The question Brad, is, what is the history of where each of those applied to the development of what rules. Obviously flow rate has nothing to do with detection spacing, but response time does and that may influence density. I do know that once there was no light hazard and then one cycle there was. And that for ever so long I could space to a max of 225 sqft under certain circumstances with standard spray/standard response heads. Then towards the end of the last century or the beginning of this I had to use quick response. I presume there was something that influenced this change and it wasn't money because SR and QR cost the same and if it were money it should have revolved around the density being insufficient. That would have promulgated closer spacing or greater flow rates which would have increased the sale of materials. Not money. Fire growth rates in LH occupancies may have quickened and then the way to deal with that would be quicker response. I can get that with QR heads or closer detection spacing. Now I'm just speculating. If I knew I'd be expostulating, if not pontificating, and not questioning.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 6:25 AM, Brad Casterline <[email protected]>wrote: > Sorry about that Ron, I get carried away. I should have stopped with > '...paradox...', since it addressed spacing and detection. > It is pretty hard to leave time out of battling accidental fires though, it > being of the utmost importance, so we have flow rates, heat release rates, > response time index... > > Brad > > -----Original Message----- > From: rongreenman . [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 8:50 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Spacing Rules > > Well, now that you two have hijacked my thread.... This was a question > about philosophy and history, not math and time. Let's try again, and the > bathroom compartmentalization thread is similar to what I'd like some > feedback on. > > Most discussion about spacing rules revolve around arguments relating to > distribution. I'm wondering how many are based on heat detection. > > For instance, why can I use an XYZ SSP head to cover 225 sq in light hazard > but not ordinary. Since I'm after density over square footage I can > certainly accomplish this prohibited feat. But after a given edition we are > suddenly required to use QR heads for light hazard for some unspecified > reason. That certainly doesn't have anything to do with coverage. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
