[Sprinklerforum] Re: NFPA 13R residential system - Exposed CPVC

[Greg McGahan]

Dapr,
The Installation Guidelines of the CPVC will give you the criteria for 
installing CPVC exposed rather than 13R.


Greg McGahan

Genesis Fire Services, LLC.





From: Dapr Jones 
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2024 10:57 AM
To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers 

Subject: [Sprinklerforum] NFPA 13R residential system - Exposed CPVC

A multi-family fit up project will have existing to remain upper floor and new 
first floor apt. units. Currently the building is not sprinkled and will have a 
new sprinkler system.

The contractor wants to run the new sprinkler pipe exposed using CPVC in the 
existing upper level units.

NFPA 13R doesn't seem to prohibit this as Table 5.2.1 does include CPVC (ASTM 
F442/F442M).

I'd like to get your thoughts on this and see if you've come across it.

Thanks

_
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: Mixed antifreeze types

[Greg McGahan]

If you use the dropmaster properly you can get nearly all of the water out to 
the point that when you pull a head you get just drops of water. I would do it 
with the antifreeze, fill and repeat a couple of times to make certain there 
wasn't enough antifreeze left to create a problem with mixing. We would use the 
DM and then pull a few heads to see what we had and if it was as empty as we 
expect, I would not have a problem refilling it with new.

From: Caleb Brogan 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 12:55 PM
To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers 

Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Re: Mixed antifreeze types


Dropmasters work great, but I wouldn’t rely on it to pull all the existing 
antifreeze out of every drop just by pulling a few. I have no idea on the 
potential mixing of the two solutions, but my personal opinion would be that 
Freezemaster is pretty expensive. The customer is paying for it, might as well 
make sure it’s all new. It shouldn’t take more than a day or two to drain 100 
drops with a couple guys working  (if the system drains well), so I would take 
the time to pull them out and make sure it’s clear. I haven’t tried to use a 
dropmaster on antifreeze though but with water it will suck a head into the RC 
from a foot away if it is working correctly.



Thanks,

Caleb



Caleb Brogan | Sprinkler Systems Designer
OH# 54-25-4815 & NICET# 147230
KOORSEN FIRE & SECURITY
727 Manor Park Dr, Columbus, OH 43228
P 614.853.5665 | Ext. 6512 | M 614.867.6791
caleb.bro...@koorsen.com | 
www.koorsen.com

24x7x365 Service: 614.878.2228 | servic...@koorsen.com

From: Fpdcdesign 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 1:28 PM
To: SprinklerForum 
Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Mixed antifreeze types



I have a client with a rather large (330 gallon) antifreeze system that is 
looking to upgrade to an approved solution. There are approximately 100 pendent 
sprinklers on either straight drops or swing joints. The contractor has 
proposed pulling a few drops and using a Dropmaster to try and drain the rest 
of them. I have no personal knowledge of how effective a Dropmaster is. Would 
using this be acceptable? Is there a way to tell if it worked? If there was a 
small amount of glycerine solution remaining, would that be a compatibility 
issue with Freezemaster? I will probably contact Lubrizol as well but am also 
looking for experience.



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
To unsubscribe send an email to sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org

[Sprinklerforum] Re: Hose Valves in Townhome Apartments

[Greg McGahan]

Assuming it is just an EOR requirement, and the EOR says install them, then
they should be installed - (I am not addressing this from a
monetary standpoint). However, the EOR has to clarify HOW to install them
specifically as it is outside the scope of the adopted standards/codes.
What size hose valve, flow and pressure requirements, Manual, Automatic,
Wet, Dry, etc. Where does the actual design criteria for the hose valve
come from?

Give them a price for a fire pump and interconnected standpipes and see how
that sits with them.



On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 8:13 AM Fpdcdesign  wrote:

> It is worth noting that the EOR (assumed in this case to be the specifying
> engineer) can request things that are beyond what the Code requires. Codes
> are a minimum, not an absolute.
>
> That being said, you should be able to get the “permit review comments”.
> Not sure who did them but it would seem that the AHJ would be doing them
> considering they issue the permits. Sounds more like the engineer’s review
> rephrased to make it sounds more mandatory.
>
> I would push back to the GC and tell him you can’t complete your work
> without a copy of those comments. Put the onus on them.
>
>
>
> On Jan 23, 2024 at 9:01 AM, > wrote:
>
> What is the height of the top floor?  What is the occupancy
> classification?  Go through 905 in the fire code and see what it says about
> standpipes.  From similar projects I have done over the years, I have not
> seen them required.  But, your local fire code will dictate.
>
>
>
>
>
> Travis Mack, SET
>
> *M.E.P.CAD* | Instructor / Support
>
> 181 N. Arroyo Grande Blvd. #105 I Henderson, NV 89074
>
> www.mepcad.com | *m: 480.547.9348*|* Whatspp: +14805479348*
>
> *Email: t.m...@mepcad.com *
>
>
>
> *AutoSPRINK  |  AutoSPRINK FAB  |  AutoSPRINK RVT  |  AlarmCAD*
>
>
>
> *From:* James Litvak 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 23, 2024 6:55 AM
> *To:* AFSA Sprinkler Forum 
> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Hose Valves in Townhome Apartments
>
>
>
> I am designing an NFPA 13 mid-rise apartment building that includes
> three townhome-style two-floor apartments. The EOR put a note on the FP
> plans to locate a hose valve on each floor of those units "AS REQUIRED." I
> didn't put them on my plans because I have never seen them required in
> similar units in other buildings. The EOR's review comments came back
> saying "Fire Protection permit review indicated hose valves required in
> 2-story units." I have requested the fire protection permit review comments
> and was told by the GC it is unlikely we'll receive them, and that I should
> just include those valves. My plans were approved by the AHJ without those
> valves. It is the EOR now refusing to accept my plans without the valves.
>
>
>
> Are those valves required?
> _ SprinklerForum
> mailing list:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> 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



-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*

_
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] Autostore

[Greg McGahan]

try=gmail=g>
>
> CONTACT BY: Phone 1-864-676-5252, Email or MS TEAMS
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Troy Schieckoff 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 16, 2024 10:39 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [Sprinklerforum] Autostore
>
>
>
> Has anyone designed an ESFR system for the automated robotic storage
> system know as Autostore? Seems to be very little info and NFPA doesn't
> really address this type of storage arrangement.  Any info would be
> welcomed.
>
> Troy
>
>
> --
>
>
> 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:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> 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 mailing 
> list:https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to 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



-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*

_
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: Backflow In Stairwell

[Greg McGahan]

2crCBF6FUbgYmcVYuj3sbKO3Bdrij0nbJUvRNFEgFTDB9FvGr0q6C=1>
>
> Phone: 704.896.9989
>
> Fax: 704.896.1935
>
>
>
> _
> SprinklerForum mailing list:
>
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.firesprinkler.org%2flist%2fsprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org=E,1,AtAz7wYoopSCDcLIcOeBd3AFB2UsZFxZSiL42tso1NHOWoRzQjl_OV5oqCbuSgeBj2B-obAdo8Xk4sbQCjhUYb2-Fwgy0a_LcVib_rFIma42bTJUVUyCSsii=1
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> 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



-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*

_
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: Pressure Regulating Valves Residual Pressures

[Greg McGahan]

With all due respect Rick, I have had Fire Departments very concerned about
the residual pressure being greater than 100 psi for safety.

Sizing PRV's is not the easiest part of a standpipe design. If you are in a
jurisdiction that requires flow testing and recording the pressures prior
to the final inspection (as it should be per NFPA 14), guessing could cost
a lot of money to correct.

On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 10:49 AM Rick Matsuda  wrote:

> The requirements of NFPA-14 for the standpipe hose valves are maximum
> 175-psi static outlet pressure and minimum 100-psi residual outlet pressure
> while flowing 250-gpm through the hose valve.
> If your pump source is from the city mains, then make it easy on yourself
> and select a PRV hose valve that will provide maximum 165-psi static outlet
> pressure.
> This should allow you to use whatever residual inlet pressure while
> flowing the 750-gpm total standpipe demand and still provide the minimum
> 100-psi residual outlet pressure.
>
> I used the 165-psi static outlet pressure cause the pump inlet pressure
> may vary up/down which will vary the pump static outlet pressure which may
> raise the static outlet pressure over 175-psi.
>
> If the pump source has a constant pressure like an elevated tank, then
> select a PRV that will provide a maximum 175-psi outlet pressure.
>
> Just my opinion but if you select a PRV based on the maximum static outlet
> pressure then this should allow a bit more than the 100-psi minimum outlet
> pressure. Check the charts to verify this.
> Don’t select a PRV based on providing just the minimum outlet pressure.
> I think that the fire department will appreciate any extra pressure to
> offset the friction loss through their fire hoses.
> Rick Matsuda
>
> On Oct 31, 2023, at 7:24 AM, Eric Rieve  wrote:
>
> 
>
> Micah,
>
>
>
> Looking at the spec sheet from Zurn I agree with Travis that you use your
> expected residual pressure while flowing the full system demand of 750gpm.
> I haven’t installed this valve myself, but you’ll notice on the residual
> pressure charts that the bonnet type curve lines stop well below 175psi.
> So, while you may pick a 120psi outlet pressure while flowing 750gpm, the
> extra play in the curve should allow the valve to maintain an outlet
> pressure below 175psi when being tested individually at 250gpm.
>
>
>
> Hope this helps!
>
> Eric Rieve, SET
>
> Rieve Fire Protection
>
>
>
> *From:* Micah Davis 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 31, 2023 6:53 AM
> *To:* SprinklerForum 
> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Pressure Regulating Valves Residual Pressures
>
>
>
> Good morning, Forum!  I hope everyone is having a great week!!
>
>
>
> I think I got this right, but someone is questioning me.  I have an
> automatic standpipe with factory pressure-regulating valves (i.e., Zurn
> 4000).  When calculating residual pressures at the inlet of the PRV to be
> used in the sizing charts, the question is, how much water should I be
> flowing in the system?  One suggestion is only flowing 250 gpm at the hose
> valve you are sizing.  The other suggestion is flowing the system demand
> flow per NFPA 14.  In this case, that would be 750 gpm (250 gpm at each of
> the two most remote hose valves plus 250 gpm at the top of the only other
> standpipe).  We are in agreement that the calculation should be a source
> calc to determine the actual pressure provided by the system.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
> Micah Davis
>
> Ferguson Fire Design
>
> _
> SprinklerForum mailing list:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> 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



-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*

_
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: Pressure Regulating Valves Residual Pressures

[Greg McGahan]

Micah,
When you test the valves you will test each one individually flowing 250
gpm so therefore you have to size them individually.

On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 5:53 AM Micah Davis  wrote:

> Good morning, Forum!  I hope everyone is having a great week!!
>
> I think I got this right, but someone is questioning me.  I have an
> automatic standpipe with factory pressure-regulating valves (i.e., Zurn
> 4000).  When calculating residual pressures at the inlet of the PRV to be
> used in the sizing charts, the question is, how much water should I be
> flowing in the system?  One suggestion is only flowing 250 gpm at the hose
> valve you are sizing.  The other suggestion is flowing the system demand
> flow per NFPA 14.  In this case, that would be 750 gpm (250 gpm at each of
> the two most remote hose valves plus 250 gpm at the top of the only other
> standpipe).  We are in agreement that the calculation should be a source
> calc to determine the actual pressure provided by the system.
>
> Thank you,
> Micah Davis
> Ferguson Fire Design
>
> _
> SprinklerForum mailing list:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org



-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*

_
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: Is a paintbooth pit a 'duct'?

[Greg McGahan]

It has always been seen as a plenum around here.

On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 4:43 PM rick matsuda  wrote:

>  I would design using the duct criteria since the pit is after the
> filters. I think it's considered the plenum which is part of the exhaust
> ductwork.
> Just my opinion.
> rick
>
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 4:37 PM Anthony Johnson <
> mountainfirepr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The pit has a metal grate over it with the filters being installed just
>> below the grate. It then turns the corner and goes up out the exhaust
>> stack. I would normally just consider the exhaust stack as the exhaust
>> 'duct' and not the entire pit but then I got to thinking. On a friday
>> afternoon that's probably a bad idea.
>>
>>
>>
>> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>> Virus-free.www.avg.com
>> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>> <#m_-1337165461309274980_m_-5211560169863844847_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 2:20 PM BRUCE VERHEI  wrote:
>>
>>> I’d expect the underfloor to have two sections. One the plenum, is
>>> immediately below the filter bank.
>>>
>>> The second is the exhaust duct.
>>>
>>> Best.
>>>
>>> bv
>>>
>>> On 08/18/2023 12:50 PM PDT Rick Matsuda  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, install sprinklers in the pit and along any “ductwork” that goes
>>> from the pit to the exterior.
>>>
>>> On Aug 18, 2023, at 2:43 PM, Anthony Johnson <
>>> mountainfirepr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Folks,
>>> Quick one for the day - is a paintbooth pit to be considered as a duct?
>>> I know most people, at least I do, think of a duct as a cylindrical or
>>> rectangular sheet metal tube for ventilation. A quick google dictionary
>>> defines it as a tube or 'passageway' for converting air, liquid whatever.
>>> That leads me to the question of whether a downflow paintbooth pit would be
>>> considered a duct for design purposes and would require the duct protection
>>> criteria of NFPA 33 which requires a minimum of 30 gpm at 15 psi for the
>>> sprinklers?
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Anthony Johnson
>>> Mountain Fire Protection
>>> 'Saving Lives and Valuing Property'
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>>> Virus-free.www.avg.com
>>> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>>>
>>> _
>>> SprinklerForum mailing list:
>>>
>>> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>>> 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 mailing list:
>>>
>>> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>>> 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 mailing list:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org



-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*

_
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: 3/4" Nipple

[Greg McGahan]

We have used brass nipples in the past for similar issues.

On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:33 PM Eric Rieve  wrote:

>
>
> So, running with this topic a bit. Let’s say this “theoretical” new system
> is a warehouse fab where some ¾” heads need to be raised up a bit for
> proper distance to ceiling due to deeper than expected I-beams. The fun
> question to ask is it ok to use ¾” x 6” stainless steel nipples and ¾”
> stainless steel couplings to raise those heads up? The ¾” weld-o-lets
> aren’t stainless, but the relevant section in NFPA 13 only mentions pipe
> and not fittings. Assuming it calc’s out ok hydraulically of course.
>
>
>
> Eric Rieve
>
> Rieve Fire Protection
>
>
>
> *From:* Travis Mack 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 9, 2023 1:53 PM
> *To:* Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Re: 3/4" Nipple
>
>
>
> You ask if it is ever allowed.  That answer is yes.  You can use ¾” CPVC,
> Copper and maybe even a few other types of pipe. Those are just the ones
> that pop into my head initially.  If you are talking black or galvanized
> steel pipe, then no, it is not acceptable in a new system.
>
>
>
>
>
> Travis Mack, SET
>
> *M.E.P.CAD* | Instructor / Support
>
> 181 N. Arroyo Grande Blvd. #105 I Henderson, NV 89074
>
> www.mepcad.com | *m: 480.547.9348*|* Whatspp: +14805479348*
>
> *Email: t.m...@mepcad.com *
>
>
>
> *AutoSPRINK  |  AutoSPRINK FAB  |  AutoSPRINK RVT  |  AlarmCAD*
>
>
>
> *From:* Brian Harris 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 9, 2023 10:49 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] 3/4" Nipple
>
>
>
> Is it ever allowed in a *new system* to use a ¾” nipple to a 1” x ¾”
> reducer, then to a 1” Sprig? I say no unless it’s a revamped system.
>
>
>
> *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
>


-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*

_
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: Residential Design in NFPA 13

[Greg McGahan]

The intent is to calculate the 4 most demanding sprinklers that would
activate in a single fire event, therefore we tend to submit the version
that reflects that scenario but we typically prove the calcs for our sake.

On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 11:07 AM Brett Peters  wrote:

> LOL, unfortunately I have someone arguing that it can be done the other
> way because "those heads have a larger area of coverage".
> In my opinion they are twisting the definitions of "adjacent" and
> "hydraulically most demanding" to include the sprinklers that cover the
> largest area but in my opinion the largest floor space doesn't
> necessarily present as the most demanding.
>
> I will be on Holidays from August 12th to 21st, returning to work on
> Tuesday August 22nd
>
> Thanks
>
> Brett Peters
> General Manager Installation & Design
> Proudline Fire Protection Services Ltd.
> br...@proudline.ca
> 780 490 7602 office ext 202
> 780 490 7605 fax
> 780 777 0568 cell
> 780 718 2676 24h
> Visit us at www.proudline.ca
>
> Proudline now offers ULc listed monitoring services, please contact
> a...@proudline.ca for more information
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 9:31 AM Chris Dorn <
> chris.d...@dornfireprotection.com> wrote:
>
>> Brett,
>>
>> I think you answered your own question. “I always choose whatever gives
>> me the greatest pressure loss not necessarily the larger flow.” Wouldn’t
>> that by definition be the hydraulically most demanding area regardless of
>> location? It’s exactly what I do also in this situation.
>>
>> Chris Dorn
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Brett Peters 
>> *Sent:* Thursday, July 20, 2023 11:15 AM
>> *To:* Sprinklerforum 
>> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Residential Design in NFPA 13
>>
>>
>>
>> Having a debate on which sprinklers actually have to be part of the
>> hydraulic calculation in a residential unit in a 13 building (So the
>> calculation has to include 4 sprinklers) - NFPA 13, 2013
>>
>>
>>
>> 11.3.1.1* The design area shall be the area that includes the four
>> adjacent sprinklers that produce
>>
>> the greatest hydraulic demand.
>>
>>
>>
>> With 11.3.1.1 in mind if you have a space where you have less than 4
>> sprinklers in a compartment and you have to start adding sprinklers in
>> other compartments to come up with 4 in the calculation, what is the method
>> that you have to use?
>>
>> So for arguments sake this scenario is 2 sprinklers in one compartment
>> and then two "adjacent" sprinklers outside of that compartment but there
>> are sprinklers in different directions that can be considered as "adjacent"
>>
>>1. Adding sprinklers from the next compartment on a different
>>sprinkler line which would qualify as an "adjacent sprinkler" and
>>potentially have 4 sprinklers fed form 3 different lines or
>>2. adding "adjacent sprinklers" that are first on a common sprinkler
>>line and potentially having 3 sprinklers on a single line.
>>
>> My argument is that scenario 2 has to be followed as that would produce
>> the largest demand to a sprinkler line and if required increase the size of
>> that line.
>>
>> The other argument is that in scenario 1 they are picking the "adjacent
>> sprinkler" that has a larger protection area, so the actual water flow
>> might be slightly higher but it spreads the flow through 3 different lines
>> instead of only 2
>>
>>
>>
>> So scenario 1 has more flow but less pressure loss resulting in smaller
>> piping and scenario 2 has less flow but more pressure loss requiring larger
>> pipe to be installed.
>>
>>
>>
>> So what are other people doing in these situations and what is really
>> considered as producing the greatest hydraulic demand? I always choose
>> whatever gives me the greatest pressure loss not necessarily the larger
>> flow.
>>
>>
>>
>> I will be on Holidays from August 12th to 21st, returning to work on
>> Tuesday August 22nd
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> Brett Peters
>>
>> General Manager Installation & Design
>>
>> Proudline Fire Protection Services Ltd.
>>
>> br...@proudline.ca
>>
>> 780 490 7602 office ext 202
>>
>> 780 490 7605 fax
>>
>> 780 777 0568 cell
>>
>> 780 718 2676 24h
>>
>> Visit us at www.proudline

[Sprinklerforum] Re: Duct obstruction criteria in LH attic

[Greg McGahan]

I literally just posed this question for a technical review and was advised
that the annex provided the guidance and that NFPA 13 never intended to
ignore any object that actually blocks the spray pattern. My view is
whatever you can sleep with at night but a deflector that is 3” above a
duct that is 2” away is obstructed in my opinion. If it is 2’ away maybe
not.


On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 5:52 PM Kevin Hall  wrote:

> Dane is correct.
>
> We get this question a lot through the Technical Review submissions, and
> the response is pretty cut and dry.
>
> The three times rule does not apply to non structural members in light and
> ordinary hazard occupancies and because the deflector is located above the
> duct, water is able to spray on both sides, so it can be considered a
> noncontinuous obstruction. No additional protection is not required.
>
> -Kevin
>
> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 5:08 PM Greg McGahan 
> wrote:
>
>> With all due respect Dane - read the annex,  it specifically addresses
>> that issue.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 3:42 PM Dane Long  wrote:
>>
>>> Anthony,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I feel there might be a few sections you need to look at regarding this
>>> question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> For me I would start at *8.6.5.2 Obstructions to Sprinkler Discharge
>>> Pattern Development.*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *8.6.5.2.1.1 *Continuous or noncontinuous obstructions less than or
>>> equal to 18 in. (457 mm)
>>>
>>> below the sprinkler deflector that prevent the pattern from fully
>>> developing shall comply with
>>>
>>> 8.6.5.2.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The section above lays the ground work for the 18in requirement
>>> (8.6.5.2). Then I would look at *8.6.5.2.1.3* Minimum Distance from
>>> Obstructions.*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *8.6.5.2.1.4* *For light and ordinary hazard occupancies, structural
>>>
>>> members only shall be considered when applying the requirements
>>>
>>> of 8.6.5.2.1.3.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> IMHO Because it specifically says “structural members only shall be
>>> considered” I believe the intent of this section is to allow for us to not
>>> provide sprinklers on both side to a reasonable degree, meaning we’re able
>>> to get water on both sides of the obstruction as long as its not a
>>> structural member.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Dane Long, AET*
>>> *Engineering Technician *| *Bamford Fire Sprinkler Co., Inc.*
>>> P:*785.825.7710*
>>> F:*785.825.0667*
>>> A:   *1383 W. North Street  Salina, KS  67401
>>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1383+W.+North+Street%C2%A0+Salina,+KS%C2%A0+67401?entry=gmail=g>*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Anthony Johnson 
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 9, 2023 2:26 PM
>>> *To:* Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers <
>>> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
>>> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Re: Duct obstruction criteria in LH attic
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The 3x rule is the only one we think would apply but it only applies to
>>> structural components.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Anthony Johnson
>>>
>>> Mountain Fire Protection
>>>
>>> 'Saving Lives and Valuing Property'
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 12:58 PM Taylor Schumacher <
>>> tay...@sfsprinkler.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> When you cannot apply one of the obstruction rules, it does not mean
>>> that there isn’t an obstruction.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If you think about this scenario the same way you would with sprinklers
>>> directly attached to a pipe, that’s where to start. Look at the 3x rule or
>>> sprinklers on each side.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Taylor Schumacher*
>>>
>>> Security Fire Sprinkler <http://www.j-berd.com/>
>>>
>>> 1 Industrial Blvd | Sauk Rapids, MN 56379
>>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1+Industrial+Blvd+%7C+Sauk+Rapids,+MN+56379+Office:+320?entry=gmail=g>
>>>
>>> Office: 320
>>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/1+Indust

[Sprinklerforum] Re: Duct obstruction criteria in LH attic

[Greg McGahan]

f 8.6.5.2.2 ('2013 ed) but it specifically mentions free standing
> partitions, privacy curtains and "similar obstructions". I don't think
> duct-work is a similar obstruction. I would like to have my ducks in a row
> if this design approach should be questioned but also want to make sure I
> have a sound design. Is our reasoning correct that essentially if the
> sprinkler deflector is above the duct water will spray on both sides and
> the duct would not pose as an obstruction?
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Anthony Johnson
>
> Mountain Fire Protection
>
> 'Saving Lives and Valuing Property'
>
>
> _
> SprinklerForum mailing list:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> 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
>


-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*

_
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: Duct obstruction criteria in LH attic

[Greg McGahan]

Anthony, from past experiences and questions the decision has to be made
based on section 8.6.5.2.1.1 - if the discharge cannot be fully developed,
then you look at the rules, if you do not meet any of the rules, then you
add sprinklers to compensate such that you get a reasonable degree of full
development.  In this case, I would look at 8.6.5.2.1.5 and make sure the
duct was less than half the distance between two sprinklers.

Just my opinion.
Greg

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 2:27 PM Anthony Johnson 
wrote:

> The 3x rule is the only one we think would apply but it only applies to
> structural components.
>
> Best Regards,
> Anthony Johnson
> Mountain Fire Protection
> 'Saving Lives and Valuing Property'
>
> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 12:58 PM Taylor Schumacher 
> wrote:
>
>> When you cannot apply one of the obstruction rules, it does not mean that
>> there isn’t an obstruction.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you think about this scenario the same way you would with sprinklers
>> directly attached to a pipe, that’s where to start. Look at the 3x rule or
>> sprinklers on each side.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Taylor Schumacher*
>>
>> Security Fire Sprinkler <http://www.j-berd.com/>
>>
>> 1 Industrial Blvd | Sauk Rapids, MN 56379
>>
>> Office: 320.656.0847 | Direct: 320.640.7050
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* matthew.will...@ferguson.com 
>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 09, 2023 12:37 PM
>> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Re: Duct obstruction criteria in LH attic
>>
>>
>>
>> I believe however, the intent of the section must still be applied. Water
>> on both sides.
>>
>> Not sure in the 13 edition the location, but in the 19 it is 10.2.7.1.2.
>>
>> We are referred back to it as applicable from the 3 times section.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sprinklers spaced on opposing sides, not to exceed the max half distance.
>>
>>
>>
>> R/
>>
>> Matt
>>
>>
>>
>> *Please rate our customer service
>> <https://survey.medallia.com/?emailsignature=3539=Fire%20and%20Fabrication>*
>>
>>
>>
>> *Matthew J. Willis, CWBSP, CET*
>>
>> *Engineering Designer IV*
>>
>> *FERGUSON FIRE DESIGN, LLC*
>>
>> *A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Ferguson Fire & Fabrication, LLC*
>>
>> 401 N 5th Street
>>
>> Suite 448
>>
>> Wausau, WI 54403
>>
>> C: 307-236-8249
>>
>> *matthew.will...@ferguson.com *
>>
>> *www.FergusonFire.com <http://www.fergusonfire.com/>*
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Anthony Johnson 
>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 9, 2023 11:24 AM
>> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Duct obstruction criteria in LH attic
>>
>>
>>
>> I have an elementary question but know there are varying opinions on the
>> topic. The situation is a tight unused attic space in a LH occupancy. Our
>> upright sprinkler deflector will be 3" above the ductwork. Evaluating all
>> of the obstruction criteria presented in NFPA we've essentially came to the
>> conclusion that the ductwork would not pose an obstruction but came to this
>> conclusion mainly by process of elimination. The beam-rule would not apply
>> since the ductwork is below the deflector. The 3X rule is only for
>> structural components in light and ordinary hazards and the 'wide
>> obstruction' rule would not apply since the ductwork is only 24" wide.
>> That only leaves the 'suspended or floor mounted vertical obstructions'
>> rule of 8.6.5.2.2 ('2013 ed) but it specifically mentions free standing
>> partitions, privacy curtains and "similar obstructions". I don't think
>> duct-work is a similar obstruction. I would like to have my ducks in a row
>> if this design approach should be questioned but also want to make sure I
>> have a sound design. Is our reasoning correct that essentially if the
>> sprinkler deflector is above the duct water will spray on both sides and
>> the duct would not pose as an obstruction?
>>
>>
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Anthony Johnson
>>
>> Mountain Fire Protection
>>
>> 'Saving Lives and Valuing Property'
>>
>> _
>> SprinklerForum mailing list:
>>
>> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>> 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



-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*

_
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: Once upon a grid...

[Greg McGahan]

Personally, I have always calculated the outriggers because sometimes they
are more demanding. If a designer reduces the spacing between the
sprinklers on the outriggers to make up for the distance against the wall,
this can force you to pick up extra heads in the same Sq Ft area. It takes
a couple of minutes to be sure and I have busted people in review where the
calcs did not work.



On Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 11:31 PM Travis Mack  wrote:

> With the modern software systems it’s quite simple. You just put as many
> design areas in the plan as needed to find the most demanding. It’s not
> like we are doing hand calcs and taking hours to do them. It is generally
> only a few seconds to a few minutes to put a calc area on a system.
>
> Travis Mack, SET
>
> *M.E.P.CAD* |
>
> 181 N. Arroyo Grande Blvd. #105 I Henderson, NV 89074
>
> 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
>
> --
> *From:* Rick Matsuda 
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 18, 2023 1:23:12 PM
> *To:* vi...@wtfp.net ; Discussion list on issues relating
> to automatic fire sprinklers 
> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Re: Once upon a grid...
>
> The rule is…you must calculate the “hydraulically most demanding area”
> which is often difficult to determine.
> Rick
>
> On Feb 18, 2023, at 2:11 PM, Vince Sabolik  wrote:
>
>  Thanks Rick -
> I fully understand the hydraulic stuff, but I was hoping to be able to
> point to a
> rule somewhere.
>
> On 2/18/2023 2:53 PM, Rick Matsuda wrote:
>
> It’s hydraulics. If you have a remote area in the middle of the grid, then
> water is flowing to the sprinklers from both mains. If the remote area has
> four sprinklers on each branchline, then two sprinklers are fed from each
> main. If you have six sprinklers on each branchline, then three sprinklers
> are fed from each main.
> As a plan reviewer, I required an additional remote area to be calculated
> if there was more than half the number of sprinklers on deadend
> “outriggers” if all the branchline pipes were the same size. The deadend
> lines are hydraulically more demanding.
> I also required additional remote areas if you down-sized the outrigger
> piping.
>
> Rule of thumb for you…don’t put more than half the number of sprinklers
> from the width of the remote area on an outrigger and don’t change the
> outrigger pipe sizes.
> Rick Matsuda
>
> On Feb 18, 2023, at 1:43 PM, Vince Sabolik 
>  wrote:
>
>  Thanks Mike -
>
> That sure would explain a lot of uncalculated three head outboards that
> I've seen,
> but I was hoping for a written down rule somewhere.
>
> On 2/18/2023 2:00 PM, Mike Morey wrote:
>
> I was always told it was half the number of heads per line in the remote
> area. Theory being roughly half the water goes each way back to the mains
> anyways, so half the heads was half the water that one direction.
>
> *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
>
> *Vince Sabolik*
> *West Tech Fire Protection, Inc.*
> 11351 Pearl Road   /   Strongsville, Ohio   44136
> Phone 440 238-4800Fax  440 238-4876   Cell 440 724-7601
>
> _
> SprinklerForum mailing list:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> 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
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> *Vince Sabolik*
> *West Tech Fire Protection, Inc.*
> 11351 Pearl Road   /   Strongsville, Ohio   44136
> Phone 440 238-4800Fax  440 238-4876   Cell 440 724-7601
>
> _
> SprinklerForum mailing list:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
>
> _
> SprinklerForum mailing list:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> sprin

[Sprinklerforum] Re: Pipe Stands

[Greg McGahan]

 done?
>
>
>
>
>
> Dennis Wilson
>
> Blackhawk Auto. Sprinklers
>
> Cedar Falls, Iowa
>
> 1-319-266-7721
>
>
>
>
>
> _
>
> SprinklerForum mailing list:
>
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org 
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.firesprinkler.org%2Flist%2Fsprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org=05%7C01%7Crhinson%40burnsmcd.com%7C59a2e8f00723473b61d208dae9ed78ad%7Cbfbb9a2b6d994e78b3c795005d555c8b%7C0%7C0%7C638079503413136871%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=oYYlgneONSDSg1EvjqHVeQxa7exn%2B23vvtbl8kbMcyU%3D=0>
>
> To unsubscribe send an email to sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _
>
> SprinklerForum mailing list:
>
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org 
> <https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.firesprinkler.org%2Flist%2Fsprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org=05%7C01%7Crhinson%40burnsmcd.com%7C59a2e8f00723473b61d208dae9ed78ad%7Cbfbb9a2b6d994e78b3c795005d555c8b%7C0%7C0%7C638079503413136871%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=oYYlgneONSDSg1EvjqHVeQxa7exn%2B23vvtbl8kbMcyU%3D=0>
>
> To unsubscribe send an email to 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
>


-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*

_
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: BFP on underground supply

[Greg McGahan]

 why not run several 2” drains out the wall.
>
> With 2½” & 3” backflows, we increase the main drain to 2” which is usually
> enough for system demand. Can always run a separate 1” insp. test also.
>
> With 4” backflows, you already need (1) 2” main drain, why not run a
> separate one for testing, that will give you (2) 2“ openings, and run a
> third if you have a 6” backflow.
>
> And with multiple systems, run the main drains out separately instead of
> combining them together before you go out.
>
>
>
> Does this sound feasible, since all we’re really trying to do is exercise
> the springs in the checks?
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Ed Kramer 
> *Sent:* Friday, November 18, 2022 11:19 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] BFP on underground supply
>
>
>
> NFPA 13 is pretty clear that some method of forward flow testing a fire
> sprinkler system backflow preventer shall be provided.  If the BFP is
> located at the system riser (very common in these parts), we provide the
> required means.
>
>
>
> So, who is responsible for providing the means if the BFP is located in a
> pit on the underground fire service, and the UG fire service (along with
> the pit/BFP) is “by others”?  From a practical viewpoint, it’s easy enough
> for us to provide that at our system riser, but are we required to do so?
> Or does that responsibility fall on whomever installs the BFP?  I’ve not
> seen this addressed anywhere in bid/contract documents.
>
>
>
> Ed Kramer
>
> Bamford Fire
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _
> SprinklerForum mailing list:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org
>


-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*

_
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] Hydrant flow tests

[Greg McGahan]

s and legacy drought
>> conditions.   This is extremely important in the West as our water levels
>> are literally dropping every year, so maybe that’s why our water agencies
>> have established such high standards of care for modeling.   City of San
>> Diego doesn’t require that you take 10% off of their models any longer –
>> why?  Because they program peak day demand, legacy drought levels and an
>> additional safety factor.   When they first started this practice, the FP
>> community was going nuts – field conditions showed 10-20 PSI more pressure
>> at the hydrants in some cases.  Yes, pipe sizing was affected,  but if
>> we’re talking about safety and prudence (without consideration for the
>> cost-impact, obviously), this methodology yields solidly conservative data
>> for basis of design.
>>
>>
>>
>> Chains are only as strong as their weakest link and physical flow testing
>> only reflects current conditions.  Was the test done during a peak day
>> demand window?  Was the test measured with a $10-15 spring loaded gauge (up
>> to 8-10% error) or a calibrated liquid-filled one with a 1% error or
>> less?   Was the test even taken by skilled personnel?My opinion on this
>> has swung – I’m now pro-model and we look at physical testing as an archaic
>> practice, and I’m a shamelessly analogue Boomer.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yours in the name of fire safety and progress,
>>
>> Steve L.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Prahl, Craig 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 31, 2022 8:10 AM
>> *To:* Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers <
>> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
>> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Re: [EXTERNAL] Hydrant flow tests
>>
>>
>>
>> Having experienced bogus results from computer modeling on more than one
>> occasion, nothing matches the actual flow of the hydrant systems.
>>
>>
>>
>> Most recently I got a water report from a local municipality who
>> generated the info via their water modeling software.  It said I could
>> expect 6700 gpm from the system……. via 8” lines at 10 fps!   Nope, don’t
>> think that’s going to be a real thing.
>>
>>
>>
>> Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME – Fire Protection |
>> craig.pr...@jacobs.com | www.jacobs.com
>>
>> 1041 East Butler Road   Greenville, South Carolina  29606
>>
>> CONTACT BY: Phone 1-864-676-5252, Email or MS TEAMS
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Rick Matsuda 
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 31, 2022 9:51 AM
>> *To:* Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] [Sprinklerforum] Hydrant flow tests
>>
>>
>>
>> I know that an accurate flow test is critical for the sprinkler system
>> design, but I’ve heard several discussions recently about water
>> conservation during our drought conditions across the SW states.
>>
>>
>>
>> With all our technology, is it possible to develop an accurate computer
>> modeling program for water departments to use in lieu of flow tests? Even
>> with the program, I think there would still be a need for some flow tests
>> to verify the program results, but maybe not as many as now.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’m not taking any pro/con position regarding this issue. I’m just
>> providing food for thought for the future as our need for water increases
>> and our resources diminish. Adequate water is the key for our industry.
>>
>>
>>
>> It’s ironic cause we get more wild fires due to the drought, and then we
>> have to use more water to fight the fires.
>>
>> Rick Matsuda
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> 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:
>> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>> 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 mailing list:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> sprinklerforum-le...@lists.firesprinkler.org



-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*

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

RE: Fire Retardant Coating used in Combustible concealed spaces

[Greg McGahan via Sprinklerforum]

And the ones I have looked at had to be reapplied in the future. They have a
lifespan of effectiveness.
Respectfully,

Greg McGahan



4187 Farrington Rd. Milton, FL 32583
P- 850-637-8535
C- 850-712-9555

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Fpdcdesign via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 10:06 AM
To: Sprinklerforum 
Cc: Fpdcdesign 
Subject: Re: Fire Retardant Coating used in Combustible concealed spaces

 
 

 Flame retardant coatings has to be installed according to strict guidelines
and the thickness of the coating needs to be verified after installation.
Tends to be expensive. Most projects I have worked on have junked that idea
for that reason.  
 
 
 
   
 

 
 
>  
> On Feb 10, 2021 at 10:34 AM,  mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)>  wrote:
>  
>  
>  
>  Project is a 100 year old 6 story Steel  &  Concrete Hotel building. The
roof is steel framed with concrete above and the Sixth floor ceiling is
Plaster over metal lath. Over the years the building has been added onto
with wood framing above the Sixth floor ceilings. As Part of a major
renovation started in 2020, the installation of a complete NFPA 13 sprinkler
system and Standpipes is taking place. A few substantial combustible
concealed spaces have been discovered throughout the building on other
floors too. If nothing is done the sprinkler design areas would need to be
increased to 3,000 SF as outlined in Chapter 11.2.3.1.5. The sprinkler
contractor and I have suggested filling these spaces with noncombustible
Insulation. The architect and builder are discussing Flame Retardant Coating
to be applied to the wood framing in order meet the Non-Combustible and
Limited Combustible concealed space definition. In reviewing Chapter
11.2.3.1.5.2 I don't see where Flame Retardant Coating
 is an option in order to reduce the  design area. I believe In order to
reduce the Design areas these combustible spaces need to be filled with
noncombustible Insulation. Would "Flame Retardant Coating" be considered an
option as outlined in A.8.15.1.2.11 (commentary text) the equivalency
provisions in Section 1.5? Thank you for your imput. Regards, G. Tim Stone
G. Tim Stone Consulting, LLC NICET Level III Engineering Technician Fire
Protection Sprinkler Design and Consulting Services  117 Old Stage Rd. -
Essex Jct (x-apple-data-detectors://3).,  VT. 05452
(x-apple-data-detectors://4/0)  CELL:  (802) 373-0638 (tel:(802)%20373-0638)
TEL:  (802) 434-2968 (tel:(802)%20434-2968)   <mailto:tston...@comcast.net>
tston...@comcast.net (mailto:tston...@comcast.net)
___ Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
(mailto:Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-f
iresprinkler.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: Horizontal Combustible Concealed Space

[Greg McGahan via Sprinklerforum]

Yes and Yes

Respectfully,

Greg McGahan



4187 Farrington Rd. Milton, FL 32583
P- 850-637-8535
C- 850-712-9555

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of JD Gamble via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 9:21 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: JD Gamble 
Subject: RE: Horizontal Combustible Concealed Space

So,  if an attic is constructed with a pitch of less than or equal to
2:12 and the depth of that space is less than or equal to 36" from deck to
ceiling, then it becomes a horizontal cc space and MUST be protected with
listed CC sprinklers?

Does that further require that the space now meet the requirements of those
CC sprinklers with limitations to area and construction configuration? Draft
Curtains?  Etc?

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
On Behalf Of Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 7:55 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Steve Leyton ; Cary Webber

Subject: RE: Horizontal Combustible Concealed Space

Or to put it another way, if an attic is constructed so that its
configuration meets the conditions of 9.3.2, it MUST be protected with
listed CC sprinklers.



Steve Leyton

(Sent from my smartphone; please excuse typos and voice-to-text
corruptions.)



 Original message 
From: Cary Webber via Sprinklerforum

Date: 1/28/21 6:41 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Cary Webber 
Subject: RE: Horizontal Combustible Concealed Space

I think it's fair to say that an attic (agreeing with Taylor S) is at the
top, however, an "attic" can be constructed that meets the definition of a
CCS per 9.3.2.



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 JD Gamble via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 9:37 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: JD Gamble 
Subject: RE: Horizontal Combustible Concealed Space

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.


So is the space NOT an attic if it has <2:12 pitched roof but meets the
other criteria stated in Glossary of terms?

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
On Behalf Of Cary Webber via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 7:34 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Cary Webber 
Subject: RE: Horizontal Combustible Concealed Space

CCS style sprinklers are generally listed to a maximum 2:12 pitch so IMO
this is the best indicator of the difference between an attic space and a
combustible ceiling space requiring special sprinklers; and yes, by
requiring special sprinklers in the horizontal CCS 9.3.2 by default
prohibits standard spray sprinklers.



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 JD Gamble via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2021 9:22 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: JD Gamble 
Subject: Horizontal Combustible Concealed Space

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.


NFPA Glossary of Terms 2019 ed.

Attic:   The space located between the ceiling of a story and the roof
directly above that habitable story.

Question:  When does an attic become a Horizontal CC Space?  And vice versa?

Question:  Do the rules of NFPA 13, 9.3.2 (2019 ed) specifically prohibit
the use of standard spray sprinklers for Horizontal CC Spaces?

Thanks,

JD Gamble
LSS of Sheridan, Inc.

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.fires
prinkler.org%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.orgdata=04%7
C01%7Ccwebber%40reliablesprinkler.com%7C48539098839b434b1fad08d8c39a29ca%7C3
61f92efbca442cdaf0d8099acee2244%7C0%7C0%7C637474414177209319%7CUnknown%7CTWF
pbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%
7C3000sdata=6oExlTi6mbgvsm1Ni3SH%2BBrNPrTNASMSafWJMfOz8uA%3Dreserv
ed=0
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.fires
prinkler.org%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.orgdata=04%7
C01%7Ccwebber%40reliablesprinkler.com%7C48539098839b434b1fad08d8c39a29ca%7C3
61f92efbca442cdaf0d8099acee2244%7C0%7C0%7C6374744141772093

RE: Pump Suction Pressure (NPSH)

[Greg McGahan via Sprinklerforum]

We always tell them the static pressure although I understand your concerns.
They have always been satisfied with Static pressure though.

Respectfully,

Greg McGahan



4187 Farrington Rd. Milton, FL 32583
P- 850-637-8535
C- 850-712-9555

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Brian Harris via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 12:22 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Brian Harris 
Subject: RE: Pump Suction Pressure (NPSH)

Cliff-
It's my understanding that the suction PSI for the pump vendor is not the
same as the static pressure. It's the pressure when the pump is running and
water is flowing so there is no cavitation etc. Normally it's not a big deal
if we design the system because the software I use will tell me what the
pressure is. Since we didn't do the original system I'm not totally sure how
to attack it. I've googled and read until my head was ready to explode, I
just figured some of the old school guys may have a "rule of thumb"
approach.

Brian Harris, CET
BVS Systems Inc.
bvssytemsinc.com

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of cliff--- via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2020 12:29 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: cl...@fire-design.com
Subject: RE: Pump Suction Pressure (NPSH)

Brian,

I may be looking at this too 'simply', but wouldn't your suction pressure be
the static pressure at the flow test location plus or minus any pressure
gain or loss for any difference between the elevation of the flow test and
the fire pump suction?

Cliff Whitfield, SET
President

Fire Design, Inc.
600 W. Bypass Hwy. 19E
Suite 202
Burnsville, NC 28714
Ph: 828-284-4772
 


-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Brian Harris via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 11:24 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Brian Harris 
Subject: Pump Suction Pressure (NPSH)

We're replacing a pump in an existing system and the pump vendor wants to
know the pump suction pressure. Since we didn't do the original system and I
know nothing about it what is a practical way of determining the pump
suction to tell the vendor?

Brian Harris, CET
BVS Systems Inc.
Design Manager
bvssystemsinc.com<http://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


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

___
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: Covered Parking in 13R

[Greg McGahan via Sprinklerforum]

Good points Skyler but it is worth mentioning that the decisions you mentions 
(13 vs 13r) etc. are subject to Geography and Jurisdiction. In Florida for 
instance, anything less than 50 sprinklers IS designed solely by the Sprinkler 
Contractor and we are responsible for answering that question. You can hire an 
engineer if you want too, but of course on smaller projects the additional cost 
can cost you the job.



Greg McGahan



4187 Farrington Road
Milton, FL 32583
O- 850-637-8535
C- 850-712-9555




From: Skyler Bilbo via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 5:57 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Skyler Bilbo
Subject: Re: Covered Parking in 13R

I don't think this has been said yet on this thread, but I think it is worth 
mentioning.  It is not a fire sprinkler contractor's job to decide where 
sprinklers are required, and/or which standard is applicable (NFPA 13/13R).  I 
know we all probably do this, but we really shouldn't.  I would bet over half 
of contractors don't know half as much as they should about this subject (me 
included; and I think I know a lot about it).  

Long story: There are so many caveats to the Building Code, which trigger 
different requirements for this, which are different in each year of the 
codes/standards, and often different between jurisdictions.  We don't know (and 
I find that it often isn't listed anywhere in the prints) if the Architect used 
a building code tradeoff (larger building area, lower fire ratings, longer 
egress distance, etc) that would automatically trigger the requirement of a 
NFPA 13 system throughout (not 13R, even though it may be less than 4 story 
residential).  It could be that the building is close enough to another 
adjacent building that it requires a NFPA 13 system, or a rated exterior wall 
(which we wouldn't know the option they selected).  There could be separated 
occupancies (with firewalls), mixed occupancies, or accessory occupancies, all 
of which may require a different approach/NFPA standard to be applied.  The 
building mentioned may or may not be a "podium building" (IBC 510.2).  Chapter 
9 of the IBC may, or may not, have minimum requirements for sprinklers based 
solely on occupancy.  This is just a few of the things that I can think of off 
the top of my head.  I'm sure I'm missing some, and there are too many specific 
situations to list here: it would be a novel (like a building code).

Long story short: don't take on the liability by quoting sprinklers in some 
areas, not in others, or with NFPA 13 in some areas and/or NFPA 13R in 
others/throughout, when you really don't know what you are doing.

What I would do: call the Architect. Get it from them (in writing) where 
sprinklers are required and if it is required to be designed per NFPA 13 or 
NFPA 13R.  It is best to do this early on in the bidding process, and try to 
get it sent in an addenda so that your competition bids it the same way you do. 
 Of course, I have done this, and my competition beats me by still bidding it 
incorrectly and against the addenda, and no one realizes that the sprinkler 
system is installed incorrectly, except me, when I walk through the building a 
year later.  That's life in this business.


My $0.02, that no one asked for,

Skyler Bilbo

1700 S. Raney Street
Effingham, IL 62401
217-819-6404 Direct
217-347-7315 Fax

sbi...@wenteplumbing.com
www.wenteplumbing.com

**new** www.beplumb.com
Like us on facebook for updates


On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 4:50 PM Art Tiroly via Sprinklerforum 
 wrote:
Residential use above a parking garage changes the occupancy requirement to a 
mixed use and NFPA 13 design criteria is required. Therefore protect the 
garage. Am I on the right track here?
 
 
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] On 
Behalf Of John Irwin via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 5:55 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: John Irwin
Subject: Covered Parking in 13R
 
I have a 3-story, 13R building. Type IIB construction. On the “engineered” bid 
set, no sprinklers are shown in the covered parking area. This area is inside 
the footprint of the first floor, with 2nd floor units being located above the 
parking area. There are no garage doors and the parking spaces are not 
separated. To sprinkle or not to sprinkle?
 
 
 
John Irwin
West Coast Branch Manager
Quick Response Fire Protection
www.quickresponsefl.com 
Office: 844-9QUICKFL
Cell: 727-282-9243
Main Office: 20545 Independence Blvd. Unit G Groveland, Florida 34736
West Coast: 15201 Roosevelt Blvd., Suite 113, Clearwater, Florida 33760
East Coast:   3133 Skyway Circle, Suite 104, Melbourne, Florida 32934
24 Hour Emergency Service Available 1-844-9QUICKFL
 
 
“The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price 
is forgotten.” – Benjamin Franklin
 



This emai

RE: NFPA 13D

[Greg McGahan via Sprinklerforum]

Not in 13D – Support is not sent back to 13 so currently it appears to be a 
loophole. However, according to Spears the bigger issue would be product 
compatibility which arguably is even more important than the slight weigh of 
duct. 

Not a politician.


Respectfully,

Greg McGahan



4187 Farrington Road
Milton, FL 32583
O- 850-637-8535
C- 850-712-9555


From: Tom Noble via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2020 4:21 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Tom Noble
Subject: Re: NFPA 13D

Tom,
Correct, I cannot find anything in the standard that addresses you issue. 


Tom Noble CET, CFPS, CWBSP

Technical Programs Specialist
American Fire Sprinkler Association
p:
214-349-5965 ext125
w:
firesprinkler.org  
  

—
Learn fire sprinkler design in less than two weeks with AFSA’s Beginning Fire 
Sprinkler System Planning School. Classes are limited to 18 students, so save 
your seat today! Click here to learn more. 




On Mar 27, 2020, at 4:18 PM, Tom Wellen via Sprinklerforum 
 wrote:

Are all the respondents politicians? Politicians sidestep the original 
question, fail to answer, distract into another direction.

Regarding NFPA 13D, it's silent on sprinkler piping or hangers shall not be 
used to support non-system components. I'm looking for a confirmation that is a 
true statement.

Tom Wellen

On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 4:07 PM Greg McGahan via Sprinklerforum 
 wrote:
What about the distance of the head to the deflector?
 
Respectfully,
 
Greg McGahan
 
<1C117B07A1684DC7B25E1F1C6EDD3209[501567].jpg>
 
4187 Farrington Road
Milton, FL 32583
O- 850-637-8535
C- 850-712-9555
 
 
From: Tom Wellen via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2020 3:36 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Tom Wellen
Subject: NFPA 13D
 
HVAC duct was found being supported by a CPVC pipe. The pipe is supported by 
holes through the wood joists. I thought NFPA 13D would prohibit sprinkler pipe 
from supporting other trades, but I don't seem to find it. 
 
It's spelled out in NFPA 13, 9.1.1.8 and 13R, 6.13. Did I miss it in NFPA 13D?
 
 
Tom Wellen 
 
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

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

RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Shell Spaces and Bushed Outlets

[Greg McGahan via Sprinklerforum]

NFPA 13 does not REQUIRE 1” outlets for shell spaces. However, it is good 
practice.

I would not include a bushing in my calcs nor would I ever expect greater than 
a 11.2 k sprinkler in a buildout – at least in the SE part of the country.

 

 

Greg McGahan

Genesis Fire Services, LLC

o-850-637-8535

 

From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 10:07 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Kyle.Montgomery ; Bruce Verhei 

Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Shell Spaces and Bushed Outlets

 

Yeah, for the first part of my question about 8.15.20, I agree. 

 

But I realize that the easy answer there is that the tee probably makes little 
difference, so why not just include it in the calc. So I figured I would spice 
it up since we actually do run into this type of scenario from time to time.

 

So it’s really two questions that can be considered independently:

 

1.  Does NFPA 13 require minimum 1” outlets in shell spaces?
2.  If I have a sprinkler installed in a bushed outlet, do I need to 
include the equivalent length for that tee in my calculations.

 

-Kyle M

 

From: Sprinklerforum [ <mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> 
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bruce 
Verhei via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 9:01 AM
To:  <mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Bruce Verhei < <mailto:bver...@comcast.net> bver...@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Shell Spaces and Bushed Outlets

 

K-17. That’s a little different than I expect. I always thought more like parts 
of a strip mall building that might end up OH-2.

 

Best.


On Feb 5, 2020, at 07:58, Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum 
mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> > wrote:

That’s the crux of my question. A literal interpretation could say that the 
sprinkler is no longer connected directly to the tee, so you have to include 
the equivalent length for the tee in the calculations. But is that really the 
intent in this scenario? Is the bushing really creating an impact to the 
hydraulics? It seems strange to me that the type of fitting the sprinkler is 
connected to (welded outlet, threaded tee, threaded elbow) is of no concern to 
the hydraulics, unless the fitting has a bushed outlet. Does a threaded tee 
with a bushing really create more friction loss than, say a saddle tee 
(mechanical tee)?

 

In a lot of cases it doesn’t make much of a difference, but every once in a 
while you run into a scenario where you’re upgrading an area that had 1” 
outlets to something that needs a large orifice sprinkler (like a K17) and if 
you have to add the friction loss for a 1” tee into your calc it really does 
have an impact.

 

-Kyle M

 

From: Sprinklerforum [ <mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> 
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of J H via 
Sprinklerforum
Sent: Tuesday, February 4, 2020 3:41 PM
To:  <mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: J H < <mailto:design.azfire...@gmail.com> design.azfire...@gmail.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Shell Spaces and Bushed Outlets

 

That doesn't sound legit - I would keep the tee in the calculations. A bushing 
isn't really recognized as a fitting per table 23.4.3.1.1 - more like a 
transient fitting.

 

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 1:22 PM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum 
mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> > wrote:

Esteemed members of the fire sprinkler community,

 

NFPA 13 (2016 Edition) section 8.15.20 is basically telling us to provide 
bushed 1” outlets for sprinklers in shell spaces, right?

 

Section 23.4.4.8.1(9) tells us that friction loss can be excluded for the 
fitting directly connected to a sprinkler.

 

In your opinion(s), is it the intent of the standard that you have to add the 
friction loss for a tee into your hydraulic calculation if using bushings, 
since the sprinkler is no longer directly connected to the tee? Or is it 
acceptable to consider a tee with a bushing as one fitting for the purpose of 
hydraulic calculations.

 

Kyle Montgomery

 

Aero Automatic Sprinkler Co.

21605 N. Central Ave.

Phoenix, AZ 85024

Direct: 623.580.7820

Cell: 602.763.4736

 <mailto:kmontgom...@aerofire.com> kmontgom...@aerofire.com

 

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
<mailto:Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> 
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org 
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org=DwMFaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=22e6bKepvo8q

RE: BIM Woes

[Greg McGahan via Sprinklerforum]

I have done multiple BIM projects. The other trades usually do not follow the 
model to a T as drawn for no justifiable reason that I have seen. BIM does work 
much better than traditional coordinating in my experience but I have not seen 
the savings in labor that would significantly justify the additional expense in 
design as of yet.

 

Just my opinion 

 

Greg McGahan

Genesis Fire Services, LLC

o-850-637-8535

 

From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 2:36 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Prahl, Craig/GVL ; Travis Mack, SET, CFPS, CWBSP, 
RME-G 
Subject: RE: BIM Woes

 

We did REVIT design for a process building, 4 levels, 8 foam-water deluge 
systems, flow was 7600 gpm.

 

We coordinated with every discipline, every discipline worked together as the 
final product had to be certified clash free.  Contractors were instructed to 
NOT deviate from the design documents or any cost associated with their change 
was on their nickel.

 

Bids came in and were super close.  After it was all over I queried the 
sprinkler contractor to get his feedback on the package and installation.  He 
told me they chopped $200K out of the bid (winning bid was $1.4MM) that would 
have been allocated for unplanned rework.  They only had to reroute one section 
of pipe due to a field routed conduit bank that wasn’t modeled.  

 

When the design is done right and all participate, and the contractors are held 
to follow that design, BIM works. 

 

Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME – Fire Protection | 864.676.5252 |  
<mailto:craig.pr...@jacobs.com> craig.pr...@jacobs.com |  
<http://www.jacobs.com/> www.jacobs.com

1041 East Butler Road   Greenville, South Carolina  29606

 

From: Sprinklerforum mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> > On Behalf Of Travis 
Mack, SET, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 3:05 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
<mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> 
Cc: Travis Mack, SET, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G mailto:tm...@mfpdesign.com> >
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: BIM Woes

 

Until our industry embraces this BIM fully, we will have these issues.  Steve 
nailed it.  When done correctly, it is great.  But we all have horror stories.  
Spend 6 months on 3D coordination and then no one follows the model.  Just had 
an issue today.  Fitter calls telling us we are hitting everything and that it 
is all wrong.  Well, we pull up the model and show we are where we indicated.  
Turns out mechanical guy didn’t follow the model and now the coordination 
process begins out in the field.  The is the same job where only 
fire/plumbing/duct are coordinating.  There are electrical and other trades 
that just said they weren’t participating.  So that project will be a total 
waste of time.

 

We have seen ones go very well when all are on board.  It all comes down to the 
strength of the 3D coordinator and the strength of the GC superintendent to 
enforce things.

 

 
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.mfpdesign.com/__;!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!SlIpmz3y4kCwmsF_R2FLu6Qlq1t9IeHldJTkDobZxXnIiI1A42NCTEUMhqsOf6QG6w$>
 

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

MFP Design, LLC

3356 E Vallejo Ct

Gilbert, AZ 85298

NEW EXTENSION: 480-505-9271 ext. 700

fax: 866-430-6107

 <mailto:tm...@mfpdesign.com> tm...@mfpdesign.com

www.mfpdesign.com 
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.mfpdesign.com__;!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!SlIpmz3y4kCwmsF_R2FLu6Qlq1t9IeHldJTkDobZxXnIiI1A42NCTEUMhqu8AmzB1A$>
 

 

Send large files to us via:  
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__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__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!SlIpmz3y4kCwmsF_R2FLu6Qlq1t9IeHldJTkDobZxXnIiI1A42NCTEUMhqu2ZsOBZw$>
 https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign 

LinkedIn:  
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__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__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!SlIpmz3y4kCwmsF_R2FLu6Qlq1t9IeHldJTkDobZxXnIiI1A42NCTEUMhqsvH7XVNw$>
 https://www.linkedin.com/in/travismack

 

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

 

 

From: Matthew J Willis mailto:ma...@rapidfireinc.com> 
> 
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 12:54 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
<mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> 
Cc: Steve Leyton mailto:st...@protectiondesign.com> >; 'Travis Mack, SET, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G' 
mailto:tm...@mfpdesign.com> >

RE: Pipe adjacent to duct

[Greg McGahan via Sprinklerforum]

I’ve never seen anything but we have had inspector’s misinterpret the 
prohibition for supporting anything from sprinkler pipe to mean touching…never 
seen this one though.

 

Greg McGahan

Genesis Fire Services, LLC

o-850-637-8535

 

From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Travis Mack via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 7:54 AM
To:  

Cc: Travis Mack 
Subject: Pipe adjacent to duct

 

We have a project where the fire inspector is stating that the fire sprinkler 
main is too close to ductwork.  There is a 6” main that is about 1/2” from the 
ductwork. 

 

Of course, the inspectors response is “it’s in the code book” when asking for a 
reference that mandates clearance to hvac ductwork. 

 

Has anyone run into something similar?

 

Note: this is not a high temp duct that would cause for enough heat to convert 
the sprinkler water to steam. This is just your standard, run of the mill, HVAC 
system. 

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

480-505-9271 x700

MFP Design, LLC

www.mfpdesign,com <http://www.mfpdesign,com> 

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

RE: THE HORROR MUSEUM PART ONE

[Greg McGahan via Sprinklerforum]

 

Well done!

 

 

Greg McGahan

Genesis Fire Services, LLC

o-850-637-8535

 

From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Radhakrishnan Duraikkannu via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 6:41 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Radhakrishnan Duraikkannu 
Subject: Re: THE HORROR MUSEUM PART ONE

 

Dear 

Pl send it

 

On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 3:13 PM Jussef Liban - GRUPO 3S via Sprinklerforum 
mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> > wrote:

Hi Group 

 

This is a photo collection with the worst mistakes I've seen in fire 
installations in my life. 

 

I have many more that I collected in my 25 years in the field, so now I decided 
to turn it them into musical with funny text and music (this is in Spanish, but 
looking the photo is more than enough). 

 

Most of them belongs to south America, showing how far are we from the good 
path in the fire protection field. 

 

If you like it, I can share with you other videos in the future that I am 
preparing in my free time, this is good for instruction, for a relax time, but 
more important to take conscience of what is happening out here

 

 <https://youtu.be/IW45IrzztvE> https://youtu.be/IW45IrzztvE

 

 

 

Saludos Cordiales

 

Jussef Liban

Gerente

 

Sigueme en las redes para obtener información sobre temas relacionados con la 
protección contra incendios.

GRUPO TELEGRAM: https://t.me/joinchat/JmalzBDcEYE8NDqSwbfrBg 

FACEBOOK:  <https://www.facebook.com/seguridadcontraincendiosalalcancedetodos/> 
https://www.facebook.com/seguridadcontraincendiosalalcancedetodos/

FACEBOOK:  <https://www.facebook.com/grupo3speru/> 
https://www.facebook.com/grupo3speru/

ARTICULOS TECNICOS COLECCIONABLES: https://grupo3s.pe/biblioteca/

LINKEDIN:  <https://www.linkedin.com/in/jussef-liban-114b56b9/> 
https://www.linkedin.com/in/jussef-liban-114b56b9/

YOUTUBE:  
<https://www.youtube.com/user/JussefLiban/featured?view_as=subscriber> 
https://www.youtube.com/user/JussefLiban/featured?view_as=subscriber

 

 



 

 

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
<mailto: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: Reliable Res3 data circa 1997

[Greg McGahan]

I have them now. I had requested them earlier but I was in a bind and right
after I sent the email I got them from Reliable. Pete Schwab had them as
well.

Thanks all,



Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 2:08 PM, <cl...@fire-design.com> wrote:

> Hi Greg,
>
>
>
> This may be a dumb question but did you check with Reliable?  Their tech
> support is top notch.
>
>
>
> Cliff Whitfield, SET
>
> President
>
>
>
> Fire Design, Inc.
>
> 184 Comfort Place
>
> Burnsville, NC 28714
>
> Ph: 828-284-4772 <(828)%20284-4772>
>
>
>
> [image: Description: New FDI Logo-4.jpg]
>
>
>
> cl...@fire-design.com
>
> www.fire-design.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org] *On Behalf Of *Greg McGahan
> *Sent:* Friday, August 4, 2017 2:34 PM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* Reliable Res3 data circa 1997
>
>
>
> Does anyone happen to have the old data sheets for the Reliable 3.9k heads?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
>
>
> Greg McGahan
> Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
> 1160 McKenzie Road
> Cantonment, FL 32533
> 850-937-1850 <(850)%20937-1850>
> fax 850-937-1852 <(850)%20937-1852>
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient_term=icon>
>  Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient_term=link>
> <#m_5225220540756320528_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> ___
> 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

Reliable Res3 data circa 1997

[Greg McGahan]

Does anyone happen to have the old data sheets for the Reliable 3.9k heads?

Thanks,


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Covered Restaurant Seating Area

[Greg McGahan]

In North Florida we live in the "no mans land" of freeze protection. It
gets cold enough to force freeze protection in these areas but its warm
enough that the expense is often a very large percentage of an otherwise
modest project. Adding several thousands dollars for a dry riser and bulk
main for 4 - 8 heads is hard for an owner and an AHJ to swallow. Nobody is
loving Antifreeze these days and with the addition of an RPZ with the
discharge above a ceiling, they are not practical either. Dry Sidewalls
only throw so far so the 4-8 heads in a seating area of a small restaurant
is sometimes 50% or more of the total buildout cost. Then we have to deal
with Corrosion. I do not know how much of an issue corrosion is in other
water side communities but in our climate it is very difficult. NOTHING but
plastic and high grade stainless will hold up long term.

I am NOT arguing that sprinklers are not needed or required, but it is very
often not enforced due to the reasons above. We have had instances where we
tried to force the issue and were told not by the AHJ. Therefore this would
be a GREAT topic for AHJ training.

Have a great day,





Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Jeff Bridges <j...@jbfireprotection.com>
wrote:

> Love this thread- I’ve faced similar situations and lost every time.
>
> In the end I agree with Steve’s question of asking why we wouldn’t want to
> protect these areas (proactive)
>
> Popcorn popped- carry on
>
>
>
> Jeff Bridges
>
> *JBFP Inc*
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org] *On Behalf Of *Steve Leyton
> *Sent:* Monday, April 17, 2017 7:55 AM
>
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* RE: Covered Restaurant Seating Area
>
>
>
> John:
>
> I was responding earlier from home and now, seated at my incredibly
> cluttered desk, have reviewed 8.15.7 (2013 ed.).   As tactfully as I can
> say this, you’re reaching.  For very hard-to-grasp fruit.   I sincerely
> doubt you’re going to get any fire or building official to see your way to
> applying an exception that describes a non-combustible envelope with wood
> framing and sprinklered interstitial spaces to a vinyl or nylon canopy.
>
>
>
> In reality – and I’ve had to walk this line hundreds of times here in fair
> weather California – the underlying reason that you’re in pickle and the
> owner wants to exclude sprinklers is because they don’t want to deal with
> the trouble and expense of designing a canopy frame that will withstand the
> weight of its cover, water-filled sprinkler pipe and wind shear.  Out here,
> you can add the applied horizontal force of seismic bracing as well.In
> cold weather climates, there’s the challenge of having to make the system
> dry, but often al fresco dining areas are built like screen rooms with hard
> framing above and around, but that’s a different story.
>
>
>
> Apologies for shamelessly pimping my business model, but if the architect
> and owner had been indoctrinated (inoculated) regarding the need to
> sprinkler such spaces early in the project (like, DESIGN PHASE), you
> wouldn’t inherit this interpretive challenge that puts you at risk
> financially.One of the reasons I don’t miss contracting is that as a
> consultant, I’m not put in the unenviable and uncomfortable position of
> lobbying against sprinklers.  Why wouldn’t we (proactive industry types)
> want to protect areas where people are eating and drinking, and especially
> where they are potentially drinking alcoholic beverages, by candlelight and
> in some states still, smoking?
>
>
>
> Steve L.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Steve
> Leyton
> *Sent:* Monday, April 17, 2017 6:16 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* RE: Covered Restaurant Seating Area
>
>
>
> I suggest you run those by your local building and fire officials.
>
>
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
>
>  Original message 
>
> From: John Irwin <jir...@criticalsystemsolutions.com>
>
> Date: 4/17/17 6:00 AM (GMT-08:00)
>
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> Subject: RE: Covered Restaurant Seating Area
>
>
>
> I would disagree with this unless you can direct me to some more
> information. 8.15.7.3(2) even goes on to spell out Light and Ordinary
> Hazard Occupancy situations where sprinklers can be omitted.
>
>
>
> *John Irw

Re: Call plates

[Greg McGahan]

I have been making them since 1984.I do not know when they were
required.


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Reed A. Roisum, SET <raroi...@kfi-eng.com>
wrote:

> Did you mean calc plates or Hydraulic Design Information Sign?
>
>
>
> Found in 1996 ed. 8-5 Hydraulic Design Information Sign but can’t see it
> in 1989 ed.  I don’t have anything in between.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Reed A. Roisum, SET *|* *Karges-Faulconbridge, Inc.* *|* Senior Fire
> Protection Designer *|* Fargo, ND *| direct: *701.552.9903
> <(701)%20552-9903>* | **mobile:* 701.388.1352 <(701)%20388-1352> *| *
> *KFIengineers.com* <http://www.kfiengineers.com>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org] *On Behalf Of *rongreenman .
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 23, 2017 4:19 PM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* Call plates
>
>
>
> Anybody know what edition of 13 first required call plates.
>
> --
>
> Sent from Gmail Mobile
>
>
> __
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.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
>
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Fire pump removal

[Greg McGahan]

You can sometimes rent a trailer mounted fire pump in many instances. We
have not done it, but we have followed the trail before and found out that
some pump manufacturers have them available.




Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Steve Leyton <st...@protectiondesign.com>
wrote:

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

tight construction

[Greg McGahan]

8.15.6.2 - What is the definition of "tight" construction in the eyes of
NFPA 13?



Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850 <(850)%20937-1850>
fax 850-937-1852 <(850)%20937-1852>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Uprights on 3" pipe

[Greg McGahan]

Travis,

In one of the classes I have taken - I cannot remember when or where - the
instructor was on the NFPA #13 committee and he implicitly said that the
verbiage was intended for "nominal" pipe size - not actual measurement. I
have NOT heard anything since to collaborate this comment.




Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Brad Casterline <bcasterli...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> It sounds like a good challenge Travis, and congratulations for getting
> the contract-- the self employed designer who turns down any work has never
> lacked for beer and cigarette money.
> And typical of goverment work, there are the doers vs the reviewers, and
> every which way the doers turn they are screwed by an inch or two.
> When the Corp of Eng is the AHJ though I have had good luck with the field
> people- they seem to know when you have gotten as close to the intent as
> reality allows-- ie, instead of deflector distance they look at 'bulb'
> distance- within an inch or two, and rightly so.
>
> We NICET IVs who can design, calc, bim coordinate, and stocklist are often
> the saviours of projects that would otherwise be a total cluster without us.
>
> Brad
> On Jan 14, 2017 10:56 AM, "Travis Mack, SET" <tm...@mfpdesign.com> wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, we do not have the ability to downsize the piping.  It
>> will be a matter of reworking the existing pipe sizing.  This consultant
>> took the easy way out and didn't really pay attention to many things.  The
>> job has over 100 psi available.  They have 2" branch lines and 3" mains for
>> everything.  I can not decrease sizing at all.  I just have to make sure
>> that the new routings I have to do with the pipe sizing per their plan is
>> still capable of delivering the minimum required densities.
>>
>> Travis Mack, SET
>> MFP Design, LLC
>> 2508 E Lodgepole Drive
>> Gilbert, AZ 85298480-505-9271 <(480)%20505-9271>
>> fax: 866-430-6107 <(866)%20430-6107>email:tm...@mfpdesign.com
>> http://www.mfpdesign.comhttps://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 1/14/2017 9:46 AM, Brad Casterline wrote:
>>
>> Well said Mr. Mack!
>>
>> Since you will be fixing The Consultant's effort I predict you will
>> resize the branchlines to 2.5", max, so the problem goes away.
>> This should be easy in LH and OH, as you know, because it is a simple
>> matter of a 1" sprig or arm over from a 3" branchline versus an SSU
>> directly on a 2.5" branchline.
>>
>> WBR,
>> 2+2=4
>> .
>> On Jan 13, 2017 9:26 PM, "Travis Mack, SET" <tm...@mfpdesign.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you.  I think that those of us in this industry (and I believe
>>> most are like this) that truly love what we do and view it as a life saving
>>> endeavor every day want to always do the best possible thing and fix every
>>> problem that is found so that the project goes on with limited hiccups and
>>> we all move on to the next project so we can protect more lives.
>>>
>>> I can pretty much guarantee that I will end up making it meet NFPA 13
>>> critieria, coordinating and re-calculating the project to make sure that at
>>> the end of the day, should something happen, the required amount of wet
>>> stuff will get on the hot stuff.  My customer and their customer can decide
>>> how they want to handle the re-submittal and extra time/schedule impact
>>> that will possibly happen.
>>>
>>> Travis Mack, SET
>>> MFP Design, LLC
>>> 2508 E Lodgepole Drive
>>> Gilbert, AZ 85298480-505-9271 <%28480%29%20505-9271>
>>> fax: 866-430-6107 <%28866%29%20430-6107>email:tm...@mfpdesign.com
>>> http://www.mfpdesign.comhttps://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 1/13/2017 8:12 PM, Ed Kramer wrote:
>>>
>>> Travis,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As a design professional (and you’re a good one), you’re expected to
>>> know and abide by the standards.  However,  in this case, you’re not the
>>> designer.  Since you have a contractual connection to this project, I’d
>>> argue you’re morally (and to a less extent l

Re: NFPA 25 - exercising hose valves

[Greg McGahan]

I love these kinds of questions because we face these decisions constantly.
We are competing against some very inadequate companies at times and the
vast majority of our clients - no industrial and non governmental - are not
interested in a better inspection. They are interested in checking a box on
their list for their insurance company. We have been yelled at for opening
inspector's test valves because the previous company (been around for 40
years) never did that before.

We choose to sleep well because we strive to do the right thing and trust
it will work out in the end.

Greg


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850 <(850)%20937-1850>
fax 850-937-1852 <(850)%20937-1852>

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Roland Huggins <rhugg...@firesprinkler.org>
wrote:

> Sounds to me like an opportunity to discuss with your client what an
> inadequate job the prior inspectors were doing.
>
>
> Roland Huggins, PE - Senior VP Engineering
> American Fire Sprinkler Assn.
> Dallas, TX
> http://www.firesprinkler.org
>
> Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 11, 2017, at 6:51 AM, John Irwin <JIrwin@criticalsystemsolution
> s.com> wrote:
>
> These are the answers I was hoping to receive.
>
> Thank you everyone.
>
> *John Irwin - CET*
>
>
>
> ___
> 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: Tenant improvement - Found word(s) list error in the Text body

[Greg McGahan]

Travis we calculate them if we are adding more than a head or two or if the 
spacing changes enough that the end head pressures are questionable. 



Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 15, 2016, at 6:34 PM, Mark Phillips  wrote:
> 
> Lol
> Raleigh North Carolina
> 
> Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Droid
> On Dec 15, 2016 6:46 PM, Rocci Cetani 3  wrote:
> Mark where do you work? I want to make sure to avoid that jurisdiction.
> 
> Rocci Cetani III, CET
> 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
> 
> 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.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
> On Behalf Of Mark Phillips
> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2016 3:34 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Subject: Re: Tenant improvement
> 
> Here if you add one head at all you calculate.
> If you relocate any head more than five feet total including break over and
> drop you calculate.
> If the existing facility has a pump. You need a current a certified pump by
> a manufacturer rep or sealed by a PE And you need to take it the street tie
> in with a current flow test performed by a AHJ certified tester and
> witnessed by the city.
> 
> We figure calculating every job so no matter what size job it's going to be
> 2500 out of the gate.
> But it's the standard so everyone is equal.
> 
> That is as long as you read the city requirements for permitting.
> 
> 
> Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Droid
> On Dec 15, 2016 6:12 PM, "Travis Mack, SET"  wrote:
> How many of you are having to provide calculations when you do a tenant
> remodel?  I'm not talking about changing densities or even going from
> standard to extended coverage sprinklers.  I just mean your average run of
> the mill add/relo project.
> 
> We have run into a fire marshal that feels it is required on all projects
> now.  The one that they are currently fighting is just a tenant change in a
> strip mall.  Building has been around for nearly 30 years.
> Water supply in area is very stable.  Would you normally figure a full
> calculation on this type of project?
> 
> 
> --
> 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
> 
> ___
> 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
> 
> ___
> 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: pipe heat trace

[Greg McGahan]

I am not sure Craig...I just believe that it will work and it falls into
practical thinking for us down here anyway. Maybe in a colder climate the
concern will be much greater.

Greg


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 9:43 AM, <craig.pr...@ch2m.com> wrote:

> I think what is being said is that you can protect the piping and that a
> valve in the line doesn’t affect the protection of the pipe.  Is that
> correct?
>
>
>
> Other questions had arisen about using the heat tape to actually protect
> valves which is a different issue.
>
>
>
>
> *Craig L. Prahl*
> Fire Protection Group Lead/SME
> *CH2M*
> 200 Verdae Blvd.
> Greenville, SC  29607
> Direct - 864.920.7540 <(864)%20920-7540>
>
> Fax - 864.920.7129 <(864)%20920-7129>
>
> CH2MHILL Extension  77540
> craig.pr...@ch2m.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org] *On Behalf Of *Greg McGahan
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 07, 2016 9:41 AM
>
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* Re: pipe heat trace [EXTERNAL]
>
>
>
> Craig,
>
>
>
> It is against the listing to take bonnets out of hanger rings too, but
> there is hardly a condominium in in Florida that still has bonnets in the
> rings.
>
>
>
> But I did my due diligence and got the answer from the manufacturer, The
> listing is not effected by the presence of valves. So for me, I am pleased
> with that. It is also not effected by by the presence of flanges. Their
> software that calculates the size and length of the their products ask for
> all pertinent information regarding valves, hangers and flanges.
>
>
>
> Just my opinion as a guy trying to walk all the lines and still make a
> living.
>
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Greg McGahan
> Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
> 1160 McKenzie Road
> Cantonment, FL 32533
> 850-937-1850 <(850)%20937-1850>
> fax 850-937-1852 <(850)%20937-1852>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 8:27 AM, <craig.pr...@ch2m.com> wrote:
>
> But that answer doesn’t state whether or not their listing includes heat
> tracing of valves.
>
>
>
>
> *Craig L. Prahl*
> Fire Protection Group Lead/SME
> *CH2M*
> 200 Verdae Blvd.
> Greenville, SC  29607
> Direct - 864.920.7540 <(864)%20920-7540>
>
> Fax - 864.920.7129 <(864)%20920-7129>
>
> CH2MHILL Extension  77540
> craig.pr...@ch2m.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org] *On Behalf Of *Greg McGahan
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 07, 2016 9:24 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* Re: pipe heat trace [EXTERNAL]
>
>
>
> I have checked with one manufacturer concerning their listing if valves
> were in the line and their answer was that valving did not effect their
> listing.
>
>
>
> So I am comfortable with using their product. From a practical standpoint
> I am 100% confident that the valve will not freeze if heat traced and
> insulated.
>
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
>
> Greg McGahan
> Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
> 1160 McKenzie Road
> Cantonment, FL 32533
> 850-937-1850 <(850)%20937-1850>
> fax 850-937-1852 <(850)%20937-1852>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 9:41 PM, AKS-Gmail-IMAP <aksei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It is worthwhile to note that joint and pipe failures related to pipe
> freezing are not failures located at the site where freezing takes place.
> Contrary to conventional wisdom the failures are not from ice stressing
> piping material. Instead it is the overpressure in the still liquid
> portions of the piping caused by a decrease in space, i.e. an advancing ice
> plug, that causes the breaks. The water at the break can subsequently flash
> freeze due to pressure loss giving the impression it was, “ice that done
> it."  A dramatic usefull example of this concept is the common method of
> using dry ice to freeze a line off when a shutoff valve has failed. Just
> make sure there is a way to relieve the overpressure. With this in mind
> there might be some instances where pressure relief mechanisms located in
> strategic locations would be a good idea.
>
>
>
> Allan Seidel
>
> St. Louis, MO
>
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 5, 2016, at 2:37 PM, craig.pr...@ch2m.com wrote:
>
>
>
> You can only trace valves if the product says it is listed for protecting
&g

Apology in advance

[Greg McGahan]

As stressful as the sprinkler world can be with all of the technical hoops
and other issues we deal with I had to share this response to an ad we
placed for Fire Sprinkler Fitters:


To Whom It May Concern,

I saw your ads on craigslist for a fire sprinkler fitter. The benefits
interested me very much. I know I can handle the fitting part -- I can fit
through doors, under desks, the small space between the couch and end
table, behind chairs at restaurants, and I'm sure wherever else you need.
I'm very skinny. I'm not sure what the "fire" part entails but I do know
how to light one. With a match or one of those stick things. Well kind of
with one of those stick things. The child-proof part makes it kind of hard.
Not that I'm a child. I'm not. I'm 19. And very grown up. And a good
fitter. As far as sprinklers go I LOVE jumping through sprinklers. The kind
that come up form the ground, the ones that go in circle, back and forth,
or even if they are stationary. I really love jumping through them when
eating watermelon.

I know I'm the girl, I'm mean fitter, for this job. You can contact me
**

P.S. I think it's really great that there are jobs out there this
multi-faceted and unique!


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: pipe heat trace

[Greg McGahan]

Craig,

It is against the listing to take bonnets out of hanger rings too, but
there is hardly a condominium in in Florida that still has bonnets in the
rings.

But I did my due diligence and got the answer from the manufacturer, The
listing is not effected by the presence of valves. So for me, I am pleased
with that. It is also not effected by by the presence of flanges. Their
software that calculates the size and length of the their products ask for
all pertinent information regarding valves, hangers and flanges.

Just my opinion as a guy trying to walk all the lines and still make a
living.

Greg




Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 8:27 AM, <craig.pr...@ch2m.com> wrote:

> But that answer doesn’t state whether or not their listing includes heat
> tracing of valves.
>
>
>
>
> *Craig L. Prahl*
> Fire Protection Group Lead/SME
> *CH2M*
> 200 Verdae Blvd.
> Greenville, SC  29607
> Direct - 864.920.7540 <(864)%20920-7540>
>
> Fax - 864.920.7129 <(864)%20920-7129>
>
> CH2MHILL Extension  77540
> craig.pr...@ch2m.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org] *On Behalf Of *Greg McGahan
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 07, 2016 9:24 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* Re: pipe heat trace [EXTERNAL]
>
>
>
> I have checked with one manufacturer concerning their listing if valves
> were in the line and their answer was that valving did not effect their
> listing.
>
>
>
> So I am comfortable with using their product. From a practical standpoint
> I am 100% confident that the valve will not freeze if heat traced and
> insulated.
>
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
>
> Greg McGahan
> Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
> 1160 McKenzie Road
> Cantonment, FL 32533
> 850-937-1850 <(850)%20937-1850>
> fax 850-937-1852 <(850)%20937-1852>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 9:41 PM, AKS-Gmail-IMAP <aksei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It is worthwhile to note that joint and pipe failures related to pipe
> freezing are not failures located at the site where freezing takes place.
> Contrary to conventional wisdom the failures are not from ice stressing
> piping material. Instead it is the overpressure in the still liquid
> portions of the piping caused by a decrease in space, i.e. an advancing ice
> plug, that causes the breaks. The water at the break can subsequently flash
> freeze due to pressure loss giving the impression it was, “ice that done
> it."  A dramatic usefull example of this concept is the common method of
> using dry ice to freeze a line off when a shutoff valve has failed. Just
> make sure there is a way to relieve the overpressure. With this in mind
> there might be some instances where pressure relief mechanisms located in
> strategic locations would be a good idea.
>
>
>
> Allan Seidel
>
> St. Louis, MO
>
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 5, 2016, at 2:37 PM, craig.pr...@ch2m.com wrote:
>
>
>
> You can only trace valves if the product says it is listed for protecting
> valves in NFPA 13 systems or something similar.
>
>
>
> You can’t automatically assume you can do anything.  What does the
> listing state, that’s where you start.
>
>
>
>
> *Craig L. Prahl*
> Fire Protection Group Lead/SME
> *CH2M*
> 200 Verdae Blvd.
> Greenville, SC  29607
> Direct - 864.920.7540 <(864)%20920-7540>
>
> Fax - 864.920.7129 <(864)%20920-7129>
>
> CH2MHILL Extension  77540
> craig.pr...@ch2m.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dewayne
> Martinez
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 01, 2016 3:53 PM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* RE: pipe heat trace [EXTERNAL]
>
>
>
> So I can heat trace the sectional valves since they are not specifically
> excluded per NFPA 13 and 14?
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@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.   ---

Re: pipe heat trace

[Greg McGahan]

I have checked with one manufacturer concerning their listing if valves
were in the line and their answer was that valving did not effect their
listing.

So I am comfortable with using their product. From a practical standpoint I
am 100% confident that the valve will not freeze if heat traced and
insulated.

Greg


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 9:41 PM, AKS-Gmail-IMAP <aksei...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It is worthwhile to note that joint and pipe failures related to pipe
> freezing are not failures located at the site where freezing takes place.
> Contrary to conventional wisdom the failures are not from ice stressing
> piping material. Instead it is the overpressure in the still liquid
> portions of the piping caused by a decrease in space, i.e. an advancing ice
> plug, that causes the breaks. The water at the break can subsequently flash
> freeze due to pressure loss giving the impression it was, “ice that done
> it."  A dramatic usefull example of this concept is the common method of
> using dry ice to freeze a line off when a shutoff valve has failed. Just
> make sure there is a way to relieve the overpressure. With this in mind
> there might be some instances where pressure relief mechanisms located in
> strategic locations would be a good idea.
>
> Allan Seidel
> St. Louis, MO
>
>
> On Dec 5, 2016, at 2:37 PM, craig.pr...@ch2m.com wrote:
>
> You can only trace valves if the product says it is listed for protecting
> valves in NFPA 13 systems or something similar.
>
> You can’t automatically assume you can do anything.  What does the
> listing state, that’s where you start.
>
>
> *Craig L. Prahl*
>  Fire Protection Group Lead/SME
> *CH2M*
> 200 Verdae Blvd.
> Greenville, SC  29607
> Direct - 864.920.7540 <(864)%20920-7540>
> Fax - 864.920.7129 <(864)%20920-7129>
> CH2MHILL Extension  77540
> craig.pr...@ch2m.com
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Dewayne
> Martinez
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 01, 2016 3:53 PM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* RE: pipe heat trace [EXTERNAL]
>
> So I can heat trace the sectional valves since they are not specifically
> excluded per NFPA 13 and 14?
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@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 <(864)%20920-7540>
> Fax - 864.920.7129 <(864)%20920-7129>
>
> CH2MHILL Extension  77540
> craig.pr...@ch2m.com
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@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 t

Re: Excessive air leak rate

[Greg McGahan]

What do you consider to be an excessive air leak for dry or preaction
systems or at what point do you go searching for the cause of the leak? in
my experience a compressor should not even run every day...once every few
days to a week on a typical system. More than that is not acceptable.



How do you know that you have an excessive air leak? All of the items below
sometimes..

When someone complains about the compressor running all the time?

When the compressor burns out?

When/if you conduct a 3 year leak rate test?

When you go to investigate low air supervisory signals?

Something else? false trips



Would it help if you were notified that the air leak rate is increasing or
approaching the maximum allowable rate? if it were in combination with the
low air alarm yesif it requires more hardware, trim etc, only in some
instances.




Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Mike Henke <mi...@pottersignal.com> wrote:

> Since I only received one response, I’ll try this one last time.
>
>
>
> What do you consider to be an excessive air leak for dry or preaction
> systems or at what point do you go searching for the cause of the leak?
>
>
>
> How do you know that you have an excessive air leak?
>
> When someone complains about the compressor running all the time?
>
> When the compressor burns out?
>
> When/if you conduct a 3 year leak rate test?
>
> When you go to investigate low air supervisory signals?
>
> Something else?
>
>
>
> Would it help if you were notified that the air leak rate is increasing or
> approaching the maximum allowable rate?
>
>
>
> Feel free to email me off line.
>
>
>
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
>
>
> mike
>
>
>
> *Mike Henke CET*
>
> Sprinkler Product Manager
>
> ___
>
>
>
> [image: http://www.pottersignal.com/signatures/graphics/logo.jpg]
>
>
>
> Potter Electric Signal Company, LLC
>
> 1609 Park 370 Place, St. Louis, MO 63042
>
> phone: 800-325-3936 <(800)%20325-3936>   |   direct: 314-595-6740
> <(314)%20595-6740>
>
>
>
> mi...@pottersignal.com   |   www.pottersignal.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org] *On Behalf Of *Mike Henke
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 01, 2016 1:22 PM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* Excessive air leak rate
>
>
>
> What would you consider to be an excessive air leak rate for dry or
> preaction systems?
>
> How many psi per day?
>
>
>
> An acceptance test for a new system requires less than 1.5 psi in 24
> hours. That’s pretty tight.
>
>
>
> NFPA 25 allows 36 psi in 24 hours for the 3 year test. That seems pretty
> loose.
>
>
>
> It looks like NFPA 25 changed it in 2008 from 10 psi per week, which is
> 1.5 psi per day, to 36 psi per day. That’s a pretty drastic change.
>
>
>
> Would it help if you were notified that the air leak rate is increasing or
> approaching the maximum allowable rate?
>
>
>
> How do you know that you have an excessive air leak?
>
> When someone complains about the compressor running all the time?
>
> When the compressor burns out?
>
> When/if you conduct a 3 year leak rate test?
>
> When you go to investigate low air supervisory signals?
>
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
>
>
> mike
>
>
>
> *Mike Henke CET*
>
> Sprinkler Product Manager
>
> ___
>
>
>
> [image: http://www.pottersignal.com/signatures/graphics/logo.jpg]
>
>
>
> Potter Electric Signal Company, LLC
>
> 1609 Park 370 Place, St. Louis, MO 63042
>
> phone: 800-325-3936 <(800)%20325-3936>   |   direct: 314-595-6740
> <(314)%20595-6740>
>
>
>
> mi...@pottersignal.com   |   www.pottersignal.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

Re: pipe heat trace

[Greg McGahan]

if all the other requirements are met...monitored, insulated etc...



Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Greg McGahan <g...@livingwaterfp.com> wrote:

> I do not see a prohibition on it...
>
>
> Greg McGahan
> Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
> 1160 McKenzie Road
> Cantonment, FL 32533
> 850-937-1850 <(850)%20937-1850>
> fax 850-937-1852 <(850)%20937-1852>
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Dewayne Martinez <
> dmarti...@total-mechanical.com> wrote:
>
>> 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

Re: pipe heat trace

[Greg McGahan]

I do not see a prohibition on it...


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Dewayne Martinez <
dmarti...@total-mechanical.com> wrote:

> 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

Re: Ceiling of trusses and insulation

[Greg McGahan]

I agree with Travis. We have however been forced to have chicken wire or
similar under the insulation to prevent it prematurely falling on the heads.


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Travis Mack, SET <tm...@mfpdesign.com>
wrote:

> Then just do standard spray sprinklers at 130 sq ft max spacing.  Reduce
> the design area to 900 sq ft.  Use 4.2k sprinklers to keep the
> over-discharge down.  I think you are correct in using the insulation for
> your ceiling to locate your deflectors.
>
> Travis Mack, SET
> MFP Design, LLC
> 2508 E Lodgepole Drive
> Gilbert, AZ 85298480-505-9271
> fax: 866-430-6107email:tm...@mfpdesign.com
> http://www.mfpdesign.comhttps://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 11/21/2016 4:01 PM, Ben Young wrote:
>
> Travis,
>
> I actually don't want to use CC heads because of the onerous draft
> stopping requirements, so that's a negative.
> Space is heated, so we're talking wet system here.
>
>
> Benjamin Young
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Travis Mack, SET <tm...@mfpdesign.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I would say you have combustible framing members less than 3' on center
>> so you are limited to 130 sq ft spacing.  If the space is less than 60"
>> deep, you may want to consider something like the Tyco CC3 and get up to
>> 16' spacing at 256 sq ft.  Also, the design area would be reduced.  You
>> would have 1950 sq ft with SSU, assuming this is dry, or 1300 sq ft with
>> CC3, again, assuming it is dry.
>>
>> Travis Mack, SET
>> MFP Design, LLC
>> 2508 E Lodgepole Drive
>> Gilbert, AZ 85298480-505-9271
>> fax: 866-430-6107email:tm...@mfpdesign.com
>> http://www.mfpdesign.comhttps://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 11/21/2016 12:56 PM, Ben Young wrote:
>>
>> So I have a crawl space that was originally supposed to get drywall on
>> the underside of the trusses, but now the owner wants sprinklers instead.
>> This is inside an apartment building of type VB construction under the
>> ground floor.  The crawl space is more than 36" deep, so it doesn't require
>> CC heads.
>> My question is how the heck do I treat the spacing for the heads I'm
>> going to install?
>> The structure is 14" deep TJIs that are stuffed with non-faced batt
>> insulation that's held in place by furring strips.  My gut is telling me
>> its not a smooth flat ceiling, but its also not exactly combustible
>> obstructed either.
>> At this point, I don't even know whether I should consider it obstructed
>> or unobstructed.
>> I'm leaning towards the insulation will act as a ceiling and I can go
>> 1-12 down from the bottom of the truss, and do 225 SQFT spacing, but can't
>> find anything to assuage my fears in the code.
>> This project was submitted under the 2010 edition of 13, but the AHJ now
>> has adopted 2013, FYI.
>> I looked through 8.15.1 but that doesn't really tell me HOW to space in
>> these areas, just if I can omit or not... also didn't find too much of use
>> in the AFSA informal interps.
>> Any thoughts on this?
>> Benjamin Young
>>
>> ___
>> Sprinklerforum mailing 
>> listSprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.orghttp://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 
> listSprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.orghttp://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: sprinkler design programs

[Greg McGahan]

I complained about it after the initial investment for a long time. After I
buckled down and LEARNED it I cannot imagine going back to another program.
I am continually learning faster and better ways to use it instead of
finding more things to dislike.

I export to hlf and after the first time it has worked pretty well.

Greg


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:26 PM, Bobby Gillett <bo...@livingwaterfp.com>
wrote:

> I learned AutoSPRINK from the day I started designing. I came in the
> office after 10 yrs in the field., learned computers, AutoSPRINK and design
> at the same time. I love AutoSPRINK. I have seen other programs and feel I
> can be more thorough with this one right here. We design and stocklist.
>
> Bobby Gillett
> *Living Water Fire Protection, LLC*
> 1160 McKenzie Rd.
> Cantonment, FL 32533
> (850) 937-1850
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Travis Mack, SET <tm...@mfpdesign.com>
> wrote:
>
>> David:
>>
>> That's the first I have heard of such issues...interesting.
>>
>> You must have the training class for AutoSprink.  Trying to do it on your
>> own is crazy.  That is for sure.
>>
>> As far as coordination, there has been nothing better for me.  I just
>> take the other trades drawings and bring them right in.  It has been no
>> issue at all.  I have even found some ways of doing it better and making it
>> even easier.  I xref the other trades in so it is less memory intensive.
>> Plus, a simple new import and my working file is all up to date.  It is a
>> very slick process.
>>
>> I make the changes in real time during online coordination meetings.  I
>> usually have my model uploaded by the end of an online coordination meeting.
>>
>> I have to go clean up some of the other trades at at times.  When they
>> have 10 objects that make up bolts, that is pretty memory intensive.
>> But other than that, it is not a real issue.
>>
>>
>> Travis Mack, SET
>> MFP Design, LLC
>> 2508 E Lodgepole Drive
>> Gilbert, AZ 85298480-505-9271
>> fax: 866-430-6107email:tm...@mfpdesign.com
>> http://www.mfpdesign.comhttps://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 9/20/2016 10:06 AM, David M. Canham wrote:
>>
>> I tried to switch two times and found it be worst investment I ever made.
>> Both time switched back to SprinkCad after a year. Lost a ton of money.
>> Last time I was told that if I took the training class and used it for a
>> year and did not live it they would refund the lease money (not the
>> training). That never happened. Took way too long for coordination. I kept
>> getting out of memory errors when importing other traded 3D files. They
>> told me I had to break the other files up into smaller ones and create
>> AutoSprink block. Being we get revised backgrounds several times a day this
>> left my no time to draw. Their answer was to buy another 7500 dollar
>> utilities to help automate that task on top off the 25,000 dollar program
>> they were already selling me.  Terrible tech support as well.  This was s
>> few years back so things may be better. Training facility was a dump with
>> obsolete laptops that would not run all of features. No plotter to show how
>> to plot(which turned out to be problematic )
>> Everything it does it seems I can now do with fewer steps.  Really feel
>> ripped off
>>
>> David M. Canham
>> Fire Systems Solutions
>> 15 Sayles Avenue
>> Lincoln, RI 02865
>> Office 401-725-1089
>> Fax 401-725-1583
>> Cell 508-277-FIRE (3473)
>>
>> On Sep 20, 2016, at 11:25 AM, John Irwin <JIrwin@criticalsystemsolution
>> s.com> wrote:
>>
>> Well their own tech team has been unable to explain to us how to “do it
>> correctly” and has recommended buying a seat of Hydralist .. so ..
>>
>>
>>
>> *John Irwin*
>>
>> Manager – Fire Sprinkler Division
>>
>>
>> *Critical System Solutions, LLC *Cell: 813.618.2781
>>
>> Email:  jir...@criticalsystemsolutions.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces
>> @lists.firesprinkler.org <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>]
>> *On Behalf Of *Cliff Whitfield
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 11:20 AM
>> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkl

Re: Nashville

[Greg McGahan]

​I will be there tomorrow morning.​


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Charles Thurston <charl...@mbfsg.com>
wrote:

> Hello Sprinkler,
>
>   Made it for the convention. I'll be the one with the lost look and the
> "Old Fart" hat.
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  Charles  mailto:charl...@mbfsg.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

Re: Ceiling Pockets

[Greg McGahan]

I do not think you can do what you are proposing. I think that you should
protect the entire pocket.



Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 1:45 PM, T. Silva <silva...@shaw.ca> wrote:

> No to what?
> Tony
>
> ------
> *From: *"Greg McGahan" <g...@livingwaterfp.com>
> *To: *sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Sent: *Monday, September 12, 2016 12:41:15 PM
> *Subject: *Re: Ceiling Pockets
>
>
> Ummm - I would say nobut that is my personal opinion.
>
>
> Greg McGahan
> Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
> 1160 McKenzie Road
> Cantonment, FL 32533
> 850-937-1850
> fax 850-937-1852
>
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 1:21 PM, T. Silva <silva...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>> --
>> NFPA 13, 2013
>>
>> 8.6.7.2 (1) "The total volume of the unprotected ceiling pocket does not
>> exceed 1000 cu.ft."
>>
>> Is the 1000 cuft only the volume of the pocket that is not sprinklered?
>> For example, there is a pocket that is 30" long x 20' wide x 2' deep,
>> creating a 1200 cuft ceiling pocket. If one row of sprinklers are provided
>> in this pocket (along the 30 foot length), to provide a protected area of
>> 30' x 10'
>>
>> (1) Is the the total volume of the unprotected ceiling pocket still 1200
>> cuft? or
>> (2) Reduced to 600 cuft, discounting the sprinklered area?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Tony
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Ceiling Pockets

[Greg McGahan]

Ummm - I would say nobut that is my personal opinion.


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 1:21 PM, T. Silva <silva...@shaw.ca> wrote:

> --
> NFPA 13, 2013
>
> 8.6.7.2 (1) "The total volume of the unprotected ceiling pocket does not
> exceed 1000 cu.ft."
>
> Is the 1000 cuft only the volume of the pocket that is not sprinklered?
> For example, there is a pocket that is 30" long x 20' wide x 2' deep,
> creating a 1200 cuft ceiling pocket. If one row of sprinklers are provided
> in this pocket (along the 30 foot length), to provide a protected area of
> 30' x 10'
>
> (1) Is the the total volume of the unprotected ceiling pocket still 1200
> cuft? or
> (2) Reduced to 600 cuft, discounting the sprinklered area?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tony
>
> ___
> 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: Flexheads in small renovation (Calculation Software)

[Greg McGahan]

I am not smart enough to know if an existing system will hydraulically work
when adding substantial friction loss for flex drops. I disagree with the
contention that you can change hard pipe to flexible drops without some
kind of evaluation.  This prevents us from using them sometimes but I would
rather err on the side of caution.


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 11:47 AM, <svang...@aerofire.com> wrote:

> Travis,
>
>
>
> What you say here is true.  It is also very helpful as you mention when
> you have multiple areas to calculate and you can’t “eyeball” the most
> hydraulically remote.  However it isn’t without risk.  Many times we have
> done this, and during our QC process realized some of the sprinklers were
> not setup properly for the hazard they are protecting, or found that a
> sprinkler was disconnected, or accidentally picked up sprinklers we didn’t
> intend to.  Same can be said about the piping network.  Or someone
> accidentally copied a pipe that they manually overwrote 90’s Tee’s Valve’s
> etc into a straight run rather than drawing them.
>
>
>
> So, I agree AutoSprink can be very helpful with multiple calcs.  I just
> offer the word of warning to those who think computers will be replacing
> smart designers anytime soon.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sean VG
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org] *On Behalf Of *Travis Mack, SET
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 30, 2016 9:14 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* Re: Flexheads in small renovation (Calculation Software)
>
>
>
> And that is the beauty of software like AutoSprink.  Just put the boundary
> on the plan.  Select all of them you have and tell it to keep the
> hydraulically most demanding.  Simple and sweet.
>
> When it may be a challenge for the AHJ to believe the area I select, then
> I will submit multiple areas just to eliminate questions.
>
> The software packages today and power of the personal computer make this
> entire thread a mute point - provided the information is available.  If you
> have the system drawn, it is literally a matter of seconds to calculate an
> area.  It is not like those of us who learned by hand back in the day and
> it would be a long drawn out process.
>
> 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 8/30/2016 9:08 AM, rongreenman . wrote:
>
> I'd agree with Mark except for two little irritations of mine when
> discussing this. "Remote Area" was a term that worked when we just
> sprinklered big boxes that housed either factories or warehouses as the
> "remote area" (furthest from the rider) was typically the hydraulically
> most demanding area. These days that area can be anywhere (a grid being the
> always example). Hydraulically most demanding area is too muchoif a
> mouthful for describing itself so I just prefer design or demand area. This
> pet peeve came about from teaching newbies the basics as they'd often get
> it in their minds that remote meant furthest away and so would want to
> calculate the the x number of heads at the greatest distance as the crow
> flies over the plan. That is also the basis of pet peeve two that "remote
> area" also suggests that there is only one possibility and it's easy to
> find. Determining the design area(s) is an art. I have an exercise based on
> a building no one would ever build but it gas over a dozen potential design
> areas and just as Mark says the student needs to determine where and which
> are most likely by estimating demand at each location.
>
>
> On Tuesday, August 30, 2016, <mphe...@aerofire.com> wrote:
>
> My personal belief is that the designer “designs” the “remote” area into
> the system, and a good designer will design the overall system to
> economically benefit from “where” the remote area lies. Unfortunately, I
> think most systems are laid out, sized, and then calculations are performed
> to determine where the remote area lies.
>
> As Steve says “just my opinion”
>
> Mark at Aero
>
> 602 820-7894
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org] *On Behalf Of *Bill Brooks
&

Re: SprinklerForum Reception @ Convention

[Greg McGahan]

I plan on attending..

Greg


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Steve Muncy <smu...@firesprinkler.org>
wrote:

> ATTENTION SPRINKLERFORUM PARTICIPANTS:
>
> As we have done periodically in the past, we will have a reception for
> SprinklerForum participants during our convention in Nashville. This is an
> opportunity for you to see other SprinklerForum participants face to face.
>
> The reception will be held from 5:00-6:00 PM on Saturday, September 17th
> in my suite at the Gaylord Opryland Hotel. The room number has not yet been
> assigned, but I will email all those who RSVP and provide the room number
> prior to the event.
>
> If you would like to attend, please RSVP to my DIRECT EMAIL ADDRESS (NOT
> THE SPRINKLERFORUM). We need your response to plan for the number of people
> planning to attend.
>
> Please send your “YES, I CAN’T WAIT TO ATTEND!!!” to:
> smu...@firesprinkler.org.
>
> If you are an old fuddy-duddy that doesn’t want to attend, or won’t be
> attending the convention due to age or illness, there is no need to respond.
>
>
>
> Steve A. Muncy, CAE - President
> American Fire Sprinkler Assn.   -- FIRE SPRINKLERS SAVE LIVES!
> Dallas, TX
> http://www.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: Ceiling pockets

[Greg McGahan]

Agree with Art.


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Art Tiroly <atir...@atcofirepro.com> wrote:

> He intent is to use either 8.7.7 or 8.8.7 for large pockets.
>
> The volume of the pocket seems more important than the depth.
>
> A 4x4x40-50’  pocket should not need sprinklers next to glass windows.
>
>
>
>
>
> Art Tiroly
>
> ATCO Fire Protection
>
> 24400 Highland Rd CLE 44143
>
> 216-621-8899
>
> 216-570-7030 cell
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org] *On Behalf Of *Ed Kramer
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 04, 2016 3:13 PM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* RE: Ceiling pockets
>
>
>
> If you qualify, you might be able to use 8.8.7.3.  Note the wording “. .
> and similar pockets.”  Section 8.5.7 doesn’t limit the depth to 3’.
>
>
>
> Ed Kramer
>
> Bamford Fire
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>] *On Behalf Of *Art
> Tiroly
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 04, 2016 11:13 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* Ceiling pockets
>
>
>
> In section 8.8.7 sprinklers may be omitted from 1000 Cu.Ft. ceiling
> pockets.
>
> This large volume is allowed but is further restricted by a 3 Ft. maximum
> pocket height.
>
> I have long narrow pockets along high windows with a new drop ceiling that
> has a pocket 4 Ft. above the new ceiling.
>
> The volumes are less than 1000 Cu.Ft.
>
> I don’t understand the restriction to 3 Ft. since the air volume seems to
> be the relevant restriction.
>
> Do I need to add sprinklers to a ceiling pocket along the windows when I
> have floor coverage.
>
>
>
>
>
> Art Tiroly
>
> ATCO Fire Protection/Tiroly
>
> 24400 Highland Rd CLE 44143
>
> 216-621-8899
>
> 216-570-7030 cell
>
>
>
>
>
> [image: Image removed by sender.]
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient_term=icon>
>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient_term=link>
>
>
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient_term=icon>
>  Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient_term=link>
>
> ___
> 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

CPVC hanging to post tension concrete rant

[Greg McGahan]

I have spent hours researching various methods of hanging CPVC to concrete
slabs.Other than a traditional drop in anchor and all thread rod, there is
not really a viable alternative.

Points of interest:

1) removing the bonnet from a hang ring voids the listing.
2) Hanger rings without the bonnet (from the factory) are not listed for
cpvc
3) One hole straps cannot be used to hang pipe upside down from the slab.
4) Two hole straps cannot be attached with 3/8" bolts or rods without
modification to the hole size - which voids the listing.
5) Two hole straps cannot be hung with powder driving pins in post tension
slabs because there is  a max hanger depth of 3/4" - the highest rating we
found was exactly 125 lbs...so even with 2 of them you do not meet the "250
lbs plus 5x the weight of the water filled pipe" requirement.

It would seem that we are well behind the times in addressing this issue as
an industry. Just noting....




Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: clear cutting oil

[Greg McGahan]

We have tried 2 different brands and the results were immediate and
dramatic. ALL of our dies had to be replaced in days and then again within
a few days or weeks depending on the usage. When we switched back to dark
on both occasions the die issue was resolved immediately. Most of the pipe
we use is domestic.

Mystified




Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Jeff Bridges <j...@jbfireprotection.com>
wrote:

> Import pipe can tear up your dies f.w.i.w.
>
> Never had an issue with clear cutting oil
>
>
>
> Jeff Bridges
>
>
>
> This email transmission (and any of its attachments) is intended only for
> the person or entity to whom it is addressed, and may contain confidential,
> proprietary and/or privileged information. No waiver of any applicable
> privileges or protections is intended hereby. If you are not the person to
> whom this transmission is addressed, you are hereby notified that the
> disclosure, copying, distribution, reliance upon or use of any of the
> information contained in this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you
> have received this transmission in error, delete any copies which may exist
> on your system and notify the sender immediately. This email transmission
> cannot be guaranteed secure or error-free. Any views expressed in this
> message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender
> specifies them to be the views of the company and is authorized to do so.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] *On Behalf Of *Greg
> McGahan
> *Sent:* Monday, May 23, 2016 11:45 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Subject:* clear cutting oil
>
>
>
> Just a quick question:
>
>
>
> Has anyone else noticed a DRAMATIC increase of wear and breakage of dies
> when using clear cutting oil?
>
>
>
> OR is there a clear cutting oil that does not eat up the dies?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
>
>
>
> Greg McGahan
> Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
> 1160 McKenzie Road
> Cantonment, FL 32533
> 850-937-1850
> fax 850-937-1852
>
> ___
> 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

clear cutting oil

[Greg McGahan]

Just a quick question:

Has anyone else noticed a DRAMATIC increase of wear and breakage of dies
when using clear cutting oil?

OR is there a clear cutting oil that does not eat up the dies?

Thanks in advance,


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

NFPA 13 2013 ed bathroom sprinklers

[Greg McGahan]

Does anyone know why the 2010 Ed and 2016 Ed of 13 allow the omission of
sprinklers in bathrooms
​in​
 "Dwelling Units" but
​ the ​
2013
​Ed ​
limits the omission to bathrooms in hotel/motels?



Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Low Lead heads in multipurpose systems/ beams

[Greg McGahan]

It appears that it has been 6 years or so since the last time this issue
was discussed. I know that there are a few Low Lead sprinklers out there
but are they absolutely required to comply with the laws?

One of the Major players does not offer a LL head yet so I am wondering
what is going on?


The available LL heads do not appear to be listed for beamed ceilings. In
talking to 2 of the major manufacturers it also appears that the beams are
now confusing to one of them as well. As far as I can tell we can use the
sprinklers outside their listings in beamed ceilings in accordance with
8.1.3.1.2. Is this correct?

Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Marriott Module 14 and dwelling units

[Greg McGahan]

I have done 4 head calcs many times and we have used the large room rule as
well using QR heads in the guest rooms.




Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Matt Grise <m...@afpsprink.com> wrote:

> In my experience it did not affect that part of the system design.
>
> If I recall correctly - it mostly addresses common drains, head types, and
> things like that.
>
> Matt Grisé PE*, LEED AP, NICET II
> Sales Engineer
> Alliance Fire Protection
> 130 w 9th Ave.
> North Kansas City, MO 64116
>
> *Licensed in KS & MO
>
> 913.888.0647 ph
> 913.888.0618 f
> 913.526.7443 cell
> www. AFPsprink.com
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ben Young
> Sent: Friday, April 01, 2016 10:01 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Subject: Marriott Module 14 and dwelling units
>
> Has anyone had any experience doing a 4-head NFPA 13 dwelling unit
> calculation in Marriott properties?  I have the latest Module 14, and it
> doesn't mention anything about it at all.  Nothing explicitly states its
> allowed or not allowed.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Benjamin Young
> ___
> 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: Wide format plotters

[Greg McGahan]

We use the iPF 755 as well.



Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Mike Hairfield <fsl...@msn.com> wrote:

> We use a Canon iPF755 for both, I also use 18# bond, and buy my ink tanks
> online forabout 67% of what the local dealer charges.
> We got it on a lease/purchase plan and it has been working like a champ.
> Just wished I got the plotter/scanner model instaed.
> Mike
>
> > From: ste...@hartcorn.com
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Subject: RE: Wide format plotters
> > Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 17:17:32 +
> >
> > We use a two plotter system... Oce for the black and whites, and Canon
> IPF750 for the colour prints. Like you suggested in the last part of your
> email, how often do you print colour prints... so we went with a slightly
> used plotter from the same people that supply/service the Oce machine...
> they even gave us a 2 year warranty on replacement parts and labour...
> >
> > Good luck!
> >
> > Steven MacKinnon
> > Fire Protection Division
> > Hartcorn Plumbing and Heating, Inc.
> > 850 South Second Street
> > Ronkonkoma, NY 11779
> > Office 631-580-2300  Fax - 631-580-1090
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ben Young
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 1:08 PM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Subject: Wide format plotters
> >
> > I've been asked to get a plan in place for when we have to replace our
> current plotter.  We have an Oce TDS 600 which is hard to get electrical
> parts for, and the controller is causing our IT department all kinds of
> headaches.
> >
> > The TDS 600 is really a beast of a printer and hasn't been down more
> than half a day in over five years, so we're very happy with the Oce Brand.
> >
> > My issue is going to Color.  Right now I'm looking at the Colorwave 500,
> which is slightly slower, but isn't inkjet based (gel toner pearls, instant
> dry, no special paper, etc.) Have others moved into color for their field
> prints?
> >
> > Obviously bid drawings are rarely in color, so I'm thinking only about
> 5-10% of the printing we do is going to be in color, and we average about
> > 16,000 sqft per month.
> >
> > Any other manufacturers I should consider that can match the long-term
> reliability of Oce?
> >
> >
> > So consumer reports doesn't test plotters, so reviews or other pro/con
> information is scant for me at this point, so I thought I would throw this
> out to the sprinkler forum people since we probably all have to print our
> stuff out at some point.
> >
> > Any input or thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
> >
> > Benjamin Young
> > ___
> > 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
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Hydraulic Placards

[Greg McGahan]

​We do this often. Depending on the situation, but in most case we find it
pretty easy to determine the obvious remote area(s) and we only survey the
path(s) back to the base of riser. SOme jobs of course you have toi survey
them all because you cannot tell without running the calcs.




Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Bruce Verhei <bver...@comcast.net> wrote:

> Bill
>
> Would an hour's time now remove it as an issue in the future? The FD or
> plan reviewing agency might have the original documentation, even if the
> designing firm is gone. A calc plate might close issue. Just note it is
> recreation, and origin of data.
>
> Is current occupant OH1 or 2, and system obviously to an experienced eye
> with some knowledge of public water system, a fairly beefy system?
> Comparison: If someone uses a 12"x6" steel I-beam for an 8' wide garage
> door header in a one-story ranch with 25 pound snow load, do you need
> stamped engineering calc's?
>
> Or is occupancy Class A plastics in double row racks to 20', with 8'
> aisles?
>
> Best
>
> Bruce
>
>
> > On Feb 1, 2016, at 13:16, Kevin Eanes <kevbeanz4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > i would just write up the midsing data plate as a definciency on the insp
> > report and let the AHJ tell the property owner that he needs to get a
> calc
> > survey.all u can do is get the numbers from the drain test to verify the
> > water supply is normal.i doubt anyone will ever push the issue on him but
> > as long as its noted on your report your ass is covered
> >> On Feb 1, 2016 4:11 PM, "Todd Williams" <fpdcdes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> The survey and Calc is the only way to be sure. I've seen some placards
> >> that w
> >> ere total crap and it has created problems
> >>
> >> Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT
> >> 860-535-2080 (ofc) 860-608-4559 (cell)
> >> Sent using CloudMagic [
> >> https://cloudmagic.com/k/d/mailapp?ct=pi=6.0.64=8.2]
> >> On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 4:03 PM, sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> >> <sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
> >> A client of mine has posed a question.
> >> I understand part of a system inspection is to verify the adequacy of
> the
> >> water
> >> supply. Many older buildings are missing the hydraulic placard on the
> >> riser, and
> >> original plans/calcs are not available.
> >>
> >> A full-blown survey and hydraulic calculation is too expensive and the
> >> owner
> >> will balk at it.
> >>
> >> Those of you who are involved in inspections, how do you handle this and
> >> what
> >> would you recommend?
> >> Would a rough 'guestimate' suffice depending on the occupancy?
> >>
> >>
> >> Thank you.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Bill Menster
> >>
> >> ___
> >> 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
> ___
> 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

Room Design and Unprotected Pockets

[Greg McGahan]

I cannot reduce the demand are if I put heads in the soffits of a corridor
with unprotected pockets. However, I do not see anything that precludes the
use of the Room Design method in the same scenario.

Am I Missing something?



Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Roof dormer sprinklers?

[Greg McGahan]

We always do it but sometimes it seems ridiculous for the amount of
material and effort to protect some of the very small ones.


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Todd Williams <fpdcdes...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I always do it if it is a combustible concealed space
>
> Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT
> 860-535-2080 (ofc) 860-608-4559 (cell)
> Sent using CloudMagic [
> https://cloudmagic.com/k/d/mailapp?ct=ti=6.0.64=8.2]
>
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 8:24 AM, sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> <sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
> I have an attic with decorative roof dormers built above the roof and
> separated
> from the attic space below by plywood sheathing. Do I need to poke heads
> up into
> the dormers? I have been doing this in the past, but now am wondering if
> it is
> necessary.
>
>
>
> Bill Menster
> WFM Consulting Inc.
>
>
> ___
> 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

Residential Sidewalls in pockets vs obstructions

[Greg McGahan]

OK what used to be simple is now a swirling mass of questions...

If you have pockets with residential sprinklers that require sprinklers -
in this case deeper than 12" - so you are forced to use sidewalls in them
and there are ceiling fans in the center of the pocket so you cannot
maintain the required 8'-0 minimum distance from the sidewall to fan

So in a room that is 12'-0 x 14' -0 we either have 3 heads - if we assume
the sidewall in the soffit is sufficient for the intent of the code without
regard to the obstruction as the pendents on the perimeter will cover under
the fan...or 4 if that is not the case.

Has the committee discussed these situations?

Thanks,


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Chutes/vertical supplies

[Greg McGahan]

According to *11.2.3.4.1 *you only need to calculate 3 sprinklers in
service chute when supplied by a separate riser...I am just digging for
full understanding here...

If you start at the 1st floor and feed a chute through multiple floors fed
from a single vertical pipe off the Dry System, does that meet the intent
of a separate riser if said pipe does not have a separate control valve?

If the answer is no, do you calculate it as a corridor (single row) up to 7
heads?

If the vertical pipe feed a  single sprinkler on each floor but they are
not in a service chute and each floor is sealed from the other, can you
calculate the largest room and only flow one sprinkler on the highest floor?

Thanks all,


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

13r Stairwells

[Greg McGahan]

If you have a 13R building with combustible stairs inside the building -
NOT open and attached, are you forced to 13 and put heads under all of the
landings?


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Quick Response Reduction

[Greg McGahan]

He is incorrect unless the ceiling is open enough to count the roof deck as
part of the same space. The table states "ceiling height".

Respectfully,



Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Rocci Cetani 3 <roc...@norcalfire.com>
wrote:

> I have an AHJ claiming that because the roof deck is 18' I can't use the
> 40%
> quick response reduction even though a ceiling is being installed at 9'
> AFF.
> I have never been questioned on my approach it seems pretty straight
> forward..Is he correct in stating I should base my reduction on the 18'
> roof
> deck?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance for your input
>
>
>
> Rocci Cetani III, CET
>
> Lead 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 <http://www.norcalfire.com/>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> ___
> 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

sprinkler pipe passing through electrical rooms

[Greg McGahan]

Am I mis-remembering that somewhere in some code - 13 or 70 - that there
used to be a statement that dictated that the only sprinkler pipe allowed
in an electrical room was the pipe feeding sprinklers in the room?

Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

quick census on 13d Multipurpose

[Greg McGahan]

Good Morning,

I would like a quick census on how many people are installing Multipurpose
13d systems..I am not trying to argue the pros and cons of them, just
simply interested in how widespread the use is.

Thanks,

Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Theater Acoustic Panels

[Greg McGahan]

Never seen anything like this one sir.



Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Steven Cook <sc...@tggallagher.com> wrote:

> Good Morning,
>
> I am reaching out to the forum to see if anyone has encountered this
> situation previously, and if so how they handled the issue.
>
> We are working on a theater project that has retractable numerous 5' x 5'
> acoustic panels, that may at any given time be located anywhere from
> entirely above the sprinklers (recessed into the ceiling) to 15 feet below
> the sprinklers.   These panels, along with lighting and sound equipment are
> moved via cable hoists.
>
> The engineer has suggested options including: retracting the panels
> automatically upon water flow alarm, fusible links on one side of the
> panels so they would drop into a vertical position, and the installation of
> a deluge system utilizing sidewall sprinklers located below the lowest
> height of the panels.
>
> There are obvious issues with all the above: moving the panels and
> equipment while the theater is potentially occupied is not a desirable
> option and likely has unacceptable time delays, similar concerns with the
> fusible links, and the consequences of an accidental deluge system
> discharge in this building  would be catastrophic.  Additionally the space
> is too large to be covered with sidewall sprinklers along the perimeter.
>
> As I see it, the best (and maybe only) option is to reduce the panel size
> down to less than 4 foot square.
>
> Any similar experience or advice?
>
> Thanks
>
> Steve Cook
> Operations Manger
> TG Gallagher
>
> ___
> 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

tank heating

[Greg McGahan]

Good Morning,

Is table 16.1.4 the only determining factor for if a suction tank requires
freeze protection?

I thought that there was also a reference to the table in regards to tank
size as well?


Thank you,


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Florida License Renewal

[Greg McGahan]

Your best bets with the most valuable information in my honest Floridian
Opinion is the one week classes put on by AFSA or NFSA...



Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Mark Eckard ma...@unifourfire.com wrote:

 Look up Florida Fire College,  You can get all needed credits, and
 required courses online, and it is very reasonable.

 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of
 wmens...@comcast.net
 Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 4:34 PM
 To: sprinklerforum
 Subject: Florida License Renewal

 Does anyone know of an easy and economical way to get the 32 required
 Florida State approved CEU classes for license renewal?  I am aware of the
 NFSA and AFSA classes, but they require travel and are costly.  Internet
 classes are available, but they too are quite costly.
 Thanks


 Bill
 ___
 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: slatted ceiling

[Greg McGahan]

Tim,

I respectfully disagree. If the wood slats comply with the description
below then I believe it is the closest reference we have to this situation.
In our case the depth exceeded the width of the opening so we put
sprinklers above the slats. Our ceiling was 1 x 6's turned vertical on edge
and spaced 5 center to center. That seemed like it would be a significant
disruption of the spray pattern and the Engineer agreed...


Open-grid ceilings in which the openings are 1/4 in. (6.4 mm) or larger in
the least dimension, where the thickness or depth of the material does not
exceed the least dimension of the opening, and where such openings
constitute 70 percent of the area of the ceiling material. The spacing of
the sprinklers over the open-grid ceiling shall then comply with the
following:


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 8:41 AM, Tim Stone tston...@comcast.net wrote:

 Todd,

 I don't believe Open Grid Ceiling rules will apply. The material can't be
 any thicker than the least dimension of the opening.
 If it is a wood frame material like 2x solid wood then you will have an
 obstruction to spray pattern to worry about. Once you get all the
 information on the slatted ceiling solutions will be easier.

 Regards,
 G. Tim Stone

 G. Tim Stone Consulting, LLC
 NICET Level III Engineering Technician
 Fire Protection Sprinkler Design
 and Consulting Services

 117 Old Stage Rd. - Essex Jct., VT. 05452
 CELL: (802) 373-0638   TEL: (802) 434-2968   Fax: (802) 434-4343
tston...@comcast.net

 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
 On Behalf Of Todd - Work
 Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 8:10 AM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: slatted ceiling

 I am working on a project with a slatted ceiling in a wide corridor. The
 ceiling construction is a fire rated wood and is considered non
 conbustible.
 There is a 2' wide sheetrock soffit around the perimeter and the slatted
 area is approximately 6 ft wide down the middle. The space above the
 ceiling
 is non combustible and would not normally require sprinklers. The FM has
 raised a question if sprinklers below would operate given the openings (I
 am
 trying to get the dimensions of the openings and the slats). I did not see
 anything in 13 addresses this. Am I missing something? Thoughts?

 Sent using CloudMagic
 [https://cloudmagic.com/k/d/mailapp?ct=ticv=6.0.64pv=8.2]
 ___
 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: slatted ceiling

[Greg McGahan]

We used 8.15.14 recently


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Todd - Work t...@fpdc.com wrote:

 I am working on a project with a slatted ceiling in a wide corridor. The
 ceiling
 construction is a fire rated wood and is considered non conbustible. There
 is a
 2' wide sheetrock soffit around the perimeter and the slatted area is
 approximately 6 ft wide down the middle. The space above the ceiling is non
 combustible and would not normally require sprinklers. The FM has raised a
 question if sprinklers below would operate given the openings (I am trying
 to
 get the dimensions of the openings and the slats). I did not see anything
 in 13
 addresses this. Am I missing something? Thoughts?

 Sent using CloudMagic [
 https://cloudmagic.com/k/d/mailapp?ct=ticv=6.0.64pv=8.2]
 ___
 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

Mulch Piles

[Greg McGahan]

Has anyone done any modeling or research on Indoor Mulch Piles?

Thanks


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Diffuser discharge temp

[Greg McGahan]

In 8.3.2.5(a) a minimum distance of 2'-6 away from diffusers is listed to
allow Ordinary Temp Sprinklers.

8.3.2.5 (9) negates this requirement if the discharge air is less than 100F.

The handbook explains the requirement for the 2'-6 minimum distance and is
being interpreted by one individual as if the intent in the explanation is
that in the event of a malfunction the air could run hot (similar to a
car running hot) and therefore the 2'-6 requirement still applies...

I believe the intent is that if the HVAC normally runs hot meaning in
excess of 100F the 2'-6 distance must be maintained in order to use
Ordinary Temp heads...


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Mixing EC sprinklers with Std coverage sprinklers

[Greg McGahan]

I lost the original question ...but I think that the AFSA has a recent
informal interp related to this issue


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 9:07 AM, å...  eurekaig...@gmail.com wrote:

 Interesting question.  If the activation temperatures are close to the same
 value, then I would match the RTI of the standdard sprinklers with the
 imputed RTI of the EC.

 An obvious caveat is if the specifications or engineeering report stipulate
 the QR in this compartment.

 The NFPA 13 intent, I believe, is to prevent QR sprinklers from activating
 when they are further away from the fire, in the presence of SR sprinklers
 when these SR sprinklers are nearer to the fire.

 If the compartment is smaller than the design area,...then the case can be
 made that the hydraulic design will account for all sprinklers activating,
 regardless of their intended order of activation (1st ring, 2nd ring, etc.)
 as manipulated by the RTI of the sprinkler.  Consider what is to be
 protected from fire by the different sprinklers and modify your judgment
 accordingly.

 Scot Deal
 Excelsior Fire/Risk Engineering
 ___
 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: standpipes in fire separated building

[Greg McGahan]

What about this section?

A.7.10.1.1 If a water supply system supplies more than one building or more
than one fire area, the total supply can be calculated based on the single
building or fire area requiring the greatest number of standpipes.
For a discussion of use by the fire department of fire department
connections, see NFPA 13E http://codesonline.nfpa.org/a/c.ref/NFC13E/book
, *Recommended Practice for Fire Department Operations in Properties
Protected by Sprinkler and Standpipe Systems*.

Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Pete Schwab pe...@waynefire.com wrote:

 If the piping supply is connected (common supply piping) then I would say
 you have to calculate until you reach 1250 GPM (since the garage is not
 sprinklered).

 7.10.1.2.3* Common supply piping shall be calculated and
 sized to provide the required flow rate for all standpipes connected
 to such supply piping, with the total not to exceed the
 maximum flow demand in 7.10.1.1.5.

 A.7.10.1.2.3 Flow is added at nodes in a standpipe system in
 250 gpm (946 L/min) increments without requiring additional
 flow, which might occur from higher pressures at that
 node (balancing the system). The common supply piping
 should be hydraulically calculated based on the required
 flow rate [500, 750, 1000, or 1250 gpm (1893, 2840, 3785, or
 4732 L/min)] for the standpipe system. The calculated
 pressure for the standpipe system does not have to be balanced
 at the point of connection to the common supply
 piping.

 It should be noted that the above is my opinion.  It has not been
 processed as a formal interpretation in accordance with the NFPA
 Regulations Governing Committee Projects and should therefore not be
 considered, nor relied upon, as the official position of the NFPA or its
 Committees.

 Peter Schwab
 VP of Purchasing and Engineering technologies

 Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinklers Inc.
 222 Capitol Court
 Ocoee, Fl 34761

 Mobile: (407) 468-8248
 Direct: (407) 877-5570
 Fax: (407) 656-8026

 www.waynefire.com







 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Greg McGahan
 Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2015 7:49 PM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: Re: standpipes in fire separated building

 I will find out tomorrow but this is one lot so I presume it is a fire
 wall. The separation into two different buildings appears to not be
 necessary per the excerpt from 14. They appear to meet definition of fire
 AREA. At least that is indeed what I hope.



 Sent from my iPhone

  On Jun 28, 2015, at 10:21 AM, John Drucker - Home 
 john.druc...@verizon.net wrote:
 
  Greg,
 
  So the garage is classified as a separate building and the two systems
 are independent ?  Two (2) Hour Rated Wall needs clarification, if it’s a
 fire wall or PARTY WALL (See 706.1.1 below) then two separate buildings.
 Ask the architect. That’s the key.
 
  706.1 General. Each portion of a building separated by one or more
  fire walls that comply with the provisions of this section shall be
  considered a separate building. The extent and location of such fire
  walls shall provide a complete separation separation. Where a fire
  wall also separates occupancies that are required to be separated by a
  fire barrier wall, the most restrictive requirements of each
  separation shall apply.
 
  706.1.1 Party walls. Any wall located on a lot line between adjacent
  buildings, which is used or adapted for joint service between the two
  buildings, shall be constructed as a fire wall in accordance with
  Section 706.
  Party walls shall be constructed without openings and shall create
  separate buildings.
 
 
  Here's the IBC/IFC Code Sections;
 
  [F] 905.2 Installation standard. Standpipe systems shall be installed
  in accordance with this section and NFPA 14.
 
  905.3.1 Height. Class III standpipe systems shall be installed
  throughout buildings where the floor level of the highest story is
  located more than 30 feet (9144 mm) above the lowest level of the fire
  department vehicle access, or where the floor level of the lowest
  story is located more than 30 feet (9144 mm) below the highest level
  of fire department vehicle access.
  Exceptions:
  1. Class I standpipes are allowed in buildings equipped throughout
  with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section
  903.3.1.1 or 903.3.1.2.
  2. Class I manual standpipes are allowed in open parking garages where
  the highest floor is located not more than 150 feet (45 720 mm) above
  the lowest level of fire department vehicle access.
  3. Class I manual dry standpipes are allowed in open parking garages
  that are subject to freezing temperatures, provided that the hose
  connections are located as required for Class II standpipes in
  accordance with Section 905.5.
  4. Class

Re: standpipes in fire separated building

[Greg McGahan]

Steve,

I called him to ask and he said that they are understaffed and he had to
make provisions for less people...




Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Steve Leyton st...@protectiondesign.com
wrote:

 1) What do you mean demanding?   They just look at every project and
 decide what's required on the spot?
 4) IBC defines fire areas.  I can't remember the when/where but I'm fairly
 certain that the reference in A.7.10.1.1 is to any fire area as defined by
 the Building Code.  The matrix you sent me includes the prescriptives for
 min. hours of fire resistance required to define fire areas by occupancy
 group.  Fire area size is important because you can create multiple fire
 smaller fire areas to skate on requirements for sprinklers in larger
 buildings of fire areas.  That's part of the code and the standard is
 reactive to that.   Your project description suggest to me that they can be
 separated.
 5) You have to have two systems (wet and dry) and standpipes on each
 system must be interconnected with each other.  Come out of your pump and
 build two risers ...

 It also occurs to me that my last answer was incomplete as I was only
 thinking of Class 1 service in the PG.   Even if you can have a manual
 Class 1, an unsprinklered garage could have a Class 3 system per code and
 the hose stations require an automatic water supply.  Not of the same flow
 and pressure as a Class 1, but automatic nonetheless.   All of it can be
 off of one pump if it's considered one system but the AHJ's mandate could
 be considered contradictory.   You have two separate buildings but they're
 being pushed together as one for system planning.  I dunno man, I guess I'd
 like to know the reasoning behind the automatic requirement for the PG.

 My opinion only,
 SML




 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Greg McGahan
 Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 1:44 PM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: Re: standpipes in fire separated building

 Thanks for the reply. Here is the best I can do to articulate my thoughts.

 1) The AHJ is demanding an Auto Standpipe in the Parking Garage and I do
 not know whybut he told the owner that is what he required.
 2) The PG has only 2 standpipes so no matter what the PG will flow a
 maximum of 750 gpm
 3) The PG S/Ps are DRY  so they will have to be separate systems to some
 degree, I was going to tie the FDC lines together and use one FDC
 4) I do not understand the reference in NFPA #14 7.10.1.1 says Fire Area
 and the IBC references Area in the table I sent you. If that term does
 not apply to this situation, I would like to understand for future
 reference what it applies to. If it does apply, I think we are fine to
 separate the two
 5)  If the High Rise s/p's are Auto Wet and the Pg are Auto Dry, which
 they are in this case, what doe that do to interconnection, calcs etc? I
 have never ran into this situation before.



 Greg






 Greg McGahan
 Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
 1160 McKenzie Road
 Cantonment, FL 32533
 850-937-1850
 fax 850-937-1852

 On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Steve Leyton st...@protectiondesign.com
 wrote:

  I've been out of my office for over a week, so apologies for not
  acknowledging the calls for my expertise.  I gotta say if it's come
  down to me, you're all a lot more desperate than I thought ...
 
  I notice replies from others on this thread and I think I concur with
  consensus.   If these are two truly separated buildings (at least as
  defined by code), are you proposing two separate standpipe systems?
  Separate response addresses, separate FDC’s?  Or is this going to be
  one universal system.  Any way you look at it, the parking structure
  isn’t sprinklered and code would say that you need a Class III with
 1,250 GPM
  demand.  The tower would be 750, so garage obviously more demanding.
 If
  you’re proposing a single automatic water supply/single system
  configuration, then I’d say it has to meet the 1,250, HOWEVER …
 
  Why is the garage required to be automatic.   By definition and open
  structure, even one taller than 75’ isn’t a high-rise.  Code allows up
  to
  12 tiers without sprinklers if I recall correctly, so the “usual”
  rules don’t necessarily apply.  My guess is that manual dry is adequate
 – at
  least per code.   So my answer would be that you should look into a 1,250
  GPM manual-dry and a 750 GPM auto-wet for the tower (assuming only two
  stairs).  Is the AHJ or another stakeholder requiring auto-dry in the
  garage?
 
  The foregoing is my opinion only and does not necessarily represent
  the opinion or intent of the NFPA 14 Technical Committee on Standpipe
  and Hose Systems.
 
  SML
 
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Sprinklerforum

Re: standpipes in fire separated building

[Greg McGahan]

Thanks for the reply. Here is the best I can do to articulate my thoughts.

1) The AHJ is demanding an Auto Standpipe in the Parking Garage and I do
not know whybut he told the owner that is what he required.
2) The PG has only 2 standpipes so no matter what the PG will flow a
maximum of 750 gpm
3) The PG S/Ps are DRY  so they will have to be separate systems to some
degree, I was going to tie the FDC lines together and use one FDC
4) I do not understand the reference in NFPA #14 7.10.1.1 says Fire Area
and the IBC references Area in the table I sent you. If that term does
not apply to this situation, I would like to understand for future
reference what it applies to. If it does apply, I think we are fine to
separate the two
5)  If the High Rise s/p's are Auto Wet and the Pg are Auto Dry, which they
are in this case, what doe that do to interconnection, calcs etc? I have
never ran into this situation before.



Greg






Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Steve Leyton st...@protectiondesign.com
wrote:

 I've been out of my office for over a week, so apologies for not
 acknowledging the calls for my expertise.  I gotta say if it's come down to
 me, you're all a lot more desperate than I thought ...

 I notice replies from others on this thread and I think I concur with
 consensus.   If these are two truly separated buildings (at least as
 defined by code), are you proposing two separate standpipe systems?
 Separate response addresses, separate FDC’s?  Or is this going to be one
 universal system.  Any way you look at it, the parking structure isn’t
 sprinklered and code would say that you need a Class III with 1,250 GPM
 demand.  The tower would be 750, so garage obviously more demanding.If
 you’re proposing a single automatic water supply/single system
 configuration, then I’d say it has to meet the 1,250, HOWEVER …

 Why is the garage required to be automatic.   By definition and open
 structure, even one taller than 75’ isn’t a high-rise.  Code allows up to
 12 tiers without sprinklers if I recall correctly, so the “usual” rules
 don’t necessarily apply.  My guess is that manual dry is adequate – at
 least per code.   So my answer would be that you should look into a 1,250
 GPM manual-dry and a 750 GPM auto-wet for the tower (assuming only two
 stairs).  Is the AHJ or another stakeholder requiring auto-dry in the
 garage?

 The foregoing is my opinion only and does not necessarily represent the
 opinion or intent of the NFPA 14 Technical Committee on Standpipe and Hose
 Systems.

 SML


 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Richard
 Matsuda
 Sent: Monday, June 29, 2015 9:50 AM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: Re: standpipes in fire separated building

 Greg,I believe the intent of NFPA-14 is to include flow from all the
 standpipes within a building that the fire dept would connect to in a fire
 emergency. If the floors in the parking garage do not communicate with
 hallways and doors to the floors in the high-rise building, then the fire
 dept will not connect to the standpipes in the parking garage to fight a
 theoretical fire in the high-rise...and visa-versa.Just my opinion...Mr.
 Leyton probably could answer this for you.rick matsuda


  On Monday, June 29, 2015 10:06 AM, Greg McGahan 
 g...@livingwaterfp.com wrote:


  What about this section?

 A.7.10.1.1 If a water supply system supplies more than one building or
 more than one fire area, the total supply can be calculated based on the
 single building or fire area requiring the greatest number of standpipes.
 For a discussion of use by the fire department of fire department
 connections, see NFPA 13E http://codesonline.nfpa.org/a/c.ref/NFC13E/book
 
 , *Recommended Practice for Fire Department Operations in Properties
 Protected by Sprinkler and Standpipe Systems*.

 Greg McGahan
 Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
 1160 McKenzie Road
 Cantonment, FL 32533
 850-937-1850
 fax 850-937-1852

 On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Pete Schwab pe...@waynefire.com wrote:

  If the piping supply is connected (common supply piping) then I would
  say you have to calculate until you reach 1250 GPM (since the garage
  is not sprinklered).
 
  7.10.1.2.3* Common supply piping shall be calculated and sized to
  provide the required flow rate for all standpipes connected to such
  supply piping, with the total not to exceed the maximum flow demand in
  7.10.1.1.5.
 
  A.7.10.1.2.3 Flow is added at nodes in a standpipe system in
  250 gpm (946 L/min) increments without requiring additional flow,
  which might occur from higher pressures at that node (balancing the
  system). The common supply piping should be hydraulically calculated
  based on the required flow rate [500

Re: standpipes in fire separated building

[Greg McGahan]

@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: Re: standpipes in fire separated building
 
 Look in the IBC and see if that 2 hour wall meets the separation requirements 
 for a fire separation. 
 
 If so, I think you should be able to treat as separate buildings for the 
 standpipe system. 
 
 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 Jun 26, 2015, at 7:15 PM, Greg McGahan g...@livingwaterfp.com wrote:
 
 I am looking a t a high rise building with 2 stair wells attached to a 
 7 story parking garage that is not protected. the Parking garage will 
 have two stairwells and be served by automatic dry standpipes. The 
 Parking Garage and the High Rise are separated by a 2 hour rated wall.
 
 Question: Do I have to calculate all 4 standpipes simultaneously or 
 can I calc each set separately due to the fire separation between the two 
 areas?
 
 Thank You,
 
 
 Greg McGahan
 Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
 1160 McKenzie Road
 Cantonment, FL 32533
 850-937-1850
 fax 850-937-1852
 ___
 Sprinklerforum mailing list
 Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl
 er.org
 ___
 Sprinklerforum mailing list
 Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
 
 
 ___
 Sprinklerforum mailing list
 Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

standpipes in fire separated building

[Greg McGahan]

I am looking a t a high rise building with 2 stair wells attached to a 7
story parking garage that is not protected. the Parking garage will have
two stairwells and be served by automatic dry standpipes. The Parking
Garage and the High Rise are separated by a 2 hour rated wall.

Question: Do I have to calculate all 4 standpipes simultaneously or can I
calc each set separately due to the fire separation between the two areas?

Thank You,


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

open space under concrete building

[Greg McGahan]

I have an architect asking if protection is required under a high rise
building  - noncombustible, if they raise the first occupied floor up so
that the ground floor is open underneath. There will be nothing
obstructing the view from one side to the other except the stairwells and
elev shaft basically.

I cannot find anything excludes protectionam I missing it?

Thanks,


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: open space under concrete building

[Greg McGahan]

Yes and yes...


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:17 AM, J. Scott Mitchell, PE jsm...@cableone.net
wrote:



 Is it accessible? Could it possibly be used for storage?
 J. Scott Mitchell, PE
 Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone

  Original message 
 From: Greg McGahan g...@livingwaterfp.com
 Date: 06/23/2015  9:01 AM  (GMT-06:00)
 To: sprinklerfo...@firesprinkler.org
 Subject: open space under concrete building

 I have an architect asking if protection is required under a high rise
 building  - noncombustible, if they raise the first occupied floor up so
 that the ground floor is open underneath. There will be nothing
 obstructing the view from one side to the other except the stairwells and
 elev shaft basically.

 I cannot find anything excludes protectionam I missing it?

 Thanks,


 Greg McGahan
 Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
 1160 McKenzie Road
 Cantonment, FL 32533
 850-937-1850
 fax 850-937-1852
 ___
 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: CPVC listing grey area

[Greg McGahan]

Agreed Travis


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Travis Mack, SET tm...@mfpdesign.com
wrote:

 A general rule of thumb is you can run CPVC anywhere sprinklers are not
 required.  If you want to run CPVC in an area where sprinklers are
 required, you have to use sprinklers that are specially listed to allow
 CPVC in those spaces.

 If you had an office building that was framed in steel, then you could use
 CPVC.

 Your case is very similar.  You want to run the piping in a
 non-combustible area and supply pendent sprinklers in the ceilings. I don't
 believe that violates any listings of the CPVC piping.

 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


 On 5/20/2015 8:38 AM, Sean Lockyer wrote:

 I have an interesting question to ask of everyone here. I am being asked
 to install an NFPA  13, non-residential sprinkler system in a small, new
 building that will be constructed with wood. However, the wood trusses will
 consist of fire rated lumber with a flamespread rating of less than 25,
 which will not require sprinkler protection since they would considered to
 then be non-combustible, or at the worst, limited combustible.

 With that being said, could you then install CPVC piping in these
 concealed areas without also having to use the specially listed concealed
 sprinklers (such as the CC1, CC2, HIP, BB1, etc.) heads that Tyco makes ?

 Remember, you can only install CPVC in an attic or a combustible
 concealed space if you also use those specially listed heads but if the
 area is technically not combustible I would say that you could use CPVC
 just like if you were using CPVC above an gyp board ceiling in an office
 for example - if you take the listing literally.

 What does everyone else think ?


Sean Lockyer
Project Designer   4617
 Parkbreeze Court
Cell386-279-1197
 Orlando, Florida 32808
slock...@aitlifesafety.com  Phone:
 407-816-9101
www.AITLifeSafety.com   Fax:
 407-816-9104


 ___
 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

13R Porches /Balconies etc

[Greg McGahan]

The situation explained in 13R 2013 ed in section *6.6.5.1.1 *specifically
explains the allowance of sidewalls outside of their listing but no mention
is made for pendents.

Question #1 - is the intent here that standard spray sidewalls be used or
are Res sidewalls allowed to be used outside of their listing?

Question #2 - If the answer to number one is that res or EC sidewalls  can
be used and you have a situation in which the use of sidewalls is not
possible and Pendent sprinklers must be used where there are exposed wood
framing members, does the same logic apply to using residential pendents
outside their listing or is the intent that SSP sprinklers be used?


Thanks for any insight.

Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: exterior cooler/freezer

[Greg McGahan]

NFPA #13 is not based on IF there is a a fire - it is based on WHEN there
is a fire.That has been hammered into my head since I got in this
industry...

WHEN there is a fire in that space - in this case the cooler, what happens?

The IBC is clear - if it is attached (by definition within the IBC) to a
protected building then sprinklers are required.We have seen the
aftermath of multiple compressors catching on fire inside coolers/freezers
- so fires do happen in them.


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Matthew J Willis ma...@rapidfireinc.com
wrote:

 Also,

 Lest we forget, the materials used in the construction of these Boxes
 help a fire along regardless of the contents.

 R/
 Matt

 Matthew J. Willis
 Project Manager
 Rapid Fire Protection Inc.
 1805 Samco Road
 Rapid City, SD 57702
 Office-605.348.2342
 Cell-605.391.2733
 Fax:-605.348.0108



 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Cahill,
 Christopher
 Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 6:07 AM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: Re: exterior cooler/freezer

 Its called a backdraft. Look it up or watch the movie. Yes it can burn.
 Also be careful with statistics. One can show any given fire is highly
 unlikely. Yet they still happen on a regular basis.

 Chris Cahill
 Fire Protection Engineer
 Burns  McDonnell
 ccah...@burnsmcd.com
 952-656-3652 Todd - Work wrote:
 I went to the jobsite yesterday to get the full scoop. This is a
 restaurant in a strip mall. In back, there will be two boxes approximately
 9 x 16 x 8(h). One will be liquor storage, which needs to have an inside
 access. This will be conditioned space and we will run 2 heads off the
 existing. The second is a combination freezer/cooler with the front 10 ft
 cooler and the back 6 ft freezer. That adds complications. You would now be
 looking at a 2 head dry system. The owner is considering eliminating the
 inside access for that box. They have contacted the AHJ to see if that
 would eliminate then need for sprinklers.

 My next question is on fire history in this type of box. By design, it
 will be pretty much air tight to preserve the temperature. Given the size
 of the space, would there be enough oxygen inside to sustain a fire that
 would expose the main building? Is there any history of this type of fire?

 Sent from my iPad

  On Mar 10, 2015, at 6:35 AM, John Drucker jdruc...@redbanknj.org
 wrote:
 
  Bill,  like the recent blue dress experiment our eyes see what we want
 them to. Fires, what fire ?
 
  John Drucker - Mobile Email
  jdruc...@redbanknj.orgmailto:jdruc...@redbanknj.org
  Cell/Text 732-904-6823
 
 
  Bill Brooks bill.bro...@brooksfpe.com wrote:
 
  Sometimes there are interpretations and sometimes misapplications.  An
  intelligent interpretation is a help to a designer, a misapplication
  can be a dangerous thing.  I'm not sure which one is being referenced
 here.
 
  Bill Brooks
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Sprinklerforum
  [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
  On Behalf Of Charles Thurston
  Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 5:50 PM
  To: Cahill, Christopher; sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
  Subject: Re: exterior cooler/freezer
 
  Hello Christopher,
 
  That is what the AHJs around here look at it as. They say the closed
  cooler door is like a fire door and no sprinkler needed. They even
  told a building owner of he left the decorative roof off a 1500 sq'
  cooler outside the building it did not have to be sprinklered.
 
  Monday, March 9, 2015, 11:16:43 AM, you wrote:
 
  Hold on a second, there could be a fire wall between the two creating
  separate buildings, lol.
 
  Chris Cahill, PE*
  Associate Fire Protection Engineer
  Burns  McDonnell
  Phone:  952.656.3652
  Fax:  952.229.2923
  ccah...@burnsmcd.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

 ___
 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: EC Sidewall Sprinklers

[Greg McGahan]

100% yes...the first number is along the wall.



Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Morey, Mike mo...@bmwc.com wrote:

 That's always been my understanding.  Interesting that it's not shown or
 specified in the cut sheet, I actually looked at one thinking surely they
 all would and the first one I looked at didn't specify anywhere in it.

 Mike Morey, CFPS, SET
 Planner Scheduler/Designer
 BMWC Constructors, Inc.
 1740 W. Michigan St, Indianapolis, IN 46222
 O: 317.651.0596 | C: 317.586.8111
 mo...@bmwc.com | www.bmwc.com

 
 From: Sprinklerforum sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org on
 behalf of Brian Harris bhar...@bvssystemsinc.com
 Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 9:55 AM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: EC Sidewall Sprinklers

 When a EC sidewall sprinkler cut sheet gives you the maximum room size,
 say 16x20, the first number (16) is the S dimension in NFPA  the second
 number (20) is the L dimension correct? So this 16x20 ECLH sidewall will
 cover 16' along the wall and 20' across the room right?

 Brian Harris, CET
 BVS Systems Inc.
 Sprinkler Division
 bvssystemsinc.comhttp://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

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

Re: Relocate sprinklers with drops RETORT

[Greg McGahan]

It sure seems like a waste of resources to me. 

Sent from my iPhone

 On Feb 6, 2015, at 6:49 PM, rfletc...@aerofire.com rfletc...@aerofire.com 
 wrote:
 
 Like shipping, unpacking and installation only applies the proper and 
 necessary stress for the sprinkler to operate as intended. Or maybe the 
 engineering is so precise that the sprinkler can only stand the rigors of 
 being threaded into a fitting once and then it's useless. Or maybe there are 
 sprinkler manufacturers reps on the 13 committee that know how fragile and 
 un-robust sprinklers are? Why would you build something could only be 
 threaded in once? I'm glad they don't manufacture pipe or fittings.
 
 Ron fletcher Sent from my iPhone
 
 On Feb 6, 2015, at 4:43 PM, John Denhardt jdenha...@stricklandfire.com 
 wrote:
 
 Mark - well said. I totally agree. 
 
 Sent from my iPhone
 
 On Feb 6, 2015, at 6:29 PM, Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. masorn...@kfi-eng.com 
 wrote:
 
 My two cents is that it is not only the potential stress to the sprinkler 
 from removal/replacement, but the potential for damage during handling.  
 This is especially true for QR sprinklers.
 
 From the EOR perspective, I have them replaced with new regardless of if it 
 could be kept in a drop.
 
 I understand there may be differing perspectives when you are in a 
 competitive bid that doesn't address the issue, or you have an owner 
 griping about every dollar spent.
 
 Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. | Karges-Faulconbridge, Inc. | Fire Protection 
 Engineer | Fargo, ND | direct: 701.552.9905 | mobile: 701.371.5759 | 
 http://www.kfiengineers.com
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum 
 [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of 
 accentf...@aol.com
 Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 4:05 PM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: Re: Relocate sprinklers with drops RETORT
 
 Good afternoon, All:
 
 I thought a previous discussion revealed that currently IF the sprinkler 
 stays in the RC, weld-o-let, fitting, etc., then it can be  reinstalled if 
 the sprinkler has not actually been removed from the original  
 fitting/outlet.
 I believe the concern was the amount of 'stress' applied to the  sprinkler 
 when trying to remove it - and possible damage resulting from the  'torque'.
 Previously, everyone seemed to be on board with this  approach.
 
 Cordially-
 
 Jerry
 _accentfire@aol.com_ (mailto:accentf...@aol.com)
 
 *Jerry D. Watts, SFPE
 President  Co-Founder
 ACCENT FIRE ENGINEERING INT'L. Ltd.**
 Santa Fe, New Mexico USA
 (800) 503.1961 nationwide
 
 *New Mexico Journeyman Sprinklerfitter Lic.  #08228
 
 **Licensed Fire Protection Engineers -  Architects/Inspectors/Fire
 Investigators:  AZ  CA  CO   NM  NV  NY  TX  UT  KS  MD  MS
 
 
 
 In a message dated 2/6/2015 2:04:42 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, 
 pe...@waynefire.com writes:
 
 Based on  the 2nd draft, this is what the 2016 language will say unless it 
 is  Successfully NITMAM ed
 
 6.2.1.1*
 When a sprinkler is removed  from a fitting or welded outlet, it shall not 
 be reinstalled except as  permitted by 6.2.1.1.1.
 6.2.1.1.1
 Dry sprinklers shall be  permitted to be reinstalled when removed in 
 accordance with the manufacturer's  installation and maintenance 
 instructions.
 
 A.6.2.1.1
 Sprinklers should be permitted to be reinstalled when the sprinkler being 
 removed from the system remains attached to the original fitting or welded 
 outlet, provided care has been taken to ensure the sprinkler has not been 
 damaged. Flexible hose connections are considered a fitting.
 In new  installations, where sprinklers are installed on pendent drop 
 nipples or  sidewall sprinklers prior to final cut-back, protective caps 
 and/or straps  should remain in place until after the drop nipple has been 
 cut to fit to the  final ceiling elevation.
 
 This is my opinion only and does not  constitute the official opinion of 
 the NFPA.
 
 Peter Schwab
 VP of  Purchasing  Engineering Technologies
 
 Wayne Automatic Fire  Sprinklers Inc.
 222 Capitol Court
 Ocoee, Fl 34761
 
 Mobile: (407)  468-8248
 Direct: (407) 877-5570
 Fax: (407)  656-8026
 
 www.waynefire.com
 
 
 
 
 -Original  Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum
 [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of 
 michael  G
 Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 3:56 PM
 To:  sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: RE: Relocate sprinklers  with drops
 
 I would have to agree with Richard,  He is not pulling  the head out of the 
 piping, the Boss of the sprinkler is taking no extra  strain and there is 
 no extra stress added on the sprinkler head its  self.  Only the piping is 
 being removed, cut threaded and  reinstalled.  We basically do this when we 
 install a system
 
 We  run the branch line, install a 0-2 and elbow, the drop and a head with 
 the  support ring installed already, so that when we do our initial testing 
 for  leaks, the drops are tested all the way to the sprinkler head. The 
 

Re: Airport Concourse

[Greg McGahan]

The last airport we did was OH1 in the seating areas as well. The AHJ 
considered that a passenger handling area. I can't say that I really disagree. 

Sent from my iPhone

 On Jan 29, 2015, at 3:37 PM, John Denhardt jdenha...@stricklandfire.com 
 wrote:
 
 NFPA 13 Chapter 22 overrides any differences in the other chapters of NFPA 
 13. This Chapter 22 is fully required. 
 
 Sent from my iPhone
 
 On Jan 29, 2015, at 4:31 PM, Duane Johnson djohn...@stricklandfire.com 
 wrote:
 
 Actually, NFPA 13 references NFPA 415. See 22.25.1 in NFPA 13.
 
 
 Duane Johnson
 Strickland Fire Protection
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] 
 On Behalf Of Duane Johnson
 Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 4:25 PM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org; SprinklerFORUM
 Subject: RE: Airport Concourse
 
 Passenger handling areas OHI per NFPA 415 (2013) 4.5.1.3. Baggage, packing 
 and mail handing areas are OHII.
 
 
 Duane Johnson
 Strickland Fire Protection
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] 
 On Behalf Of Gregory Lindholm
 Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 4:19 PM
 To: SprinklerFORUM
 Subject: Airport Concourse
 
 What would you design an airport concourse for? I would assume light hazard, 
 but I cannot find anything on it.
 I could maybe think something else at the baggage carousels, but not the 
 seating areas where people are waiting for their planes.
 
 Greg Lindholm 
 ___
 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
 ___
 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: ceiling pockets, part 2

[Greg McGahan]

Todd,

At the core I do not believe that the intent is to consider pockets in
separate rooms as adjacent when the explanations have been based on delayed
activation from multiple pockets collecting heat. Or I am I
misunderstanding the original pocket protection intent?


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Brad Casterline bcasterl...@fsc-inc.com
wrote:

 NFPA 13 2002 8.6.7.2 (4)

 Each unprotected ceiling pocket is separated from any adjacent unprotected
 ceiling pocket by a minimum 10 ft horizontal distance.

 'adjacent' is the key word here Todd, and Webster's would not resolve it
 for
 you. This is a good time for you to whip out your professional opinion, and
 if you say something like The pocket in the room of origin is totally
 indifferent to the pocket in the adjacent room, at least in the normal
 automatic sprinkler activation times designed for--- yadayadayada--- I
 doubt you would get much resistance.

 Brad

 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
 On Behalf Of Todd - Work
 Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 8:45 AM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: ceiling pockets, part 2

 This is a follow up to the question I posed about a week ago. 13 says that
 there needs to be a 10 ft separation between ceiling pockets. I assume that
 means if they are in the same room. Would a non-rated wall create a
 separation that would vacate the need for the 10 ft separation. I am away
 from my copy of 13 right now.

 Todd




 Sent from my iPad
 ___
 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: Blazemaster Piping

[Greg McGahan]

The only problem would be AHJ requirements. Painting with latex is not a 
problem per material listing or NFPA 13. 

Sent from my iPhone

 On Jan 19, 2015, at 3:59 PM, Tony Silva silva...@shaw.ca wrote:
 
 I have already posed this question to Tyco, and am awaiting a hopefully quick 
 reply. Meanwhile I thought I will also ask the forum.
 
 I have been asked whether Tyco Blazemaster sprinkler piping can be painted. 
 This is in a area that the piping will run exposed, tight to the ceiling, 
 complying with the installation requirements. 
 
 Has anyone seen Blazemaster being painted? In the Blaze installation manual 
 it states, If painting is required, use only latex based paints. So it is 
 obvious that the piping can be painted. My concern is if the markings on the 
 piping giving the pipe listings are covered, will it be a problem? I guess 
 this will apply to steel piping also, and their pipe markings are regularly 
 painted over without any concerns. But I thought I will ask. 
 
 The other concern is regarding the color. Blazemaster has a characteristic 
 color identifying the product. Will changing the color be a problem?
 
 Tony 
 ___
 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: Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas

[Greg McGahan]

Merry Christmas   Thanks for all the sprinkler technical advice this year!

Sent from my iPhone

 On Dec 24, 2014, at 7:57 PM, John Drucker - Home john.druc...@verizon.net 
 wrote:
 
 Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas Everyone !
 
 John
 
 John Drucker
 Assistant Construction Official 
 Fire Protection Subcode Official 
 Red Bank, New Jersey
 
 
 ___
 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: residential calcs

[Greg McGahan]

Jamie, that has always been the case for me pretty much...

In this case we are unable to use Res heads in the corridor so we have to
go to the next room. This one does not have a pump and does not have enough
water pressure for the highest floor.

I have it working now but I had to do crazy things to get it there.


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Jamie Seidl jamie.se...@gmail.com wrote:

 I've generally found that the 4 most hydraulically demanding sprinklers are
 typically a single branch line.  1 bed room head, largest spacing furthest
 from the main, 1 closet, 1 bath, and maybe a corridor sprinkler, all off
 one line.  The bedroom sprinkler pressure requirement drives the rest. This
 can also apply to other room configurations, but the results are normally
 the same with the single branch line.

 Jamie Seidl
 ___
 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

residential calcs

[Greg McGahan]

Help please

Situation in a NFPA 13 hotel...:

There is a 1'-0 wide soffit by 4 deep  adjacent to a restroom wall. If I
place  res sidewall 4 under soffit the deflector would then be 8 below
the higher ceiling past the 1'-0 soffit.

Although I am very conservative with calcs in general - this one hurts the
pipe sizes bigtime so I am asking if my conservative approach is
technically correct or overkill:

Question #1 - Do I have to calculate the head for the 6-12 distance below
the ceiling or can I use the 4-6 range?


Question #2 - When you do a 4 head Res calc in a 13 building, do you define
adjacent by linear distance or do you purposely go for the sidewall in
the next room even if it is further away in order to be conservative? IW -
the nearest pendent in the next room is 4' away, going the other direction,
the sidewall in the next room is 10' away.V's are sidewalls and + are
pendentsthats as close as I can get at this hour.

 I  I   I V  I
V
 I  I   I I
 I+I +I  + I
   +
 I  I   I I


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: What's YOUR response??

[Greg McGahan]

Steve is correct and if you use the EC heads at 12x12 and there is not
specific flow information available, the minimum published flow must be
used. So if the minimum flow for 14x14 is published you must meet that
requirement.

Greg


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Steve Leyton st...@protectiondesign.com
wrote:

 I believe the answer is no.   You can mix standard and extended coverages
 but not RTI's.

 Steve Leyton
 PROTECTION DESIGN  CONSULTING
 2851 Camino del Rio South, Suite 210
 San Diego, CA 92108
 ---
 Ph:   619.255.8964 - ext. 102
 Fax:  619.255.9364
 Cell: 619.972.5696




 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Vince Sabolik
 Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 8:57 AM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: What's YOUR response??

 Hi forum ... this hurting my brain today.

 If standard response sprinklers are installed in a given space - a retail
 tenant, can QR extended heads be used in a subsequent addition. The two
 areas will have the same ceiling and I want to use extended heads in the
 addition because of intense surface strip lighting.

 Also, does anyone know if an extended head can be used in a 12 x 12
 spacing @ 7 psi if the listing starts at 14 x 14?

 Thanks for any info!


   Vince


 ___
 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

transverse flue space clarification

[Greg McGahan]

Storage of non-typical objects  - ie car parts of all different shape and
sizes on wire rack shelves...

There are no pallets or standard sized boxes  etc therefore there is a lot
of open spaces between items. What does this do to the definition and
requirements for transverse flue spaces?

Are the vertical frames automatically flue spaces or in this scenario is it
possible that there just aren't any definable transverse flue spaces?

Thanks,

Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Victaulic webite

[Greg McGahan]

Happens to me every time I go to their site. 

Sent from my iPhone

 On Dec 3, 2014, at 10:46 AM, Aaron Peck amp...@me.com wrote:
 
 I've had that too, thought it was just me since I'm in Bahrain and connected
 to a vpn through Sweden. I've had to change it several times in the past
 couple of days. Might be something else if it's happening to other people.
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
 On Behalf Of Todd - Work
 Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 7:23 PM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: Re: Victaulic webite
 
 Good call. I used the language selector at the top of the page and that
 didn't work. Didn't scroll down to the bottom. Thanks
 
 Todd G Williams, PE
 Fire Protection Design/Consulting
 Stonington, CT
 www.fpdc.com
 860-535-2080 (ofc)
 
 On Dec 3, 2014, at 10:02 AM, John Corcoran j...@globesprinkler.com
 wrote:
 
 If you look at the footer of the page it should give you the option to
 select 'English'.
 
 John Corcoran
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum 
 [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of 
 Todd - Work
 Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 10:00 AM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: Victaulic webite
 
 Is anyone else's Victaulic website stuck in German?
 
 Todd G Williams, PE
 Fire Protection Design/Consulting
 Stonington, CT
 www.fpdc.com
 860-535-2080 (ofc)
 ___
 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-firesprinkl
 er.org
 ___
 Sprinklerforum mailing list
 Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
 
 ___
 Sprinklerforum mailing list
 Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

FM Global and the UFC

[Greg McGahan]

Does FM allow the small room rule for end head pressures in small room
rules as in NFPA #13?

The UFC is confusing as the installation goes by 13 and the calcs go by FM
standards.

Thanks,

Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Hydraulic Placard

[Greg McGahan]

I can state a few instances in which the calc plate info helped identify large 
water supply issues.  If the demand on the play was 500 gpm at 40 psi. And the 
main drain test yields 20 psi through a 2 inch drain you can make a good guess 
that there is an issue that needs addressing.  It also identifies building use 
changes that were not done correctly. .10/1500 in a retail store can tell the 
AHJ he needs to look further. 

I think they are important. 



Sent from my iPhone

 On Nov 7, 2014, at 5:16 PM, Matt Willis ma...@rapidfireinc.com wrote:
 
 I tend to agree. However, what real world use do we gain years later from 
 this information?
 Any additions will be calculated. If not, at least meet the same number of 
 sprinklers per piece of pipe.
 During the days when we would write up over spaced heads and calcs were new, 
 I could see the need. Now days..., not so much.
 
 R/
 Matt
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] 
 On Behalf Of Todd - Work
 Sent: Friday, November 07, 2014 3:03 PM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: Re: Hydraulic Placard
 
 FWIW, A hydraulic placard tells me (1) it is a hydraulically designed system 
 and (2) The original design criteria. Everything else is superfluous. 
 
 Todd G Williams, PE
 Fire Protection Design/Consulting
 Stonington, CT
 www.fpdc.com
 860-535-2080 (ofc)
 
 On Nov 7, 2014, at 4:29 PM, Pete Schwab pe...@waynefire.com wrote:
 
 In states like Florida with a 2 tag system, a missing hydraulic placard is a 
 deficiency and automatically gets a red tag. That really makes building 
 owners happy.
 
 Peter Schwab
 VP of Purchasing  Engineering Technologies
 
 Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinklers Inc.
 222 Capitol Court
 Ocoee, Fl 34761
 
 Mobile: (407) 468-8248
 Direct: (407) 877-5570
 Fax: (407) 656-8026
 
 www.waynefire.com
 
 
 
 We’re hiring great people at all of our locations!  Please check out our 
 website for the details! 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum 
 [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of 
 Roland Huggins
 Sent: Friday, November 07, 2014 4:09 PM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: Re: Hydraulic Placard
 
 A starting point is to identify that it is a non-critical deficiency (along 
 with the categories for any other deficiencies).  Then the owner can 
 prioritize what is to be fixed and when.  If we could get some owners to 
 just fix the impairments, we’d be a long way down the road.
 
 The discussion obviously will be different when the state requires tagging 
 and notification of the AHJ.  What do you guys and gals see in these states 
 on what to bring to the AHJ’s attention?
 
 Roland
 
 
 Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering
 American Fire Sprinkler Assn.   ---  Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives
 Dallas, TX
 http://www.firesprinkler.org http://www.firesprinkler.org/
 
 
 
 
 
 On Nov 7, 2014, at 11:54 AM, Jeff Bridges j...@jbfireprotection.com wrote:
 
 An earlier thread brought up a good point and a common problem- 
 Hydraulic Placards
 
 Missing Hydraulic Placard is a common deficiency found during routine 
 inspections.
 
 Owners and AHJ's seldom (read never) have copies of the Approved 
 plan, so the only method of re-determining these numbers can be 
 costly and time consuming.
 
 Owners scoff at the price and even the importance- AHJ's have waived 
 the requirement on some instances leaving the Sprinkler contractor looking 
 bad.
 
 What's your experience on how do you react when it comes to the 
 missing Hydraulic Placard?
 
 
 
 Jeff Bridges
 
 JB Fire Protection Inc
 
 (888) 523-4737 Fax (714) 285-0203
 
 Fire Sprinklers Save Lives  Property
 
 
 
 ___
 Sprinklerforum mailing list
 Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink
 l
 er.org
 
 ___
 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-firesprinkl
 er.org
 ___
 Sprinklerforum mailing list
 Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
 ___
 Sprinklerforum mailing list
 Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Outdoor Dining

[Greg McGahan]

I agree with the field inspector if the canopy is immediately adjacent to
the building - within inches - and if there are combustibles under it. If
it is further than that it would be subject to whether or not it falls
under the definition of attached in the building code.



Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Jeff Bridges j...@jbfireprotection.com
wrote:

 Our situation is an un-attached free standing structure. NFPA 13 8.15.7
 refers to attached exterior features I believe

 FWIW this is in LA City. Restaurant is on the ground floor of a low rise.
 Framing of outdoor dining area (28' x 60') is square steel tubing and not
 attached to building
 Fabric is NFPA 701 compliant nonflammable material

 Initial plan check said no sprinkler protection required. Field inspector
 says YES.

 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
 On Behalf Of Larry Keeping
 Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 7:01 PM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: RE: Outdoor Dining

 I don't see how you can conclude there is no standard to apply to the
 situation. As per NFPA 13-2010:

 8.15.7* Exterior   Roofs, Canopies, Porte-Cocheres, Balconies, Decks, or
 Similar Projections.

 8.15.7.1   Unless the requirements of 8.15.7.2, 8.15.7.3, or 8.15.7.4 are
 met, sprinklers shall be installed under exterior roofs, canopies,
 porte-cocheres, balconies, decks, or similar projections exceeding 4 ft
 (1.2
 m) in width.

 Note the specific reference to canopies. Neither 8.15.7.2, 8.15.7.3 nor
 8.15.7.4 give any exemptions if a canopy is fabric instead of something
 more
 rigid.

 For the 2013 edition of the standard the title was changed to Exterior
 Projections so that all situations would be covered. The technical
 committee wanted to include consideration of all of the components that
 project from a building where different terms are used for their
 description.

 Larry Keeping, P.Eng.

 Professional Loss Control
 3413 Wolfedale Road, Suite 6
 Mississauga, Ontario
 L5C 1V8

 Phone:   905-949-2755, ext. 204
 Fax:905-949-1752

 E-mail:lkeep...@plcfire.com

 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
 On Behalf Of Aaron Rohr
 Sent: October-29-14 3:57 PM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: RE: Outdoor Dining

 yes

 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
 On Behalf Of Jeff Bridges
 Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 12:57 PM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: RE: Outdoor Dining

 Thank you all for your replies-
 There is no standard for which to follow is what I gather and it's up to
 Architect or AHJ


 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
 On Behalf Of Greg McGahan
 Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 3:46 AM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: Re: Outdoor Dining

 We have never been allowed to omit sprinkler form an exterior canopy based
 solely on the fact that it is has a fabric covering. If it covered nothing
 but sidewalk and was considered non-combustible etc, then it has always
 been
 treated as a normal rigid permanent canopy of any other construction type,
 if there are no combustibles etc underneath it, then no protection is
 required. If the use is in doubt, then it is strictly an AHJ call.

 We have seen the case where the fact that it was removable did not alter
 the
 AHJ's opinion, because in the event of a fire and the canopy being
 deployed,
 he wanted protection.

 AHJ call...from my experience.


 Greg McGahan
 Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
 1160 McKenzie Road
 Cantonment, FL 32533
 850-937-1850
 fax 850-937-1852

 On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:58 PM, John Drucker - Home 
 john.druc...@verizon.net wrote:

  Jeff, perhaps this will help,
 
 
 
  CANOPY. A permanent structure or architectural projection
 
  of rigid construction over which a covering is attached that
 
  provides weather protection, identity or decoration. A canopy
 
  is permitted to be structurally independent or supported
 
  by attachment to a building on one or more sides.
 
 
 
  2012 IBC
 
 
 
  [F] 903.2 Where required. Approved automatic sprinkler
 
  systems in new buildings and structures shall be provided in
 
  the locations described in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.12.
 
 
 
  [F] 903.2.1.2 Group A-2. An automatic sprinkler system
 
  shall be provided for Group A-2 occupancies
 
  where one of the following conditions exists:
 
 
 
  1. The fire area exceeds 5,000 square feet (464.5
 
  m2);
 
  2. The fire area has an occupant load of 100 or
 
  more; or
 
  3. The fire area is located on a floor other than a
 
  level of exit

Re: Outdoor Dining

[Greg McGahan]

We have never been allowed to omit sprinkler form an exterior canopy based
solely on the fact that it is has a fabric covering. If it covered nothing
but sidewalk and was considered non-combustible etc, then it has always
been treated as a normal rigid permanent canopy of any other construction
type,  if there are no combustibles etc underneath it, then no protection
is required. If the use is in doubt, then it is strictly an AHJ call.

We have seen the case where the fact that it was removable did not alter
the AHJ's opinion, because in the event of a fire and the canopy being
deployed, he wanted protection.

AHJ call...from my experience.


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:58 PM, John Drucker - Home 
john.druc...@verizon.net wrote:

 Jeff, perhaps this will help,



 CANOPY. A permanent structure or architectural projection

 of rigid construction over which a covering is attached that

 provides weather protection, identity or decoration. A canopy

 is permitted to be structurally independent or supported

 by attachment to a building on one or more sides.



 2012 IBC



 [F] 903.2 Where required. Approved automatic sprinkler

 systems in new buildings and structures shall be provided in

 the locations described in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.12.



 [F] 903.2.1.2 Group A-2. An automatic sprinkler system

 shall be provided for Group A-2 occupancies

 where one of the following conditions exists:



 1. The fire area exceeds 5,000 square feet (464.5

 m2);

 2. The fire area has an occupant load of 100 or

 more; or

 3. The fire area is located on a floor other than a

 level of exit discharge serving such occupancies.



 [F] 903.3.1.1.1 Exempt locations. Automatic sprinklers

 shall not be required in the following rooms or

 areas where such rooms or areas are protected with

 an approved automatic fire detection system in

 accordance with Section 907.2 that will respond to

 visible or invisible particles of combustion. Sprinklers

 shall not be omitted from any room merely

 because it is damp, of fire-resistance-rated construction

 or contains electrical equipment.



 4. Rooms or areas that are of noncombustible

 construction with wholly noncombustible contents.



 3105.4 Canopy materials. Canopies shall be constructed of

 a rigid framework with an approved covering that meets the

 fire propagation performance criteria of NFPA 701 or has a

 flame spread index not greater than 25 when tested in accordance

 with ASTM E 84 or UL 723.



 We have just a configuration which is also a component of the means of
 egress and thus part of the A2 Restaurant Use.  The canopy is a permanent
 structure and has been designed for snow and wind load and contains
 combustible furniture.  The underside of the canopy is sprinklered.



 John Drucker, CET

 Assistant Construction Official

 Fire Protection Subcode Official

 Building/Fire/Electrical Inspector

 Borough of Red Bank

 Red Bank, New Jersey

 Email: jdruc...@redbanknj.org mailto:jdruc...@redbanknj.org







 -Original Message-
 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
 sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
 On Behalf Of Jeff Bridges
 Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 6:28 PM
 To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Subject: RE: Outdoor Dining



 Got it-

 One plain YES and one up to the AHJ with some explanation which I
 appreciate



 This situation is a common occurrence and 1/2 the time we put sprinklers
 other 1/2 we don't Fabric used is similar to what's used on chain link
 fences for privacy.

 Enough to provide sun protection but also allowing air transfer.

 So is this fabric/ canvas adequate for proper heat collection and
 activation
 of a sprinkler or we just doing this to make some inspector happy?

 If that's the case I'd rather hand him a few hundred it'd save everyone
 time
 n energy







 -Original Message-

 From: Sprinklerforum [
 mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org
 mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]

 On Behalf Of Jeff Bridges

 Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 11:20 AM

 To:  mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org

 Subject: Outdoor Dining



 Fully sprinklered Restaurant with outdoor dining-



 Restaurant has an outdoor dining area with steel frame over the top and a
 pullback fabric canopy.



 If sprinkler protection is provided (and is it even required) is the fabric
 sufficient to catch heat for sprinkler activation?









 ___

 Sprinklerforum mailing list

  mailto:Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
 Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org


 
 http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.or
 g

 http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: PIV Tampering - IFC vs IBC vs NFPA

[Greg McGahan]

I can only tell you that we have been tampering all NEW valves on systems
that require monitoring for the past 7 years or so. We have NOT been
tampering existing valves that are chained and locked unless there are
major revisions taking place to the system.

Greg


Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC http://www.livingwaterfp.com
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 7:38 AM, Morey, Mike mo...@bmwc.com wrote:

 We've had an issue come up relating to PIV tampering.  We use a state
 adopted (Indiana) code that is based almost entirely on IBC/IFC 2006.
 We've been asked to tamper PIVs per IBC/IFC.  Our site includes a large
 campus fire main loop and there is some discussion about whether or not all
 those valves require tampering.  My contention is that the campus fire main
 is a private fire service main and is outside the scope of IBC and the
 chapter 9 requirement to tamper all valves, IFC chapter 5 seems to be the
 correct code to apply and refers almost exclusively to NFPA 24 for private
 fire service mains.  NFPA allows locking and periodic checks rather than
 requiring electronic monitoring as IBC/IFC chapter 9 does.  Is there any
 succinct way to show the campus loop is out of the scope of IBC, or is my
 reasoning incorrect?

 Mike Morey, CFPS, SET
 Planner Scheduler/Designer
 BMWC Constructors, Inc.
 1740 W. Michigan St, Indianapolis, IN 46222
 O: 317.651.0596 | C: 317.586.8111
 mo...@bmwc.com
 https://owa.bmwc.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=hEc2LsZXLUqfB3v1fAsIUDtQSkfsw9AIUxDXhx81O08DpGEK3NHRaSbWuncnZEk-mLpe2vYiBJY.URL=mailto%3amanta%40bmwc.com
 | www.bmwc.com
 https://owa.bmwc.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=hEc2LsZXLUqfB3v1fAsIUDtQSkfsw9AIUxDXhx81O08DpGEK3NHRaSbWuncnZEk-mLpe2vYiBJY.URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.bmwc.com%2f
 
 ___
 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