I live in a province in Canada with its own building code version and recently had a project for a very small, single-story building - an industrial class with an incinerator.
We were originally told that the building needed to be sprinklered so we designed a system for it. Since the system will cost a lot of money, the owners have hired a code consultant that concluded that the building does not need to be sprinklered as there is no requirement to sprinkler a single-story very small industrial building by the building code. They make the argument that standards like NFPA 82 & NFPA 20 (for fire pumps) pertain to the equipment but not the building as those aspects are covered by the building code. They also mention this usage has been called into question and accepted in other Canadian provinces with similar code structures. Noting that this argument is not specific to the incinerator or NFPA 82 but any equipment or room covered by an NFPA standard, I'm wondering if anyone has heard a similar argument or has other experience in another jurisdiction. Does the usage here drive a requirement for fire sprinkler protection? Is this the correct approach here? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
9 Comments
Are there any good practices or other viable options allowed by NFPA 20 (other than a Pressure Limiting Driver) to limit the fire pump discharge pressure to at churn to 175psi when there is a high static pressure on the water supply?
Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I have 30-inch deep beams which are spaced just under 5'-0" apart running east to west.
I have 48-inch deep beams running north and south spaced 24'-0" apart. Do I have to get a row of sprinklers in every 5-foot pocket? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Assuming that it's been approved by a structural engineer, is there any code or standard restrictions that would prevent running CPVC branch pipe through a built-up floor beam?
Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I cannot find a residential sprinkler that will allow for sloped ceilings greater than an 8/12 pitch.
How can we approach this and still provide proper protection in a residential property? Most log cabins have ceilings with a pitch up to 12/12. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe NFPA 13 required Extra Hazard Group I sprinkler protection for Aircraft Hangars.
What is the appropriate density/area be under CMDA design? NFPA 409 has a minimum density of 0.17 gpm/sqft (6.9 Lpm) and uses k5.6 to k8.0 quick response sprinklers, however the design area is 15,000 sqft (1,394 sqm). The hanger is only 9,680 sqft (900 sqm) and three light aircraft are to be stored in the hangar. Would 0.30 gpm/sqft (12.2mm) density and an area of 2,500 sqft (230 sqm) with quick response not be more affective than 0.17 gpm/sqft (6.8mm) density and a 9,690 sqft (900 sqm) area? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe If I store only steel items, in steel racks with flow through shelves (made of steel), do I need in-rack sprinklers?
It seems logical that I could use only ceiling sprinklers in this example. The logic is that the all steel construction has zero fuel for a fire and acts as a good "fire break" against the spread of fire within the building. Let me know if you'd agree or if I'm off base here. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We have a climbing gym that's in construction. See the image below. The architect is calling this out as an assembly space, so we have light hazard upright protection up at the roof only. The fire marshal walked the building and has concerns that the climbing walls create obstructions. Are the climbing walls a construction concern? Any other input here?
Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I am planning a sprinkler system for a warehouse which is in a seismic area. Because of the ceiling structure, we need to use trapeze hangers, and possibly combine it with the seismic bracing. We are planning to use steel angles attached to concrete purlins, based on the sketch below, and put the seismic bracing to this steel angle (like we usually would do with a trapeze hanger). Is something like this allowed?
Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe NFPA 13 makes provisions for the addition of a backflow preventer to a pipe schedule system (i.e., device pressure loss must be taken into account for minimum residual pressure available, per Section 19.3.2.6.2 of the 2019 Edition).
When adding flexible sprinkler drops to a pipe schedule system (1 for 1), is a recalculation necessary, or wouldn't the basic addition of that extra pressure loss to the residual pressure for the pipe schedule system be all that's needed? The AHJ is requiring a recalculation rather than simply adding the pressure loss to the residual pressure as we would do for adding a backflow preventer. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe In a strict "like-for-like" repair, are hydraulic calculations required?
Is there a code basis either way? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Working from an insurance perspective through a sprinkler design for a warehouse.
The warehouse contains "flammable solids" in carton storage. These are considered to be H228 "flammable solids", according to the California Highway Patrol (CHP). Can these be protected as plastics? Would we need to store these in a separate area? Unsure how to begin to address these, thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Spray Room vs Spray Booth: When to use the requirements for one or the other?
I am working on a flammable spray application and was wondering if anyone has a any good metrics for when to determine if an enclosure is a "spray room" vs a "spray booth". I am working on a 40-ft by 10-ft enclosure which I would argue is a room, but NFPA 33 provides discernable direction even with Annex sections, especially with "this definition is not intended to limit the term spray booth to any particular design." This shows up in A.3.3.19. From NFPA 33 2021: Spray Booth 3.3.19 "A power-ventilated enclosure for a spray application operation or process that confines and limits the escape of the material being sprayed, including vapors, mists, dusts, and residues that are produced by the spraying operation and conducts or directs these materials to an exhaust system." Annex A.3.3.19: "Spray booths are manufactured in a variety of forms, including automotive refinishing, downdraft, open-face, traveling, tunnel, and updraft booths. This definition is not intended to limit the term spray booth to any particular design. The entire spray booth is part of the spray area. A spray booth is not a spray room." Spray Room 3.3.20 "A power-ventilated enclosure for a spray application operation or process that confines and limits the escape of the material being sprayed, including vapors, mists, dusts, and residues that are produced by the spraying operation and conducts or directs these materials to an exhaust system." Annex A.3.3.20 "The entire spray room is considered part of the spray area. A spray booth is not a spray room." Based on definitions there are no official metrics to determine when to use either definition. Is this perhaps a constructed room vs a manufactured structure? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We are bidding a job that may possibly need a 1,250 gpm rated fire pump due to not enough flow from the city. Our test was 43 psi static, 35 psi residual at 872 gpm. We will need to include a ground suction tank.
How do I correctly include or simulate a ground suction tank in my hydraulic calculations? We use the Sigma Hydraulic Calculation program. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I'm working on a project that is using cold-formed steel joist framing to build a mezzanine in a existing warehouse. They are using 3/4" plywood as the subfloor. They are actually forming the studs on site as they go.
Is this considered a combustible concealed space? Would this require COIN (combustible interstitial) sprinklers per NFPA 13 Section 8.15.1.6? The framed joists are 2-inches deep, and from deck to ceiling is 60 inches. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I'm new to the estimating space, and I was wondering if there is any good material or training outlets to learn best practices in quoting projects.
I'm on the fire sprinkler side, so I'd be interested in learning as much as I can about labor, labor hours, material quotes, etc. Thanks in advance! Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe How do you determine the sprinkler temperature when placed within range of a mini-split HVAC unit?
Is there any reason to have sprinkler temperatures different from the "Unit Heater" detail we've known for a very long time? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We are adding a vertical backflow preventer to my riser assembly.
What minimum dimension do I need for the closet doors to keep it accessible for testing and maintenance? If there are large doors, can the doors be adjacent to the backlfow and open to provide the access to the backflow? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I was milling around in NFPA 13 and I saw the “alternative” design approach chapter (Chapter 21) that it mentions that in the case of Extended Coverage sprinklers that the 6 flowing sprinklers must meet a minimum coverage area of 768 sq ft.
I haven’t run into a scenario where this would be an issue… but is that generally applicable to all systems or is there some sort of “alternative” design trigger where this is necessary? I was just always under the impression that I only needed to calculate 6 Extended Coverage K25.2 sprinklers and that was it. This is Section 21.1.8 in the 2016 Edition of NFPA 13. I appreciate the clarification. We're designing a Wet Manual Class I standpipe in a low-rise building with 4 stairs/standpipes and therefore 4 isolation valves. There are 7 total levels of this building.
The horizontal supply pipe must be located in the level 5 ceiling. Is it allowable to locate the standpipe isolation valves at this 5th level versus the more typical location near the bottom of each standpipe? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe NFPA 13 Chapter 19 indicates that for sloped ceilings over 16.7 percent or 9.5 degrees, the system area shall be increased by 30 percent.
My understanding is that the test facility used had this limitation. We further do recognize that highly sloped ceilings will cause heat to move fast towards the apex and will result in a delayed response of sprinklers, or worse, heads operate over areas not affected by fire. With a ceiling of 10 degrees which is 0.5 degrees over the limit, will the affect on sprinkler operation really be affected to the extent where the 30% corrective is considered essential? Without running a full CFD model, the three means of calculating response times of sprinklers we have do not consider ceiling pitch adequately. Looking at calculated results it simply would be more effective to just have lower sprinkler temperature ratings and use quick-response. Would use of quick response sprinklers be enough to mitigate the concern in CMSA design instead of high temperature sprinklers (K11.2 or more)? Thinking a little outside the box here, thanks in advance for the advice/input. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Canopies and overhangs have been discussed extensively, including the Meyerfire article and Exterior Projection Cheatsheet.
I know when and how NFPA 13 requires protection, but I am finding architects often provide a "gap" between the face of the building and an exterior canopy. Sometimes this gap is very small. I have had an AHJ tell me a gap of any size results in no protection required, even if a roof overhang overlaps above. I'd like to ask the building code experts here if this is a function of if the area beneath is considered part of the Fire Area. Once again I have a project where it is a wide canopy of combustible construction, would require protection beneath, but it is free-standing, with just a couple inches gap between the canopy and the exterior wall of the building. Sprinklers required, or not? Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Does NFPA 13 require pipe hangers and supports (that are not UL/FM listed) to account for pressure thrust forces and any other forces beyond NFPA 13-2019 Section 17.1.2 for five times the weight of the water-filled pipe plus 250 lb at each point of piping support?
We have a 6-inch dry standpipe and we calculated a downward force of around 2,000 lbs to satisfy NFPA 13-2019 Section 17.1.2. However, taking thrust into account at a specific location with a 90 degree elbow, the calculated thrust force is around 6,000 lbs. This appears very high and wondered whether any other fire protection professionals can weigh in on whether thrust force should be accounted for in the calculation. I do not see any NFPA 13 requirements to satisfy thrust forces for aboveground piping. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Is there a code or standard that specifies floor clearance in front of a fire pump controller cabinet?
I am installing a fire pump in an existing building which has a controller with a transfer switch. Of course the fire pump room size presents clearance issues. I have clearances I need for sprinkler pipe, but I do not know the working clearances required in front of the cabinets. I do have door swing clearance, but was wondering about a working clearance. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Do you know of jurisdictions that require Aboveground Test Certificates for sprinkler system modifications that do not involve hydrostatic testing?
Aboveground Test Certificates are provided for documentation of the modifications, however these include provisions for hydrostatic testing. Am I missing something here? 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 |