I think you're right. It just doesn't seem like that should be the case. How
can this spacing allowance be appropriate for the notoriously unforgiving ESFR
criteria, but somehow not OK for the traditionally much more forgiving standard
spray sprinklers. Or that Factory Mutual, who you could say
FM allows it because all of their sprinklers are "storage" sprinklers. It
doesn't matter if it is CMDA, CMSA or ESFR, it is a "storage" sprinkler for
FM so the extended requirements are in play. I don't think you will find
any forgiveness on this issue in 13.
Every time we've dealt with this
We're looking at a project where a portion of an existing ESFR building is
being converted to store cartooned expanded plastics. It looks like we've
settled on a design criteria that involves changing out the sprinklers at the
deck to 11.2K standard spray sprinklers at a 0.45 density and adding
I don't think 8.16.4.3 applies at all. I don't think there is anything in
13 that actually does apply as 13 requires sprinklers everywhere except
where omitted by 13 (4.1). Limited (partial) systems are addressed in 4.2.
Ron Greenman
rongreen...@gmail.com
253.576.9700
The Universe is
