Re: Existing Dry System

[Skyler Bilbo via Sprinklerforum]

I think horizontal separations are very often misunderstood.  Many people
think these are the same as firewalls.  I may have missed it, but I don't
think section 510 of the building code was mentioned.  This is a great
place to start, and if you haven't read it recently, it is worth a
refresh.  Pay very close attention to the specific wording of whatever
section of 510 you are trying to apply.


Skyler Bilbo

On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 3:46 PM Chris Dorn via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I would have to agree with Matt. A new CO would mean it should be reviewed
> as a new building and must meet all the requirements for protection of that
> particular type of construction.
>
> Chris
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Grise 
> Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 2:49 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Subject: RE: Existing Dry System
>
> To the original question - I would not expect that 901.4 would apply to
> the parking level if they are planning to gut the building and get a new
> CO. If their new code approach removes the need for the sprinkler system on
> that level, then it would not be a 'required system' so it would not seem
> to be covered by 901.4.
>
> I am always amazed by the various ways that architects can skin a cat -
> and I can't claim to know all of them, however there does seem to be at
> least one code-compliant way to get rid of the sprinklers on the lower
> level (if the building construction matches up)...
>
> Matt
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Zachary Siegrist via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 1:33 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Zachary Siegrist 
> Subject: Re: Existing Dry System
>
> That is my understanding as well Matt.
> Fire area separation IBC 707.3.10
> Fire wall separation IBC 706.4
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 2:27 PM Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > I was thinking that it was 2 hours to be a separated occupancy in the
> > same building, but 3 hours to be classified as separate buildings?
> >
> > Of course, I cant find that code section now
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sprinklerforum 
> > On Behalf Of Kevin Hall via Sprinklerforum
> > Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 1:18 PM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Cc: Kevin Hall 
> > Subject: Re: Existing Dry System
> >
> > The building code requires a 3-hr separation to consider the spaces
> > individually.
> >
> > Kevin Hall, M.Eng, P.E., CWBSP, MSFPE
> > *Coordinator, Engineering and Technical Services*
> >
> > *American Fire Sprinkler Association*
> > p: 214-349-5971
> > w:
> > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2ffiresprinkler.org;
> > c=E,1,gBFrPI4RvmQJHpfzP0sijlsi_qHHUj88C0BhBuIqSIYUrBAAkFs8sep6QG-_kqgq
> > xYr3GwKcZrs8Mc4UZSIehiD2rrvMjrrSrFJUV0B4tiSirOw,=1
> > 
> > 
> > <
> > https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-a
> > fsa-/
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > *Be a Member, Get a Member*
> >
> > We’re introducing many new programs to help meet your team’s business
> > needs. AFSA is offering a six-month trial membership for contractors
> > and a 12-month trial membership for municipal AHJs. Let’s help
> > potential members see what they’re missing! Current members who
> > recruit a new contractor member will receive a $100 gift card and the
> > new member gets a free webinar.  Let’s grow stronger together! Join
> > AFSA <
> > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fwww.firesprinkler.o
> > rg%2fjoin=E,1,FDGC9I1ogQXrTByuRyy1Yu3cRIqzCP7i7J2tCOGIo2fyCf67RxVG2J
> > toa9pMSUH01ALdXhTdcm_vG_tGBZDg67eFoJ_cHFZYUvLj2VL8FYFLMnCLfki5HCg,
> > o=1
> > >.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 1:53 PM Dane Long via Sprinklerforum <
> > sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
> >
> > > We did an apartment years ago that was S-2 on the first floor with
> > > R-2 above. We ended up sprinkling it throughout. You have to be
> > > careful because there are a few requirements in the IBC you'll want
> > > to check out. I'm guessing a 2hr fire separate is probably
> > > requirement. You also might want to check out 406.6.3 (2015) and
> > > 903.2.10 (2015) to make sure you don’t meet any of the exceptions.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Dane Long, CET
> > > Engineering Technician | Bamford Fire Sprinkler Co., Inc.
> > > P:785.825.7710
> > > F:785.825.0667
> > > A:   1383 W. North Street  Salina, KS  67401
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Sprinklerforum
> > > 
> > > On Behalf Of Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:19 AM
> > > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > > Cc: Thomas Reinhardt 
> > > Subject: Existing Dry System
> > >

Re: NFPA 13R & NFPA 14

[Skyler Bilbo via Sprinklerforum]

I could dream up a scenario where a 13R system had a higher pressure
requirement (with a lower flow) than a standpipe calculation.  Being
limited to 4 stories definitely makes this a lot less likely to occur in
the real world.  It could happen, but I have never seen it here in the real
world.


Skyler Bilbo


On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 3:37 PM Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> In practice, probably not.   As I'm sitting here today, I can't honestly
> recall how/when that section came into being or when we may have last
> tweaked it, but it's a CYA for sure.Maybe if I had a building projected
> with 13R that had an accessory use like... I dunno, boat storage.   A
> marina hotel or apartment/complex with boat storage - yeah, that's the
> ticket!   The boat storage is solely for use by residents and guests, so
> 13R could be applied if allowed by the AHJ and that standard prescribes
> that design shall conform to 13 outside the dwelling units, so EH2 or some
> such.   But that still doesn't account for the fact that it would have to
> be a high-rise building to require an automatic water supply for a Class 1
> system, but what about a Class 2 or 3 where water supply also has to be
> automatic?
>
> I dunno, I'm just trippin' but regardless of whether this makes sense or
> not, the preceding ramble is
> my opinion only and does not represent NFPA or the NFPA 14 Technical
> Committee, nor intended to serve as an interpretation of the standard.
>
>
> Steve Leyton
> Protection Design & Consulting
> San Diego, CA
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Jose Anibal
> Castillo via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 7:43 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Jose Anibal Castillo 
> Subject: NFPA 13R & NFPA 14
>
> In section 7.10.1.3.1.1 of the nfpa 14, 2019 states that in cases where
> 13R system demand is higher than the standpipe demand it is supposed to be
> chosen the higher demand.
>
> Is it even possible to have a residential sprinkler system with a higher
> demand than the standpipe?
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> José A.  Castillo
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Existing Dry System

[Chris Dorn via Sprinklerforum]

I would have to agree with Matt. A new CO would mean it should be reviewed as a 
new building and must meet all the requirements for protection of that 
particular type of construction. 

Chris


-Original Message-
From: Matt Grise  
Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 2:49 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Existing Dry System

To the original question - I would not expect that 901.4 would apply to the 
parking level if they are planning to gut the building and get a new CO. If 
their new code approach removes the need for the sprinkler system on that 
level, then it would not be a 'required system' so it would not seem to be 
covered by 901.4. 

I am always amazed by the various ways that architects can skin a cat - and I 
can't claim to know all of them, however there does seem to be at least one 
code-compliant way to get rid of the sprinklers on the lower level (if the 
building construction matches up)...

Matt 


-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Zachary Siegrist via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 1:33 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Zachary Siegrist 
Subject: Re: Existing Dry System

That is my understanding as well Matt.
Fire area separation IBC 707.3.10
Fire wall separation IBC 706.4

On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 2:27 PM Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum < 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I was thinking that it was 2 hours to be a separated occupancy in the 
> same building, but 3 hours to be classified as separate buildings?
>
> Of course, I cant find that code section now
>
> Matt
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum 
> On Behalf Of Kevin Hall via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 1:18 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Kevin Hall 
> Subject: Re: Existing Dry System
>
> The building code requires a 3-hr separation to consider the spaces 
> individually.
>
> Kevin Hall, M.Eng, P.E., CWBSP, MSFPE
> *Coordinator, Engineering and Technical Services*
>
> *American Fire Sprinkler Association*
> p: 214-349-5971
> w:
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2ffiresprinkler.org;
> c=E,1,gBFrPI4RvmQJHpfzP0sijlsi_qHHUj88C0BhBuIqSIYUrBAAkFs8sep6QG-_kqgq
> xYr3GwKcZrs8Mc4UZSIehiD2rrvMjrrSrFJUV0B4tiSirOw,=1
> 
> 
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-a
> fsa-/
> >
>
>
>
> *Be a Member, Get a Member*
>
> We’re introducing many new programs to help meet your team’s business 
> needs. AFSA is offering a six-month trial membership for contractors 
> and a 12-month trial membership for municipal AHJs. Let’s help 
> potential members see what they’re missing! Current members who 
> recruit a new contractor member will receive a $100 gift card and the 
> new member gets a free webinar.  Let’s grow stronger together! Join 
> AFSA < 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fwww.firesprinkler.o
> rg%2fjoin=E,1,FDGC9I1ogQXrTByuRyy1Yu3cRIqzCP7i7J2tCOGIo2fyCf67RxVG2J
> toa9pMSUH01ALdXhTdcm_vG_tGBZDg67eFoJ_cHFZYUvLj2VL8FYFLMnCLfki5HCg,
> o=1
> >.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 1:53 PM Dane Long via Sprinklerforum < 
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > We did an apartment years ago that was S-2 on the first floor with
> > R-2 above. We ended up sprinkling it throughout. You have to be 
> > careful because there are a few requirements in the IBC you'll want 
> > to check out. I'm guessing a 2hr fire separate is probably 
> > requirement. You also might want to check out 406.6.3 (2015) and
> > 903.2.10 (2015) to make sure you don’t meet any of the exceptions.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Dane Long, CET
> > Engineering Technician | Bamford Fire Sprinkler Co., Inc.
> > P:785.825.7710
> > F:785.825.0667
> > A:   1383 W. North Street  Salina, KS  67401
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sprinklerforum
> > 
> > On Behalf Of Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum
> > Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:19 AM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Cc: Thomas Reinhardt 
> > Subject: Existing Dry System
> >
> > Question for the group. I have an existing three story B occupancy 
> > with an open parking underneath. The only sprinklers is a dry system 
> > protecting the parking area only. The building is going to be 
> > converted
> to a R2 occupancy.
> > The whole residential area will be sprinklered with a 13R system. 
> > The architect informed me that he will remove the  dry system from 
> > the parking area. I have reviewed open parking facilities before, 
> > and am aware that sprinklers are not required.(S-2). I say that the 
> > system must remain. I'm using the International Fire Code Chapter 9 
> > section 901.4, which relates that fire protection systems shall be 
> > maintained.
> Any thoughts.
> >
> > Tom 

RE: NFPA 13R & NFPA 14

[Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum]

In practice, probably not.   As I'm sitting here today, I can't honestly recall 
how/when that section came into being or when we may have last tweaked it, but 
it's a CYA for sure.Maybe if I had a building projected with 13R that had 
an accessory use like... I dunno, boat storage.   A marina hotel or 
apartment/complex with boat storage - yeah, that's the ticket!   The boat 
storage is solely for use by residents and guests, so 13R could be applied if 
allowed by the AHJ and that standard prescribes that design shall conform to 13 
outside the dwelling units, so EH2 or some such.   But that still doesn't 
account for the fact that it would have to be a high-rise building to require 
an automatic water supply for a Class 1 system, but what about a Class 2 or 3 
where water supply also has to be automatic?   

I dunno, I'm just trippin' but regardless of whether this makes sense or not, 
the preceding ramble is 
my opinion only and does not represent NFPA or the NFPA 14 Technical Committee, 
nor intended to serve as an interpretation of the standard.


Steve Leyton
Protection Design & Consulting
San Diego, CA 





-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On 
Behalf Of Jose Anibal Castillo via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 7:43 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Jose Anibal Castillo 
Subject: NFPA 13R & NFPA 14

In section 7.10.1.3.1.1 of the nfpa 14, 2019 states that in cases where 13R 
system demand is higher than the standpipe demand it is supposed to be chosen 
the higher demand.

Is it even possible to have a residential sprinkler system with a higher demand 
than the standpipe?


Regards



José A.  Castillo
___
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: Existing Dry System

[Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum]

To the original question - I would not expect that 901.4 would apply to the 
parking level if they are planning to gut the building and get a new CO. If 
their new code approach removes the need for the sprinkler system on that 
level, then it would not be a 'required system' so it would not seem to be 
covered by 901.4. 

I am always amazed by the various ways that architects can skin a cat - and I 
can't claim to know all of them, however there does seem to be at least one 
code-compliant way to get rid of the sprinklers on the lower level (if the 
building construction matches up)...

Matt 


-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Zachary Siegrist via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 1:33 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Zachary Siegrist 
Subject: Re: Existing Dry System

That is my understanding as well Matt.
Fire area separation IBC 707.3.10
Fire wall separation IBC 706.4

On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 2:27 PM Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum < 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I was thinking that it was 2 hours to be a separated occupancy in the 
> same building, but 3 hours to be classified as separate buildings?
>
> Of course, I cant find that code section now
>
> Matt
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  
> On Behalf Of Kevin Hall via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 1:18 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Kevin Hall 
> Subject: Re: Existing Dry System
>
> The building code requires a 3-hr separation to consider the spaces 
> individually.
>
> Kevin Hall, M.Eng, P.E., CWBSP, MSFPE
> *Coordinator, Engineering and Technical Services*
>
> *American Fire Sprinkler Association*
> p: 214-349-5971
> w:
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2ffiresprinkler.org;
> c=E,1,gBFrPI4RvmQJHpfzP0sijlsi_qHHUj88C0BhBuIqSIYUrBAAkFs8sep6QG-_kqgq
> xYr3GwKcZrs8Mc4UZSIehiD2rrvMjrrSrFJUV0B4tiSirOw,=1
> 
> 
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-a
> fsa-/
> >
>
>
>
> *Be a Member, Get a Member*
>
> We’re introducing many new programs to help meet your team’s business 
> needs. AFSA is offering a six-month trial membership for contractors 
> and a 12-month trial membership for municipal AHJs. Let’s help 
> potential members see what they’re missing! Current members who 
> recruit a new contractor member will receive a $100 gift card and the 
> new member gets a free webinar.  Let’s grow stronger together! Join 
> AFSA <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fwww.firesprinkler.o
> rg%2fjoin=E,1,FDGC9I1ogQXrTByuRyy1Yu3cRIqzCP7i7J2tCOGIo2fyCf67RxVG2J
> toa9pMSUH01ALdXhTdcm_vG_tGBZDg67eFoJ_cHFZYUvLj2VL8FYFLMnCLfki5HCg,
> o=1
> >.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 1:53 PM Dane Long via Sprinklerforum < 
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > We did an apartment years ago that was S-2 on the first floor with 
> > R-2 above. We ended up sprinkling it throughout. You have to be 
> > careful because there are a few requirements in the IBC you'll want 
> > to check out. I'm guessing a 2hr fire separate is probably 
> > requirement. You also might want to check out 406.6.3 (2015) and 
> > 903.2.10 (2015) to make sure you don’t meet any of the exceptions.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Dane Long, CET
> > Engineering Technician | Bamford Fire Sprinkler Co., Inc.
> > P:785.825.7710
> > F:785.825.0667
> > A:   1383 W. North Street  Salina, KS  67401
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sprinklerforum 
> > 
> > On Behalf Of Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum
> > Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:19 AM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Cc: Thomas Reinhardt 
> > Subject: Existing Dry System
> >
> > Question for the group. I have an existing three story B occupancy 
> > with an open parking underneath. The only sprinklers is a dry system 
> > protecting the parking area only. The building is going to be 
> > converted
> to a R2 occupancy.
> > The whole residential area will be sprinklered with a 13R system. 
> > The architect informed me that he will remove the  dry system from 
> > the parking area. I have reviewed open parking facilities before, 
> > and am aware that sprinklers are not required.(S-2). I say that the 
> > system must remain. I'm using the International Fire Code Chapter 9 
> > section 901.4, which relates that fire protection systems shall be 
> > maintained.
> Any thoughts.
> >
> > Tom Reinhardt
> > Skokie Fire Prevention Bureau
>  y=gmail=g>
> > Plan Review/Fire Inspector
> > 7424 Niles Center Road
> > Skokie Fire Department
> > Skokie, IL 60077 847-982-5342
> > thomas.reinha...@skokie.org
> >
> >
> > 

Re: Existing Dry System

[Zachary Siegrist via Sprinklerforum]

That is my understanding as well Matt.
Fire area separation IBC 707.3.10
Fire wall separation IBC 706.4

On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 2:27 PM Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I was thinking that it was 2 hours to be a separated occupancy in the same
> building, but 3 hours to be classified as separate buildings?
>
> Of course, I cant find that code section now
>
> Matt
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Kevin Hall via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 1:18 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Kevin Hall 
> Subject: Re: Existing Dry System
>
> The building code requires a 3-hr separation to consider the spaces
> individually.
>
> Kevin Hall, M.Eng, P.E., CWBSP, MSFPE
> *Coordinator, Engineering and Technical Services*
>
> *American Fire Sprinkler Association*
> p: 214-349-5971
> w:
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2ffiresprinkler.org=E,1,gBFrPI4RvmQJHpfzP0sijlsi_qHHUj88C0BhBuIqSIYUrBAAkFs8sep6QG-_kqgqxYr3GwKcZrs8Mc4UZSIehiD2rrvMjrrSrFJUV0B4tiSirOw,=1
> 
> 
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
> >
>
>
>
> *Be a Member, Get a Member*
>
> We’re introducing many new programs to help meet your team’s business
> needs. AFSA is offering a six-month trial membership for contractors and a
> 12-month trial membership for municipal AHJs. Let’s help potential members
> see what they’re missing! Current members who recruit a new contractor
> member will receive a $100 gift card and the new member gets a free
> webinar.  Let’s grow stronger together! Join AFSA <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fwww.firesprinkler.org%2fjoin=E,1,FDGC9I1ogQXrTByuRyy1Yu3cRIqzCP7i7J2tCOGIo2fyCf67RxVG2Jtoa9pMSUH01ALdXhTdcm_vG_tGBZDg67eFoJ_cHFZYUvLj2VL8FYFLMnCLfki5HCg,=1
> >.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 1:53 PM Dane Long via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > We did an apartment years ago that was S-2 on the first floor with R-2
> > above. We ended up sprinkling it throughout. You have to be careful
> > because there are a few requirements in the IBC you'll want to check
> > out. I'm guessing a 2hr fire separate is probably requirement. You
> > also might want to check out 406.6.3 (2015) and 903.2.10 (2015) to
> > make sure you don’t meet any of the exceptions.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Dane Long, CET
> > Engineering Technician | Bamford Fire Sprinkler Co., Inc.
> > P:785.825.7710
> > F:785.825.0667
> > A:   1383 W. North Street  Salina, KS  67401
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sprinklerforum 
> > On Behalf Of Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum
> > Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:19 AM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Cc: Thomas Reinhardt 
> > Subject: Existing Dry System
> >
> > Question for the group. I have an existing three story B occupancy
> > with an open parking underneath. The only sprinklers is a dry system
> > protecting the parking area only. The building is going to be converted
> to a R2 occupancy.
> > The whole residential area will be sprinklered with a 13R system. The
> > architect informed me that he will remove the  dry system from the
> > parking area. I have reviewed open parking facilities before, and am
> > aware that sprinklers are not required.(S-2). I say that the system
> > must remain. I'm using the International Fire Code Chapter 9 section
> > 901.4, which relates that fire protection systems shall be maintained.
> Any thoughts.
> >
> > Tom Reinhardt
> > Skokie Fire Prevention Bureau
> 
> > Plan Review/Fire Inspector
> > 7424 Niles Center Road
> > Skokie Fire Department
> > Skokie, IL 60077 847-982-5342
> > thomas.reinha...@skokie.org
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Sprinklerforum mailing list
> > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> >
> > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2flists.firesprinkler
> > .org%2flistinfo.cgi%2fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org=E,1,1nWn4me-B
> > I2hAlPFENvWtXxPrGYChOyUMZA3gDMlu3KSdNXhu9MZD0fKpC-8kypfdtKkaeF8TRhpmpX
> > 1lOpHVyUYfA9SYkdZVc5rk4dMzIU,=1
> >
> > ___
> > Sprinklerforum mailing list
> > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> >
> > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2flists.firesprinkler
> > .org%2flistinfo.cgi%2fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org=E,1,7NKTHOFEe
> > 4Gq7eEjw0a4t0eb6APq_fsizWr709b-Q74hhyxZd3IGiGoVQdd1CA70wiqRNQM2UjLuaNB
> > m5Q11k1g_QRAVUOBUfVKUBjxr4JB7m6M,=1
> >
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> 

RE: Existing Dry System

[Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum]

I was thinking that it was 2 hours to be a separated occupancy in the same 
building, but 3 hours to be classified as separate buildings?

Of course, I cant find that code section now

Matt 


-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Kevin Hall via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 1:18 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Kevin Hall 
Subject: Re: Existing Dry System

The building code requires a 3-hr separation to consider the spaces 
individually.

Kevin Hall, M.Eng, P.E., CWBSP, MSFPE
*Coordinator, Engineering and Technical Services*

*American Fire Sprinkler Association*
p: 214-349-5971
w: 
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2ffiresprinkler.org=E,1,gBFrPI4RvmQJHpfzP0sijlsi_qHHUj88C0BhBuIqSIYUrBAAkFs8sep6QG-_kqgqxYr3GwKcZrs8Mc4UZSIehiD2rrvMjrrSrFJUV0B4tiSirOw,=1



   


*Be a Member, Get a Member*

We’re introducing many new programs to help meet your team’s business needs. 
AFSA is offering a six-month trial membership for contractors and a 12-month 
trial membership for municipal AHJs. Let’s help potential members see what 
they’re missing! Current members who recruit a new contractor member will 
receive a $100 gift card and the new member gets a free webinar.  Let’s grow 
stronger together! Join AFSA 
.


On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 1:53 PM Dane Long via Sprinklerforum < 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> We did an apartment years ago that was S-2 on the first floor with R-2 
> above. We ended up sprinkling it throughout. You have to be careful 
> because there are a few requirements in the IBC you'll want to check 
> out. I'm guessing a 2hr fire separate is probably requirement. You 
> also might want to check out 406.6.3 (2015) and 903.2.10 (2015) to 
> make sure you don’t meet any of the exceptions.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dane Long, CET
> Engineering Technician | Bamford Fire Sprinkler Co., Inc.
> P:785.825.7710
> F:785.825.0667
> A:   1383 W. North Street  Salina, KS  67401
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  
> On Behalf Of Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:19 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Thomas Reinhardt 
> Subject: Existing Dry System
>
> Question for the group. I have an existing three story B occupancy 
> with an open parking underneath. The only sprinklers is a dry system 
> protecting the parking area only. The building is going to be converted to a 
> R2 occupancy.
> The whole residential area will be sprinklered with a 13R system. The 
> architect informed me that he will remove the  dry system from the 
> parking area. I have reviewed open parking facilities before, and am 
> aware that sprinklers are not required.(S-2). I say that the system 
> must remain. I'm using the International Fire Code Chapter 9 section 
> 901.4, which relates that fire protection systems shall be maintained. Any 
> thoughts.
>
> Tom Reinhardt
> Skokie Fire Prevention Bureau
> Plan Review/Fire Inspector
> 7424 Niles Center Road
> Skokie Fire Department
> Skokie, IL 60077 847-982-5342
> thomas.reinha...@skokie.org
>
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2flists.firesprinkler
> .org%2flistinfo.cgi%2fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org=E,1,1nWn4me-B
> I2hAlPFENvWtXxPrGYChOyUMZA3gDMlu3KSdNXhu9MZD0fKpC-8kypfdtKkaeF8TRhpmpX
> 1lOpHVyUYfA9SYkdZVc5rk4dMzIU,=1
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2flists.firesprinkler
> .org%2flistinfo.cgi%2fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org=E,1,7NKTHOFEe
> 4Gq7eEjw0a4t0eb6APq_fsizWr709b-Q74hhyxZd3IGiGoVQdd1CA70wiqRNQM2UjLuaNB
> m5Q11k1g_QRAVUOBUfVKUBjxr4JB7m6M,=1
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2flists.firesprinkler.org%2flistinfo.cgi%2fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org=E,1,Ve2GG5Hoin9VCATLo2IQsdzod65dn440fK5AE7ZaFqkvXAS3r5Q8oiPl-GCQshCiroj3u3BhhBP6DBxo0wIojNuCg5sv__CEVIC4mkFd92s,=1
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: NFPA 13R & NFPA 14

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Agree - anything could be possible!  But very hard indeed.

Thanks,
John

John August Denhardt, PE
*Vice President, Engineering and Technical Services*

*American Fire Sprinkler Association*
m: p: 301-343-1457
214-349-5965 ext 121
w: firesprinkler.org



   

*Our members are at the heart of everything we do*


*Be a Member, Get a Member*

We’re introducing many new programs to help meet your team’s business
needs. AFSA is offering a six-month trial membership for contractors and a
12-month trial membership for municipal AHJs. Let’s help potential members
see what they’re missing! Current members who recruit a new contractor
member will receive a $100 gift card and the new member gets a free
webinar.  Let’s grow stronger together! Join AFSA
.




On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 12:28 PM Cary Webber via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> One would have to try very hard...but nothing is impossible!
>
>
>
> Cary Webber CFPS Director, Technical Services
> Reliable Automatic Sprinkler Co., Inc.
> 1470 Smith Grove Road, Liberty, SC  29657
> Tel: 864-843-5161
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Jose Anibal Castillo via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 10:43 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Jose Anibal Castillo 
> Subject: NFPA 13R & NFPA 14
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
> click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know
> the content is safe.
>
>
> In section 7.10.1.3.1.1 of the nfpa 14, 2019 states that in cases where
> 13R system demand is higher than the standpipe demand it is supposed to be
> chosen the higher demand.
>
> Is it even possible to have a residential sprinkler system with a higher
> demand than the standpipe?
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> José A.  Castillo
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.firesprinkler.org%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.orgdata=04%7C01%7Ccwebber%40reliablesprinkler.com%7Ce8bb25665c444e3c4b4108d8c923a6e9%7C361f92efbca442cdaf0d8099acee2244%7C0%7C0%7C637480502547341878%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=oYvWE517JhGg0d0mdIxRXBxa1UIGQo%2FlGyt0fzc3Nmg%3Dreserved=0
> ___
> 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: Existing Dry System

[Kevin Hall via Sprinklerforum]

The building code requires a 3-hr separation to consider the spaces
individually.

Kevin Hall, M.Eng, P.E., CWBSP, MSFPE
*Coordinator, Engineering and Technical Services*

*American Fire Sprinkler Association*
p: 214-349-5971
w: firesprinkler.org



   


*Be a Member, Get a Member*

We’re introducing many new programs to help meet your team’s business
needs. AFSA is offering a six-month trial membership for contractors and a
12-month trial membership for municipal AHJs. Let’s help potential members
see what they’re missing! Current members who recruit a new contractor
member will receive a $100 gift card and the new member gets a free
webinar.  Let’s grow stronger together! Join AFSA
.


On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 1:53 PM Dane Long via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> We did an apartment years ago that was S-2 on the first floor with R-2
> above. We ended up sprinkling it throughout. You have to be careful because
> there are a few requirements in the IBC you'll want to check out. I'm
> guessing a 2hr fire separate is probably requirement. You also might want
> to
> check out 406.6.3 (2015) and 903.2.10 (2015) to make sure you don’t meet
> any
> of the exceptions.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dane Long, CET
> Engineering Technician | Bamford Fire Sprinkler Co., Inc.
> P:785.825.7710
> F:785.825.0667
> A:   1383 W. North Street  Salina, KS  67401
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:19 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Thomas Reinhardt 
> Subject: Existing Dry System
>
> Question for the group. I have an existing three story B occupancy with an
> open parking underneath. The only sprinklers is a dry system protecting the
> parking area only. The building is going to be converted to a R2 occupancy.
> The whole residential area will be sprinklered with a 13R system. The
> architect informed me that he will remove the  dry system from the parking
> area. I have reviewed open parking facilities before, and am aware that
> sprinklers are not required.(S-2). I say that the system must remain. I'm
> using the International Fire Code Chapter 9 section 901.4, which relates
> that fire protection systems shall be maintained. Any thoughts.
>
> Tom Reinhardt
> Skokie Fire Prevention Bureau
> Plan Review/Fire Inspector
> 7424 Niles Center Road
> Skokie Fire Department
> Skokie, IL 60077 847-982-5342
> thomas.reinha...@skokie.org
>
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: Existing Dry System

[Zachary Siegrist via Sprinklerforum]

I’m referencing the 2015 I Codes.  Is there adequate separation per IBC
707.3.10? If not then perhaps it’s been built nonseparated in which IBC
508.3 applies the most restrictive provisions of chapter 9 that apply to
the non separated occupancies to the total nonseparated area.  Just a head
up that if this building was to be classified as separated, table 508.4
only recognizes buildings as sprinkles of equipped with a 13 system.  You
can’t take the 1 hour reduction with a 13R.

Zach

On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 1:42 PM Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> One approach that I have seen in a similar situation:
>
> If the are not separated enough to classify as 'separated' (2 hr, I
> think?) then each area must be protected according to the portion that
> requires the most protection - so 13R for the lower area. Which would
> basically be 13 for the lower area, since it is outside of the dwelling
> unit areas.
>
> Matt
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 12:19 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Kyle.Montgomery ; John O'Connor <
> jocon...@nfspk.com>
> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: Existing Dry System
>
> I think the OP is the AHJ.
>
> I just want to say that I think it's cool that a plan reviewer/inspector
> would come here to get the industries opinion about something like that. We
> are all on the same team.
>
> Looks like Dane beat me to it, but I do think there is a fire separation
> required. Also, why someone would remove an existing fire sprinkler system?
> Is the maintenance becoming a problem?
>
> -Kyle M
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of John O'Connor via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 10:44 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: John O'Connor 
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Existing Dry System
>
> You may want to run this by the AHJ.  His requirements will trump the
> architect's.
>
>
> John R. O'Connor,  SET,  RME
>
> National Fire Sprinklers, Inc.
> 2601 Elm Hill Pike, Suite J
> Nashville  TN  37214
>
> Office 615-885-1301
> Fax  615-885-7505
> Cell 615-519-1118
> jocon...@nfspk.com
>
> In God We Trust
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:19 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Thomas Reinhardt 
> Subject: Existing Dry System
>
> Question for the group. I have an existing three story B occupancy with an
> open parking underneath. The only sprinklers is a dry system protecting the
> parking area only. The building is going to be converted to a R2 occupancy.
> The whole residential area will be sprinklered with a 13R system. The
> architect informed me that he will remove the  dry system from the parking
> area. I have reviewed open parking facilities before, and am aware that
> sprinklers are not required.(S-2). I say that the system must remain. I'm
> using the International Fire Code Chapter 9 section 901.4, which relates
> that fire protection systems shall be maintained. Any thoughts.
>
> Tom Reinhardt
> Skokie Fire Prevention Bureau
> Plan Review/Fire Inspector
> 7424 Niles Center Road
> Skokie Fire Department
> Skokie, IL 60077 847-982-5342
> thomas.reinha...@skokie.org
>
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2furldefense.proofpoint.com%2fv2%2furl%3fu%3dhttp-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org%26d%3dDwICAg%26c%3dwn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA%26r%3dZ_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A%26m%3dKDx4qSNGFJHpv0Coku0i9pKpkxL0vEX70lpxsEIzWuo%26s%3dBCBEUlDzVl4D8GGgUkXKLHw4uRKJkuse7LZSCTmTMe4%26e%3d=E,1,IMrb7IMEJdMDhDBPW0QNCpGL_5qIIzm7VVb64fLGd6yRk869jtvPcd66G0YA8TFnldm_qU0H1DJVpYfGL2kGpzPVdOYkIU02j6c15mirpktMVMmVOBEHeR95kDWo=1
>
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2furldefense.proofpoint.com%2fv2%2furl%3fu%3dhttp-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org%26d%3dDwICAg%26c%3dwn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA%26r%3dZ_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A%26m%3dKDx4qSNGFJHpv0Coku0i9pKpkxL0vEX70lpxsEIzWuo%26s%3dBCBEUlDzVl4D8GGgUkXKLHw4uRKJkuse7LZSCTmTMe4%26e%3d=E,1,vkrHjIvmLmqfJIpzvw0jRYEH07mqZMxKSWqVJScBliE7UPU8jpPcoUNGu3gcyqsLhQNmC4PVoEyksrr4eowMsDi1MCg69BBYFuXSyMFu1kWawxYXLKtpgJqETzQ,=1
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> 

Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: Existing Dry System

[Fpdcdesign via Sprinklerforum]

 
 

 What liability do you assume by removing an existing, operating sprinkler 
system?
 
 
 
   
 

 
 
>  
> On Feb 4, 2021 at 1:42 PM,   (mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)>  wrote:
>  
>  
>  
>  One approach that I have seen in a similar situation: If the are not 
> separated enough to classify as 'separated' (2 hr, I think?) then each area 
> must be protected according to the portion that requires the most protection 
> - so 13R for the lower area. Which would basically be 13 for the lower area, 
> since it is outside of the dwelling unit areas. Matt -Original 
> Message- From: Sprinklerforum  
>  (mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org)>  On Behalf Of 
> Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 12:19 PM 
> To:  sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
> (mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)  Cc: Kyle.Montgomery  
> mailto:kmontgom...@aerofire.com)>; John O'Connor  
> mailto:jocon...@nfspk.com)>  Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: 
> Existing Dry System I think the OP is the AHJ. I just want to say that I 
> think it's cool that a plan reviewer/inspector would co
me here to get the industries opinion about something like that. We are all on 
the same team. Looks like Dane beat me to it, but I do think there is a fire 
separation required. Also, why someone would remove an existing fire sprinkler 
system? Is the maintenance becoming a problem? -Kyle M -Original 
Message- From: Sprinklerforum  
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org)>  On Behalf Of John 
O'Connor via Sprinklerforum Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 10:44 AM To:  
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
(mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)  Cc: John O'Connor  
mailto:jocon...@nfspk.com)>  Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: 
Existing Dry System You may want to run this by the AHJ. His requirements will 
trump the architect's. John R. O'Connor, SET, RME National Fire Sprinklers, 
Inc.  2601 Elm Hill Pike, Suite J Nashville TN 37214 
(x-apple-data-detectors://10/1)  Office  615-885-1301 (tel:615-885-1301
)  Fax  615-885-7505 (tel:615-885-7505)  Cell  615-519-1118 (tel:615-519-1118)  
 jocon...@nfspk.com (mailto:jocon...@nfspk.com)  In God We Trust -Original 
Message- From: Sprinklerforum  
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org)>  On Behalf Of Thomas 
Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:19 AM To:  
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
(mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)  Cc: Thomas Reinhardt  
mailto:thomas.reinha...@skokie.org)>  Subject: 
Existing Dry System Question for the group. I have an existing three story B 
occupancy with an open parking underneath. The only sprinklers is a dry system 
protecting the parking area only. The building is going to be converted to a R2 
occupancy. The whole residential area will be sprinklered with a 13R system. 
The architect informed me that he will remove the dry system from the parking 
area. I have reviewed op
en parking facilities before, and am aware that sprinklers are not 
required.(S-2). I say that the system must remain. I'm using the International 
Fire Code Chapter 9 section 901.4, which relates that fire protection systems 
shall be maintained. Any thoughts. Tom Reinhardt Skokie Fire Prevention Bureau 
Plan Review/Fire Inspector  7424 Niles Center Road Skokie Fire Department 
(x-apple-data-detectors://17/0)  Skokie, IL 60077  847-982-5342 
(tel:847-982-5342)   thomas.reinha...@skokie.org 
(mailto:thomas.reinha...@skokie.org)  
___ Sprinklerforum mailing list  
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
(mailto:Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)   
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2furldefense.proofpoint.com%2fv2%2furl%3fu%3dhttp-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org%26d%3dDwICAg%26c%3dwn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA%26r%3dZ_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A%
26m%3dKDx4qSNGFJHpv0Coku0i9pKpkxL0vEX70lpxsEIzWuo%26s%3dBCBEUlDzVl4D8GGgUkXKLHw4uRKJkuse7LZSCTmTMe4%26e%3d=E,1,IMrb7IMEJdMDhDBPW0QNCpGL_5qIIzm7VVb64fLGd6yRk869jtvPcd66G0YA8TFnldm_qU0H1DJVpYfGL2kGpzPVdOYkIU02j6c15mirpktMVMmVOBEHeR95kDWo=1
  ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list  
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
(mailto:Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)   
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2furldefense.proofpoint.com%2fv2%2furl%3fu%3dhttp-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org%26d%3dDwICAg%26c%3dwn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA%26r%3dZ_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A%26m%3dKDx4qSNGFJHpv0Coku0i9pKpkxL0vEX70lpxsEIzWuo%26s%3dBCBEUlDzVl4D8GGgUkXKLHw4uRKJkuse7LZSCTmTMe4%26e%3d=E,1,vkrHjIvmLmqfJIpzvw0jRYEH07mqZMxKSWqVJScBliE7UPU8jpPcoUNGu3gcyqsLhQNmC4PVoEyksrr4eowMsDi1MCg69BBYFuXSyMFu1kWawxYXLKtpgJqETzQ,=1
  

RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: Existing Dry System

[Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum]

One approach that I have seen in a similar situation:

If the are not separated enough to classify as 'separated' (2 hr, I think?) 
then each area must be protected according to the portion that requires the 
most protection - so 13R for the lower area. Which would basically be 13 for 
the lower area, since it is outside of the dwelling unit areas.

Matt 


-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2021 12:19 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Kyle.Montgomery ; John O'Connor 

Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: Existing Dry System

I think the OP is the AHJ. 

I just want to say that I think it's cool that a plan reviewer/inspector would 
come here to get the industries opinion about something like that. We are all 
on the same team.

Looks like Dane beat me to it, but I do think there is a fire separation 
required. Also, why someone would remove an existing fire sprinkler system? Is 
the maintenance becoming a problem?

-Kyle M

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of John O'Connor via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 10:44 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: John O'Connor 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Existing Dry System

You may want to run this by the AHJ.  His requirements will trump the 
architect's.


John R. O'Connor,  SET,  RME

National Fire Sprinklers, Inc.
2601 Elm Hill Pike, Suite J
Nashville  TN  37214

Office 615-885-1301
Fax  615-885-7505
Cell 615-519-1118
jocon...@nfspk.com

In God We Trust

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:19 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Thomas Reinhardt 
Subject: Existing Dry System

Question for the group. I have an existing three story B occupancy with an open 
parking underneath. The only sprinklers is a dry system protecting the parking 
area only. The building is going to be converted to a R2 occupancy.
The whole residential area will be sprinklered with a 13R system. The architect 
informed me that he will remove the  dry system from the parking area. I have 
reviewed open parking facilities before, and am aware that sprinklers are not 
required.(S-2). I say that the system must remain. I'm using the International 
Fire Code Chapter 9 section 901.4, which relates that fire protection systems 
shall be maintained. Any thoughts.

Tom Reinhardt
Skokie Fire Prevention Bureau
Plan Review/Fire Inspector
7424 Niles Center Road
Skokie Fire Department
Skokie, IL 60077 847-982-5342
thomas.reinha...@skokie.org


___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2furldefense.proofpoint.com%2fv2%2furl%3fu%3dhttp-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org%26d%3dDwICAg%26c%3dwn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA%26r%3dZ_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A%26m%3dKDx4qSNGFJHpv0Coku0i9pKpkxL0vEX70lpxsEIzWuo%26s%3dBCBEUlDzVl4D8GGgUkXKLHw4uRKJkuse7LZSCTmTMe4%26e%3d=E,1,IMrb7IMEJdMDhDBPW0QNCpGL_5qIIzm7VVb64fLGd6yRk869jtvPcd66G0YA8TFnldm_qU0H1DJVpYfGL2kGpzPVdOYkIU02j6c15mirpktMVMmVOBEHeR95kDWo=1
 


___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2furldefense.proofpoint.com%2fv2%2furl%3fu%3dhttp-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org%26d%3dDwICAg%26c%3dwn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA%26r%3dZ_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A%26m%3dKDx4qSNGFJHpv0Coku0i9pKpkxL0vEX70lpxsEIzWuo%26s%3dBCBEUlDzVl4D8GGgUkXKLHw4uRKJkuse7LZSCTmTMe4%26e%3d=E,1,vkrHjIvmLmqfJIpzvw0jRYEH07mqZMxKSWqVJScBliE7UPU8jpPcoUNGu3gcyqsLhQNmC4PVoEyksrr4eowMsDi1MCg69BBYFuXSyMFu1kWawxYXLKtpgJqETzQ,=1
 
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2flists.firesprinkler.org%2flistinfo.cgi%2fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org=E,1,46TvO956kwYXN3zp8Xcmr-4pZTQyEHgSxPxbINQI7Iiza2SlLubboCIQYzR8Xk5hPHd3JM-amgqlWS8bgjm0CWuLvnaKL2OxCgHmOzu-=1
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: Existing Dry System

[Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum]

I think the OP is the AHJ. 

I just want to say that I think it's cool that a plan reviewer/inspector would 
come here to get the industries opinion about something like that. We are all 
on the same team.

Looks like Dane beat me to it, but I do think there is a fire separation 
required. Also, why someone would remove an existing fire sprinkler system? Is 
the maintenance becoming a problem?

-Kyle M

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of John O'Connor via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 10:44 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: John O'Connor 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Existing Dry System

You may want to run this by the AHJ.  His requirements will trump the 
architect's.


John R. O'Connor,  SET,  RME

National Fire Sprinklers, Inc.
2601 Elm Hill Pike, Suite J
Nashville  TN  37214

Office 615-885-1301
Fax  615-885-7505
Cell 615-519-1118
jocon...@nfspk.com

In God We Trust

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:19 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Thomas Reinhardt 
Subject: Existing Dry System

Question for the group. I have an existing three story B occupancy with an open 
parking underneath. The only sprinklers is a dry system protecting the parking 
area only. The building is going to be converted to a R2 occupancy.
The whole residential area will be sprinklered with a 13R system. The architect 
informed me that he will remove the  dry system from the parking area. I have 
reviewed open parking facilities before, and am aware that sprinklers are not 
required.(S-2). I say that the system must remain. I'm using the International 
Fire Code Chapter 9 section 901.4, which relates that fire protection systems 
shall be maintained. Any thoughts.

Tom Reinhardt
Skokie Fire Prevention Bureau
Plan Review/Fire Inspector
7424 Niles Center Road
Skokie Fire Department
Skokie, IL 60077 847-982-5342
thomas.reinha...@skokie.org


___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org=DwICAg=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=KDx4qSNGFJHpv0Coku0i9pKpkxL0vEX70lpxsEIzWuo=BCBEUlDzVl4D8GGgUkXKLHw4uRKJkuse7LZSCTmTMe4=
 


___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org=DwICAg=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=KDx4qSNGFJHpv0Coku0i9pKpkxL0vEX70lpxsEIzWuo=BCBEUlDzVl4D8GGgUkXKLHw4uRKJkuse7LZSCTmTMe4=
 
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Existing Dry System

[Dane Long via Sprinklerforum]

We did an apartment years ago that was S-2 on the first floor with R-2
above. We ended up sprinkling it throughout. You have to be careful because
there are a few requirements in the IBC you'll want to check out. I'm
guessing a 2hr fire separate is probably requirement. You also might want to
check out 406.6.3 (2015) and 903.2.10 (2015) to make sure you don’t meet any
of the exceptions.

Thanks,

Dane Long, CET
Engineering Technician | Bamford Fire Sprinkler Co., Inc.
P:    785.825.7710
F:    785.825.0667
A:   1383 W. North Street  Salina, KS  67401



-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:19 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Thomas Reinhardt 
Subject: Existing Dry System

Question for the group. I have an existing three story B occupancy with an
open parking underneath. The only sprinklers is a dry system protecting the
parking area only. The building is going to be converted to a R2 occupancy.
The whole residential area will be sprinklered with a 13R system. The
architect informed me that he will remove the  dry system from the parking
area. I have reviewed open parking facilities before, and am aware that
sprinklers are not required.(S-2). I say that the system must remain. I'm
using the International Fire Code Chapter 9 section 901.4, which relates
that fire protection systems shall be maintained. Any thoughts.

Tom Reinhardt
Skokie Fire Prevention Bureau
Plan Review/Fire Inspector
7424 Niles Center Road
Skokie Fire Department
Skokie, IL 60077 847-982-5342
thomas.reinha...@skokie.org


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

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

RE: Distilled Spirits

[tstone52--- via Sprinklerforum]

NFPA 13
NFPA 30
FM Data Sheet 7-29
FM Data Sheet 7-74
"Recommended Fire Protection Practices for Distilled Spirits Beverage
Facilities"; The Distilled Spirits Council of the Untied States, Inc.
XL Catlin GAP 8.1.0, Barrel Storage of Distilled Spirits
XL Catlin GAP 17.23.3.2, Distilleries

For Starters!!

Regards,
G. Tim Stone
 
G. Tim Stone Consulting, LLC
NICET Level III Engineering Technician
Fire Protection Sprinkler Design
and Consulting Services
 
   117 Old Stage Rd. - Essex Jct., VT. 05452
CELL: (802) 373-0638   TEL: (802) 434-2968
 tston...@comcast.net

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 1:21 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. 
Subject: Distilled Spirits 

Can anyone direct me to design criteria for the manufacturing and storage of
distilled spirits ( Rum)?

 

Any info would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thank you

 

Troy

___
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: Existing Dry System

[John O'Connor via Sprinklerforum]

You may want to run this by the AHJ.  His requirements will trump the
architect's.


John R. O'Connor,  SET,  RME

National Fire Sprinklers, Inc.
2601 Elm Hill Pike, Suite J
Nashville  TN  37214

Office 615-885-1301
Fax  615-885-7505
Cell 615-519-1118
jocon...@nfspk.com

In God We Trust

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:19 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Thomas Reinhardt 
Subject: Existing Dry System

Question for the group. I have an existing three story B occupancy with an
open parking underneath. The only sprinklers is a dry system protecting the
parking area only. The building is going to be converted to a R2 occupancy.
The whole residential area will be sprinklered with a 13R system. The
architect informed me that he will remove the  dry system from the parking
area. I have reviewed open parking facilities before, and am aware that
sprinklers are not required.(S-2). I say that the system must remain. I'm
using the International Fire Code Chapter 9 section 901.4, which relates
that fire protection systems shall be maintained. Any thoughts.

Tom Reinhardt
Skokie Fire Prevention Bureau
Plan Review/Fire Inspector
7424 Niles Center Road
Skokie Fire Department
Skokie, IL 60077 847-982-5342
thomas.reinha...@skokie.org


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


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

RE: Distilled Spirits

[John O'Connor via Sprinklerforum]

Dear Forum,
You might look at FMG's data sheets #7-74 and 7-29 for guidance.
But when
FM is not involved, there is more gray area, and not a lot of definitive
direction.  
We have been involved with a small (but rapidly growing)
distillery here in Tennessee for the past 7-8 years.  Their barrel storage
is on pallets to 24 feet in unheated pre-engineered steel warehouses.  We
have been protecting them (with full approval of AHJ's) with Class Comm
IV, to 24' with C=100.  Going to NFPA-13, page 157, 2016 Ed., take a .295 /
2000 and adjust for dry and 24' to .384/2600 + 500 HA.
Recently their new underwriter has been looking at .35 / 4000 +500 HA,
regardless whether wet or dry, and not sure of their source for this
information.  However, .35 /4000 +500 is far beyond the requirements of
NFPA-13, the AHJ's will go along with the change.  

The distilling building was designed for .30/5000 + 500 HA, at the
request 
of their underwriter, who is long since been replaced.  Do not have the 
source for this data other than the underwriter required it.


John R. O'Connor,  SET,  RME

National Fire Sprinklers, Inc.
2601 Elm Hill Pike, Suite J
Nashville  TN  37214

Office 615-885-1301
Fax  615-885-7505
Cell 615-519-1118
jocon...@nfspk.com

In God We Trust

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On
Behalf Of Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 12:27 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Steve Leyton ; Trillium Fire Sprinkler
Design Inc. 
Subject: RE: Distilled Spirits 

How about a best practices guide from the distilling industry?   

Steve L.

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of
Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2021 10:21 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. 
Subject: Distilled Spirits 

Can anyone direct me to design criteria for the manufacturing and storage
of distilled spirits ( Rum)?

 

Any info would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thank you

 

Troy

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


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

Existing Dry System

[Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Question for the group. I have an existing three story B occupancy with an open 
parking underneath. The only sprinklers is a dry system protecting the parking 
area only. The building is going to be converted to a R2 occupancy. The whole 
residential area will be sprinklered with a 13R system. The architect informed 
me that he will remove the  dry system from the parking area. I have reviewed 
open parking facilities before, and am aware that sprinklers are not 
required.(S-2). I say that the system must remain. I'm using the International 
Fire Code Chapter 9 section 901.4, which relates that fire protection systems 
shall be maintained. Any thoughts.

Tom Reinhardt
Skokie Fire Prevention Bureau
Plan Review/Fire Inspector
7424 Niles Center Road
Skokie Fire Department
Skokie, IL 60077 847-982-5342
thomas.reinha...@skokie.org


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

RE: NFPA 13R & NFPA 14

[Cary Webber via Sprinklerforum]

One would have to try very hard...but nothing is impossible!



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



-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Jose Anibal Castillo via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 10:43 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Jose Anibal Castillo 
Subject: NFPA 13R & NFPA 14

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


In section 7.10.1.3.1.1 of the nfpa 14, 2019 states that in cases where 13R 
system demand is higher than the standpipe demand it is supposed to be chosen 
the higher demand.

Is it even possible to have a residential sprinkler system with a higher demand 
than the standpipe?


Regards



José A.  Castillo
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.firesprinkler.org%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.orgdata=04%7C01%7Ccwebber%40reliablesprinkler.com%7Ce8bb25665c444e3c4b4108d8c923a6e9%7C361f92efbca442cdaf0d8099acee2244%7C0%7C0%7C637480502547341878%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=oYvWE517JhGg0d0mdIxRXBxa1UIGQo%2FlGyt0fzc3Nmg%3Dreserved=0
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: [EXTERNAL] NFPA 13R & NFPA 14

[Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum]

It is if there is no requirement for a standpipe.

-Kyle M

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Jose Anibal Castillo via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 8:43 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Jose Anibal Castillo 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] NFPA 13R & NFPA 14

In section 7.10.1.3.1.1 of the nfpa 14, 2019 states that in cases where 13R 
system demand is higher than the standpipe demand it is supposed to be chosen 
the higher demand.

Is it even possible to have a residential sprinkler system with a higher demand 
than the standpipe?


Regards



José A.  Castillo
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.firesprinkler.org_listinfo.cgi_sprinklerforum-2Dfiresprinkler.org=DwIGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=rYQ1ksDj1zRZnWzsq-WD8_4Y8idQ1MgYekE5tZTca8w=Ax0UOb5CK1LXIqOhcVuDUV8oA4vTKBRhY-rYrvkCFgg=
 
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Distilled Spirits

[Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum]

Forumites:

To clarify, I sent this mail yesterday with an attachment titled "Recommended 
Fire Protection Practices" published by DISCUS, the Distilled Spirits Council 
of the United States.  I guess the Forum Firewall (correctly) identified my 
email address as high-risk because the attachment was apparently culled.   So 
my email reads like a snarky rhetorical question, which it wasn't.   This time.

Anyway, you can view it here:

https://www.distilledspirits.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/2020_DISCUS-Recommended-Fire-Protection-Practices-Foreword-and-Table-of-Contents.pdf


Steve L.

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On 
Behalf Of Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2021 10:27 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Steve Leyton ; Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design 
Inc. 
Subject: RE: Distilled Spirits 

How about a best practices guide from the distilling industry?   

Steve L.

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On 
Behalf Of Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2021 10:21 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. 
Subject: Distilled Spirits 

Can anyone direct me to design criteria for the manufacturing and storage of 
distilled spirits ( Rum)?

 

Any info would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thank you

 

Troy

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

RE: Distilled Spirits

[Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum]

How about a best practices guide from the distilling industry?   

Steve L.

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On 
Behalf Of Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2021 10:21 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. 
Subject: Distilled Spirits 

Can anyone direct me to design criteria for the manufacturing and storage of 
distilled spirits ( Rum)?

 

Any info would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thank you

 

Troy

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

NFPA 13R & NFPA 14

[Jose Anibal Castillo via Sprinklerforum]

In section 7.10.1.3.1.1 of the nfpa 14, 2019 states that in cases where 13R
system demand is higher than the standpipe demand it is supposed to be
chosen the higher demand.

Is it even possible to have a residential sprinkler system with a higher
demand than the standpipe?


Regards



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