In reply to Travis, As reviewer/inspector I’ve been involved with common 8 head system that had as largest I.D. 2 1/2” UG.
Best. Bruce > On Apr 23, 2019, at 09:11, Roland Huggins <[email protected]> wrote: > > There is also the option to have a remote area with different hazard > classifications within it (and the size of it is predicated upon whether > there are walls around the smaller, higher hazard portion). Look at A.11.1.2. > > > Roland > > > Roland Huggins, PE > Senior Vice President, Engineering & Technical Services > American Fire Sprinkler Association > p: 214-349-5965 ext121 > w: firesprinkler.org > > > 4 days. 1,500+ attendees. > AFSA38: Convention, Exhibition, & Apprentice Competition is North America's > largest fire sprinkler trade event. Join us at the Manchester Grand Hyatt in > beautiful San Diego, California October 1-4, 2019. Priority booth selection > starts April 12. Get yours now. MORE INFO > > >> On Apr 23, 2019, at 8:55 AM, Travis Mack, SET, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> 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. >> >> <image002.jpg> >> Travis Mack, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G, SET >> MFP Design, LLC >> 3356 E Vallejo Ct >> Gilbert, AZ 85298 >> 480-505-9271 >> fax: 866-430-6107 >> [email protected] >> www.mfpdesign.com >> >> Send large files to us via: https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign >> LinkedIn: 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]> 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. J >>> >>> 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] >>> 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 | >>> [email protected] | www.jacobs.com >>> 1041 East Butler Road Greenville, South Carolina 29606 >>> >>> From: Sprinklerforum <[email protected]> On >>> Behalf Of Steve Leyton >>> Sent: Monday, April 22, 2019 6:19 PM >>> To: [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] >>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
_______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
