Past experience will show that elevator hoistway pit fires have occurred where hydraulic fluids were not a factor. I will grant you that this situation is less likely with the ignition source, i.e. cigarette smoking, being restricted or eliminated in most buildings.
No, it only intensifies the contradiction. Accumulated "combustible" debris in of itself is not a hazard ? If that's the case then why are we requiring sprinklers in storage closets, combustible concealed spaces and just about any other unihabited location where combustible materials are present. Apparently hydraulic fluids need to be present with combustibles to constitute a hazard. Wow ! Ignition is the hazard, but since we cant always prevent and or predict when and where ignition will occur, our pardigm is to actively suppress these situations just in case. Risk management. Of course some OCCUPANCIES present a greater fire risk then others and the codes address this by selectively requiring suppression based on OCCUPANCY. Now if the committees explanation was........... " the incidence and intensity of elevator pit fires is low based on the limited amount of combustible debris and the expected heat and smoke yield negates the need for sprinklers in elevator pits. The presence of combustible of hydraulic fluids however poses a greater fire hazard due to an expected increase in heat and smoke yield thus requiring the installation of automatic fire sprinklers to control such a fire." .........., then yes it's a plausable explanation. But that's not the way its explanined or written. On the other hand we could eliminate sprinklers in pits and just about anywhere else if people would simply stop doing stupid things. Roland, heres your soapbox back I'm getting dizzy. John Drucker Fire Protection Subcode Official (AHJ) New Jersey -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brooks, Bill Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:27 AM To: '[email protected]' Subject: RE: hydraulic elevators Nothing the committee does is contradictory (by definition)! It only appears contradictory until there is an explanation that makes the apparent contradiction plausible. So... It appears the committee is saying: 1. Debris - combustible fluid = no hazard 2. Debris + combustible fluid = hazard By itself, any quantity of accumulated debris is not a hazard. Wouldn't this be borne out by past experience? Does this remove the contradiction? Bill Brooks Pittsburgh, PA -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John Drucker Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 1:42 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 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
