Is the .8 based on 64 sqft, 80sqft, or 100 sqft? Or is it 80 gpm minimum? Seems like .8 x 1500 (1200 gpm) should be able to control most OH Grp II hazards even if the discharge patter is a little weak.
Ron -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joe Hankins Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 11:59 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: ESFR in production areas You can't calculate and ESFR for a density less than about 0.80 because they will not develop an effective distribution patern at those low pressures. That's why Tyco reacted to your suggestion the way they did. Joe Fletcher, Ron wrote: >We have run into the problem of ESFR's in production areas many times >but mostly due to the obstruction rules. I haven't had an AHJ try to >apply area/density criteria to ESFR's. > >Offer to calc a full RA at "X" density to prove the system exceeds that >prescribed for the hazard. There is no precedence for treating ESFR's >as area/density but if the AHJ wants a full size remote "area" then >they should be willing to allow a "density" calc in lieu of the ESFR >discharge criteria. (In for a penny in for a pound.) > >The Tyco guys once asked me if I had any ideas for new products. I >suggested they cross list ESFR's for area/density. They looked at me >like I had two heads so I wouldn't look for any changes from the OEM. > >Ron Fletcher >Aero Automatic >Phoenix, AZ > > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John >Powell >Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 3:25 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: ESFR in production areas > >We have an issue with ESFR in a rack storage area interspersed with >componant assembly. The assembly process does not involve flamable >liquids or hydraulic equipment. There are no shielded hazards and the >storage complies with the ESFR listing. Our AHJ requires that the >limited assembly/process hazard be listed for QR sprinklers, which it >is, and the number of ESFR sprinklers calculated for the usual OH area >of operation discharging at the listed pressure for the storage and >building height involved. Seems excessive to me. Have the forum >members had any similar ruling? >John Powell - New Zealand > >_______________________________________________ >Sprinklerforum mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum >_______________________________________________ >Sprinklerforum mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > > _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
