Re: Joining black carbon steel with stainless steel piping

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I understand Henry.  But I did a lot of copper systems in my earlier days.
I remember seeing corrosion on typical copper/galvanized steel
plumbing systems but not on steel/copper sprinkler systems.  I asked why.
I was told by a seasoned engineer, the water must be flowing through the
systems to cause a major issue. The statement to me was, since sprinkler
water is static, very little corrosion occurs.  ?

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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


*Expand your business with ITM.*

Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s comprehensive
20-month ITM Inspector Development program
<https://www.firesprinkler.org/itm> that provides a blended learning
environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry leaders.
Now enrolling for Spring 2022!


On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 4:02 PM Henry Fontana  wrote:

> John you are correct.  You need  three things for corrosion to happen a
> cathode (one metal), an anode (a second metal), and an electrolyte.
> Without water you have no electrolyte their for no corrosion.  So if this
> system is dry then you have no issue.
>
> 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: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 2:48 PM
> To:  <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> Cc: John Denhardt 
> Subject: Fwd: Joining black carbon steel with stainless steel piping
>
> I am not an expert on this topic. However, I was told the key was
> corrosion mainly occurs when water flows on a regular basis.  With water
> flowing on a regular basis, corrosion becomes a larger concern.
>
> John August Denhardt, P.E.
> Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services American Fire Sprinkler
> Association
> 301-343-1457
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> > From: Ken Wagoner via Sprinklerforum
> > 
> > Date: February 28, 2022 at 1:59:28 PM EST
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Cc: Ken Wagoner , "Prahl, Craig/GVL"
> > , "Hinson, Ryan" 
> > Subject: Re: Joining black carbon steel with stainless steel piping
> > Reply-To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> >
> > Craig,
> >
> > I would ask the question of the engineering staff over at Ames. The
> number of their stainless steel in-building risers I've seen has been
> astounding, and they primarily connect to a black steel riser.
> >
> > I would wager there's been some investigation on their part of that
> issue.
> >
> > sincerely,
> > *Ken Wagoner, SET*
> > *Parsley Consulting
> > 500 West Mechanic Street
> > Harrisonville, Missouri 64701-2235*
> > *Phone: (760) 745-6181 *
> > *Visit the website
> > <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flin
> > kprotect.cudasvc.com%2Furl%3Fa%3Dhttp%253a%252f%252fwww.parsleyconsult
> > ing.com%252f%26c%3DE%2C1%2CY5zKJKPEh1mBEBqSR-VE9cUKl5y-eyP8BpvmE_5j9Zq
> > W2eJbNphYzrCMBZ-2YuX6d-RRkHI4gQ1FV-cvOeCfRC58uZS9NiToZv2mx7909oCqLvCW_
> > n5hDHeK%26typo%3D1data=04%7C01%7CHenry.Fontana%40jci.com%7Cfa007e
> > 4b1cc24a8f19aa08d9faf33eb9%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%
> > 7C637816745050436909%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQI
> > joiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=E2bdQ2HHaH0
> > C1AmYPNjaVBNxu3d20bIjkNGXtAedvUI%3Dreserved=0>*
> >> On 2/28/2022 10:21 AM, Hinson, Ryan via Sprinklerforum wrote:
> >> Craig,
> >> >From literature I have, SS has an anodic index of approximately 0.60 V
> while plain CS has that of 0.85 V.
> >> If the environment in which the join

Fwd: Joining black carbon steel with stainless steel piping

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I am not an expert on this topic. However, I was told the key was corrosion 
mainly occurs when water flows on a regular basis.  With water flowing on a 
regular basis, corrosion becomes a larger concern. 

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association 
301-343-1457

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Ken Wagoner via Sprinklerforum 
> Date: February 28, 2022 at 1:59:28 PM EST
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Ken Wagoner , "Prahl, Craig/GVL" 
> , "Hinson, Ryan" 
> Subject: Re: Joining black carbon steel with stainless steel piping
> Reply-To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> 
> Craig,
> 
> I would ask the question of the engineering staff over at Ames. The number of 
> their stainless steel in-building risers I've seen has been astounding, and 
> they primarily connect to a black steel riser.
> 
> I would wager there's been some investigation on their part of that issue.
> 
> sincerely,
> *Ken Wagoner, SET*
> *Parsley Consulting
> 500 West Mechanic Street
> Harrisonville, Missouri 64701-2235*
> *Phone: (760) 745-6181 *
> *Visit the website 
> *
>  
>> On 2/28/2022 10:21 AM, Hinson, Ryan via Sprinklerforum wrote:
>> Craig,
>> >From literature I have, SS has an anodic index of approximately 0.60 V 
>> >while plain CS has that of 0.85 V.  
>> If the environment in which the joint is located is 'normal' or 
>> 'controlled', you shouldn't have a galvanic compatibility issue.  If the 
>> environment is considered 'harsh', the anodic index delta must be smaller 
>> (approximately 0.15 V) in which case, some sort of dielectric 
>> fitting/sacrificial anode would be needed for joint longevity.
>> 
>> As I am not an expert, I suggest reaching out to someone such 
>> aswww.corrosion-doctors.org  for more assistance.
>> 
>> Hope this helps,
>> 
>> Ryan L. Hinson, PE*, SET**  \  Burns & McDonnell
>> Senior Fire Protection Engineer
>> O 612-900-3755 \  M 763-688-4045 \  F 952-229-2923
>> rhin...@burnsmcd.com   \  burnsmcd.com
>> 8201 Norman Center Drive, Suite 500  \  Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 55437
>> *Registered in: AK, LA, MD, MN, PA, TX, & UT
>> **NICET IV - Water-Based Systems Layout
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Sprinklerforum  On 
>> Behalf Of Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum
>> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 10:06 AM
>> To:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> Cc: Prahl, Craig/GVL
>> Subject: Joining black carbon steel with stainless steel piping
>> 
>> I've got a engineer asking about the joining of grooved stainless to grooved 
>> black carbon steel and if there needs to be a special dielectric or similar 
>> type of assembly used to join the two?
>> 
>> I've been hunting on the interwebs and haven't found any type of special 
>> coupling or should the connection be flanged?
>> 
>> In all my years this is the first time this subject has ever come up.
>> 
>> Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME - Fire Protection 
>> |craig.pr...@jacobs.com  
>> |https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jacobs.com%2Fdata=04%7C01%7Crhinson%40burnsmcd.com%7C2d6969ca91d4441ae22908d9fad44781%7Cbfbb9a2b6d994e78b3c795005d555c8b%7C0%7C0%7C637816612359587927%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=ln%2Ffq9qqoz%2FALwILLnsYh4I62399EES0Jp16yw6U%2FvU%3Dreserved=0
>> 1041 East Butler Road   Greenville, South Carolina  29606
>> CONTACT BY: email or MS TEAMS
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged 
>> information that is for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any viewing, 
>> copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by unintended 
>> recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in 
>> error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting 
>> it from your computer.
>> ___
>> 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%7Crhinson%40burnsmcd.com%7C2d6969ca91d4441ae22908d9fad44781%7Cbfbb9a2b6d994e78b3c795005d555c8b%7C0%7C0%7C637816612359587927%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=1HZ7rCOBMvIGnkxdF6EcTJYOIGN1cnyC8cQHktVKb4c%3Dreserved=0
>> ___
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
> 
> 
> -- 
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> 

Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: INDOOR SPORTS FACILITY FIELD HOUSE

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

A NFPA 13 owner's certificate with additional clarifications and statements
will assist the design professional and sprinkler designer to ensure the
owner receives what he needs for the specific installation and provide a
basis of design.

Insist on a signed owner's certificate for all projects.  It is required by
NFPA 13.

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.*


*Expand your business with ITM.*

Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s comprehensive
20-month ITM Inspector Development program
 that provides a blended learning
environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry leaders.
Now enrolling for Spring 2022!


On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 11:46 AM Josh McDonald via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> It is important to inquire about the actual intended use of the facility.
> A few scenarios have come up that are similar in description to the hazard
> that you have only to find out after the installation that it is rented out
> for events on off-hours to be regularly filled up with bounce houses, food
> trucks, or other hazards that may need to be considered upon hazard
> analysis.  Though it is not possible to predict the owner's intent or all
> of the possibilities the increase of plastic may need to be considered upon
> hazard analysis.
>
> The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
> considered the official position of the NFPA or its technical committees.
> AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering services, and this
> opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as such.
>
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 8:17 AM Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > Take it a step farther.  You need to look at all the various areas within
> > the building.  For multi-use buildings, you can have various levels of
> > hazards under one roof.  This is one reason why you can't use the annex
> as
> > an end-all of occupancies.
> >
> >
> >
> > Tall, open areas need to be looked at differently than standard height
> > 8-10 ft areas.
> >
> >
> >
> > Look at your sprinkler listings. A sprinkler Listed for LH may have a
> > ceiling height limitation.
> >
> >
> >
> > Don't ya just love the wild and wooly world of fire protection?  
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sprinklerforum  On
> > Behalf Of Bob Caputo via Sprinklerforum
> > Sent: Monday, February 7, 2022 8:58 AM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Cc: Bob Caputo ; tston...@comcast.net
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: INDOOR SPORTS FACILITY FIELD HOUSE
> >
> >
> >
> > Not in my opinion.  We should always look at the definitions for each
> > occupancy classification as opposed to the list in the annex.  These
> > facilities have a lot of plastics and combustibles that exceed the
> > definition of light hazard and they are of heights exceeding 8 ft so OH1
> is
> > probably not adequate.
> >
> >
> >
> > When I look at the foam in landing pits of gymnasiums or even the
> > bleachers, I'd have a hard time seeing a simple gymnasium as light
> hazard.
> >
> >
> >
> > This is a personal opinion.
> >
> >
> >
> > Bob Caputo, CFPS
> >
> > President
> >
> > American Fire Sprinkler Association
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> >
> > From: Sprinklerforum  > > On Behalf Of
> > tstone52--- via Sprinklerforum
> >
> > Sent: Monday, February 7, 2022 7:44 AM
> >
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org > sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> >
> > Cc: tston...@comcast.net
> >
> > Subject: INDOOR SPORTS FACILITY FIELD HOUSE
> >
> >
> >
> > NFPA does not define Field houses.
> >
> >
> >
> > Indoor Track, Basketball Courts, Tennis Courts and Climbing Wall. The new
> > building will be 37'-0 high to the peak of a flat roof.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Would it be safe to use Light Hazard Occupancy?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> >
> > G. 

Re: Older copy of FMG 8-3

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

You have to appreciate this group of people on the forum. It is great to be 
part of the AFSA association and specifically this group!

John

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association 
301-343-1457

> On Jan 27, 2022, at 10:22 AM, Ben Young via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> Already got a response to this. Thanks all
> 
>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:03 AM Ben Young 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> I'm looking for an older tire storage protection scheme that allows an
>> overhead density of 0.3/2000 with one level of IRAS at 30 GPM. The current
>> version of 8-3 doesn't include this anymore.
>> 
>> Does anyone have an older copy (pre 2009) that they could send me off
>> forum?
>> 
>> FYI tires are stored in single row racks on tread without pallets up to 15
>> feet high in a 20 foot high building.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Benjamin Young
>> 
> -- 
> 
> Benjamin Young
> ___
> 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: UNUSED ATTIC DEFINITION

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Following up on Bob's post. NFPA 13, the 2025 edition is now open for
public input.  My staff has been very active in reviewing the 2022 edition
of NFPA 13 and other documents which are open for inputs.

If any member needs assistance on submitting or developing public inputs,
please contact our staff at techni...@firesprinkler.org.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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.*


Expand your design department in 2022!

Learn design with AFSA's Beginning Fire Sprinkler System Planning School.
Our technical experts teach the basics of system layout based on the 2019
edition of NFPA 13. Space is limited. Enroll today at:
www.firesprinkler.org/schools.


On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 2:16 PM Bob Caputo via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Tim,
>
> In defense of the committee and its members, NFPA standards state clearly
> that where terms are not specifically defined in chapter 3, Mirriam Webster
> Collegiate Dictionary, 11th edition definitions shall be used.  Unused mean
> no storage in this context and the standard does provide protection
> requirements for situations where fuel fired heaters are present.
>
> Of course, you are welcome to submit language to define unused attic spaces
> for consideration when the standard is open for public inputs.  If we
> provided a definition for every term used, the NFPA 13 would weigh 10
> pounds (4.54 kilos)
>
> Bob Caputo, President
> AFSA
>
> On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 9:24 AM tstone52--- via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > The building is new wood frame with insulated roof deck over the Attics.
> > The
> > roof pitches range from 8:12 – 12:12. Occupancy is Hotel, 3 story built
> > into
> > hillside with full Attic. This fully insulated Attic shall remain above
> 40°
> > F. which would allow installation of wet pipe system.
> >
> >
> >
> > Two air handling units (1 at each end of the Attic) will be suspended
> from
> > the Roof. Each unit occupies about 160 SF of area in an Attic of about
> > 9,400
> > SF. These AHUs will have propane fired furnaces. I have already spoken
> with
> > Mechanical Engineer and he has suggested that the Fire boxes could be
> > replaced with forced hot water coils if needed. There will be service
> > platforms built underneath and around these AHUs for servicing only. No
> > Walls, Service doors and ladder from floor below only to access the AHUs.
> > No storage and Public will not have access.
> >
> >
> >
> > Could this be considered “Unused Attic”?  I have laid out sprinkler
> > coverage
> > using QR listed heads in accordance with NFPA 13, 10.2.4.2 and Table
> > 10.2.4.2.1(a) and 10.2.6.1.4. I believe this layout should also qualify
> for
> > Ordinary Hazard per Table 10.2.4.2.1(b), 2022 edition.
> >
> >
> >
> > I wish NFPA would define “Unused Attic”. This term is used in NFPA 13 so
> > why
> > not define it. Or do I treat the entire Attic spaces as “Mechanical
> Room”?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you advance.
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
> >  .,+VT.+05452?entry=gmail=g>
> >
> >  CELL: (802) 373-0638
> >
> >    tston...@comcast.net
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Sprinklerforum mailing list
> > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> >
> >
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
> >
> --
> Bob Caputo, CFPS
> *President*
>
> *American Fire Sprinkler Association*
> p: 214-349-5965 ext124
> w: firesprinkler.org
> 
> 
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
> >
>

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Food trucks inside a building

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

An ordinary hazard group 1 classification for a parking garage is most
likely not appropriate for any modern garage.  The 2022 edition of NFPA 13
annex has changed "parking garages" to an ordinary hazard group II
classification and the technical committee had discussion on changing to
extra hazard group I or II.  The NFPA research Foundation is looking into
this hazard.  To state this classification is in flux, is an
understatement.  Think about the vehicles of today versus the vehicles of
the 1950s to 1970s.

A "vehicle" with generators, cooking appliances, fuel for them, and other
hazards are not a normal vehicle.  My RV is not a normal vehicle.  One
needs to look at the hazards.

It is important to understand that the engineer on record is responsible to
provide this hazard analysis classification.

The Society of Fire Protection Engineer’s Position statement PS 2020-1
states:

The Engineer’s responsibilities for the design can include, but are not
limited to:

A. Evaluate the broad range of hazards and protection schemes required to
develop a workable, integrated solution to a fire safety problem.

B. Prepare engineering documents for fire protection systems. This may
include:

∙ Conceptual and detailed engineering documents

∙ Hazard and risk analyses

∙ Performance-based design analyses

∙ Integrated building systems analyses

∙ Fire protection system drawings

∙ Calculations for all fire protection systems, as necessary

∙ Technical specifications indicating general, product, and execution
requirements

∙ Affix a professional stamp or seal with signature and date to documents
prepared under the Engineer’s direct supervision and control.

It is the responsibility of the engineer to determine the hazard, risk and
workable, integrated solution for the fire safety problem.


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.*


Expand your design department in 2022!

Learn design with AFSA's Beginning Fire Sprinkler System Planning School.
Our technical experts teach the basics of system layout based on the 2019
edition of NFPA 13. Space is limited. Enroll today at:
www.firesprinkler.org/schools.


On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 10:56 AM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> It's always been my understanding that the different hazard
> classifications are based upon the fuel load of a potential fire, not the
> likelihood that there will be a fire. So whether there is a stove in
> operation or not shouldn’t really change the hazard.
>
> So you come back to fuel load, which is present whether you are cooking in
> the truck or the truck is parked. So, are you allowed to park taco trucks
> in a parking garage? In order to call a parking garage Ordinary Hazard
> Group 1, do we need to have signage on the entrance that prohibits taco
> trucks from entering?
>
> My biggest questions would be:
> 1. Since they are likely parked long-term, do the have additional fuel or
> other combustible supplies that wouldn't be present in a vehicle moving
> from location to location?
> 2. Is there a buildup of grease that needs to be considered based on how
> the ventilation air is treated?
>
> I don't think ordinary hazard would be out of the question. I think my
> first attempt would be to go OH 2, and make someone convince me that it
> needed to be more than that.
>
> Full disclosure, I don't have the necessarily letters after my name to act
> as a consultant, and I tend to be a little less conservative than our other
> brothers and sisters on this forum.
>
> -Kyle M
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2022 10:30 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org; Edk 
> Cc: Prahl, Craig/GVL ; Fpdcdesign <
> fpdcdes...@gmail.com>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Food trucks inside a building
>
> Shielded fires wouldn't be my primary concern, fuel density and fire
> intensity would be my concerns.  A little fire in a truck can be handled by
> a fire extinguisher. I'm not sure if food trucks are required to have
> anything other than that for fire control.  But a fire in one of these
> units is not going to be shielded for very long if it isn't brought under
> control almost immediately.
>
>
> Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME – Fire Protection |
> craig.pr...@jacobs.com |
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.jacobs.com__;!!Ba8_KKAT!ZrXP5SK6t5glR-DVUQLAZqoO-M8IgbnbLSNz1_g0q5s8iY5IgvuCyhGm_e3Ao6KYcFE$
> 1041 East Butler Road   Greenville, South Carolina  29606

Re: Need some help - Poz-lock Data sheets

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

What a great group of people.  I have the information I was looking for
already!

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.*


Expand your design department in 2022!

Learn design with AFSA's Beginning Fire Sprinkler System Planning School.
Our technical experts teach the basics of system layout based on the 2019
edition of NFPA 13. Space is limited. Enroll today at:
www.firesprinkler.org/schools.


On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 3:50 PM John Denhardt 
wrote:

> We are looking for data sheets on Poz-lock pipe and fittings.  If anyone
> has these, please forward them to me at jdenha...@firesprinkler.org.
>
> We appreciate the assistance.
>
> 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.*
>
>
> Expand your design department in 2022!
>
> Learn design with AFSA's Beginning Fire Sprinkler System Planning School.
> Our technical experts teach the basics of system layout based on the 2019
> edition of NFPA 13. Space is limited. Enroll today at:
> www.firesprinkler.org/schools.
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Need some help - Poz-lock Data sheets

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

We are looking for data sheets on Poz-lock pipe and fittings.  If anyone
has these, please forward them to me at jdenha...@firesprinkler.org.

We appreciate the assistance.

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.*


Expand your design department in 2022!

Learn design with AFSA's Beginning Fire Sprinkler System Planning School.
Our technical experts teach the basics of system layout based on the 2019
edition of NFPA 13. Space is limited. Enroll today at:
www.firesprinkler.org/schools.
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Using Flex Head Connection from CPVV

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

My top of the head guess is that this would be allowed.  I have never heard
of any concerns or restrictions with this approach.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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.*


Expand your design department in 2022!

Learn design with AFSA's Beginning Fire Sprinkler System Planning School.
Our technical experts teach the basics of system layout based on the 2019
edition of NFPA 13. Space is limited. Enroll today at:
www.firesprinkler.org/schools.


On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 9:09 PM Vince Sabolik via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Thoughts?
>
> Approved or not?
>
> Thanks, Vince
> --
>
>
> *Vince Sabolik*
>
> *West Tech Fire Protection, Inc.***
>
> 11351 Pearl Road   /   Strongsville, Ohio   44136
>
> Phone 440 238-4800Fax 440 238-4876   Cell 440 724-7601
> ___
> 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: Group of Pipe Obstruction

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I do not disagree that the pattern is not perfect.  However, the goal is
fire control, not fire suppression.  In light and ordinary hazards
occupancies especially, as long as the fire stays contained, we have met
the goal of NFPA 13.  In addition, we need to ensure the sprinkler operates
in a reasonable time. In my opinion, the location of the sprinklers to
ensure operation in a timely manner is just or more important to me.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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


*Are you a member with a technical question? *

Don't forget one of the most valuable resources that American Fire
Sprinkler Association provides is technical reviews from our Engineering &
Technical Services Department. It’s like having an FPE on your staff. Visit
www.firesprinkler.org/interp
<https://www.firesprinkler.org/WWW/Contacts/Sign_In.aspx?WebsiteKey=3dff22a3-0306-479c-bccc-7aa1986c8ada=true=/WWW/Technical_Services/Informal_Interpretations/WWW/Informal_Interpret/Member_View.aspx?hkey=8023e65f-a2ad-4465-9920-0f9313a07324>
to
submit a question today!


On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 6:42 PM AKS-Gmail-IMAP via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> One should realize what happens when a continuous deluge of water, ie fire
> sprinkler flow, encounters a piping group or an electrical conduit group,
> especially level piping groups. The water flows on the piping surface and
> then drops off the pipe at the pipe’s bottom. What hits the top drops off
> the bottom. Continuous water streams will still be raining on whatever is
> directly underneath the piping, but not in a random distribution. Ask any
> on site challenger to think about if they would get soaked while standing
> underneath the piping group.
>
> > On Dec 16, 2021, at 1:59 PM, John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
> >
> > NFPA 13 - 2019 - The answer depends on the hazard and the sprinkler type.
> > ESFR and CMSA do have requirements that address this issue.  For light
> and
> > ordinary hazards, as long as the individual widths are 4' or less with
> some
> > separation to allow water to hit the floor,and the sprinkler deflector is
> > above the obstruction, no additional sprinklers are needed.
> >
> > *The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
> > interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing
> Committee
> > Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes
> no
> > liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
> > considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
> > technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting
> engineering
> > services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
> > upon, as such.*
> >
> > 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
> > <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
> > <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
> > <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
> >
> >   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>
> >
> > *Our members are at the heart of everything we do.*
> >
> >
> > *Are you a member with a technical question? *
> >
> > Don't forget one of the most valuable resources that American Fire
> > Sprinkler Association provides is technical reviews from our Engineering
> &
> > Technical Services Department. It’s like having an FPE on your staff.
> Visit
> > www.firesprinkler.org/interp
> &g

Re: Group of Pipe Obstruction

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

NFPA 13 - 2019 - The answer depends on the hazard and the sprinkler type.
ESFR and CMSA do have requirements that address this issue.  For light and
ordinary hazards, as long as the individual widths are 4' or less with some
separation to allow water to hit the floor,and the sprinkler deflector is
above the obstruction, no additional sprinklers are needed.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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.*


*Are you a member with a technical question? *

Don't forget one of the most valuable resources that American Fire
Sprinkler Association provides is technical reviews from our Engineering &
Technical Services Department. It’s like having an FPE on your staff. Visit
www.firesprinkler.org/interp

to
submit a question today!


On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 11:29 AM Joe Burtell via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I apologize if this has already been asked and answered. I could have sworn
> NFPA addressed this but I am looking for when a group of mechanical pipes
> are racked and create a wide obstruction, what the minimum gaps between
> pipe to not consider it a solid obstruction? Can someone point me to the
> correct section, please?
>
> Best regards,
>
> *Joe Burtell, SET, CFPS*
>
> [image: Burtell Fire_Small]
>
> Phone | Fax | Mobile| Text *406-204-4653 <++1-406-204-4653>*
>
> 116 N. 11th Street | Billings, MT 59101
>
> Email: j...@burtellfire.com
>
> Web Site: http://www.burtellfire.com
>
> *“**The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low
> price is forgotten.**”*
>
> *NOTICE:*  The information contained in this e-mail transmission is
> intended only for use of the individual or entity named above.  This e-mail
> transmission, and any documents, files, previous e-mail transmissions or
> other information attached to it, may contain confidential information that
> is legally privileged.  If you are not the intended recipient of this
> e-mail transmission, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it
> to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
> dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this transmission or
> any of the information contained in or attached to this e-mail is strictly
> prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please
> immediately notify us by return e-mail transmission and destroy the
> original e-mail transmission as well as its attachments without reading or
> saving it in any manner.  Thank you.
> ___
> 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: Fire Pump Shutdown

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Department. It’s like having an FPE on your staff. Visit
www.firesprinkler.org/interp
<https://www.firesprinkler.org/WWW/Contacts/Sign_In.aspx?WebsiteKey=3dff22a3-0306-479c-bccc-7aa1986c8ada=true=/WWW/Technical_Services/Informal_Interpretations/WWW/Informal_Interpret/Member_View.aspx?hkey=8023e65f-a2ad-4465-9920-0f9313a07324>
to
submit a question today!

On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 7:44 AM Larrimer, Peter A (HEFP\19HEF) via
Sprinklerforum  wrote:

> For what it is worth, we went in a different direction.  We upsized the
> jockey pump to 50gpm to handle the flow of one sprinkler (5.6 X square root
> of 100) so that testing of the sprinkler switches can be done without the
> booster pump operating (we often have lots of switches supplied by the
> pump).  This allows a lot of switches to be tested without having to shut
> down the pump, which would require instituting impairment procedures.  We
> also generally use manual shut down for the booster pump upon activation of
> the pump running alarm and staff who would respond to the pump don't have
> to be involved during switch testing with this arrangement.
>
> Pete Larrimer
> VA
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of BF Blake via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 3:27 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: BF Blake 
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Fire Pump Shutdown
>
> Copy.  Was installed/designed to 2013 Edition.  Central station reporting
> is not operational.  Thanks for all.
>
> Byron
>
> 
> From: Sprinklerforum  on
> behalf of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 11:23 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> Cc: John Denhardt 
> Subject: Re: Fire Pump Shutdown
>
> Keep in mind the following from UFC 3-600-01 (8 AUGUST 2016, CHANGE 5, 14
> SEPTEMBER 2020)
>
> 9.5.3 Pump Start and Shutdown.
>
>
> 9.5.3.1 Fire pumps must be arranged to start automatically.
>
>
> 9.5.3.2 Fire pumps must be arranged to automatically shut down after
> reaching the
>
> stop pressure and the expiration of \3\the minimum run time determined by
> NFPA 20/3/.
>
> Stop pressure must be at least 5 psi below maximum churn pressure at the
> lowest
>
> available static pressure.
>
> Note: The lowest available static pressure should be utilized in
> determining churn
>
> pressure so that the stop pressure can be achieved with low pressure. The
> 5 psi
>
> differential is used to allow for gauge error.\2\
>
>
> 9.5.3 /2/Fire pump activation (run) must transmit an alarm condition to the
>
> Installation receiving station, or remote receiving station, but not
> activate the Facility
>
> notification appliance
>
>
> While I understand what the above states, my personal opinion is to have
> the fire pump operating anytime a sprinkler is operating.  We do not want
> to short cycle the fire pump.  My suggestion is always for manual shut-down
> unless the site is unmanned and response to the site would take
> considerable time..  A properly designed and maintained fire pump system
> can operate at churn or near churn conditions for a lengthy time with no
> issues.
>
> We all know fire pump systems are maintained in full accordance with NFPA
> 25 and the manufacturer's recommendations.
>
> *The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
> considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
> technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
> services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
> upon, as such.*
>
> 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
> <
> https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Ffiresprinkler.org%2Fdata=04%7C01%7C%7Ce77f82920c1b4121c81a08d9aad1d7b5%7Ce95f1b23abaf45ee821db7ab251ab3bf%7C0%7C0%7C637728640517024173%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=4hbQHFn9YeX0dIc%2BpnuDhI%2FF8VZ%2BuOKy4lS%2BEps5YeU%3Dreserved=0
> >
> <
> https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fafsa%2Fstatus%2F1039528345367732224data=0

Re: Fire Pump Shutdown

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Keep in mind the following from UFC 3-600-01 (8 AUGUST 2016, CHANGE 5, 14
SEPTEMBER 2020)

9.5.3 Pump Start and Shutdown.


9.5.3.1 Fire pumps must be arranged to start automatically.


9.5.3.2 Fire pumps must be arranged to automatically shut down after
reaching the

stop pressure and the expiration of \3\the minimum run time determined by
NFPA 20/3/.

Stop pressure must be at least 5 psi below maximum churn pressure at the
lowest

available static pressure.

Note: The lowest available static pressure should be utilized in
determining churn

pressure so that the stop pressure can be achieved with low pressure. The 5
psi

differential is used to allow for gauge error.\2\


9.5.3 /2/Fire pump activation (run) must transmit an alarm condition to the

Installation receiving station, or remote receiving station, but not
activate the Facility

notification appliance


While I understand what the above states, my personal opinion is to have
the fire pump operating anytime a sprinkler is operating.  We do not want
to short cycle the fire pump.  My suggestion is always for manual shut-down
unless the site is unmanned and response to the site would take
considerable time..  A properly designed and maintained fire pump system
can operate at churn or near churn conditions for a lengthy time with no
issues.

We all know fire pump systems are maintained in full accordance with NFPA
25 and the manufacturer's recommendations.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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


*Are you a member with a technical question? *

Don't forget one of the most valuable resources that American Fire
Sprinkler Association provides is technical reviews from our Engineering &
Technical Services Department. It’s like having an FPE on your staff. Visit
www.firesprinkler.org/interp
<https://www.firesprinkler.org/WWW/Contacts/Sign_In.aspx?WebsiteKey=3dff22a3-0306-479c-bccc-7aa1986c8ada=true=/WWW/Technical_Services/Informal_Interpretations/WWW/Informal_Interpret/Member_View.aspx?hkey=8023e65f-a2ad-4465-9920-0f9313a07324>
to
submit a question today!



On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 3:13 PM BF Blake via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Thanks John, 100% with you.
> Byron, Poland.
>
>
> ____
> From: Sprinklerforum  on
> behalf of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 11:11 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> Cc: John Denhardt 
> Subject: Re: Fire Pump Shutdown
>
> To me, the intent is to have the fire pump operating anytime a sprinkler is
> operating.  We do not want to short cycle the fire pump.  My suggestion is
> always for manual shut-down unless the site is unmanned and response to
> Technical he site would take considerable time..  A properly designed and
> maintained fire pump system can operate at churn or near churn conditions
> for a lengthy time with no issues.
>
> *The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
> considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
> technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
> services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
> upon, as such.*
>
> 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
> <
> https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Ffiresprinkler.org%2Fdata=04%7C01%7C%7C46b5a8

Re: Omit sprinklers

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Agree with Tom - as long as the spray-in insulation is noncombustible, you
should be good to go.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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.*


*Are you a member with a technical question? *

Don't forget one of the most valuable resources that the American Fire
Sprinkler Association provides is technical reviews from our Engineering &
Technical Services Department. It’s like having an FPE on your staff. Visit
www.firesprinkler.org/interp

to
submit a question today!


On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 2:41 PM Tom Wellen via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Shawn,
>
> I would hope the insulation used in the concealed space to entirely fill it
> has the fire retardant additive.
>
> So, below the gypsum, as long as no other combustibles are exposed (wood
> framing for wall), only gypsum (that is a limited-combustible material),
> sprinklers can be omitted.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 1:22 PM Shawn Foor via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > Open web wood truss construction that is filled completely with spray
> foam
> > insulation with gyp board placed on bottom of truss and a drop ceiling
> > located 12" below gyp board would that space require sprinkler
> protection.
> >
> > --
> > Shawn Foor, SET
> >
> > *FOOR DESIGN, LLC*
> > *10208 E 98TH ST*
> > *TULSA, OK 74133*
> > *P:918-237-1400*
> > ___
> > Sprinklerforum mailing list
> > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> >
> >
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
> >
>
>
> --
> Tom Wellen - May '91
> Senior Fire Protection Consultant
> Fire Engineering & Consulting, LLC
> (972) 355-2159
> fireeac.com
>
> 
> ___
> 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: Fire Pump Shutdown

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

To me, the intent is to have the fire pump operating anytime a sprinkler is
operating.  We do not want to short cycle the fire pump.  My suggestion is
always for manual shut-down unless the site is unmanned and response to
Technical he site would take considerable time..  A properly designed and
maintained fire pump system can operate at churn or near churn conditions
for a lengthy time with no issues.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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.*


*Are you a member with a technical question? *

Don't forget one of the most valuable resources that American Fire
Sprinkler Association provides is technical reviews from our Engineering &
Technical Services Department. It’s like having an FPE on your staff. Visit
www.firesprinkler.org/interp

to
submit a question today!


On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 2:27 PM BF Blake via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Greetings Forum Members
>
> Do we believe it is the intent of NFPA 20 TC is  for 10 minute automatic
> shut down (when enabled) of fire pumps to apply only during churn (e.g.
> dead head, closed loop, testing) conditions or to any condition to include
> sprinkler flow (e.g. 1/2" 5.6K ITC flow)?
>
> Is the intent to protect the fire pump from "burn out"?  Is the intent to
> run pumps to failure (destruction) or is the intent, with 10 minute auto
> shut down, where permitted, to attempt to preserve the pump?
>
> Thanks
>
> Byron
> NATO Facility
> UFC Criteria 03-600-01 (2013) Applicable
> Słupsk, Pomorskie, Poland
>
> ___
> 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: Shoe store complications

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Whatever the engineer of the record is requiring.  See the SFPE position
statement 20-1.  This is not a simple answer.

The AHJ and insurer should also approve the selection

Thanks,
John


*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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.*


*Are you a member with a technical question? *

Don't forget one of the most valuable resources that the American Fire
Sprinkler Association provides is technical reviews from our Engineering &
Technical Services Department. It’s like having an FPE on your staff. Visit
www.firesprinkler.org/interp

to
submit a question today!

On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 3:52 PM Kevin Hall via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Whatever the designer of record wants.
>
> Kevin Hall, M.Eng., P.E., ET, CWBSP, PMSFPE
> *Coordinator, Engineering and Technical Services*
>
> *American Fire Sprinkler Association*
> p: 214-349-5971
> w: firesprinkler.org
> 
> 
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
> >
>
>
>
> *Are you a member with a technical question? *
>
> Don't forget one of the most valuable resources that American Fire
> Sprinkler Association provides is technical reviews from our Engineering &
> Technical Services Department. It’s like having an FPE on your staff. Visit
> www.firesprinkler.org/interp
> <
> https://www.firesprinkler.org/WWW/Contacts/Sign_In.aspx?WebsiteKey=3dff22a3-0306-479c-bccc-7aa1986c8ada=true=/WWW/Technical_Services/Informal_Interpretations/WWW/Informal_Interpret/Member_View.aspx?hkey=8023e65f-a2ad-4465-9920-0f9313a07324
> >
> to
> submit a question today!
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 12:51 PM Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > Whatever the fire official wants.
> >
> > SL
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Kyle.Montgomery 
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 12:50 PM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Cc: Spencer Tomlinson ; Steve Leyton <
> > st...@protectiondesign.com>
> > Subject: RE: Shoe store complications
> >
> > I would assume that there are tons of these that exist with OH2 sprinkler
> > designs. Are there any examples of fires in any of those and information
> > about whether the fire was controlled or overwhelmed the sprinklers? If
> the
> > theory says it should be protected like Group A plastics, but the history
> > shows that OH2 has proven sufficient, then what do you do?
> >
> > -Kyle M
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sprinklerforum  On
> > Behalf Of Spencer Tomlinson via Sprinklerforum
> > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 2:04 PM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Cc: Spencer Tomlinson ; Steve Leyton <
> > st...@protectiondesign.com>
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Shoe store complications
> >
> > I have worked with a very large insurer of mall properties that treats
> the
> > commodity class of any shoe store as storage of Group A unexpanded
> > plastics, at whatever height, etc., that applies.
> >
> > Spencer Tomlinson, PE
> > Owner, Fire Protection Engineer
> >
> >
> > Ph:  316-202-6412
> > Fax: 316-202-2346
> > Cell: 620-955-7293
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sprinklerforum  On
> > Behalf Of Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum
> > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 2:59 PM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Cc: Steve Leyton 
> > Subject: Shoe store complications
> >
> > Has anyone got any experience with design or classification of a discount
> > shoe store that displays shoes in 8' shelving units?   These are particle
> > board, storage to 10', with shoes on attachments to the front of  the
> > shelving units and densely packed boxes with 

Re: Mixing of K-Factors in self-storage facilities

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

What K factor sprinkler are you trying to use?

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association 
301-343-1457

> On Oct 29, 2021, at 10:09 AM, Sean Lockyer via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> NFPA 13 generally discourages the use of mixing K-Factors in a system; 
> however, the mixing of K-Factors is allowed in certain circumstances, namely 
> in section 23.4.4.9.3 where it allows such use for small rooms and 
> enclosures. In a self-storage facility, the small 5' x 5' storage units would 
> not be considered "small rooms" as they are not light hazard (once again, per 
> the strict definition as layed out in chapter 3). However, would you be able 
> to consider the small units as enclosures since they are completely separate 
> rooms from the other, larger self-storage units ?
> 
> Sean Lockyer
> Project Designer6817 N. Orange 
> Blossom Trail
> Cell386-337-1078 Orlando, Florida 
> 32810
> slock...@aitlifesafety.com Phone:407-816-9101
> www.AITLifeSafety.com  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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: Gridded dry system

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

If it looks and acts as a grid, it’s gridded.  Multiple ways to supply one 
sprinkler; a grid. Water delivery time will be longer. 

The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the NFPA or its technical committees.
AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering services, and this
opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as such.

John

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association 
301-343-1457

> On Oct 26, 2021, at 1:42 PM, Kevin Hall via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
> considered the official position of the NFPA or its technical committees.
> AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering services, and this
> opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as such.
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Supervised Air Manual Dry Standpipe

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Henry and all - From Kevin Hall's earlier post:
That being said, the committee is currently working on language for the 2022
edition to clarify this requirement. This is the current language that can
be found in the first draft of the 2022 edition (see nfpa.org/14next to
look at it in TerraView)

8.3.2.4  Supervisory Air.
> 8.3.2.4.1  System piping shall be supervised.
> 8.3.2.4.2  Supervisory air shall be maintained at a minimum pressure of 7
> psi (0.5 bar).
> 8.3.2.4.2.1 Supervisory air pressures shall be permitted to be less than 7
> psi (0.5 bar) in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
> 8.3.2.4.3  Supervisory air shall be maintained at a maximum pressure of 20
> psi (1.4 bar).
> 8.3.2.4.3.1 Supervisory air for automatic dry and semiautomatic dry
> systems shall be permitted to exceed 20 psi (1.4 bar) in accordance with
> the manufacturer’s instructions for dry pipe and deluge valves.


This would apply to all dry standpipe systems (automatic, semi-automatic,
and manual). I would encourage everyone to review the change and submit a
public comment if you feel there needs to be further clarification.
Additionally, the entire document was restructured and several new
requirements pertaining to vertical standpipe system zones were added, so
again -- review and submit public comments.

The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the NFPA or its technical committees.
AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering services, and this
opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as such.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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.*


*Have you visited **afsasafetyportal.com*

* yet? *

It's AFSA's member-only safety resource! This virtual library delivers the
accident-prevention and safety-related information you need to educate your
staff, help prevent claims, and create a safe work environment. Click here
 to learn more.





On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 7:48 AM Henry Fontana via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I also believe, and please correct me if I am wrong.  The next edition of
> NFPA 14 will require dry standpipe to be monitored.  I am not sure of the
> requirements but I did hear it talked about in Texas at the convention.
>
> 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: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Mike Stossel via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 5:31 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Mike Stossel ; BRUCE VERHEI <
> bver...@comcast.net>; Moschello, Joe 
> Subject: RE: Supervised Air Manual Dry Standpipe
>
> In NYC we put a 2 1/2" FHV right next to the FDC with a pressure gauge.
> When they arrive they use the 2 1/2" FHV as a dump valve and can see the
> pressure that is left in the system at a single location.
>
> Mike Stossel SET
>
> 36 Barren Road
> East Stroudsburg, PA 18302
> Office: 973-670-2627
> m...@knssprinkler.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of BRUCE VERHEI via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 1:53 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: BRUCE VERHEI ; Moschello, Joe <
> jmosche...@cityofsummit.org>
> Subject: RE: Supervised Air Manual Dry Standpipe
>
> I’m not familiar with NYC’s requirement. I do know FF’s hate waiting 

Re: Transport to Marriott

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Uber. Around $15

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association 
301-343-1457

> On Sep 17, 2021, at 10:18 AM, Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> Is there anyone who has already arrived at the convention who can inform me 
> of how they got there? Are there van shuttles at the airport? Does anyone 
> know how much a taxi or in Uber cost?
> 
> 
> Steve Leyton, President
> Protection Design and Consulting
> T  |  619.255.8964 x 102  |  
> www.protectiondesign.com
> 2851 Camino Del Rio South  |  Suite 210  |  San Diego, CA  92108
> Fire Protection System Design | Consulting | Planning | Training
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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: Fire Pump Room Sprinkler Classification

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Keep in mind .3 gpm/sqft/2,500 sq.ft. looks alot like extra hazard group 1
in NFPA 13 and no adjustments are allowed.

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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


*Don’t miss another issue!*

Sign-up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
magazine *Sprinkler Age* <https://sprinklerage.com/subscribe/> delivered
straight to your mailbox, inbox, or both! Subscribe now to get the latest
information you need to know and never miss another issue.




On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 2:14 PM John Denhardt 
wrote:

> I understand NFPA 37 (18edt), section 11.4.5.1 states .3 gpm/sq ft/2,500
> sq ft.  However, I prefer quoting the NFPA 20 language.  Using EH2 allows
> reductions for high temperature sprinklers and the possibility of using the
> room design method.
>
> *The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
> considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
> technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting
> engineering services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered,
> nor relied upon, as such.*
>
> 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
> <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
> <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
><https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>
>
> *Our members are at the heart of everything we do.*
>
>
> *Don’t miss another issue!*
>
> Sign-up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
> magazine *Sprinkler Age* <https://sprinklerage.com/subscribe/> delivered
> straight to your mailbox, inbox, or both! Subscribe now to get the latest
> information you need to know and never miss another issue.
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 2:06 PM Matthew J Willis 
> wrote:
>
>> NFPA 37 (18edt), section 11.4.5.1 states .3/2500.
>>
>> R/
>> Matt
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Sprinklerforum  On
>> Behalf Of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
>> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:55 AM
>> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> Cc: John Denhardt ; Prahl, Craig/GVL <
>> craig.pr...@jacobs.com>; James Crawford 
>> Subject: Re: Fire Pump Room Sprinkler Classification
>>
>> Language was added to NFPA 20 a few cycles ago - EH2 for a diesel driven
>> fire pump system.
>>
>> NFPA 20 - 2019 edition
>>
>> 4.14.1.3 Fire Pump Building or Rooms with Diesel Engines. Fire pump
>> buildings or rooms enclosing diesel engine pump drivers and day tanks shall
>> be protected with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance
>> with NFPA 13 as an Extra Hazard Group 2 occupancy.
>>
>>
>> *The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
>> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
>> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
>> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
>> considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
>> technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
>> services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
>> upon, as such.*
>>
>> 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
>> <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
>> <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
>> <
>> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
>> >
>><https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/&

Re: Fire Pump Room Sprinkler Classification

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I understand NFPA 37 (18edt), section 11.4.5.1 states .3 gpm/sq ft/2,500 sq
ft.  However, I prefer quoting the NFPA 20 language.  Using EH2 allows
reductions for high temperature sprinklers and the possibility of using the
room design method.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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


*Don’t miss another issue!*

Sign-up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
magazine *Sprinkler Age* <https://sprinklerage.com/subscribe/> delivered
straight to your mailbox, inbox, or both! Subscribe now to get the latest
information you need to know and never miss another issue.


On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 2:06 PM Matthew J Willis 
wrote:

> NFPA 37 (18edt), section 11.4.5.1 states .3/2500.
>
> R/
> Matt
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 11:55 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: John Denhardt ; Prahl, Craig/GVL <
> craig.pr...@jacobs.com>; James Crawford 
> Subject: Re: Fire Pump Room Sprinkler Classification
>
> Language was added to NFPA 20 a few cycles ago - EH2 for a diesel driven
> fire pump system.
>
> NFPA 20 - 2019 edition
>
> 4.14.1.3 Fire Pump Building or Rooms with Diesel Engines. Fire pump
> buildings or rooms enclosing diesel engine pump drivers and day tanks shall
> be protected with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance
> with NFPA 13 as an Extra Hazard Group 2 occupancy.
>
>
> *The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
> considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
> technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
> services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
> upon, as such.*
>
> 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
> <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
> <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
> >
><https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>
>
> *Our members are at the heart of everything we do.*
>
>
> *Don’t miss another issue!*
>
> Sign-up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
> magazine *Sprinkler Age* <https://sprinklerage.com/subscribe/> delivered
> straight to your mailbox, inbox, or both! Subscribe now to get the latest
> information you need to know and never miss another issue.
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 1:48 PM Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > If you look at the definitions in NFPA 13 of the various occupancies,
> > the presence of diesel fuel (combustible liquid) would dictate an EH2.
> >
> > With electric pumps OH1 or OH2 would be fine.
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sprinklerforum 
> > On Behalf Of James Crawford via Sprinklerforum
> > Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 1:43 PM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Cc: James Crawford 
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fire Pump Room Sprinkler Classification
> 

Re: Fire Pump Room Sprinkler Classification

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Language was added to NFPA 20 a few cycles ago - EH2 for a diesel driven
fire pump system.

NFPA 20 - 2019 edition

4.14.1.3 Fire Pump Building or Rooms with Diesel Engines. Fire pump
buildings or rooms enclosing diesel engine pump drivers and day tanks shall
be protected with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance
with NFPA 13 as an Extra Hazard Group 2 occupancy.


*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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.*


*Don’t miss another issue!*

Sign-up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
magazine *Sprinkler Age*  delivered
straight to your mailbox, inbox, or both! Subscribe now to get the latest
information you need to know and never miss another issue.


On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 1:48 PM Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> If you look at the definitions in NFPA 13 of the various occupancies, the
> presence of diesel fuel (combustible liquid) would dictate an EH2.
>
> With electric pumps OH1 or OH2 would be fine.
>
> 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
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of James Crawford via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 1:43 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: James Crawford 
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fire Pump Room Sprinkler Classification
>
> We are having a discussion in our and with a local AHJ on the design
> requirements of the sprinkler system in a fire pump room with a diesel fire
> pump.
>
> Comments have varied from OH2 to EX1 to EH2
>
> Any feed back out there?
>
> Thank You
>
> James Crawford
> Phaser Fire Protection Ltd.
> Phone 604-888-0318
> Cel: 604-790-0938
> Email jcrawf...@phaserfire.ca
> Web:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.phaserfire.ca__;!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!VeW9MkqZMmcPED-a0wA7RwhAfQ9ekKbI-XGRCR5BXJpBngHfsWeWJWDi_Ck0p1mH6g$
> <
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.phaserfire.ca__;!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!VeW9MkqZMmcPED-a0wA7RwhAfQ9ekKbI-XGRCR5BXJpBngHfsWeWJWDi_Ck0p1mH6g$
> >
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org__;!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!VeW9MkqZMmcPED-a0wA7RwhAfQ9ekKbI-XGRCR5BXJpBngHfsWeWJWDi_CkUz7yIVA$
>
> 
>
> NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged
> information that is for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any
> viewing, copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by
> unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
> message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message
> and deleting it from your computer.
> ___
> 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] Transfer Switches

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Agree - Too much caffeine.  I did say something slightly off-topic.

I fully understood your points, however I think you missed mine.  I was
stating just because an area had reliable power for the last 10 years,
after a few incidents, the rating can change.  This should not change an
existing system's approval but moving forward, new systems might need to
comply with different requirements.

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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

*Get in the (Fitter) Zone!*


AFSA's "Fitter Zone" features live webinars designed specifically for fire
sprinkler fitters. These live presentations are held on Saturdays whenever
possible, so you don't have to take your fitters out of the field during
the workweek. If you cannot attend live sessions, these webinars will be
recorded and can be purchased for on-demand access.  Learn more *here*
<https://www.firesprinkler.org/fitterzone>.




On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 12:16 PM Steve Leyton 
wrote:

> All true of course, but in this case the electric pump was approved and
> installed with the primary power supply apparently considered "reliable".
>  NFPA 20 criteria are admittedly generous and of course you're right about
> Texas and NOLA, but what we don't ever want is for a particular situation
> or design challenge to fall into the vortex of over-consideration or
> open-ended "What if?" thinking.   I understood the context of the original
> question to be that the power is reliable and the gen-set is NOT required
> to be connected.   Getting an EOR involved who may be more interested in
> covering their ass than considering the owner's interests isn't necessarily
> prudent or necessary.   I still recall one of our friends telling me about
> a state capitol building project where the EOR specified a 2,000 GPM diesel
> pump for a mostly Light Hazard building...
>
> Yes, a diesel pump is always an option but they require much more
> intensive testing and maintenance, have a higher first cost, are noisy and
> stinky, and in states like CA there are costly environment regs (we're NOT
> the only one) that pile on even more.And surprisingly, diesel pumps are
> NOT more likely to fire up as required - FM found several years ago that
> the failure rate of installed pumps was roughly equal comparing diesel to
> electric drives.
>
> Okay, Monday morning caffeine shot expended - carry on.
>
> SL
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of John
> Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Monday, August 30, 2021 7:52 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: John Denhardt 
> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Transfer Switches
>
> Slightly off topic - the determination of "reliable" normal power can
> change with time.  Look at the Texas area after last winter.  Look at New
> Orleans after the last 24 hours.  Just because an area was served by
> reliable power in the psat, things do change.  Have the engineer of record
> determine if standby power is required.  As Craig stated, many factors can
> influence the decision.
>
> On a personal note, I have specified, designed, installed, tested, and
> maintained thousands of diesel driven fire pumps systems.  Thet do make a
> good option where normal and or standby power is an issue.
>
> 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
> <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
> <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
> >
><https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>
>
> *Our members are at the heart of everything we do.*
>
> *Get in the (Fitter) Zone!*
>
>
> AFSA's "Fitter Zone" features live webinars designed specifically for fire
> sprinkler fitters. These live presentations are held on Saturdays whenever
> possible, so you don't have to take your fitters out of the field during
> the workweek. If you cannot attend live sessions, these webinars will be
> recorded and can be purchased for on-demand access.  Learn more *here* <
> https://www.firesprinkler.org/f

Re: [EXTERNAL] Transfer Switches

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Slightly off topic - the determination of "reliable" normal power can
change with time.  Look at the Texas area after last winter.  Look at New
Orleans after the last 24 hours.  Just because an area was served by
reliable power in the psat, things do change.  Have the engineer of record
determine if standby power is required.  As Craig stated, many factors can
influence the decision.

On a personal note, I have specified, designed, installed, tested, and
maintained thousands of diesel driven fire pumps systems.  Thet do make a
good option where normal and or standby power is an issue.

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.*

*Get in the (Fitter) Zone!*


AFSA's "Fitter Zone" features live webinars designed specifically for fire
sprinkler fitters. These live presentations are held on Saturdays whenever
possible, so you don't have to take your fitters out of the field during
the workweek. If you cannot attend live sessions, these webinars will be
recorded and can be purchased for on-demand access.  Learn more *here*
.




On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 8:58 AM Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> No. Just because a generator is present doesn't automatically require it
> to be connected to the fire pump.
>
> The requirement of secondary or backup power for an electric fire pump is
> directly related to the reliability of the primary power source and other
> factors, some which may be code driven, some based on the function of the
> building and other reasons may be related to the contents of the building
> (hazardous materials).  There are specific guidelines that typically are
> addressed or queried as part of the electrical power supply analysis by the
> project electrical engineer/contractor.  (well, hopefully).
>
> NFPA 20, 2019 9.3.2 speaks about non-reliable power sources and additional
> criteria is defined within the appendix.  Now, while this particular
> section is addressing High-Rises, the same application can apply to any
> building with contents or other conditions that absolutely must have an
> operational fire pump.
>
> So in the case of this building which has refrigerated consumables,
> whether or not the fire pump HAS to be operational in a power outage to
> protect the building and product is more of an owner/insurer preference.
> If the ice cream melts, it will be a mess but it will not endanger the
> public.
>
> 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
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Richard Mote via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2021 8:04 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Richard Mote 
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Transfer Switches
>
> Got a email from a customer with the following question. I'm on the road
> with no access to my books.If an emergency generator is installed on a
> building, is there anything in the codes that would require it to be
> connected to the fire pump.
> RichardL. Mote CET
>
> Rimrock Design Services,LLC
>
> PO Box 36
> Middleburg, PA 17842
>
> Mobile 570-541-2685
>
> EMAIL rimrock.designservi...@gmail.com
>
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org__;!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!T4uYAkl7uaiDaLLk06_07WCUsdxHvgb0jPnXmoR860XehiP7vacKg939FxRbmK-YAw$
>
> 
>
> NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged
> information that is for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any
> viewing, copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by
> unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
> message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message
> and deleting it from your computer.
> ___
> 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: Transfer Switches

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

A point to be mentioned:  a fire pump is only supplied by normal power and
if desired or required, "standby" power.  "Emergency" power is different.
"Shedding" of power is fully allowed with standby power.

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.*

*Get in the (Fitter) Zone!*


AFSA's "Fitter Zone" features live webinars designed specifically for fire
sprinkler fitters. These live presentations are held on Saturdays whenever
possible, so you don't have to take your fitters out of the field during
the workweek. If you cannot attend live sessions, these webinars will be
recorded and can be purchased for on-demand access.  Learn more *here*
.




On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 11:41 AM David Williams via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Or you “shed” the refrigeration from the generator sizing during a fire
> event. That much ice cream will stay cold for the period of time the fire
> pump needs the power.
>
> David Toshio Williams, PE*, FPE
> (*Registered in MN, WI, MI, IA, IL, IN, ND, VT)
> (218) 279-2436 direct | (218) 310-2446 cell
> LHB, Inc. | PERFORMANCE DRIVEN DESIGN
>
>
> From: Sprinklerforum  on
> behalf of Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> Date: Friday, August 27, 2021 at 10:25 AM
> To: Mark Phillips , Richard Mote <
> spri...@aol.com>, sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> Cc: Steve Leyton , Richard Mote <
> spri...@aol.com>
> Subject: RE: Transfer Switches
> It's ice cream; depending on local health code requirements, a "save"
> might still be a profound or total loss.
>
> After a long time in this racket, I find myself falling back more and more
> on Chapter 1 of all the standards wherein we find the intent statement,
> which is to provide a "reasonable" level of protection against fire.If
> they want/need a generator to keep ice cream from melting in this fully
> sprinklered building, then plug one in.   But it's also fair to undertake a
> cost/benefit analysis if backing up the pump means doubling the cost of the
> gen set and if the owner doesn't see the value, so be it.  Keeping in mind
> that at no point in this discussion has there been any allusion to the
> power supply not meeting the reliability requirements of NFPA 20.
>
> SL
>
>
> From: Mark Phillips [mailto:philli...@pyebarkerfire.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2021 3:48 AM
> To: Richard Mote ; sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Richard Mote ; Steve Leyton <
> st...@protectiondesign.com>
> Subject: Re: Transfer Switches
>
> Not a code requirement but less expensive that complete product loss.
>
>
>
> Sent from my mobile device
> Please excuse spelling, grammar, and auto correction.
>
> Mark Phillips
> Branch Manager
> Fire Sprinkler Design, Install, Inspections
> Service, Backflows, Fire Alarm Inspections
>
> 832-101 Purser Drive
> Raleigh NC 27603
> Phone: 919-779-4010
> Fax : 919-779-4014
> Cell : 919-268-7587
> Email : philli...@pyebarkerfire.com
> Web : www.pyebarkerfire.com http://www.pyebarkerfire.com%3chttp:/www.pyebarkerfire.com>>
>
> 
> From: Sprinklerforum  > on behalf of
> Richard Mote via Sprinklerforum  >
> Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2021 8:24:16 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>>
> Cc: Richard Mote mailto:spri...@aol.com>>;
> st...@protectiondesign.com <
> st...@protectiondesign.com>
> Subject: Re: Transfer Switches
>
> [EXTERNAL]
>
> This is a building within a building a 60,000 sq.ft. steel building with a
> 27,700 sq.ft. freezer. The emergence generator is to protect several tons
> of ice cream from having a melt down. If they size the generator to handle
> the fire 150 hp fire pump load it will double the price he says.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>>
> To: Richard Mote mailto:spri...@aol.com>>;
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>>
> Cc: Steve Leyton  

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Stub-up Material

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

 pressures were excessive. Upon visiting the site, we discovered the
> standpipes were interconnected at the top of the building (on the roof) as
> opposed to the floor level.  The steel pipe was exposed to direct sunlight
> every day...  increasing the system pressure significantly.  We proposed
> tenting the pipe on the roof to solve the problem, which it did.
>
> The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
> considered the official position of the AFSA, and/or NFPA or its technical
> committees. AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering services,
> and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as
> such.
>
>
> Bob Caputo, President
> American Fire Sprinkler Association
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 10:47 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Prahl, Craig/GVL ; John Denhardt <
> jdenha...@firesprinkler.org>
> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Stub-up Material
>
> Thanks for the additional comments John, oh and BTW, I guess the forum
> doesn't do different text colors.
>
> My point was that if you are unsure whether or not an item is being used
> correctly, go to the sources, either the manufacturer's installation
> guidelines, the letter from the recognized testing agency,  or the Approval
> Guide and verify one way or another whether the component is being used and
> is installed as it was intended.
>
> There are those out there who will try to gain an advantage over others by
> substituting cheaper or more easily installed materials regardless of
> whether or not the choice material is appropriate or not.   So if it
> doesn't
> seem right, verify.
>
> As far as temperature exposure versus pressure rating degradation, whether
> someone agrees or not doesn't matter. It is a tested and proven fact
> provided in the published data by the manufacturer.   I'd be curious how
> the
> NFPA 24 committee viewed this information.
>
>
>
> Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME - Fire Protection |
> craig.pr...@jacobs.com |
> https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jacobs.com%2Fdata=04%7C01%7Crhinson%40burnsmcd.com%7C1a13bdae20c7483ae05408d9635e869c%7Cbfbb9a2b6d994e78b3c795005d555c8b%7C0%7C0%7C637650080495691594%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0sdata=eWyLHH%2BIgW7dgbJbW6002rZznre9mWpmRb%2FobLurp0U%3Dreserved=0
> 1041 East Butler Road   Greenville, South Carolina  29606
> CONTACT BY: email or MS TEAMS
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 11:22 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: John Denhardt 
> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Stub-up Material
>
> Looking at Craig's comments directly, I want to provide some information.
> *(in blue bold)*
>
> 1. Go to the manufacturer's data and see if it is listed to be installed
> above grade per UL and/or FM as a fire riser. * I am not aware of many
> nonmetallic underground materials which are Listed for a fire riser.
> The NFPA 24 technical committee acknowledged this during the debates on
> the new language which was added for the 2019 editions of NFPA 13 and 24..*
>
> 2. Exposure to elevated temperatures such as in a fire event can cause
> plastic pipe to fail. The pressure rating of Non-metallic pipe is typically
> coupled to the design temperature at which it is intended to be used.  A
> class of piping that may be rated for 175 psi at 73 deg. (f) will not
> provide the same resiliency at 150 deg (f) and even less at 500 deg. (f).
> For example, C900 PVC obtains its pressure rating at an ambient
> temperature of 73 deg. (f) at which its pressure rating reduction
> coefficient would be
> 100 (100% of pressure rating is attainable).  At 140 deg. (f) it's
> pressure reduction coefficient is .22 where it has lost 75% of its pressure
> rating.
> This is why we typically do not accept plastic pipe of any kind above
> grade for a riser unless the manufacturer explicitly states that it is
> Listed and/or Approved for such an installation. * I do not disagree with
> the information.  The NFPA 24 technical committee reviewed this data.*
>
> 3. Additional support is needed for the riser assembly.  *Agree.*
>
> *What I want to add is that the NFPA 24 technical committee added new
> language in th

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Stub-up Material

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

My relocation was the NFPA 24 technical committee discussed the
temperature/pressure limitations and the fact the material was not Listed.
They were okay with limited use (thus the 2' allowance) of the product.
The caution notes were added to the Annex to point out some of the concerns.

I do agree if left up to the installing contractor, they will do whatever
is the best option for them as long as it is allowed by the local codes and
adopted standard.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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


*Apprentice Trainers Wanted* It’s time to put your knowledge and experience
to work training the next generation of Fire Sprinkler Fitters and
Technicians. In preparation to deliver related technical instruction (RTI)
for national apprenticeship training, AFSA currently seeks qualified
instructors.  Click here <http://www.firesprinkler.org/trainers> for more
information.


On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 11:47 AM Prahl, Craig/GVL 
wrote:

> Thanks for the additional comments John, oh and BTW, I guess the forum
> doesn't do different text colors.
>
> My point was that if you are unsure whether or not an item is being used
> correctly, go to the sources, either the manufacturer's installation
> guidelines, the letter from the recognized testing agency,  or the Approval
> Guide and verify one way or another whether the component is being used and
> is installed as it was intended.
>
> There are those out there who will try to gain an advantage over others by
> substituting cheaper or more easily installed materials regardless of
> whether or not the choice material is appropriate or not.   So if it
> doesn't seem right, verify.
>
> As far as temperature exposure versus pressure rating degradation, whether
> someone agrees or not doesn't matter. It is a tested and proven fact
> provided in the published data by the manufacturer.   I'd be curious how
> the NFPA 24 committee viewed this information.
>
>
>
> 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
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2021 11:22 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: John Denhardt 
> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Stub-up Material
>
> Looking at Craig's comments directly, I want to provide some information.
> *(in blue bold)*
>
> 1. Go to the manufacturer's data and see if it is listed to be installed
> above grade per UL and/or FM as a fire riser. * I am not aware of many
> nonmetallic underground materials which are Listed for a fire riser.
> The NFPA 24 technical committee acknowledged this during the debates on
> the new language which was added for the 2019 editions of NFPA 13 and 24..*
>
> 2. Exposure to elevated temperatures such as in a fire event can cause
> plastic pipe to fail. The pressure rating of Non-metallic pipe is typically
> coupled to the design temperature at which it is intended to be used.  A
> class of piping that may be rated for 175 psi at 73 deg. (f) will not
> provide the same resiliency at 150 deg (f) and even less at 500 deg. (f).
> For example, C900 PVC obtains its pressure rating at an ambient
> temperature of 73 deg. (f) at which its pressure rating reduction
> coefficient would be
> 100 (100% of pressure rating is attainable).  At 140 deg. (f) it's
> pressure reduction coefficient is .22 where it has lost 75% of its pressure
> rating.
> This is why we typically do not accept plastic pipe of any kind above
> grade for a riser unless the manufacturer explicitly states that it is
> Listed and/or Approved for such an installation. * I do not disagree with
> the information.  The NFPA 24 technical committee reviewed this data.*
>
> 3. Ad

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Stub-up Material

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Looking at Craig's comments directly, I want to provide some information. *(in
blue bold)*

1. Go to the manufacturer's data and see if it is listed to be installed
above grade per UL and/or FM as a fire riser. * I am not aware of many
nonmetallic underground materials which are Listed for a fire riser.
The NFPA 24 technical committee acknowledged this during the debates on the
new language which was added for the 2019 editions of NFPA 13 and 24..*

2. Exposure to elevated temperatures such as in a fire event can cause
plastic pipe to fail. The pressure rating of Non-metallic pipe is typically
coupled to the design temperature at which it is intended to be used.  A
class of piping that may be rated for 175 psi at 73 deg. (f) will not
provide the same resiliency at 150 deg (f) and even less at 500 deg. (f).
For example, C900 PVC obtains its pressure rating at an ambient temperature
of 73 deg. (f) at which its pressure rating reduction coefficient would be
100 (100% of pressure rating is attainable).  At 140 deg. (f) it's pressure
reduction coefficient is .22 where it has lost 75% of its pressure rating.
This is why we typically do not accept plastic pipe of any kind above grade
for a riser unless the manufacturer explicitly states that it is Listed
and/or Approved for such an installation. * I do not disagree with the
information.  The NFPA 24 technical committee reviewed this data.*

3. Additional support is needed for the riser assembly.  *Agree.*

*What I want to add is that the NFPA 24 technical committee added new
language in the 2019 editions of NFPA 13 and 24 to cover this application.
This material was discussed and debated in detail.*

NFPA 13 - 6.1.4* Underground piping shall be permitted to extend into

the building through the slab or wall not more than 24 in.

(600 mm). [24:10.1.4]


NFPA 13 - A.6.1.4 Where nonmetallic underground piping is provided

above grade or inside a building, the following should be

considered:

(1) Exposure from direct rays of sunlight

(2) Compatibility with chemicals such as floor coatings and

termiticides/insecticides

(3) Support of piping and appurtenances attached thereto

(e.g., sprinkler risers, backflow preventers)

[24:A.10.1.4]

*I fully understand Craig's concern and as an engineer of record, he can
specify what he wants.  However, the NFPA 24 technical committee
understood these concerns and still allowed the use of this material in
this application.*

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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.*


*Apprentice Trainers Wanted* It’s time to put your knowledge and experience
to work training the next generation of Fire Sprinkler Fitters and
Technicians. In preparation to deliver related technical instruction (RTI)
for national apprenticeship training, AFSA currently seeks qualified
instructors.  Click here  for more
information.


On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 2:43 PM Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I think the question was related to the material, not the height of the
> extension above the slab.
>
> 1. Go to the manufacturer's data and see if it is listed to be installed
> above grade per UL and/or FM as a fire riser.
>
> 2. Exposure to elevated temperatures such as in a fire event can cause
> plastic pipe to fail. The pressure rating of Non-metallic pipe is typically
> coupled to the design temperature at which it is intended to be used.  A
> class of piping that may be rated for 175 psi at 73 deg. (f) will not
> provide the same resiliency at 150 deg (f) and even less at 500 deg. (f).
> For example, C900 PVC obtains its pressure rating at an ambient temperature
> of 73 deg. (f) at which its pressure rating reduction coefficient would be
> 100 (100% of pressure rating is attainable).  At 140 deg. (f) it's pressure
> reduction coefficient is .22 where it has lost 75% of its pressure rating.
> This is why we typically do not accept plastic pipe of any kind above grade
> for a riser unless the manufacturer explicitly states that it is 

Re: Sprinkler drop sizing

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I know the answer has been given correctly.  However, an assumption was
made - steel piping.  Other materials may be smaller:  (NFPA 13-2019
edition)

27.2.1.2 Pipe sizes shall be no less than 1 in. (25 mm) nominal

for black or galvanized steel piping and 3∕4 in. (20 mm) nominal

for copper tubing or brass, stainless steel, or nonmetallic

piping listed for fire sprinkler service unless permitted by

Sections 29.4 and 29.5.

I just wanted to point this allowance out.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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.*


*Apprentice Trainers Wanted* It’s time to put your knowledge and experience
to work training the next generation of Fire Sprinkler Fitters and
Technicians. In preparation to deliver related technical instruction (RTI)
for national apprenticeship training, AFSA currently seeks qualified
instructors.  Click here  for more
information.




On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 5:09 PM Jennifer Cornett via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Thank you all for your help!
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Jennifer Cornett, NICET SET
> Sprinkler Sales
> Firetrol Protection Systems, Inc.
> 1001 Ave. B
> Lubbock, Texas 79401
> Ph 806-771-3500
> Cell 806-589-9630
> Fax 806-771-3501
> www.firetrol.net
> 
> This email is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it
> is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential
> and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If the reader of this
> email message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent
> responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
> communication is prohibited.  If you have received this email in error,
> please notify us immediately by telephone at 806-771-3500 and also indicate
> the sender's name.  Thank you.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dennis Wilson 
> Sent: Thursday, July 1, 2021 10:55 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org; Mark Phillips <
> philli...@pyebarkerfire.com>
> Cc: Jennifer Cornett 
> Subject: RE: Sprinkler drop sizing
>
> I have the 1985 book, and it wasn't allowed then.
> Same rule as now, ½ x 1 ell to 1" drops.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Jennifer Cornett via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, July 1, 2021 10:45 AM
> To: Mark Phillips ;
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Jennifer Cornett 
> Subject: RE: Sprinkler drop sizing
>
> The branchlines are 1", 1-1/4", etc. with a tee and the drop is ½" pipe to
> the sprinkler heads. Where I would normally design a 1" drop, they used ½".
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Jennifer Cornett, NICET SET
> Sprinkler Sales
> Firetrol Protection Systems, Inc.
> 1001 Ave. B
> Lubbock, Texas 79401
> Ph 806-771-3500
> Cell 806-589-9630
> Fax 806-771-3501
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http*3A*2F*2Fwww.firetrol.net*2Fdata=04*7C01*7Cdwilson*40blackhawksprinklers.com*7Cae4b0f62c0dc4e334df408d93ca758d7*7C20b3eafa18334148b9c58e75b45c105a*7C1*7C1*7C637607511722507659*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C2000sdata=kc*2BlRxn2CSGtMULXo*2FBrodet*2FABlV*2FNbAju5aOPx*2BXM*3Dreserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!O7jEn5k3aH8!KLtRQ84SRGU7ksZJEM_f4eUJ3JoMckU9TwMWpJ5ZFllWW1PbJRxYMR1EnrcfgLXxzQ$
> <
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http*3A*2F*2Fwww.firetrol.net*2Fdata=04*7C01*7Cdwilson*40blackhawksprinklers.com*7Cae4b0f62c0dc4e334df408d93ca758d7*7C20b3eafa18334148b9c58e75b45c105a*7C1*7C1*7C637607511722507659*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C2000sdata=kc*2BlRxn2CSGtMULXo*2FBrodet*2FABlV*2FNbAju5aOPx*2BXM*3Dreserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!O7jEn5k3aH8!KLtRQ84SRGU7ksZJEM_f4eUJ3JoMckU9TwMWpJ5ZFllWW1PbJRxYMR1EnrcfgLXxzQ$
> > 

Re: "Calculating" a Pipe Scheduled system for Backflow Retro

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I know this is an old post but

Look at NFPA 13 -2019 edition:

19.3.2 Water Demand Requirements — Pipe Schedule Method.

19.3.2.6* Residual Pressure.

19.3.2.6.1 The residual pressure requirement of Table 19.3.2.1

shall be met at the elevation of the highest sprinkler.

19.3.2.6.2 Friction Loss Due to Backflow Prevention Valves.

19.3.2.6.2.1 When backflow prevention valves are installed on

pipe schedule systems, the friction losses of the device shall be

accounted for when determining acceptable residual pressure

at the top level of sprinklers.

This requirement has been in the standard for many years.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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*


*Train a safer, more efficient workforce.*

By enrolling your employees in the AFSA Apprenticeship Training Series for
Sprinkler Fitters
,
you will reap the benefits of a qualified, professional installation crew.
Well-trained employees will work smarter, increasing your company's
productivity and, in turn, its profits. Learn more

.





On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:56 AM J H via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Yeah, I've done it before but wanted to see if I had been doing it
> correctly. I don't like to hydraulically calculate a pipe scheduled system
> as I've often seen the calcs bust causing even more headache for everyone
> when it's not necessary if the pipe scheduled 'hand calc' method works -
> not to mention they're two totally different sizing methods. As it turns
> out this particular project is busted by both the pipe scheduled 'hand
> calc' method and hydraulic calculation method so it's become a non issue -
> the owner will have to modify his system in order to reduce friction loss
> to the point where it can be retrofitted with a backflow preventor.
>
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail_term=icon
> >
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail_term=link
> >
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 12:36 AM Fpdcdesign via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >  I have done a few of these. I am not sure about 2019, but 2016 main and
> > appendix describe how to do this. You are pretty much in the right track
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Apr 13, 2021 at 6:51 PM,   > sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)>  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  Any takers? Does anyone retrofit backflows onto pipe scheduled
> systems?
> > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 2:43 PM J H   (mailto:
> > design.azfire...@gmail.com)>  wrote:  >  Hello All,  >  We're
> > retrofitting a double check into an existing pipe scheduled system.  >
> In
> > looking at NFPA 13 (2019) edition 19.3.2.1 in order to do this we just  >
> > need a hydrant flow test and then subtract the friction losses of the  >
> > double check and the friction loss due to elevation of the highest  >
> > sprinkler from the flow test and make sure the leftover pressure is
> > greater  >  than the value of 19.3.2.1. Is that correct?  >   >  JH  >
>  >
> > ___ Sprinklerforum mailing
> > list  Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org (mailto:
> > 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 

Re: 13 / 13R IN SAME BUILDING?

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Something to think about 
Keep in mind NFPA 13R has limited property protection compared to a NFPA 13 
system.  Can the community afford to lose the use of the firehouse due to a 
fire which was not contained by a NFPA 13R system. 

John

John August Denhardt, P.E
Vice President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association
301-343-1457

> On May 11, 2021, at 9:53 AM, Fpdcdesign via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Look under “Scope” in NFPA 13R, both the main part and the appendix.   
> 
> 
> 
> Todd G Williams, PE  
> Fire Protection Design/Consulting
> 
> Stonington, CT
> 
> 860-535-2080 (tel:860-535-2080)  (ofc)
> 
> 860-554-7054 (tel:860-554-7054) (fax)
> 
> 860-608-4559 (tel:860-608-4559)  (cell)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> On May 11, 2021 at 9:33 AM,  > (mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I have a fire station retro-fit project in Michigan. The A/E has specified 
>> NFPA 13 design for the entire facility and 13R design for only the second 
>> floor of the 2-story section which is a sleeping area. This 2-story section 
>> is wood frame construction with attic space. The A/E is using the 13R design 
>> to avoid requiring sprinklers in the attic space (which would require a 
>> dry-pipe system). I believe this is wrong but am having trouble finding code 
>> reference to make my case. To phrase this another way, is it acceptable to 
>> classify a part of the system as 13R? Any input is appreciated. Thanks Bill 
>> Menster WFM Consulting ___ 
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list  Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
>> (mailto: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: Available Pressure from Fire Water Storage Tank

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Lots of items to think about.  I always recommend using the tank at the
lowest available level.

   - What is the level of the tank before refilled?
   - Is the tank being utilized for any other purposes.


Reminder - account for the friction loss between the tank and the suction
side of the fire pump.

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*


*Train a safer, more efficient workforce.*

By enrolling your employees in the AFSA Apprenticeship Training Series for
Sprinkler Fitters
,
you will reap the benefits of a qualified, professional installation crew.
Well-trained employees will work smarter, increasing your company's
productivity and, in turn, its profits. Learn more

.




On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 1:13 PM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I'm working on a project where they are adding a new building to an
> existing campus. There is an existing fire water storage tank and fire
> pump  that serves the site underground fire loop. The new building has a
> very demanding sprinkler system that just barely exceeds the fire pump's
> pressure available at the demand flow (using just the pump curve as the
> water supply).
>
> Normally, I would be conservative and use just a few psi as my water
> supply from the tank (as though it were nearly empty). But, is that overly
> conservative? The tank is mounted on the ground, at the same elevation as
> the fire pump, but it is nearly 45 feet tall, with a total capacity of over
> 500,000 gallons. Can I use some of that elevation pressure, or do I need to
> design and calc as though the tank is nearly depleted?
>
> -Kyle M
> ___
> 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: Location of hydrant valves in CA.

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

NFPA 24 - 2019

7.1.1.2.2 Valves required by 7.1.1.2 shall be installed within

20 ft (6.1 m) of the hydrant.

7.1.1.2.2.1 Valves shall be clearly identified and kept free of

obstructions.

7.1.1.2.3 Where valves cannot be located in accordance with

7.1.1.2.2, valve locations shall be permitted where approved by

the AHJ.


I hope this helps.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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*


*Train a safer, more efficient workforce.*

By enrolling your employees in the AFSA Apprenticeship Training Series for
Sprinkler Fitters
,
you will reap the benefits of a qualified, professional installation crew.
Well-trained employees will work smarter, increasing your company's
productivity and, in turn, its profits. Learn more

.





On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 10:21 AM David Williams via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> A civil engineer friend of mine is working on a state project in
> California and there is a fight between the water purveyor and the state
> fire marshal as to the location of the hydrant valves. The water purveyor
> wants the valves to be right off the main and does not feel a need to keep
> the valves within 20 feet of a hydrant. The local fire marshal is okay with
> that too, but since this is a state project the state FM is saying the
> valve must move. (not a private main, all owned by the water purveyor, but
> on state property).
>
> Can someone point me to any language that might cede the NFPA’s valve
> location requirements to the water purveyor? Or the best way to deal with
> the CA FM.
>
> TIA.
>
> David Toshio Williams, PE*, FPE – Lead MEP/FP Engineer
> (*Registered in MN, WI, MI, IA, IL, IN, ND, VT)
> 21 West Superior Street, Suite 500, Duluth, MN 55802
> Direct 218.279.2436 | Cell 218.310.2446
> LHBcorp.com
>
> LHB, Inc. | PERFORMANCE DRIVEN DESIGN.
>
> ___
> 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: Manual Dry Standpipe

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Fully agree.  Interconnection is required. A control valve is required at each 
stairway riser. 

Thanks,
John
> 
> The foregoing 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.
> 
John August Denhardt, P.E.
Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association 
301-343-1457

> On May 4, 2021, at 3:51 PM, Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> Agreed.  Four separate FDC's - in a building with no sprinklers and likely 
> without any annunciation of where in the building a fire is working - would 
> be extremely challenging for the first responding company.   The intent is 
> for each FDC, including multiple FDCs that pump into a single standpipe 
> system, to energize any and all standpipe hose connections.   
> 
> 
> The foregoing 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, President
> Protection Design and Consulting
> T  |  619.255.8964 x 102  |  www.protectiondesign.com 
> 2851 Camino Del Rio South  |  Suite 210  |  San Diego, CA  92108
> Fire Protection System Design | Consulting | Planning | Training
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] 
> On Behalf Of Henry Fontana via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2021 12:30 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Henry Fontana ; Brian Harris 
> 
> Subject: RE: Manual Dry Standpipe
> 
> I would just say if they were not interconnected then it would be very 
> confusing when the fire department showed up on where to pump the water 
> 
> Henry Fontana
> Operations Manager (NYC)
> Johnson Controls Fire Protection
> 100 Lighting Way Secaucus, NJ 07094
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On 
> Behalf Of Brian Harris via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, May 4, 2021 3:25 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Brian Harris 
> Subject: Manual Dry Standpipe
> 
> A parking garage is being supplied by a Manual Dry Standpipe in each exit 
> stairwell, 4 total. Per NFPA-14 (2013) 7.5 would these need to be 
> interconnected? There are no sprinklers in the garage, only standpipes in the 
> stairwells.
> 
> Brian Harris, CET
> BVS Systems Inc.
> Design Manager
> bvssystemsinc.com
> Phone: 704.896.9989
> Fax: 704.896.1935
> 
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.firesprinkler.org%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.orgdata=04%7C01%7CHenry.Fontana%40jci.com%7Cc23f4d268f7b4ba12aa908d90f325e2d%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C1%7C637557531272517508%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=Wb4uFHWTFvGJbmhsNsbeT9LdMiVEYYoyb%2Fcfyy3jnm8%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
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Dry System Couplings

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

As usual, Scott is 100% correct.  NFPA 13 and the Listing are
minimum standards.  An owner, contractor, or an engineer can always ask for
higher grade material or methods.

I have seen schedule 40 black steel with cut grooves, "flush" type gaskets,
1/2" per 10' of pitch, with hangers every 10' maximum on many dry and
predation systems where cost is *not* the driving factor.  Piping systems
which have been installed with the above have been performing very well.
Adding a nitrogen generation system as the air supply will only increase
the performance of the piping system.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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*


*Enter your apprentices to win a trip to San Antonio!*

Deadline to enter to compete in the 28th Annual National Apprentice
Competition is April 30, 2021. Don't miss this opportunity to be recognized
for your training efforts! *It’s free to enter online at *
https://www.firesprinkler.org/competition

On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 1:47 PM Scott Futrell via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I'd sure be interested in hearing more on this subject.
> "Listing" only partially answers the question.
> Roll groove v. cut groove makes a difference.
> If the bottom line is as cheap as possible then you go one route.
> If the bottom line is an effective fire sprinkler system for the life  of
> the building, you go a different route.
>
> Scott
>
> Office: (763) 425-1001 x 2
> Cell: (612) 759-5556
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Tom Noble
> via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2021 8:14 AM
> To: Ron Greenman via Sprinklerforum
> Cc: Tom Noble
> Subject: Re: Dry System Couplings
>
> NFPA 13 2016 edition section 6.5.3.2 only requires the couplings to be
> listed for dry system use.  If the coupling is listed for use in dry or
> precaution systems it is fully acceptable to be used. Some manufactures
> will suggest to use a “Flush or Tri-seal” gaskets in cold storage or
> freezer applications to prevent the water build up in the gasket itself.
> Ultimately, not a code requirement.
>
> The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
> considered the official position of the NFPA or its technical committees.
> AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering services, and this
> opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as such.
>
> > On Apr 30, 2021, at 7:42 AM, Taylor Schumacher via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
> >
> > I'm digging through coupling data sheets and I'm seeing that most are
> listed for use in wet and dry systems even when they do not have the gap
> seal. Is there a requirement for using gaskets that have this gap seal
> gasket or is it more of a best practice thing?
> >
> > Taylor Schumacher
>
> ___
> 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: Car Dealerships

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

No other option.  1,500 Sq.Ft. minimum remote area.

Any chance adjusting K factors of the sprinklers?

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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*


*Enter your apprentices to win a trip to San Antonio!*

Deadline to enter to compete in the 28th Annual National Apprentice
Competition is April 30, 2021. Don't miss this opportunity to be recognized
for your training efforts! *It’s free to enter online at *
https://www.firesprinkler.org/competition


On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 9:48 AM Jamie Seidl via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I have a small dealership renovation we are designing now.  An issue has
> come up with the calculations we are having a difficult time solving, and I
> wanted to pick the forums collective brain on it.
> Looking at the existing system, it appears the original install contractor
> utilized the QR reduction in the showroom to reduce the design area.  The
> renovation calls for increasing the 130 sqft vestibule ceiling height to
> 26' from 17'.  This essentially eliminates our ability to apply the QR
> reduction, and defaults our remote area back to 1500 sqft.  Unfortunately,
> we don't have the water to make this remote area work anymore.  Is anyone
> aware of a way to keep the reduced design area?  I have been racking my
> brain on this, trying to eliminate the need for a pump.
> Thanks again forum...
> Jamie Seidl
> ___
> 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: Grooved joints in pump suction main

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I have completed hundreds of design, installations, and commissioning with
grooved connections on the suction and discharge sides of fire pumps.  I
never have seen an issue.  In fact, I use FxG adapters when I have
flanged valves or fittings.  I know it probably will not happen during my
career, but I have requested the fire pump manufacturers use groove
connections at the fire pump suction and discharge connections.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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*


*Expand your business with ITM*
Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
learning environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry
leaders. Plus, the first six-months of instruction is online. Now
enrolling for Spring 2021 .


On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 5:22 PM Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Yeah, a sucked rubber was front and center on my worry list.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Kyle.Montgomery [mailto:kmontgom...@aerofire.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2021 2:18 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Matt Grise ; Steve Leyton <
> st...@protectiondesign.com>
> Subject: RE: Grooved joints in pump suction main
>
> We use grooved all the time as well (like hundreds of times) and I'm not
> aware of any issue as a result of it. I'm pretty confident that there isn't
> a rule against it. I've never seen it suck one of the gaskets through the
> pump, if that's what you're concerned about.
>
> -Kyle M
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, April 6, 2021 2:12 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Matt Grise ; Steve Leyton <
> st...@protectiondesign.com>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Grooved joints in pump suction main
>
> I am not aware of any prohibitions. We use grooved when we can. For
> whatever reason (tradition?) gate valves seem to always be flanged, so we
> frequently go flanged just due to availability.
>
> Matt
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2021 4:09 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Steve Leyton 
> Subject: Grooved joints in pump suction main
>
> We've got this pump house...  Took over the design from a civil engineer
> and have been in repair mode for a couple weeks.   The original concept
> used a pre-engineered and all-inclusive pump house but the assembly won't
> be accepted by the state agency with jurisdiction because it hasn't passed
> the CA seismic testing gauntlet and is thus, not considered a
> pre-engineered/pre-approved structure.   In the course of revising this to
> slab-on-grade building, the pumps go from sitting on frames that are part
> of the floor assembly to skid-mounted and we have to furnish housekeeping
> pads that are currently really tall.   Since pump suction is 10" and we
> need a flex coupling near the floor and we have a 10" flanged ell on top of
> two flange x groove pieces, the CL of pump suction has risen to about 3'-8"
> above the floor requires a 19" concrete pad.   If I can attached the
> suction main directly to the flex coupling at about 12-14" above the FF, we
> can cut nearly a foot out of this housekeeping pad
>   so the question is:
>
> Is there any statutory prohibition or observation of good practices that
> precludes using grooved fittings and control valves on a pump suction
> main?  For whatever it's worth, this is low pressure, 2,500 gpm at 54 psi
> pumps with high static of about 70 psi.
>
> Steve Leyton
> Protection Design & Consulting
> San Diego, CA
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> 

Re: Type of sprinkler in a Gravity Waste Chute

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Interesting questions.  I just had this situation a few weeks ago.  These
are my thoughts.

NFPA 13 - 2019 edition and NFPA 82 as referenced in section 26.15 of NFPA
13 does not specify a specific temperature classification for the
sprinkler.  I would install an intermediate temperature rated sprinkler to
handle the wide range of temperatures which these sprinklers might be
exposed to.  The time of activation between an ordinary and intermediate
temperature classification is not significant in real world fire conditions.

NFPA 13 - 2019 edition and NFPA 82 as referenced in section 26.15 of NFPA
13 does not specify Listed corrosion sprinklers are required.  In my
opinion, I think installing a Listed corrosion resistant sprinkler is a
good idea.  Many of the "decorative" sprinklers are Listed as corrosion
resistant even though specific more "robust" corrosion sprinklers are
manufactured.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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*


*Expand your business with ITM*
Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
learning environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry
leaders. Plus, the first six-months of instruction is online. Now
enrolling for Spring 2021 .

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 1:43 PM Jerry Van Kolken via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> What temp sprinkler and coating should be recommended for a trash chute?
>
> On multistory buildings I keep getting asked to review the Trash chute
> drawing since we have to pipe to the sprinkler provide in the chutes. I
> always see ½" brass 155 deg heads being provided by the chute installer.
> While I'm typical being asked to provide intermediate in the Trash rooms. I
> would also assume the sprinkler should have some type of corrosion
> resistance due to the environment of the chute and the wash sprayer.
>
> I want to recommend at a min. an intermediate poly- coated sprinkler, but
> don't know enough about Chute code to know if I'm in the wrong.
>
> Jerry Van Kolken
> Millennium Fire Protection Corp.
> 2950 San Luis Rey Rd.
> Oceanside, CA 92058
> (760) 722-2722 FX 722-2730
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail and any attachments are for the sole
> use of the intended recipients and contain information that may be
> confidential or legally privileged. If you have received this e-mail in
> error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message. Any
> disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of this communication by someone
> other than the intended recipient is prohibited.
> ___
> 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: New coil actuators - New standard

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Below is the exact language from NFPA 13 -2019 edition:

8.3.1.2.1 Actuator Supervision. Effective January 1, 2021,

removal of an electric actuator from the preaction or deluge

valve that it controls shall result in an audible and visual indication

of system impairment at the system releasing control

panel.


This language should apply to any new systems permitted under the 2019
edition of NFPA 13 after January 1, 2021.  *(Personal opinion:  As someone
who designs, installs, tests, and commissions these systems, this
requirement is way overdue.)*

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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*


*Expand your business with ITM*
Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
learning environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry
leaders. Plus, the first six-months of instruction is online. Now
enrolling for Spring 2021 .


On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:33 AM Mike Henke via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Bruce,
>
> Typically the standards do not apply retroactively. This would typically
> be for new installations where the latest edition of NFPA 13 was adopted.
>
> If the electronic model cannot be used, there is a mechanical method, the
> Potter RBVS.
> I am not aware of other manufacturers coming out with products for this.
> One solenoid manufacturer has a built in switch.
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> mike
>
> Mike Henke CET
> Sprinkler Product Manager
> ___
>
>
>
> Potter Electric Signal Company, LLC
> 1609 Park 370 Place, St. Louis, MO 63042
> phone: 800-325-3936   |   direct: 314-595-6740
>
> mi...@pottersignal.com   |   www.pottersignal.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of BRUCE VERHEI via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 1:33 AM
> To: Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: BRUCE VERHEI 
> Subject: New coil actuators - New standard
>
> Please reference
>
> https://youtu.be/e7Vkdb9z2qc
>
> Mike H. Et al:
>
> Is this standards change typical, i.e., not intended to apply
> retroactively?
>
> I assume other manufacturers are putting out similar listed or marked
> products.
>
> Best.
>
> Bruce Verhei
> ___
> 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: NFPA 13 2016 25.2.1.4.2

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

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*

*American Fire Sprinkler Association*
m: p: 301-343-1457
214-349-5965 ext 121
w: firesprinkler.org
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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


*Expand your business with ITM*
Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
learning environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry
leaders. Plus, the first six-months of instruction is online. Now
enrolling for Spring 2021 <https://www.firesprinkler.org/itm>.




On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 10:25 PM John Irwin 
wrote:

> 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 forgive spelling errors,
> typographical transgressions and grammatical gaffs.
>
> ------
> *From:* Sprinklerforum 
> on behalf of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 18, 2021 10:22:20 PM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> *Cc:* John Denhardt 
> *Subject:* Re: NFPA 13 2016 25.2.1.4.2
>
> 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*
>
> *American Fire Sprinkler Association*
> m: p: 301-343-1457
> 214-349-5965 ext 121
> w: firesprinkler.org
> <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
> <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
> >
><https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>
>
> *Our members are at the heart of everything we do*
>
>
> *Expand your business with ITM*
> Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
> Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
> learning environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry
> leaders. Plus, the first six-months of instruction is online. Now
> enrolling for Spring 2021 <https://www.firesprinkler.org/itm>.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 8:21 PM John Irwin via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > 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 we always get signed from the owner and or GC. It
> > always results in delays and change orders for additional testing time as
> > well as repairs to areas that were not in our scope. So far, none of my
> > clients has wanted to spend the time to argue our case. (Note, I'm in
> > Florida so the Fire prevention code is LAW and locals can't decide on a
> > whim to rewrite code). This particular AHJ focuses on the words "such as
> > relocated drops" as if only drops are exempt from pressure.
> >
> > Has anyone gotten a code interpretation from NFPA on this? I'd really
> love
> > to stop putting 200 psi on these old systems.
> >
> > At this very moment I have 2 guys still on a job making repairs after a
> > failed hydro this morning.
> >
> >
> >
> > John Irwin
> > Director Of Construction
> > Quick Response Fire Protection
> > 727-282-9243
> >
> > Typed on tiny keys, just for you. Please forgive spelling errors,
> > typographical transgressions and grammatical gaffs.
> > ___
> > Sprinklerforum mailing list
> > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkl

Re: NFPA 13 2016 25.2.1.4.2

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

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*

*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*


*Expand your business with ITM*
Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
learning environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry
leaders. Plus, the first six-months of instruction is online. Now
enrolling for Spring 2021 .




On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 8:21 PM John Irwin via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> 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 we always get signed from the owner and or GC. It
> always results in delays and change orders for additional testing time as
> well as repairs to areas that were not in our scope. So far, none of my
> clients has wanted to spend the time to argue our case. (Note, I'm in
> Florida so the Fire prevention code is LAW and locals can't decide on a
> whim to rewrite code). This particular AHJ focuses on the words "such as
> relocated drops" as if only drops are exempt from pressure.
>
> Has anyone gotten a code interpretation from NFPA on this? I'd really love
> to stop putting 200 psi on these old systems.
>
> At this very moment I have 2 guys still on a job making repairs after a
> failed hydro this morning.
>
>
>
> John Irwin
> Director Of Construction
> Quick Response Fire Protection
> 727-282-9243
>
> Typed on tiny keys, just for you. Please forgive spelling errors,
> typographical transgressions and grammatical gaffs.
> ___
> 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: leaving abandoned sprinkler piping in place

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

NFPA 13 - 2019

29.2.2 Where all or part of an inactive sprinkler system is

abandoned in place, components including sprinklers, hose

valves and hoses, and alarm devices shall be removed.

29.2.3 Control valves abandoned in place shall have the operating

mechanisms removed.

29.2.4 Sprinkler system piping and/or valves abandoned in

place shall be uniquely identified to differentiate them from

active system piping and valves.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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*


*Expand your business with ITM*
Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
learning environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry
leaders. Plus, the first six-months of instruction is online. Now
enrolling for Spring 2021 .




On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 10:17 AM Mike Morey via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> IBC/IFC 901.4.5, 901.6
>
> 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 260.487.7991
> email mmo...@shambaugh.com
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Travis Mack via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 10:13 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: travis.m...@mfpdesign.com
> Subject: leaving abandoned sprinkler piping in place
>
>
> BE ADVISED - This email originated outside EMCOR.
>
>
> I have a customer that is being asked to cut and cap an existing system
> and leave it in place.  I seem to recall a section of the fire or building
> code that does not permit you to leave abandoned life safety equipment in
> place.  They are being asked to remove the sprinklers but leave all of the
> piping dead in the air.  Is anyone familiar with this section of the fire /
> building code?  If so, would you be able to provide the location in the IFC
> / IBC so that I can forward it on?
>
> Thanks in advance for the assistance.
>
> Travis Mack, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G, COC, SET Engineering Manager MFP Design
> 3356 E Vallejo Ct
> Gilbert, AZ 85298
> 480-505-9271 ext. 700 C: 480-272-2471
> travis.m...@mfpdesign.com
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.mfpdesign.com__;!!FaxH778!PJCw9Pa2TNeRO4zz75oVIyWFaMBBIZHAIdYMts8typU07MeeCiBX7c8dne5-6IEC$
> <
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.mfpdesign.com__;!!FaxH778!PJCw9Pa2TNeRO4zz75oVIyWFaMBBIZHAIdYMts8typU07MeeCiBX7c8dne5-6IEC$
> >
>
> Send large files to us via:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign__;!!FaxH778!PJCw9Pa2TNeRO4zz75oVIyWFaMBBIZHAIdYMts8typU07MeeCiBX7c8dnQ_c1_ow$
> <
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Fwww.hightail.com*2Fu*2FMFPDesign=02*7C01*7C*7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77*7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511*7C0*7C0*7C636379016677342180=eGdMZGu2wXhUupGwgGTrqF3b54OP5*2BAZvlHhABSexWY*3D=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!FaxH778!PJCw9Pa2TNeRO4zz75oVIyWFaMBBIZHAIdYMts8typU07MeeCiBX7c8dnVZrGrvt$
> >
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org__;!!FaxH778!PJCw9Pa2TNeRO4zz75oVIyWFaMBBIZHAIdYMts8typU07MeeCiBX7c8dnfhv1YIn$
>
> This message is for the named person's use only.  It may contain
> confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No
> confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission.  If
> you receive this message in error, please  immediately delete it and all
> copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the
> sender.  You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute,
> print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended
> 

Re: [External] Re: Does a remote free standing FDC require a valve pit?

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Tom - you stated "What happened to the balanced supplies?  FDC's must equal
tank or city in capacity.  One inlet for every 250 demand.  Stuff went
south, maybe southwest"

Can you clarify what you meant?   Is this about sprinkler or standpipe
FDCs?  Once I have some more information, I will respond.


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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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


*Expand your business with ITM*
Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
learning environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry
leaders. Plus, the first six-months of instruction is online. Now
enrolling for Spring 2021 <https://www.firesprinkler.org/itm>.




On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 9:07 PM Tom Duross via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> 150 should be the base for non high-rise FDC's unless placarded for higher
> required pressures.   Then maybe 50 over?
> I give many FDC's a pass, just me, when they leak, and a lot do.  If
> they're fitted with plastic or aluminum covers, and changed to plugs, some
> hold but many don't.  I get a hold of 30 minutes before leaking back BUT
> how many of these leak during 5 year tests?  A lot.  If I can attribute the
> leakage to the swivel, and only the swivel, OK, you pass.  Keep in mind
> many buy cheap chinese tin hats for supplying their systems and they don't
> hold anything.  Even some of the flush style are cheap junk.  Once the
> covers are removed, the swivels being put against pressure (some for the
> first time) from an aluminum or brass plug, all you have is the gasket.
> Even replaced, some don't hold.  Getting back, yes to the pit.  Who's going
> to bring a shovel and dig up a checkvalve? Bueller?
> What happened to the balanced supplies?  FDC's must equal tank or city in
> capacity.  One inlet for every 250 demand.  Stuff went south, maybe
> southwest.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2021 11:11 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: John Denhardt 
> Subject: Re: [External] Re: Does a remote free standing FDC require a
> valve pit?
>
> Once NFPA 25 2022 edition is finalized, I would expect new/revised
> language for hydrostatic testing criteria of fire department connections
> for ITM.
>
> NFPA 13  - requires the fire department connection pass a hydrostatic
> test.  200 PSI minimum with no drop in pressure or no visible leakage.
>
> NFPA 13 -2019 edition states:
>
> 28.2.1.7 Piping between exterior fire department connection and the check
> valve in the fire department inlet pipe shall be hydrostatically tested in
> the same manner as the balance of
>
> the system. After repair or replacement work affecting the fire department
> connection, the piping between the exterior and
>
> the check valve in the fire department inlet pipe shall be isolated and
> hydrostatically tested at 150 psi (10 bar).
>
> *The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
> considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
> technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
> services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
> upon, as such.*
>
> 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
> <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
> <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
> >
><https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>
>
> *Our members are at the heart of everything we do*
>
>
> *Expand your business with ITM*
> Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
> Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
> 

Re: Check Valve After Flow switch?

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I would like to know why this is the "best way" for the installation.  I am
not stating it is not, just not sure why one way is better especially since
we have done it a certain way for years.

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*


*Expand your business with ITM*
Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
learning environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry
leaders. Plus, the first six-months of instruction is online. Now
enrolling for Spring 2021 .




On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 5:05 PM Henry Fontana via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Hello all.
>
> This is not a code change. Both manufacturers (one of them I work for)
> state that this is the best way for installation and will not cause a
> nuisance alarm. Ever since Globe came out with theirs I have questioned why
> it’s designed this way.
>
> Henry Fontana
> Operations Manager (NYC)
> Johnson Controls Fire Protection
> 100 Lighting Way| St#402|Secaucus|NJ 07094
> Cell: 201-210-9873
> henry.font...@jci.com
>
>
> On Mar 15, 2021, at 5:01 PM, Jerry Van Kolken via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> I've just received a second product sheet from a different suppliers for
> a pre-built riser where the check valve is located above/after the flow
> switch. Is this arrangement a new change coming is the code?
>
> Jerry Van Kolken
> Millennium Fire Protection Corp.
> 2950 San Luis Rey Rd.
> Oceanside, CA 92058
> (760) 722-2722 FX 722-2730
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail and any attachments are for the sole
> use of the intended recipients and contain information that may be
> confidential or legally privileged. If you have received this e-mail in
> error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message. Any
> disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of this communication by someone
> other than the intended recipient is prohibited.
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.firesprinkler.org%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.orgdata=04%7C01%7CHenry.Fontana%40jci.com%7C26515cca58bc49e3d54708d8e7f57436%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C1%7C637514388691689096%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000sdata=YJtrVeB3%2B0j7oRNOyglmknAuIy16Q%2FWqp4aW3J8goyQ%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: [External] Re: Does a remote free standing FDC require a valve pit?

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Once NFPA 25 2022 edition is finalized, I would expect new/revised language
for hydrostatic testing criteria of fire department connections for ITM.

NFPA 13  - requires the fire department connection pass a hydrostatic
test.  200 PSI minimum with no drop in pressure or no visible leakage.

NFPA 13 -2019 edition states:

28.2.1.7 Piping between exterior fire department connection and the check
valve in the fire department inlet pipe shall be hydrostatically tested in
the same manner as the balance of

the system. After repair or replacement work affecting the fire department
connection, the piping between the exterior and

the check valve in the fire department inlet pipe shall be isolated and
hydrostatically tested at 150 psi (10 bar).

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the **AFSA, and/or NFPA or its
technical committees.**AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering
services, and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied
upon, as such.*

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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


*Expand your business with ITM*
Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
learning environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry
leaders. Plus, the first six-months of instruction is online. Now
enrolling for Spring 2021 <https://www.firesprinkler.org/itm>.




On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 10:57 AM Mitchell, Scott via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I can't speak for contractors, but one approach we've taken is to keep the
> pressure above the required minimum while visually verifying absence of
> physical leakage.  In one situation the boundary of the test section
> included an existing closed gate valve.  Yes, water leaked past the gate.
> We told them to run the test pump as needed to keep the pressure above the
> minimum and inspect the work (all visible) to make sure there are no leaks.
>
> Applying that approach to what you described - if the ball drip is the
> only thing leaking and the test pressure was never allowed to go below the
> minimum, I'd say it passed.
>
> My thoughts,  Scott
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2021 10:36 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: John Denhardt 
> Subject: [External] Re: Does a remote free standing FDC require a valve
> pit?
>
> I would like to know how contractors are passing the required initial and
> the periodic NFPA 25 hydrostatic test of the free standing FDC when an
> automatic ball drip is installed in the underground piping?
>
> 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
> <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
> <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
> >
><https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>
>
> *Our members are at the heart of everything we do*
>
>
> *Expand your business with ITM*
> Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
> Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
> learning environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry
> leaders. Plus, the first six-months of instruction is online. Now enrolling
> for Spring 2021 <https://www.firesprinkler.org/itm>.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 10:15 AM Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > Do you wrap the ball drip in landscaping fabric to keep it from
> > getting clogged with sediment?
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Dewayne Martinez
> > Fire Protection Design Manager
> >
> > TOTAL Mechanical
> > Building Integr

Re: Does a remote free standing FDC require a valve pit?

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I would like to know how contractors are passing the required initial and
the periodic NFPA 25 hydrostatic test of the free standing FDC when an
automatic ball drip is installed in the underground piping?

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*


*Expand your business with ITM*
Professionalize the role of your inspection team with AFSA’s ITM Inspector
Development Program. This comprehensive 20-month program provides a blended
learning environment teamed with robust curriculum created by top industry
leaders. Plus, the first six-months of instruction is online. Now
enrolling for Spring 2021 .




On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 10:15 AM Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Do you wrap the ball drip in landscaping fabric to keep it from getting
> clogged with sediment?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Dewayne Martinez
> Fire Protection Design Manager
>
> TOTAL Mechanical
> Building Integrity
>
> W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
> Pewaukee, WI  53072
> dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
> Ph:  262-522-7110
> Cell: 414-406-5208
> http://www.total-mechanical.com/
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Jamie Seidl via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 11:27 AM
> To: Sprinklerforum 
> Cc: Jamie Seidl 
> Subject: Re: Does a remote free standing FDC require a valve pit?
>
> We've typically installed a ball drip in gravel similar to a french drain
> at the low point.
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 11:17 AM Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > I see a trend starting in our area where the architect is specifying a
> > remote free standing FDC without a valve pit when the check valve can
> > be placed inside the building. Upon talking to my field superintendent
> > he was concerned that some check valves let multiple gallons of water
> > through whenever a system is drained and refilled and that the remote
> > pipe may eventually fill up and freeze.  We were toying with the idea
> > of installing a return bend in the FDC pipe downstream of the check
> > before it leaves the building to help prevent this.  A  ball valve
> > would be installed between the return bend and check to drain out the
> > pipe.  Anyone else have insight on this?
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Dewayne Martinez
> > Fire Protection Design Manager
> >
> > TOTAL Mechanical
> > Building Integrity
> >
> > W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
> > Pewaukee, WI  53072
> > dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
> > Ph:  262-522-7110
> > Cell: 414-406-5208
> > http://www.total-mechanical.com/
> > ___
> > Sprinklerforum mailing list
> > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> >
> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl
> > er.org
> >
> ___
> 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
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Group III Aircraft Hangar

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I fully agree it is the EOR responsibility to identify the hazard (design)
requirements.  The SFPE's Position Paper 20-1 makes this clear.  This
position paper was published in December 2020.  AFSA is an
endorsing organization to this position paper.

*4.2.1 Engineering Documents*

The Engineer is responsible for the preparation of engineering documents
that establish the objectives and design criteria of the system(s). The
engineering documents shall be of sufficient clarity to indicate the
location, nature, and extent of the work proposed and show that they
conform to the provisions of relevant laws, codes, ordinances, rules, and
regulations. To establish minimum design quality in the engineering
documents, the documents should include, as a minimum, the following
information when applicable:



   - Identify the scope of work


   - Identify applicable codes and standards including the specific edition


   - Conform with the applicable building code(s)


   - Identify applicable code and referenced standard requirements.
  - Identify any trade-offs allowed based on the installation of a
  suppression system, or some other compensatory factor.


   - *Identify occupancy type(s), areas to be protected (or omitted), and
   hazard classification(s)*


   - *Water-based suppression systems: a) Select type of system(s) and
   components; b) classify the hazard(s), storage arrangements, and
   commodities to be protected; c) establish the design criteria; d) determine
   and confirm the available water supply including any necessary adjustments;
   e) create a conceptual system layout and hydraulic calculations to verify
   adequacy of proposed water supply arrangements; f) set criteria regarding
   systems structural support including seismic documentation (as
   appropriate); g) identify water quality or other environmental factors that
   would affect the proposed systems; and h) **establish zoning with
   consideration to building elements (e.g. horizontal exits) or other fire
   protection/life safety systems (e.g. smoke control).*


I will be writing an article on the new SFPE position paper in the next few
months.  While I understand some projects do not have an EOR, any designs
being completed with an EOR involved need to understand the potential
liability for this approach.

Bottom line, if an EOR instructs in writing to design a system to a certain
hazard, and you do not think it is correct, challenge the EOR.  Cover your
liability.  If the EOR insists the design approach is correct, walk away
from the project OR move forward documenting all decisions.  The AHJs
review might agree with you.  In any case, if I was "stamping" the shop
drawing, I would place a note above my seal stating language similar to:

"THE ENGINEER OF RECORD, MR. BOB.SPRINKLER, PE, HAS CLASSIFIED THE HAZARD
FOR THE STORAGE AREA AS ORDINARY HAZARD GROUP II.  OUR SHOP DRAWINGS AND
HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS ARE BASED ON THIS DESIGN CRITERIA.  I HAVE NOT BE
RETAINED TO EVALUATE THE DESIGN CRITERIA OR ANY OTHER SERVICE.  AT FIRST
GLANCE, THE HAZARD CLASSIFICATION DOES NOT SEEM CORRECT.  I DO NOT ACCEPT
ANY LIABILITY FOR WORK WHICH WAS NOT PERFORMED BY ME.  OUR SHOP DRAWINGS
AND HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH NFPA 13-2019 EDITION AS
NOTED ABOVE."

I hope this helps.  Look for my article in an upcoming Sprinkler Age.

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 Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 8:50 AM Fpdcdesign via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

>
>
>
>  Who’s stamp goes on the drawing?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > On Feb 20, 2021 at 8:17 AM,   sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)>  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >  While I agree it is not our “job” as NICET techs to classify the
> hazard, that doesn’t exempt us from all responsibility. When the EOR
> classifies an area as light hazard where they are storing group A plastics
> to 10’ doesn’t mean that we just arbitrarily follow something we know is
> wrong. When the architect and EOR misapply 13R when 13 is needed, we just
> don’t follow along blindly. I have 

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Air Venting (2021)

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

The language in NFPA 13 section 16.7 is an attempt to provide a method to
vent some of the trapped air out of the system.  At this point, the
technical committee did not adapt language to require multiple air vents.
In fact, a single 1/2" manual vent is acceptable.  The air vent is required
to be near a high point and according to the language in the annex, the
manual valve should be at an accessible point and preferably not over 7 ft
above the floor.  Remember, the annex language is a good explanation of the
language and shows the intent of the technical committee but it is not a
requirement.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the  AFSA or NFPA, or NFPA's technical
committees.  AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering services,
and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as
such.*

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 18, 2021 at 3:44 PM Kevin Hall via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Yes - that is the intent as explained in the annex.
>
> "A.16.7 A manual or automatic air venting valve can be a reasonable
> approach on wet pipe sprinkler systems to reduce corrosion activity. The
> purpose of the air venting valve is to exhaust as much trapped air as
> possible from a single location every time the system is filled. The
> objective of venting is to reduce the amount of oxygen trapped in the
> system that will fuel corrosion and microbial activity. It is neither the
> intent nor practical to exhaust all trapped air from a single location on a
> wet pipe sprinkler system; however, more than one vent can be used on a
> system at the designer's discretion. Interconnection of branch line piping
> for venting purposes is not necessary. An inspector's test valve can serve
> this purpose.
>
> The air venting valve should be located where it will be most effective.
> System piping layout will guide the designer in choosing an effective
> location for venting. In order to effectively accomplish venting, it is
> necessary to choose a location where the greatest volume of trapped air is
> vented during the first fill and each subsequent drain and fill event. The
> vent connection to the system should be located off the top of horizontal
> piping at a high point in the system; however, the vent connection can also
> be effectively located off the side of a riser or riser nipple at a high
> point in the system.
>
> Manual air venting valves should be accessible. The manual air venting
> valve should be located at an accessible point and preferably not over 7 ft
> (2.1 m) above the floor. Automatic air valves are not required to comply
> with the accessibility requirement of manual air venting valves; however,
> it is recommended the designer locate automatic air vents over areas
> without ceilings, above a lay-in ceiling, or above an access panel.
>
> Each wet pipe sprinkler system should be vented every time the system is
> filled."
>
> The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
> considered the official position of the NFPA or its technical committees.
> AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering services, and this
> opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as such.
>
>
> Kevin Hall, M. Eng, P.E., CWBSP, MSFPE
>
> Coordinator, Engineering and Technical Services
>
> American Fire Sprinkler Association
>
> kh...@firesprinkler.org
>
> 214-349-5971
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 3:33 PM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > It was 

Re: Hotel or Condo

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Absolutely - Closets which are 24 sq.ft. or less in motels and hotels are
the exception.  Transient occupancy usually means low storage in closets,
thus no protection is required.

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 Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 4:36 PM Joe Burtell via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> NFPA 13 only allows omission for hotels and motels, so I think the answer
> is, there is no omission allowed in the "condo" areas.
>
> Best regards,
>
> *Joe Burtell, SET, CFPS*
>
> [image: Burtell Fire_Small]
>
> Phone | Fax | Mobile| Text *406-204-4653 <++1-406-204-4653>*
>
> 116 N. 11th Street | Billings, MT 59101
>
> Email: j...@burtellfire.com
>
> Web Site: http://www.burtellfire.com
>
> *“**The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low
> price is forgotten.**”*
>
> *NOTICE:*  The information contained in this e-mail transmission is
> intended only for use of the individual or entity named above.  This e-mail
> transmission, and any documents, files, previous e-mail transmissions or
> other information attached to it, may contain confidential information that
> is legally privileged.  If you are not the intended recipient of this
> e-mail transmission, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it
> to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
> dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this transmission or
> any of the information contained in or attached to this e-mail is strictly
> prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please
> immediately notify us by return e-mail transmission and destroy the
> original e-mail transmission as well as its attachments without reading or
> saving it in any manner.  Thank you.
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 2:13 PM Brian Harris via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > When does a hotel room become a condo and are there any sprinkler
> > omissions allowed? Looking at some review comments for a project we were
> > asked to take over and the first 8 floors are "hotel" rooms and the next
> 11
> > are "condos".. I know NFPA-13 is clear on closets and bathrooms for
> hotels
> > & motels but I don't see anything that talks about condo's.
> >
> > Brian Harris, CET
> > BVS Systems Inc.
> > Design Manager
> > bvssystemsinc.com
> > Phone: 704.896.9989
> > Fax: 704.896.1935
> >
> > ___
> > 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: Multiple System Calculation

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

All - For the 2022 edition of NFPA 13, some clarifications and changes are
coming for the "Phantom Flow" calculation process.  The diagram in the
annex has been revised.  These changes are still tentative since the NITIAM
process is currently occurring. Hopefully, these changes will make it
easier to understand.  NFPA's website has the proposed language.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the AFSA, NFPA, or NFPA's technical
committees. AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering services,
and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as
such.*

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 Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 2:00 PM Sean Conlin via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> See NFPA-13, 23.4.4.1.1.4 and 23.4.4.1.1.5.
>
>
>
> This should help you with the engineer.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Sean W. Conlin, A.Sc.T.
> Director
> Demand Sprinkler Design Inc.
> 37 Summerfield Crescent
> Brampton, ON L6X 4K4
> T: 905-216-0922
> C: 416-317-0028
> E: scon...@demandsprinklerdesign.ca
>
> This message, including any attachments is considered confidential and for
> use only by the intended recipient(s).
> Any other distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited.
> Please delete this communication and notify
> Demand Sprinkler Design Inc. if you are not the intended recipient or have
> received this message in error. Demand
> Sprinkler Design Inc. accepts no responsibility or liability for any loss
> or damage from use, including damage from viruses.
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Burtell 
> Sent: February 11, 2021 1:47 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Subject: Multiple System Calculation
>
>
>
> I have a situation where an engineer is telling me I have to calculate a
> wet and dry system together because neither space meets the 1500 s.f
> minimum. I have a penthouse mechanical room OH 1 (WET) of 1014 s.f. and an
> adjacent room OH1 (DRY) of 469 s.f. I have calculated each room separate of
> each other. There is a full-height wall with a door that separates the
> rooms. The wall and door are not fire rated, so the large room method is
> out. This does not make any sense to me. Any sections that would require
> this to be done. He is saying 11.1.2 of NFPA 13 2016 requires it. I argue
> exception #2 says it does not apply.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> *Joe Burtell, SET, CFPS*
>
>
>
> [image: Burtell Fire_Small]
>
>
>
> Phone | Fax | Mobile| Text *406-204-4653 <++1-406-204-4653>*
>
>
>
> 116 N. 11th Street | Billings, MT 59101
>
>
>
> Email: j...@burtellfire.com
>
>
>
> Web Site: http://www.burtellfire.com
>
>
>
> *“**The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low
> price is forgotten.**”*
>
>
>
> *NOTICE:*  The information contained in this e-mail transmission is
> intended only for use of the individual or entity named above.  This e-mail
> transmission, and any documents, files, previous e-mail transmissions or
> other information attached to it, may contain confidential information that
> is legally privileged.  If you are not the intended recipient of this
> e-mail transmission, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it
> to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
> dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this transmission or
> any of the information contained in or attached to this e-mail is strictly
> prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please
> immediately notify us by return e-mail transmission and destroy the
> original e-mail transmission as well as its attachments without reading or
> saving it in any manner.  Thank you.
>
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing 

Re: [EXTERNAL] Noncontinuous obstructions More than 18" down

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I now have the drawing.  I am reviewing it.

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

*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
<http://www.firesprinkler.org/join>.




On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 11:08 AM John Denhardt 
wrote:

> No, I have not seen the drawing.
>
> Dane - please send me the drawing.
>
> 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
> <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
> <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
><https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>
>
> *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
> <http://www.firesprinkler.org/join>.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 11:03 AM Kyle.Montgomery 
> wrote:
>
>> Have you guys had a chance to look at the actual plans Dane is dealing
>> with? It seems to meet the letter of the law for not requiring additional
>> heads, but it also looks like the outlier that the committee probably
>> wasn't expecting when that was written. In plan view, these panels cover
>> nearly 90% of the floor area. I'm not saying that you definitely need
>> sprinklers, but it would be cool to see some fire modeling or something to
>> see the impact of these panels on activation time and/or sprinkler
>> discharge.
>>
>> -Kyle M
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Sprinklerforum  On
>> Behalf Of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
>> Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 8:48 AM
>> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>> Cc: John Denhardt ; Dane Long <
>> da...@bamfordfire.com>; Skyler Bilbo 
>> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Noncontinuous obstructions More than 18" down
>>
>> My understanding of the standard is no additional protection is needed as
>> long as you have the 18" of clearance between the sprinkler and the top of
>> the obstruction.  As you stated, the pattern is developed sufficiently to
>> allow adequate protection since water will be delivered on both sides of
>> the obstructions.
>>
>> *The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
>> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
>> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
>> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
>> considered the official position of the AFSA, NFPA or NFPA's technical
>> committees. AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering services,
>> and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as
>> such.*
>>
>> 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
>> <
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_firesprinkler.org_=DwIGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=dE_ALmGW3CHaFJIa1qPVLZpyrhiKK9Q6pwnWic9Kb74=BZdIbAOiOpzb7zeMSyXRk7uLyyR6OFVrhuVWUfDEvvM=
>> > <
>> https://urldefense.proofp

Re: [EXTERNAL] Noncontinuous obstructions More than 18" down

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

No, I have not seen the drawing.

Dane - please send me the drawing.

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

*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
<http://www.firesprinkler.org/join>.




On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 11:03 AM Kyle.Montgomery 
wrote:

> Have you guys had a chance to look at the actual plans Dane is dealing
> with? It seems to meet the letter of the law for not requiring additional
> heads, but it also looks like the outlier that the committee probably
> wasn't expecting when that was written. In plan view, these panels cover
> nearly 90% of the floor area. I'm not saying that you definitely need
> sprinklers, but it would be cool to see some fire modeling or something to
> see the impact of these panels on activation time and/or sprinkler
> discharge.
>
> -Kyle M
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 8:48 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: John Denhardt ; Dane Long <
> da...@bamfordfire.com>; Skyler Bilbo 
> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Noncontinuous obstructions More than 18" down
>
> My understanding of the standard is no additional protection is needed as
> long as you have the 18" of clearance between the sprinkler and the top of
> the obstruction.  As you stated, the pattern is developed sufficiently to
> allow adequate protection since water will be delivered on both sides of
> the obstructions.
>
> *The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
> interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
> Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
> liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
> considered the official position of the AFSA, NFPA or NFPA's technical
> committees. AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering services,
> and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as
> such.*
>
> 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
> <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_firesprinkler.org_=DwIGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=dE_ALmGW3CHaFJIa1qPVLZpyrhiKK9Q6pwnWic9Kb74=BZdIbAOiOpzb7zeMSyXRk7uLyyR6OFVrhuVWUfDEvvM=
> > <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_afsa_status_1039528345367732224=DwIGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=dE_ALmGW3CHaFJIa1qPVLZpyrhiKK9Q6pwnWic9Kb74=rgZGhkVIEiOkxv7HF0k1dibEsbMBuX-VGP-f93fSO8U=
> > <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_american-2Dfire-2Dsprinkler-2Dassociation-2Dafsa-2D_=DwIGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=dE_ALmGW3CHaFJIa1qPVLZpyrhiKK9Q6pwnWic9Kb74=q7u9PEOPcL28Jkuawdg_gajxoP_Wz9VXBIZ-7AoKK2I=
> >
><
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.instagram.com_firesprinklerorg_=DwIGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=dE_ALmGW3CHaFJIa1qPVLZpyrhiKK9Q6pwnWic9Kb74=RqqX_n3FmBVW0QSNLTzcmgf-0_7yqQkw_5hraWbfMYA=
> >
>
> *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 <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.firesprinkler.org_join=D

Re: [EXTERNAL] Noncontinuous obstructions More than 18" down

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

My understanding of the standard is no additional protection is needed as
long as you have the 18" of clearance between the sprinkler and the top of
the obstruction.  As you stated, the pattern is developed sufficiently to
allow adequate protection since water will be delivered on both sides of
the obstructions.

*The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal
interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing Committee
Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA assumes no
liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are not to be
considered the official position of the AFSA, NFPA or NFPA's technical
committees. AFSA cannot provide design or consulting engineering services,
and this opinion should therefore not be considered, nor relied upon, as
such.*

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 Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 10:12 AM Dane Long via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I don’t think these classify as a cloud ceiling as their 4ft by 8ft tectum
> ceiling panels suspended below the desk. Per A8.6.5.3.3 Ceiling panels with
> the width 4ft or less and the length 4ft or more and more than 18" down do
> not require protection. NFPA 13 doesn’t specify a max or min. spacing
> between ceiling panels. These panels are spaced minimum 6" between and
> sloped in two directions (See Attached for some snips).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dane Long, AET
> 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 Skyler Bilbo via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 5:36 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Skyler Bilbo 
> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Noncontinuous obstructions More than 18" down
>
> It sounds like the architect is working hard to inspire kids with his
> beautiful ceiling design...  From the little information you gave, it may
> be more like a cloud ceiling than a traditional obstruction.  See section
> 3.3.5.1 for the definition, and then 8.15.1.2.1.3 for criteria.  You may
> also want to check out the research that "inspired" the cloud ceiling
> criteria at the link below, it is really great information.
>
>
> https://www.nfpa.org/News-and-Research/Fire-statistics-and-reports/Research-reports/Suppression/Sprinkler-Protection-for-Cloud-Ceilings
>
>
> Skyler Bilbo
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 3:41 PM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > Does "at least 1 inch of space between each panel" mean several feet
> > of space between each panel, or does it mean just a couple of inches.
> >
> > To me, it sounds more like you would have to treat them as grouped
> > obstructions and protect underneath.
> >
> > -Kyle M
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sprinklerforum 
> > On Behalf Of Dane Long via Sprinklerforum
> > Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 2:29 PM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Cc: Dane Long 
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Noncontinuous obstructions More than 18" down
> >
> > Seeking others opinions
> >
> > I'm doing an Elementary school where in the commons area they have
> > 4ft. by 8ft. tectum ceiling panels space throughout with at least 1"
> > of space between each panel. These panels are slopes with the roof in
> > one direct and then away from the roof in another. A8.6.5.3.3 Per NFPA
> > 13 (2016)
> >
> > "A.8.6.5.3.3 When obstructions are located more than 18 in. (450 mm)
> > below the sprinkler deflector, an adequate spray pattern develops and
> > obstructions up to and including 4 ft (1.2 m) wide do not require
> > additional protection underneath. Examples are ducts, decks, open
> > grate flooring, catwalks, cutting tables, overhead doors, soffits,
> > ceiling panels, and other similar obstructions. The width of an object
> > is the lesser of the two horizontal dimensions (with the length being
> > the longer horizontal dimension). Sprinkler protection is 

Re: Slopes / Storage / UFC 3-600-01 change 5

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

The UFC 3-600-1 requires the storage areas to be designed in accordance
with NFPA 13.  If under NFPA 13, you qualify for low-pile/miscellaneous
storage, the 30% for slope increase is applicable.  If you do not qualify
for low-pile/miscellaneous storage, a slope ceiling is not allowed.

Thanks,
John


*The above is my personal opinion as a professional engineer.  It 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.*


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
.




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 Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 12:30 PM Travis Mack via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> What are your thoughts on slope ceilings >2:12 in storage.  We have an
> engineer on a project that a customer is bidding for a military project.
> There are a couple areas where it is storage that falls under miscellaneous
> / low pile storage.  The criteria is EH2.  The FPE is stating that the area
> increase for slope does not apply because the area is storage and storage
> design criteria are not increased for slope.
>
> My customer is bidding per the plans / specs and will see what happens
> when it goes in for design and approval if we get it.  My question is more
> of "does it make sense what the FPE is stating?"
>
> He is stating the intent of UFC and NFPA is that since it is storage, the
> area increases do not apply.  But if it is storage, then you can't have a
> sloped ceiling.  However I believe with low pile you may be able to have
> that slope because it is one of the curves (OH -> EH), but you have to do
> the design area increase for slope.
>
> What do those on the forum think of this little conundrum.
>
> Travis Mack, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G, COC, SET
> Engineering Manager
> MFP Design
> 3356 E Vallejo Ct
> Gilbert, AZ 85298
> 480-505-9271 ext. 700 C: 480-272-2471
> travis.m...@mfpdesign.com
> www.mfpdesign.com
>
> Send large files to us via: https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign
>
> ___
> 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 & 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: Tissue Paper Wrapped in Plastic

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Following up - the 2019 edition of NFPA 13 has similar language:

Table A.20.4(b)
Tissue products plastic-wrapped: exposed - Group A nonexpanded
Tissue products plastic-wrapped; cartoned - Class III

Hope this helps.

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.*


*Expand your design department in 2021!*
AFSA is taking its popular two-week Beginning Fire Sprinkler System
Planning School on the road. From San Diego to Tampa Bay and stops in
between, our technical experts will teach the basics of system layout based
on the 2019 edition of NFPA 13. Space is limited. Enroll today at
https://www.firesprinkler.org/schools.


On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 2:50 PM Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Yes, the plastic is the material first exposed to the fire/ignition source.
>
> 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
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Mike Hairfield via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 8:43 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Mike Hairfield 
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Tissue Paper Wrapped in Plastic
>
> I just found this in NFPA-13 2013 Table A.5.6.4.1 that Paper products,
> uncartoned and plastic wrapped is Group A Plastic Commodities.
>
> Is this correct?
> Mike
>
> 
> From: Sprinklerforum  on
> behalf of Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 8:38 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> Cc: Matt Grise 
> Subject: RE: Tissue Paper Wrapped in Plastic
>
> Sorry - just looked at the NFPA 13 criteria for tissue. I don't see any
> options to fit those criteria.
>
> Maybe they could store it in boxes? Have you looked into FM criteria?
>
> Matt
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Monday, February 01, 2021 7:32 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Matt Grise 
> Subject: RE: Tissue Paper Wrapped in Plastic
>
> Depends on the packaging. If it is in boxes, class 4? If it is loose, then
> maybe lightweight rolled paper?
>
> Matt
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Mike Hairfield via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Monday, February 01, 2021 7:30 AM
> To: Sprinkler Forum 
> Cc: Mike Hairfield 
> Subject: Tissue Paper Wrapped in Plastic
>
> Has anyone designed a warehouse of Tissue Paper wrapped in Plastic maximum
> storage height of 25'-0" high in a building that is 38'-0" high.
>
> I couldn't find any design criteria in NFPA-13 for this commodity.
>
> Mike
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Flinkprotect.cudasvc.com*2Furl*3Fa*3Dhttp*253a*252f*252flists.firesprinkler.org*252flistinfo.cgi*252fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org*26c*3DE*2C1*2Ct20xtsAN2fnCefyqXmvkS-nQ3SE6sM_TjpEeIefY982173jJisfF0gnSPTjjK-gsBcgCDttdBZ5wCNlenc3lLrE-5VYGP3hDF4vF4P2ooM20hmbs*26typo*3D1data=04*7C01*7C*7C5626b09c3c7f49b57fe008d8c6b6b4a4*7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435*7C1*7C0*7C637477835304883096*7CUnknown*7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0*3D*7C1000sdata=LlwobQ3Fmz63C9H*2BvmLM5HWAK4dXsD3QymmHOLc*2Fg*2FE*3Dreserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!SFdVRAd9QugBm_bQFLshmscR94uS3eaAsox4h75ekHxrwaPKTKeiimDOoRMoY21v7g$
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> 

Re: Area Increases

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Steve is correct.  Protection schemes are available to some extent by
others; but currently not NFPA 13.  My only point was to respond to the 30%
increase due to slope as required by NFPA 13.  Engineering judgement or
other standards will need to be applied to those situations.

The above is my personal opinion as a professional engineer.  It 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 or its
Technical Committees.

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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


*Expand your design department in 2021!*
AFSA is taking its popular two-week Beginning Fire Sprinkler System
Planning School on the road. From San Diego to Tampa Bay and stops in
between, our technical experts will teach the basics of system layout based
on the 2019 edition of NFPA 13. Space is limited. Enroll today at
https://www.firesprinkler.org/schools.


On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 12:38 PM Steve Leyton 
wrote:

> I assume this statement of intent was added because full-scale fire
> testing has only been undertaken in test cells that have flat ceilings (I
> would very much appreciate input from the manufacturing community in that
> regard).  But that doesn't mean that we don't have to fire protect storage
> under sloped roof assemblies because thousands of older buildings with
> saw-tooth and pitched roofs are used for S-group occupancies, and it would
> be VERY helpful if there was some guidance on how to apply storage
> sprinklers under those conditions.   Whether it's in the standard (even
> annex material would be of value) or in the manufacturers' tech data
> sheets, we need SOMETHING, if only to substantiate so called "engineered"
> approaches to designs that will deliver adequate discharge to stored
> commodities below.Simplistically disclaiming that there's no
> consideration given to a particular condition in the standard doesn't mean
> that such a condition can't or doesn't exist.
>
> Definitely my opinion only,
>
> Steve L.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of John
> Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 8:54 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: John Denhardt 
> Subject: Re: Area Increases
>
> As Travis stated, slope ceilings are not covered under the protection
> schemes of NFPA 13 for "Storage".  Thus, the increase does not apply to
> "Storage" unless miscellaneous or low-piled storage applies.
>
> NFPA 13 - 2019:  20.6.1 Ceiling Slope. The sprinkler system criteria
> specified in Chapters 20 through 25 are intended to apply to buildings with
> ceiling slopes not exceeding 2 in 12 (16.7 percent) unless modified by a
> specific section in Chapters 20 through 25.
>
>
> *The above is my personal opinion as a professional engineer.  It 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 or its
> Technical Committees.*
>
> 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
> <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
> <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
> >
><https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>
>
> *Our members are at the heart of everything we do.*
>
> *Expand your design department in 2021!* AFSA is taking its popular
> two-week Beginning Fire Sprinkler System Planning School on the road. From
> San Diego to Tampa Bay and stops in between, our technical experts will
> teach the basics of system layout based on the 2019 edition of NFPA 13.
> Space is limited. Enroll today at https://www.firesprinkler.org/schools.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 11:16 AM Travis Mack via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > Slope >2:12 is not allowed for storage.

Re: Area Increases

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

As Travis stated, slope ceilings are not covered under the protection
schemes of NFPA 13 for "Storage".  Thus, the increase does not apply to
"Storage" unless miscellaneous or low-piled storage applies.

NFPA 13 - 2019:  20.6.1 Ceiling Slope. The sprinkler system criteria
specified in Chapters 20 through 25 are intended to apply to buildings with
ceiling slopes not exceeding 2 in 12 (16.7 percent) unless modified by a
specific section in Chapters 20 through 25.


*The above is my personal opinion as a professional engineer.  It 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 or its
Technical Committees.*

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.*

*Expand your design department in 2021!*
AFSA is taking its popular two-week Beginning Fire Sprinkler System
Planning School on the road. From San Diego to Tampa Bay and stops in
between, our technical experts will teach the basics of system layout based
on the 2019 edition of NFPA 13. Space is limited. Enroll today at
https://www.firesprinkler.org/schools.



On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 11:16 AM Travis Mack via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Slope >2:12 is not allowed for storage.  So, you don't apply because it is
> not permitted.  Dry system increase - yes.
>
> If you are talking misc storage or low pile where you use the OH or EH
> curve then yes, slope and dry increase.
>
>
> Travis Mack, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G, SET
> Engineering Manager
> MFP Design
> 3356 E Vallejo Ct
> Gilbert, AZ 85298
> NEW EXTENSION: 480-505-9271 ext. 700
> NEW MOBILE: 480-272-2471
> mailto:travis.m...@mfpdesign.com
> www.mfpdesign.com
>
>
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of JD Gamble via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 9:13 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: JD Gamble 
> Subject: Area Increases
>
> I know this answer is obvious before I even ask the question but for some
> reason I am befuddled in brain lock (must be Monday again today)
>
> Do you have to apply the area increase for dry systems and sloped ceilings
> to the area of operation for storage applications?
>
>
> JD Gamble
> LSS of Sheridan, Inc.
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> mailto: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: schedule 7 pipe?

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Matt - fully understand the position you have.

To answer your initial question specifically, I have heard of *no* push to
change NFPA 13 with regard to piping material.

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.*


*Expand your design department in 2021!*
AFSA is taking its popular two-week Beginning Fire Sprinkler System
Planning School on the road. From San Diego to Tampa Bay and stops in
between, our technical experts will teach the basics of system layout based
on the 2019 edition of NFPA 13. Space is limited. Enroll today at
https://www.firesprinkler.org/schools.


On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 5:03 PM Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> There is no doubt  that thicker pipe lasts longer.
>
> However, when the owner of a warehouse specifies schedule 7 piping for the
> sprinkler system in a hard bid, the installing contractor will be using
> schedule 7.
>
> Matt
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Lucas Kirn 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2021 3:34 PM
> To: Matt Grise ; sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Subject: RE: schedule 7 pipe?
>
> Matt,
>
> Having seen many cases of failed sch. 7 pipe over the past 10+ years I
> would tell anyone willing to listen to stay far, far away from it. Pipe
> schedule is the most basic form of corrosion/leak protection. The thinner
> the pipe, the shorter the lifespan.
>
> I have also seen several instances where a GC or property owner came back
> and tried to sue the installing sprinkler contractor because the system
> started leaking after less than 10 years - through no fault of the
> contractor. In my opinion installing an inferior product exposes your
> company to more liability.
>
> Lucas Kirn, PE
>
> Engineered Corrosion Solutions
> (314) 415-1387 |
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fecscorrosion.com=E,1,xpOWPXSiPcfMjrQXW0481anSuS-LAdKXY8Csy9gBfPzMFPZQ61fHBTnx1JPCTU5vcUquYUcmx0Hs_Eg8_66rAgyi9fc2BhzVgD_0ACnhMOXX6-GkecLttgY,=1
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Grise 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2021 9:58 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Subject: schedule 7 pipe?
>
> Has there been any push/interest in allowing unlisted (standard ASTM A53)
> schedule 7 steel pipe to be allowed by code in place of the listed "flow"
> piping options?
>
> Matt
>
>
> ___
> 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: schedule 7 pipe?

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

That is what I missed.

Correct - if you *do not *comply with 16.3.1 for the pipe or tube you are
using, Listed pipe or tube is required.

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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


*Expand your design department in 2021!*
AFSA is taking its popular two-week Beginning Fire Sprinkler System
Planning School on the road. From San Diego to Tampa Bay and stops in
between, our technical experts will teach the basics of system layout based
on the 2019 edition of NFPA 13. Space is limited. Enroll today at
https://www.firesprinkler.org/schools.


On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 2:42 PM Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I was looking at NFPA 13 - 2019 16.3.2 "when steel pipe referenced in
> 7.3.1.1 is used... ...minimum nominal wall thickness for pressures up to
> 300psi shall be in accordance with Schedule 10..."
>
> Does this require that thinner pipe be listed?
>
> I was curious if the listed s7/s5 products are any different from plain
> ASTM A53 pipes.
>
> Matt
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2021 1:30 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: John Denhardt 
> Subject: Re: schedule 7 pipe?
>
> Keep in mind, NFPA 13 states piping or tubing that meets Table 7.3.1.1 is
> acceptable.  Listing is NOT required.
>
> *NFPA 13 - 2019:  7.3.1.1 Pipe or tube shall meet or exceed one of the
> standards in Table 7.3.1.1 or be in accordance with 7.3.3.*
>
> Thus, as long as any piping or tubing material complies with one of the
> standards listed in Table 7.3.1.1, it is acceptable to use.
>
> I have not used much schedule 7 steel pipe in my career.  However, I have
> heard many horror stories with this steel pipe.
>
> 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:
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2ffiresprinkler.org=E,1,bWryeR7tZ1O1dLjO_NhXR7V9rqsGxiLcfcfxT61KfaRhT9d0vtjwLH8mf5H5b3CwfLZsk5y7lN7JEH9NkkBgwe6xh-RXiPwz27rNQL7VVbhK0GqIrDj-jw,,=1
> <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
> <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
> >
><https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>
>
> *Our members are at the heart of everything we do.*
>
>
> *Expand your design department in 2021!* AFSA is taking its popular
> two-week Beginning Fire Sprinkler System Planning School on the road. From
> San Diego to Tampa Bay and stops in between, our technical experts will
> teach the basics of system layout based on the 2019 edition of NFPA 13.
> Space is limited. Enroll today at
>
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.firesprinkler.org%2fschools.=E,1,qs9LkaxPeR7tDIQVW9-azgrqbr53d67A6UYAwcltYiDIbtUt4GfBVOY5w9T6n83ucR00o4SIsFz_q3_gR4EGrMhmFr-YMwlwqmHdCnLepyggICEUFCpe-zlJxUU,=1
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:58 AM Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > Has there been any push/interest in allowing unlisted (standard ASTM
> > A53) schedule 7 steel pipe to be allowed by code in place of the listed
> "flow"
> > piping options?
> >
> > Matt
> >
> > ___
> > 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,1,7rii8OKXA
> > UAY3sTqr74qkb_8u6tIjZP00BTkd2h-2502Sweaf0f3SP94B6veam2pdmTDTc3twqER3RP
> > e1aQyyUnqyk7j-P2PXtCTbxR8HeD3w1x7AqViLzPK=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,MYY-2t_MWoEpGuIZq0hFfqzvPlgneE0QsS5c3SP_vYWPZ6OR1IsDv33M31SO90CHonz-mxqtB8VHDR5dwDD-w_5SpIWGm-s2zq52hKU0Ijw-irZH5p4l160-FmM,=1
> ___
> 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: schedule 7 pipe?

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Keep in mind, NFPA 13 states piping or tubing that meets Table 7.3.1.1 is
acceptable.  Listing is NOT required.

*NFPA 13 - 2019:  7.3.1.1 Pipe or tube shall meet or exceed one of the
standards in Table 7.3.1.1 or be in accordance with 7.3.3.*

Thus, as long as any piping or tubing material complies with one of the
standards listed in Table 7.3.1.1, it is acceptable to use.

I have not used much schedule 7 steel pipe in my career.  However, I have
heard many horror stories with this steel pipe.

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.*


*Expand your design department in 2021!*
AFSA is taking its popular two-week Beginning Fire Sprinkler System
Planning School on the road. From San Diego to Tampa Bay and stops in
between, our technical experts will teach the basics of system layout based
on the 2019 edition of NFPA 13. Space is limited. Enroll today at
https://www.firesprinkler.org/schools.


On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:58 AM Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Has there been any push/interest in allowing unlisted (standard ASTM A53)
> schedule 7 steel pipe to be allowed by code in place of the listed "flow"
> piping options?
>
> Matt
>
> ___
> 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: RV Storage

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

My suggestions:


   - RV Storage Building* - Extra Hazard Group 2*
   - Boat Storage Building (just parked, not on racks) *- Extra Hazard
   Group 2*
   - Storage lockers with height less than 12 feet *- Depends on what is
   being stored.  For example, Group A plastics might be more demanding.
   Follow miscellaneous storage chart in NFPA 13.*

Hope this helps

*The above is my personal opinion as a professional engineer.  It 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.*

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.*

*Love free stuff? *

Tell an industry friend why you are an AFSA member and when they join or
re-join the AFSA family, you will receive a $100 Amazon gift card and
they’ll receive one free AFSA on-demand webinar of their choice—including
CEUs (a $250 value)! It’s our way to say thank you and welcome. Offer valid
through December 31, 2020. Visit firesprinkler.org/join

.


On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 3:29 PM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Certainly EH 2 seems like it will get the job done. But for those of you
> saying that, which commodity drives you to that? For example, if they were
> three separate buildings:
>
> RV Storage Building
> Boat Storage Building (just parked, not on racks)
> Storage lockers with height less than 12 feet
>
> Would you consider each of those EH 2 on their own? Or would one or more
> of those be a lesser hazard?
>
> -Kyle M
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Friday, January 8, 2021 9:27 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Steve Leyton 
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: RV Storage
>
> Concur.  We have done a couple previously that were takeovers with CMDA
> sprinklers and have one currently in progress that used to be a Lowe's
> store and is protected with ESFR.   EH2 by the book (IMHO), but we had one
> AHJ who insisted on .45/2000 (he had his reasons).
>
> Steve Leyton
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Byron Weisz
> via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2021 8:16 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Byron Weisz 
> Subject: RE: RV Storage
>
> Multiple Projects - Extra Hazard Group II
>
>
> Byron Weisz
>
> Cen-Cal Fire Systems, Inc.
> P.O. Box 1284
> Lodi,  CA   95241
> Phone (209)  334-9119
> Fax  (209)  334-2923
> by...@cen-calfire.com
>
> This and any attached documents are for the use of the intended
> recipient(s) only and may contain information that is privileged,
> confidential, or work product that may be exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, any use,
> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication and any
> attachments is strictly prohibited, and you are hereby requested to delete
> this message and any attached documents, to destroy any printed copies, and
> to telephone or otherwise contact the sender immediately about the error.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Bobby Welch via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2021 8:08 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Bobby Welch 
> Subject: RV Storage
>
> We have a customer who has an existing warehouse with an existing wet
> system. He is wanting to store RV's and boats in the high bays, and have
> caged storage lockers in lower areas.
> We are trying to figure out the extent of system upgrades we have to make
> for the system to work. Storage height will not exceed 12'. We thought this
> would be close in line with a parking garage facility, but the storage
> aspect throws it into a gray area considering NFPA has no specific
> literature referring to this type of storage (besides storage lockers).
> My question is, does anyone have experience designing systems for this
> type of storage, and if so what were your conclusions? Any advice would
> help.
> Thanks.
>
> Bobby Welch | Sprinkler Systems Designer KOORSEN FIRE & SECURITY
> 3577 Concorde Rd, Vandalia, OH 45377
> P 937.641.8403 | Ext. 0318 | M 937.594.8457
> bobby.we...@koorsen.com |
> 

Re: CPVC EQ Bracing - 2 hole straps and another question

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Scott makes a great point.  CPVC piping has to be free to move.

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.*


*Love free stuff? *

Tell an industry friend why you are an AFSA member and when they join or
re-join the AFSA family, you will receive a $100 Amazon gift card and
they’ll receive one free AFSA on-demand webinar of their choice—including
CEUs (a $250 value)! It’s our way to say thank you and welcome. Offer valid
through December 31, 2020. Visit firesprinkler.org/join

.


On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 3:42 PM Scott Futrell via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Just remember to allow for thermal expansion and contraction. It can get
> very ugly if the CPVC is restrained and thermal expansion and contraction
> has not been appropriately allowed for. This applies when a building is
> warm in the summer during construction and then air conditioning is turned
> on as well as heating and cold weather changes.
>
> Scott
>
> Office: (763) 425-1001 x 2
> Cell: (612) 759-5556
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Bob Knight via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 2:36 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Bob Knight 
> Subject: RE: CPVC EQ Bracing - 2 hole straps and another question
>
> Personally, I would provide the restraint and be done.  As Travis said,
> apply the less than 6" criteria and you should be good with the CPVC
> hangers.
>
> 9.3.5.8.5   Four-way bracing shall not be required where risers penetrate
> intermediate floors in multistory buildings where the clearance does not
> exceed the limits of 9.3.4.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Bob Knight, CET III
> Fire by Knight, LLC
> 208-318-3057
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
> On Behalf Of J H via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 1:24 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: J H
> Subject: Re: CPVC EQ Bracing - 2 hole straps and another question
>
> So the sidewall sprinklers for the upper floor of this project are being
> fed from the system below due to freezing concerns at the upper level. Of
> course the line will be strapped to the wall framing on it's way up and so
> according to the definitions if I'm supplying a single sprinkler it would
> be a 'sprig' and just require a two-hole strap on the way up (restraint)
> while a couple of spots on the project will feed two sprinklers from one
> tap off the lower floor - I'm guessing that in the case of more than two
> sprinklers it's no longer a 'sprig' and would be a riser and would require
> a 4-way brace. Sound about right?
>
>
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campai
> gn=sig-email_content=webmail_term=icon
> 
> >
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campai
> gn=sig-email_content=webmail_term=link
> 
> >
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 1:04 PM Bob Knight via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > Sprigs do not require sway bracing, but there is this: 9.3.6.6  Sprigs
> > 4 ft  or  longer  shall  be  restrained against lateral movement.
> >
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Bob Knight, CET III
> > Fire by Knight, LLC
> > 208-318-3057
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> > sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org]
> > On Behalf Of Matthew J Willis via Sprinklerforum
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2020 12:28 PM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > Cc: Matthew J Willis
> > Subject: RE: CPVC EQ Bracing - 2 hole straps and another question
> >
> > To my knowledge, the 2 hole strap is listed as a hanger only. Not for
> > seismic.
> >
> > The second question is a good one.
> > I love Chapter 3, especially for seismic.
> >
> > Check 3.5.11 in the 2016 for a "Sprig".
> >
> > The standard mandates riser for 4 way if they exceed 3'-0".
> >
> > Riser Nipples, the piece between a Cross Main and Branchline, 3.5.9,
> > are excluded.
> >
> > 3.5.10 is for "Risers".
> >
> > Given that the definition of a sprig, seems different than 

Re: Open Grate Flooring - Calculations

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Bill - I agree with Cecil; look at the system as levels.  Calculate
the system which is most demanding.

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.*


*Love free stuff? *

Tell an industry friend why you are an AFSA member and when they join or
re-join the AFSA family, you will receive a $100 Amazon gift card and
they’ll receive one free AFSA on-demand webinar of their choice—including
CEUs (a $250 value)! It’s our way to say thank you and welcome. Offer valid
through December 31, 2020. Visit firesprinkler.org/join

.


On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 9:53 PM Sprinkler Academy - C Bilbo via
Sprinklerforum  wrote:

> Hi Bill,
>
> Look at the system in levels.  Calculate the most demanding level.  Yes,
> area density is still applicable.
>
>
>
> It should be recognized that the above is my opinion as a member of the
> NFPA 13 Committee, 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 the NFPA, nor any of their technical committees.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> Cecil Bilbo
> Academy of Fire Sprinkler Technology
> Champaign, IL
> 217.607.0325
> www.sprinkleracademy.com
> ce...@sprinkleracademy.com
> ??
> OUR STUDENTS SAVE LIVES!!
>
> 
> From: Sprinklerforum  on
> behalf of bill.brooks brooksfpe.com via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2020 10:11 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> Cc: bill.brooks brooksfpe.com 
> Subject: Open Grate Flooring - Calculations
>
> A multilevel industrial facility is using extensive open grate flooring
> systems.  Is it feasible to use a density/area calculation when the fire
> plume does not stop at the open grate?  Does a building have to have a
> "ceiling" (2016 3.3.5) to perform a hydraulic calculation?  Just
> questioning the intent of the rulebook here.  The facility is in a
> jurisdiction which does not apply IBC - just NFPA 1 and 101.
>
> Bill Brooks
>
> William N. Brooks P.E.
> Brooks Fire Protection Engineering Inc.
> 372 Wilett Drive
> Severna Park, MD 21146
> 410 544 3620 o
> 412-400-6528 c
>
> ___
> 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: Merry Christmas,

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Merry Christmas to all my friends. 

John

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association 
301-343-1457

> On Dec 25, 2020, at 1:01 PM, Bob Caputo via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> Thank youSame to you and yours
> 
>> On Fri, Dec 25, 2020 at 10:38 AM Mario Berrios via Sprinklerforum <
>> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Merry Christmas,
>> mario berrios
>> ___
>> 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: potential freezing in ESFR system

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Currently - NFPA 13-2019 allows pulling plugs and installing sprinklers
without another hydrostatic test.


28.2.1.8* When systems are being hydrostatically tested, tests shall be
permitted to be conducted with pendent or horizontal sidewall sprinklers or
plugs installed in fittings. Any plugs shall be replaced with pendent or
horizontal sidewall sprinklers after the test is completed.

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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


*Love free stuff? *

Tell an industry friend why you are an AFSA member and when they join or
re-join the AFSA family, you will receive a $100 Amazon gift card and
they’ll receive one free AFSA on-demand webinar of their choice—including
CEUs (a $250 value)! It’s our way to say thank you and welcome. Offer valid
through December 31, 2020. Visit firesprinkler.org/join
<https://www.firesprinkler.org/WWW/Membership/Membership_Home_2.aspx?hkey=aaf9ae7c-5cf9-4981-b8f5-d852a5de39c5=3dff22a3-0306-479c-bccc-7aa1986c8ada>
.


On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 1:17 PM Richard Mote  wrote:

> Just wondering, what would be the point of doing a hydrostatic test and
> then replacing all the sprinklers. In a 40,000 sq. ft. system at 100 sq.
> ft. per, that a potential for 400 new leaks.
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: John Denhardt 
> Sent: Tue, Dec 22, 2020 1:11 pm
> Subject: Re: potential freezing in ESFR system
>
> Again personally, I would never knowingly put water in a wet piping system
> unless the "client" can ensure or take responsibility" for any damage due
> to freezing.  Pulling the pendent sprinklers is not a viable option.
>
> As a contractor, in almost all cases, our client backed down.  In the case
> when they insisted, we were compensated to remove and replace all
> the sprinklers with new after the hydrostatic test.
>
> 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
> <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
> <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
> <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/
> >
>   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>
>
> *Our members are at the heart of everything we do.*
>
>
> *Love free stuff? *
>
> Tell an industry friend why you are an AFSA member and when they join or
> re-join the AFSA family, you will receive a $100 Amazon gift card and
> they’ll receive one free AFSA on-demand webinar of their choice—including
> CEUs (a $250 value)! It’s our way to say thank you and welcome. Offer valid
> through December 31, 2020. Visit firesprinkler.org/join
> <
> https://www.firesprinkler.org/WWW/Membership/Membership_Home_2.aspx?hkey=aaf9ae7c-5cf9-4981-b8f5-d852a5de39c5=3dff22a3-0306-479c-bccc-7aa1986c8ada
> >
> .
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 11:05 AM Bob Caputo via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > Matt,
> >
> > Not sure many people are lurking around the forum this week, so I’ll
> offer
> > my 2 cents worth….  1st and foremost, I would get the GC to sign off on a
> > letter stating that you are not responsible for any freeze damage
> resulting
> > from their request to perform the hydro prior to having heat in the
> > building.
> >
> > This is not as much chance for damage with the systems drained in my
> > opinion, because if there is any ice formed at low points  or above the
> > sprinklers, there is room for expansion without damage to surrounding
> > parts.  That said, the sprinkler manufacturer would probably not
> recommend
> > or stand behind their product in the event of any such damage.
> >
> > You didn’t note if the ESFR pendant sprinklers are attached directly to
> > the branch lines or on drop nipples but assuming attached directly, I
> would
> > recommend putting a good shop vac on the main drain and pulling a few
> > remote sprinklers to draw off as much water as possible.  Regardless,
> > protect you liability with a well written letter explaining your concerns
&

Re: potential freezing in ESFR system

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Again personally, I would never knowingly put water in a wet piping system
unless the "client" can ensure or take responsibility" for any damage due
to freezing.  Pulling the pendent sprinklers is not a viable option.

As a contractor, in almost all cases, our client backed down.  In the case
when they insisted, we were compensated to remove and replace all
the sprinklers with new after the hydrostatic test.

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.*


*Love free stuff? *

Tell an industry friend why you are an AFSA member and when they join or
re-join the AFSA family, you will receive a $100 Amazon gift card and
they’ll receive one free AFSA on-demand webinar of their choice—including
CEUs (a $250 value)! It’s our way to say thank you and welcome. Offer valid
through December 31, 2020. Visit firesprinkler.org/join

.


On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 11:05 AM Bob Caputo via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Matt,
>
> Not sure many people are lurking around the forum this week, so I’ll offer
> my 2 cents worth….  1st and foremost, I would get the GC to sign off on a
> letter stating that you are not responsible for any freeze damage resulting
> from their request to perform the hydro prior to having heat in the
> building.
>
> This is not as much chance for damage with the systems drained in my
> opinion, because if there is any ice formed at low points  or above the
> sprinklers, there is room for expansion without damage to surrounding
> parts.  That said, the sprinkler manufacturer would probably not recommend
> or stand behind their product in the event of any such damage.
>
> You didn’t note if the ESFR pendant sprinklers are attached directly to
> the branch lines or on drop nipples but assuming attached directly, I would
> recommend putting a good shop vac on the main drain and pulling a few
> remote sprinklers to draw off as much water as possible.  Regardless,
> protect you liability with a well written letter explaining your concerns
> and putting the responsibility for potential damage on the GC or the
> owner.  This will likely change their mind about doing the hydro before
> heat is available.
>
> Just my opinion - and is not intended to represent the opinion of AFSA,
> NFPA or any NFPA Committee
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
> Bob Caputo, CFPS
> President
> American Fire Sprinkler Association
> p:  214-349-5965 ext124
> w:  firesprinkler.org 
>     <
> https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>   <
> https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
>  
> Love free stuff?
>
> Tell an industry friend why you are an AFSA member and when they join or
> re-join the AFSA family, you will receive a $100 Amazon gift card and
> they’ll receive one free AFSA on-demand webinar of their choice—including
> CEUs (a $250 value)! It’s our way to say thank you and welcome. Offer valid
> through December 31, 2020. Visit firesprinkler.org/join <
> https://www.firesprinkler.org/WWW/Membership/Membership_Home_2.aspx?hkey=aaf9ae7c-5cf9-4981-b8f5-d852a5de39c5=3dff22a3-0306-479c-bccc-7aa1986c8ada
> >.
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 22, 2020, at 8:47 AM, Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > we have a GC who wants to hydro test a pendant ESFR system before they
> have heat in the building. They want to fill and test during the day while
> temperatures are over 40F, and then drain the system before it gets cold
> again.
> >
> > I thought it did not sound like a great idea, but I can't necessarily
> find any code or rule that specifically prohibits the plan.
> >
> > on the same note - if a pendant ESFR warehouse were going to be left
> cold and drained, would it be required to pull every head?
> >
> > matt
> > ___
> > 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

Re: Standpipe signage

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

On a standpipe system, I always indicate the FDC sign requirements on the shop 
drawing. I usually just state “CHARGE FDC AT 150 PSIG” unless the system needs 
more. 

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association 
301-343-1457

> On Nov 25, 2020, at 11:48 AM, James Crawford via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> Just throwing this out there, how many designers add a note to the drawings 
> indicating the signage required at the fire department connection indicating 
> the pressure required to deliver the standpipe system demand as per NFPA #14 
> section 6.4.5.2.2 (2016ed).
> 
> On a second note we have a building that is sprinklered and has a standpipe 
> and as such the standpipe demand when calculated is 63psi @ 500gpm at the top 
> most outlets, so the pressure required to deliver this is 112psi at the inlet 
> of the Siamese connection, this was what we put on the sign. I have been 
> advised that this is wrong and the pressure would be 149psi at the inlet as 
> this would then deliver 100psi at the hose valve.
> 
> Comments?
> 
> Thank You
> 
> James Crawford
> Phaser Fire Protection Ltd.
> Phone 604-888-0318
> Cel: 604-790-0938
> Email jcrawf...@phaserfire.ca
> Web: www.phaserfire.ca
> 
> ___
> 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: Domestic Demands 13R

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

That request is now our list of items to be considered or the 2025 edition
of 13R.

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.*

*Don’t miss another issue!*

Sign up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
magazine *Sprinkler* *Age* delivered straight to your mailbox, inbox, or
both! Subscribe  now to get the latest
information you need to know and never miss another issue.


On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 1:30 PM Travis Mack via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I think the rationale is that for a project in the downtown areas, your
> flow test is already accounting for those buildings being active.  In the
> new development, your flow test is not accounting for those since they
> don't yet exist.
>
> However, I am glad the commentary in the 13R handbook (2016) specifically
> states it is only to include one building when you have multiple on a
> site.  It would be great if that could make it in to the body of the
> standard.
>
>
> Travis Mack, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G, SET
> Engineering Manager
> MFP Design
> 3356 E Vallejo Ct
> Gilbert, AZ 85298
> NEW EXTENSION: 480-505-9271 ext. 700
> NEW MOBILE: 480-272-2471
> mailto:travis.m...@mfpdesign.com
> www.mfpdesign.com
>
> Send large files to us via:
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hightail.com%2Fu%2FMFPDesign=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=eGdMZGu2wXhUupGwgGTrqF3b54OP5%2BAZvlHhABSexWY%3D=0
> LinkedIn:
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Ftravismack=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=tT5E7LsZjSmyreKi4gDCa70EWN%2BZodi%2FhbeCbHNRijI%3D=0
>
> “The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low
> price is forgotten.”
>
> Need/Want a faster way to check material pricing?  Build a material
> quote?  Check availability ?   Searching for an invoice?
> *If you do not already have an account with ferguson.com, click
> https://www.ferguson.com/account-registration to register.*
> **Have a Ferguson account? Download the Ferguson app for on-the-go access
> to your favorite ferguson.com features.
> http://fergusoncommunications.us.newsweaver.com/hq7bgesq7f/1qtklpp37l9byeftyuoy12/external?email=true=6=2591775=517003
>  or
> http://fergusoncommunications.us.newsweaver.com/hq7bgesq7f/n1gewi5ud95byeftyuoy12/external?email=true=6=2591775=517003**
>
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Bob Knight via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2020 11:27 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Bob Knight 
> Subject: RE: Domestic Demands 13R
>
> "However, they may be expected to have domestic demands. That is the plan
> reviewer rationale in one particular case."
> Does the reviewer apply this same logic when doing a project in a downtown
> area with hundreds of buildings all using water at the same time?
> I would assume not. So, why would this be any different? The domestic
> demand needs to be added only when sharing the water supply from the same
> line for each individual building. This is not a collective requirement.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
> Bob Knight, CET III
> Fire by Knight, LLC
> 208-318-3057
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Travis Mack
> via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2020 9:53 AM
> To: mailto:philli...@pyebarkerfire.com; mailto:
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: mailto:travis.m...@mfpdesign.com
> Subject: RE: Domestic Demands 13R
>
> Correct. However, they may be expected to have domestic demands. That is
> the plan reviewer rationale in one particular case.
>
>
> Travis Mack, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G, SET
> Engineering Manager
> MFP Design
> 3356 E Vallejo Ct
> Gilbert, AZ 85298
> NEW EXTENSION: 480-505-9271 ext. 700
> NEW MOBILE: 480-272-2471
> mailto:travis.m...@mfpdesign.com
> http://www.mfpdesign.com
>
> Send large files to us via:
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hightail.com%2Fu%2FMFPDesign=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=eGdMZGu2wXhUupGwgGTrqF3b54OP5%2BAZvlHhABSexWY%3D=0
> LinkedIn:
> 

Re: Clearance around all pump equipment

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Others have stated the requirements.  I have seen many installations where
there was room and the installer did not take advantage of it.  Adequate
and reasonable space must be maintained to properly inspect, service,
repair, and replace all equipment.  I always ask, how would I work on this
equipment,

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.*

*Don’t miss another issue!*

Sign up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
magazine *Sprinkler* *Age* delivered straight to your mailbox, inbox, or
both! Subscribe  now to get the latest
information you need to know and never miss another issue.


On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 2:29 PM Ron Greenman via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Pretty much, Ben.
>
>
> Ron Greenman
>
> rongreen...@gmail.com
>
> 253.576.9700
>
> The Universe is monstrously indifferent to the presence of man. -Werner
> Herzog, screenwriter, film director, author, actor and opera
> director (1942-)
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 6:56 AM Ben Young via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > If you have a backflow in the pump room the local water authority may
> > require a set clearance for testing. 3 feet around everything seems a
> > little extreme but it's not like clearance is a bad thing. Does that mean
> > you can't have system risers closer than say 4 feet on center too?
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 7:48 PM Ron Greenman via Sprinklerforum <
> > sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
> >
> > > In one local jurisdiction here there is a requirement for three feet
> all
> > > around major equipment, font, sides, and back. It would good if they
> > would
> > > inform the architects that continue to provide smaller and smaller pump
> > and
> > > riser rooms.
> > >
> > >
> > > Ron Greenman
> > >
> > > rongreen...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > 253.576.9700
> > >
> > > The Universe is monstrously indifferent to the presence of man. -Werner
> > > Herzog, screenwriter, film director, author, actor and opera
> > > director (1942-)
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 3:12 PM Sprinkler Academy - C Bilbo via
> > > Sprinklerforum  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Travis,
> > > >
> > > > NFPA 20 only requires that the room be sized "to fit" with clearance
> > for
> > > > access.  While that clearance is required, there is no set amount of
> > > > clearance defined.
> > > >
> > > > From the 2019 edition:
> > > > "4.14.1.1.7 The pump room or pump house shall be sized to fit all of
> > the
> > > > components necessary for the operation of the fire
> > > > pump and to accommodate the following:
> > > > (1) Clearance between components for installation and maintenance
> > > > (2) Clearance between a component and the wall for installation
> > > > and maintenance
> > > > (3) Clearance between energized electrical equipment and
> > > > other equipment in accordance with NFPA 70 (this one has requirements
> > > that
> > > > you've already met.)
> > > > (4) Orientation of the pump to the suction piping to allow
> > > > compliance with 4.16.6.3 (this would be the '10 pipe diameter rule'
> for
> > > > certain suction piping.)
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, I don't have any other substantiation for ya.
> > > >
> > > > It should be recognized that the above is my opinion as a member of
> the
> > > > NFPA, 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.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Cecil Bilbo
> > > > Academy of Fire Sprinkler Technology
> > > > Champaign, IL
> > > > 217.607.0325
> > > > www.sprinkleracademy.com
> > > > ce...@sprinkleracademy.com
> > > >
> > > > OUR STUDENTS SAVE LIVES!!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > From: Sprinklerforum  >
> > on
> > > > behalf of Travis Mack via Sprinklerforum <
> > > > sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2020 3:38 PM
> > > > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org <
> > > > sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> > > > Cc: travis.m...@mfpdesign.com 
> > > > Subject: Clearance around all pump equipment
> > > >
> > > > Is there anything in any fire code or standard that requires a 3'
> > > > clearance around ALL pump room equipment.  We are 

Announcement - AFSA President and our AFSA 39 General Session

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I am very pleased  with this announcement.  Congratulations Bob!

*The AFSA Board of Directors and AFSA are excited to announce the unanimous
selection of Bob Caputo, CFPS, as the association’s President. Caputo’s
will begin with AFSA on November 1, 2020. *

 A link to the announcement on our blog is as follows:
https://sprinklerage.com/robert-g-bob-caputo-named-afsa-president/

In addition, AFSA's 39 General session was held yesterday.  A link to this
session is on our website by clicking the "Watch it Here" button.   I think
you will find the General Session very informative.  AFSA Website


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.*

*Don’t miss another issue!*

Sign up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
magazine *Sprinkler* *Age* delivered straight to your mailbox, inbox, or
both! Subscribe  now to get the latest
information you need to know and never miss another issue.
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Submittal Packages

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Agree however, long lead items like fire pump systems might need to be
released early to meet project schedules.

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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

*Don’t miss another issue!*

Sign up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
magazine *Sprinkler* *Age* delivered straight to your mailbox, inbox, or
both! Subscribe <https://sprinklerage.com/subscribe/> now to get the latest
information you need to know and never miss another issue.


On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 11:59 AM Hinson, Ryan  wrote:

> It's very difficult to efficiently review a project when submittals come
> in piecemeal.  Inevitably, things get missed and resubmittals of such
> partial submittals only complicate matters.  Though there are always
> exceptions, we require complete (re)submittals with shop drawings complying
> with NFPA working plans requirements, quality annotated cutsheets clearly
> indicating any selected/elected options, along with the hydraulic
> calculations in accordance with NFPA hydraulic calculation procedures.
> Incomplete submittals are rejected without review.  We also require each
> review comment of a submittal to be addressed in a returned written
> response letter accompanying the resubmittal.
>
> We've had success when this is stated up front in bid documents and plan
> review generally goes much quicker and with less headache.
>
> Ryan L. Hinson, PE*, SET**  \  Burns & McDonnell
> Senior Fire Protection Engineer
> O 952-656-3662 \  M 763-688-4045 \  F 952-229-2923
> rhin...@burnsmcd.com  \  burnsmcd.com
> 8201 Norman Center Drive, Suite 500  \  Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 55437
> *Registered in: LA, MD, MN, PA, TX, & UT
> **NICET IV - Water-Based Systems Layout
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2020 10:41 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Prahl, Craig/GVL ; John Denhardt <
> jdenha...@firesprinkler.org>
> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Submittal Packages
>
> John,  I have that requirement in big bold letters in several places in
> the specs but have had a contractor ask to submit components including the
> fire pump even before the first pipe has been placed on a drawing.
>
> I was told this is how they've been doing it for decades.  Just wanted to
> see what the industry consensus was.
>
> Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME – Fire Protection | 864.676.5252 |
> craig.pr...@jacobs.com |
> https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jacobs.com%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Crhinson%40burnsmcd.com%7C5ca87af7c38244f427b108d86ba08957%7Cbfbb9a2b6d994e78b3c795005d555c8b%7C0%7C1%7C637377684527248653sdata=3aGT7kLeKIbnZg4TvDPBxUoz195Nl4J%2BkvETIT7u%2F50%3Dreserved=0
> 1041 East Butler Road   Greenville, South Carolina  29606
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2020 11:32 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: John Denhardt 
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Submittal Packages
>
> I have seen both.  I prefer the entire package.  However, I have worked
> with General Contractors that demand equipment data sheets with 2 weeks of
> contract award.
>
> Engineers - a suggestion:  put the requirement in your specification to
> require a complete package if that is what you want.
>
> 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
> <
> https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Ffiresprinkler.org%2F__%3B!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!TVuehqgV7EeDz8BUWmJXdWrh2IZ_6p63iAQoV3IyzVHWs7PRbgP-v_mV-lxAcUuJLQ%24data=02%7C01%7Crhinson%40burnsmcd.com%7C5ca87af7c38244f427b108d86ba08957%7Cbfbb9a2b6d994e78b3c795005d555c8b%7C0%7C0%7C637377684527248653sdata=vFABZNjVDj0TMJWyznfcXcjehgx8m3vKbhLCL6JTMyE%3Dreserved=0
> > <
> https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fafsa%2Fstatus%2F1039528345367732224__%3B!!B5cixuoO7ltTeg!TVuehqgV7EeDz8BUWmJXdWrh2IZ_6p63iAQoV3IyzVHWs7PRbgP-v_mV-lw7VifYqg%24data=02%7C01%7Cr

Re: Submittal Packages

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I have seen both.  I prefer the entire package.  However, I have worked
with General Contractors that demand equipment data sheets with 2 weeks of
contract award.

Engineers - a suggestion:  put the requirement in your specification to
require a complete package if that is what you want.

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.*

*Don’t miss another issue!*

Sign up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
magazine *Sprinkler* *Age* delivered straight to your mailbox, inbox, or
both! Subscribe  now to get the latest
information you need to know and never miss another issue.


On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 11:08 AM Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Just a general question.
>
> Do you submit your shop drawing package to the EOR as one package or do
> you submit components first and then later the layout drawings and calcs?
>
> Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME – Fire Protection | 864.676.5252 |
> craig.pr...@jacobs.com | www.jacobs.com
> 1041 East Butler Road   Greenville, South Carolina  29606
>
>
> 
>
> NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged
> information that is for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any
> viewing, copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by
> unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
> message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message
> and deleting it from your computer.
> ___
> 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: ssu - concealed space - small room???

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

You got it.  You must satisfy the definition of small room and my guess is
you will not meet the requirements.

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.*

*Don’t miss another issue!*

Sign up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
magazine *Sprinkler* *Age* delivered straight to your mailbox, inbox, or
both! Subscribe  now to get the latest
information you need to know and never miss another issue.


On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 8:12 PM Travis Mack via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> 4' deep space so no specially listed sprinklers.  But the unobstructed
> criteria in 13 for the definition of a small room, I believe kicks me out.
> But this is a first for me.
>
>
> Travis Mack, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G, SET
> Engineering Manager
> MFP Design
> 3356 E Vallejo Ct
> Gilbert, AZ 85298
> NEW EXTENSION: 480-505-9271 ext. 700
> NEW MOBILE: 480-272-2471
> mailto:travis.m...@mfpdesign.com
> www.mfpdesign.com
>
> Send large files to us via:
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hightail.com%2Fu%2FMFPDesign=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=eGdMZGu2wXhUupGwgGTrqF3b54OP5%2BAZvlHhABSexWY%3D=0
> LinkedIn:
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Ftravismack=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180=tT5E7LsZjSmyreKi4gDCa70EWN%2BZodi%2FhbeCbHNRijI%3D=0
>
> “The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low
> price is forgotten.”
>
> Need/Want a faster way to check material pricing?  Build a material
> quote?  Check availability ?   Searching for an invoice?
> *If you do not already have an account with ferguson.com, click
> https://www.ferguson.com/account-registration to register.*
> **Have a Ferguson account? Download the Ferguson app for on-the-go access
> to your favorite ferguson.com features.
> http://fergusoncommunications.us.newsweaver.com/hq7bgesq7f/1qtklpp37l9byeftyuoy12/external?email=true=6=2591775=517003
>  or
> http://fergusoncommunications.us.newsweaver.com/hq7bgesq7f/n1gewi5ud95byeftyuoy12/external?email=true=6=2591775=517003**
>
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Fpdcdesign via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2020 5:08 PM
> To: Sprinklerforum 
> Cc: Fpdcdesign 
> Subject: Re: ssu - concealed space - small room???
>
>
>
>
> Are you required to use concealed space sprinklers?
>
>
>
> If it meets the NFPA definition of a room and the requirements of
> http://11.2.3.3 are met, then you should be able to use it above a
> ceiling. Be sure of any fire resistance rating requirements.
>
>
>
> Todd G Williams, PE
> Fire Protection Design/Consulting
>
> Stonington, CT
>
> 860-535-2080 (tel:860-535-2080) (ofc)
>
> 860-554-7054 (tel:860-554-7054) (fax)
>
> 860-608-4559 (tel:860-608-4559) (cell)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > On Oct 7, 2020 at 7:59 PM,  sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org)> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > We have a project that was pre-engineered. It has several issues that we
> are having to correct. One is something I haven’t considered. We have a
> concealed combustible space that requires 130 sq ft max spacing. The
> pendents are 225 sq ft max spacing. All of the walls for the office spaces
> – think medical office type project – are full height to deck and
> drywalled. Is there any reason you wouldn’t use the small room method for
> determining area per sprinkler for the SSU in the concealed space? For
> example, the room may be 120 sq ft for example. However, the SSU located by
> the FPE is 6’ off the north wall and 6’ off the west wall. Using SxL, this
> would be 144 sq ft per sprinkler. But, if the space above the ceiling could
> be treated as a small room, then the area per sprinkler could be the room
> area divided by the number of sprinklers in the room. This would mean the
> sprinkler is 120 sq ft per sprinkler. This happens in several places. There
> are many instances where I can just move the sprinkler to be more centered
> and solve the problem, but not all areas. So, would you consider that space
> above the ceiling to be allowed to follow small room rules? Travis Mack,
> CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G, SET Engineering Manager MFP Design 3356 E Vallejo Ct
> Gilbert, AZ 85298 NEW EXTENSION: 480-505-9271 ext. 700 NEW MOBILE:
> 480-272-2471 mailto:travis.m...@mfpdesign.com http://www.mfpdesign.com
> Send large files to us via: 

Re: 8.17.5 Hose Connections

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

In a storage application, hose connections (without hose) are for the
responding trained emergency personnel to utilize for "mop up" and if
necessary final extinguishment. of the fire.  They are not considered as
part of a standpipe system.

*The above is my personal opinion as a professional engineer.  It 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.  *

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.*

*Don’t miss another issue!*

Sign up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
magazine *Sprinkler* *Age* delivered straight to your mailbox, inbox, or
both! Subscribe  now to get the latest
information you need to know and never miss another issue.


On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 3:16 PM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> So, I understand the "Small [1 ½ in. ] Hose Connections" that are
> discussed in 8.17.5.1. You typically find these in rack storage warehouses.
>
> But I'm confused by 8.17.5.2 Hose Connections for Fire Department Use.
> What hose connections would these be? Or, perhaps I should ask when these
> hose connections would be required. The description and the associated
> figures looks like it is referring to the hose valves you would find as
> part of a combined sprinkler/standpipe system. But the commentary in the
> handbook says specifically "These connections are not to be treated as
> standpipe hose connections".
>
> -Kyle M
> ___
> 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: FM 8-9

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

AFSA is trying to schedule a Webinar on this topic.  Keep an eye out for
this.

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.*

*Don’t miss another issue!*

Sign up to get your exclusive copy of the industry’s leading membership
magazine *Sprinkler* *Age* delivered straight to your mailbox, inbox, or
both! Subscribe  now to get the latest
information you need to know and never miss another issue.


On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 10:35 AM cw bamford via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> The Impact of the Interim Revisions of FMDS 8-9 on the Protection of
> Storage
>
> Viking Corp  just did a paper and webinar.
>
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 6:14 AM Bruce Hermanson via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know what FM Data sheet points you to what sprinkler heads to
> > calculate when the tables in 8-9 have you calculating (10) quick response
> > K25.2 sprinklers?
> >
> > I know when you calculate (12) its (4) per line on remote (3) lines. I
> > cannot find what to do with (10).
> >
> > Maybe 4,4,2??
> >
> >
> >
> > Bruce Hermanson
> >
> > President
> >
> >
> >
> > TSFP
> >
> > 47810 Galleon Drive
> >
> > Plymouth, MI 48170
> >
> > (734) 454-1350
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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: Hangers for CPVC Pipe going through TGI Joists

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Agree - the structure is the support.  Restraints or chafing protectuion
might be needed.

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.*

*AFSA Summer Sale!*

For a limited time only, AFSA is offering members up to 50% off its
on-demand recorded webinars! Featuring the most sought-after thought
leaders, AFSA On-Demand offers a superior learning experience with ability
to earn CEU and CPD credits anytime, anywhere. Visit
http://www.firesprinkler.org/ondemand to learn more.


On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 9:50 AM Matthew J Willis via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> No, but they do require bushings or some sort of other method to prevent
> chafing.
>
> Assuming round holes and no side to side movement expected.
>
> R/
> Matt
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Mike Hairfield via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 6:39 AM
> To: Sprinkler Forum 
> Cc: Mike Hairfield 
> Subject: Hangers for CPVC Pipe going through TGI Joists
>
> The TGI Joists are spaced 16" apart, does NFPA-13 require hangers on the
> CPVC pipe since the TGI joists are supporting the pipe?
>
> Mike
> ___
> 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: On/Off Switch in the Electric supply to a Dry Pipe System Air Compressor

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

rinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Is there currently a listing criteria for "fire protection air
> compressors"? I see UL 1450 Standard for Motor-Operated Air Compressors,
> Vacuum Pumps, and Painting Equipment, but does that include any specifics
> for fire protection use?
> > >
> > > -Kyle M
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Sprinklerforum 
> > > On Behalf Of Scott Futrell via Sprinklerforum
> > > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 5:02 AM
> > > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > > Cc: Scott Futrell ; John Denhardt
> > > 
> > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: On/Off Switch in the Electric supply to a Dry
> > > Pipe System Air Compressor
> > >
> > > IMHO, yes, it should be. Off the shelf, big box store compressors,
> don't last very long costing the owner more.
> > >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > > Office: (763) 425-1001 x 2
> > > Cell: (612) 759-5556
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Sprinklerforum 
> > > On Behalf Of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> > > Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 12:18 AM
> > > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > > Cc: John Denhardt 
> > > Subject: Re: On/Off Switch in the Electric supply to a Dry Pipe System
> > > Air Compressor
> > >
> > > Scott beat me to it.
> > >
> > > Commentary - Considering an air compressor is not required to be
> Listed, the technical committee is putting requirements into the standard.
> Maybe the air compressor should be Listed for Fire Protection use.
> > >
> > > 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
> > > <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_firesprinkler.org_=DwIGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=WP_Ee0FuuH1e5mq10X4gcOZMHx2GdZU9EftHhQUJs_M=8waGKKWG7-Mv6MqDo9j_tkD7cBE5hk_fivLXl0SYS9w=
> > <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_afsa_status_1039528345367732224=DwIGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=WP_Ee0FuuH1e5mq10X4gcOZMHx2GdZU9EftHhQUJs_M=4DPjVZGv7KmOO2NjKRJoNEHjsuLX8_0HW1_N7bolOAg=
> > <
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_american-2Dfire-2Dsprinkler-2Dassociation-2Dafsa-2D_=DwIGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=WP_Ee0FuuH1e5mq10X4gcOZMHx2GdZU9EftHhQUJs_M=sWbaw6rcxJgUN92-s71uz7xJs1KWW77opq9PcVSTSD4=
> >
> > >
> > > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.instagram.co
> > > m_firesprinklerorg_=DwIGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoq
> > > udh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=WP_Ee0FuuH1e5mq10X4gcOZMHx2GdZU9EftHhQ
> > > UJs_M=mp2o-WyyDw5kgYii9M9iPUZeme6WJ0mwT76cVXyyHhg= >
> > >
> > > *Our members are at the heart of everything we do.*
> > >
> > > *AFSA Summer Sale!*
> > >
> > > For a limited time only, AFSA is offering members up to 50% off its
> on-demand recorded webinars! Featuring the most sought-after thought
> leaders, AFSA On-Demand offers a superior learning experience with ability
> to earn CEU and CPD credits anytime, anywhere. Visit
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.firesprinkler.org_ondemand=DwIGaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=WP_Ee0FuuH1e5mq10X4gcOZMHx2GdZU9EftHhQUJs_M=hBtrQOd91IklvOpdcriG8jllMNQEzanwddCfuaBHrsI=
> to learn more.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:07 PM Scott Futrell via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > 2019:
> > > > 8.2.6.6.5.1
> > > > The disconnecting means for an automatic air compressor shall not be
> > > > a general-use light switch or a cord-and-plug connected motor.
> > > >
> > > > Scott
> > > >
> > > > Office: (763) 425-1001 x 2
> > > > Cell: (612) 759-5556
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Sprinklerforum
> > > > 
> > > > On Behalf Of Ron Greenman via Sprinklerforum
> > > > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2020 2:26 PM
> > > > To: 

Re: On/Off Switch in the Electric supply to a Dry Pipe System Air Compressor

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Scott beat me to it.

Commentary - Considering an air compressor is not required to be Listed,
the technical committee is putting requirements into the standard.  Maybe
the air compressor should be Listed for Fire Protection use.

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

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

*AFSA Summer Sale!*

For a limited time only, AFSA is offering members up to 50% off its
on-demand recorded webinars! Featuring the most sought-after thought
leaders, AFSA On-Demand offers a superior learning experience with ability
to earn CEU and CPD credits anytime, anywhere. Visit
http://www.firesprinkler.org/ondemand to learn more.


On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:07 PM Scott Futrell via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> 2019:
> 8.2.6.6.5.1
> The disconnecting means for an automatic air compressor shall not be a
> general-use light switch or a cord-and-plug connected motor.
>
> Scott
>
> Office: (763) 425-1001 x 2
> Cell: (612) 759-5556
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Ron Greenman via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2020 2:26 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Ron Greenman 
> Subject: Re: On/Off Switch in the Electric supply to a Dry Pipe System Air
> Compressor
>
> A switch that looks like a light switch would be legit for a small motor.
> If the compressor is on a dedicated 20A circuit it would need to be a 20A
> rated switch. You wouldn't be able to tell a 20A from a 15A (common light
> circuit rating) without looking at the rating. If it's a 20A/230V
> compressor the switch would need to be a Double Pole/Single Throw. Again.
> you can't tell from just the lever.
>
>
> Ron Greenman
>
> rongreen...@gmail.com
>
> 253.576.9700
>
> The Universe is monstrously indifferent to the presence of man. -Werner
> Herzog, screenwriter, film director, author, actor and opera director
> (1942-)
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 12:02 PM Mike Hairfield via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> > Like the one for a light switch, there is breaker in the electrical
> > panel with a lock-out
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > 
> > From: Sprinklerforum 
> > on behalf of John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum <
> > sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2020 3:00 PM
> > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org <
> > sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>
> > Cc: John Denhardt 
> > Subject: Re: On/Off Switch in the Electric supply to a Dry Pipe System
> > Air Compressor
> >
> > You are required to have a disconnect switch. What kind of “On/Off”
> > switch are you seeing?
> >
> > John
> >
> > John August Denhardt, P.E.
> > Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services American Fire
> > Sprinkler Association
> > 301-343-1457
> >
> > > On Sep 24, 2020, at 2:50 PM, Mike Hairfield via Sprinklerforum <
> > sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Made a inspection to one of my jobs today and found that the
> > > electrical
> > contractor installed a On/Off
> > > switch to the air compressor which I know isn't allowed.
> > >
> > > Where does it state in NFPA that this isn't allowd?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > ___
> > > Sprinklerforum mailing list
> > > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> > >
> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl
> > er.org ___
> > Sprinklerforum mailing list
> > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> >
> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl
> > er.org ___
> > Sprinklerforum mailing list
> > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> >
> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl
> > er.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: On/Off Switch in the Electric supply to a Dry Pipe System Air Compressor

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

You are required to have a disconnect switch. What kind of “On/Off” switch are 
you seeing?

John

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association 
301-343-1457

> On Sep 24, 2020, at 2:50 PM, Mike Hairfield via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> Made a inspection to one of my jobs today and found that the electrical 
> contractor installed a On/Off
> switch to the air compressor which I know isn't allowed.
> 
> Where does it state in NFPA that this isn't allowd?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mike
> ___
> 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

Welcome to the AFSA Technical Service Team - Kevin Hall

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I am excited to announce to the SprinklerForum the addition of Kevin Hall
to our staff.  He will be a great asset to the team.

Official Press Release:
The American Fire Sprinkler Association (AFSA) is pleased to welcome
Coordinator of Technical Services Kevin Hall, P.E., MSFPE, to its
Department of Engineering & Technical Services. Kevin has been in the fire
protection industry for nearly 10 years. He is a registered professional
engineer in fire protection in Delaware and Maryland and has his Bachelor
and Master’s degrees in fire protection engineering from the University of
Maryland College Park. Kevin previously served as a member of several NFPA
committees including NFPA 30B, 45, 96, 101A, 550/55a, 750, 770, and 1031,
as a member of the International Standards Organization (ISO) TC21/SC5
committee and served on UL STP 2901. He is a member of NFPA, ICC, and SFPE.
Kevin has developed, updated, and taught training programs and technical
courses. He also has real-world experience on the contractor side of the
industry and in the installation of sprinkler systems. He is the perfect
addition to AFSA’s technical staff. You can reach Kevin via email at
kh...@firesprinkler.org or phone at 214-349-5965 ext. 128

Welcome Kevin!

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.*

*AFSA Summer Sale!*

For a limited time only, AFSA is offering members up to 50% off its
on-demand recorded webinars! Featuring the most sought-after thought
leaders, AFSA On-Demand offers a superior learning experience with ability
to earn CEU and CPD credits anytime, anywhere. Visit
http://www.firesprinkler.org/ondemand to learn more.
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

AFSA Membership

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

*I want to first off offer a Thank You for all the support I have received
in my new position at AFSA.*  I can not believe it has already been 8
months.  Lots of great things have been happening at AFSA.  I love my job!

*To all of our current AFSA members -* I appreciate you being a member!
AFSA is here to serve and support you!

*To all of the SprinklerForum members that are NOT members of AFSA -*  We’ve
been getting some great questions to the forum lately. The participation
and engagement is awesome. If you are enjoying SprinklerForum, please
support it by joining AFSA. www.firespirnkler.org/join We allow this forum
to be open to the entire industry and we do need your support!  There are
even more great products and events open to you as a member.

For the long time SprinklerForum members, you will remember the following
type of statements from our great late friend and member George
Church. - People
join AFSA if you are using the services.  Your money will be well spent.

AFSA does offer AHJ, Designer, Contractor, and Supplier/Manufacturer
categories. Cost for the AHJ and Designer categories is very reasonable.

Make George proud!

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.*

*AFSA Summer Sale!*

For a limited time only, AFSA is offering members up to 50% off its
on-demand recorded webinars! Featuring the most sought-after thought
leaders, AFSA On-Demand offers a superior learning experience with ability
to earn CEU and CPD credits anytime, anywhere. Visit
http://www.firesprinkler.org/ondemand to learn more.
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: Ethanol unloading exposure protection

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Craig - Great summary!

Bruce has a valid point.  Ben make sure you are not overstepping your
obligations and make sure you are being compensated fairly for this work
and the associated liability.

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.*

*AFSA Summer Sale!*

For a limited time only, AFSA is offering members up to 50% off its
on-demand recorded webinars! Featuring the most sought-after thought
leaders, AFSA On-Demand offers a superior learning experience with ability
to earn CEU and CPD credits anytime, anywhere. Visit
http://www.firesprinkler.org/ondemand to learn more.


On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 9:20 AM Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Ben,
>
> Since we don’t' have a drawing or layout of what is where, there's going
> to be a lot of speculation and possibly misdirection when it comes to
> suggestions.  So you'll have to sort through it all and find the applicable
> stuff.
>
>
>
> NFPA 80A provides direction on exposure protection requirements for the
> facility but refers you back to NFPA 13 for actual exposure protection
> design.
>
> 2019 NFPA 13, Chapter 8.7 deals with exposure fires.  It provides all the
> data you are seeking on design, sprinkler options, flow rates, pressures,
> etc.
>
> Typically the system I've designed for these types of applications have
> been deluge systems using listed discharge nozzles, not regular
> sprinklers.  We have used dry pilot actuation as well as other types of
> detection such as UV/IR, optical flame detection and even Detect-O-Wire
> (heat tape) for actuation based on the specific installation to trigger the
> systems.
>
> Foam for exposure protection is a wrong application.  Depending on what it
> looks like, foam is often used If you were protecting the unloading station.
>
> FM Data Sheet 7-38 provides information on Ethanol related installations.
>
>
>
>
> If I was tasked with this, here's what I'd be asking and have to know:
>
> I'd first be looking at what is required by code.  What type of unloading
> station are we talking about?  Rail car, tanker trailer???  Covered or
> open?  What kind of volume of fuel?   The reason for knowing this is that
> even if it were not part of my scope of work, if the unloading station is
> not adequately protected, it raises the severity level I'm going to use for
> my exposure protection scheme.
>
> Is the unloading station provided with secondary containment to hold any
> spills?  Is there a fire suppression system in the unloading area to handle
> a pool fire or truck/rail equipment fire?
>
> What is the distance between this unloading station and the exposed
> building you're trying to protect?
>
> What is the exposed building, office, warehouse, process bldg. ??
> Fully sprinklered or not?
>
> Are they properly separated in compliance with the applicable codes?
>
> If they are not, has the local AHJ said anything about the situation? Have
> any site or architectural or other plans been reviewed yet?
>
> Is there a difference in the height of the exposed bldg. and the unloading
> station?  Which one is higher?
>
>
> Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME – Fire Protection | 864.676.5252 |
> craig.pr...@jacobs.com | www.jacobs.com
> 1041 East Butler Road   Greenville, South Carolina  29606
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sprinklerforum 
> > On Behalf Of Ben Young via Sprinklerforum
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 1:59 PM
> > To: 321 via Sprinklerforum 
> > Cc: Ben Young 
> > Subject: Ethanol unloading exposure protection
> >
> > Does anyone know where I can find some criteria (preferably in FM
> > Global data sheets) on how to provide exposure protection on the
> > exterior of a building wall  using dry sidewall heads?
> >
> > I have an insurance company telling me to do this but they didn't give
> > me a basis of design.
> >
> >
> > Trying to stay away from foam since to my knowledge there are no dry
> > sidewalls listed for discharge devices and I don't want to deal with
> > containment.
> >
>
> 
>
> NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged
> information that is for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any
> viewing, copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by
> unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
> message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message
> and deleting it from your computer.
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> 

Re: C-Clamp Hangers

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I think Ryan is onto the issue.  If it is in the specification, request
clarification from the engineer.  A large percentage of time, the engineer
is not clear enough when the specification is written.

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.*

*AFSA Summer Sale!*

For a limited time only, AFSA is offering members up to 50% off its
on-demand recorded webinars! Featuring the most sought-after thought
leaders, AFSA On-Demand offers a superior learning experience with ability
to earn CEU and CPD credits anytime, anywhere. Visit
http://www.firesprinkler.org/ondemand to learn more.


On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 2:30 PM Jerry Van Kolken via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Ryan,
> That was my thinking. We always us the restraining straps  on our hanger
> assemblies.
>
> Mike,
> The products I'm using are listed. This is a requirement from the client
> side.
>
>
>
> 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 Hinson, Ryan via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 11:11 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Hinson, Ryan 
> Subject: RE: C-Clamp Hangers
>
> Hanger attachments are being confused with bracing attachments.
> -   NFPA 13 (2019) Section 18.5.11.10 explicitly DOES NOT allow
> C-clamps
> used for seismic bracing structural attachments with or without
> restraining straps unless specifically listed for such use.
> -   Section 18.7.1 allows their use for hangers in seismically active
> areas when a restraining strap is included.
> -   Chapter 17 explicitly DOES allow listed use of c-clamps for hangers
> alone.
>
> See commentary for further discussion and pictures depicting their allowed
> hanger usage.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Ryan L. Hinson, PE*, SET**  \  Burns & McDonnell Senior Fire Protection
> Engineer O 952-656-3662 \  M 763-688-4045 \  F 952-229-2923
> rhin...@burnsmcd.com  \  burnsmcd.com
> 8201 Norman Center Drive, Suite 500  \  Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 55437
> *Registered in: LA, MD, MN, PA, TX, & UT **NICET IV - Water-Based Systems
> Layout
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sprinklerforum  On
> Behalf Of Jerry Van Kolken via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 12:52 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: jvankol...@mfpc.us
> Subject: C-Clamp Hangers
>
> Does anyone know the reasoning Why you would not be allowed to use C-Clamps
> for your hanger attachments?
>
>
>
> I've had a couple of specs have this requirement pass by my desk recently.
>
>
>
> Jerry Van Kolken
>
> Millennium Fire Protection Corp.
>
> 2950 San Luis Rey Rd.
>
> Oceanside, CA 92058
>
> (760) 722-2722 FX 722-2730
>
>
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.fires
> prinkler.org%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
> data=02%7
> C01%7Crhinson%40burnsmcd.com
> %7C1d14008726f74fa34d4308d849e89359%7Cbfbb9a2b6d
>
> 994e78b3c795005d555c8b%7C0%7C0%7C637340610543326549sdata=%2Bt0YUDv8iKf9
> xPab8hEUmLbdCBOX%2FIZ5VDKB7jaeLls%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
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: C-Clamp Hangers

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Possibly an outdated specification.

I have not heard of any issues with properly installed listed C-clamps.

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.*

*AFSA Summer Sale!*

For a limited time only, AFSA is offering members up to 50% off its
on-demand recorded webinars! Featuring the most sought-after thought
leaders, AFSA On-Demand offers a superior learning experience with ability
to earn CEU and CPD credits anytime, anywhere. Visit
http://www.firesprinkler.org/ondemand to learn more.


On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 1:50 PM Jerry Van Kolken via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Does anyone know the reasoning Why you would not be allowed to use C-Clamps
> for your hanger attachments?
>
>
>
> I've had a couple of specs have this requirement pass by my desk recently.
>
>
>
> Jerry Van Kolken
>
> Millennium Fire Protection Corp.
>
> 2950 San Luis Rey Rd.
>
> Oceanside, CA 92058
>
> (760) 722-2722 FX 722-2730
>
>
>
> ___
> 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: Window Sprinklers

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Agree 100%.  Follow the Listing - period.

If an architect or an engineer wants to violate the Listing, let them
provide direction and assume all liability.

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.*

*AFSA Summer Sale!*

For a limited time only, AFSA is offering members up to 50% off its
on-demand recorded webinars! Featuring the most sought-after thought
leaders, AFSA On-Demand offers a superior learning experience with ability
to earn CEU and CPD credits anytime, anywhere. Visit
http://www.firesprinkler.org/ondemand to learn more.


On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 10:26 AM Joe Burtell via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Here is how I see it. All manufacturers prohibit horizontal mullions.  My
> guess is they failed testing when horizontal millions were present. The
> building code requires the windows to be protected with listed sprinklers.
> Even if I did put the additional window sprinkler below the
> horizontal million, it is now void of it's listing which the building code
> and NFPA required to be listed for such use. The last part is the liability
> as a small contractor. The architect does not want to spend the money to
> put in the proper glass.
>
> Best regards,
>
> *Joe Burtell, SET, CFPS*
>
> [image: Burtell Fire_Small]
>
> Phone | Fax | Mobile| Text *406-204-4653 <++1-406-204-4653>*
>
> 116 N. 11th Street | Billings, MT 59101
>
> Email: j...@burtellfire.com
>
> Web Site: http://www.burtellfire.com
>
> *“**The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low
> price is forgotten.**”*
>
> *NOTICE:*  The information contained in this e-mail transmission is
> intended only for use of the individual or entity named above.  This e-mail
> transmission, and any documents, files, previous e-mail transmissions or
> other information attached to it, may contain confidential information that
> is legally privileged.  If you are not the intended recipient of this
> e-mail transmission, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it
> to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
> dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this transmission or
> any of the information contained in or attached to this e-mail is strictly
> prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please
> immediately notify us by return e-mail transmission and destroy the
> original e-mail transmission as well as its attachments without reading or
> saving it in any manner.  Thank you.
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 8:15 AM å...   wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Your situation is not fully described for me to make a higher-quality
> > response.
> > I have however, seen instances where 1). horizontal mullions and yes, 2).
> > inappropriate orientation and location of window sprinklers causes the
> > downfalling water to
> >   in the case of the first, jet off the plane of the window pane, leaving
> > lower sections starkly unwetted.
> >  in the case of the second, water boucing off the pane and leaving the
> > primary window pane underprotected and sections below the horizontal
> > mullion direly so.
> >
> > Having said that...  the words of Peter Drucker come to mind   "nothing
> is
> > so useless as to do something that is not needed."
> > Depending upon where the windows are located:
> >   A.   is the chance of a fire higher than required to demand the window
> > sprinklers in the first place?
> > This is not a trivial question.  It is for this very reason we do
> > not install sprinkles in some bathrooms and some closets...
> > The answer requires good judgment, which is mannah from heaven,
> > job justification and exercise of the brain from the mundane
> black-&-white
> > Code regurgitation.
> >   B.  Are there window sprinklers on both sides of the window barrier,
> > which could rationalize not installing window sprinklers when combined
> with
> > reasoning in A.
> >
> > Consideration from different angles:
> >   Forest-for-the trees... as well as
> >   the devil-is-in-the-details...
> >
> > Good luck, and thanks for sharing your situation Joe!
> > Scot Deal
> > Excelsior Risk & Fire Engineering
> > gms:  + 420 606 872 129
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org

Re: Ambulatory Health Care protection

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Since it is new construction, all light hazard areas must utilize quick
response sprinklers.

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.*

Well-trained employees work more quickly and correctly. By enrolling
your employees in the AFSA Apprenticeship Training Series for Sprinkler
Fitters
,
you
reap the benefits of a qualified, professional installation crew.
Plus, AFSA’s four-level apprenticeship curriculum is recognized in all 50
states. Learn more .


On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 4:18 PM Travis Mack, SET, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G via
Sprinklerforum  wrote:

> *Is it light hazard?  If so, yes.  Is it existing?  May not have to
> upgrade.*
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
> Behalf Of *Thomas Reinhardt via Sprinklerforum
> *Sent:* Friday, June 26, 2020 1:17 PM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Cc:* Thomas Reinhardt 
> *Subject:* FW: Ambulatory Health Care protection
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Thomas Reinhardt
> *Sent:* Friday, June 26, 2020 9:37 AM
> *To:* Sprinklerforum 
> *Subject:* Ambulatory Health Care protection
>
>
>
> Quick question for the group. Do new ambulatory health care occupancies
> need quick response sprinklers? Facility is 9,000 sqft. Thanks
> ___
> 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: Listed sprinkler guard for horizontal or vertical spray sidewalls

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Agree. This forum is a valuable asset. Thanks to all for their contribution. 

John

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association 
301-343-1457

> On Jun 24, 2020, at 7:03 PM, Mark Phillips via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> Gotta love all the great people here!
> 
> Sent from my mobile device
> Please excuse spelling, grammar, and auto correction.
> 
> Mark Phillips
> Branch Manager
> Fire Sprinkler Design, Install, Inspections
> Service, Backflows, Fire Alarm Inspections
> 
> 832-101 Purser Drive
> Raleigh NC 27603
> Phone: 919-779-4010
> Fax : 919-779-4014
> Cell : 919-268-7587
> Email : philli...@pyebarkerfire.com
> Web : www.pyebarkerfire.com
> 
> From: Sprinklerforum  on 
> behalf of Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum 
> 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2020 6:03:28 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
> 
> Cc: Steve Leyton ; Dennis Wilson 
> 
> Subject: RE: Listed sprinkler guard for horizontal or vertical spray sidewalls
>  
> [EXTERNAL]
> Thank you – a direct HIT!
>  
> SL
>  
> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] 
> On Behalf Of Dennis Wilson via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2020 2:27 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Dennis Wilson 
> Subject: RE: Listed sprinkler guard for horizontal or vertical spray sidewalls
>  
> Reliable F1FR-56
>  
> From: Sprinklerforum  On 
> Behalf Of Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2020 4:21 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Steve Leyton 
> Subject: Listed sprinkler guard for horizontal or vertical spray sidewalls
>  
> Does anyone know if any manufacturers have a listed guard for standard 
> sidewall sprinklers?   We specified Viking on a project where the sprinklers 
> are installed on the piping, running alongside beams in an open area of a 
> tilt-up building that is being repurposed as a charter school, so Light 
> Hazard occupancy class.   The client has requested that these particular 
> sprinklers be protected from potential damage, but they are already installed 
> so our first choice is to find a solution for horizontal sidewalls.   2nd 
> choice is to roll the piping and install vertical sidewalls (I think we 
> should have designed it that way in the first place in hindsight), so if no 
> guards are available, at least the piping will protect the sprinklers.   Any 
> of the manufacturers have a listed solution for horizontal or vertical?
>  
>  
> 
>  
>  
> ___
> 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] Edge of a platform

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I am unaware of any allowances for this situation.  However, I like Kyle's
thoughts.  I would want to see more details but I would consider that
approach.

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.*

Well-trained employees work more quickly and correctly. By enrolling
your employees in the AFSA Apprenticeship Training Series for Sprinkler
Fitters
,
you
reap the benefits of a qualified, professional installation crew.
Plus, AFSA’s four-level apprenticeship curriculum is recognized in all 50
states. Learn more .


On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 6:06 PM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Since the area inside of the beams is covered by the sprinklers below the
> mezzanine, could you just call the extension from the beams an obstruction
> to the overhead system of 12” width or less? Would you need protection
> under this size of an obstruction?
>
>
>
> -Kyle M
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
> Behalf Of *Jerry Van Kolken via Sprinklerforum
> *Sent:* Friday, June 12, 2020 2:16 PM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Cc:* jvankol...@mfpc.us
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Edge of a platform
>
>
>
> I have a mezzanine platform in the middle of a warehouse with 24x to 40x
> Wide Flanges around the perimeter. The edge of this platform extents in
> some spot up to 12” from the center of these wide flange. Due to this deep
> framing it’s not possible space the sprinklers to protect to the edge of
> the platform without running another line of sprinkler in this 12” space on
> the outer edge.
>
>
>
> Are there any exceptions for this type of situation?
>
>
>
> Jerry Van Kolken
>
> *Millennium Fire Protection Corp.*
>
> 2950 San Luis Rey Rd.
>
> Oceanside, CA 92058
>
> (760) 722-2722 FX 722-2730
>
>
> ___
> 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: stairways & elevators when only the basement is sprinklered

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

In my opinion, you are looking for direction from NFPA 13 where NFPA 13 is
not applicable in this case.  Someone has decided to make a partial
sprinklered building.  That person needs to tell you what sections of NFPA
13 are to be followed or ignored.  Otherwise, the liability falls on you.
Do not let that happen

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



   

*Help AFSA “Sound the Alarm” about sprinklers!*

AFSA’s charitable partner the American Red Cross is educating millions
through its Home Fire Preparedness Campaign. Help us support the inclusion
of fire sprinklers in their messaging.  Donate today!



On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 12:07 PM Ed Kramer via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I’m working on a small office building where only the basement is required
> to be sprinklered.  Single-story with basement, VB construction.  I don’t
> know the code path that required basement-only to be sprinklered.
>
>
>
> This basement has 2 noncombustible 1-hour rated stairways that lead up to
> the 1st floor.  Normally, we’d sprinkler the tops of these stairs.  For a
> basement-only design, should the tops of these stairways be sprinklered?
>
>
>
> Project also has a hydraulic elevator.  I will be sprinklering the pit,
> but the top of the shaft meets the criteria for omitting sprinklers, so
> that’s not in question on this project.  But lets pretend the top is
> required to be sprinklered - for a basement-only design, should the top of
> the shaft be sprinklered?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ed K
>
> Bamford Fire
>
>
> ___
> 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: mattress storage

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

As others have already stated, exposed expanded, Group A, Table
A.20.4.5.1.  Depending on the storage height, Table 4.3.1.7.1 might be
applicable.

References are to the 2019 edition of NFPA 13.

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



   

*Help AFSA “Sound the Alarm” about sprinklers!*

AFSA’s charitable partner the American Red Cross is educating millions
through its Home Fire Preparedness Campaign. Help us support the inclusion
of fire sprinklers in their messaging.  Donate today!



On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 10:07 AM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Todd: I wonder how the compressed foam mattresses behave when the box
> burns away?
>
>
>
> FM Global Engineer: … (comes to startling realization) … Mother of God…
>
>
>
>
>
> This had me chuckling. You’ve piqued my curiosity. Maybe we should start a
> ‘Go Fund Me’ for full scale fire testing of compressed foam mattresses.
>
>
>
> -Kyle M
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
> Behalf Of *Fpdcdesign via Sprinklerforum
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 4, 2020 6:44 AM
> *To:* Sprinklerforum 
> *Cc:* Fpdcdesign ; Matt Grise 
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: mattress storage
>
>
>
> I am actually working on a foam mattress manufacturer right now. Expanded
> Group A plastic. You would have to check if they are exposed or in
> cardboard boxes. Some mattresses are compressed and put into boxes. I’m not
> sure how a compressed foam mattress would behave in a fire situation when
> the box burns away. Ceiling height plays a big role in design requirements.
>
>
> Todd G Williams, PE
>
> Fire Protection Design/Consulting
>
> Stonington, CT
>
> 860-535-2080 (ofc)
>
> 860-554-7054  (fax)
>
> 860-608-4559 (cell)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 4, 2020 at 9:33 AM,  > wrote:
>
> Group A (not 1)
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
> Behalf Of *Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:32 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Cc:* Matt Grise 
> *Subject:* RE: mattress storage
>
>
>
> Usually exposed, expanded group 1 plastic. NFPA 13 and FM have some
> protection criteria.
>
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
> Behalf Of *Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. via Sprinklerforum
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 04, 2020 8:00 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Cc:* Trillium Fire Sprinkler Design Inc. 
> *Subject:* mattress storage
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I need opinions on mattress storage warehouse in furniture store. I have a
> furniture store with a 8000sqft storage area with mattresses stacked on the
> floor to a maximum height of 12 feet.
>
>
>
> Mostly foam mattresses.
>
>
>
> Any idea where I would start to look for the design criteria?
>
>
>
> Any guidance would be appreciated.
>
>
>
>
>
> 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: Structural Load

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I agree with Ken. I have been down this road before.  The structure needs
to support the piping plus 250 pounds at the point of hanging.  If the
structure can handle this load, then the structure has an issue.

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



   

*Help AFSA “Sound the Alarm” about sprinklers!*

AFSA’s charitable partner the American Red Cross is educating millions
through its Home Fire Preparedness Campaign. Help us support the inclusion
of fire sprinklers in their messaging.  Donate today!



On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 12:18 PM Parsley Consulting via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Jerry,
>
> Although I'm slightly unclear over what you're being told I would make
> sure that whoever is providing that information to you has read 9.2.1.3.1
> of the '16 edition of -13:
>
> 9.2.1.3.1 Sprinkler piping shall be substantially supported from the
> building structure, *which must support the added load of the
> water-filled pipe plus a minimum of 250 lb (115 kg) applied at the point of
> hanging*, except where permitted by 9.2.1.1.2, 9.2.1.3.3, and 9.2.1.4.1
>
> 9.2.1.1.2 deals with toggle hangers supporting pipe 1½" and smaller,
> 9.2.1.3.3 covers flexible hose fittings, and 9.2.1.4.1 covers branch
> hangers into a metal deck.
>
> It's pretty clear that the structure has to be able to support at least
> the load noted in 9.2.1.3.1.
>
> As I am a principal member of the hanging and bracing committee, please
> see the disclaimer below.
>
> sincerely,
>
> *Ken Wagoner, SET Parsley Consulting*
>
>
>
> * 350 West 9th Avenue, Suite 206 Escondido, California 92025 Phone
> 760-745-6181 Visit the website  *
>
> *IMPORTANT NOTICE: This correspondence is not a Formal Interpretation
> issued pursuant to NFPA Regulations. Any opinion expressed is the personal
> opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the official
> position of the NFPA or its Technical Committees. In addition, this
> correspondence is neither intended, nor should it be relied upon, to
> provide professional consultation or services*
>
> *It should be noted that the above is my opinion as a member of the NFPA
> Automatic Sprinkler System Hanging and Bracing Committee 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 or its
> Committees*
>
>
> On 06/03/2020 8:25 AM, Jerry Van Kolken via Sprinklerforum wrote:
>
> I have a building where they are telling me the structural point loading
> on the framing less than 250lbs. (140lbs)
>
>
>
> Advice?
>
>
>
> Jerry Van Kolken
>
> *Millennium Fire Protection Corp.*
>
> 2950 San Luis Rey Rd.
>
> Oceanside, CA 92058
>
> (760) 722-2722 FX 722-2730
>
>
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing 
> listSprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.orghttp://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: Exemption for sprinklers

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

FWIW - Pete works for the Veterans Administration.  So NFPA 101 most likely 
applies. 

John

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association 
301-343-1457

> On Jun 2, 2020, at 4:02 PM, Prahl, Craig/GVL via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> Let me first ask this, is NFPA 101 the legally adopted code in the 
> jurisdiction in which this building is located?
>  
> Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead/SME – Fire Protection | 864.676.5252 | 
> craig.pr...@jacobs.com | www.jacobs.com
> 1041 East Butler Road   Greenville, South Carolina  29606
>  
> From: Sprinklerforum  On 
> Behalf Of Larrimer, Peter A (HEFP\10NA5B) via Sprinklerforum
> Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2020 3:49 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> Cc: Larrimer, Peter A (HEFP\10NA5B) 
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Exemption for sprinklers
>  
> NFPA 101, 7.14 (2018) permits sprinklers to be omitted from “Normally 
> Unoccupied Building Service Equipment Support Areas”.  These support areas 
> are not intended to be accessed by persons for maintenance. However, they 
> might have man-doors installed that would make them accessible and when they 
> are over 45,000 square feet, they are required to have man doors installed.
>  
> There is a provision in NFPA 101 that states the following:
>  
> 7.14.2.2 Egress from normally unoccupied building service
> equipment support areas shall be provided by doors complying
> with 7.2.1 where the normally unoccupied building service
> equipment support area exceeds 90,000 ft2 (8370 m2) in buildings
> protected throughout by an approved, supervised automatic
> sprinkler system in accordance with 9.7.1.1(1).
>  
> 7.14.2.3 The absence of sprinklers in the normally unoccupied
> building service equipment support area, as permitted by
> an exemption of NFPA 13, shall not cause a building to be classified
> as nonsprinklered for purposes of applying the provisions
> of 7.14.2.2.
>  
>  
> I am looking for the exemption in NFPA 13 that would allow a space to have 
> man-doors, and also allow the sprinklers to be omitted from that space so 
> that I can apply 7.14.2.3.  Can anyone help by showing me where that might 
> exist in NFPA 13?  This provision was added to the 2012 edition of NFPA 101. 
>  
> Thanks
>  
> Pete Larrimer
> VA
> 
> 
> NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged 
> information that is for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any viewing, 
> copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by unintended 
> recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in 
> error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting 
> it from your computer.
> ___
> 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: NFPA 13, 2013 ed - hangers and pressures above 100psi

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Yes sir - it was added for the 2016 edition of NFPA 13 and remained the
same for the 2019 edition.  Problem solved.

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

*Help AFSA “Sound the Alarm” about sprinklers!*

AFSA’s charitable partner the American Red Cross is educating millions
through its Home Fire Preparedness Campaign. Help us support the inclusion
of fire sprinklers in their messaging.  Donate today!
<https://www.redcross.org/donate/cm/afsa-pub.html/>


On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 2:16 PM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> This has been addressed in the 2016 Edition:
>
>
>
> 9.2.3.4.4.4 and 9.2.3.5.2.2 both state “unless flexible sprinkler hose
> fittings are used”.
>
>
>
> So it doesn’t say it in 2013 Edition, but it’s clear what the intent was
> an the direction the code is going.
>
>
>
> -Kyle M
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
> Behalf Of *Jeff Garrison via Sprinklerforum
> *Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2020 10:45 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Cc:* Jeff Garrison 
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: NFPA 13, 2013 ed - hangers and pressures above
> 100psi
>
>
>
> The Bracket IS the LAST hanger, per Flex manufacturers I have talked to,
> but,
> NFSA gave us an opinion that a 13" arm-over to a Flex still needs a hanger
> if you are over 100 psi, 'cause that's what the book says.
>
>
> *Jeff Garrison*
>
> *248-331-6164 - cell*
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 1:36 PM Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks everyone for the input.  My fitter brought this up to me and after
> I read the sections I was still not sure.  John’s comment makes perfect
> sense.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Dewayne Martinez
>
> Fire Protection Design Manager
>
>
>
> *TOTAL Mechanical*
>
> *Building* *Integrity*
>
>
> W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
> Pewaukee, WI  53072
>
> dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
>
> Ph:  262-522-7110
>
> Cell: 414-406-5208
>
> http://www.total-mechanical.com/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.total-2Dmechanical.com_=DwMFaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=GuyXOYFE8HWi-Xbn5-IZb_9eM04tODDhEKXoCHgTBqA=8ZVozdgRafXPDNc9hOhE4TDBNzPR53EiPeCO0g4UDXM=>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum  *On
> Behalf Of *John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum
> *Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2020 10:41 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> *Cc:* John Denhardt 
> *Subject:* Re: NFPA 13, 2013 ed - hangers and pressures above 100psi
>
>
>
> In my opinion, no.  The flexible drop assembly is anchored to the
> ceiling.  The point of this requirement is to keep the pendent sprinkler
> from moving upwards during activation.  The flexible drop assembly
> accomplishes this requirement.
>
>
>
> 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
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__firesprinkler.org=DwMFaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=GuyXOYFE8HWi-Xbn5-IZb_9eM04tODDhEKXoCHgTBqA=DvQqwFWMX_rtvBDxtjMwEg-3lSungkkG2FriwKNu2BE=>
>
>
>
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_firesprinkler.org_=DwMFaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=GuyXOYFE8HWi-Xbn5-IZb_9eM04tODDhEKXoCHgTBqA=woUG00rZjmjFZYPaaa55cfX_OuqJWXL2u8-0RJQMnQY=>
>
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_afsa_status_1039528345367732224=DwMFaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=GuyXOYFE8HWi-Xbn5-IZb_9eM04tODDhEKXoCHgTBqA=6U3oQfFNe0XBanXmPdft75O6ZAyxNR34yeIbAjZm3x8=>
>
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_american-2Dfire-2Dsprinkler-2Dassociation-2Dafsa-2D_=DwMFaQ=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A=GuyXOYFE8HWi-Xbn5-IZb_9eM04tODDhEKXoCHgTBqA=hXACDUqpUecxM5XsShaRuvQPPQJD53kIz-dY8Cj3iWY=>
>
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A

Re: NFPA 13, 2013 ed - hangers and pressures above 100psi

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

I will at the 2022 edition and see if we can add something.  Maybe in the
Annex.

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
<https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
<https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
   <https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>

*Help AFSA “Sound the Alarm” about sprinklers!*

AFSA’s charitable partner the American Red Cross is educating millions
through its Home Fire Preparedness Campaign. Help us support the inclusion
of fire sprinklers in their messaging.  Donate today!
<https://www.redcross.org/donate/cm/afsa-pub.html/>


On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 12:52 PM Ron Greenman via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I'd agree with John for the very same reason he thinks (intent of the
> requirement) no, but I'll bet there are AHJs out there that will read the
> rulebook differently, citing no exception stated, and without concern for
> intent, and say yes, you need to do it. And probably even some that agree
> that the intent is met when using flex drops but since there is no stated
> exception it is now enforcing the letter because that's the mandate, or
> even merely a CYA.
>
>
> Ron Greenman
>
> rongreen...@gmail.com
>
> 253.576.9700
>
> The Universe is monstrously indifferent to the presence of man. -Werner
> Herzog, screenwriter, film director, author, actor and opera
> director (1942-)
>
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 8:40 AM John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
>> In my opinion, no.  The flexible drop assembly is anchored to the
>> ceiling.  The point of this requirement is to keep the pendent sprinkler
>> from moving upwards during activation.  The flexible drop assembly
>> accomplishes this requirement.
>>
>> 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
>> <https://www.facebook.com/firesprinkler.org/>
>> <https://twitter.com/afsa/status/1039528345367732224>
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/american-fire-sprinkler-association-afsa-/>
>><https://www.instagram.com/firesprinklerorg/>
>>
>> *Help AFSA “Sound the Alarm” about sprinklers!*
>>
>> AFSA’s charitable partner the American Red Cross is educating millions
>> through its Home Fire Preparedness Campaign. Help us support the inclusion
>> of fire sprinklers in their messaging.  Donate today!
>> <https://www.redcross.org/donate/cm/afsa-pub.html/>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:28 AM Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum <
>> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Is the hanger on the pipe supplying a flexible drop to a pendant
>>> sprinkler in a ceiling still required to one that prevents upward movement?
>>>
>>> Sections 9.2.3.4.4.1,9.2.3.5.2.2
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dewayne Martinez
>>>
>>> Fire Protection Design Manager
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *TOTAL Mechanical*
>>>
>>> *Building* *Integrity*
>>>
>>>
>>> W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
>>> Pewaukee, WI  53072
>>>
>>> dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
>>>
>>> Ph:  262-522-7110
>>>
>>> Cell: 414-406-5208
>>>
>>> http://www.total-mechanical.com/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: NFPA 13, 2013 ed - hangers and pressures above 100psi

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

In my opinion, no.  The flexible drop assembly is anchored to the ceiling.
The point of this requirement is to keep the pendent sprinkler from moving
upwards during activation.  The flexible drop assembly accomplishes this
requirement.

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



   

*Help AFSA “Sound the Alarm” about sprinklers!*

AFSA’s charitable partner the American Red Cross is educating millions
through its Home Fire Preparedness Campaign. Help us support the inclusion
of fire sprinklers in their messaging.  Donate today!



On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:28 AM Dewayne Martinez via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> Is the hanger on the pipe supplying a flexible drop to a pendant sprinkler
> in a ceiling still required to one that prevents upward movement?
>
> Sections 9.2.3.4.4.1,9.2.3.5.2.2
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Dewayne Martinez
>
> Fire Protection Design Manager
>
>
>
> *TOTAL Mechanical*
>
> *Building* *Integrity*
>
>
> W234 N2830 Paul Rd.
> Pewaukee, WI  53072
>
> dmarti...@total-mechanical.com
>
> Ph:  262-522-7110
>
> Cell: 414-406-5208
>
> http://www.total-mechanical.com/
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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: Dust Collection

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

Now that’s is just funny but unfortunately is sometimes typical for a technical 
committee. 

Happy Memorial Day weekend. 


John

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Vice-President Engineering and Technical Services
American Fire Sprinkler Association 
301-343-1457

> On May 22, 2020, at 3:49 PM, Sprinkler Academy - C Bilbo via Sprinklerforum 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> To lighten the mood as we go into Memorial Day weekend
> 
> Sometime around 2007, there was a rather large discussion on the size of a 
> piece of combustible dust.  The standards are not aligned (see 'combustible 
> dust' in the Glossary of Terms).  The argument, I mean debate, of the floor 
> of the worldwide NFPA Technical Meeting was intense.  People got very 
> emotional about how many microns it takes to be an official dust particulate. 
>  From all sides of the room came shouts of "360 microns", "400 microns", "500 
> microns", and what seemed HUGE: "600 microns". for the record a micron is 
> about the thickness of a sheet of paper.  
> 
> The debate went for what seemed like hours! (it was about 60 minutes) And the 
> vote failed to change anything
> 
> I could listen to hours and hours of fire sprinkler debate, but I was dyin' 
> that day!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It should be recognized that the above is my opinion as a member of the NFPA, 
> 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 the NFPA, nor 
> any of their technical committees. 
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> 
> Cecil Bilbo, president 
> Academy of Fire Sprinkler Technology
> Champaign, IL
> 217.607.0325
> www.sprinkleracademy.com
> ce...@sprinkleracademy.com
> ??
> OUR STUDENTS SAVE LIVES!!
> 
> 
> From: Sprinklerforum  on 
> behalf of Ron Greenman via Sprinklerforum 
> 
> Sent: Friday, May 22, 2020 12:36 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
> 
> Cc: Ron Greenman 
> Subject: Dust Collection
>  
> Does anyone know the NFPA references for dust ducting and collection for 
> compressed paper laminate production? I am home (of course) and my books are 
> 75 miles away. Thanks.
> 
> 
> Ron Greenman
> 
> rongreen...@gmail.com
> 
> 253.576.9700
> 
> The Universe is monstrously indifferent to the presence of man. -Werner 
> Herzog, screenwriter, film director, author, actor and opera director (1942-)
> ___
> 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: I-B construction - ABS plumbing piping

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

As Travis stated, it is in the works!  

Thanks,
John

John August Denhardt, P.E.
Strickland Fire Protection Incorporated
4011 Penn Belt Place
Forestville, Maryland 20747-4737
301.474.1136 - Office
301.343.1457 - Mobile

From: Sprinklerforum  On Behalf 
Of Travis Mack via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2020 9:02 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Travis Mack ; Mitchell, Scott 

Subject: Re: [External] Re: I-B construction - ABS plumbing piping

That is processing 

Travis Mack, SET
Engineering Manager
MFP Design
tm...@mfpdesign.com
travis.m...@ferguson.com
480-505-9271 x700
NEW MOBILE : (480) 272-2471

Send large files to us via: 
https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign




On May 21, 2020, at 6:00 AM, Mitchell, Scott via Sprinklerforum 
mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>>
 wrote:

You might try an informal interpretation from John August Denhart and company.  
☺

Scott Mitchell

From: Sprinklerforum 
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>>
 On Behalf Of J H via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 11:43 PM
To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: J H mailto:design.azfire...@gmail.com>>
Subject: [External] Re: I-B construction - ABS plumbing piping

You're going to have to get your ammo, your formal interpretations and get an 
audience with the little princess's boss - the king.

[https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif]
Virus-free. 
www.avast.com

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 5:46 PM Rod DiBona via Sprinklerforum 
mailto:sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org>>
 wrote:
Maybe look at the contract for dispute resolution. Hopefully push past the GC 
to the owner for  their decision before it goes to mediation etc. Check the 
contract that the GC has with the owner that the sprinkler sub is likely tied 
to. May be a case where this tie helps. At the end of the day the owner pays 
the bill. Would help to understand the GC’s contract. Is it a firm fixed? GC 
plus fee? How is the contingency money handled? Split with the GC? 100% back to 
owner. I would know these things before going this route. Good luck, this 
clearly isn’t right.


Rod DiBona
Chief Operating Officer
R.F.P.G
Rapid Fire Protection Group
1530 Samco Road
Rapid City, SD 57702
Office-605-348-2342
Cell- 605-391-3553
www.rapidfireinc.com

[cid:image001.jpg@01D62F51.B620FD00][cid:image002.jpg@01D62F51.B620FD00]




From: Sprinklerforum 
mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org>>
 On Behalf Of Travis Mack, SET, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G via Sprinklerforum
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 6:36 PM
To: 
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Cc: Travis Mack, SET, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G 
mailto:tm...@mfpdesign.com>>; 'Matt Grise' 
mailto:m...@afpsprink.com>>; 'Rocci 3 Cetani' 
mailto:roc...@norcalfire.com>>
Subject: RE: I-B construction - ABS plumbing piping

Seems like we have an AHJ not backing down. We had the reviewing engineer for 
the sprinkler plans write a letter stating that the criteria is in compliance 
with NFPA and that limited quantities of combustibles are permitted above the 
ceiling and still classify it as non-combustible.  This is data cabling and 
waste vent piping that the inspector is drawing a line in the sand to provide 
protection above the ceilings of a large high school.  I have been working 
getting informal interpretations from various entities to support our position.

GC is telling sprinkler contractor it was design build so no change order.  
But, specs say to put sprinklers above ceiling if structure is combustible or 
if steel beams are not fire proofed.  In this project, the steel beams are fire 
proofed.  The contract “intent” drawings call out to add sprinklers below 
stairs if combustible but no where else in the project.  There is nothing to 
indicate sprinklers would be required above the ceilings.  A similar school 
built the next jurisdiction over does not have sprinklers above the ceiling.  I 
have been told other projects in this jurisdiction have the same construction 
and same situation with no sprinklers above the ceiling.  One of them 
referenced is a hospital.  I’m sure the data cabling in a hospital is far 
greater than a high school.

This one is going to get interesting.  And probably pretty ugly.

From: Sprinklerforum 

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Help Finding Code Section

[John Denhardt via Sprinklerforum]

The 2019 edition of 13 has been changed to (*the red bold highlighted text
has been deleted*):

9.3.14.3 - Where there is a noncombustible space above a noncombustible or
limited-combustible drop ceiling that is sprinklered because it is open to
an adjacent sprinklered space *on only one side *and where there is no
possibility for storage above the drop ceiling, the sprinkler system shall
be permitted to extend only as far into the space as 0.6 times the square
root of the design area of the sprinkler system in the adjacent space.

I will see if the section is open in the 2022 edition process and see if we
can add something to the annex.

Hope this helps.

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



   

*Help AFSA “Sound the Alarm” about sprinklers!*

AFSA’s charitable partner the American Red Cross is educating millions
through its Home Fire Preparedness Campaign. Help us support the inclusion
of fire sprinklers in their messaging.  Donate today!



On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 10:14 AM Kyle.Montgomery via Sprinklerforum <
sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:

> I agree with Skyler, this should be an acceptable way to protect the area.
> I also agree that the wording is poorly written for what the intent is.
> Also, the picture in the book (it’s even in the appendix of the regular
> version) is showing a condition where the larger area has no ceiling and
> the smaller area does have a ceiling; kind of the opposite of Brian’s
> condition, but no good reason to think it couldn’t still apply.
>
>
>
> I’d like to see the “only on one side” removed from the wording, and a few
> more figures added (like a plan view of the condition shown, plus a section
> and plan view of the condition Brian is describing). I think that would
> clear things up, and I THINK that would still be in line with the original
> intent of the allowance.
>
>
>
> *Kyle Montgomery*
>
>  [image: cid:image001.gif@01CAA0CE.8D8066F0]
>
> *Aero Automatic Sprinkler Co.*
>
> *21605 N. Central Ave.*
>
> *Phoenix, AZ 85024*
>
> *Direct: 623.580.7820*
>
> *Cell: 602.763.4736*
>
> kmontgom...@aerofire.com
>
>
>
> *From: *Skyler Bilbo via Sprinklerforum
> 
> *Sent: *Wednesday, May 20, 2020 5:30 AM
> *To: *sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org; bhar...@bvssystemsinc.com
> *Cc: *Skyler Bilbo 
> *Subject: *[EXTERNAL] Re: Help Finding Code Section
>
>
>
> Brian,
>
>
>
> I believe you are looking for section 8.15.23.3 (2013 edition).  The
> handbook has a nice picture, and does a much better job of explaining
> this.  Extend coverage into the space above the ceiling a distance of at
> least 0.6 times the square root of the remote area.  Note that it also
> says: where this happens on one side...
>
>
>
>
>
> Good Luck,
>
> Skyler Bilbo
>
> 1700 S. Raney Street
>
> Effingham, IL 62401
>
> 217-819-6404 Direct
>
> 217-347-7315 Fax
>
>
>
> sbi...@wenteplumbing.com
>
> www.wenteplumbing.com
> 
>
>
>
> **new** www.beplumb.com
> 
>
> Like us on facebook
> for
> updates
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 7:22 AM Brian Harris via Sprinklerforum <
> sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote:
>
> Picture a non-combustible single story office building, drop ceilings
> throughout except for a small electrical room in one corner. I swear I saw
> in one of the newer versions of NFPA that providing protection above the
> ceiling was only required within a certain area above this “open” room and
> not the entire building. Any help finding the reference would be greatly
> appreciated.
>
>
>
> *Brian Harris, CET*
>
> BVS Systems Inc.
>
> Design Manager
>
> bvssystemsinc.com
> 
>
> Phone: 704.896.9989
>
> Fax: