Wire cage elevators in industrial settings are often unenclosed. The original question, “What constitutes an “enclosed” shaft?”, I think is a question asking, “Is not a shaft enclosed by definition?”. That makes sense to me. In certain circumstances building codes require a shaft of specific wall construction properties to enclose “openings between floors”. That shaft is enclosed by definition. Penetrations through the shaft wall would have certain properties, but an unenclosed shaft would not be possible. A lift between floors has to go through an opening between floors, the hoist-way, so it winds up getting shafted in typical circumstances. Remember that the next time you ride an elevator. Now the fire sprinkler standard comes along wanting to write some rules. Perhaps the sprinkler standard writers decided to say what they wanted to say without using the elevator code words and the building code words that better define the situation.
> On Feb 25, 2022, at 8:59 AM, Ken Wagoner via Sprinklerforum > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Todd, and Matt, > > Speculating here. > > Some time ago I stayed in a hotel which had a huge multi-story atrium, and > along two of the four walls were elevators. Both elevator "shafts" were open > to the atrium for the length of travel, save for the pit at the bottom. > > That might be a shaft which is regarded as not being "enclosed." Just my > thoughts. > > sincerely, > *Ken Wagoner, SET* > *Parsley Consulting > 500 West Mechanic Street > Harrisonville, Missouri 64701-2235* > *Phone: (760) 745-6181 * > *Visit the website > <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fwww.parsleyconsulting.com%2f&c=E,1,Y5zKJKPEh1mBEBqSR-VE9cUKl5y-eyP8BpvmE_5j9ZqW2eJbNphYzrCMBZ-2YuX6d-RRkHI4gQ1FV-cvOeCfRC58uZS9NiToZv2mx7909oCqLvCW_n5hDHeK&typo=1>* > > On 2/24/2022 9:14 PM, Matt Grise via Sprinklerforum wrote: >> Todd, >> >> Your question makes me think that you have run across something unusual... >> >> Have you encountered a "non- enclosed" shaft? >> >> Matt Grise >> Alliance Fire Protection >> 130 w 9th Ave >> North Kansas City, MO >> 913.526.7443 >> >> sent from mobile device >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Fpdcdesign via Sprinklerforum<[email protected]> >> Date: 2/24/22 9:03 PM (GMT-06:00) >> To: Sprinklerforum<[email protected]> >> Cc: Fpdcdesign<[email protected]> >> Subject: Sprinkler in elevator pit. >> >> >> >> >> NFPA 13 (2013) section 8.15.5.2 says that sprinklers may be omitted in >> elevator pits for “enclosed, non-combustible…” elevator shafts. What >> constitutes an “enclosed” shaft? >> >> >> >> Todd G Williams, PE >> Fire Protection Design/Consulting >> >> Stonington, CT >> >> 860-535-2080 (tel:860-535-2080) (ofc) >> >> 860-554-7054 (tel:860-554-7054) (fax) >> >> 860-608-4559 (tel:860-608-4559) (cell) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2flists.firesprinkler.org%2flistinfo.cgi%2fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org&c=E,1,ExS8p1y0Hr1gez_4FheG_PCYrYK5u7gB3u2dXqKeFW0ElN5FapcOv2AUonWa20Nzx11YndVwKfEQ3bNXV2NYUcMqO0PubiOKaEuqw3sYI-Y4eg6Kww,,&typo=1 >> _______________________________________________ >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > > -- > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > https://www.avg.com > _______________________________________________ > 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
