sprinklernotes
Testing of Sample Sprinklers
You asked the following questions: “The questions are in reference to NFPA 25,
2014 edition in section 5.3 for testing of sprinklers. (1) In the case of a
multi-building apartment complex built concurrently in a single phase, is it
appropriate to consider the entire complex as the sample area? (2) If the
sample area is determined to be a single building and not the entire complex,
and any sample fails would this necessitate replacement of the heads only in
the building with the failed sample and not the entire complex? Our concern is
that we are treating multi-system warehouses differently than we are treating
apartment complexes and are looking to develop standard procedures for all our
inspectors and offices. Relative references are Section 5.3.1.1.1 Where
sprinklers have been in service for 50 years, they shall be replaced or
representative samples from one or more sample areas shall be tested. Section
5.3.1.1.1.6 Dry sprinklers that have been in service for 10 years shall be
replaced or representative samples shall be tested and then retested at 10-year
intervals. Section 5.3.1.2 A representative sample of sprinklers for testing
per 5.3.1.1.1 shall consist of a minimum of not less than four sprinklers or 1
percent of the number of sprinklers per individual sprinkler sample, whichever
is greater. Section 5.3.1.3 Where one sprinkler within a representative sample
fails to meet the test requirement, all sprinklers within the area represented
by that sample shall be replaced.” In response to your questions, we have
reviewed NFPA 25, 2014 edition as the applicable standard. Our informal
interpretation is as follows:
To answer your first question as to if it is appropriate to consider the entire
complex as your sample area, the answer is that it is allowed, but I would not
say it is appropriate. If just one of those sprinklers were to fail, then all
sprinklers throughout the complex would need to be replaced. That approach
would create a lot of risk whereby one sprinkler in a localized harsher
environment could force the replacement of sprinklers in other areas that may
not have failed. Since we have the option of defining the area covered by a
single sample, the method to minimize that risk would be to obtain your samples
from as many different exposing environments that exist throughout the complex.
This would avoid allowing a single area to dictate the overall outcome. This
methodology would certainly increase your sample areas (upfront cost), but in
return minimize the impact of any failures and better reflect the influence of
the localized environment on the activation of the sprinkler. It really boils
down to involving the customer and explaining the cost and potential outcomes
by increasing your sample area versus minimizing your sample area.
To answer your second question in regard to whether a single building if
defined as your sample area could require replacement of all the sprinklers
within a complex with multiple buildings, the answer is no. The only sprinklers
that are required to be replaced are those within the area represented by that
individual sample. To expand this further, when you have multiple sample areas
within a single building, a failure in only one sample does not require the
replacement of sprinklers for the entire building. It is worth mentioning that
there are some cost-saving measures that can be applied to limit the number of
sprinklers in your samples. For instance, if the same manufactured sprinklers
are of the same family-- a 155° GB-QR sidewall installed within a living area
could represent also a 155° GB-QR pendent also installed within living areas.
The same could apply for an industrial plant that might have the same
manufacturer and family of sprinklers with like characteristics, but with a
different orientation.
