With all due respect Dane - read the annex,  it specifically addresses that
issue.

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 3:42 PM Dane Long <[email protected]> wrote:

> Anthony,
>
>
>
> I feel there might be a few sections you need to look at regarding this
> question.
>
>
>
> For me I would start at *8.6.5.2 Obstructions to Sprinkler Discharge
> Pattern Development.*
>
>
>
> *8.6.5.2.1.1 *Continuous or noncontinuous obstructions less than or equal
> to 18 in. (457 mm)
>
> below the sprinkler deflector that prevent the pattern from fully
> developing shall comply with
>
> 8.6.5.2.
>
>
>
> The section above lays the ground work for the 18in requirement (8.6.5.2).
> Then I would look at *8.6.5.2.1.3* Minimum Distance from Obstructions.*
>
>
>
> *8.6.5.2.1.4* *For light and ordinary hazard occupancies, structural
>
> members only shall be considered when applying the requirements
>
> of 8.6.5.2.1.3.
>
>
>
> IMHO Because it specifically says “structural members only shall be
> considered” I believe the intent of this section is to allow for us to not
> provide sprinklers on both side to a reasonable degree, meaning we’re able
> to get water on both sides of the obstruction as long as its not a
> structural member.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Dane Long, AET*
> *Engineering Technician *| *Bamford Fire Sprinkler Co., Inc.*
> P:    *785.825.7710*
> F:    *785.825.0667*
> A:   *1383 W. North Street  Salina, KS  67401*
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Anthony Johnson <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 9, 2023 2:26 PM
> *To:* Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers <
> [email protected]>
> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Re: Duct obstruction criteria in LH attic
>
>
>
> The 3x rule is the only one we think would apply but it only applies to
> structural components.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Anthony Johnson
>
> Mountain Fire Protection
>
> 'Saving Lives and Valuing Property'
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 12:58 PM Taylor Schumacher <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> When you cannot apply one of the obstruction rules, it does not mean that
> there isn’t an obstruction.
>
>
>
> If you think about this scenario the same way you would with sprinklers
> directly attached to a pipe, that’s where to start. Look at the 3x rule or
> sprinklers on each side.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Taylor Schumacher*
>
> Security Fire Sprinkler <http://www.j-berd.com/>
>
> 1 Industrial Blvd | Sauk Rapids, MN 56379
>
> Office: 320.656.0847 | Direct: 320.640.7050
>
>
>
> *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 09, 2023 12:37 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Re: Duct obstruction criteria in LH attic
>
>
>
> I believe however, the intent of the section must still be applied. Water
> on both sides.
>
> Not sure in the 13 edition the location, but in the 19 it is 10.2.7.1.2.
>
> We are referred back to it as applicable from the 3 times section.
>
>
>
> Sprinklers spaced on opposing sides, not to exceed the max half distance.
>
>
>
> R/
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> *Please rate our customer service
> <https://survey.medallia.com/?emailsignature&fc=3539&bg=Fire%20and%20Fabrication>*
>
>
>
> *Matthew J. Willis, CWBSP, CET*
>
> *Engineering Designer IV*
>
> *FERGUSON FIRE DESIGN, LLC*
>
> *A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Ferguson Fire & Fabrication, LLC*
>
> 401 N 5th Street
>
> Suite 448
>
> Wausau, WI 54403
>
> C: 307-236-8249
>
> *[email protected] <[email protected]>*
>
> *www.FergusonFire.com <http://www.fergusonfire.com/>*
>
>
>
> *From:* Anthony Johnson <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 9, 2023 11:24 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Duct obstruction criteria in LH attic
>
>
>
> I have an elementary question but know there are varying opinions on the
> topic. The situation is a tight unused attic space in a LH occupancy. Our
> upright sprinkler deflector will be 3" above the ductwork. Evaluating all
> of the obstruction criteria presented in NFPA we've essentially came to the
> conclusion that the ductwork would not pose an obstruction but came to this
> conclusion mainly by process of elimination. The beam-rule would not apply
> since the ductwork is below the deflector. The 3X rule is only for
> structural components in light and ordinary hazards and the 'wide
> obstruction' rule would not apply since the ductwork is only 24" wide.
> That only leaves the 'suspended or floor mounted vertical obstructions'
> rule of 8.6.5.2.2 ('2013 ed) but it specifically mentions free standing
> partitions, privacy curtains and "similar obstructions". I don't think
> duct-work is a similar obstruction. I would like to have my ducks in a row
> if this design approach should be questioned but also want to make sure I
> have a sound design. Is our reasoning correct that essentially if the
> sprinkler deflector is above the duct water will spray on both sides and
> the duct would not pose as an obstruction?
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Anthony Johnson
>
> Mountain Fire Protection
>
> 'Saving Lives and Valuing Property'
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> SprinklerForum mailing list:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> [email protected]
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> SprinklerForum mailing list:
> https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> [email protected]
>


-- 

Greg McGahan

*Genesis Fire Services, LLC*

*4912 Glover Lane. Milton, FL **32570*

*P- 850-637-8535*

*C- 850-712-9555*
_________________________________________________________
SprinklerForum mailing list:
https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to