject:* pipe heat trace [EXTERNAL]



I need to heat trace some standpipe feed mains in a parking garage when
running from the riser room to the stairwells.  Is it acceptable to also
heat trace the standpipe control valves?  They would prefer to keep them
out of the stairwells.

Thanks,

Dewayne

___
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