Chris,
I still think that if the hydraulically most demanding area falls either
between 2 systems or branch lines off 2 separate cross mains, you still
need to pick up the full remote area for the area/density method. The
fire will not know what sprinklers are supplied from which pipe. You
still
On the other hand, there's a zillion SF of big boxes out there with multiple
systems covering ONE area and with 40k SF system limit for high-piled
storage, of course more than one system can cover an area.
It would only be where different criteria apply and walls pop up that you
start worrying
If you have adjacent systems and calc both are you anticipating flowing the
entire remote areas of both systems? If statistics are correct and most fires
are controlled or extinguished by less than 3 sprinklers even if the fire
involved several sprinklers on adjacent systems, would calcing
http://www.dfbls.az.gov/UserFiles/file/ofm/budgetannouncement.pdf
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
For Technical Assistance, send an email to:
From another list.
Division News from Arizona - Suspension of State Fire Marshal Programs
By: Arizona Fire Chiefs Association
http://www.dailydispatch.com/editorials.asp?authorid=30
Published: 1/8/2010
The Arizona Office of the State Fire Marshal has immediately suspended
several
Anyone want to venture a guess on whether water flowing through 2
systems is more or less hydraulically demanding than that flowing
through one? Granted you could have a case where a higher hazard in a
relatively small area is centered between systems that MIGHT be more
demanding with two
Thanks Roland,
I guess I wasn't that clear in my statement but my thoughts were along
the lines of the annex material you pointed out.
Dewayne
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Roland
Huggins
If I'm remembering it correctly the statement was that someone had them
calc. the area between two Deluge systems that were not separated by walls
on the assumption that a fire in that area would set off both systems at the
same time. This is similar to NAVFAC hangers with Deluge systems where
Please note I am not arguing the big picture. One really, really should
calc the most demanding area no matter how many systems it may or may not
cross.
My point was the standard was deficient in really small systems within the
area of a larger system. Even if the area is bound by walls it
agreed but that is a different animal and we're hunting wwwabbit
Roland
On Jan 14, 2010, at 9:09 AM, Thom McMahon wrote:
If I'm remembering it correctly the statement was that someone had
them
calc. the area between two Deluge systems that were not separated
by walls
on the assumption
This is the comment I was referring too! Yes it is a coyote and not a
rabbit, but this started the whole multi system calc. stuff. (By the way I'm
agreeing with you, in case that doesn't come thru)
Thom McMahon, SET
Firetech, Inc.
2560 Copper Ridge Dr
P.O. Box 882136
Steamboat Springs, CO 80488
We have 65,000 sqft of rack storage that requires in-rack sprinklers.
The racks span an area that is protected by 4 roof systems. Can we use a
single system to supply the in-rack and have all 65,000 sqft on a single
valve?
I thought that I read somewhere once upon a time that in-rack systems
had
For jurisdictions facing budget
cuts in their fire prevention departments,
consider a document framed in 1995 by
the US Fire Administration and conceived
by Eric Schmidt, then FPE with Prince George's County
Maryland. The 80 page document provides
a method whereby residential sprinkler
Good to remind all of this. I was not part of the development but did
review it around that time. I found it to be rather good. The math was
sound for the time. What I mean is this was before the 0.05 and the modern
crop of res heads so I can't swear the GPM and pressures are the same.
Why
The way I understand it 40,000 sf is your limit.
*
8.2.1 *The maximum floor area on any one floor to be protected by sprinklers
supplied by any one sprinkler system riser or combined system riser shall be
as follows:
(3) Extra hazard
(a) Pipe schedule — 25,000 ft2 (2323 m2)
(b) Hydraulically
Would the 40,000 sqft limit apply to the area including the aisles? Of
the 65,000 sqft of area the racks cover only about half is actually
rack. So if there is only 32,500 sqft. of rack one system should do it?
13 doesn't address the issue (that I can find) and maybe that's why. I
thought I read
Ron:
i remember reading the same thing and it did include the rack aisles. I
will try to find it.
T
On 1/14/2010 1:10 PM, Fletcher, Ron wrote:
Would the 40,000 sqft limit apply to the area including the aisles? Of
the 65,000 sqft of area the racks cover only about half is actually
rack. So
8.13 In-Rack Sprinklers.
8.13.1 System Size. The area protected by a single system of
sprinklers in racks shall not exceed 40,000 ft2 (3716 m2) of floor
area occupied by the racks, including aisles, regardless of the
number of levels of in-rack sprinklers.
Craig L. Prahl, CET
Fire
craig,
Good find. I just found that and almost hit send
-Jim
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 2:18 PM, craig.pr...@ch2m.com wrote:
8.13 In-Rack Sprinklers.
8.13.1 System Size. The area protected by a single system of
sprinklers in racks shall not exceed 40,000 ft2 (3716 m2) of floor
area occupied
Thanks Craig. I must have read right past that two or three times this
morning. I need a vacation.
Ron
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of
craig.pr...@ch2m.com
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010
When I've had multiple roof zones with extensive racking I'll feed the racks in
roof area A off of the adjacent roof area B's riser. Then serve B's
racks off of A's roof system riser. Reasoning for this is that if you had an
impairment in system A you only impact one system, either the roof
That's a good idea. If it doesn't cost too much in the way of bulk pipe
I may give it a try.
Ron F
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of
craig.pr...@ch2m.com
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 1:25
Can anyone give me a definition of indicating shut-off valve. My guess is
that it is an OS Y but don't know.
Karen Purvis
Senior Designer
Facility Systems Consultants
713 South Central Street,
Suite 101
Knoxville, TN 37902
ph.865-246-0164
fax 865-246-1084
Not necessarily. Ball Valves and butterfly valves can be considered indicating
valves due to the fact that either by the position of the handle or the flag on
the actuator, their position can be determined.
Craig L. Prahl, CET
Fire Protection Specialist
Mechanical Department
CH2MHILL
Any valve that has an indicating device where you can tell if it is open or
closed by looking. OSY would be one as with others.
Rod DiBona
Rapid Fire
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Karen
An OSY is one type of indicating valve. A Post Indicating Valve (PIV) would
also fall into that category. It wouldn't HAVE to specifically be an Outside
Stem/Screw and Yoke valve.
The indicating portion would be signage as part of the valve showing OPEN or
SHUT/CLOSED or some other means to
Yes this answered the question, which of course was the answer I thought but
was prompted to ask anyway. Thanks all.
Karen Purvis
Senior Designer
Facility Systems Consultants
713 South Central Street,
Suite 101
Knoxville, TN 37902
ph.865-246-0164
fax 865-246-1084
-Original Message-
From:
Does anyone know of a sidewall sprinkler that is listed for LH with an
extended throwback? Needs to cover at least 10 inches behind...
Thanks,
Carrol A. Glimstad
Fire Sprinkler Systems Designer
Cosco Fire Protection, Inc.
500 Menlo Drive, Suite 150
Rocklin, CA 95765
Ph: 916.652.1306
Fax:
Mr. Cahill wrote:
A ball valve
may very well indicate its position but I don't think they are any Listed as
a fire sprinkler control valve. I think the 5 second rule is what eliminates
them from the Listed variety of a generic indicating valve.
For the most part you are correct, but Victaulic
Good to know, thanks.
Chris
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ken Holsopple
(forum)
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 3:17 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Definition
Mr.
Or the Milwaukee butterball dating back to the 80's
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Chris Cahill
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 4:13 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE:
What does Turkey have to do with it ?
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George
Church
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 4:45 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Definition
Or
Ok let me clarify my original statements. I was referring to a lever
handled ball valve not being Listed but an indicating valve. I did indeed
forget about the ball inside the hybrid butterballs and now see the clone in
Victaulic's. (We use plenty of M. BB's so a swift KITA is warranted.)
Hey
Yep...but the Butterball has a disc. It's not a ball valve, but is a listed
indicating control valve.
What do I win?
Best Regards,
Ken Holsopple
-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George
Hello Ken,
You WON Left over Christmas fruit cake.
Thursday, January 14, 2010, 5:00:11 PM, you wrote:
Yep...but the Butterball has a disc. It's not a ball valve, but is a listed
indicating control valve.
What do I win?
Best Regards,
Ken Holsopple
-Original Message-
I was referring to the ball valves such as the Vic 728's with the indicator
flag.
Craig L. Prahl, CET
Fire Protection Specialist
Mechanical Department
CH2MHILL
Lockwood Greene
1500 International Drive
PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491
Direct - 864.599.4102
Fax - 864.599.8439
Move East where its warmer and yes it IS time to go home now and Ken
will provide SKITA at no charge to the employee. We could use a nice PE to
kick around ;)
I checked my iPhone to see if it WAS warmer here tan there today (figured
you're about same as Fargo) and indeed, we're 39*F now.
It's been unseasonably warm here at the latitude 1 degree north of
Fargo getting into the fifties each day and staying in the mid
--forties at night. Turkey, by the way, since Craig asked, is a
country that occupies all of the Anatolian Peninsula, sometimes known
as Asia Minor but I don't know
I reviewed this about ten years ago and I found the concept to be good
but there were many anomalies in the execution that put me off. I
don't recall what the exact issues were but the taste they left in my
mouth drove me back to 13D exclusively. On the other hand the rule of
thumb or schedule
You can't all leave yet, I just got here! The Butterball is an
indicating turkey that pops up when done. If ignored, it could
potentially set off the residential sprinkler system (in PA).
At 05:43 PM 1/14/2010, you wrote:
It's been unseasonably warm here at the latitude 1 degree north of
Only if it gets smokey.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Todd Williams t...@fpdc.com wrote:
You can't all leave yet, I just got here! The Butterball is an
indicating turkey that pops up when done. If ignored, it could
potentially set off the residential sprinkler system (in PA).
At 05:43
Speaking OF residential sprinkler systems in PA or anywhere else for that
matter, the 5 sec. slow close is code specific. You won't find it in 13D
because a ball valve is not required to be listed for 13D, but still can
indicate.
Thom McMahon, SET
Firetech, Inc.
2560 Copper Ridge Dr
P.O. Box
We had this very discussion at work yesterday. If Washington State were
actually successful in adopting the IRC as it reads I personally don't
believe there are enough sprinkler companies to do the work as conventional
(bid, design, permit, then install and test). We discussed how electricians
And a ball valve that's part of a listed assembly, even if you would
otherwise need a slow close valve like for a main drain, is OK.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Thom McMahon tmcma...@firetechinc.com wrote:
Speaking OF residential sprinkler systems in PA or anywhere else for that
matter,
Or sadly, one of their children.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Jim Johnston
j...@inlandfireprotection.com wrote:
We had this very discussion at work yesterday. If Washington State were
actually successful in adopting the IRC as it reads I personally don't
believe there are enough sprinkler
All:
Was this guide written to before or after the 13-D committee added the min
gpm/sf requirement?
Yours,
Bruce Verhei
- Original Message -
From: Ron Greenman rongreen...@gmail.com
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 3:49:02 PM GMT -08:00
As far as I know this was written before there were any residential
heads except Omegas and the calcs are based on the 0.04 density.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 5:04 PM, bver...@comcast.net wrote:
All:
Was this guide written to before or after the 13-D committee added the min
gpm/sf
47 matches
Mail list logo
