Absolutely, but I see a lot of issues that CLEARLY need to be spelled out in GREAT detail. No place for wishy-washy language that lawyers will use against contractors.
Some examples of issues to tackle: Change in water flow tests. Well, do I even need a test? Current argument about backflows and whether there needs to be measurements. Most AHJ's expect hose monsters. Change in codes that change the design even though the occupancy has not changed. I have a hangar built for 2-747's to the 1967 NFPA 409. Guess what, foam is not required but today not possible without foam. We've learned about storage. We used to have 3 OH curves. Speaking of storage I went through this as an AHJ a lot in the 90's. We asked those with high-piled storage to prove they had not changed their height or commodities from the original install and the original install met the codes at the time. Because if you didn't change you were deemed compliant by the code at least. Almost, none could prove they complied. Seemed up to about 16' class III was ok but higher, tires or plastics seems to fail. We all know there are a lot of deficient installations. What do we do with a year old system that won't work for whatever reason? How about obstruction issues? And much of the original designs are lost about a week after occupancy. Are we tracing pipe? Re-doing calcs for old system. And we all know really bad installations put out a lot of fire as long as the valve is open. My recollection is if the valve is open and no one interferes in the operation during the fire NFPA stats are 97% successful? Sorry, been a while since I read the report. If this effort would only deal with the remaining 3% is it worth it? Perhaps this should start as a targeted approach, hospitals, nursing homes and schools? Although, one of my kids just started high school, building isn't that old. I've only been there a couple times and each time I see a spacing or obstruction deficiencies. I can only imagine what a review of the calc's and pipe size would reveal. Am I concerned, only a little, see first sentence of this paragraph. Maybe storage? You'll note I didn't say residential yet. IMHO it's even harder to screw those up such to create a risk. Yes, I know it can be done! Don't get me wrong I believe existing systems should get a good review at some point. NFPA 25 is already felt to building owners to be a money grab for contractors. Telling them I need to spend 100's of hours redrawing and re-calc'ing a system will result in revolt. Then I tell them the original installation didn't meet code, then they need a pump because water decayed..... 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 Roland Huggins Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 9:13 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: NFPA25 scope ACtually this issue is much broader than NFPA 25. NFPA is asking the question, what if anything that it do to reduce the number of failures of the sprinkler system to control the fire (due to changes of contents changes in the water supply, etc where the water discharge is not enough to control the fire). One of the question is should verifying the adequacy of the sprinkler system be part of an NFPA 25 inspection or some other NFPA document? That is the starting point for this thread. What do you gals and guys think? Roland Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives Dallas, TX http://www.firesprinkler.org On Nov 5, 2013, at 10:09 PM, "Douglas Hicks" <[email protected]> wrote: > http://www.nfpa.org/newsandpublications/nfpa-journal/2013/november-december-2013/features/closer-look?order_src=C246 > > More on 25 and the scope of 25. > _______________________________________________ > 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
