I don't know they ever got listed.  I was at an NFPA conference in mid '90's 
where mfg (can't recall which one) had such a beast and tested it out to all 
the requirements successfully.  I recall 30x30 but don't trust my memory. NFPA 
committee reacted with NO WAY! Fear was the size of an area should a single 
head fail to open.  All fully acknowledged systems weren't designed for this 
scenario but also the reality limiting the potential area of failure gave a 
chance it would still be controlled. This was before the o-ring issue came to 
light.  So I'm sure that sealed the deal until at least my generation retires. 

Chris Cahill, PE*
Associate Fire Protection Engineer 
Burns & McDonnell
Phone:  952.656.3652
Fax:  952.229.2923
[email protected]
www.burnsmcd.com
*Registered in: MN


Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For




-----Original Message-----
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of Matt Grise
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 2:47 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: extended coverage heads over 400sf

I have heard that there was a time before NFPA 13 limited sprinkler coverage to 
400 sf that some heads were listed for 22x22 or 24x24 (or some other 
combination that exceeded 400sf).

just for curiousity - Does anyone have any info on these?
 
Matt Grisé PE*, LEED AP, NICET II  
Sales Engineer 
Alliance Fire Protection 
130 w 9th Ave.
North Kansas City, MO 64116

*Licensed in KS & MO 

913.888.0647 ph 
913.888.0618 f 
913.927.0222 cell 
www. AFPsprink.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

Reply via email to