Because in EQ land there's stuff going on in the Building Code and ASCE 7 that you unwashed people in non-EQ land can't see. Like, you either have to use a swing joint or flexible hose connection on your pendent drops to lay-in tile ceilings that aren't rigidly braced, or provide an oversized hole in the ceiling tile to prevent damage to the sprinkler. (For those who have never seen them, "filler" rings are available to enclose the annular space in these holes, which are larger diameter than the escutcheons. And they look like crap.) It is intended that there be some measure of movement in the drop piping that is independent of the main and branch piping, which are hung and braced and restrained to the roof or floor assembly above.
Steve Leyton -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 10:54 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: NFPA 13 '10 9.3.6 BL Restraint Well... I guess a Ken Wagoner power point hand-out will work. But I think the real question hidden in Chris' original query is why? Why is an 8' arm-over not required to be restrained in EQ land, but an 8' branch line with two heads on it would be? Does one NOT see the movements in an earthquake that the other would? Or is it just an oversight in the rule making process? Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. | Karges-Faulconbridge, Inc. | Fire Protection Engineer | Fargo, ND | direct: 701.552.9905 | mobile: 701.371.5759 | http://www.kfiengineers.com -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Daniel Wilder Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 12:35 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: NFPA 13 '10 9.3.6 BL Restraint Page 25 http://www.firesprinkler.org/handouts/9.19_8a_Seismic.pdf Dan W -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 10:17 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: NFPA 13 '10 9.3.6 BL Restraint We appreciate your effort, Steve - and I know you mean well - but I think we still want to hear from Ken on this one... Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. | Karges-Faulconbridge, Inc. | Fire Protection Engineer | Fargo, ND | direct: 701.552.9905 | mobile: 701.371.5759 | http://www.kfiengineers.com -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 11:22 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: NFPA 13 '10 9.3.6 BL Restraint Per 2013 NFPA 13, and I'm paraphrasing: By definition, arm-overs are NOT branchlines. Where piping - ANY piping - above a ceiling serves a sprinkler in the pendent position below the ceiling, and the pressure at that sprinkler is >100psi, the hanger shall be of a type that resists vertical movement. Where seismic protection is required and the provisions of 9.3 are to be applied, restraint of branchlines against lateral AND vertical movement. This applies to branch piping but not arm-overs. The end hanger on an armover may require vertical restraint subject to the pressure, but not a lateral restraint. Branch restraints are required at intervals according to tables 9.3.6.4(a) and (b) and may be configured as one of the five options in 9.3.6.1. If using splay wire or a rod-type hanger on a 45° angle, the restraint must be within 2' of a hanger that resists vertical movement. If an "arm-over" serves two or more sprinklers, it's not an arm-over. My two-and-a-half-cents ... Steve Leyton -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steven Scandaliato Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2013 7:01 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: NFPA 13 '10 9.3.6 BL Restraint Wagoner....you need to answer this one... Steven Scandaliato, SET CFPS 520.971.2322 Cell -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Travis Mack Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2013 7:09 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: NFPA 13 '10 9.3.6 BL Restraint Arm over is defined as pipe supplying a single head - if I remember correctly. Restraint is not required for arm overs. So technically not required. Travis Mack, SET MFP Design, LLC Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 20, 2013, at 6:01 PM, "Cahill, Christopher" > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Issue is not about vertical restraint from >100 psi. Well below. This > is strictly an EQ question. > > > Chris Cahill, PE* > Senior Fire Protection Engineer > Burns & McDonnell > 8201 Norman Center Drive > Bloomington, MN 55437 > Phone: 952.656.3652 > Fax: 952.229.2923 > [email protected] > www.burnsmcd.com > > Proud to be one of FORTUNE's 100 Best Companies to Work For > *Registered in: MN > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Dwight Havens > Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2013 6:13 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: NFPA 13 '10 9.3.6 BL Restraint > > pendent heads w/ > 100 psi > > > > > > > On Sunday, October 20, 2013 6:44 PM, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Isn't the thrust restraint a requirement for systems with pressures in excess of 100 psi? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Ron Greenman [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2013 09:42 PM > To: [email protected] > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: NFPA 13 '10 9.3.6 BL Restraint > > Don't have anything at the moment. Is this eq country? Somewhere > there's something that requires up thrust restraint at the end of line. I think lateral is only required for seismic areas, but I'd need to read the section before I made an unequivocal statement. No books in the car. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Oct 20, 2013, at 2:08 PM, "Cahill, Christopher" >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Got a code section that connects a length of a BL to a restraint or >> the inverse of what you said, that if it needs a hanger then it needs restraint? I got one that says it doesn't, 9.3.6.7 Drops and armovers shall not require restraint. 3.5.3 Arm-Over. A horizontal pipe that extends from the branch line to a single sprinkler or a sprinkler above and below a ceiling. I just find it odd I can have a 2" pipe 100' long serving one head and it doesn't need anything but regular old gravity hangers. Or I can't find anything to challenge 9.3.6.7. My case I have a bunch of 3-8' 1" legit armovers. Contractor didn't install restraint and I think he's right technically. >> >> Chris Cahill, PE* >> Senior Fire Protection Engineer >> Burns & McDonnell >> 8201 Norman Center Drive >> Bloomington, MN 55437 >> Phone: 952.656.3652 >> Fax: 952.229.2923 >> [email protected] >> www.burnsmcd.com >> >> Proud to be one of FORTUNE's 100 Best Companies to Work For >> *Registered in: MN >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of rongreenman . >> Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2013 2:19 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: NFPA 13 '10 9.3.6 BL Restraint >> >> Restraint is to avoid upward thrust and side to side thrust, whipping >> for Devo fans, at the end of a branch line. If an armover does not >> need a hanger it wouldn't need restraint >> >> >> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Cahill, Christopher >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Two questions. >>> >>> Is there a length of an armover that needs restraint? Imagine a 12' >>> armover that only feeds one head. >>> >>> Can restraint be connected to something other than structure, like a >>> concrete floor above? >>> >>> Chris Cahill, PE* >>> Senior Fire Protection Engineer >>> Burns & McDonnell >>> 8201 Norman Center Drive >>> Bloomington, MN 55437 >>> Phone: 952.656.3652 >>> Fax: 952.229.2923 >>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> >>> www.burnsmcd.com<http://www.burnsmcd.com/> >>> >>> Proud to be one of FORTUNE's 100 Best Companies to Work For >>> *Registered in: MN >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> >>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin >>> k >>> l >>> er.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-firesprink >> l er.org _______________________________________________ >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink >> l >> er.org > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er.org _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er.org _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er.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 ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com ______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ 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 ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com ______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ 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
