this seque will not help Chris per se, but which text gets the trump play? if contradiction exists between Code and standard texts (unlike the original questioned here, where we are in a grey area) which verse is on first?
scot deal excelsior fire engineering On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 12:08 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > IFC 903.3.1.1.1 #4 would appear to agree with 8.14.1.2.2. If you have no > combustibles above the ceiling then what's his issue? > > Typically the "room" or "area" listed in 903.1.1 is deemed as being a > potentially occupied space. If you read 315.2.4 only those spaces which are > used for storage require fire resistant rated construction or sprinklers. > So it would seem obvious that if the space were not used for storage it > would not be subject to those requirements. > > His interpretation of 903.3.1.1 contradicts 903.3.1.1.1. There are > obviously conditions where not spinklering an area is allowed with certain > exceptions. > > As indicated in the body of the Fire Code, NFPA 13 is a referenced standard > essentially making it a part of the Code, the installation rules of NFPA 13 > apply. > > > > Here is some wording out of the IFC 2006 Commentary relating to 903.3.1.1: > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > The extent of coverage and distribution of sprinklers is based on the NFPA > 13 standard. Numerous conditions exist in the standard where sprinklers are > specifically required and also where they may or may not be located. Once it > is determined that the sprinkler system is to be in accordance with NFPA 13, > that standard must be reviewed for installation details. For example, > exterior spaces such as combustible canopies are required to be equipped > with sprinklers according to Section 8.14.7 of NFPA 13 where the canopy > extends for a distance of 4 feet (1219 mm) or more. A 3-foot (914 mm) > combustible canopy would not require sprinklers and neither would a 6-foot > (1829 mm) canopy constructed of noncombustible materials, provided there is > no combustible storage under the canopy. Exceptions for the use of NFPA 13R > and 130 systems are addressed throughout the code when exceptions based upon > the use of sprinklers are provided. More specifically, if the use of these > other standards is appropriate, it will be noted within the exception. For a > building to be considered "equipped throughout" with an NFPA 13 sprinkler > system, complete protection must be provided in accordance with the > referenced standard, subject to the exempt locations indicated in section > 903.3.1.1.1. > > > Concerning 903.3.1.1.1: > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This section allows the omission of sprinkler protection in certain > locations if an approved automatic fire detection system is installed. > Buildings in compliance with one of the four listed conditions would still > be considered fully sprinklered throughout in compliance with the code and > NFPA 13 and thus are eligible for all applicable code alternatives, > exceptions or reductions. Elimination of the sprinkler system in a sensitive > area is subject to the approval of the fire code official. > > Condition 4 requires the construction of the room or area, as well as the > contents, to be noncombustible. > An example would be an area in an unprotected steel frame building (Type > liB construction) used for steel or concrete block storage. Neither involves > any significant combustible packaging or sources of ignition, and few > combustibles are present (see Figure 903.3.1). > Because installation is required to be in accordance with NFPA13, if the > standard allows for the omission of sprinklers in any location, then the > building is still considered as sprinklered throughout. For example, Section > 8.14.8.1.1 of NFPA 13 allows sprinklers to be omitted from bathrooms in > certain circumstances. If sprinklers are not provided in the bathrooms due > to the conditions stipulated in NFPA 13, the building would still be > considered as sprinklered throughout in accordance with NFPA 13 and the IBC. > > > Good luck, hopefully you're not dealing with one of those guys whose mantra > is "My mind's made up, don't confuse me with facts." > > > Craig L. Prahl, CET > Fire Protection Specialist > 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 Chris Russel > Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 12:21 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: IFC vs NFPA 13 issue > > Hello, > > I have a disagreement with the fire marshal and I would like another > opinion. I have a prefabed metal building framed with sheet metal studs in > all areas but the elevator shaft which is a 2 hour fire wall made of wood > and sheetrock. > > > > We omitted sprinklers in the area above the t-bar lid per NFPA 13/2002 > 8.14.1.2.1 because this area is of noncombustible construction and limited > combustible construction. > > > > The fire marshal has stated that limited combustible construction is not > allowed per the IFC per the following code. > > IFC section 903.3.1.1 - NFPA 13 sprinkler systems. > > Where the provisions of this code require that a building or portion of > thereof be equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in a > accordance with section 903.3.1.1, sprinklers shall be installed throughout > in accordance with NFPA 13 except as provided in Section 903.3.1.1.1. > > 903.3.1.1.1 - Exempt locations > > Automatic sprinklers shall not be required in the following rooms or areas > where such rooms or areas are protected with an approved automatic fire > detection system in accordance with section 907.2 that will respond to > visible or invisible particles of combustion. Sprinklers shall not be > omitted from any room merely because it is damp, of fire-resistance rated > construction or contains electrical equipment. #4 In rooms or areas that are > of noncombustible construction with wholly noncombustible contents. > > > > It is my opinion that 903.3.1.1.1 addresses areas exempt from 903.3.1.1 > i.e. > exceptions to the requirement of an NFPA 13 system. This does not mean that > areas exempt from coverage in NFPA 13 must conform to IFC 903.3.1.1.1. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Chris Russell > > > > t. 360.734.4940 > f. 360.647.9540 > > securitysolutionsnw.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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]<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)
