Bruce makes a valid point. Prisons are very special occupancies. You are
guarding against the equipment being damaged or destroyed by the guests,
protecting therir lives in emergencies and protecting their lives against
themselves and each other. Institutional sprinklers are easy to open if you
can get to them, despite the Tiny has met his match as. The escutcheons are
secure so  no shiv making nor tying something around them or the pipe but
easy to open. Hence some way for the constantly attended control room
operator  to control flow or at least be alerted that the piping integrity
has been compromised. Then there is detection. If just relying on a wet
pipe there will be a water flow incident often. Nearly every week if the
lock ups I've dealt with are typical. If I were a secfiwr I'd want a Vesda
zone for each cell with a sample taken just after the return air intake in
the duct (positive sampling with no chance of dilution) signaling an FACP
that has a listed releasing releasing relay operating a SIPA with air
supervision.

On Tuesday, September 20, 2016, Bruce Verhei <bver...@comcast.net> wrote:

> Depending on acceptance of complexity (i.e. more failure opportunities) an
> electric release might be acceptable. Put it in an STI cover. Signage.
> Training manual. ...
>
>
> AHJ's: I know for several reasons most of you have to be lurkers on this
> forum. But this is to you:
>
> I've not been confused with being an FPE, except for folks testing my
> flattery coefficient. But this issue points out why if you have opportunity
> to be involved very early in project, pushing for an FPE even if not always
> required in your state or province is helpful. And I don't just mean a
> scope of work limited to smoke removal.
>
> The basic specifications should be agreed to prior to issuance of a
> building permit.
>
> Best
>
> Bruce Verhei
>
> On Sep 20, 2016, at 14:17, Michael Goodis <m...@keyfps.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','m...@keyfps.com');>> wrote:
>
> No they didn't.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 20, 2016, at 3:57 PM, Bruce Verhei <bver...@comcast.net
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','bver...@comcast.net');>> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure if the efficacy of the model of a smoke detector inside the
> (assault resistant) grill from each cell.
>
> But this doesn't pass a laugh test. Back calculate the from the high
> sensitivity setting from the detector manual, then multiply that number by
> Ed's 30 times dilution comment, and you are starting to get an idea of
> smoke level in the cells.
>
> You haven't added a safety factor for dilution prior to smoke entering the
> duct system, or that the self monitoring detector may be out of specs. And
> all based on one detector?
>
> I can't imagine the system operating before the turnkeys in the control
> booth opened the manual control valve.
>
> They did specify a second manual override to trip the valve in the control
> booth, didn't they?
>
> Best
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 20, 2016, at 09:39, michael G <m...@keyfps.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','m...@keyfps.com');>> wrote:
>
> Absolutly, what we have been saying the entire time.  the return air is
> drawn at roughly 75 cfm if im not mistaken, the entire draw for the unit
> was in the range of 6500-8500 cfm.
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org');>]
> *On Behalf Of *Ed Vining
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 12:32 PM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org');>
> *Subject:* Re: Pre-action detection
>
>
>
> The need is to detect fire in a pod. Fire in a pod generates smoke. Air
> comes back from all pods.  The ventilation system dilutes the smoke from
> the fire pod.  By a factor of 30?  The concentration of smoke hitting the
> detector could be close to 3% of the concentration at the pod. Lack of
>  detector listing is insignificant compared to the effect of dilution.
>
>
>
> Wouldn't a wet system be nice?
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 8:14 AM, michael G <m...@keyfps.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','m...@keyfps.com');>> wrote:
>
> No, they are back at the main return, that is it. just one duct detector,
> that covers about 30 cell pods.   They do not have any detectors in the
> grilles in the cell pods.   that’s our main concern.
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org');>]
> *On Behalf Of *rongreenman .
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 11:07 AM
>
>
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org');>
> *Subject:* Re: Pre-action detection
>
>
>
> I am presuming the duct detectors are just inside the return air from the
> cells and the day rooms  and other common areas are high ceilinged with
> normal detectors or where ceilings are low the access is limited.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 7:54 AM, <craig.pr...@ch2m.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','craig.pr...@ch2m.com');>> wrote:
>
> Where a fire alarm system is installed, duct detectors are an initiating
> device attached to and powered by the FACP system just as any other room
> detector.  It’s essentially a regular detector head with tubes placed in an
> enclosure.
>
>
>
> Here’s a quote to chew on from the book, Operation of Fire Protection
> Systems:
>
> “The detection of duct smoke is made difficult by its dilution with return
> air from other spaces (away from the fire) and possibly with outside fresh
> air.  Also, when the HVAC system fan is not running, smoke may not reach
> the duct detector. For these reasons, air duct smoke detectors must never
> be considered as a substitute for open area protection.”
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *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
> craig.pr...@ch2m.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','craig.pr...@ch2m.com');>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces@lists.firesprinkler.
> org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org');>]
> *On Behalf Of *Parsley Consulting
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 10:22 AM
> *To:* sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org');>
> *Subject:* Re: Pre-action detection [EXTERNAL]
>
>
>
> Greg,
>     The first issue that came to my mind was that the duct detector is
> frequently provided with power from the HVAC system and not from the FACU
> or releasing panel.  I don't know the logistics of what you're dealing with
> or whether that issue might have some impact however that might be worth
> looking into.  I have to admit I'd never heard of something like this.
> That by itself doesn't mean it's outside the listing or the guidance in -72
> or -13, just that I've never run across this configuration.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Ken Wagoner, SETParsley Consulting350 West 9th Avenue, Suite
> 206Escondido, California 92025Phone 760-745-6181 <760-745-6181>Visit our
> website <http://www.parsleyconsulting.com/> *
>
> On 09/20/2016 6:28 AM, Gregg Key wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
>
>
>                               First of all, what a great convention. Good
> speakers and fellowship. Nashville was awesome as well. I am in serious
> need of some technical assistance. I have posted this a few times with some
> response but this has become a three ring circus between the architect
> ,fire marshal and us . The Architect specified a double interlock
> pre-action system with the detection being provided with a duct detector in
> the return duct at the unit. We have refused to certify the system due the
> fact that the detector not being listed for this application. State is
> asking me to hang a partial certification ( yellow tag) . has anyone else
> dealt with this detection being used for a pre-action system in a detention
> center?   Any help would be appreciated
>
>
>
> Gregg Key
>
> General Manager
>
> Key Fire Protection Enterprises,LLC
>
> 3200 Mike Padgett Hwy
>
> Augusta GA, 30906
>
> O-706-790-3473
>
> C- 706-220-8821
>
> F- 706-738-2119
>
> gr...@keyfps.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gr...@keyfps.com');>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org 
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org');>
>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org');>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.
> org
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Ron Greenman
>
>
> 4110 Olson Dr., NW
> Gig Harbor, WA 98335
>
> rongreen...@gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','rongreen...@gmail.com');>
>
> 253.576.9700
>
>
>
> The Universe is monstrously indifferent to the presence of man. -Werner
> Herzog, screenwriter, film director, author, actor and opera
> director (1942-)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org');>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.
> org
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Ed Vining
>
> 4819 John Muir Rd
>
> Martinez CA 94553
>
> 925-228-8792
>
> Cell 925-787-0465
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> [image: Avast logo] <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org');>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.
> org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org');>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.
> org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org');>
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.
> org
>
>

-- 
Sent from Gmail Mobile
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Reply via email to