Re: NFPA 13 Pocket guide

2008-10-01 Thread Roland Huggins
Dave Hague wrote the last one. I'll ask him if he is slatted to do an update. Roland On Sep 30, 2008, at 1:24 PM, Joe Burtell wrote: Does anyone know when the 2007 NFPA 13 pocket guide will be out or who to talk to. I have asked NFPA but no one the put me through to really knows. Best

Re: shallow pitched roof.

2008-10-03 Thread Roland Huggins
And what makes you think the intent of the standard is to IGNORE the title and every single section that says CONCEALED SPACE as well as past text that said attic. That's the problem of using logic without all the pieces of the puzzle (especially for something that isn't all that

Re: limited combustible concealed space

2008-10-06 Thread Roland Huggins
No since there is a maximum RHR of 3500 BTU/lb as well as flames spread rating. The better question - is there enough EXPOSED combustibles to propagate the fire? As discussed in the Handbook, you are allowed to have a limited amount of exposed combustibles. The example uses the

Re: Solid Continuous Obstruction

2008-10-06 Thread Roland Huggins
that is what the standard says and might I add, horrible code writing. If the top of the duct is below the deflector but less than 18 inches, it still says to apply 8.6.5.1.2. MAKES NO SENSE. We did an article on this after this requirement was created defining how we think it should be

Re: sizing expansion tanks

2008-10-23 Thread Roland Huggins
At the ROP meeting the INstallation committee changed it to approved. Then at the ROC meeting it went back to Listed. I can't imagine this coming up as a NITMAM but even if it did, I'd be surprised if the floor would accept the change. so, as of today, it is still required to be Listed.

Re: monitoring station time

2008-10-23 Thread Roland Huggins
It's been a while since I've looked at NFPA 72 but I believe the 90 sec is for the remote station to receive the alarm. In the past there wasn't anything directing the operations of the remote station (ie how long they take to notify the fire department). There have been changes directed

Re: Closets / cabinets

2008-11-05 Thread Roland Huggins
I go with what Ron said. Also note that obstructions (shelves) are not an issue in a closet. Also it is A.8.15.8.2 that states that sprinklers are not required within furniture is the old text and it was expanded in 07 (and put within the standard ) at 8.1.1(7). That section also states

Re: White papers and definition of roles

2008-11-10 Thread Roland Huggins
Having a valid design concept at the beginning of the project is a beautiful thing. Those operating outside their field of expertise will not change until THEY are held financially liable for THEIR mistakes. Then and only then will this Hatfield and McCoy feud end. IT is coming but WHEN

Re: HELP.

2008-11-12 Thread Roland Huggins
but wash your hands before returning - lol Roland On Nov 12, 2008, at 4:19 AM, Smith, David L.(FAC) wrote: Try this [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical

Re: inspection reports and copying fire marshals

2008-11-14 Thread Roland Huggins
NFPA 25 has had proposals to add sending a copy of the report to the AHJ. It was rejected. Logistics was part of it since most of the land mass in this country is unincorporated with no local AHJ per se. The bottom line though, is that the owner is responsible for maintaining their

Re: inspection reports and copying fire marshals

2008-11-14 Thread Roland Huggins
As pointed out by the man with many great tools, there is a PR side of this issue and not just a contractual side. Nothing like showing voting parents that the safety of their kids is immaterial. Although it is hard to get the toothpaste back in the tube, since they contacted all the

Re: Testing Sprinklers

2008-11-18 Thread Roland Huggins
The Annex material further elaborates that it does not have to be every single type of sprinkler with SIMILAR sidewall, pendent, and upright sprinklers by the SAME manufacturer being in the same representative sample. Roland On Nov 17, 2008, at 2:36 PM, Dyce Geoffrey H. wrote: We have a

Re: 13R system with individual risers calc to 13D?

2008-11-18 Thread Roland Huggins
What does the IBC say? If there were townhouses (not since units divided per floor), then a 13D could be used with minimal rated separation per the IRC. The code drives the allowed type of system, not how small you make each individual system. Make sure the tamper switches are

Re: Mech/Electrical room classification(waExistingPipeScheduledSystem Water Supply)

2008-11-19 Thread Roland Huggins
How I read George's comment is that picking one piece of criteria alone does not necessarily qualify as being that much more conservative. Having worked at a nuke plant for a good while, there is an extensive overall program that combined makes a very high level of fire protection such as

Re: Electrical Rooms

2008-12-23 Thread Roland Huggins
Once upon a time (and likely still there) there was other criteria that prohibited passing through a compartment but that was under Electrical VAULTS. I've seem them in older buildings. Anyone seeing them in new construction? Roland On Dec 18, 2008, at 2:45 AM, John Drucker wrote:

Re: dry system test times

2008-12-24 Thread Roland Huggins
I would be surprised if this situation has been discussed by the Installation TC but consider this starting with the referenced hydraulic perspective: You have two portions of the building with different design basis and EACH require supporting hydraulic calculations. Why wouldn't you

Re: Antifreeze and RPZ

2008-12-24 Thread Roland Huggins
You can put in anything you like from the water purveyors view but someone proposed to 13 that the restriction on antifreeze be removed since it all requires an RPZ. I never expected it to pass but was in a curious mood as to how conservative the TC might be feeling. It floated like a

Re: Variable speed pressure limiting fire pumps

2008-12-24 Thread Roland Huggins
The UL Directory can be searched on-line. Here's a link for the Quick Guide (since it initially appears you need to already know the company name): http://www.ul.com/regulators/quickguide.html Roland On Dec 19, 2008, at 8:12 AM, Frans Stoop wrote: Gentlemen, NFPA 20 par. 5.7.6.3 allows

Re: Sidewall Sprinklers

2009-01-05 Thread Roland Huggins
The only exception to not having a wall, soffit, or beam behind them is when installed UNDER roll-up doors ( as allowed by 8.4.2 (3) Roland On Dec 31, 2008, at 11:37 AM, Dale Wingard wrote: Duane, NFPA 13(2007) 8.7.4.1.2 addresses the location of vertical and horizontal sidewalls in

Re: 1st Level of in-rack sprinklers location

2009-01-05 Thread Roland Huggins
If you room for another foot, I'll toss out a thought We have a high level of assurance that stuff will not be located on the floor (that pesky automated equipment has little tolerance for variances I assume). Would you not consider that the main issue is having in-racks every other

Re: Apartment Building

2009-01-08 Thread Roland Huggins
negative on that. IF it is a 13R, then the entire building is 13R and a hose stream is not required. Take a peak at the annex A.6.8.2. The TC was a tad sloppy since we had this same issue on the old wording of 6.8.2. Until said otherwise, the philosophy that the entire building must

Re: The Engineering Problem

2009-01-09 Thread Roland Huggins
submitting that form will certainly help you vent BUT unless someone dies or something falls down, it's unlikely much will happen to the PE. At least based on relatively recent and granted only one state, but a PE rejected plans two of the many listed deficiencies were: you can not have

Re: Sprinkler system interconnection to domestic waste pipe

2009-01-09 Thread Roland Huggins
Hey Stewart Hope you had a good Christmas season. My hard drive died so I lost that great real estate link you sent me a while ago. Can you resend something. Although it won't be in the near future, my wife wants to return home when I retire. Hopefully we will start exploring different

Re: Sprinkler system interconnection to domestic waste pipe

2009-01-09 Thread Roland Huggins
Back in my prior life, we discharged to slop sinks in janitor closets but it was a government building and the fact that it resulted in that portion of the building fleeing the fine aroma was tolerated. In another case, had a call from an owner after some occupants fled from the smell and

Re: MIC

2009-01-21 Thread Roland Huggins
And it IS compatible with Blazemaster (just identified as such since testing does take time). ROland On Jan 20, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Chris Cahill wrote: Potter has a bunch of potential solutions. Article in this months FPC mag. Doug Chartier Corrosion Solutions Product Manager Potter

Re: MIC

2009-01-21 Thread Roland Huggins
there was a proposal a cycle or two ago that wanted all of these components addressed. The TC said that was not necessary. The value of reading the ROP/ROC for REJECTED items is that it provides a lot of information on the INTENT since all rejected items need a reason. Granted some are

Re: Re[2]: Old Escutcheons and replacing them

2009-01-21 Thread Roland Huggins
Last time I looked, they also sell HEAT COLLECTORS Roland On Jan 20, 2009, at 1:05 PM, John Denhardt wrote: Agree with George - Replace the sprinklers and use the correct escutcheon. The standard is clear and as far as I know, AGRCO's recessed escutcheons are not listed with any sprinklers.

Re: Boat Storage

2009-01-21 Thread Roland Huggins
Despite NFPA 303 saying treat as Group A plastic in racks and go to NFPA 13, the 13 TC excluded that from Ch 21 for the 2010 edition. WE did add that NFPA 13 has NO guidance for boats on racks. The FPRF has completed the first phase which was just a study on available data. All their

Re: Boat Storage

2009-01-23 Thread Roland Huggins
There are several items mentioned I'd likely to comment on. 1. As soon as someone shows me a hangar that stacks their planes in racks, I'll consider it as a starting point. 2. Fire modeling is not a useful tool for defining SUPPRESSION criteria. 3. Many racks also provide the roof

Re: pressure relief valve

2009-01-23 Thread Roland Huggins
the 2010 edition expanded this from just gridded systems to all wet- pipe systems Roland On Jan 23, 2009, at 3:41 AM, å... wrote: if the riser feeds a gridded system, you should not remove the pressure relief valve. ___ Sprinklerforum

Re: rod orientation installed below sloped roof decks

2009-02-12 Thread Roland Huggins
That translates to rods shall be perpendicular to the pipe, clarified in the 2007 edition. This is one of those rare situations where the 2002 ed Sprinkler Handbook got it wrong. Roland On Feb 11, 2009, at 2:17 PM, Thom McMahon wrote: 9.1.2.3* Hanger rods shall be installed so that

Re: ESFR and Smoke Vents

2009-02-17 Thread Roland Huggins
Everyone advocates for their interest BUT I am not aware of a time when we published a research paper that tap danced on such thin ice. Interesting to note that it's finding was so different from that of the NIST study (which I think we can consider a tad less biased). Schulte did a

Re: Minimal

2009-02-17 Thread Roland Huggins
Some advocates of extreme criteria (no implication Chris) use as a basis that the standard is just a minimum. They talk as if that means marginally acceptable. You hit it on the nose by saying it is the Minimum amount to get a Reasonable level of protection. The point is not whether it

Re: Unlisted pumps

2009-02-19 Thread Roland Huggins
In playing the why do we need it since the municipal system does not use listed pumps, such comparisons also need to consider monitoring of service and response to loss of service before claiming to be similar. Roland On Feb 19, 2009, at 8:19 AM, A.P.Silva wrote: The owner has two tanks

Re: AHJ right or wong?

2009-02-25 Thread Roland Huggins
Much better presentation of the question on the second go round. The edition of the standard is certainly a key factor. As for input, I assume you take all provided it is not a Pelosi response. Roland On Feb 25, 2009, at 12:52 PM, George Church wrote: Now that its just a word problem,

Re: PE Peer Review

2009-02-25 Thread Roland Huggins
Did they did the spec package? Was that stated in the spec package? IF not, send them a bill for a change order. Roland On Feb 25, 2009, at 3:02 PM, Fletcher, Ron wrote: I would like the take from the PE's on forum on how to deal with a plan review comment from an unnamed engineering

Re: PE Peer Review

2009-02-25 Thread Roland Huggins
How dare you to use facts in a philosophical debate - lol Roland On Feb 25, 2009, at 3:19 PM, Ed Vining wrote: This retired PE says the unnamed engineer is wrong. The design area requirements are based on the degree of hazard, not the probability or frequency of fires. Ed Vining On Wed,

Re: PE Registration Board Action

2009-02-26 Thread Roland Huggins
An outstanding idea. Unfortunately, the FL SFPE chapter attempted just such an effort (to reduce unnecessary or excessive material going to the Board) and was instructed in no uncertain terms to: stop - Stop - STOP. The perceived threat of litigation drives many decisions. Roland On Feb

Re: Fire marshall

2009-02-26 Thread Roland Huggins
Also worth noting that just because a state fire marshal exists does not mean that they resolve differences in interpretation between local AHJ's or act as a higher authority over-ruling a local AHJ's interpretation. Roland On Feb 25, 2009, at 7:02 PM, John Drucker wrote: Jay, A State

Re: Aicraft Hangar Group III

2009-02-27 Thread Roland Huggins
bullseye. IF protection is being provided but NFPA 409 does not require the hangar to be protected then you do it as a NFPA 13 system. Roland On Feb 27, 2009, at 5:27 AM, Fletcher, Ron wrote: It's in #13. I believe it is EH Grp I. Ron Fletcher Aero Automatic Sprinkler Phoenix, AZ 85024

CPVC and steel pipe

2009-02-27 Thread Roland Huggins
On a related note, Blazemaster has added Wheatland pipe with anti- microbial coating to its' Chemical Compatibility list. Roland On Feb 27, 2009, at 7:15 AM, George Church wrote: Is the possibility of MIC greater than the likelihood of ESF from MIC coatings? This would aid us in deciding, on

Re: Test/Drain at the Riser

2009-03-11 Thread Roland Huggins
I think you keep trying because you truly believe this is correct and that if only we could see what you are trying to say, we too would understand. Your experiment only shows the expansion difference between air (cup 1/2 full) and water (cup completely full) since it is not a rigid

Re: Underground transition

2009-03-11 Thread Roland Huggins
Ignoring what many do as the basis for continuing it (like heat vents in a sprinklered building which I Like to say as having legitimacy by longevity), how can one claim that any pipe above the floor is UNDERGROUND? The variables of concern and related tests are based on the use and

Fwd: Underground transition

2009-03-12 Thread Roland Huggins
Someone sent me an email focusing on 13:23.1.6.1 that prompted me to revisit this issue. I was focused on plastic (which seems to pop-up all the time and is NOT an adequate transition piece) but as the Sprinkler handbook identifies, other metal types of pipe could do. I find it amusing

Re: Miscellaneous Storage

2009-03-12 Thread Roland Huggins
You're mostly there. Chap 13 applies equally to storage (no pile limit or % of building) when based on storage height. A warehouse with Class I-IV up to 12 ft follows chap 13. The issue of in-racks is not identified by SprinkCode because chap 13 reverts to chap 11. and the occupancy

Re: Siesmic - NFA 13 vs IBC

2009-03-13 Thread Roland Huggins
there was a problem with the 2003 IBC and associated ASCE 7. I did an article on this issue in the NFPA Journal (Jan 2005). This issue initiated the first TIA on the 02 edition of 13 and lead to significant changes in the 07 edition. Any one interested that doesn't keep old Journals can

Re: Mixed-Use Code Question

2009-03-13 Thread Roland Huggins
those have been lenient AHJ/BCO's. Other than the previously discussed EXCEPTION (parking floor to other occupancies), the only way a single structure can be two or more buildings is separation by fire WALLS. Walls in a horizontally orientation is called a collapsed building. AS for

Re: Mixed-Use Code Question

2009-03-16 Thread Roland Huggins
To repeat that famous quote: Stupid IS as stupid DOES. Roland On Mar 14, 2009, at 7:29 AM, Tom Duross wrote: They think that once the other 7 units and common basement (OH2 per spec, ok by me) are completed, the changes will only apply within the four walls of the unit. I sent him a

Re: 13R egress

2009-03-18 Thread Roland Huggins
Look at the Sprinkler Handbook. It states that sprinklers are not required in a corridor that empties into an outside stair but hs no doors (only the ends are open) as well as providing an example of an exterior wraparound corridor. I mention both since the first corridor is enclosed

Re: Excessive system pressure

2009-03-19 Thread Roland Huggins
There are times when folks just have to agree to disagree. I asked nicely last week to do just that and let this thread die. We all enjoy a good debate but not when it becomes unnecessary contentious Just because no one else agrees with your position is not a valid reason to say that

Re: Fire Pump relief valve discharge

2009-03-20 Thread Roland Huggins
How about a more basic question. Why do you even have a relief valve? With a rating of only 105 psi exceeding 175 psi with a tank feed requires a tall tank. Roland On Mar 19, 2009, at 11:23 PM, A.P.Silva wrote: The building owner wants to connect the discharge piping from the pump

Re: Fire Pump relief valve discharge

2009-03-20 Thread Roland Huggins
If it is a relatively new pump, it may churn at 140% but I'd be shocked if that were the case. I haven't gone looking but has any one seen a horizontal pump that exceeds the old 120% criteria? The pumps I've played with have been less than 110% and there are a boat load that are at or

Re: Possible IBC question

2009-03-23 Thread Roland Huggins
keep in mind the list of variables to consider listed in A.8.2.5. It is a good question for the consultants and AHJ's to respond to since there is a difference on how you treat small auxiliary buildings and multiple structures that fall into one fire area verses two buildings separated by

Re: Concurrent Testing

2009-03-24 Thread Roland Huggins
what conflicts between 13 and 25 and why woud you be comparing them Roland On Mar 24, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Tom Duross wrote: There are also conflicts between 13 and 25 but ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list

Re: Exterior Decks/Balconies 13R

2009-03-25 Thread Roland Huggins
Interesting that although IBC dictates something beyond the scope and GUIDANCE of 13R, there is nothing on the design basis for performing the calculations. We did an informal interpretation on it available on the database. Roland On Mar 25, 2009, at 5:26 AM, Tom Duross wrote: I have an

Re: side by side standpipes

2009-03-25 Thread Roland Huggins
Just because the design exceeds the minimum number of exits needed to meet the travel distance does NOT allow you to say the extra exit is not REQUIRED so no standpipe in it. If it is an actual stairway exit, it is considered required. Roland On Mar 25, 2009, at 9:46 AM, Greg McGahan

Re: PODs storage again

2009-03-31 Thread Roland Huggins
If the HPR insurance company makes a judgement call on how to protect it and it doesn't work, they pay for the loss. IF this guidance is not in the published HPR Loss Prevention Data sheets, then the consult is making the judgement call. Guess who will likely pay for the loss? Now

Re: Limited Area sprinkler systems

2009-03-31 Thread Roland Huggins
As identified by Karen, the IBC allows some locations (such as furnace rooms) to be individually protected (or a higher degree of separation). This is providing protection from this room to the rest of the building. So I guess the sleeping room is such a hazard that the rest of the

Re: RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY DRY SYSTEM

2009-03-31 Thread Roland Huggins
true but the text is weakly worded. The section that references the Table says based on the hazard not the type of sprinkler (as does the Table). I believe the intent was for residential sprinklers (for which a 15 sec requirement exists as part of the listing test standard) but writing

Re: NFPA 13R/D and ceiling pockets

2009-04-06 Thread Roland Huggins
I suspect the prior response was attempting to point out that the listing is for smooth construction (excluding the beamed listing) and a ceiling pocket kinda messes that up. So to use residential sprinklers in such arrangements, it has to be allowed by 13 /13R. A related example is the

Re: 100ft from FDC to hydrant?

2009-04-09 Thread Roland Huggins
better yet - look at the Annex at A.6.8.1 Ron - one or the other check will not be open expect for that rare occurrence with the supply curves match. Roland On Apr 9, 2009, at 8:21 AM, Reed Roisum wrote: NFPA 13, 2007 ed. Handbook 6.8 Reed A. Roisum, CET Fire Protection Technician

Re: Fire Protection Performance Intent - 2002 NFPA-13- 8.14.5.1 8.14.5.2

2009-04-10 Thread Roland Huggins
I've always tied the potential for an atomized leak threat to be related to high pressure equipment and worked on the premise that hydraulic elevators are not high pressure. The accumulation of grimy fluid that gets past the seals combined with the trash poses the problem. So this leads

Re: Storage Sprinkler

2009-04-10 Thread Roland Huggins
Listen to Steve but support it with the 2010 ROC. We did a lot of work to explicitly address excessive clearance for spray sprinklers in storage under section 12.1.3.4 currently titled Ceiling Heights (changed that too). The current criteria won't fly because it is limited to solid pile

Re: Storage Sprinkler

2009-04-10 Thread Roland Huggins
: 623.580.7836 F: 623.434.3420 C: 602.763.4160 -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Roland Huggins Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 9:49 AM To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: Storage Sprinkler

Re: Storage Sprinkler

2009-04-10 Thread Roland Huggins
in 12.1.3.4.1(2007). What if you are still using 2002? Daniel L. Merkle, CET From: Roland Huggins rhugg...@firesprinkler.org To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 1:14:06 PM Subject: Re: Storage Sprinkler As the criteria says

Re: stortz and UL listing

2009-04-10 Thread Roland Huggins
Folks in hell want ice water but that doesn't mean they get it. I just looked through the UL Directory and did not find one. May have overlooked it but until proven otherwise, yes give me a cup of that fine boiling water please. As for HOW can that be. The AHJ's like them (with cause) so

Re: stortz and UL listing

2009-04-13 Thread Roland Huggins
If it isn't the AHJ Requiring them then what is the basis for so many being installed when none are listed? We all know the music we are suppose to sing but this one is a song by itself (as far of extent of use) Never said EVERY AHJ likes them but that's no cause for throwing profanity

Re: column enclosure

2009-04-15 Thread Roland Huggins
You're going to to have to use sound reasoning so good luck. The fact that the TC can NOT address every possible situation and that you have the exact issue addressed except for the exterior aspect AND you have an allowance that that is worse (from a risk perspective) with the pipe chase

Re: rated wall opening

2009-04-16 Thread Roland Huggins
It's done all the time in fire partitions but a 3 hr wall is starting to sound like a fire wall (which presents a much greater concern regarding integrity etc.). I'd proceed carefully. Roland On Apr 16, 2009, at 7:50 AM, Dewayne Martinez wrote: Is there any testing or criteria in regards

Re: 5 Year Inspection w/ CPVC

2009-04-17 Thread Roland Huggins
that's because it doesn't exist YET. It was added to NFPA 25 at the ROP meeting. Unfortunately the ROP will not be published until June. Until then the approach to take is that the 5 yr inspection is predominately looking for evidence of excessive corrosion activity driven by MIC

Re: 5 Year Inspection w/ CPVC

2009-04-20 Thread Roland Huggins
(407) 399-5081 - Mobile pjohn...@bardane.net www.bardane.net -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Roland Huggins Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 1:16 PM To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org

Re: antifreeze combustibility?

2009-04-21 Thread Roland Huggins
go to your library and look at your back issue for ROP's and ROC's on 13. It has been over 6 years so I am a little weak on the specifics but it was presented that an antifreeze solution can cause a slight increase in the rate of heat release over a gas burner. That was when the

Re: antifreeze combustibility?

2009-04-21 Thread Roland Huggins
Hypothetically tell them if they use 100% they have their head stuck - lol. As long as it is a SOLUTION then FPA 13 covers it. Roland On Apr 21, 2009, at 11:50 AM, Todd Williams wrote: My question is hypothetical at this point. I don't even have a contract at this point. I'm just throwing

Re: copper pipe

2009-04-28 Thread Roland Huggins
that's the same as asking which steel pipe is preferred: sch 40, 30, or 10. The answer is - it depends. Roland On Apr 24, 2009, at 6:23 AM, Todd Williams wrote: Which type of copper tube is preferable for sprinkler systems, K, L or M? Todd G. Williams, PE Fire Protection

Re: Servicing and adjusting grooved joints

2009-04-30 Thread Roland Huggins
We're from the federal government and we are here to help you. The technical point to be made is that doing government work is a whole different world and you best learn the dance before stepping onto that floor. I won't belabor the point that it typically doubles with questionable real

Re: Slow responding dry pipe valves

2009-05-04 Thread Roland Huggins
One minor problem -where you going to find a new exhauster? The reference to exhausters in NFPA 13 has been removed for the 2010 edition since they are no longer manufactured. Even with one, any bets that a 2-1/2 minute water delivery after valve trip will still not make the combined 60

Re: Preaction: single vs double

2009-05-04 Thread Roland Huggins
Is there no room within the freezer considering there is a 10yr inspection cycle on dry pendent sprinklers and a slightly higher cost? The 30% increase on ALL preaction systems for storage (not occupancy hazard approach) has gone through a dance to get to ALL doing it. In the 2002 ed, you

Re: Preaction: single vs double

2009-05-04 Thread Roland Huggins
another wrinkle that can bite you. Since we are referring to K-11.2 dry pendent sprinklers for a freezer, if the contents are high enough to be considered storage (thus the discussion on required K-factor to density), you might as well stop the discussion. 12.6.3 not only requires the

Re: 2-1/2 Starter Pieces

2009-05-07 Thread Roland Huggins
in order to apply it to larger diameters than 2-1/2, you would be have to jump from say 3 inches for the starter piece (to the first sprinkler) down to 2 inches on the second section of branch line so that the entire portion of BL that would otherwise need a brace is no more than 12 ft.

Re: 2-1/2 Starter Pieces

2009-05-07 Thread Roland Huggins
No. I came from the broad requirement that BL's larger than 2/1/2 require a sway brace and some of us questioning what do you do when ONLY the starter piece (being rather short) is larger the 2-1/2. The old way required a brace on a potentially 2 ft piece of pipe. Roland On May 7, 2009,

Re: Hydrant Flow Test time frame for validity

2009-05-12 Thread Roland Huggins
I'm still waiting on the model that will give a hint that the latest work on an area left a valve closed so the calculated loop is invalid. Roland On May 12, 2009, at 11:05 AM, R Richardson wrote: Hi Thom, Thanks for the feedback. We have been operating under the same set of

Re: Lock out/Tag out

2009-05-14 Thread Roland Huggins
Your client may also have their own guidance (especially if large company and/or government) that must be applied for work performed on their site. Lockheed Martin had requirements that exceeded OSHA. Same applies to confined space entry. Roland On May 14, 2009, at 3:08 PM, Forest Wilson

Re: 24 TJI Wood Joist

2009-05-18 Thread Roland Huggins
better yet, put it at the top of the channel and it becomes your new point of measurement for distance below ceiling. Roland On May 17, 2009, at 11:34 AM, Thom McMahon wrote: Just an adder to what Ken said. The 3000sf design area has to be used in all adjacent areas, so if the area above

Re: Large drop sprinklers

2009-05-19 Thread Roland Huggins
Hose stream N/A matches the number of sprinklers N/A making it a NCD - No Can Do Remote area: look at 22.4.4.2 Roland On May 18, 2009, at 4:07 PM, A.P.Silva wrote: NFPA 13, 2002 table 12.3.2.2.1(a) or NFPA 13, 2007 table 16.2.2.1(a) Large Drop Sprinkler Design Criteria for Class

Re: CPVC w/o water between riser and FDC

2009-05-19 Thread Roland Huggins
When pushed that what we also say but I have it on my list for next cycle so the TC can discuss it. Roland On May 19, 2009, at 7:27 AM, Ron Greenman wrote: I got this from Lubrizol. Apparently this is a question in another North Wet jurisdiction also. A friend from Blazemaster thought I

Re: Large drop sprinklers

2009-05-19 Thread Roland Huggins
-Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Roland Huggins Sent: May 19, 2009 8:31 AM To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: Large drop sprinklers Hose stream N/A matches the number

Re: Large drop sprinklers Part 2

2009-05-19 Thread Roland Huggins
. It IS allowed to be used for dry pipe and a 500 gpm hose allowance is required. Moral of the story: Look before you leap. Anyone have a chute I can borrow? Moving forward with that TIA. Roland On May 19, 2009, at 12:02 PM, Roland Huggins wrote: Instead of attempting to discern some

Re: Wine Barrel Storage

2009-05-20 Thread Roland Huggins
I would not let the pallet reference influence the decision since pallets have an immense amount of surface area for a low mass to go along with the air space. Mak'em whomping big difference. Roland On May 19, 2009, at 12:07 PM, Arthur Tiroly wrote: What I envision is a lot of wood and a

Re: Compressed Air Piping

2009-05-21 Thread Roland Huggins
I'm going to go out on a limb and say I don't think the group interpreted your initial question as being a separate air supply. So how about repeating the question? Roland On May 20, 2009, at 6:44 PM, Tom Duross wrote: Really? Do medical levels apply to a dry system central air system?

Re: reducing suction line

2009-05-27 Thread Roland Huggins
Another option is to not run the pump at 150% Roland On May 26, 2009, at 5:59 PM, Todd Williams wrote: The pump is a 250 gpm; a minimum of 4 suction is required (OK, 3-1/2). I did a project with the same size pump 2 years ago, taking suction from 2 tanks with a 4 suction line. When we tested

Re: 13 13R - same building

2009-05-28 Thread Roland Huggins
even the scope of 13R and annex material confirm you can not mix the two systems in one building. As for HORIZONTAL separation equal to building separation -as soon as it's possible to have the floor collapse and not affect the other side, then we'll talk about horizontal separation for

Re: 13 13R - same building

2009-05-28 Thread Roland Huggins
Predominate was used since the ICC is black and white on other uses where 13R needs to allow WHO is using the other occupancies to drive the decision. It s not really driven by risk but by continuity of operation. A kitchen or office spaces used exclusively by the residents is not

Re: 13 13R - same building

2009-05-29 Thread Roland Huggins
there are two fine points you jumped over. First, IBC does not require a 13R for residential occupancies. It says per 903.3 which encompasses 13, 13R and 13D so you can use whichever is allowed. Obviously 13D is off the plate since it states in 903.3.1.3 for one and two family dwellings

Re: Combustible rated floors

2009-06-01 Thread Roland Huggins
it s worth a small amount f time to ensure the AHJ is aware of when protection can be omitted and when the 3,000SF remote area is applicable. Roland On Jun 1, 2009, at 6:02 AM, Dewayne Martinez wrote: 1hr ceiling attached to the bottom of the truss and a 1hr floor on top. Truss are

Re: Catwalks

2009-06-01 Thread Roland Huggins
you can also have them call NFPA for clarification that you are indeed telling them the truth and not trying to be a sneaky wassscal. Roland On May 29, 2009, at 4:10 PM, Bob Knight wrote: Thom, You said, Unless you have something else going on, like Hw stands for Health and Welfare and

Re: Class 2 oxidizers

2009-06-02 Thread Roland Huggins
Unless you have rated construction allowing the room design, there is no basis for just doing the room. 12.3 is for regular size remote areas and deals simply with the boundary between them. A.12.3 deals with small areas of higher hazard in a lower hazard facility. This actually

Re: DoD UFC - 13R System Design

2009-06-05 Thread Roland Huggins
Bill Have you tried chatting with Joe Simone who heads up the NAVFAC FPE group. He presented at our last convention which was in DC (home of NAVFAC headquarters). Roland On Jun 5, 2009, at 8:33 AM, bill.bro...@brooksfpe.com wrote: I know there are quite a few individuals out there who

Re: Backflow Testing

2009-06-12 Thread Roland Huggins
NFPA 25 requires a full forward flow test - NOT a test of the water supply curve for the BFP. Put simply, the only thing you have to prove is that you moved the amount of water equal to the system demand through the BFP. Show the Q and that's it. The intent is to fully exercise the BFP

Re: Slow responding dry pipe valves - FDT

2009-06-17 Thread Roland Huggins
There was a change in the 13 ROP that addresses this issue. It points out that even when water delivery is calculated, the acceptance test still requires a timed delivery for future ITM. It states that if a single outlet takes longer than 70 sec then it must be evaluated. To be honest,

Re: Slow responding dry pipe valves-FDT

2009-06-17 Thread Roland Huggins
nothing changed (except for dwelling units). The 500 gal w/o QOD or 750 gal limits still apply. The timed approach is just for exceeding them. As for dwelling units, it is not 15 sec regardless of size. Roland On Jun 17, 2009, at 3:44 PM, Ron Greenman wrote: So what drove the change

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >