In an exposure fire like the one described, it would be the responsibility of
the design team to make sure that the fusible link of the sprinkler head is in
an area that can "sense" the exposure threat. NFPA 80A discusses this concept
in its appendix. So the glass bulb in the sprinkler head should be in a
location that will receive the radiated heat from the fire just like the
tempered glass wall will. In other words, it should not be behind some
architectural feature that would shield the glass bulb in the sprinkler head
from the radiation exposure.
Re-reading my previous post it seems that I was suggesting that the bubble in
the glass bulb of the sprinkler head is what helps activates the head. It is
actually the lack of the bubble that activates the head. As the liquid in the
bulb heats up, it expands and fills the air space (bubble) in the bulb and once
the air space is gone the pressure build up in the liquid assists the glass
bulb in rupturing. The point in the previous post was that the glass bulb in
the sprinkler head has an internal force that is helping to break it and the
tempered glass wall does not.
So it would seem to me if both glass elements are subject to the same radiated
exposure, the glass bulb in the sprinkler head would break before the tempered
glass wall. I am not 100% sure about this though, and it would be interesting
to see a live fire test.
I am assuming that when the Tyco head was listed, the heads were closed prior
to the start of the test and prior to being exposed to the standard time
temperature curve.
Regards,
Justin D. Reid, P.E.
Project Engineer
RLH Fire Protection
468 N. Camden Dr. #290L
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Office: (310) 601-3013
Cell: (213) 798-0251
Fax: (866) 871-2237
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of å... ....
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 8:57 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Window Sprinklers
Thank you for this criticism. That is what makes this forum really useful
as a tool.
bare-knuckled debate. I never said i was not the fool. But being an
engineer, well,
some people consider a license to prove me a fool. I admit it. don't need to
prove it.
Fire away, all day and all night. I'll take the bullets if that is what it
takes to learn
the lesson and get the design tight.
from a couple of stitches back on this "dead thread."
" ... The cut sheet supports this in "Based on this successful testing, the
Model WS Specific Application Window Sprinkler can be used as interior
protection of windows or glazing in a sprinklered building or
non-sprinklered building."
scot deal
excelsior fire
*********************
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 7:13 PM, Thom McMahon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> This thread has already gone on way too long but I can't let this slide.
>
> Scott: [sic] ...your already outside the scope of the listing and the
> building code, so your
> using your "Engineer" Status
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
