Thanks Roland. 
I guess I did get to this conclusion to check with AHJ before reading your 
e-mail. :-)
Always works.

My thought was that I almost can treat this as storage on one level of rack 
because of such a low storage and protect only with ceiling sprinklers.

And I promise it will be resolved before bid.
 
Thanks to everyone for help.
Anna Reich




---- Roland Huggins <[email protected]> wrote: 
> You're mostly there.  Chap 13 applies equally to storage (no pile  
> limit or % of building) when based on storage height.  A warehouse  
> with Class I-IV  up to 12 ft follows chap 13.  The issue of in-racks  
> is not identified by SprinkCode because chap 13 reverts to chap 11.  
> and the occupancy hazard approach (which as a side bar even the QR  
> reduction applies for the referenced warehouse).  The solid shelf / in- 
> rack requirement is a general requirement for chap 16 but 16.2.1.2 .1  
> send you to chap 13 for the criteria and nothing in chap 11 or 13  
> requires solid shelf / in-rack protection.  Could this be better  
> addressed (ok to say addressed at all), of course.  Keeping in mind  
> that this is intended to be addressed as an Occupancy Hazard Approach  
> issue, helps to focus the discussion.  Granted on a full warehouse,  
> I'd be concerned about the solid shelving but in a low ceiling  
> basement especially with the rack along only one wall, I can't say  
> that poses the same level of concern and would contend that the  
> standard does not require them.
> 
> As a note of interest, this was raised as a question to the TC during  
> the ROC meeting with limited and mixed opinions (too late in the game  
> to actually do anything to the standard).  As I've learned, you can't  
> necessarily guess with assurance where a herd of 30 votes will go so  
> it will be interesting next cycle to see the answer to the flood of  
> proposals on this topic.
> 
> Bottom line, you best have this discussion with the AHJ before  
> submittals (before a binding bid is even better).
> 
> Roland
> 
> On Mar 12, 2009, at 7:55 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Would this not meet the definition of Miscellaneous Storage?
> >
> > 3.9.1.14* Miscellaneous Storage.
> > -Storage that does not exceed 12 ft (3.66 m) in height and is  
> > incidental to another occupancy use group.
> > [you said top shelf was at 5ft.]
> > -Such storage shall not constitute more than 10 percent of the  
> > building area or 4000 ft2 (372 m2) of the sprinklered area,  
> > whichever is greater.
> > [is the building at least 20,001 sq. ft. and sprinklered?]
> > -Such storage shall not exceed 1000 ft2 (93m2) in one pile or area,  
> > and each such pile or area shall be separated from other storage  
> > areas by at
> > least 25 ft (7.62 m).
> > [you stated the shelving area is approx. 680 sq. ft.]
> >
> >
> >
> > Linens = Class III or Class IV commodity.
> >
> > If you meet the criteria for the Misc. Storage definition it would  
> > seem reasonable that the room could be protected by ceiling  
> > sprinklers alone.  Based on NFPA 13, 2007, Table 13.2.1, for Class  
> > IV, storage <10ft. you're looking at OH2  with 250 gpm hose and no  
> > in-rack sprinklers and this covers shelf type configuration.
> >
> > Also in A.8.6.6 it mentions shelves along the wall which are not  
> > directly below sprinklers do not have the 18" clearance restriction.
> >
> >
> >
> > Craig L. Prahl, CET
> _______________________________________________
> 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)

Reply via email to