As with any guide book, it can be easy to misinterpret the intention of the source. The list of "hazards" in 13 is a broad brush and without proper experience one could misinterpret the statement to be all inclusive which of course it can't be. For any "engineering" company to apply the broad brush and just say a facility needs sprinklers is ignorant and careless. There have been some instances where the building code required sprinklers because of the building size and configuration but sprinklers could not be installed because of the extreme hazard any water discharge would have caused. In those cases different types of construction were necessary. That's what the A/E firms are supposed to do for the contractor, not the contractor doing it for the A/E. Sounds like the project needs to be thrown back into the lap of the A/E firm. Unfortunately there is always some hungry contractor with not much scruples and a payroll to make that will take it and fake it.
Commercial systems are pretty much spelled out but industrial facilities require a different and more in depth analysis. Craig L. Prahl, CET Fire Protection Group Mechanical Department CH2MHILL Lockwood Greene 1500 International Drive PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax - 864.599.8439 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ch2m.com On 3/6/08, Todd Williams - FPDC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm glad to see others seem to be thinking along the same lines. This > is the second design-build chemical facility project this year with no > engineering or insurance company input and no company policies on fire > protection other than 'code says we need sprinklers'. > > Let me pose this: if there is no such thing as an 'ordinary chemical > plant' and they all require specific engineering analysis per NFPA 30, > is NFPA doing a disservice by including this in 13? Anybody can read > that statement and decide that a facility is an ordinary chemical > plant and protect it as OH2 when it should be analyzed and could be a > lot higher. Don't mean to dis the sprinkler bible, but this type of > statement could have some unintended consequences. > > > > At 12:07 PM 3/6/2008, you wrote: > >I have never done a chemical processing facility that fell under NFPA > >13 and never an OH occupancy. Usually they fall under NFPA 30 or a > >more stringent and specific FM criteria. Each plant requires a > >detailed hazards analysis of the process, equipment types and > >purpose, MSDS info as well as building construction among other > >issues to determine the proper protection approach. > > > >The other issue is that there are new technologies being born every day. > >Each new product being used or produced doesn't always have a page of > >it's own in the code. So it takes some homework and detailed > >analysis when it comes to determining fire protection criteria for > >these kinds of facilities. > > > >"Ya gotta love it!" > > > > > >Craig L. Prahl, CET > >Fire Protection Group > >Mechanical Department > >CH2MHILL > >Lockwood Greene > >1500 International Drive > >PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax - > >864.599.8439 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ch2m.com > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd > >Williams - FPDC > >Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 11:26 AM > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: Ordinary chemical plants? > > > >In NFPA 13, under the section describing OH2 occupancies, they > >mention "Chemical plants - ordinary". What is an ordinary chemical plant? > > > >Todd G. Williams, PE > >Fire Protection Design/Consulting > >Stonington, Connecticut > >www.fpdc.com > >860.535.2080 > >_______________________________________________ > >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) > > Todd G. Williams, PE > Fire Protection Design/Consulting > Stonington, Connecticut > www.fpdc.com > 860.535.2080 > _______________________________________________ > 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) > -- Ron Greenman at home.... _______________________________________________ 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)
