Maybe what we need is a reference in 13D similar to that in 13R that you refer to 13 when there is no guidance in the lesser document. Another perhaps is to have the scope of the documents printed in bold, big print on the covers. You all know and I know that fires happen, that fire damage unchecked is far more severe than water damage, etc., etc., but the public doesn't know it and thinks the fire men will get to their rural mansion in Topanga Canyon in moments and save their precious home without causing any additional damage and probably fixing the existent damage with their hoses. And right know I guess my biggest peeve is AHJs that add crap to 13D to protect property. If they want to do that have people put in 13 residential systems and be done with it. Maybe we need a 13-LS (life safety) and a 13D-LS/P (life safety & property) and let the owner sign a document that says he knows what he's getting. End of rant.
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Steve Leyton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What would you have the T/C do? Give us something in writing and I'm > sure the other AFSA rep's would join me in crafting a committee proposal > to work into the ROC if it's well-conceived. The challenge of course, > is that it's not reasonably possible to account for every eventuality. > You know that Tyco has done and continues to do tests with exposed beams > and sloped ceilings; has Reliable got anything in the can that you can > share with us about the direction of testing and new listings for these > conditions? There are sprinklers already on-market that are listed for > this exact scenario, so I'm not sure that any committee action is > warranted or would even be useful at this time. > > > Steve Leyton > Protection Design & Consulting > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike > Brown (TECH- GVL) > Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 6:10 AM > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: RE: Residential Sprinklers and Beam Obstructions > > My point is that the NFPA 13D Committee should provide guidelines to > follow in these situations. I do not care if they say calculate the > room to light hazard as long as they put it in writing. But the way it > is now, it is just what ever the contractor or engineer (designer) can > get the AHJ to go along with. > > Michael L. Brown > Manager of Technical Services > The Reliable Automatic Sprinkler Company, Inc.' > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.reliablesprinkler.com > (864) 843-5228 > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matsuda, > Richard > Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 5:08 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Residential Sprinklers and Beam Obstructions > > I love these discussions cause I get to hear about the problems that > the contractors have in designing these systems. Guess what...we (the > AHJ) have the same problems trying to approve them. > > I remembered a similar discussion saying something about not allowing > them to build something that you can't protect...I think it was a boat > storage rack or something about ESFR sprinklers. The problem with these > houses is that the architect, builder, and home owner have conspired to > build them and now we have to figure out how to protect them. I guess I > could tell them to rip it all out and make a smooth flat ceiling, but I > don't think that would be acceptable to our administration. > > So what do we do? My simplistic answer is that if it looks like an > over-kill design with 10 heads in a 20 x 20-foot room, then it probably > is a waste of money. If one head can protect the room with a smooth flat > ceiling, then maybe four or five heads should be "reasonable" with beam > pockets. Depends on the size and occupancy of the room, beam locations, > depth, ceiling height, type of sprinklers used, and other > variables...but there is a "reasonable" answer to it. The difficulty is > deciding what's "reasonable"...and no single solution will fit all > situations. > > rick matsuda > city of dallas, bldg insp dept > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob > Knight > Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 11:52 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Residential Sprinklers and Beam Obstructions > > I'm working on a home (13D) that has several rooms with the ceiling > broken > up by "beam pockets". These vary in width from 2'8" to 3'3" o.c. with > the > beams being 6" deep. Concealed residential sprinklers are being used. > In > one room, which is 224 sf, if I place a sprinkler in every pocket like I > think I should, there will be 13 sprinklers. This averages out to 17 sf > per > head. Another room is 375 sf and will require 10 sprinklers. This > averages > at 37.5 per head. In rooms of this size do I really need a sprinkler in > every pocket? Can a sprinkler be placed in every other pocket and be > acceptable? Has anyone else found a better way to protect rooms like > this? > Any and all suggestions will help. > > Thanks, > > Bob Knight, CET > (208) 318-3057 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.firebyknight.com > _______________________________________________ > 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) > _______________________________________________ > 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) > _______________________________________________ > 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) > -- Ron Greenman at home.... _______________________________________________ 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)
