Before you spend your cash I’d make sure you have the correct thread standard.
Best.
Bruce.
> On 03/18/2021 2:55 PM Skyler Bilbo via Sprinklerforum
> wrote:
>
>
> Sorry, the one I sent was NST on the 4" side. This should be the correct
> one.
>
>
I wish we used two terms. I used to call the 13-D test a ‘leak test’, instead
of hydrostatic test. That’s what we really mean here. We want to see the pipe
charged, and see if it leaks.
A hydrostatic and a leak test aren’t really the same thing.
Best.
Bruce Verhei
> On 03/18/2021 8:21 PM
I’d ask why. Is the fire sprinkler system acting as detection system for a
smoke exhaust system?
Best.
Bruce Verhei
> On 03/18/2021 8:05 PM Travis Mack via Sprinklerforum
> wrote:
>
>
> We've had cases where the 2 story volume area is required to be protected
> from the 1st floor
If you think it would help, I can always have a personal conversation with
her. Let';s discuss tomorrow.
For future use with AHJs, AFSA will make the informal
interpretation available to all members.
Thanks,
John
John August Denhardt, PE
*Vice President, Engineering and Technical Services*
I'd like that. The last time I went a couple rounds with her we did have a few
AFSA interpretations but none exactly fit the 'identical' situation so she
wasn't satisfied.
John Irwin
Director Of Construction
Quick Response Fire Protection
727-282-9243
Typed on tiny keys, just for you. Please
John - Let's talk tomorrow. I think we can prepare an informal
interpretation for you describing the intent of this section.
AFSA will be covering Acceptance Testing is some upcoming AHJ webinars.
Thanks,
John
John August Denhardt, PE
*Vice President, Engineering and Technical Services*
I believe Automatics came out with the first Standard Spray Sprinklers in
1953. The SS had the U (upright) of P (pendant) designation and defined
their orientation. The "old-style" sprinklers or conventional sprinklers
manufactured before then could be installed in the upright or the pendant
CLEVELAND and 'conventional' head that could be installed as a pendent or
upright.
On Mar 18, 2021, Vince Sabolik via Sprinklerforum
wrote:
>"Automatic" Sprinkler used to be IN Clevelar.
>Did you run into one of the old style heads that was installed in the
>upright or pendent position?
>
>On
NFPA 13 2016 25.2.1.4.2, Modifications that cannot be isolated, such as
relocated drops, shall require testing at system working pressure.
We have a local AHJ that always requires us to pump up tenant improvement
projects to 200 psi if they are over 20 sprinklers. We have a waiver/release
form
"Automatic" Sprinkler used to be IN Clevelar.
Did you run into one of the old style heads that was installed in the upright
or pendent position?
On Mar 18, 2021, jaycs7919--- via Sprinklerforum
wrote:
>Just wondering if anyone is familiar with these sprinklers. I am
>hoping some of the more
I ask because this time it will require a 40'-0" drop and seismic assembly for
each sprinkler
Jerry Van Kolken
Millennium Fire Protection Corp.
2950 San Luis Rey Rd.
Oceanside, CA 92058
(760) 722-2722 FX 722-2730
-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum On Behalf
Of Jerry Van Kolken
I believe there was a change somewhere, or just good practice, but responders
like the ability to shut the system off from the floor they are standing on.
In other words, if you can see it, then the control valve should be on the
level you are standing.
I have been meaning to research this
We've had cases where the 2 story volume area is required to be protected from
the 1st floor system, but not the entire building just off of one system
because of that.
Travis Mack, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G, COC, SET
Engineering Manager
MFP Design
3356 E Vallejo Ct
Gilbert, AZ 85298
480-505-9271 ext.
I've had this review comment come up and want to know if there was any way to
argue it.
I have a project where each level of the building has its own system. There are
areas where the lower level opens into the upper level. Because these 2 level
are not complete separate the reviewer is asking
Just wondering if anyone is familiar with these sprinklers. I am hoping some
of the more experienced guys like Ron or Richard dealt with them. They are
installed in two configurations and trying to verify which is correct.
Jay Stough
Tilley Fire Solutions
https://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/AboutTheCodes/13/Errata_13_19_2.pdf
Mike Morey
CFPS 3229 * NICET S.E.T. 123677
Project Manager * Fire Protection Group
Shambaugh & Son, LP an EMCOR Company
7614 Opportunity Drive * Fort Wayne, IN * 46825
direct 260.487.7824 / cell 260.417.0625 / fax
Can someone tell me if Section 9.5.6 was truly supposed to be deleted from the
2019 edition of NFPA 13 and replaced with Section 20.6.6?
Looking at the free access online, Section 9.5.6 still exists. However, if you
view the standard as a committee member, Section 9.5.6 is not there. I have
Sorry, the one I sent was NST on the 4" side. This should be the correct
one.
https://www.firehosedirect.com/aluminum-4-1-2-nh-to-4-npt-double-female
- Skyler Bilbo
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 1:52 PM Skyler Bilbo
wrote:
> Same site offers a 4" NPT to 4-1/2" NST female-female adapter.
Same site offers a 4" NPT to 4-1/2" NST female-female adapter. Probably
need to get AHJ approval, since it is not listed/approved.
https://www.firehosedirect.com/aluminum-4-1-2-nh-to-4-nh-double-female
https://www.firehosedirect.com/aluminum-4-1-2-nh-rocker-lug-plug
- Skyler Bilbo
On Thu,
Hello sir.
Check out this site.
https://www.firehosedirect.com/aluminum-4-storz-x-4-1-2-male-nh-thread
Henry Fontana
Operations Manager (NYC)
Johnson Controls Fire Protection
100 Lighting Way Secaucus, NJ 07094
Cell: 201-210-9873
henry.font...@jci.com
-Original Message-
From:
Local authorities can require threadless couplings (storz) or other inlet
requirements if not in conformance with NFPA 1963:
16.12.3.1.1 Where local fire department connections do not
conform to NFPA 1963, the authority having jurisdiction shall
be permitted to designate the connection to be
You may have to put an adapter on a standard Storz connection.
Mike Hill
-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum On Behalf
Of BOB AKINS via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 2:41 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: BOB AKINS
Subject: 4 1/2" FDC
I have a city
Storz connection?
> On Mar 18, 2021, at 1:40 PM, BOB AKINS via Sprinklerforum
> wrote:
>
> I have a city requiring 4 1/2" FDC and I am having difficulty finding a
> source
> SincerelyBob
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>
I have a city requiring 4 1/2" FDC and I am having difficulty finding a source
SincerelyBob
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
I was updating my Tolco product sheet for seismic bracing and was noticing a
lot of changes to these sheets and updated values on the loading.
The UL listed sheets don't have values for specific angles, but the FM listed
sheets do.
These sheets also are now marked with an "OPM" next to the UL
Ron-
Seems like it's the "I've always done it that way rule..."
Thanks.
Brian Harris, CET
BVS Systems Inc.
bvssytemsinc.com
-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum On Behalf
Of Ron Greenman via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 11:10 AM
To:
I remember something about keeping the detector 12" out and down from the
intersection of a wall and ceiling but that had nothing to do with
sprinklers and may have been an industry practice, or a "Sven and Ollie
we've always done it this way, right-or-wrong" rule.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 7:40 AM
That was for heat detectors. 2019 NFPA 72, 21.4.2 related to the shunt-trip
operation of elevators.
Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME - Fire Protection |
craig.pr...@jacobs.com | www.jacobs.com
1041 East Butler Road Greenville, South Carolina 29606
CONTACT BY: email or MS TEAMS
Henry,
I’m not sure why the forum site would have disallowed your question but I will
inquire with our IT people.
To your specific question, NFPA 13, 2019 edition was reorganized (as you know)
and all existing system modification requirements were moved to Chapter 29.
The use of a 4”
Matt-
Thank you.
Brian Harris, CET
BVS Systems Inc.
bvssytemsinc.com
-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum On Behalf
Of Matthew J Willis via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 10:07 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Matthew J Willis ; Richard Carr
Subject:
The last time I remember, it was Chapter 6 of NFPA 72. (Not sure which chapter
it is in the current edition)
It was a requirements for the detector to be located within 24" of the
sprinkler.
That was for like in an elevator situation where you want the detector going
before the sprinkler.
It's not for the sprinkler, wasn't sure if it was for the detector. Thanks.
Brian Harris, CET
BVS Systems Inc.
bvssytemsinc.com
-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum On Behalf
Of Richard Carr via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 9:12 AM
To:
Craig-
Thank you.
Brian Harris, CET
BVS Systems Inc.
bvssytemsinc.com
-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum On Behalf
Of Craig Leadbetter via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 9:11 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Craig Leadbetter
Subject: Re: Smoke
Could be an obstruction issue.
Richard M. Carr, SET
Project Manager/Design
Diboco Fire Sprinklers, Inc.
325 Jackson Loop Road
Flat Rock, NC 28731
rich...@diboco.com
828-696-3400
828-696-2288 Fax
828-708-9118 Mobile
-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum On Behalf
Of Prahl,
I don't believe there is anything other than when the smoke is close enough
to cause an obstruction to the spray pattern.
Craig Leadbetter
(C) 906-362-5393
craigleadbet...@gmail.com
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 7:38 AM Brian Harris via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
I searched NFPA 13, 15 and 72 and couldn't find anything referring to a
separation between a detector and a sprinkler.
Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME - Fire Protection |
craig.pr...@jacobs.com | www.jacobs.com
1041 East Butler Road Greenville, South Carolina 29606
CONTACT BY: email or
Has anyone heard of a minimum distance of 12" required between a smoke detector
and a sprinkler head? I don't see anything in NFPA-13 and I'm admittedly not
very familiar with alarm/electrical codes.
Thank You,
Brian Harris, CET
BVS Systems Inc.
Design Manager
37 matches
Mail list logo
