I chime in because there have been some misconceptions.
First off "Only structural members have to be treated as
obstructions". This is not applicable because multiple adjacent
obstructions are not intended to be looked at individually but by
what they do as a group. Since the clouds affect adjacent
sprinklers, they are considered CONTINUOUS. There was a case where a
crafty architect didn't want to see the sprinklers so he located a
light directly below and close to EVERY sprinkler. It meet the
literal letter IF one ignores the fact that continuous means
something that affects not one but adjacent sprinklers. Soooooo, the
TC wrote A.8.6.5.2.1.4 "It is not the intent of this section to
permit the use of fixtures and architectural features or treatments
to conceal, obscure, or otherwise obstruct sprinkler discharge. The
exception should be applied in accordance with the performance
objectives of 8.6.5.1."
Secondly: It gets sticky once you go beyond 36 inches below the
deflector. In this case you have approximately 3"0" between the deck
and panels. You more than likely less than 36 inches below the
deflector. If you were greater than 36 inches then you have to
discuss GROUPING of the obstructions with the AHJ and whether they
are to be treated individually or together. WHat do you think the
outcome will be? If they were all 4 ft apart and further down, then
we would have something that I would debate especially since the fuel
load is rather light.
I disagree that a 3'11" square would not capture enough heat activate
to activate a sprinkler. At least I would have a difficult time
arguing that the results of tests showing a SMALL heat collector
negatively affects the plume should be extrapolated to a 3'11" square.
As such, sprinklers are required throughout the real ceiling, ie the
deck(I've seen plenty where they are just below the clouds) and below
the obstructions.
SInce I am rendering an option, I need to state as a member of NFPA
13 that this is not an interpretation by NFPA or any of its technical
committees (though the annex text is rather explicit).
Roland
On Aug 15, 2007, at 11:21 AM, Rapid Fire - Bismarck wrote:
I know the ceiling cloud issue has been beaten to death, and I
apologize for
re-scratching an irritated wound...
Scenario:
Band - Choir room(s) with 4' x 4' acoustical dampening-style clouds
littered
throughout the room w/ space created between the panels ranging
from 1'-0" ~
4'-0" 'open' space. Structure above is steel joist - approximately
3'-0"
clearance from top of panel to bottom of decking. I do not believe
these
panels fall under the "Drop-out Ceiling" section... therefore, I'm
wondering
if my spacing would be to place deflector within 6" of the deck and
place
around / near the openings created between the panels. Any thoughts,
previous experiences? Knowledge from the forum is always
appreciated!!
Chuck
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.19/953 - Release Date:
8/14/2007
5:19 PM
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:Sprinklerforum-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
