I realize that the added expense of running hundreds of feet of additional
pipe to interconnect the risers may seem exorbitant. But Stop and think a
moment. Every day we run thousands of feet of pipe to ensure these
properties are protected, but we're not willing to run a couple of hundred
feet of additional pipe to ensure that these systems will perform, with
minimal training the way they are expected to by both the owner and the FD?
Maybe this needs to be submitted to 13, as Ed said, but doing what is right
has never been limited by "The standard doesn't say I have to!" (I just
can't get that Winnie text to sound as good as Steve L. can) Sitting down
with the owner and the AHJ and reviewing the situation, and reasons to do it
right, may have your owner opening his wallet, to save the AHJ from getting
something he doesn't want and won't work for his FD.
Thom McMahon
Firetech, Inc.
2560 Copper Ridge Dr
Steamboat Springs, CO 80488-2136
Tel: 970-879-7952
Fax: 970-879-7926
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 6:40 AM
Subject: RE: FDC's on multiple systems
That is why if there are multiple risers it just works out best to
provide a single FDC at the backflow or at some designated point on the
UG system if it's a private loop, but if the building is large enough to
warrant multiple risers but is fed from a municipal system, then a
common FDC or FDC tied together is not practical. Signage at risers
and a good walkthrough of the facility with the local FD is about the
best that can be done. Running hundreds of feet of pipe inside the
building between risers to connect FDC's is just a bit over the top.
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 Thom
McMahon
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 7:12 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: FDC's on multiple systems
From an AHJ point of view more than one FDC on a Building that only
supplies
a portion of that building is always a bad idea. Late at night, maybe
snowing they drive up to the building, see an FDC, but the strobe or
water motor above it isn't flashing or making a sound. They have the
right address, even if no smoke or flame is visible, they will still
hook up to it before entering the building, guessing that the strobe is
broken or water motor broken. Now we've put them at risk, because they
don't have time to drive all the way around the building to see if there
is another strobe flashing somewhere, or another FDC.
This is just a bad idea!
Thom McMahon
Firetech, Inc.
2560 Copper Ridge Dr
Steamboat Springs, CO 80488-2136
Tel: 970-879-7952
Fax: 970-879-7926
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed Kramer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 2:27 PM
Subject: FDC's on multiple systems
Run into something new that I need opinions on.
An addition is being added to an existing building. Existing building
is
fully sprinklered. The total area of the combined existing and new
structure exceeds 52,000 sf and the existing system riser is in the
far
corner away from the addition. So the decision was made to bring in a
new
underground supply to serve the new addition. Thus the new addition
will
have its own independent system riser and fire department connection.
Does 2002 NFPA 13 section 8.16.l2.4.3 (or any other section) require
the
two FDCs (one existing, one new) be tied together?
The commentary hints at this, but I've never thought that was the
intent.
I thought the intent was that multiple systems SERVED BY THE SAME
UNDERGROUND LEAD-IN be served by the same FDC. Section 8.16.2.4.5
seams
to
support this.
Opinions?
Ed Kramer
Littleton, CO
_______________________________________________
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
