Chris can tell me if I'm reading too much into what he said, but the picture I got from his suggestion was putting in a new branchline to supply the new heads. That would be less demanding than adding those heads to existing branchlines. If the heads are in the design area then they have to be included.
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Greg McGahan <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't see any way you can avoid these heads being in the remote area no > matter how you feed them. > > With the new heads the spacing in the center of the grid will be 10 x 20. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 30, 2013, at 9:22 AM, "Cahill, Christopher" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I assmue you are cutting heads into the existing bl's causing you to add > another head to the bl on the calcs. You can always run a new bl such that > the flow never hits the existing bl in the remote area. More costly? A > little but cheaper than replacing the existing system. > > > > Chris Cahill > > Burns & McDonnell > > Fire Protection Engineer > > 952-656-3652 > > [email protected] Greg McGahan wrote: > > Hello, > > > > We have an existing system installed 20 x 20 with 14.5K ECOH sprinklers. > They have now installed a new wall separating the space into 2 spaces and > left the sprinklers overspaced off the wall. The Calc plate indicates that > the design was originally .15 fpm over 2,000 soft and when we re-calc the > system we are nearly identical to the results recorded on the data plate. > If we calculate it at .20/1,500 it does not work. > > > > Question is how to we even begin to sort this out in order to add a row > of new heads to correct the overspacing? The new sprinklers all seem to be > specifically listed for .20 (OH2) and i do not see a loophole to utilize a > lower density and a larger Remote Area as in the original design. I also do > not see an allowance in 13 for such a scenario (similar to the allowance > for modifications to existing systems with residential heads that were > originally designed for less than 7 psi end head pressure) > > > > I do not think there will be any salvaging this system if we cannot > reduce the density… > > > > Thanks for any help, > > Greg > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 [email protected] 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) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
