Is missing a coverplate for a concealed sprinkler a deficiency in NFPA 25 that would be required to be corrected?
Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
7 Comments
So I am dealing with a building who stores plastic containers, I asked for the SDS sheets to find out what they say as far as protection.
The SDS sheets only mention water fog, dry chemical, foam, and carbon dioxide as suitable extinguishing agents; no water spray. The building currently has water spray. In the SDS under "Unsuitable Extinguishing Media" it lists "none known". Does this mean that water spray could be suitable for use even though it is not mentioned under extinguishing media? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe The architect has specified a solid panel ceiling in an 8-ft wide corridor.
The ceiling has a 4-inch gap that extends the width of the corridor. The gap is spaced every 8-ft. The architect would like us to locate the sprinklers in the gaps so the ceiling has a clean look. The gaps are open to above. There are no sprinklers above the ceiling. I believe the sprinklers should be installed in the solid part of the ceiling, not the gap, so heat can collect and activation is not delayed. Am I correct? Thank you in advance for your responses. We are working on a new (750 gpm) standpipe system.
When testing and setting the field adjustable 2-1/2" PRV hose valves, do you set each one flowing 250 gpm while also flowing 500 gpm elsewhere, to account for the hydraulically calculated design (i.e. lower inlet pressure per NFPA 14-11.5.5.1)? Or do you just set each one only flowing 250 GPM by itself? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I have a situation with obstructed construction; solid 18-inch steel beams with pockets being over 320 square feet. The beams are 10-ft on center.
The area is part of a warehouse, Ordinary Hazard Group 2. Can I space my branch lines 14-ft apart if I'm protecting every pocket? Sprinklers are 5-ft (on center) from beam and 14-ft to the next branch line. Thanks in advance! Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Looking for some back history here - why is heat sensor detection temperature 57 degrees C?
On what basis was sprinkler temperature determined to be 68 degrees C? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I am working on a NFPA 13R 3-story apartment building.
The Labor & Industries (Washington State) compliance elevator inspector is requiring sprinklers in the pit and in the machine room, because it has more than 2 occupants and it is a commercial elevator. Can someone clarify if Labor & Industries requirements do not follow NFPA standards? If they do not, do their requirement supersede adopted NFPA standards? Have others ran into similar situations like this? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe When supporting pipe using trapeze hangers, is it acceptable to have the pipe resting on top of trapeze, or does it have to be hung from it?
Are there listing or approval issues associated with this? The situation involves using trapeze to hang pipe under a duct but it needs to be as tight as possible to duct work. Having the pipe on top of trapeze would accommodate our situation. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I have observed forward-flow tests of backflow preventers, and fire pumps tests, that are conducted through 2.5-inch nozzles identical to the image below, but without the playpipe tip screwed onto the end of the nozzle.
Image Link The pitot reading was taken off the 1-3/4" threaded end of the nozzle where the playpipe tip gets screwed on. Is this approach acceptable, and would the GPM table for the 1-3/4" butt for converting the pitot pressure to flow be acceptable? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I have observed forward-flow tests of backflow preventers, and fire pumps tests, that are conducted through 2.5-inch nozzles identical to the image below, but without the playpipe tip screwed onto the end of the nozzle.
Image Link The pitot reading was taken off the 1-3/4" threaded end of the nozzle where the playpipe tip gets screwed on. Is this approach acceptable, and would the GPM table for the 1-3/4" butt for converting the pitot pressure to flow be acceptable? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe How much engine oil can be stored in a building with an Ordinary Hazard Group 2 (OH2) sprinkler system?
We're working on a repair garage and NFPA 13 (2019) classifies repair garages as OH2 in the appendix. It seems reasonable that some amount of engine oil would be allowed to be stored. However, the NFPA 13 definition of OH2 doesn't allow for flammable/combustible liquids, but EH1 and EH2 allows for some unspecified amount of flammable/combustible liquids. NFPA 13 section 26.2.1 states that sprinkler system discharge criteria for the protection of flammable and combustible liquids shall comply with NFPA 30. NFPA 30 (2021) table 10.7.1 allows for unlimited IIIB liquids to be stored in mercantile occupancies with an OH2 sprinkler system. Can this mercantile section be applied to a storage occupancy? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe A client of ours operates a printing press facility and has installed a machine to collect and form dust into "bricks" to avoid venting them to atmosphere.
The machine is fed by ducts that tap into an existing dust collection system. The client asked for a quote to adjust the overhead sprinkler system because of the new ducts but I think the new ductwork and machine might require suppression of some form, as well as interacting with the existing sprinkler system at the roof. (1) Does NFPA 13 (2016 Edition) Section 11.2.3.2.2.2 indicate that the existing roof system cannot have quick response sprinklers? "Quick-response sprinklers shall not be permitted for use in extra hazard occupancies or other occupancies where there are substantial amounts of flammable liquids or combustible dusts." It's hard to tell from the floor but I believe at least some of the systems have quick response. (2) Is the dust collector ductwork governed by NFPA 13 at all? Section 22.33 Exhaust Systems for Air Conveying of Vapors, Gases, Mists, and Noncombustible Particulate Solids would not seem to apply since the particulate dust is a paper product and inherently combustible. (3) Are dust collector machines like paint booths in that manufacturers pre-coordinate requirements and access for sprinklers into the filter media? Thanks for all the guidance; I haven't seen this application before. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe When testing our flow switch, the first time, it will take 25 seconds before the flow switch activates. When we reset and start over, it takes 5 seconds for the switch to activate.
After waiting an hour to test again, the first test always takes 25 seconds for the switch to activate. Any thoughts on why? This is running on an 8-inch pipe. The flow switch on all of the 6-inch pipes work properly. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe A client of ours operates a printing press facility and has installed a machine to collect and form dust into "bricks" to avoid venting them to atmosphere.
The machine is fed by ducts that tap into an existing dust collection system. The client asked for a quote to adjust the overhead sprinkler system because of the new ducts but I think the new ductwork and machine might require suppression of some form, as well as interacting with the existing sprinkler system at the roof. (1) Does NFPA 13 (2016 Edition) Section 11.2.3.2.2.2 indicate that the existing roof system cannot have quick response sprinklers? "Quick-response sprinklers shall not be permitted for use in extra hazard occupancies or other occupancies where there are substantial amounts of flammable liquids or combustible dusts." It's hard to tell from the floor but I believe at least some of the systems have quick response. (2) Is the dust collector ductwork governed by NFPA 13 at all? Section 22.33 Exhaust Systems for Air Conveying of Vapors, Gases, Mists, and Noncombustible Particulate Solids would not seem to apply since the particulate dust is a paper product and inherently combustible. (3) Are dust collector machines like paint booths in that manufacturers pre-coordinate requirements and access for sprinklers into the filter media? Thanks for all the guidance; I haven't seen this application before. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I am currently in the beginning stages of design for a 200,000 sqft warehouse which will be used for production and assembly of electric generators (picture the gas/diesel trailer-mounted generator you would see on a construction site but battery powered). There will be three separate areas where the batteries will be stored.
The overhead system will be an ESFR k-25.2 system. The specs for the job are calling out a rated, freestanding, sprinklered canopy structure above the battery storage areas as an additional requirement to the overhead system which does make sense to me. Is there anyone who has advice or experience with this type of commodity and coverage of it? What code references should we be looking at, if any exist? FM Global released a study on lithium ion batteries but from reading over it they were testing smaller power-tool-sized batteries and not large battery banks. To my knowledge this is a relatively new hazard for the industry and the code requirements are having to play catch up. Again, any guidance would be appreciated. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Can sidewall heads be used for water curtain application?
While typically pendent are used to provide a water curtain around a vertical opening, I am working on a project where the arrangement led to sidewall heads being preferred by the architect. NFPA 13 is not explicit about water curtain needing to be a specific type of sprinkler, it just says it should be a standard spray with 3gpm /lineal ft applied. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe In the 2015 International Building Code, Section 101.2:
The provisions of this code shall apply to the construction, alteration... of every building or structure in any appurtenances connected or attached to such buildings or structures. Exception: Detached one- and two-family dwellings and multiple single-family dwellings (townhouses) not more than three stories above grade plane in height with a separate means of egress, and their accessory structures not more than three stories above grade plane in height, shall comply with the International Residential Code. The debate: Why in the world are we going to allow them to label this design as residential? The townhouse exception is seemingly being used pretty loosely around the building department. In our college community, these structures meet the requirements of a townhouse, but with obvious intent to be student housing. After looking at code....I cant say I blame these designers. I see no way to combat their argument. They meet all the code requirements to avoid the extra costs of a 13R system and only have to add an additional layer of gyp to comply!? If I am missing something, please let me know! Maybe I just need to accept them as townhouse? It sure doesn't "feel" right. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I was recently cited by a surveyor for not having supervised control valves (isolation gate valves) on the jockey pump.
All other control valves are supervised for the riser and fire pump. I view the jockey pump as not critical or a necessary part of the fire pump and would not have an adverse effect if the jockey pump were out of service for any reason. Is there a NFPA code reference that requires supervision on jockey pump gate valves? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I have a highrise that exceeds 400-ft in height. The engineer designed a combination riser with all of the floor control assemblies coming from one riser, and not alternating as is in code.
I'm wondering if there's something I'm missing - any way around alternating the floor control assemblies, like upper-level pumps being considered separate systems or something of the like? Looking for better understanding here and being sure I'm not missing something bigger picture. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Hi all, is anybody aware of a sealed sprinkler that is available in the market with an elongated spray pattern?
I'm looking for something specifically designed for conveyor protection. Have tried the main manufacturers (Reliable, Tyco, Viking etc.) but nothing seems to be out there. The FM data sheet (FMDS0711) suggests that they are out there. Many thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We are doing the install for a new building. The fire sprinkler underground comes in the building and they are requiring ductile pipe be used inside the building up to the backflow preventer.
Can anyone cite literature for this? I know NFPA does not require the use of back-flow prevention, but am interested in the code basis for the pipe type until the backflow preventer. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We have a project with a Class IV commodity rack storage area. The building has a roof slope around 24% (5.5 / 12). Based on NFPA 13 2022 Edition, Section 20.9.1, one option for this case is "where storage is protected with in-rack sprinklers in accordance with one of the options in Section 25.6, provided no storage is placed above the highest level of in-rack sprinklers." The question is: if a horizontal barrier and a level of rack sprinklers are installed above the last load level, and there is not going to be any storage above this level, can a system design be done based on 25.6 omitting the ceiling sprinklers? The gap between the top of the load and the roof is about 6.5 meters in the highest area. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We have three traction elevators side by side, and the three elevators are run in a shaft with no dividing walls between the elevators.
The construction is poured-concrete with a concrete ceiling. Is this shaft considered to be "enclosed" for the purpose of omitting sprinklers from the bottom of the shaft? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We are converting approximately 100 extended coverage, ordinary hazard upright sprinklers (off of a 1x3/4 bushing) to standard spray chrome pendents (light hazard). The ceilings are approximately 6'-0" below the existing branchlines at the deck. We are planning to use "2-Stage" drops where we add a 1" double elbow ( with a 1" close nipple) off the branchline, then drop down about 5'-0" to get down near the ceiling and terminate this with a 1" plugged elbow. Then when the time comes, we will add a flexible sprinkler connector to this and fix the sprinkler in the suspended ceiling (ASTM C635 & C636). If I use a 72" flexible connector, I understand I don't need a hanger per 17.4.1.3.3.3 (NFPA 13 2019).
If I use a 23" starter piece of pipe off the bottom of the drop, would I need to catch a hanger due to the total length of this assembly? Or, since the flexible connector is 6'-0" and the starter pipe is 23" (Section 17.4.3.5.1) could I get away without an additional hanger? Not that I'm planning to do this but just curious what people think? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I am a fire sprinkler fitter a military installation. Have a question regarding low expansion foam systems with the use of Viking Grate nozzles.
Of course with the concerns of AFFF, there are many issues and decisions flying around about the existing systems we have out here in our aircraft hangars. Is it acceptable to use the Viking grate nozzles without the low expansion foam? How does this provide any fire protection? Obviously, this is not how the system was designed, in my opinion. Please help me understand how this can be acceptable. I appreciate any and all input. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe |
ALL-ACCESSSUBSCRIBESubscribe and learn something new each day:
COMMUNITYTop June '24 Contributors
YOUR POSTPE EXAMGet 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
FILTERS
All
ARCHIVES
July 2024
PE PREP SERIES |