OK the curiosity was killing me so I spent my lunch time putting (5) 16"
beams in the 8' ceiling, 24" plenum, panel-panel cross (fire in the middle),
fast growth fire, 9.375" gaps scenario. I'll hit calc on my way out the door
and right around Monday morning it should be done :)
I took a couple 'snapshots' of the set-up if any one is interested.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Brad Casterline [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 9:09 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Ceiling Cloud Study FYI

Good point and idea Allan. Since one of the questions is "Does the hot layer
or the cloud ceiling jet drive the sprinkler activation", it makes sense to
see the effect of, say, 16" deep beams at 6-8 feet on center in a 24" deep
plenum space... etc.
Nothing beats full scale tests, but at this point it would be a fairly
simple matter to add a hundred or two structural scenarios to the existing
model to get some additional insight, if nobody wants to put the steel back
up, build fires, etc :)
 
-----Original Message-----
From: AKS-Gmail-IMAP [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 9:14 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Ceiling Cloud Study FYI

Maybe I missed this, but the study, testing and report surprisingly does not
acknowledge or mention the fact that many if not most cloud ceiling
conditions are where the the ceiling above the clouds is the structural deck
supported by beams and girders.

That structure can divide the above ceiling surface into compartments that
can either hold or channel away combustion products from the gaps. The
structural members above cloud ceilings are more likely to be deeper than
normal because clouds are often architectural methods used to break up the
ceiling expanse resulting from wide structural bays where the architecture
wants to eliminate columns. A cloud ceiling in a small room, i.e. where the
structure above might be less involved, may not be architecturally appealing
and may be there as a primary result of a not so common HVAC concept.     

The test apparatus was in fact one reused from testing the effects of
structural steel. They can put that steel back up and run the cloud tests
again under more likely conditions to see how far the no steel conclusions
can carry.

Allan Seidel
St. Louis, MO


On Aug 8, 2013, at 9:18 AM, Brad Casterline <[email protected]> wrote:

>
http://www.nfpa.org/research/fire-protection-research-foundation/reports-and
>
-proceedings/suppression/other-sprinkler-protection/sprinkler-protection-for
> -cloud-ceilings
> 
> 
> 
> Brad Casterline, NICET IV
> 
> Fire Protection Division
> 
> 
> 
> FSC, Inc.
> 
> P: 913-722-3473
> 
> [email protected]
> 
> www.fsc-inc.com
> 
> 
> 
> Engineering Solutions for the Built Environment
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Reply via email to