Agreed.  As builts would be nice, but never present.  It's really a crap
shoot, and the contractor would need to decide if he/she was capable of
completing it correctly. I won't touch a storage occupancy for something
like this, and less likely to on a building that has multiple uses, flex
space ect.

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:00 AM Steve Leyton <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Correct.  But if the plate is missing and the basis of the system design
> isn’t known and no as-built drawings are available, which branch on the
> decision tree do you follow?   If it’s a retail center, it MUST be Ordinary
> 2, right?   If it’s an office building it has to be Light, unless the shell
> was designed for Ordinary.  Would that be Ordinary 1 or 2?   If it’s a
> warehouse … ???   Seems to me that many of these situations involve a lot
> more than just hanging a new sign, unless you have documented knowledge of
> the system design or a UL/FM crystal ball.
>
>
>
> SML
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Matthew J
> Willis
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 21, 2018 7:45 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* RE: Calculation Plates
>
>
>
> The answer to your original question is no. NFPA 25 does not require a
> calculation. It requires the plate.
>
>
>
> The information on the plate drives the fact that you must now do a
> calculation.
>
> To be correct, you would have to use the Original flow test, as that was
> the basis of design. So a new flow test more than likely will not match.
>
> Getting a new flow test and calc is NFPA 13. Further NFPA 13 involvement
> could come into play if the calcs no longer work.
>
> At this point, you will have moved well beyond 25, and should be operating
> under a different scope.
>
>
>
> If you really wanted to have some fun.., 25 just requires the placard to
> be in place.
>
>
>
> What if you see a blank one during the inspection? Per 25, you are
> compliant.
>
>
>
>
>
> R/
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> *Matthew J. Willis, **CWBSP*
>
> *Design Manager /**3-D** Specialist*
>
> *Rapid Fire Protection Inc. <http://rapidfireinc.com/>*
>
> *1530 Samco Road*
>
> *Rapid City, SD 57702*
>
> *Office-605.348.2342*
>
> *Direct Line-605.593.5063*
>
> *Cell-605.391.2733*
>
> *Fax:-605.348.0108*
>
>
>
> [image: cid:[email protected]]
>
>
>
> *From:* Sprinklerforum <[email protected]> *On
> Behalf Of *Wayne Cordiner
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 21, 2018 7:56 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: Calculation Plates
>
>
>
> John,
>
>
>
> The key to remember here is in NFPA 25 the intent is to inspect, test and
> maintain a previously approved system. With that in mind the plate you’d be
> inspecting exists based on the original installation. The data added even
> to a new plate should reflect that.
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Wayne T. Cordiner, Jr.
>
> 917-426-5844
>
> [email protected]
>
>
> On Nov 21, 2018, at 05:24, John Irwin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I have been in this industry for 25 years. I believe every company I have
> ever worked at has done a hydraulic calculation when replacing Hydraulic
> Placards due to an inspection deficiency. But yesterday we were having a
> discussion here in the office as to whether or not the calculation was
> actually required per NFPA 25. There is no information on the plate that
> indicates whether or not the system even works … just what is required.
> Does your company do a flow test and calculation when replacing missing
> plates? And if so, what happens when you discover that the system no longer
> works as originally designed?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> John Irwin
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>


-- 
     \ \
     (o>  --  If life were easy...
 \ \_/ /)                           It'd be called your mom...
  \_/_)
   _|_
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Reply via email to