I think we’re seeing a much more holistic view of massed projects by fire officials, with consideration for both basic code compliance and also operational practices and concerns. For our part, the 14 committee is trying to steer the standard that way in code development. Standpipe hydraulics and FDC placement are two issues that were discussed in detail and studied by task groups in the 2019 cycle and this will continue for the 2022. One of the things to consider with a project that might be considered as multiple buildings is whether there’s an enhancement or challenge presented by segregated FDCs; if the complex is one building, inlet connections can be configured so that each side of the building that faces a fire lane or access right-of-way has at least one connection and pumping any of the connections will provide an auxiliary water supply to any standpipe in the complex. Downside of that is potential over-pressurization of lower floors if pumping operations are targeting upper ones, particularly in the low- or mid-rise portions of a mixed-height building or complex. But thoughtful zoning of FDCs can mitigate or completely bypass that issue, which underscores the limits of a purely prescriptive approach. There’s no way to encapsulate a singular “right way” or “best practice” in the standard because the designs are so site-specific (or should be). As the project gets bigger and taller, it amplifies the importance of the relationship between prevention and operations on the AHJ side of the counter, and between the AHJ and the designer in general.
[Steve Signature (3)] From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of James Litvak Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2018 8:42 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: High Rise and Non-High Rise Standpipes I'm not entirely sure how the second tower could be considered not a high rise. The highest occupied floor is 124' or so above the fire department access. I was told it wasn't a high rise during kickoff, but we may have been given incorrect information. After talking to the architect, the AHJ is considering it all one building anyway. So that puts that to rest. On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 1:53 PM Nick Maneen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: If you have a single building that is a high-rise, then the entire building is a high-rise. On another note, I’m not sure how a 9 story building isn’t a high rise unless it is less than 8’-4” between floors. Nick Maneen, SET c 704.791.7789 From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of James Litvak Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 1:44 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: High Rise and Non-High Rise Standpipes I've got a building that is two towers with a parking garage in between. One tower is 11 floors and is a high rise, with two standpipes. The other tower is 9 floors and isn't a high rise, with three standpipes. The AHJ has said that because the towers and garage are all connected, the tower that isn't a high rise is considered a high rise with respect to standpipe calculations. I had originally considered my calc to be 750 gpm for the two standpipes in the high rise, them being automatic wet, and 1000 gpm for the three in the non-high rise, them being manual wet. Does it make sense that the AHJ has said it is one building with 5 standpipes, and to do a 1000 gpm calc with the two standpipes in the high rise and one in the non-high rise (the fire pump is in the non-high rise)? _______________________________________________ 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
