No one could or would in their right mind write a letter guaranteeing the performance of anything. There are far too many variables and an AHJ with any experience should know that. The best anyone could do would be to state that the product is expected to perform as tested by the mfgr when installed and maintained according to its listing and conditions, water supply and pressures are as calculated and expected. Good Luck!
Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead - Fire Protection | 864.676.5252 | [email protected] | www.jacobs.com<http://www.jacobs.com/> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Paulsen Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2018 12:02 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [EXTERNAL] Egress Window Protection Good Day Fellow Forumites! I have been trying to deal with a local code authority with regard to an "alternative" use for automatic sprinklers and I have run up against an obstacle that I would like to get the forum's opinion on what approaches or methods can be used to satisfy the plan reviewer. The Situation: We are dealing with an existing 4 story inner city apartment renovation. The building has been gutted and refurbished into a new residential (R-2) occupancy. The building is protected by a new 13R sprinkler system supplied by municipal water. Pretty much standard up to this point. The building has an exterior fire escape structure that utilizes the existing double hung windows as points of egress from the apartments. These windows are protected by individual sprinklers mounted at the center of each window with the deflector no more than 2" above the window opening. These K 5.6 heads are calculated to flow 20 GPM at 15 PSI. The thought process behind this is that the sprinkler, when activated, will protect the window glass and preserve the path of egress for the tenants trying to leave the structure. We have designed several of these projects over the last two years and I have a standard detail block that I put on each drawing that shows the spray pattern of the sprinkler, mounting detail, a letter from the manufacturer's PE detailing the test procedure that was used to determine the sprinkler spray pattern and a reference to NFPA-13, 2016, Section 23.3.7.1. This detail has satisfied the plan reviewers for months, but now they a requiring a letter from an FPE (YES, not a PE) or the manufacturer saying the sprinkler will "provide 100% wetting of the glazing surface". As you can imagine, in our law suite happy land, the manufacturer is reluctant to write this letter and I don't know any FPE's that I can ask to write such a letter or if they would laugh me off the phone if I did. Has anyone else dealt with this type of issue and if so, HOW!? Thanks, John Paulsen - SET Crown Fire System Design 6282 Seeds Rd. Grove City, OH 43123 P - 614-782-2438 F - 614-782-2374 C - 614-348-8206 ________________________________________________________________________________________ NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged information that is for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any viewing, copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.
_______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
