I am floored. I have just been advised by two PE's on this string that everything I have done for 40 years is improper, NFPA historical data is useless and wrong (where are you Roland?), NICET certification based on NFPA criteria is wrong and I should be in agreement with this poppycock??? I have been reading with great interest and cannot believe you fire protection people have not responded en masse over those statements. Boys, these are your tax dollars at work and to be very honest, it really burns my butt as to how they are spent. Steve....you are way to polite with your response to these fellows. Geoff Dyce NICET IV
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Williams - work Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 4:46 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Beyond code (was max velocity) And we can add a full blown coordination process (meetings and a sign-off) on a 50 head Light Hazard job... At 04:37 PM 1/15/2007, you wrote: >Can you substantiate a single incident where 130 sq. ft. sprinkler >spacing in lieu of 225 or greater saved a courthouse? (I know you >likely can't, it was in fact a rhetorical question). I notice that >you say "I" a lot in your posting - "I don't allow ..." "I specify >..." Are you a policy-making officer or an enforcement officer? > >AHJ's normally work with an adopted code set, which in turn references >certain standards. That is what we're charged with delivering under a >contract usually - a design and/or installation that is in accordance >with the adopted codes and standards. And those documents are >developed by committees comprised of experts who rely on technical and >empirical data to formulate and maintain minimum standards of care for >the specific code or standard-based issue that is being addressed. >This is the consensus process at its best when it works smoothly, which >in spite of a certain amount of parochial bitching is most of the time. > >I have a darned good idea where a lot of the money goes on public >projects - it gets WASTED. Spent on too many levels of review and not >enough straightforward plan check and inspection of the referenced >codes and standards and whatever other provisions are enforced, such as the >Navy UFC's for example. And ridiculous submittal requirements like >the 13 hard-copy sets we just submitted on a 50% review for a 15,000 >s.f. aircraft service building at a MCAS that's equipped with fire >sprinklers only. And the NAVFAC engineer that rejected our flow test >that was witnessed by the base fire marshal, the GC's project engineer >and superintendent, the sprinkler contractor's foreman and yours truly >but NOT witnessed by the project FPE who's only real deliverable >product is a code analysis. > >I've been doing Federal, State and Local public works projects for 25+ >years Rahe and I'm telling you that even with a much higher standard >of care than the minimum NFPA prescriptive standards, we could deliver >fire sprinkler work to Uncle Sam for 65 cents on-the-dollar if these >"rump rules" were relaxed and/or eliminated. > >Steve Leyton >Protection Design & Consulting > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 1:13 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Beyond code (was max velocity) > > >Thanks to everyone for the input. >To explain further about what I do to try to insure the greatest amount >of longevity and reliability for a system within some reason, I also >specify that all light hazard sprinkler coverage is 130 square feet >rather than 225 square feet. This helps when walls are moved and >sprinklers are not. Happens a lot. I don't allow extended coverage >sprinklers. I don't allow any piping with a CRR less than 1. All >threaded pipe must be Schedule 40 and all roll groove pipe must be >Schedule 10 minimum. Threadable lightwall piping is not allowed. The >calculated design area must be the hydraulically most remote and must >be calculated at 1500 square feet, not 900 no matter what the >conditions. No mechanical "Ts" are allowed. No flexheads allowed. No >adjustable drop nipples allowed. If I have a fire pump for elevation >loss, then all calculations must be through the bypass loop until the >point of the need for the pump for elevation; usually the 4th or 5th >floor. Just call me old fashioned, but once I sign the Certificate of >Occupancy, all changes are out of my hands. Remember sprinklers may be >moved, added, subtracted, changed, etc. all without any calculation of >any kind. You would not believe the systems in some of our buildings. > >All of this, and more, is on the drawings and in the specifications so >that >the playing field is level. If you only knew where most of your tax >dollars go in the government, you would gladly pay for the beefed up >sprinkler system. Across the nation, our Federal Courthouses will cost >from $80 million up to $400 million. Sprinkler systems at twice the >usual cost are extremely cheap insurance. > >Thank You > >Rahe Loftin, P.E. >Region 7 - GSA >Office - 817-978-7299 >Fax - 817-978-8644 >Cell - 817-371-3102 > > >_______________________________________________ >Sprinklerforum mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > >_______________________________________________ >Sprinklerforum mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum Todd G. Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, Connecticut 860-535-2080 www.fpdc.com _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
