8.10.4.1 of the 2002 edition says that residential heads are to be no
more than four inches from the ceiling unless the listing allows
more.Check the listing. If there is nothing in there that allows the
deflector distance to be down to 11" then you will need sprinklers in
the higher pocket
Not your everyday sprinkler save if all is true in the attached story
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/fire-sabol-firefighters-2329243-cloth
es-residents
Scott A. Futrell
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mai
I have a 500 sq. ft. room which has a soffit around the perimeter that sticks
out 12" and is 11" from the ceiling. My boss seems to think that I can put a
sprinkler under the soffit on each side of the room and since the soffits are
12'-6" apart (on each side of the wall) we do not have to add s
Rodney,
Some of this was addressed in the ROP and ROC on NFPA-13, and there are
some revisions coming to 7.1.2.1 and 7.1.3 that will require 1/2"
pressure relief valves on all wet pipe systems, and for a manual or
automatic air venting valve to be installed on all wet pipe systems.
The discus
Rodney:
Welcome to Standards Land, the newest attraction in the non-reality
based theme park called Sprinkler World.
Note well that the language you cite conspicuously used the term,
"should", which has been a long-overlooked shortcoming of this
particular section of the standard.The NFPA man
I am writing this response on behalf of any forum members who do not
completely understand some of these issues, not as a direct response to
Mark. The following two paragraphs are from NFPA 13 (2002):
8.16.4.2.1 An alarm test connection not less than 1 in. (25.4 mm) in
diameter, terminating in
Timothy,
You're right about testing the single head flow but on a wet system
this can be done from anywhere since the water is equal everywhere. It
does not need to be timed at the most remote point because it is
already there. Timing is in this case to note the time from beginning
of flow to alar
Of course it is important to have the ITC at the furthest remote location for a
dry system, since you do want to know the longest time it takes to get water on
the fire, but as Ron pointed out, in a wet system the volumetric flow rates are
the same, no matter where (elevation being equal) in the
hsupp...@firesprinkler.org
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
__ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 3921 (20090309) __
The message was checked by ESET Smart
That's my point what sprinkler work? Code 50% open they claim 50% open. We
can review the details and make sure it's 50.1% open to cover the more
than part. They have full control over maintaining flues. I'm not judging
whether this is a good idea or not just reading the code and comparing
I respectfully disagree.
The purpose is to test the alarm device during a one head fire flow. Since
we have to time the device, putting it at the most remote area makes more
since, since we are simulating a fire at the most remote area and timing the
activation of the alarm device. The alarm devic
And I just as respectfully re-disagree. The purpose of the ITC is to
test each waterflow alarm device, and to be sure that an audible alarm
sounds within 5 minutes - see 6.9.1 and 8.17.4.2 (2007 ed.). That's it
- the standard even contains a new disclaimer regarding this issue - see
A.8.17.4.2
Until they pay more for this than plywood only to have us tell em thanks,
here's the cost of the sprinkler work anyway..
glc
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Chris Cahill
Sent: Monday, Marc
Hear, hear! Theoretically, one would need multiple air relief
locations if purging were the issue. The issues of surging and
pressure swell/packing can be mitigated with a pressure relief valve,
which can be at the test/drain (obviously, several are sold with this
feature) or at a more remote o
Except for the fact the definition of solid shelving seems to support the
case. '02 - 3.10.10...Shelves of wiremesh...more than 50% open and where the
flue spaces are maintained shall be defined as open rack.
They are not advertising to us. They are advertising to people who have
warehouses and
So it lets sprinkler discharge through as opposed to a solid shelf. They
think this is special?
It makes no difference when the rack is loaded with products, the sprinkler
discharge is still obstructed.
Who builds racks and puts nothing on them? It's a dumb advertising feature.
Craig L. Pr
No, but its only 50% open, and I believe it needs to be 70% open to be
considered acceptable waterflow.
Now maybe a sharp guy could specify an increase in density to overcome this,
and confirm interruption of spray pattern to droplets coming thru their
deck.
But its tough to design for boxes or
http://www.punchdeck.com/index.html
I found this advertised in the current issue of a major magazine. It seems
like it is mostly designed for in rack, but under applications it speaks of
archive storage over large area. It also seems the key selling point to this
is the ability to allow sprinkl
Pardon me if this is ground that was already covered-
I specify the Inspector's test Connection to be located at the sprinkler riser.
This is NOT something that is new to NFPA-13 either. E.g., the 1996 edition
(4-15.4.2) does not require the location to be at the riser - it doesn't
specify any
There's been other threads defining systems, but in this case the SF defines
you have two, so two PRVs are reqd. If this bothes you as stupid, console
yourself that when the one clogs up, you have installed a redundant one
ready to take over. Unless you're using the larger claval we'd use on a
pump
20 matches
Mail list logo
