Area increase factor based on C.F.C. 506.3 (NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?)
Than you all for your valued inputs and expertise. In the 2nd to last paragraph in the 2010 California Fire Code 903.2.8 'When not used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the California Building Code an Automatic Sprinkler System installed in accordance with section 903.3.1.2 shall be allowed in Group R-2.1 Occupancies. Is it safe to assume that since it doesn't specifically mention an R-2 occupancy not being used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the 2010 C.F.C. that it be allowed to be installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2 of the 2010 C.F.C. (Did I say that correctly?) George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
Area increase factor based on C.F.C. 506.3 (NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?)
Than you all for your valued inputs and expertise. In the 2nd to last paragraph in the 2010 California Fire Code 903.2.8 'When not used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the California Building Code an Automatic Sprinkler System installed in accordance with section 903.3.1.2 shall be allowed in Group R-2.1 Occupancies. Is it safe to assume that since it doesn't specifically mention an R-2 occupancy not being used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the 2010 C.F.C. that it be allowed to be installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2 of the 2010 C.F.C. (Did I say that correctly?) George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
Area increase factor based on C.F.C. 506.3 (NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?)
Than you all for your valued inputs and expertise. In the 2nd to last paragraph in the 2010 California Fire Code 903.2.8 'When not used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the California Building Code an Automatic Sprinkler System installed in accordance with section 903.3.1.2 shall be allowed in Group R-2.1 Occupancies. Is it safe to assume that since it doesn't specifically mention an R-2 occupancy not being used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the 2010 C.F.C. that it be allowed to be installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2 of the 2010 C.F.C. (Did I say that correctly?) George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 -Original Message- From: Cahill, Christopher ccah...@burnsmcd.com To: sprinklerforum sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Sent: Tue, Apr 22, 2014 1:25 pm Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Let me play devil's advocate for a second. Why does NFPA 13x committees deal with this? Most (not all) of us in the US work with I codes and it's rather clear to me what to use. I don't work in NFPA 5000 but ASSUME it's similar. IBC tells me which variant to use, NFPA 13x only tells me how to do it. (Avoiding the vernacular code/standard out of respect for Greenman.) So the NFPA Committees can change or say anything they want and it's pointless. Hell, they could say 13D for residential high-rises and NFPA 13D Committee would have little they could do about it. Not that dissimilar to NFPA 409 and IBC 412. In 409 ch. 5 they have all sorts of requirements for a building that are not required if following the basics of IBC. For example, rated walls are not required in many hangars if you meet the height and area limits for mixed use. Don't need to protect the columns and don't need draft curtains, etc. True, a few places might legally adopt 409 in its entirety or you get there from insurance but that's not routine. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com *Registered in: MN Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Pete Schwab Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 3:06 PM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? A heads up in regards to the 2016 edition of NFPA 13R. The committee has made a pretty drastic change that will significantly assist in determining if and when NFPA 13R applies. This was done in the First Draft phase and is currently open for Public Comment. Here is the language from A.1.1 as how it appears in the First Draft Report. See the end sentences in paragraph #1. NFPA 13R is appropriate for use as an alternative to NFPA 13 only in those residential occupancies, as defined in this standard, up to and including four aboveground stories in height, and limited to buildings that are 60 ft (18 m) or less in height above grade plane, which is consistent with limits established by model building codes for buildings of Type V construction. The height of a building above grade plane is determined by model building codes, which base the height on the average height of the highest roof surface above grade plane. For further information on the building height story limits, see model building codes. Buildings that contain multiple occupancies (either separated or non-separated), accessory occupancies or incidental uses are often subject to special rules that may restrict the use of NFPA 13R. Refer to the adopted building code to determine whether such restrictions are applicable. The criteria in this standard are based on full-scale fire tests of rooms containing typical furnishings found in residential living rooms, kitchens, and bedrooms. The furnishings were arranged as typically found in dwelling units in a manner similar to that shown in Figure A.1.1(a), Figure A.1.1(b), and Figure A.1.1(c). Sixty full-scale fire tests were conducted in a two-story dwelling in Los Angeles, California, and 16 tests were conducted in a 14 ft (4.3 m) wide mobile home in Charlotte, North Carolina. Sprinkler systems designed and installed according to this standard are expected to prevent flashover within the compartment of origin where sprinklers are installed in the compartment. A sprinkler system designed and installed according to this standard cannot, however, be expected to completely control a fire involving fuel loads that are significantly higher than average for dwelling units [10 lb/ft2 (49 kg/m2)], configurations of fuels other than those with typical resi dential occupancies, or conditions where the interior finish has an unusually high flame spread index (greater than 225). To be effective, sprinkler systems installed in accordance with this standard need to open
RE: Area increase factor based on C.F.C. 506.3 (NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?)
You're welcome welcome welcome welcome welcome welcome ... Original message From: George Medina Jr fireg...@aol.com Date:04/25/2014 9:25 AM (GMT-08:00) To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Area increase factor based on C.F.C. 506.3 (NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?) Than you all for your valued inputs and expertise. In the 2nd to last paragraph in the 2010 California Fire Code 903.2.8 'When not used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the California Building Code an Automatic Sprinkler System installed in accordance with section 903.3.1.2 shall be allowed in Group R-2.1 Occupancies. Is it safe to assume that since it doesn't specifically mention an R-2 occupancy not being used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the 2010 C.F.C. that it be allowed to be installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2 of the 2010 C.F.C. (Did I say that correctly?) George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 -Original Message- From: Cahill, Christopher ccah...@burnsmcd.com To: sprinklerforum sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Sent: Tue, Apr 22, 2014 1:25 pm Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Let me play devil's advocate for a second. Why does NFPA 13x committees deal with this? Most (not all) of us in the US work with I codes and it's rather clear to me what to use. I don't work in NFPA 5000 but ASSUME it's similar. IBC tells me which variant to use, NFPA 13x only tells me how to do it. (Avoiding the vernacular code/standard out of respect for Greenman.) So the NFPA Committees can change or say anything they want and it's pointless. Hell, they could say 13D for residential high-rises and NFPA 13D Committee would have little they could do about it. Not that dissimilar to NFPA 409 and IBC 412. In 409 ch. 5 they have all sorts of requirements for a building that are not required if following the basics of IBC. For example, rated walls are not required in many hangars if you meet the height and area limits for mixed use. Don't need to protect the columns and don't need draft curtains, etc. True, a few places might legally adopt 409 in its entirety or you get there from insurance but that's not routine. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com *Registered in: MN Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Pete Schwab Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 3:06 PM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? A heads up in regards to the 2016 edition of NFPA 13R. The committee has made a pretty drastic change that will significantly assist in determining if and when NFPA 13R applies. This was done in the First Draft phase and is currently open for Public Comment. Here is the language from A.1.1 as how it appears in the First Draft Report. See the end sentences in paragraph #1. NFPA 13R is appropriate for use as an alternative to NFPA 13 only in those residential occupancies, as defined in this standard, up to and including four aboveground stories in height, and limited to buildings that are 60 ft (18 m) or less in height above grade plane, which is consistent with limits established by model building codes for buildings of Type V construction. The height of a building above grade plane is determined by model building codes, which base the height on the average height of the highest roof surface above grade plane. For further information on the building height story limits, see model building codes. Buildings that contain multiple occupancies (either separated or non-separated), accessory occupancies or incidental uses are often subject to special rules that may restrict the use of NFPA 13R. Refer to the adopted building code to determine whether such restrictions are applicable. The criteria in this standard are based on full-scale fire tests of rooms containing typical furnishings found in residential living rooms, kitchens, and bedrooms. The furnishings were arranged as typically found in dwelling units in a manner similar to that shown in Figure A.1.1(a), Figure A.1.1(b), and Figure A.1.1(c). Sixty full-scale fire tests were conducted in a two-story dwelling in Los Angeles, California, and 16 tests were conducted in a 14 ft (4.3 m) wide mobile home in Charlotte, North Carolina. Sprinkler systems designed and installed according to this standard are expected to prevent flashover within the compartment of origin where sprinklers are installed in the compartment. A sprinkler system designed and installed according to this standard cannot, however, be expected to completely control a fire involving fuel loads that are significantly higher than average for dwelling units [10 lb/ft2
Area increase factor based on C.F.C. 506.3 (NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?)
Than you all for your valued opinions and expertise, especially your I.B.C./U.B.C./C.F.C. references. In the 2nd to last paragraph in the 2010 California Fire Code 903.2.8 'When not used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the California Building Code an Automatic Sprinkler System installed in accordance with section 903.3.1.2 shall be allowed in Group R-2.1 Occupancies. Is it safe to assume that a R-2 occupancy used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the 2010 C.F.C. be allowed to be installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2 of the 2010 C.F.C. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 -Original Message- From: Travis Mack tm...@mfpdesign.com To: sprinklerforum sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Sent: Tue, Apr 22, 2014 11:04 am Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Agree as well. I am no IBC expert, but I do know a couple instances where the architect can take an allowance and it drives the system to 903.3.1.1 instead of 903.3.1.2 of the IBC. I always check these on all projects where 13R may be applicable. If I find what I feel is an error, I will call the architect and point out my concerns. I can't tell you how many times the architectural firms say they were unaware of the difference in those two sections. My first check is to always go with the code study analysis and then if it doesn't make sense, I throw it back to the architect and make them do the final determination. Travis Mack, SET MFP Design, LLC 2508 E Lodgepole Drive Gilbert, AZ 85298 480-505-9271 fax: 866-430-6107 email:tm...@mfpdesign.com On 4/22/2014 10:59 AM, Parsley Consulting wrote: I have to agree with Steve. There has been many a multi-family project cross my plan review table with the system designed to NFPA 13R because the architect called it out on the drawings, while also taking several allowances for a fully sprinklered building. Thanks to Steve, and a couple of others, I'm now well aware of the limitations in the IBC (CBC out here), which allow that to be done only if the design of the system conformed to NFPA 13. Some pretty high profile architectural firms have made that error, stamped and sealed their drawings. A significant number of AHJ's don't seem to know that's the case, at least based on the training classes I've attended and taught. More's the pity. Ken On 4/22/2014 10:46 AM, Steve Leyton wrote: Chris: You know we're buds, right? Good, 'cause that's just regoddamnediculous.Many AHJ's don't have all the information ...??? TFB - they owe their customers the professional service to acquire and apply that information. You wanna be sued into oblivion after a fire loss? Do the code analysis apart from the enforcing agency (especially if someone can show evidence later of correspondence or opinion by the AHJ that maybe it should have been a different basis of design) and then prosecute your work based on that independent opinion. I agree that the architect is in responsible charge and typically they do a code analysis. But they very often simply put Sprinklers - Yes or words to that effect into the note block. It says in the code which design to use and if the Architect can't or won't answer, then the BO should have the final say. Legally, in most cities and states, they do have the final say. SML -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Cahill, Christopher Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 10:41 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I agree Arch is better to ask. As a sprinkler contractor you probably don't have all the information to ask correctly. Many AHJ's don't have all the information either. I've seen many a project go forward on this issue long before an AHJ sees it. And if you call the fire marshal because that's who the sprinkler permit is through probably the building official approved the type of sprinkler. I was an AHJ for a long time and wouldn't answer. I'd ask you what the Arch said and the building official agreed to. If I discovered a problem later I took it up with the building official. When I was an contractor I sure drove a lot of Arch's nuts asking. And yes they rarely knew the answer. We'd talk it out and caveat the bid. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com *Registered in: MN Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Forest Wilson Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 11:39 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I ask the Architect
Area increase factor based on C.F.C. 506.3 (NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?)
Than you all for your valued opinions and expertise, especially your I.B.C./U.B.C./C.F.C. references. In the 2nd to last paragraph in the 2010 California Fire Code 903.2.8 'When not used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the California Building Code an Automatic Sprinkler System installed in accordance with section 903.3.1.2 shall be allowed in Group R-2.1 Occupancies. Is it safe to assume that a R-2 occupancy used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the 2010 C.F.C. be allowed to be installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2 of the 2010 C.F.C. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 -Original Message- From: George Medina Jr fireg...@aol.com To: sprinklerforum sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Sent: Thu, Apr 24, 2014 12:06 pm Subject: Area increase factor based on C.F.C. 506.3 (NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?) Than you all for your valued opinions and expertise, especially your I.B.C./U.B.C./C.F.C. references. In the 2nd to last paragraph in the 2010 California Fire Code 903.2.8 'When not used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the California Building Code an Automatic Sprinkler System installed in accordance with section 903.3.1.2 shall be allowed in Group R-2.1 Occupancies. Is it safe to assume that a R-2 occupancy used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the 2010 C.F.C. be allowed to be installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2 of the 2010 C.F.C. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 -Original Message- From: Travis Mack tm...@mfpdesign.com To: sprinklerforum sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Sent: Tue, Apr 22, 2014 11:04 am Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Agree as well. I am no IBC expert, but I do know a couple instances where the architect can take an allowance and it drives the system to 903.3.1.1 instead of 903.3.1.2 of the IBC. I always check these on all projects where 13R may be applicable. If I find what I feel is an error, I will call the architect and point out my concerns. I can't tell you how many times the architectural firms say they were unaware of the difference in those two sections. My first check is to always go with the code study analysis and then if it doesn't make sense, I throw it back to the architect and make them do the final determination. Travis Mack, SET MFP Design, LLC 2508 E Lodgepole Drive Gilbert, AZ 85298 480-505-9271 fax: 866-430-6107 email:tm...@mfpdesign.com On 4/22/2014 10:59 AM, Parsley Consulting wrote: I have to agree with Steve. There has been many a multi-family project cross my plan review table with the system designed to NFPA 13R because the architect called it out on the drawings, while also taking several allowances for a fully sprinklered building. Thanks to Steve, and a couple of others, I'm now well aware of the limitations in the IBC (CBC out here), which allow that to be done only if the design of the system conformed to NFPA 13. Some pretty high profile architectural firms have made that error, stamped and sealed their drawings. A significant number of AHJ's don't seem to know that's the case, at least based on the training classes I've attended and taught. More's the pity. Ken On 4/22/2014 10:46 AM, Steve Leyton wrote: Chris: You know we're buds, right? Good, 'cause that's just regoddamnediculous.Many AHJ's don't have all the information ...??? TFB - they owe their customers the professional service to acquire and apply that information. You wanna be sued into oblivion after a fire loss? Do the code analysis apart from the enforcing agency (especially if someone can show evidence later of correspondence or opinion by the AHJ that maybe it should have been a different basis of design) and then prosecute your work based on that independent opinion. I agree that the architect is in responsible charge and typically they do a code analysis. But they very often simply put Sprinklers - Yes or words to that effect into the note block. It says in the code which design to use and if the Architect can't or won't answer, then the BO should have the final say. Legally, in most cities and states, they do have the final say. SML -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Cahill, Christopher Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 10:41 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I agree Arch is better to ask. As a sprinkler contractor you probably don't have all the information to ask correctly. Many AHJ's don't have all the information either. I've seen many a project go forward on this issue long before an AHJ sees it. And if you call the fire marshal because that's who the sprinkler permit is through probably the building official approved the type of sprinkler. I was an AHJ for a long time
Area increase factor based on C.F.C. 506.3 (NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?)
Thank you all for your valued opinions and expertise, especially your I.B.C./U.B.C./C.F.C. references. In the 2nd to last paragraph in the 2010 California Fire Code 903.2.8 'When not used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the California Building Code an Automatic Sprinkler System installed in accordance with section 903.3.1.2 shall be allowed in Group R-2.1 Occupancies. Is it safe to assume that a R-2 occupancy used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the 2010 C.F.C. be allowed to be installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2 of the 2010 C.F.C. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
Area increase factor based on C.F.C. 506.3 (NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?)
Than you all for your valued inputs and expertise. In the 2nd to last paragraph in the 2010 California Fire Code 903.2.8 'When not used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the California Building Code an Automatic Sprinkler System installed in accordance with section 903.3.1.2 shall be allowed in Group R-2.1 Occupancies. Is it safe to assume that since it doesn't specifically mention an R-2 occupancy not being used in accordance with section 504.2 or 506.3 of the 2010 C.F.C. that it be allowed to be installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.2 of the 2010 C.F.C. (Did I say that correctly?) George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 -Original Message- From: George Medina Jr fireg...@aol.com To: sprinklerforum sprinklerfo...@firesprinkler.org Sent: Mon, Apr 21, 2014 10:17 pm Subject: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Forum, Can anyone please add there 2 cents in and help clarify when to classify as a 13 system versus a 13R I have a project that consist of 3 stories with an occupancy of R2/S2 and Construction Type VA. The project is lay ed out like a horse shoe with 3 sides and a corridor running down the middle from 1 required stairwell to another on the opposite end, with a court yard in the middle. There are private garages around the perimeter of the building (which all have access from a common 1st floor corridor only) All the Garages have a 2 hour separation between them and the 2nd level residential units and the 1st floor corridor. There are residential units on the 1st floor (opposite the garages) facing the court yard. I figured the Garage calculations shall conform to NFPA-13, based on NFPA-13R (2013ed.) Sec. 7.3.1. My question is if the building can be classified as a 13R (with garage areas calced at NFPA-13) or should it be classified as a NFPA-13 with dwelling units residential heads (calculations based on the greater of the area/density @ .10 or the head listing). If not, what is the determining factor or the threshold. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
I would say that if the garages are for resident use only and they are ancillary to the primary occupancy, then you could use 13R Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT 860-535-2080 www.fpdc.com On Apr 22, 2014, at 1:17 AM, George Medina Jr fireg...@aol.com wrote: Forum, Can anyone please add there 2 cents in and help clarify when to classify as a 13 system versus a 13R I have a project that consist of 3 stories with an occupancy of R2/S2 and Construction Type VA. The project is lay ed out like a horse shoe with 3 sides and a corridor running down the middle from 1 required stairwell to another on the opposite end, with a court yard in the middle. There are private garages around the perimeter of the building (which all have access from a common 1st floor corridor only) All the Garages have a 2 hour separation between them and the 2nd level residential units and the 1st floor corridor. There are residential units on the 1st floor (opposite the garages) facing the court yard. I figured the Garage calculations shall conform to NFPA-13, based on NFPA-13R (2013ed.) Sec. 7.3.1. My question is if the building can be classified as a 13R (with garage areas calced at NFPA-13) or should it be classified as a NFPA-13 with dwelling units residential heads (calculations based on the greater of the area/density @ .10 or the head listing). If not, what is the determining factor or the threshold. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
What does the code study sheet say! Did the architect use the sprinkler system to increase the allowable area per floor? If he did, you are doing NFPA 13 throughout. If he did not, 13R may be applicable. Travis Mack, SET MFP Design, LLC Sent from my iPhone On Apr 21, 2014, at 10:17 PM, George Medina Jr fireg...@aol.com wrote: Forum, Can anyone please add there 2 cents in and help clarify when to classify as a 13 system versus a 13R I have a project that consist of 3 stories with an occupancy of R2/S2 and Construction Type VA. The project is lay ed out like a horse shoe with 3 sides and a corridor running down the middle from 1 required stairwell to another on the opposite end, with a court yard in the middle. There are private garages around the perimeter of the building (which all have access from a common 1st floor corridor only) All the Garages have a 2 hour separation between them and the 2nd level residential units and the 1st floor corridor. There are residential units on the 1st floor (opposite the garages) facing the court yard. I figured the Garage calculations shall conform to NFPA-13, based on NFPA-13R (2013ed.) Sec. 7.3.1. My question is if the building can be classified as a 13R (with garage areas calced at NFPA-13) or should it be classified as a NFPA-13 with dwelling units residential heads (calculations based on the greater of the area/density @ .10 or the head listing). If not, what is the determining factor or the threshold. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
A word of caution regarding semantics: The building is either designed to 13 or 13R. There is no 13 for this area and 13R for that area. If the garages are considered part of the building and the building is eligible for 13R (as this one appears it may be) then the building is designed to 13R. The garage calculations would be done to 13R (which happens to reference 13 rules, except for the hose allowances). Only if the garages are determined to be separate buildings would be able to say 13R for the main building and 13 for the garages. This sounds petty on the surface, but when we use these terms loosely, the Architects and plumbing engineers pick up on it and start spreading false premises: We're gonna design these rooms to that 13R code and these areas to 13. You need residential sprinklers everywhere, except the laundry rooms, because those have to be designed to 13. The apartments above are to 13R but the first floor mercantile - including the open stair to the apartments- is designed to 13. No, No, and No. One building - one design standard. 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-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Medina Jr Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 12:18 AM To: sprinklerfo...@firesprinkler.org Subject: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Forum, Can anyone please add there 2 cents in and help clarify when to classify as a 13 system versus a 13R I have a project that consist of 3 stories with an occupancy of R2/S2 and Construction Type VA. The project is lay ed out like a horse shoe with 3 sides and a corridor running down the middle from 1 required stairwell to another on the opposite end, with a court yard in the middle. There are private garages around the perimeter of the building (which all have access from a common 1st floor corridor only) All the Garages have a 2 hour separation between them and the 2nd level residential units and the 1st floor corridor. There are residential units on the 1st floor (opposite the garages) facing the court yard. I figured the Garage calculations shall conform to NFPA-13, based on NFPA-13R (2013ed.) Sec. 7.3.1. My question is if the building can be classified as a 13R (with garage areas calced at NFPA-13) or should it be classified as a NFPA-13 with dwelling units residential heads (calculations based on the greater of the area/density @ .10 or the head listing). If not, what is the determining factor or the threshold. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
Go Mark! And even if the garages are used by non-tenants I believe the 13R designation could still apply. If you look at 13R and garages, and I'm imagining the 2007 edition so it may have changed, there are three criteria for garages in 13R. Depending on how they communicate, or don't, with each other and the building itself seems to define how they are defined for design purposes. As Mark says, just because 13R references you to 13 for a single point of design to follow in a special circumstance doesn't necessarily mean you default entirely to 13. 13 references 24 but we don't install all the piping to 24 (although I did once see a backflow installed about 20 feet off the floor, with glanded flanges, Megalugs and rodding). 13 also references 72 but because I have to do a thing (hook up alarm stuff) doesn't mean it completely trumps everything else. I know this is silly but it's not far off. Just because 13R looks a lot like 13 doesn't make it the same. A zebra looks like a striped horse On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. masorn...@kfi-eng.com wrote: A word of caution regarding semantics: The building is either designed to 13 or 13R. There is no 13 for this area and 13R for that area. If the garages are considered part of the building and the building is eligible for 13R (as this one appears it may be) then the building is designed to 13R. The garage calculations would be done to 13R (which happens to reference 13 rules, except for the hose allowances). Only if the garages are determined to be separate buildings would be able to say 13R for the main building and 13 for the garages. This sounds petty on the surface, but when we use these terms loosely, the Architects and plumbing engineers pick up on it and start spreading false premises: We're gonna design these rooms to that 13R code and these areas to 13. You need residential sprinklers everywhere, except the laundry rooms, because those have to be designed to 13. The apartments above are to 13R but the first floor mercantile - including the open stair to the apartments- is designed to 13. No, No, and No. One building - one design standard. 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-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Medina Jr Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 12:18 AM To: sprinklerfo...@firesprinkler.org Subject: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Forum, Can anyone please add there 2 cents in and help clarify when to classify as a 13 system versus a 13R I have a project that consist of 3 stories with an occupancy of R2/S2 and Construction Type VA. The project is lay ed out like a horse shoe with 3 sides and a corridor running down the middle from 1 required stairwell to another on the opposite end, with a court yard in the middle. There are private garages around the perimeter of the building (which all have access from a common 1st floor corridor only) All the Garages have a 2 hour separation between them and the 2nd level residential units and the 1st floor corridor. There are residential units on the 1st floor (opposite the garages) facing the court yard. I figured the Garage calculations shall conform to NFPA-13, based on NFPA-13R (2013ed.) Sec. 7.3.1. My question is if the building can be classified as a 13R (with garage areas calced at NFPA-13) or should it be classified as a NFPA-13 with dwelling units residential heads (calculations based on the greater of the area/density @ .10 or the head listing). If not, what is the determining factor or the threshold. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ 253.680.7346 253.576.9700 (cell) Member: ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC, WFSC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) A problem well stated is a problem half solved. -Charles F. Kettering, inventor and engineer (1876-1958) ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
I'm a little late to this thread, but I did want to address the initial question, i.e. when do you use this standard or that standard. Notwithstanding the annex language in 13R that's intended to clarify its application, the bottom line answer is that it's up to the building official. If you - as a bidding contractor or design consultant or whatever your stake in the issue - cannot clearly determine the applicable standard, a formal query should be directed to the building official with jurisdiction. Steve L. -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of rongreenman . Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 7:45 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Go Mark! And even if the garages are used by non-tenants I believe the 13R designation could still apply. If you look at 13R and garages, and I'm imagining the 2007 edition so it may have changed, there are three criteria for garages in 13R. Depending on how they communicate, or don't, with each other and the building itself seems to define how they are defined for design purposes. As Mark says, just because 13R references you to 13 for a single point of design to follow in a special circumstance doesn't necessarily mean you default entirely to 13. 13 references 24 but we don't install all the piping to 24 (although I did once see a backflow installed about 20 feet off the floor, with glanded flanges, Megalugs and rodding). 13 also references 72 but because I have to do a thing (hook up alarm stuff) doesn't mean it completely trumps everything else. I know this is silly but it's not far off. Just because 13R looks a lot like 13 doesn't make it the same. A zebra looks like a striped horse On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. masorn...@kfi-eng.com wrote: A word of caution regarding semantics: The building is either designed to 13 or 13R. There is no 13 for this area and 13R for that area. If the garages are considered part of the building and the building is eligible for 13R (as this one appears it may be) then the building is designed to 13R. The garage calculations would be done to 13R (which happens to reference 13 rules, except for the hose allowances). Only if the garages are determined to be separate buildings would be able to say 13R for the main building and 13 for the garages. This sounds petty on the surface, but when we use these terms loosely, the Architects and plumbing engineers pick up on it and start spreading false premises: We're gonna design these rooms to that 13R code and these areas to 13. You need residential sprinklers everywhere, except the laundry rooms, because those have to be designed to 13. The apartments above are to 13R but the first floor mercantile - including the open stair to the apartments- is designed to 13. No, No, and No. One building - one design standard. 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-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Medina Jr Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 12:18 AM To: sprinklerfo...@firesprinkler.org Subject: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Forum, Can anyone please add there 2 cents in and help clarify when to classify as a 13 system versus a 13R I have a project that consist of 3 stories with an occupancy of R2/S2 and Construction Type VA. The project is lay ed out like a horse shoe with 3 sides and a corridor running down the middle from 1 required stairwell to another on the opposite end, with a court yard in the middle. There are private garages around the perimeter of the building (which all have access from a common 1st floor corridor only) All the Garages have a 2 hour separation between them and the 2nd level residential units and the 1st floor corridor. There are residential units on the 1st floor (opposite the garages) facing the court yard. I figured the Garage calculations shall conform to NFPA-13, based on NFPA-13R (2013ed.) Sec. 7.3.1. My question is if the building can be classified as a 13R (with garage areas calced at NFPA-13) or should it be classified as a NFPA-13 with dwelling units residential heads (calculations based on the greater of the area/density @ .10 or the head listing). If not, what is the determining factor or the threshold. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl er.org -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave
RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
Let me add to what Steve just said: During the building plan check process a trade-off may occur in which an otherwise acceptable 13R system is required to be upgraded to a full 13 system. This fact may or may not be fully revealed upfront to bidding contractors, so it pays to ask. And any questions you have concerning the application of the code should be directed to the AHJ. Galen Taylor County of Los Angeles Fire Department Fire Prevention Engineering 323-890-4339 galen.tay...@fire.lacounty.gov -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 9:06 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I'm a little late to this thread, but I did want to address the initial question, i.e. when do you use this standard or that standard. Notwithstanding the annex language in 13R that's intended to clarify its application, the bottom line answer is that it's up to the building official. If you - as a bidding contractor or design consultant or whatever your stake in the issue - cannot clearly determine the applicable standard, a formal query should be directed to the building official with jurisdiction. Steve L. -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of rongreenman . Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 7:45 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Go Mark! And even if the garages are used by non-tenants I believe the 13R designation could still apply. If you look at 13R and garages, and I'm imagining the 2007 edition so it may have changed, there are three criteria for garages in 13R. Depending on how they communicate, or don't, with each other and the building itself seems to define how they are defined for design purposes. As Mark says, just because 13R references you to 13 for a single point of design to follow in a special circumstance doesn't necessarily mean you default entirely to 13. 13 references 24 but we don't install all the piping to 24 (although I did once see a backflow installed about 20 feet off the floor, with glanded flanges, Megalugs and rodding). 13 also references 72 but because I have to do a thing (hook up alarm stuff) doesn't mean it completely trumps everything else. I know this is silly but it's not far off. Just because 13R looks a lot like 13 doesn't make it the same. A zebra looks like a striped h orse On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. masorn...@kfi-eng.com wrote: A word of caution regarding semantics: The building is either designed to 13 or 13R. There is no 13 for this area and 13R for that area. If the garages are considered part of the building and the building is eligible for 13R (as this one appears it may be) then the building is designed to 13R. The garage calculations would be done to 13R (which happens to reference 13 rules, except for the hose allowances). Only if the garages are determined to be separate buildings would be able to say 13R for the main building and 13 for the garages. This sounds petty on the surface, but when we use these terms loosely, the Architects and plumbing engineers pick up on it and start spreading false premises: We're gonna design these rooms to that 13R code and these areas to 13. You need residential sprinklers everywhere, except the laundry rooms, because those have to be designed to 13. The apartments above are to 13R but the first floor mercantile - including the open stair to the apartments- is designed to 13. No, No, and No. One building - one design standard. 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-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Medina Jr Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 12:18 AM To: sprinklerfo...@firesprinkler.org Subject: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Forum, Can anyone please add there 2 cents in and help clarify when to classify as a 13 system versus a 13R I have a project that consist of 3 stories with an occupancy of R2/S2 and Construction Type VA. The project is lay ed out like a horse shoe with 3 sides and a corridor running down the middle from 1 required stairwell to another on the opposite end, with a court yard in the middle. There are private garages around the perimeter of the building (which all have access from a common 1st floor corridor only) All the Garages have a 2 hour separation between them and the 2nd level residential units and the 1st floor corridor. There are residential units on the 1st floor (opposite the garages
Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
I ask the Architect. The problem with asking the AHJ is that they can change their mind later. In Ohio, most of their approval stamps have an exception clause. Ask the Architect, let the Architect ask the AHJ. Then if the AHJ changes their mind, the Architect is caught in the middle of the dispute. On 4/22/2014 12:28 PM, Taylor, Galen wrote: Let me add to what Steve just said: During the building plan check process a trade-off may occur in which an otherwise acceptable 13R system is required to be upgraded to a full 13 system. This fact may or may not be fully revealed upfront to bidding contractors, so it pays to ask. And any questions you have concerning the application of the code should be directed to the AHJ. Galen Taylor County of Los Angeles Fire Department Fire Prevention Engineering 323-890-4339 galen.tay...@fire.lacounty.gov -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 9:06 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I'm a little late to this thread, but I did want to address the initial question, i.e. when do you use this standard or that standard. Notwithstanding the annex language in 13R that's intended to clarify its application, the bottom line answer is that it's up to the building official. If you - as a bidding contractor or design consultant or whatever your stake in the issue - cannot clearly determine the applicable standard, a formal query should be directed to the building official with jurisdiction. Steve L. -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of rongreenman . Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 7:45 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Go Mark! And even if the garages are used by non-tenants I believe the 13R designation could still apply. If you look at 13R and garages, and I'm imagining the 2007 edition so it may have changed, there are three criteria for garages in 13R. Depending on how they communicate, or don't, with each other and the building itself seems to define how they are defined for design purposes. As Mark says, just because 13R references you to 13 for a single point of design to follow in a special circumstance doesn't necessarily mean you default entirely to 13. 13 references 24 but we don't install all the piping to 24 (although I did once see a backflow installed about 20 feet off the floor, with glanded flanges, Megalugs and rodding). 13 also references 72 but because I have to do a thing (hook up alarm stuff) doesn't mean it completely trumps everything else. I know this is silly but it's not far off. Just because 13R looks a lot like 13 doesn't make it the same. A zebra looks like a striped h orse On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. masorn...@kfi-eng.com wrote: A word of caution regarding semantics: The building is either designed to 13 or 13R. There is no 13 for this area and 13R for that area. If the garages are considered part of the building and the building is eligible for 13R (as this one appears it may be) then the building is designed to 13R. The garage calculations would be done to 13R (which happens to reference 13 rules, except for the hose allowances). Only if the garages are determined to be separate buildings would be able to say 13R for the main building and 13 for the garages. This sounds petty on the surface, but when we use these terms loosely, the Architects and plumbing engineers pick up on it and start spreading false premises: We're gonna design these rooms to that 13R code and these areas to 13. You need residential sprinklers everywhere, except the laundry rooms, because those have to be designed to 13. The apartments above are to 13R but the first floor mercantile - including the open stair to the apartments- is designed to 13. No, No, and No. One building - one design standard. 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-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Medina Jr Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 12:18 AM To: sprinklerfo...@firesprinkler.org Subject: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Forum, Can anyone please add there 2 cents in and help clarify when to classify as a 13 system versus a 13R I have a project that consist of 3 stories with an occupancy of R2/S2 and Construction Type VA. The project is lay ed out like a horse shoe with 3 sides and a corridor running down the middle from 1 required stairwell to another on the opposite end, with a court yard in the middle. There are private
RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
Not sure how the building official gets off changing their mind after the fact. If the fire official can't decide which standard applies they should get the same opinion from the Building Official that the architect or sprinkie would get. Ohio uses the same basic code as California and the basis of design for sprinklers is a prescriptive based on occupancy class. In mixed occupancies, issues of separation can complicate interpreting the code, and that's the subjective part. So if the BO is bending one way and other stakeholders bending the other, it comes down to who actually has jurisdiction, and that's usually the BO, not the FO or the Architect. SML -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Forest Wilson Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 9:39 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I ask the Architect. The problem with asking the AHJ is that they can change their mind later. In Ohio, most of their approval stamps have an exception clause. Ask the Architect, let the Architect ask the AHJ. Then if the AHJ changes their mind, the Architect is caught in the middle of the dispute. On 4/22/2014 12:28 PM, Taylor, Galen wrote: Let me add to what Steve just said: During the building plan check process a trade-off may occur in which an otherwise acceptable 13R system is required to be upgraded to a full 13 system. This fact may or may not be fully revealed upfront to bidding contractors, so it pays to ask. And any questions you have concerning the application of the code should be directed to the AHJ. Galen Taylor County of Los Angeles Fire Department Fire Prevention Engineering 323-890-4339 galen.tay...@fire.lacounty.gov -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 9:06 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I'm a little late to this thread, but I did want to address the initial question, i.e. when do you use this standard or that standard. Notwithstanding the annex language in 13R that's intended to clarify its application, the bottom line answer is that it's up to the building official. If you - as a bidding contractor or design consultant or whatever your stake in the issue - cannot clearly determine the applicable standard, a formal query should be directed to the building official with jurisdiction. Steve L. -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of rongreenman . Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 7:45 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Go Mark! And even if the garages are used by non-tenants I believe the 13R designation could still apply. If you look at 13R and garages, and I'm imagining the 2007 edition so it may have changed, there are three criteria for garages in 13R. Depending on how they communicate, or don't, with each other and the building itself seems to define how they are defined for design purposes. As Mark says, just because 13R references you to 13 for a single point of design to follow in a special circumstance doesn't necessarily mean you default entirely to 13. 13 references 24 but we don't install all the piping to 24 (although I did once see a backflow installed about 20 feet off the floor, with glanded flanges, Megalugs and rodding). 13 also references 72 but because I have to do a thing (hook up alarm stuff) doesn't mean it completely trumps everything else. I know this is silly but it's not far off. Just because 13R looks a lot like 13 doesn't make it the same. A zebra looks like a striped h orse On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. masorn...@kfi-eng.com wrote: A word of caution regarding semantics: The building is either designed to 13 or 13R. There is no 13 for this area and 13R for that area. If the garages are considered part of the building and the building is eligible for 13R (as this one appears it may be) then the building is designed to 13R. The garage calculations would be done to 13R (which happens to reference 13 rules, except for the hose allowances). Only if the garages are determined to be separate buildings would be able to say 13R for the main building and 13 for the garages. This sounds petty on the surface, but when we use these terms loosely, the Architects and plumbing engineers pick up on it and start spreading false premises: We're gonna design these rooms to that 13R code and these areas to 13. You need residential sprinklers everywhere, except the laundry rooms, because those have to be designed to 13. The apartments above are to 13R but the first floor mercantile
RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
I agree Arch is better to ask. As a sprinkler contractor you probably don't have all the information to ask correctly. Many AHJ's don't have all the information either. I've seen many a project go forward on this issue long before an AHJ sees it. And if you call the fire marshal because that's who the sprinkler permit is through probably the building official approved the type of sprinkler. I was an AHJ for a long time and wouldn't answer. I'd ask you what the Arch said and the building official agreed to. If I discovered a problem later I took it up with the building official. When I was an contractor I sure drove a lot of Arch's nuts asking. And yes they rarely knew the answer. We'd talk it out and caveat the bid. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com *Registered in: MN Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Forest Wilson Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 11:39 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I ask the Architect. The problem with asking the AHJ is that they can change their mind later. In Ohio, most of their approval stamps have an exception clause. Ask the Architect, let the Architect ask the AHJ. Then if the AHJ changes their mind, the Architect is caught in the middle of the dispute. On 4/22/2014 12:28 PM, Taylor, Galen wrote: Let me add to what Steve just said: During the building plan check process a trade-off may occur in which an otherwise acceptable 13R system is required to be upgraded to a full 13 system. This fact may or may not be fully revealed upfront to bidding contractors, so it pays to ask. And any questions you have concerning the application of the code should be directed to the AHJ. Galen Taylor County of Los Angeles Fire Department Fire Prevention Engineering 323-890-4339 galen.tay...@fire.lacounty.gov -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 9:06 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I'm a little late to this thread, but I did want to address the initial question, i.e. when do you use this standard or that standard. Notwithstanding the annex language in 13R that's intended to clarify its application, the bottom line answer is that it's up to the building official. If you - as a bidding contractor or design consultant or whatever your stake in the issue - cannot clearly determine the applicable standard, a formal query should be directed to the building official with jurisdiction. Steve L. -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of rongreenman . Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 7:45 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Go Mark! And even if the garages are used by non-tenants I believe the 13R designation could still apply. If you look at 13R and garages, and I'm imagining the 2007 edition so it may have changed, there are three criteria for garages in 13R. Depending on how they communicate, or don't, with each other and the building itself seems to define how they are defined for design purposes. As Mark says, just because 13R references you to 13 for a single point of design to follow in a special circumstance doesn't necessarily mean you default entirely to 13. 13 references 24 but we don't install all the piping to 24 (although I did once see a backflow installed about 20 feet off the floor, with glanded flanges, Megalugs and rodding). 13 also references 72 but because I have to do a thing (hook up alarm stuff) doesn't mean it completely trumps everything else. I know this is silly but it's not far off. Just because 13R looks a lot like 13 doesn't make it the same. A zebra looks like a striped h orse On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. masorn...@kfi-eng.com wrote: A word of caution regarding semantics: The building is either designed to 13 or 13R. There is no 13 for this area and 13R for that area. If the garages are considered part of the building and the building is eligible for 13R (as this one appears it may be) then the building is designed to 13R. The garage calculations would be done to 13R (which happens to reference 13 rules, except for the hose allowances). Only if the garages are determined to be separate buildings would be able to say 13R for the main building and 13 for the garages. This sounds petty on the surface, but when we use
RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
Chris: You know we're buds, right? Good, 'cause that's just regoddamnediculous. Many AHJ's don't have all the information ...??? TFB - they owe their customers the professional service to acquire and apply that information. You wanna be sued into oblivion after a fire loss? Do the code analysis apart from the enforcing agency (especially if someone can show evidence later of correspondence or opinion by the AHJ that maybe it should have been a different basis of design) and then prosecute your work based on that independent opinion. I agree that the architect is in responsible charge and typically they do a code analysis. But they very often simply put Sprinklers - Yes or words to that effect into the note block. It says in the code which design to use and if the Architect can't or won't answer, then the BO should have the final say. Legally, in most cities and states, they do have the final say. SML -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Cahill, Christopher Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 10:41 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I agree Arch is better to ask. As a sprinkler contractor you probably don't have all the information to ask correctly. Many AHJ's don't have all the information either. I've seen many a project go forward on this issue long before an AHJ sees it. And if you call the fire marshal because that's who the sprinkler permit is through probably the building official approved the type of sprinkler. I was an AHJ for a long time and wouldn't answer. I'd ask you what the Arch said and the building official agreed to. If I discovered a problem later I took it up with the building official. When I was an contractor I sure drove a lot of Arch's nuts asking. And yes they rarely knew the answer. We'd talk it out and caveat the bid. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com *Registered in: MN Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Forest Wilson Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 11:39 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I ask the Architect. The problem with asking the AHJ is that they can change their mind later. In Ohio, most of their approval stamps have an exception clause. Ask the Architect, let the Architect ask the AHJ. Then if the AHJ changes their mind, the Architect is caught in the middle of the dispute. On 4/22/2014 12:28 PM, Taylor, Galen wrote: Let me add to what Steve just said: During the building plan check process a trade-off may occur in which an otherwise acceptable 13R system is required to be upgraded to a full 13 system. This fact may or may not be fully revealed upfront to bidding contractors, so it pays to ask. And any questions you have concerning the application of the code should be directed to the AHJ. Galen Taylor County of Los Angeles Fire Department Fire Prevention Engineering 323-890-4339 galen.tay...@fire.lacounty.gov -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 9:06 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I'm a little late to this thread, but I did want to address the initial question, i.e. when do you use this standard or that standard. Notwithstanding the annex language in 13R that's intended to clarify its application, the bottom line answer is that it's up to the building official. If you - as a bidding contractor or design consultant or whatever your stake in the issue - cannot clearly determine the applicable standard, a formal query should be directed to the building official with jurisdiction. Steve L. -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of rongreenman . Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 7:45 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Go Mark! And even if the garages are used by non-tenants I believe the 13R designation could still apply. If you look at 13R and garages, and I'm imagining the 2007 edition so it may have changed, there are three criteria for garages in 13R. Depending on how they communicate, or don't, with each other and the building itself seems to define how they are defined for design purposes. As Mark says, just because 13R references you to 13 for a single point of design to follow
Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
I have to agree with Steve. There has been many a multi-family project cross my plan review table with the system designed to NFPA 13R because the architect called it out on the drawings, while also taking several allowances for a fully sprinklered building. Thanks to Steve, and a couple of others, I'm now well aware of the limitations in the IBC (CBC out here), which allow that to be done only if the design of the system conformed to NFPA 13. Some pretty high profile architectural firms have made that error, stamped and sealed their drawings. A significant number of AHJ's don't seem to know that's the case, at least based on the training classes I've attended and taught. More's the pity. Ken On 4/22/2014 10:46 AM, Steve Leyton wrote: Chris: You know we're buds, right? Good, 'cause that's just regoddamnediculous.Many AHJ's don't have all the information ...??? TFB - they owe their customers the professional service to acquire and apply that information. You wanna be sued into oblivion after a fire loss? Do the code analysis apart from the enforcing agency (especially if someone can show evidence later of correspondence or opinion by the AHJ that maybe it should have been a different basis of design) and then prosecute your work based on that independent opinion. I agree that the architect is in responsible charge and typically they do a code analysis. But they very often simply put Sprinklers - Yes or words to that effect into the note block. It says in the code which design to use and if the Architect can't or won't answer, then the BO should have the final say. Legally, in most cities and states, they do have the final say. SML -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Cahill, Christopher Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 10:41 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I agree Arch is better to ask. As a sprinkler contractor you probably don't have all the information to ask correctly. Many AHJ's don't have all the information either. I've seen many a project go forward on this issue long before an AHJ sees it. And if you call the fire marshal because that's who the sprinkler permit is through probably the building official approved the type of sprinkler. I was an AHJ for a long time and wouldn't answer. I'd ask you what the Arch said and the building official agreed to. If I discovered a problem later I took it up with the building official. When I was an contractor I sure drove a lot of Arch's nuts asking. And yes they rarely knew the answer. We'd talk it out and caveat the bid. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com *Registered in: MN Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Forest Wilson Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 11:39 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I ask the Architect. The problem with asking the AHJ is that they can change their mind later. In Ohio, most of their approval stamps have an exception clause. Ask the Architect, let the Architect ask the AHJ. Then if the AHJ changes their mind, the Architect is caught in the middle of the dispute. On 4/22/2014 12:28 PM, Taylor, Galen wrote: Let me add to what Steve just said: During the building plan check process a trade-off may occur in which an otherwise acceptable 13R system is required to be upgraded to a full 13 system. This fact may or may not be fully revealed upfront to bidding contractors, so it pays to ask. And any questions you have concerning the application of the code should be directed to the AHJ. Galen Taylor County of Los Angeles Fire Department Fire Prevention Engineering 323-890-4339 galen.tay...@fire.lacounty.gov -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 9:06 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I'm a little late to this thread, but I did want to address the initial question, i.e. when do you use this standard or that standard. Notwithstanding the annex language in 13R that's intended to clarify its application, the bottom line answer is that it's up to the building official. If you - as a bidding contractor or design consultant or whatever your stake in the issue - cannot clearly determine the applicable standard, a formal query should be directed to the building official with jurisdiction. Steve L. -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun
Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
Agree as well. I am no IBC expert, but I do know a couple instances where the architect can take an allowance and it drives the system to 903.3.1.1 instead of 903.3.1.2 of the IBC. I always check these on all projects where 13R may be applicable. If I find what I feel is an error, I will call the architect and point out my concerns. I can't tell you how many times the architectural firms say they were unaware of the difference in those two sections. My first check is to always go with the code study analysis and then if it doesn't make sense, I throw it back to the architect and make them do the final determination. Travis Mack, SET MFP Design, LLC 2508 E Lodgepole Drive Gilbert, AZ 85298 480-505-9271 fax: 866-430-6107 email:tm...@mfpdesign.com On 4/22/2014 10:59 AM, Parsley Consulting wrote: I have to agree with Steve. There has been many a multi-family project cross my plan review table with the system designed to NFPA 13R because the architect called it out on the drawings, while also taking several allowances for a fully sprinklered building. Thanks to Steve, and a couple of others, I'm now well aware of the limitations in the IBC (CBC out here), which allow that to be done only if the design of the system conformed to NFPA 13. Some pretty high profile architectural firms have made that error, stamped and sealed their drawings. A significant number of AHJ's don't seem to know that's the case, at least based on the training classes I've attended and taught. More's the pity. Ken On 4/22/2014 10:46 AM, Steve Leyton wrote: Chris: You know we're buds, right? Good, 'cause that's just regoddamnediculous.Many AHJ's don't have all the information ...??? TFB - they owe their customers the professional service to acquire and apply that information. You wanna be sued into oblivion after a fire loss? Do the code analysis apart from the enforcing agency (especially if someone can show evidence later of correspondence or opinion by the AHJ that maybe it should have been a different basis of design) and then prosecute your work based on that independent opinion. I agree that the architect is in responsible charge and typically they do a code analysis. But they very often simply put Sprinklers - Yes or words to that effect into the note block. It says in the code which design to use and if the Architect can't or won't answer, then the BO should have the final say. Legally, in most cities and states, they do have the final say. SML -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Cahill, Christopher Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 10:41 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I agree Arch is better to ask. As a sprinkler contractor you probably don't have all the information to ask correctly. Many AHJ's don't have all the information either. I've seen many a project go forward on this issue long before an AHJ sees it. And if you call the fire marshal because that's who the sprinkler permit is through probably the building official approved the type of sprinkler. I was an AHJ for a long time and wouldn't answer. I'd ask you what the Arch said and the building official agreed to. If I discovered a problem later I took it up with the building official. When I was an contractor I sure drove a lot of Arch's nuts asking. And yes they rarely knew the answer. We'd talk it out and caveat the bid. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com *Registered in: MN Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Forest Wilson Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 11:39 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I ask the Architect. The problem with asking the AHJ is that they can change their mind later. In Ohio, most of their approval stamps have an exception clause. Ask the Architect, let the Architect ask the AHJ. Then if the AHJ changes their mind, the Architect is caught in the middle of the dispute. On 4/22/2014 12:28 PM, Taylor, Galen wrote: Let me add to what Steve just said: During the building plan check process a trade-off may occur in which an otherwise acceptable 13R system is required to be upgraded to a full 13 system. This fact may or may not be fully revealed upfront to bidding contractors, so it pays to ask. And any questions you have concerning the application of the code should be directed to the AHJ. Galen Taylor County of Los Angeles Fire Department Fire Prevention Engineering 323-890-4339 galen.tay...@fire.lacounty.gov -Original Message- From
RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
Yes, we're buds. Drink waiting next time I get to SD. Medium interfering with communication. I used to get calls it's x story apartment, 13R or 13? This is the first I've ever hear of such project. Now mind you I'm talking to the sprinkler contractor as I was the permitting authority for sprinklers NOT the building department. I ask what type of construction. And the conversation usually ended right there as most didn't have any idea what type meant. In theory could be type III, IV or V and be 'wood'. I was in an old city so on remodels III and IV were plausible. So yeah AHJ did NOT have all the information to make a determination. I'd ask what the code sheet said and they'd say there was none in the sprinkler package. Imagine my surprise it wasn't in the sprinkler package ( a little sarcasm there if it wasn't painfully obvious), AHJ did NOT have all the information to make a determination. What did the BO or Arch say? This is preliminary hasn't gone for permit and Arch didn't know. AHJ did NOT have all the information to make a determination. Conversation might go other ways, fire lanes, draft stops, attics, fire walls, blah, blah, blah from there with the same result, AHJ did NOT have all the information to make a determination. Believe me I tried to help but AHJ did NOT have all the information to make a determination. If it ain't in the BO's office for review the BO probably did NOT have all the information to make a determination. A phone call from a sprinkler contractor who doesn't know the building code results in bad decision making. I AGREE, with a PROPER Arch or FPE code analysis AND a submittal to AHJ (BO) NOW they have all the information to make a concurrence of the determination. A whole lotta stuff actually happens before this point where the AHJ did NOT have all the information to make a determination. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com *Registered in: MN Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 12:47 PM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Chris: You know we're buds, right? Good, 'cause that's just regoddamnediculous. Many AHJ's don't have all the information ...??? TFB - they owe their customers the professional service to acquire and apply that information. You wanna be sued into oblivion after a fire loss? Do the code analysis apart from the enforcing agency (especially if someone can show evidence later of correspondence or opinion by the AHJ that maybe it should have been a different basis of design) and then prosecute your work based on that independent opinion. I agree that the architect is in responsible charge and typically they do a code analysis. But they very often simply put Sprinklers - Yes or words to that effect into the note block. It says in the code which design to use and if the Architect can't or won't answer, then the BO should have the final say. Legally, in most cities and states, they do have the final say. SML -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Cahill, Christopher Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 10:41 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I agree Arch is better to ask. As a sprinkler contractor you probably don't have all the information to ask correctly. Many AHJ's don't have all the information either. I've seen many a project go forward on this issue long before an AHJ sees it. And if you call the fire marshal because that's who the sprinkler permit is through probably the building official approved the type of sprinkler. I was an AHJ for a long time and wouldn't answer. I'd ask you what the Arch said and the building official agreed to. If I discovered a problem later I took it up with the building official. When I was an contractor I sure drove a lot of Arch's nuts asking. And yes they rarely knew the answer. We'd talk it out and caveat the bid. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com *Registered in: MN Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Forest Wilson Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 11:39 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I ask the Architect. The problem with asking the AHJ
RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
One more thought, the BO and I had a great relationship. Often they would accept the yes on the plan sheet and defer to me for the right type of sprinklers. Chris -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Cahill, Christopher Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 1:19 PM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Yes, we're buds. Drink waiting next time I get to SD. Medium interfering with communication. I used to get calls it's x story apartment, 13R or 13? This is the first I've ever hear of such project. Now mind you I'm talking to the sprinkler contractor as I was the permitting authority for sprinklers NOT the building department. I ask what type of construction. And the conversation usually ended right there as most didn't have any idea what type meant. In theory could be type III, IV or V and be 'wood'. I was in an old city so on remodels III and IV were plausible. So yeah AHJ did NOT have all the information to make a determination. I'd ask what the code sheet said and they'd say there was none in the sprinkler package. Imagine my surprise it wasn't in the sprinkler package ( a little sarcasm there if it wasn't painfully obvious), AHJ did NOT have all the information to make a determination. What did the BO or Arch say? This is preliminary hasn't gone for permit and Arch didn't know. AHJ did NOT have all the information to make a determination. Convers ation might go other ways, fire lanes, draft stops, attics, fire walls, blah, blah, blah from there with the same result, AHJ did NOT have all the information to make a determination. Believe me I tried to help but AHJ did NOT have all the information to make a determination. If it ain't in the BO's office for review the BO probably did NOT have all the information to make a determination. A phone call from a sprinkler contractor who doesn't know the building code results in bad decision making. I AGREE, with a PROPER Arch or FPE code analysis AND a submittal to AHJ (BO) NOW they have all the information to make a concurrence of the determination. A whole lotta stuff actually happens before this point where the AHJ did NOT have all the information to make a determination. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com *Registered in: MN Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 12:47 PM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Chris: You know we're buds, right? Good, 'cause that's just regoddamnediculous. Many AHJ's don't have all the information ...??? TFB - they owe their customers the professional service to acquire and apply that information. You wanna be sued into oblivion after a fire loss? Do the code analysis apart from the enforcing agency (especially if someone can show evidence later of correspondence or opinion by the AHJ that maybe it should have been a different basis of design) and then prosecute your work based on that independent opinion. I agree that the architect is in responsible charge and typically they do a code analysis. But they very often simply put Sprinklers - Yes or words to that effect into the note block. It says in the code which design to use and if the Architect can't or won't answer, then the BO should have the final say. Legally, in most cities and states, they do have the final say. SML -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Cahill, Christopher Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 10:41 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I agree Arch is better to ask. As a sprinkler contractor you probably don't have all the information to ask correctly. Many AHJ's don't have all the information either. I've seen many a project go forward on this issue long before an AHJ sees it. And if you call the fire marshal because that's who the sprinkler permit is through probably the building official approved the type of sprinkler. I was an AHJ for a long time and wouldn't answer. I'd ask you what the Arch said and the building official agreed to. If I discovered a problem later I took it up with the building official. When I was an contractor I sure drove a lot of Arch's nuts asking. And yes they rarely knew the answer. We'd talk it out and caveat the bid. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com
RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
I too have seen this more than once. About to start on a motel where the architect took an allowance for increased building size (thus requiring a 13 system), but the project engineer specified a 13R system. When they get that worked out, I'll start design. Ed Kramer Lawrence, KS -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Travis Mack Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 1:04 PM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Agree as well. I am no IBC expert, but I do know a couple instances where the architect can take an allowance and it drives the system to 903.3.1.1 instead of 903.3.1.2 of the IBC. I always check these on all projects where 13R may be applicable. If I find what I feel is an error, I will call the architect and point out my concerns. I can't tell you how many times the architectural firms say they were unaware of the difference in those two sections. My first check is to always go with the code study analysis and then if it doesn't make sense, I throw it back to the architect and make them do the final determination. Travis Mack, SET MFP Design, LLC 2508 E Lodgepole Drive Gilbert, AZ 85298 480-505-9271 fax: 866-430-6107 email:tm...@mfpdesign.com On 4/22/2014 10:59 AM, Parsley Consulting wrote: I have to agree with Steve. There has been many a multi-family project cross my plan review table with the system designed to NFPA 13R because the architect called it out on the drawings, while also taking several allowances for a fully sprinklered building. Thanks to Steve, and a couple of others, I'm now well aware of the limitations in the IBC (CBC out here), which allow that to be done only if the design of the system conformed to NFPA 13. Some pretty high profile architectural firms have made that error, stamped and sealed their drawings. A significant number of AHJ's don't seem to know that's the case, at least based on the training classes I've attended and taught. More's the pity. Ken On 4/22/2014 10:46 AM, Steve Leyton wrote: Chris: You know we're buds, right? Good, 'cause that's just regoddamnediculous.Many AHJ's don't have all the information ...??? TFB - they owe their customers the professional service to acquire and apply that information. You wanna be sued into oblivion after a fire loss? Do the code analysis apart from the enforcing agency (especially if someone can show evidence later of correspondence or opinion by the AHJ that maybe it should have been a different basis of design) and then prosecute your work based on that independent opinion. I agree that the architect is in responsible charge and typically they do a code analysis. But they very often simply put Sprinklers - Yes or words to that effect into the note block. It says in the code which design to use and if the Architect can't or won't answer, then the BO should have the final say. Legally, in most cities and states, they do have the final say. SML -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Cahill, Christopher Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 10:41 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I agree Arch is better to ask. As a sprinkler contractor you probably don't have all the information to ask correctly. Many AHJ's don't have all the information either. I've seen many a project go forward on this issue long before an AHJ sees it. And if you call the fire marshal because that's who the sprinkler permit is through probably the building official approved the type of sprinkler. I was an AHJ for a long time and wouldn't answer. I'd ask you what the Arch said and the building official agreed to. If I discovered a problem later I took it up with the building official. When I was an contractor I sure drove a lot of Arch's nuts asking. And yes they rarely knew the answer. We'd talk it out and caveat the bid. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com *Registered in: MN Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Forest Wilson Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 11:39 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I ask the Architect. The problem with asking the AHJ is that they can change their mind later. In Ohio, most of their approval stamps have an exception clause. Ask the Architect, let the Architect ask the AHJ. Then if the AHJ changes their mind, the Architect is caught
RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
That's what I was alluding to and that Ken reiterated. You can take credit with a 13R for certain things that require the building to be furnished throughout with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system but increase in height and area are not among those certain things and that mistake is made ALL the time. The committee has been wrestling with how to deal with mixed occupancies for three cycles. Once upon a time it was simple: if the building is classified as multiple occupancies, then it was a 13 (or should have been). Now we have to determine if residential is the predominant use or not. If it is, such as a hotel, then the other uses such as A, B and S2 occupancies are considered accessory and you design per 13R but protect areas outside the dwelling per 13. AS PRESCRIBED IN 13R. But if you read A.1.1 in the 2013 edition of 13R, you will see a provision that states, Where buildings of mixed use can be totally separated so that the residential portion is considered a separate building under the local code, NFPA 13R can be used in the residential portion while NFPA 13 is used in the rest of the building. This part requires that all the stakeholders put on their thinking caps and determine 1) Do the occupancy separations qualify as building separations and, 2) Is it cost-effective to offer up separate bases of design in such a circumstance. I would postulate that in 99% of cases, it's just a helluva lot easier to treat mixed uses as 13 and primarily residential uses as 13R. 13R offers a much wider range of flexibility than many users of the standard are aware of, and includes provisions for more conservative design in the non-dwelling areas. There have been some roof burn-offs in Type 5 buildings that prompted proposals to require sprinklers in combustible concealed spaces the last two cycles, but those proposals were rejected. The life-safety record of 13R systems is still exemplary, even in buildings with a certain amount of non-residential uses ... The foregoing is my opinion only and does not necessarily represent the opinion or intent of the NFPA 13D/13R Technical Committee on Residential Sprinkler Systems. SML -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 11:26 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? I too have seen this more than once. About to start on a motel where the architect took an allowance for increased building size (thus requiring a 13 system), but the project engineer specified a 13R system. When they get that worked out, I'll start design. Ed Kramer Lawrence, KS -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Travis Mack Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 1:04 PM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? Agree as well. I am no IBC expert, but I do know a couple instances where the architect can take an allowance and it drives the system to 903.3.1.1 instead of 903.3.1.2 of the IBC. I always check these on all projects where 13R may be applicable. If I find what I feel is an error, I will call the architect and point out my concerns. I can't tell you how many times the architectural firms say they were unaware of the difference in those two sections. My first check is to always go with the code study analysis and then if it doesn't make sense, I throw it back to the architect and make them do the final determination. Travis Mack, SET MFP Design, LLC 2508 E Lodgepole Drive Gilbert, AZ 85298 480-505-9271 fax: 866-430-6107 email:tm...@mfpdesign.com On 4/22/2014 10:59 AM, Parsley Consulting wrote: I have to agree with Steve. There has been many a multi-family project cross my plan review table with the system designed to NFPA 13R because the architect called it out on the drawings, while also taking several allowances for a fully sprinklered building. Thanks to Steve, and a couple of others, I'm now well aware of the limitations in the IBC (CBC out here), which allow that to be done only if the design of the system conformed to NFPA 13. Some pretty high profile architectural firms have made that error, stamped and sealed their drawings. A significant number of AHJ's don't seem to know that's the case, at least based on the training classes I've attended and taught. More's the pity. Ken On 4/22/2014 10:46 AM, Steve Leyton wrote: Chris: You know we're buds, right? Good, 'cause that's just regoddamnediculous.Many AHJ's don't have all the information ...??? TFB - they owe their customers the professional service to acquire and apply that information. You wanna be sued into oblivion after a fire loss? Do the code analysis apart from the enforcing agency (especially if someone can show evidence later
RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
A heads up in regards to the 2016 edition of NFPA 13R. The committee has made a pretty drastic change that will significantly assist in determining if and when NFPA 13R applies. This was done in the First Draft phase and is currently open for Public Comment. Here is the language from A.1.1 as how it appears in the First Draft Report. See the end sentences in paragraph #1. NFPA 13R is appropriate for use as an alternative to NFPA 13 only in those residential occupancies, as defined in this standard, up to and including four aboveground stories in height, and limited to buildings that are 60 ft (18 m) or less in height above grade plane, which is consistent with limits established by model building codes for buildings of Type V construction. The height of a building above grade plane is determined by model building codes, which base the height on the average height of the highest roof surface above grade plane. For further information on the building height story limits, see model building codes. Buildings that contain multiple occupancies (either separated or non-separated), accessory occupancies or incidental uses are often subject to special rules that may restrict the use of NFPA 13R. Refer to the adopted building code to determine whether such restrictions are applicable. The criteria in this standard are based on full-scale fire tests of rooms containing typical furnishings found in residential living rooms, kitchens, and bedrooms. The furnishings were arranged as typically found in dwelling units in a manner similar to that shown in Figure A.1.1(a), Figure A.1.1(b), and Figure A.1.1(c). Sixty full-scale fire tests were conducted in a two-story dwelling in Los Angeles, California, and 16 tests were conducted in a 14 ft (4.3 m) wide mobile home in Charlotte, North Carolina. Sprinkler systems designed and installed according to this standard are expected to prevent flashover within the compartment of origin where sprinklers are installed in the compartment. A sprinkler system designed and installed according to this standard cannot, however, be expected to completely control a fire involving fuel loads that are significantly higher than average for dwelling units [10 lb/ft2 (49 kg/m2)], configurations of fuels other than those with typical resi dential occupancies, or conditions where the interior finish has an unusually high flame spread index (greater than 225). To be effective, sprinkler systems installed in accordance with this standard need to open the sprinklers closest to the fire before the fire exceeds the ability of the sprinkler discharge to extinguish or control the fire. Conditions that allow the fire to grow beyond that point before sprinkler activation or that interfere with the quality of water distribution can produce conditions beyond the capabilities of the sprinkler system described in this standard. Unusually high ceilings or ceiling configurations that tend to divert the rising hot gases from sprinkler locations or change the sprinkler discharge pattern from its standard pattern can produce fire conditions that cannot be extinguished or controlled by the systems described in this standard. NFPA 13R references NFPA 13 in many aspects (hanging and bracing, design densities and spacing outside of dwelling unit, painting and finish of sprinklers, welding, etc.). If this standard does not specifically address a situation, NFPA 13 is a good resource that can be utilized by the installer and the authority having jurisdiction for a solution. It is not the intent of this standard to require compliance with NFPA 13 when NFPA 13R is silent on a subject. Only AHJ approval should be required. There is a committee input that adds language into A.1.1 discussing separated and non-separated occupancies, podiums, incidental occupancies and where to find that info in the (2) Model Building codes. That task group spent several days developing the language. However, the committee felt that the installation standard should not say when, just how. I am in disagreement but was in the minority. End result: More NFPA 13 systems throughout entire buildings because fire AHJ's will not be versed in how to navigate the building codes and will simply insist on the better life safety. It should be recognized that the above is my opinion only, and 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, nor any of their technical committees. 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
RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
Let me play devil's advocate for a second. Why does NFPA 13x committees deal with this? Most (not all) of us in the US work with I codes and it's rather clear to me what to use. I don't work in NFPA 5000 but ASSUME it's similar. IBC tells me which variant to use, NFPA 13x only tells me how to do it. (Avoiding the vernacular code/standard out of respect for Greenman.) So the NFPA Committees can change or say anything they want and it's pointless. Hell, they could say 13D for residential high-rises and NFPA 13D Committee would have little they could do about it. Not that dissimilar to NFPA 409 and IBC 412. In 409 ch. 5 they have all sorts of requirements for a building that are not required if following the basics of IBC. For example, rated walls are not required in many hangars if you meet the height and area limits for mixed use. Don't need to protect the columns and don't need draft curtains, etc. True, a few places might legally adopt 409 in its entirety or you get there from insurance but that's not routine. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer Burns McDonnell Phone: 952.656.3652 Fax: 952.229.2923 ccah...@burnsmcd.com www.burnsmcd.com *Registered in: MN Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Pete Schwab Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 3:06 PM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13? A heads up in regards to the 2016 edition of NFPA 13R. The committee has made a pretty drastic change that will significantly assist in determining if and when NFPA 13R applies. This was done in the First Draft phase and is currently open for Public Comment. Here is the language from A.1.1 as how it appears in the First Draft Report. See the end sentences in paragraph #1. NFPA 13R is appropriate for use as an alternative to NFPA 13 only in those residential occupancies, as defined in this standard, up to and including four aboveground stories in height, and limited to buildings that are 60 ft (18 m) or less in height above grade plane, which is consistent with limits established by model building codes for buildings of Type V construction. The height of a building above grade plane is determined by model building codes, which base the height on the average height of the highest roof surface above grade plane. For further information on the building height story limits, see model building codes. Buildings that contain multiple occupancies (either separated or non-separated), accessory occupancies or incidental uses are often subject to special rules that may restrict the use of NFPA 13R. Refer to the adopted building code to determine whether such restrictions are applicable. The criteria in this standard are based on full-scale fire tests of rooms containing typical furnishings found in residential living rooms, kitchens, and bedrooms. The furnishings were arranged as typically found in dwelling units in a manner similar to that shown in Figure A.1.1(a), Figure A.1.1(b), and Figure A.1.1(c). Sixty full-scale fire tests were conducted in a two-story dwelling in Los Angeles, California, and 16 tests were conducted in a 14 ft (4.3 m) wide mobile home in Charlotte, North Carolina. Sprinkler systems designed and installed according to this standard are expected to prevent flashover within the compartment of origin where sprinklers are installed in the compartment. A sprinkler system designed and installed according to this standard cannot, however, be expected to completely control a fire involving fuel loads that are significantly higher than average for dwelling units [10 lb/ft2 (49 kg/m2)], configurations of fuels other than those with typical resi dential occupancies, or conditions where the interior finish has an unusually high flame spread index (greater than 225). To be effective, sprinkler systems installed in accordance with this standard need to open the sprinklers closest to the fire before the fire exceeds the ability of the sprinkler discharge to extinguish or control the fire. Conditions that allow the fire to grow beyond that point before sprinkler activation or that interfere with the quality of water distribution can produce conditions beyond the capabilities of the sprinkler system described in this standard. Unusually high ceilings or ceiling configurations that tend to divert the rising hot gases from sprinkler locations or change the sprinkler discharge pattern from its standard pattern can produce fire conditions that cannot be extinguished or controlled by the systems described in this standard. NFPA 13R references NFPA 13 in many aspects (hanging and bracing, design densities and spacing outside of dwelling unit, painting and finish of sprinklers, welding, etc.). If this standard does
Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
The 13R technical committee first addressed it because the IBC didn’t really do a very good job with it several cycles ago. Actually it should have been the 13 TC since when does a lower level of protection standard dictate combining with a higher level system (but that’s s different story). I attempted to have the annex of 13R changed by a TIA since it is wrong (regarding must be a separate building). The starting point in wrapping ones mind around combining 13 and 13R in a single building is to realize that the IBC allows some combinations of occupancies to have a portion of the building protected with a 13 system and another portion to have NO PROTECTION AT ALL. From that point on, it’s easy to accept that some conditions exist where part of the building is 13 and part is 13R. Business continuity is NOT a concern of the code like it is within the 13 mindset (so burning off the roof is ok if the top floor is residential but the lower floors are commercial). A vague rule of thumb is that depending upon the occupancies (since some occupancies require sprinklers through the BUILDING per 903.1.1) if the building is classified as a Separated Mixed occupancies it COULD allow both types of systems within the single building. I’m surprised that this group has a problem with this issue since I assume everyone has a FREE subscription to Sprinkler Age. We did an article in 2013 on it. Roland Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives Dallas, TX http://www.firesprinkler.org On Apr 22, 2014, at 1:25 PM, Cahill, Christopher ccah...@burnsmcd.com wrote: Let me play devil's advocate for a second. Why does NFPA 13x committees deal with this? Most (not all) of us in the US work with I codes and it's rather clear to me what to use. I don't work in NFPA 5000 but ASSUME it's similar. IBC tells me which variant to use, NFPA 13x only tells me how to do it. (Avoiding the vernacular code/standard out of respect for Greenman.) So the NFPA Committees can change or say anything they want and it's pointless. Hell, they could say 13D for residential high-rises and NFPA 13D Committee would have little they could do about it. Not that dissimilar to NFPA 409 and IBC 412. In 409 ch. 5 they have all sorts of requirements for a building that are not required if following the basics of IBC. For example, rated walls are not required in many hangars if you meet the height and area limits for mixed use. Don't need to protect the columns and don't need draft curtains, etc. True, a few places might legally adopt 409 in its entirety or you get there from insurance but that's not routine. Chris Cahill, PE* Associate Fire Protection Engineer ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
Forum, Can anyone please add there 2 cents in and help clarify when to classify as a 13 system versus a 13R I have a project that consist of 3 stories with an occupancy of R2/S2 and Construction Type VA. The project is lay ed out like a horse shoe with 3 sides and a corridor running down the middle from 1 required stairwell to another on the opposite end, with a court yard in the middle. There are private garages around the perimeter of the building (which all have access from a common 1st floor corridor only) All the Garages have a 2 hour separation between them and the 2nd level residential units and the 1st floor corridor. There are residential units on the 1st floor (opposite the garages) facing the court yard. I figured the Garage calculations shall conform to NFPA-13, based on NFPA-13R (2013ed.) Sec. 7.3.1. My question is if the building can be classified as a 13R (with garage areas calced at NFPA-13) or should it be classified as a NFPA-13 with dwelling units residential heads (calculations based on the greater of the area/density @ .10 or the head listing). If not, what is the determining factor or the threshold. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
Re: NFPA-13R or NFPA-13?
Sounds like a 13R to me. I'm not so sure about the assessment of 7.3.1 criteria for the garage - I wouldn't think a two hour separation is enough to classify the garages as a 'separate building'. That's usually when you have residential over a parking garage structure - think podium style. I would be looking more into 7.3.2. It sounds like you're on the right track - I would double check your local ammendments, the architect's code analysis and any specs or insurance requirements that may require more than 13r. On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 10:17 PM, George Medina Jr fireg...@aol.com wrote: Forum, Can anyone please add there 2 cents in and help clarify when to classify as a 13 system versus a 13R I have a project that consist of 3 stories with an occupancy of R2/S2 and Construction Type VA. The project is lay ed out like a horse shoe with 3 sides and a corridor running down the middle from 1 required stairwell to another on the opposite end, with a court yard in the middle. There are private garages around the perimeter of the building (which all have access from a common 1st floor corridor only) All the Garages have a 2 hour separation between them and the 2nd level residential units and the 1st floor corridor. There are residential units on the 1st floor (opposite the garages) facing the court yard. I figured the Garage calculations shall conform to NFPA-13, based on NFPA-13R (2013ed.) Sec. 7.3.1. My question is if the building can be classified as a 13R (with garage areas calced at NFPA-13) or should it be classified as a NFPA-13 with dwelling units residential heads (calculations based on the greater of the area/density @ .10 or the head listing). If not, what is the determining factor or the threshold. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 10:17 PM, George Medina Jr fireg...@aol.com wrote: Forum, Can anyone please add there 2 cents in and help clarify when to classify as a 13 system versus a 13R I have a project that consist of 3 stories with an occupancy of R2/S2 and Construction Type VA. The project is lay ed out like a horse shoe with 3 sides and a corridor running down the middle from 1 required stairwell to another on the opposite end, with a court yard in the middle. There are private garages around the perimeter of the building (which all have access from a common 1st floor corridor only) All the Garages have a 2 hour separation between them and the 2nd level residential units and the 1st floor corridor. There are residential units on the 1st floor (opposite the garages) facing the court yard. I figured the Garage calculations shall conform to NFPA-13, based on NFPA-13R (2013ed.) Sec. 7.3.1. My question is if the building can be classified as a 13R (with garage areas calced at NFPA-13) or should it be classified as a NFPA-13 with dwelling units residential heads (calculations based on the greater of the area/density @ .10 or the head listing). If not, what is the determining factor or the threshold. George Medina Jr. Mobile: 323-906-5701 ___ 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
