I don't believe the intent was to restrain the individual armovers, as their short length usually will not allow them the motion we're trying to prevent.(Perhaps the TC could provide a maximum length of armovers, vs. single head branchlines.) But the branchline they are attached to must be restrained, and if they are on a crossmain or feed main, those are already "Braced" a higher level of restraint.
Thom McMahon, SET Firetech, Inc. 2560 Copper Ridge Dr P.O. Box 882136 Steamboat Springs, CO 80488 Tel: 970-879-7952 Fax: 970-879-7926 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland Huggins Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 10:13 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Restraint of Branch Lines There was a proposal (13-283) to require restraint on drops greater than 10 ft which the TC rejected. Roland On Jun 19, 2008, at 9:01 AM, Roland Huggins wrote: > Having said that, I have given up on trying to say what any large > group will ultimately decide (that being the technical committee) > until it's done. I will look to see if there is a proposal that we > can attach a comment that will clarify this issue come the Sept ROC > meeting. > > Roland _______________________________________________ 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)
