Richard, 

No problem just trying to toss our some things to consider. 

Have you compared cost of adding unit heaters to the rack storage space
so you could change to wet pipe system?  Just a thought, because if you
were able to reduce your system demand you might be able to eliminate
the pump.  

 


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 Lindner,
Richard
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Determining a Warehouse Commodity Classification

Thank you for you reply Craig.  You have definitely touched on many
points that I will conveying to the owner to make this a better project
in terms of fire protection (namely the separate storage issues for
combustibles).

I only included info regarding the storage area, but yes, the office
space is also protected with heads overhead as well as in the office
spaces.  The project has a fire pump since the flow test we received
(mid-summer test) showed us only having 59 static, 40 residual and
adding in our losses for elevation as well as backflow means we are way
below what we need.  I only included the 20psi reading so I didn't get
suggestions that my project sized too large (ie. a 750 gpm could barely
be tested on this system).

Our design so far was based on Class II dry pipe (0.17 @ 2600 sq ft.)
per '99 fig 7-3.2.2.2.2 and then adding in a 140% adjustment to
compensate for ceiling height per 7-3.2.2.2.3 for a 0.24 GPM @ 2600 sq.
ft.  We just want to make sure we're not missing anything else.

Thank you everyone for your time and comments.  I really appreciate your
input!

Richard


 
Richard K. Lindner
Plumbing Senior Designer
Morris, Johnson & Associates, Inc.
 
611 Industrial Way West
Eatontown, New Jersey  07724
P:  732-380-1100 ext. 4186  |  F:  732-380-1111
[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.morrisjohnson.com -----Original
Message-----

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 9:34 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Determining a Warehouse Commodity Classification


Seems some are missing that this is a repair garage, not a big box
retail warehouse.

But anyway Richard,   I would suggest having the aerosols/flammable
liquids stored in a fire rated cabinet to take them out of the rack
storage equation.  Sounds like the quantity is minimal so you shouldn't
need a large cabinet.  You can also drop a sprinkler into the cabinet
for extra protection.  Same with the batteries, put them in a separate
room not in the racks.  Then it appears that all you have left could be
considered Class II as you have stated.  

As far as ESFR, I would say only as a last resort if you can't make it
work with a control mode design strategy.  I also think you need to run
some preliminary calcs before calling for a fire pump on a project like
this.  The cost would be quite disproportional to the overall project
value and is without doubt going to create some wailing and gnashing of
teeth on the part of the owner and GC.  You state that you've got 20 psi
at 1100 gpm,  what is the static pressure?  You need all the numbers not
just flowing psi and gpm.  Make sure someone has performed a proper
hydrant flow test for you and make sure it's a recent test.  If you can
go to a Control Mode design you could possibly make it work depending on
where your system falls within the curve.  It might take some massaging
of pipe sizes and some extra time in selecting valves and backflows etc.
with the lowest pressure drop.  

I don't buy into the concept of trying to see into the future use of a
building and over designing a system to accommodate what MIGHT be.
Who's got a crystal ball to see all the possibilities?  Design it
conservatively but within reason and document what the design is based
on.  Over design based on conjecture increases cost and trying to ram a
high dollar system down the throat of an owner based on "what might be"
creates a lot of $$$$$$ heartburn for owners.  Those are the kind of
things that shed a negative light on our industry.  People don't totally
appreciate or understand what we do and all they see is the cost versus
return on investment ratio of zero for that sprinkler system.  

>From a building code standpoint, is your office area separated from the
storage and shop areas by rated walls/ceilings?  Is the area above the
office accessible for storage?  Owners love to use that space for
storage of all kinds of odds and ends.  If it is, then don't forget
about sprinkling at the main building roof level as well as inside the
office.   


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
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

Reply via email to