11.3.1.2. #2, 2007 13 is worded "over the design area" as opposed to 8.5.2.1.1 "protection area of coverage" per sxl and goes on to note 8.6.2.1.2 which states "shall be the area of the room divided by the number of sprinklers" for small rooms. Just my take on it.
Ron -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dewayne Martinez Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 10:18 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: residential heads / 4 head calc Greg, I don't see either "compartment" or "room" stated in either 02 or 07, just the 4 hydraulically most demanding. I think that if you use the "listed" area and pressures in your calc for the residential heads and not the actual area, then it is no different than using extended coverage QR sprinklers. But then one would have to ask, why not use QR to begin with? Dewayne Martinez, CET Design Build Fire Protection [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg McGahan Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 6:53 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: residential heads / 4 head calc Well, that is my point. Since the density is now .10 in order compensate for the difference in property protection vs life safety protection, I can not understand the difference in the stipulation between residential and QR in this case. In addition; 11.3.1 does not say "rooms" it says "compartments". A compartment does not have to have ANY fire resistance and can have openings, while a room "shall be enclosed with walls having a fire-resistance rating equal to the water supply duration indicated in Table 11.2.3.1.2". I feel that this is a significant difference and therefore you should be able to use the room design method in this case. Thank you, Greg McGahan Living Water Fire Protection, LLC 1160 McKenzie Road Cantonment, FL 32533 850-937-1850 Fax: 850-937-1852 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dewayne Martinez Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 6:21 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: residential heads / 4 head calc Perhaps because you use the actual area of the residential sprinkler, not the listed area, in the calculation process? -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 6:18 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: residential heads / 4 head calc Wow - that question may open a can of worms. I always assumed that residential sprinklers used in a 13 design had to be calced per section 11.3.1 (2007; 11.2.3.5 in the 2002). That section says to calc the 4 most demanding sprinklers, even if they exist in 4 separate rooms. I reasoned that it was (in part) to make up for the lower density allowed for residential sprinklers. Well, the lower density is no longer allowed in a 13 design, so that reasoning is kaput. In Greg's example (one sprinkler in a unit with self closing doors), the incentive seems to be to install QR sprinklers instead of residential. Then, by room design method, only 1 sprinkler is calced instead of 4. Or maybe the unit has 2 sprinklers, but it still has the impact of decreasing pipe sizes. Since residential sprinklers used in a 13 design now must provide a minimum .10 density, is there any reason (other than 13 doesn't seem to allow it) that they shouldn't be allowed to be calced using the room design method? Ed Kramer Littleton, CO -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg McGahan Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 4:15 PM To: [email protected] Subject: residential heads / 4 head calc Can you use the most demanding room method when calculating residential sprinklers in a Hotel per NFPA 13? QR sprinklers where there is only one head in a motel room with self closing doors? Thank you, Greg McGahan Living Water Fire Protection, LLC 1160 McKenzie Road Cantonment, FL 32533 850-937-1850 Fax: 850-937-1852 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/843 - Release Date: 6/10/2007 1:39 PM Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/843 - Release Date: 6/10/2007 1:39 PM _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
