I share your concerns about the still-way-too-low standard of care in our industry. As we pull out of the recession, more and more hacks are jumping onto the bandwagon just as they always do and we see an increase in the Cluelessness Factor that is upsetting and unacceptable. But this has been happening cyclically for my entire career and the fact that you've encountered 5 badly built fire pumps should not trigger a knee-jerk reaction regarding FPE reviews of residential fire sprinkler systems. Chris, you are both a PE and a sprinkie and I have great respect for your skill set. But most FPE's (more than most, let's just say about 98% of FPE's) aren't you or Mark Sornsin or Roland Huggins or Tom Wellen. When it comes to sprinklers, most FPE's (including the VERY best) are generalists who are conversational regarding sprinklers, but not fluent in the design vocabulary. So adding a statutory requirement for oversight of an underqualified designer by an underqualified design "professional" is adding cost, but not value. My comments and position on this issue are not based on the same set of concerns that I think we all share regarding the qualifications of contractors and design professionals on projects that are designed per NFPA 13 and are comprise the larger and more complex buildings that we find out there in the universal built environment.
SL -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cahill, Christopher Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 2:25 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Friday PE Question I agree with ya'll too but I can see where regulators are not satisfied with the overall state of the sprinkler industry. To be brutally honest it's a mess. As an example, I've seen 5 fire pumps this past year that were installed in the last 10 years with piping entering the pump is off axis. THEY DREW A FRIGGIN' PICTURE IN THE BOOK! Don't tell me NICET's are the solution either. Recently a IV sent in plans without a single pipe on the plan. It wasn't an accident as the plans said they'd show them with the as-built set. I was 1/2 tempted to allow and then see what happens at final when it wouldn't calc out. That said all PE's or contactors are not created equal and I don't have a real solution. I don't mean to start a contractor vs. engineer discussion. There are plenty of engineers that aren't any better than the contractors. Granted my experiences are not 13D but I can see unhappy AHJ's throwing out the baby with the bath water and require PE's on everything. Ordinarily, PE's don't need to be involved with 13D's. Read your State sprinkler rules carefully. For example in MN there was a time the State FM and sprinkler licensing rules didn't apply to single family homes and they were regulated as plumbing systems. I say there was a time because I live here but don't do work in MN so things may have changed. 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 I'm not cantankerous I just express myself vividly. - Antonin Scalia -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rod DiBona Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 3:50 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Friday PE Question Put me down as a FIRM supporter of what Steve said below.. Appreciate you taking the time to write it out Steve - absolute bullseye.... My opinion only from Rod at Rapid Fire - Not representing an opinion of AFSA... -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 1:10 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Friday PE Question I'm not a fire official so my perspective is purely from the industry side of the counter. I am stridently opposed to this level of documentation because there isn't any value added for the cost of the services. The number one challenge to adoption of the fire sprinkler code change nationwide has been objection and highly organized lobbying by the NAHB. The number one reason they give to underscore their opposition is cost: housing is already so expensive that home ownership is seeming out of reach of many American families and adding this onerous requirement is just another burden to the prospective buyer of the home. Never mind that the actual costs are exaggerated or comparatively low compared to other elements in a new home (like upgraded windows, flooring, etc.), this strategy has been working very well for the opposition. Based on my 25+ years of advocacy and public speaking and code development work in the effort to effect universal adoption and applicatio n of the residential sprinkler mandate, I have arrived at a point of view that looks VERY closely at any added costs that don't add to the life safety or overall value of a proposed residential sprinkler system. To that end, I have consistently opposed the proposals to add mandatory waterflow alarms to 13D that we receive every cycle. I'm not opposed to notification, but we already have that by way of the required smoke detectors, which are likely to work faster than the sprinklers anyway. What I oppose is the added cost: In 2008, NFPA published a residential sprinkler "white paper" that estimated the average cost of sprinklers in one- and two-family dwellings nationwide to be $1.61. The CPI has risen 9.77% since then, so let's use $1.77 as a cost per discussion. If we do, then a 2,000 sq. ft. home costs about $3,500 to sprinkler. In adding an audible alarm, the flow switch, bell, backing box and cable likely cost about $150 and the installation and testing likely cost about $200 for the electrician and sprinkler installer so you have ROUGHLY $350 in added costs and BOOM! You just added 10% to the cost of the sprinkler system and NAHB just went running off to your state legislature to harp on the fact that our industry doesn't care about homeless people ... So when it comes to FPE preparation of or 3rd party review of 13D designs, I have to wonder why? What's the point, what are we trying to "fix", where's the value or added measure of safety? In my long career in the fire sprinkler and general fire/life safety industries, I have only met a very few FPE's who are as expert at sprinkler design as the average NICET-certified sprinkler layout technician. I have met or seen the work of or heard anecdotally about dozens of rubber stamp FPE's and ME's who robo-sign drawings for a fee and it's regulatory layers like this that keep them in business. Here's the dirty little secret: residential sprinklers aren't rocket science. More importantly, the market value of the work isn't at the level of aerospace engineering so we can't price any of the work as if it was rocket science. If an FPE wanted even a two-hour fee to review and sign a set of sprinkler drawings (and presumably calc's and a material submittal), that's $300-400 i n the North American market. And another 10% added to the cost of the system. I reiterate the question: What does this fix that's currently broken? Put me down as a NO, Jerry. My opinion only, not representative of the AUT-RSS, NFPA or AFSA. Steve Leyton Protection Design & Consulting San Diego, CA -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 2:55 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Friday PE Question Good Afternoon, All: By chance, do any of you know of any Fire Departments/Fire Marshals Offices (i.e., city, county, state agencies) that currently require a third-party PE review/seal of single-family dwelling (13'D') fire sprinkler system "shop" drawings/calc's?? If so, please advise...If not, your thoughts/input would be appreciated. Gracias from Nuevo Mejico!! Jerry [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) Jerry D. Watts, M.S.F.P.E. President & Co-Founder ACCENT FIRE ENGINEERING INT'L. Ltd.* Santa Fe, New Mexico USA (800) 503.1961 nationwide *Licensed Architects - Fire Protection Engineers/NICET Designers/NICET Inspectors/Fire Investigators: AZ CA CO NM NV NY TX UT KS MD MS _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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
