While enjoying my temporary retirement and not having access to a copy of
13D please consider that when evaluating the following.

Read the exceptions carefully.  Does it say attic or attics without fueled
equipment?  Also read the definition of spaces used for living.  Does an
attic with equipment become living space?  Make sure it's something required
to cover before you find a solution.

Also read the TIA carefully and consider which edition is in effect in your
area.  If the issue is stoves perhaps AF in an attic only is OK?  Remember
both incidents and the testing are open flames appliances with people
expected to be in close proximity.  I don't think we expect people to
regularly be in close proximity to an attic furnace.  AF has proven time and
time again to not impede fire protection by limited incidents of negative
outcomes compared to the very many systems out there, at least one I'd argue
was wrongly installed and AF was specifically tested in high piled storage
and found to be effective in certain tested scenarios.  AF is not inherently
bad, not using it wisely seems to be the issue.

And for example in MN no AHJ can enforce the TIA for two reasons, we have
not adopted the ed. the TIA covers and even if we had the TIA was not part
of the legal adoption process so couldn't be enforced.  A savvy AHJ could
make a safety claim under IFC chapter 1 but a savvier contractor or FPE
could show more than 50/50 is apparently the concern and the committees
admittance the issue is not resolved that more testing is needed, as I
understand it.  

So you would have a strong case if you used 50/50 over the furnace only.
Even if the place burns down and the insurance company blames the contractor
the intent of 13D is life safety and 10 minutes never property.  And the
underwriter should discover the issue during their due diligence thus making
their acceptance a blessing of sorts for the subrogation issue. 

Chris Cahill   

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 11:14 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: 13D attic Fuel-fired protection

Providing an enclosure could get a bit more complicated due to the need for
combustion air.  If the combustion air happens to be -20F, will the
enclosure really provide freeze protection?

Ed Kramer
Littleton, CO

 
> An enclosure may be the only alternative, not
> knowing the dimension of the units involved. It
> would just need to be an insulated box, since we
> are enclosing a furnace and residual heat would probably keep the space
> warm.

_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://fireball.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
[email protected]
http://fireball.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