Well, it's a nursing home in PA so it's under the 1999 edition of 13 for the
addition we're pricing.
HOWEVER, the original system has a NICET IV signing off that it's in accordance
with the 1994 edition, despite the 4 small gridded piping configurations in the
existing dry system. Installed in 1999, and has pinholes, as a separate issue.
Obviously, with four dry grids within the system:
a) it's NOT in accordance with 1994 NFPA 13 "dry grids shall not be installed".
b) I'd suspect a long trip and water delivery time based on:
1. Presence of dry grids (90% of which have extended trip times, volume
is 778 gallons.
2. Waterflow test is 51 static, 40 at 920. Not exactly the big hammer
I'd like to see if I was trying to deliver water to the ITC in 60 seconds.
This is a nursing home, one dry system with sprigs up to SSU's and dry pendents
down to protect the patient rooms (eventually).
Of course we've got the added bonus of 1999 CSC GB sprinklers, and no
indication of they used SR or QR sprinklers. This was based on 1994, and it was
1996 that required QR in Light hazard, so I'll assume they didn't use QRs.
Hence the "eventually" editorial observation, imagine SR GB dry pendents
(there's a 1-2 punch for ya- they'll operate slowly as SR's, they may not
operate, they have less than 60 PSI static and less in air pressure trying to
push the ORing out, and they're dry pendents, with all the lack of reliability
they exhibit. Add Pinholes as an added feature, and maybe the usual scale from
black steel pipe in a dry system. Betcha the sprigs to SSU's go straight up,
not cocked to match the 5/12 roof slope, I'll give 2:1 odds. Note I also saw
pendent sprinklers in the mech room, screwed directly into the bottom of the
exposed branchlines where, at a minimum, return bends would have been required.
Does anyone else believe that AHJs like Architects and BCOs give too much
credit to sprinkler contractors in general to install systems correctly? Sure
the code is complex. Sure BCO's are trained in the IBC, not 13. So where in
that does the AHJ transfer his regulatory oversight to making sure a system is
installed per 13?
Owner is a really great guy. I really don't look forward to giving him our
findings on the existing, in which we're starting down the path of pinhole
remediation, but what can we do? Its installed, and the statute of limitations
has, I believe, run out. We will suggest he approach the original installer and
ask if they'll fix the deficiencies since its obvious on paper they were wrong.
If they want to protect their reputation, they will; if not, too late for a
suit. News publicity would only detract from the public's impression of the
reliability of sprinkler systems in general, not good for the industry, and not
good for the reputation of this home as a safe place.
Hope someone changed out the GB's under the VRP or perhaps he will have a leg
to stand on when trying to have at least some of the remediation fixed. If
they've been doing ITM work, and didn't note the VRP sprinklers, I'd call them
negligent if I was entitled to an opinion. Should be an interesting meeting,
should we and the Owner and the original installer all sit down for coffee,
doughnuts, and "what were you thinking?" and "are you going to come back and
fix this stuff?".
George L. Church, Jr., CET
Rowe Sprinkler Systems, Inc.
PO Box 407, Middleburg, PA 17842
877-324-ROWE 570-837-6335 fax
g...@rowesprinkler.com
-----Original Message-----
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 12:10 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: dry grid prohibition
And you have to determine what edition was in use by the jurisdiction at the
time of the installation.
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Todd Williams <t...@fpdc.com> wrote:
> 1989 section 5.2.3.1 includes it in the last sentence. The other
> editions (at least later ones) had it as a separate section.
>
>
>
> At 11:03 AM 6/11/2012, you wrote:
> >
> http://dbase.firesprinkler.org:591/online_archives/tech_interps/FMPro?
> -db=informal-interps.fp5&-format=record_detail.htm&-lay=form&-recid=12
> 629921&-findall=
> >
> >You asked the following question "What year did NFPA ban the use of
> gridded dry pipe systems?" In response to your question, we have
> reviewed the 1989 and the 1991 Edition of NFPA 13 as the applicable
> standards. Our informal interpretation is that the 1991 Edition of
> NFPA 13 was the first edition to ban the use of a gridded dry pipe
> system. The 1989 NFPA 13, Subsection 5-2.3.1 "Volume Limitations" discusses
> gridded systems.
> Exception to 5-2.3.1 talks about the ability to exceed the maximum
> system volume of 750 gallons for non-gridded systems. I did not have a
> copy of the
> 1989 Handbook available but the 1987 Handbook had a commentary on
> Subsection 5-2.3.1 "Volume Limitations". The commentary to "Volume
> Limitations" discusses the problem of excessive delays in water
> delivery for gridded dry systems. The next NFPA 13 Edition following
> 1989 is the 1991. Under Subsection 3-2.3.1 "Volume Limitations" is
> Subsection 3-2.3.2 that states, "Gridded dry pipe systems shall not be
> install ed." This is the first occurrence in NFPA 13 for the ban on
> gridded dry pipe systems. The commentary in the 1991 Handbook state
> that in more the 90 percent of the installations of gridded dry pipe
> systems, the times for delivering water to the inspector's test
> connection were excessive. The commentary further state that in some
> cases it took as long as 10 minutes for the water to be delivered to
> the inspectors test. In conclusion, NFPA
> 13 up to the 1991 Edition allowed gridded dry pipe systems. The 1991
> Edition banned the use of gridded dry pipe systems
> >
> >Dan
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org [mailto:
> sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Church
> >Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 7:56 AM
> >To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> >Subject: dry grid prohibition
> >
> >Would anyone know when dry grids were taken out of NFPA 13? My
> recollection is mid 1980's, but don't have a copy to check.
> >
> >We've encountered a dry-pipe system installed circa 1999, purported
> >to be
> in accordance with NFPA 13- 1994 according to the signature of a NICET
> Level IV, complete with little NICET symbol that looks like a
> seal....oh well. But each of the four wings is protected by a small gridded
> system.
> >
> >Can someone say whether or not dry grids were permitted in the 1994
> edition of 13?
> >
> >
> >George L. Church, Jr., CET
> >Rowe Sprinkler Systems, Inc.
> >PO Box 407, Middleburg, PA 17842
> >877-324-ROWE 570-837-6335 fax
> >g...@rowesprinkler.com
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Sprinklerforum mailing list
> >Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> >http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
> >_______________________________________________
> >Sprinklerforum mailing list
> >Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> >http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> Todd G. Williams, PE
> Fire Protection Design/Consulting
> Stonington, CT
> 860.535.2080
> www.fpdc.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
--
Ron Greenman
Instructor
Fire Protection Engineering Technology
Bates Technical College
1101 So. Yakima Ave.
Tacoma, WA 98405
rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu
http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/
253.680.7346
253.576.9700 (cell)
Member:
ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC, WFSC
They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon,
essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachments/20120611/b5019145/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
