Craig, Would the space above the surrounding rooms (with ceilings) in your scenario (which is exactly what I have) require sprinklers? Are they even applicable to 8.15.1.2 if they are not “concealed” areas?
Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef> ________________________________ From: Sprinklerforum <[email protected]> on behalf of Prahl, Craig/GVL <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 10:12 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: NFPA 13 8.15.23 Spaces above ceilings 2016 ed Word pictures are fun aren’t they? If the graphic doesn’t show up, email me and I’ll email you directly. The graphic is from 2016 ed of NFPA 13, Figure A.8.15.23.3. I’m going to use some random numbers to hopefully help clarify this in my mind. So, as an example let’s say the rooms in the space including the IT room have walls that extend up 10 ft. The underside of the roof deck is 15 ft. Rooms adjacent to the IT room have ceilings at 10 ft. but the IT room has no ceiling and is open to the deck above. So if I’m standing in the IT room I can see into the open space above the ceiling in the adjacent rooms on all four sides of the IT room. Does that sound right? If that is the case then let’s walk through 8.15.23. 8.15.23.1: Does the space above the adjacent ceilings require sprinkler protection per 8.15.1.2? If it meets 8.15.1.2.1 then, no. So let’s assume that is the case. No sprinklers. 8.15.23.2 Spaces above ceilings are not sprinklered, so not applicable. 8.15.23.3 This is assuming you’ve provided sprinklers in the ceilings in the adjacent rooms. You’d extend the design area at the 0.6*Sq. Rt. of the Design area or 24 ft beyond the limit of the IT room over the adjacent ceilings. You would do this on all four sides of the IT room as depicted in the graphic below. Not sure why the writers of this section made the statement of this only occurring on one side as this is not an uncommon occurrence having this conditions on multiple sides of a room/space. [cid:[email protected]] Craig Prahl | Jacobs | Group Lead – Fire Protection | 864.676.5252 | [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> | www.jacobs.com<http://www.jacobs.com/> 1041 East Butler Road Greenville, South Carolina 29606 From: Sprinklerforum <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Kyle.Montgomery Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 11:32 AM To: [email protected] Cc: 'Cecil Bilbo' <[email protected]>; 'Pete Schwab' <[email protected]> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: NFPA 13 8.15.23 Spaces above ceilings 2016ed It’s kind of a gray area, but I’m going to politely disagree with my friend Travis and say that you can apply 8.15.23.3 and extend sprinkler coverage at the deck only 0.6 times the design area past the room with no ceiling. The trick is the wording. It’s written as though the space with the ceiling is the small space and the space without the ceiling is the large space. So, if you had a small room with the ceiling that was an “island” in the middle of a warehouse, for example, you could not apply this rule because it is open to an adjacent sprinklered space on all sides. That’s the opposite of what you have. You’ve got a situation where the space above the drop ceiling isn’t open to an adjacent sprinklered space on only one side, it’s open to the adjacent sprinklered space IN THE MIDDLE. Someone could make the argument that this condition doesn’t match the description so you can’t apply it, and that could be a strong argument. But I would say that if you look at the intention of the rule, which is based on the fire not extending more than half the design area into the area above the ceiling, I can’t see a good argument that says if you extend your coverage the minimum distance out from your room that you haven’t met the intention of the rule. Fellows, please feel free to shoot some holes in my theory. Kyle Montgomery [cid:[email protected]] Aero Automatic Sprinkler Co. 21605 N. Central Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85024 Direct: 623.580.7820 Cell: 602.763.4736 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of JD Gamble Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 5:39 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cc: 'Cecil Bilbo' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 'Pete Schwab' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: NFPA 13 8.15.23 Spaces above ceilings 2016ed Travis you are correct in your mental image of the room. We have three locations that have come into question. One does only have one communicating wall but the others have multiple. It’s my impression as well that without the full height walls, we have to add coverage. Get Outlook for iOS<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__aka.ms_o0ukef&d=DwMF-g&c=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA&r=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A&m=eghgkfsX9abLYXeIrpwuoTYvdheDNXuDJORls3qcspo&s=2BqpXVsmVXyFyZ8Zb6f0fp_85JWt2YD4y-aVWcmjmek&e=> ________________________________ From: Sprinklerforum <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Travis Mack, SET, CFPS, CWBSP, RME-G <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 6:36 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cc: 'Cecil Bilbo'; 'Pete Schwab' Subject: RE: NFPA 13 8.15.23 Spaces above ceilings 2016ed I’m not sure I get your total picture, but I’ll try. First, we start with sprinklers in all spaces. Then we can ask if we can omit in places. The section you quote is only applicable if it is open on one side, like figure A.15.23.3. If your IT room is the space in question and you have it open to rooms around it, then your don’t meet the criteria of open on only one side. Based on very limited idea of what you have on your project, I tend to think sprinklers would be required above the areas adjacent to the IT room. But I am envisioning the IT room as an island surrounded by rooms on all sides, or at least more than one side. [MFP_logo_F]<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.mfpdesign.com_&d=DwMF-g&c=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA&r=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A&m=eghgkfsX9abLYXeIrpwuoTYvdheDNXuDJORls3qcspo&s=Hz3noah6lgQGs0WfbQ50ySTEV5UOSJw9Co4ojCpIFOQ&e=> 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]<mailto:[email protected]> www.mfpdesign.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.mfpdesign.com&d=DwMFAg&c=OgZOSER8c1RLeytEexU279Q2qk0jVwkrOdYe5iSi-kk&r=_w721WvezJkWUVteY4FMhecHAoDqOn85ooHi6vIkMag&m=RT3tDDH1_OXBjwDVcUyvRKVl3dZVxrSHtDiNksc67_I&s=knyEy5SZuEvR42OG12hbLI5L91R8xwvRt3P90jTQsMQ&e=> Send large files to us via: https://www.hightail.com/u/MFPDesign<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fwww.hightail.com-252Fu-252FMFPDesign-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77-257C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511-257C0-257C0-257C636379016677342180-26sdata-3DeGdMZGu2wXhUupGwgGTrqF3b54OP5-252BAZvlHhABSexWY-253D-26reserved-3D0&d=DwMF-g&c=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA&r=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A&m=eghgkfsX9abLYXeIrpwuoTYvdheDNXuDJORls3qcspo&s=VczTFbxx_WZGN3lKUZ0kAUg1Ka3RWwcUPsrcqZDsQrQ&e=> LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/travismack<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fwww.linkedin.com-252Fin-252Ftravismack-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C1121d49f9e6b4cf248f108d4df580e77-257C14e5497c16da42e69ffa77d19bafe511-257C0-257C0-257C636379016677342180-26sdata-3DtT5E7LsZjSmyreKi4gDCa70EWN-252BZodi-252FhbeCbHNRijI-253D-26reserved-3D0&d=DwMF-g&c=wn3mZQLIuInh2ClcJ0_DIA&r=Z_2A85VL7AQzoqudh6uOyS3bn8etxB7nLN8OBJwQd9A&m=eghgkfsX9abLYXeIrpwuoTYvdheDNXuDJORls3qcspo&s=K25YN1NWNJv8QRn6oes3yRAWP6FnzBU8khGDlED0VOk&e=> “The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten.” From: Sprinklerforum <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of JD Gamble Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 5:31 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cc: 'Cecil Bilbo' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Pete Schwab <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: NFPA 13 8.15.23 Spaces above ceilings 2016ed Can anyone explain how this section would NOT apply to the following situation. IT Room, open to deck, walls do not go full height. Rooms around the IT room are non/limited combustible above with hardlids below. Currently no sprinklers installed above the ceilings where spaces communicate with the IT rooms open walls. (we are in the argument about it, State isn’t much help). Have I applied this section in error requiring sprinklers above the hardlids because the walls are not full height based on 8.15.23? JD Gamble LSS of Sheridan Inc. ________________________________ 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. Jacobs’ Energy, Chemicals and Resources business is now part of Worley
_______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
