Finally!
Thank you, Chris Brown Fire Protection Designer, Poole Fire Protection Office: 913.829.8650 Direct: 913.747.2056 Cell: 913.208.3600 Fax: 913.829.8690 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Drucker Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 12:42 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: hydraulic elevators The NFPA-13 hoistway pit suppression requirement is contradictory. The explanatory material states; " The sprinklers in the pit are intended to protect against fires caused by debris, which can accumulate over time." The exception permits the omission of sprinklers in hoistway pits that are enclosed, of non combustible construction and that do not contain combustible hydraulic fluids. So what happened to the debris ?. The removal of combustible hydraulic fluids does not alleviate the debris issue. A hazard still exists. Additionally the non combustible fluid issue is not addressing hydraulic elevators but rather traction elevators that don't utilize hydraulics as their means of locomotion. John Drucker Fire Protection Subcode Official New Jersey -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland Huggins Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 1:17 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: hydraulic elevators the problem with hydraulic oil is not how well it burns in standard liquid form (ie flash point). It's when a small leak occurs under pressure and you get atomized oil spraying out. As a comparison, grain dust laying on the ground is not that big a deal but when floating in the air, can go boom. Roland On Jan 8, 2007, at 9:57 AM, Loren Johnson wrote: > In my dealings with FM Global, their Approval Guide does list > manufacturers who have a less hazardous type of hydraulic fluid, which > has a higher flash point than normal hydraulic fluids. FM indicates > that these too will burn under certain conditions, but the fire risk > has been reduced to an acceptable degree. > > Loren Johnson - CFPS, CET > Fire Protection Systems Consultant > The Hitchcock Company > Peoria, IL > --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> I had been told by one elevator inspector that there was an FM >> approved hydraulic media that was non-combustible and if that was >> being used the sprinkler in the pit could be deleted. >> >> On the other hand in another jurisdiction I was told that regardless >> of the hydraulic media used that we were to provide a sprinkler in >> the pit due to the possible accumulation of miscellaneous debris >> which could catch fire. >> >> >> Isn't it wonderful to be in an industry where everything is so black >> and >> white? ;) >> >> >> >> Craig L. Prahl, CET >> Fire Protection Group >> Mechanical Department >> CH2MHILL >> Lockwood Greene >> 1500 International Drive >> PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax - >> 864.599.8439 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lg.com >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George >> Church >> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:41 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: RE: hydraulic elevators >> >> Perhaps everyone else in the area installs to #13R ? >> Perhaps a call to the local AHJ(s) would clear up whether you're the >> only one doing it correctly, in which case maybe your competitors >> will be a little dismayed to find themselves going back and >> retrofitting their bottoms. The call to the AHJ(s) could be >> two-fold: ask them if >> they believe it should be required; and ask WHY it is not- you may >> find in the near future you're no longer alone in the shaft. >> >> George Church >> Rowe Sprinkler >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David >> de Vries/Firetech >> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:30 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: hydraulic elevators >> >> Pat on the back to the only contractor in the area complying with >> this provision of 13. >> >> -- >> David de Vries, P.E., CSP >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> -------------- Original message -------------- >> From: "Greg McGahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>> >>> We are receiving mixed reviews from AHJ's >> regarding this issue: Are >>> sprinklers required in the bottom of hydraulic >> elevator shafts? >>> >>> I know what the code says but we have never been >> able to document that >> >>> ANY >> >>> hydraulic elev fluid is non-combustible by >> definition. I was informed >>> this >> >>> morning that we are the only contractor in the >> area putting sprinklers >> >>> in the bottom of these shafts. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Greg McGahan >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >> [email protected] >> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum >> _______________________________________________ >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >> [email protected] >> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum >> > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
