Just as a point of information, I thought I should relate to you the new text
that will be entered into the forthcoming 2016 edition of NFPA 13:
8.3.3.2 Where quick-response sprinklers are installed, all
sprinklers within a compartment shall be quick- response unless otherwise
permitted in 8.3.3.3 , 8.3.3.4 , or 8.3.3.5 .
8.3.3.3 Where there are no listed quick-response sprinklers in the
temperature range required, standard- response sprinklers shall be
permitted to be used.
8.3.3.4 The provisions of 8.3.3.2 shall not apply to in-rack
sprinklers.
8.3.3.5 Where a sprinkler carries a listing for both
standard-response protection and quick-response protection at different
coverage areas, that sprinkler shall be permitted to be installed within a
compartment at the spacing for both the quick-response and
standard-response listings without any separation between the areas so
covered.
8.3.3.6 When existing light hazard systems are converted to use
quick-response or residential sprinklers, all sprinklers in a
compartment shall be changed.
I think that this will satisfy your concerns - at least in the future.
Best regards
Larry Keeping
-----Original Message-----
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On
Behalf Of Fairchild, Jack
Sent: July-07-15 1:01 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Mixing EC sprinklers with Std coverage sprinklers
What Scot said, but the most conservative answer is once an EC head is
installed with the small spacing it is by nature QR and all heads in the space
would need to be QR.
Jack Fairchild
-----Original Message-----
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On
Behalf Of Greg McGahan
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 10:26 AM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Mixing EC sprinklers with Std coverage sprinklers
I lost the original question ...but I think that the AFSA has a recent informal
interp related to this issue
Greg McGahan
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com>
1160 McKenzie Road
Cantonment, FL 32533
850-937-1850
fax 850-937-1852
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 9:07 AM, å... .... <eurekaig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Interesting question. If the activation temperatures are close to the
> same value, then I would match the RTI of the standdard sprinklers
> with the imputed RTI of the EC.
>
> An obvious caveat is if the specifications or engineeering report
> stipulate the QR in this compartment.
>
> The NFPA 13 intent, I believe, is to prevent QR sprinklers from
> activating when they are further away from the fire, in the presence
> of SR sprinklers when these SR sprinklers are nearer to the fire.
>
> If the compartment is smaller than the design area,...then the case
> can be made that the hydraulic design will account for all sprinklers
> activating, regardless of their intended order of activation (1st
> ring, 2nd ring, etc.) as manipulated by the RTI of the sprinkler.
> Consider what is to be protected from fire by the different sprinklers
> and modify your judgment accordingly.
>
> Scot Deal
> Excelsior Fire/Risk Engineering
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl
> er.org
>
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
