There's the issue,  the ceiling in question wouldn't be considered a floating 
cloud, (my point), with just small openings for return air.

I envision the floating clouds as those panels scattered throughout an area 
intended for acoustic absorption or architectural flavor but not necessarily 
attached to each other or to walls.

We're talking of two different things here apparently.


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.ch2m.com

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland Huggins
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 11:46 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Floating Ceilings

What divergent opinions?  You copied all the other opinions except mine.  You 
may have been referring to Craig's response.

Bob and I are on the same page - floating clouds are obstructions, not the 
ceiling.

Now I did run down a tangent and mentioned a small opening (up to 12
inches) at the edge (and only the  edge) of the room.  That one has room to 
discuss not putting sprinklers above the ceiling (which isn't a floating cloud).

Roland

On Aug 5, 2008, at 8:24 AM, George Church wrote:

> Do the last two posts reflect divergent opinions by two #13 committee
> members? I thought it was all B&W.....
>
> Seriously, if you have time to approach the AHJ (and make time,
> obviously, rather than risk your dwgs bounced...) and point out that
> if 4" wide continous grilles were added about the perimeter, then it
> would no longer be a floating ceiling, and it would be a
> (noncombustible) concealed space.
>
> Then ask "what changes if the grilles are removed, from a
> thermodynamic perspective?" If your AHJ can handle that question
> intelligently, you may then have permission to omit protection above,
> and the taxpayers don't need to pay for the grilles.
>
> I believe this would assist in merging the two trains of thought in
> the previous posts by Misters Huggins and Caputo- and I would highly
> recommend not disregarding the opinions of either one of these learned
> members of #13
> Committee:
> 1. RJH is also on the Standards Council 2. BC is a VP of your firm.
>
> glc

_______________________________________________
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)

Reply via email to