Almost as old as the State I live in (1889). Presuming you post letter to owner's agent, and they contract you to calc system.
What c-factor would you use? Internal pipe examination? Have i.d.'s stayed consistent? Best Bruce > On Apr 27, 2016, at 06:31, Scott Futrell <[email protected]> wrote: > > You need to be on the record, the letter is a good idea. > > The deposition questions are not fun...So, Mr. Williams, you are a > Professional Engineer, right? ... I'd keep going, but it wouldn't be in my > best interest. > > Scott > > Office: (763) 425-1001 x 2 > Cell: (612) 759-5556 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Todd Williams > Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 8:20 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Existing pipe schedule and storage > > The original building was built in 1884 and the sprinkler system installed at > that time. Since the standardized pipe schedule did not come into being until > 1896, my assumption is that the sizing was at the installers discretion. The > branch pipe sizing is less that what was called for in 1896 edition of the > sprinkler standard (3/4-1-1-1.1/4-1.1/4, etc). I seriously doubt that this > would meet a hydraulic calculation. However, this system has been > great-great-grandfathered in so far. > My plan is to write a letter to the owner's agent. > > > Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT > 860-535-2080 (ofc) 860-608-4559 (cell) > Sent using CloudMagic > [https://cloudmagic.com/k/d/mailapp?ct=ti&cv=6.0.64&pv=8.2] > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Scott Futrell <[email protected]> wrote: > Good morning Todd. > > > > It is my opinion that you need to notify someone that an evaluation in > accordance with NFPA 25 (2014 edition) 4.1.6 and 4.1.7 needs to be > undertaken. Code of Ethics. If you've seen it, as a FPE, you are obligated to > question it if it doesn't appear to be correct. > > > > It would take some research to determine what edition of NFPA 13 was > applicable at the time of the original construction and if there was a change > in occupancy for the 12 ft. storage. But, protecting 12 ft. of class IV > without a calculation to verify the water supply versus the pipe schedule > pipe sizing could be problematic. > > > > As far as the fire department approving it goes, from the 2012 IFC, 105.3.6 > Compliance with Code. The issuance or granting of a permit shall not be > construed to be a permit for, or an approval of, any violation of any of the > provisions of this code or of any other ordinance of the jurisdiction. > Permits presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of > this code or other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid...Any > addition to or alteration of approved construction documents shall be > approved in advance by the fire code official, as evidenced by the issuance > of a new or amended permit. 105.4.4 Approved documents. Construction > documents approved by the fire code official are approved with the intent > that such construction documents comply in all respects with the code. > Review and approval by the fire code officials shall not relieve the > applicant of the responsibility of compliance with this code. [emphasis added] > > > > If it is designed, installed, tested, inspected, and maintained incorrectly > it is still wrong. > > > > Good luck. > > > > Scott > > > > Office: (763) 425-1001 x 2 > > Cell: (612) 759-5556 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd > Williams > Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 5:28 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Existing pipe schedule and storage > > > > I am working at a facility where there is an existing OH pipe schedule > system over 12ft palletized Class IV storage. The fire department has > approved it, but I question whether it will provide adequate protection. I > did not see anything in NFPA 13 that requires storage occupancies to be > hydraulically calculated. Am I missing something? > > This is outside of the project I am working on, but as an FPE, I feel > obligated to notify someone if I see a potential hazard such as this. > > > > Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT > > 860-535-2080 (ofc) 860-608-4559 (cell) > > Sent using CloudMagic > > [https://cloudmagic.com/k/d/mailapp?ct=ti&cv=6.0.64&pv=8.2] > > _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected]<mailto:[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
