I figured an open container of fluid would be the same throughout the
container, or a homogeneous solution. But I did not expect that a closed
container would be a homogeneous solution. So why do we need a test drain
at the far end of the pipe, and why do we need another test port at
mid-cent
Allow me a bit of a long winded response instead of a simple yes or no.
First off, although your question is not about whether you can omit sprinklers
but whether you have to have a 3,000 sf remote area (not stated but understood
since you are referencing chap 11), let’s start in 8.15.1.2.6 that
I would say you can calc your system back to the gauge on the riser only when
you have completed a flow test where the effective point of the test is the
gauge on the riser. E.g., you have a backflow test connection that ties to the
riser at or near the point of connection of the gauge.
Otherw
Thanks Roland
But my coffee has not kicked in, So I agree with 8.15.1.2.6 allows the omission
of the sprinkler heads as we meet those requirements, and 11.2.3.1.4(4)(j)
allows us to not use a 3000 sf design area if we firestop the joist channels
into 160 cu ft blocks, or in our case about ever
I haven't seen any rely to your question, so I'll take a stab.
First, I'm not sure where the 30" obstruction width originated.
As I understand it, if your obstruction is more than 30" wide you would need a
sprinkler under it, unless there was at least 18" of clearance from the
deflector to the
we are in complete agreement on you latest statement (below).
In your originally question though, weren’t you questioning whether or not ch
11 applied to a single joist channel or multiple channels. In other words, you
were asking if the AHJ was wrong in requiring every 4th channel to be
fires
