I just found it amusing that sidewall sprinklers in a duct were pooh-poohed for not being in conformance with the standard by people who advocated using pendants in a horizontal position which apparently is not in conformance with '13 either. :-P
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 2:27 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > You’re welcomed to install how you see fit but spraying inside a duct is a > lot different than out in a room or on a dock. > > > > It’s a comparison of apples to elephants. > > > > You have no issues or concersn about whether or not the water spray can > reach the other side of the duct or whether or not heat will collect and > set it off in such a confined space. So if you install it at 3 o’clock, 9 > o’clock or 12 o’clock it really doesn’t matter as far as discharge is > concerned. > > > > Rooms and space rules have no application inside a piece of ductwork. > > > *Craig L. Prahl* > Fire Protection Group Lead/SME > *CH2M* > 200 Verdae Blvd. > Greenville, SC 29607 > Direct - 864.920.7540 > > Fax - 864.920.7129 > > CH2MHILL Extension 77540 > [email protected] > > > > *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]. > org] *On Behalf Of *IPA > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 09, 2016 5:18 PM > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Paint spray application [EXTERNAL] > > > > I don't find the lack of an orientation in 22.4.2 a compelling enough > reason to install it horizontally especially since 3.6.2.3 states that > pendant sprinklers are to spray water 'downward against the deflector.' The > old dry pendant at the dock scenario at least has it at a 45 degree angle > but not horizontal. > > > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:47 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > Inside a duct no matter the orientation, the sprinkler sees the same shape > and the discharge will more than adequately cover the small space. > > > > Look at 22.4.2 in 2013 edition of 13. > > > > Orientation is not specified. Now you might pick a location based on > drainage or other factors. But there is no specific NFPA constraint. > > > > > *Craig L. Prahl* > Fire Protection Group Lead/SME > *CH2M* > 200 Verdae Blvd. > Greenville, SC 29607 > Direct - 864.920.7540 > > Fax - 864.920.7129 > > CH2MHILL Extension 77540 > [email protected] > > > > *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]. > org] *On Behalf Of *IPA > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 09, 2016 2:28 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Paint spray application [EXTERNAL] > > > > So, where is the code section that says pendant sprinklers can be > installed in any orientation in ducts? I've just scoured '13 and can't find > it. > > > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Bob <[email protected]> wrote: > > Brad, > > It’s all good. I tend to agree with the QR on small booths. Especially > since we are calc’ing for the worst case that all sprinklers will flow > anyway. Seems that opening faster would be a good idea, but then again I’m > not an engineer, just a guy who draws lots of lines and circles. > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > Bob Knight, CET III > > 208-318-3057 > > > > *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]. > org] *On Behalf Of *Brad Casterline > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 09, 2016 12:21 PM > *To:* [email protected]; [email protected] > > > *Subject:* RE: Paint spray application > > > > Yes indeed. > I knew as soon as I hit send it was a bad idea. > I have thought for several years there should be an exception for no QR in > EH, ever since I understood the reasoning. > I should have more soberly made my point that I think small paint booths > are an excellent application -- if you calc all heads flowing why not use > low temp QR? It would be the next best thing to open head deluge, would it > not? > And I apologize for the name calling and meaness of spirit, FWIW. There is > no excuse for that. A big part of how I feel about myself is based on how i > act on this Forum. > > Thanks, > Brad > > On Aug 9, 2016 1:02 PM, "Bob" <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have an example of one that I did in Salt Lake recently. It has 144 > sprinklers in it. This counts all the exhaust ducts and stacks plus the > ceiling sprinklers. > > > > Thank you, > > > > Bob Knight, CET III > > 208-318-3057 > > > > *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]. > org] *On Behalf Of *[email protected] > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 09, 2016 6:29 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* RE: Paint spray application > > > > How many example of industrial spray booths with more than 40 heads would > you like Brad? They exist and are not all that rare. > > > > > *Craig L. Prahl* > Fire Protection Group Lead/SME > *CH2M* > 200 Verdae Blvd. > Greenville, SC 29607 > Direct - 864.920.7540 > > Fax - 864.920.7129 > > CH2MHILL Extension 77540 > [email protected] > > > > *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]. > org <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Brad > Casterline > *Sent:* Monday, August 08, 2016 8:39 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* RE: Paint spray application [EXTERNAL] > > > > Show me a spray booth with forty sprinklers Steve > > On Aug 8, 2016 7:36 PM, "Steve Leyton" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sure. And fires that can be spread by running fuel such as plastics and > FCL’s (not to mention BLEVE’s) can set off 40 standard response sprinklers > in a minute. I can only imagine the sheer volume of responding sprinklers > and skipping that could occur based on how smooth or bumpy the roof/ceiling > assembly is if you started wantonly plugging QR control-mode sprinklers > into EH fires. (On paper) MDD = .80 ADD = .275 > > > > My opinion only, > > Steve L. > > > > > > > > *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]. > org] *On Behalf Of *Brad Casterline > *Sent:* Monday, August 08, 2016 5:17 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Paint spray application > > > > Shakey ground is all i have ever known Ken. > I am no more a professional than you are. > THINK MAN! > small spaces with fast fires need the fastest acting sprinklers we can > muster. > I've been in court myself a couple times- neither one over sprinklers > though-- > please stop being so stodgy! > > On Aug 8, 2016 7:05 PM, "Parsley Consulting" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I don't know, Brad. You're standing on pretty shaky ground there. > > The decision to use QR sprinklers in an extra hazard occpuancy is a direct > contradiction to 8.4.1.1.2 of NFPA 13, including the 2016 edition, or a > similar section number, at least as far back as the 1999 edition. If you > install QR sprinklers in a space that is legitimately classed as an extra > hazard occupancy, aren't you directly contradicting this particular section > of NFPA 13? The handbook provides the following explanatory text on the > topic: > > Extra hazard occupancies are characterized by the probability of > fast-developing fires with high heat release rates that have the potential > to open a large number of quick-response sprinklers before the sprinklers > have time to control the fire. The operation of a large number of > sprinklers in a relatively short time period has the potential to overtax > the system. For this reason, quick-response sprinklers using the area > design method of Chapter 11 are not permitted for the protection of extra > hazard occupancies. Additional perspective on this can be found in the > discussion of safety margin found in B.2.1. > > Further, I'm not aware of any QR sprinkler which has been tested and > listed by an NRTL for use in protecting extra hazard occupancies. Barring > that, to follow the guidance you're suggesting the > contractor/designer/installer has to violate both NFPA 13 AND the listing > of the sprinkler. I'm not suggesting the gloom and doom drama of "people > could die", however it does concern me greatly when I read suggestions to > ignore both texts. > > My thought about that is to make sure your insurance is paid up, and have > a good lawyer on retainer. I don't know of a good defense while sitting in > the witness chair to a question similar to, "Are you telling me you ignored > the applicable law and the manufacturer's recommendations for the > installation of that sprinkler?" > > When I have nightmares I think about having to answer questions similar to > that. > > > > > > > *Ken Wagoner, SET Parsley Consulting 350 West 9th Avenue, Suite 206 > Escondido, California 92025 Phone 760-745-6181 <760-745-6181> Visit our > website <http://www.parsleyconsulting.com/> * > > > On 08/08/2016 4:17 PM, Brad Casterline wrote: > > We're not suppose to use QR in EH either but I say balderdash. > That is for big open spaces beacase you could have a bunch of heads going > off way over there when the emergency is way over here. Small spaces with > fast fires are better off if you use low temp qr and calc every head > possible going off > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
