I’ve run into a few AHJs that have specifically thrown this section to us for paint booths. We also had this thrown at us on a tire carousel storage. This caused total havoc on the projects.
The paint booth was in an existing facility designed to OH2. They paint booth had 6 sprinklers. We had to run a 6” bulk across the facility to get this paint booth. It seems like overkill, but following that section as it is written, we had to flow 800 gpm for the area. <http://www.mfpdesign.com/> Travis Mack, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G, SET MFP Design, LLC 3356 E Vallejo Ct Gilbert, AZ 85298 480-505-9271 fax: 866-430-6107 <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] www.mfpdesign.com Send large files to us via: <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hightail.com%2Fu%2FMFPDesign&data=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180&sdata=eGdMZGu2wXhUupGwgGTrqF3b54OP5%2BAZvlHhABSexWY%3D&reserved=0> https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign LinkedIn: <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Ftravismack&data=02%7C01%7C%7C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77%7C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511%7C0%7C0%7C636379016677342180&sdata=tT5E7LsZjSmyreKi4gDCa70EWN%2BZodi%2FhbeCbHNRijI%3D&reserved=0> https://www.linkedin.com/in/travismack “The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten.” From: Sprinklerforum <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Bruce Verhei Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2019 8:17 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Intent of 23.4.4.2.5 I read it as Ed notes. As well other example of paint spray booth I’d question too. Paint spray booths can have sprinkler protection in an otherwise unsprinklerd building. They’d all be dry chem total flood if we drove an underground sized up that much. Just the cost of larger DDCVA would be a big impact. Best. Bruce Verhei On Apr 23, 2019, at 08:01, Ed Kramer <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: Steve, you don’t mention the edition of 13 you’re working with, but I’m looking in the ’16. 23.4.4.2.5 is a sub-section of 23.4.4.2 “Density/Area Method”. The section above that is 23.4.4.1.1 “Room Design Method”. I don’t see any similar requirement in that section. I’d argue that 23.4.4.2.5 doesn’t apply to the room design method. But some days I just feel like arguing. :) Ed K Bamford Fire From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Prahl, Craig/GVL Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2019 7:33 AM To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: Intent of 23.4.4.2.5 I feel your pain. This additional flow rate added to a small room has never made any sense and I’d love to understand the logic of being forced to flow 1,950 gpm into a room that is only required to deliver 150 gpm. Is there any actual benefit to this exercise? It’s amazing how buildings were assumed adequately protected when all that was used was the pipe schedule method. Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead – Fire Protection | 864.676.5252 | <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] | <http://www.jacobs.com/> www.jacobs.com 1041 East Butler Road Greenville, South Carolina 29606 From: Sprinklerforum <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Monday, April 22, 2019 6:19 PM To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Intent of 23.4.4.2.5 We have a building with fire rated and secure compartments that are less than the NFPA 13 minimum design areas so we have calculated those areas using the room design method where the compartments comply. Two are fire protected with preaction sprinklers and 23.4.4.2.5 seems to imply that where a design area is flowing less than what the density would be across the minimum required design area, then a “kicker” needs to be added to raise the flow rate to that figure. Since we’re in Light Hazard and the design area is only about 1,000 sq. ft., we’re flowing about 150 GPM. But they’re coming after us for 1,500 x 1.3 = 1,950 saying the required flow rate is 195. If it’s LH, we can downward adjust and the demand drops to 117 which we satisfy. In all my years I’ve never had this section thrown at us so could use any help or opinion regarding exactly how this section should be applied. <image001.jpg> _____ 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] <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
