Thanks Roland.

This was just an activation comparison based on the calc rules in 13 for EH.
Some rules apply no matter what happens after activation.

I don't consider the rules for EH and Storage to be interchangeable in this regard. EH sprinkler rules are mostly for SSU and SSP. Storage sprinkler rules are based on lots of great experiments so we get Special Application and EFSR that does take fire control into consideration, not just activation.

so I guess the answer to your question is 'none' :)


Quoting Roland Huggins <>:

So what fire model did you use that will provide any degree off accuracy on fire control?

Roland Huggins, PE - Senior VP Engineering
American Fire Sprinkler Assn.
Dallas, TX <>

Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives

On Aug 9, 2017, at 4:36 PM, wrote:

 Make that 46% increase.
If we started with 2500 and reduced to 2000 for using 286F (SR) because of the reasoning, "fewer heads would go off", we would have to go the other direction for QR. 2500x1.3=3250. I did a quick activation comparison with 286F SR vs 200F QR. I used a 5100 kW t^2 ULTRA FAST design fire. In the same time 24 SR activated, 35 QR activated.


If I used QR in EH I would inrease the operating area 30% of my own accord for the same reason we do that for dry- - -
"More heads would go off".

Quoting "Kyle.Montgomery" <>:

NFPA 13 section states that QR sprinklers shall not be permitted for use in extra hazard occupancies.

Section 12.6.6 states that the use of QR sprinklers shall be permitted when listed for such use.

So, if I have a storage occupancy where the appropriate design criteria table directs me to use an Extra Hazard design curve, can I use QR sprinklers (assuming they are listed for storage use)?

I believe the answer would be “yes”, but looking for some feedback.


-Kyle M

Sprinklerforum mailing list

Sprinklerforum mailing list

Sprinklerforum mailing list

Reply via email to