Update! Thanks to all that replied. The EOR was convinced that our design
approached was acceptable and gave me a letter saying so. Plans into City
with a copy of letter and are being reviewed. Paid for my years dues to AFSA
and then some.
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Johnson, Duane (NIH/OD/ORS) [C]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 1:39 PM
Subject: RE: Slippery Slope
8.4.8.1 Special sprinklers that are intended for the protection of
specific hazards or construction features shall be permitted where such
devices have been evaluated and listed for performance under the
following conditions:
(1) Fire tests related to the intended hazard
(2) Distribution of the spray pattern with respect to wetting of
floors and walls
(3) Distribution of the spray pattern with respect to obstructions
(4) Evaluation of the thermal sensitivity of the sprinkler
(5) Performance under horizontal or sloped ceilings
(6) Area of design
(7) Allowable clearance to ceilings
And...
1.6.1 Nothing in this standard shall be intended to restrict new
technologies or alternate arrangements, provided the level of safety
prescribed by this standard is not lowered.
1.6.2 Materials or devices not specifically designated by this standard
shall be utilized in complete accord with all conditions, requirements,
and limitations of their listings.
6.2.4.2 Special Sprinklers. Special sprinklers shall be permitted to be
listed for protection of a specific construction feature in a portion of
an occupancy classification.
Duane Johnson, PE
Program Manager
Division of the Fire Marshal (Support Contractor)
Office of Research Services
National Institutes of Health
301-496-0487
-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Browning [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 12:10 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Slippery Slope
I have a project we designed the Dry System with 7 SD Attic heads. The
ME wants the Area and Slope increases per 11.2.3.2.4 and 11.2.3.2.5. I
pointed out the listing of the Attic heads but all he says is " If it's
OK with the Local AHJ, he takes " no exception to that design approach"
but he will not stamp the drawings saying this, even tho he DID stamp
the first set " rejected/ resubmit"!
LOcal AHJ requires plans to be stamped by the EOR or the Architect prior
to submission, and the Architect won't stamp them " because".
Trying to build a case that what we did is " per NFPA 13 and industry
standard.
Any thoughts?
Dennis Browning
Browning Fire
Medford, Oregon
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
For Technical Assistance, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.6/1797 - Release Date: 11/18/2008
11:23 AM
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
