Does the mechanical, plumbing or electrical community have the equivalent of
NFPA 13?  I don't think they do.  I'm serious I just don't really know.   

Our good book tells us both what is needed and really almost how to
accomplish.  A heating section of the code might stipulate a temperature
(like our density) but doesn't tell them what type of heat source and how to
get it there.  Do you use forced hot air, in floor heat, radiant.....Spiral
duct, square duct, what velocity, what size.  We are based on one media of
suppression - water. We aren't dealing with such varying delivery methods
such as conduction, radiation vs. convection.  I have to believe there are
pros and cons to each and someone needs to evaluate what best fits the
situation.  I have to believe this is more than style differences.  They get
to balance different rooms with different thermal properties, day/night
windows/no windows, same temp but more/less BTU's.  We get the density for
most projects from the book (temperature).  Arguably there can only be one
correct density whether there are window or not. HPS storage might have a
few different whether ESFR, in-racks, roof only..... 

We really only have one pipe type in commercial construction - steel.  OK
wall thickness may vary but it's still round steel pipe, we may vary the
ends with thread and grooves but that's style not performance in delivering
a density.  OK you might throw in a little plastic (but rare).  So at best
you have two choices steel and plastic and plastic is rather limited in
approved applications.  We only have a limited number of orifice sizes and
usually it's a choice between 2.  Depending on the density and area you have
a fixed gpm to provide.  OH at standard spacing k5.6 if you have a lot of
pressure or k8.  Would anyone use larger, possible but unlikely.  20'x20'
light hazard k11 or k14 depending on pressure again. 

To an extent the only thing an FPE could add to most projects is style.
Maybe a little judgment in life span by spec'ing thicker wall or joining
methods.  But again that's style in the performance during fire.

Is our better cook book really the reason for the differences between MPE
and FPE?     

Chris Cahill, P.E.
Fire Protection Engineer
Sentry Fire Protection, Inc.
 
763-658-4483
763-658-4921 fax
 
Email: [email protected]
 
Mail: P.O. Box 69
        Waverly, MN 55390
 
Location: 4439 Hwy 12 SW
              Waverly, MN 55390

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 11:03 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: another fire - this will be interesting

I've had that discussion about the HVAC group just putting an "X" on the
drawing and stating "Provide HVAC systems per the applicable codes and
standards" and got a deer in the headlights response.

But clients in our business usually will take what you tell them they need.
Most of the resistance to doing detailed FP engineering comes from within
our own house. And again it's a matter of whether the competition is doing
it or not and your price is competitive with the detailed FP work or it's
best to drop it and put it on the contractor so the cost is not reflected in
the engineering cost estimate.

Over the years I've seen more and more design being shifted off to
contractors in various disciplines as a way to reduce engineering costs.
It's a money game because ultimately nothing is for free.

I've even seen in-house PM's bypass engineering directly and hire a design
build contractor who subs all the disciplines out to design build subs.  No
engineering dollars spent at all, makes him look real good and real
profitable.


Craig L. Prahl, CET
Fire Protection Specialist
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 Paul Pinigis
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 11:46 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: another fire - this will be interesting

The lack of detail on the engineer's sprinkler drawings is often dictated by
the client, not the A/E firm.  For example, the Navy will not allow us to do
detailed designs because they (like many others) believe that will lead to
change orders.  Somehow they don't have a problem with the HVAC engineer or
the plumbing engineer showing their detailed designs.  I would like to see
equal treatment; the HVAC engineers should show a hatch pattern on the floor
plan with a note that says "deign ductwork to provide a comfortable
environment.".

Paul Pinigis, P.E.
Life Safety Department Head



-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 10:57 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: another fire - this will be interesting

You'll have to do more than just make your magical FPE's appear from the
sky, you'll have to change the mindset of an entire industry.

For too long the A/E industry has felt it was a waste of time and money to
do detailed design for fire protection, the thought being that since the
contractor did all that for free, why duplicate the effort.  Less hours
spent on fire protection meant more hours to be used by someone else or
could be saved altogether.  That makes the PM look good, hours
unspent=bigger bonus.

So even if you did have your super FPE's appear, they would still not be
able to produce the documents the contractors would love to see.

Trying to educate project managers, schedulers, department managers
etc...... is an uphill battle.  They don't understand the FP industry, how
it works, who does what, submittals to AHJ's, minimum information required
on a drawing package, when in the course of the project fire protection
needs to start and finish, what info is needed to do the fp design work
(when you are doing more than an "X" on a drawing, and the list of obstacles
goes on and on.  Next project, you start the battle all over again.

Other disciplines don't understand the rules you have for head spacing,
deflector distances below decks, obstructions, water pressure and flow
issues, etc. Most think FP as being able to move where ever so they have
more room and are often told that very thing by their supervisors.

You don't know how many times I've been told by ME's who are supposed to be
responsible for FP work that it is so confusing.  What's scary is most
probably know just enough to pass the FPE.  So that's obviously not the
answer to the overall problem.




Craig L. Prahl, CET
Fire Protection Specialist
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 George Church
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 11:24 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: another fire - this will be interesting

We'd need several hundred qualified FPEs (or equal) to fall out of the sky
in order to do what you  say, as desirable a concept as you present.
That and a couple thousand more so we contractors can put them on staff so
we can evaluate water supplies and perform hydraulic calculations in
accordance with the SFPE White Paper (unless the more recent revs have
allowed us to calc systems like we've been doing as an industry since there
were calcs).

Instead we have FPE-Plumbing Designer ACTING like FPEs despite being only
casually familiar with our industry, codes, standards, materials,
etc.- i.e., practicing outside their area of competence.

And so we don't just call this PE bashing, I'll point out that contractors
evaluating water supplies- and that would be all of us performing calcs
based on some flow test, ours or someone elses- need to be aware of lowest
tank gradient, the importance of correcting for elevation and other
corrections needed to move the data correctly from the test to the floor
flange. I have a project where my competitor doing an adjacent building on
same site off same main is using a flow test result that is 10 PSI higher
than mine, with twice the flow. I've become familiar with the site, water
supply, and did a more accurate test than they did, I guess that's the price
of being able to sleep at night.

glc

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Pinigis
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 10:35 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: another fire - this will be interesting

Very well said John.  This is exactly the approach that we take; we look at
the building or project holistically and our fire protection engineers
direct the architect, mechanical, electrical, structural, telecom, etc. to
ensure coordination and compliance.

Paul Pinigis, P.E.
Life Safety Department Head

Hankins and Anderson
Consulting Engineers
4880 Sadler Road Suite 300
Glen Allen, VA 23060
v: (804) 285.4171 f: (804) 217.8520
d:(804) 521-7011

http://www.haengineers.com



-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Drucker
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 9:46 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: another fire - this will be interesting


Simply put "fire protection" is not seamless. Often enough it's a patchwork
of pieces and parts assembled without a clear and common objective. We see
this everyday with smoke detectors being installed in unsprinklered elevator
hoistways because no one told the alarm engineer that sprinklers had been
eliminated by the sprinkler engineer, or fire dampers installed in one hour
walls in fully sprinklered buildings because no one told the mechanical
engineer. The disconnect with the fire service is yet another example, site
planning left to the civil engineer without regard to fire protection needs.

What we need are MEPF firms, engineering firms that employ and fully utilize
fire protection engineers to look at the big picture, assess, plan, design,
coordinate and supervise cost effective and efficient fire protection
solutions.

If as a fire protection engineer you're simply designing fire alarm or
sprinkler systems you are not working to your full potential !  There are
firms that provide life safety analysis to provide passive fire protection
solutions, often coined working for the "dark side" they nonetheless do what
others are not, looking at the big picture. High rise sprinklers in Chicago
or San Diego anyone ?

So how does the active fire protection community counter this claim, perhaps
by long term planning, synergistic value driven engineering. It goes all the
way back to codes and standards, how many cycles did it take to recognize
sprinklers in fully sprinklered buildings for notification survivability on
fire alarm systems ?

One stop shopping ladies and gentlemen, one stop shopping.

Sincerely

John Drucker
Fire Protection Subcode Official (AHJ)
Building/Fire/Electrical Inspector

Safe Buildings Save Lives !



-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chris Cahill
Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 10:36 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: another fire - this will be interesting

Ron said "(I suspect the savings in mains, hydrants, fire stations,
apparatus and firefighters is way more than a wash in fully sprinklered,
planned communities than the cost of sprinklering schools)."

Were these savings realized?  Last I read which was a long time ago there
was very little saved on the reduction in the list you provided.
They never actually followed through in reducing mains and limiting stations
etc.  I will certainly say in the macro scale these saving are not being
fully realized.  Hell we still have fully paid stations in many departments
that average < 1 call a day and plenty more that are < 2.  As a pay-per-call
volunteer I saw more fire than many paid guys in these parts.

Chris Cahill, P.E.
Fire Protection Engineer
Sentry Fire Protection, Inc.

763-658-4483
763-658-4921 fax

Email: [email protected]

Mail: P.O. Box 69
        Waverly, MN 55390

Location: 4439 Hwy 12 SW
              Waverly, MN 55390

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman
Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 2:05 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: another fire - this will be interesting

Good point so far overlooked. There's also the dubious "saved foundation"
success that may have not been worth the risk of going into harm's way. And
no one has brought up the environmental advantages of sprinklers--less
smoke, less destroyed building materials to dispose of, less dirty water to
process and, of course, less water used overall. And the Scottsdale less
public money spent on firefighting infrastructure (I suspect the savings in
mains, hydrants, fire stations, apparatus and firefighters is way more than
a wash in fully sprinklered, planned communities than the cost of
sprinklering schools).

On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Dave <[email protected]> wrote:
> Since we are offering up various thoughts and theories on the general
application of sprinklers .....  Regardless of how much egress time is
allegedly available or occupant ability to respond or even construction
materials & methods - there still is a fire in a building -  Presuming we
get everyone out safely and that eliminates the 'life safety need for
sprinklers' will we then NOT call the fire department to respond??
>
> Once there's a fire in a building there is another completely real
> life
hazard in play - the responding emergency personnel.  Some may enter the
building and be very close to harm's way and others may respond and have
ancillary functions - traffic control, EMS, crowds etc.  Regardless of the
specifics we can generally agree that a fire in a non-sprinklered building
will be larger than the same fire in a sprinklered building.
It's not always the fire but medical emergencies or trips & falls that
create the threat of harm.  The larger the fire the greater its duration and
intensity
- all of which increase exposure and life safety risk to responders.
>
> Personally I don't get behind the non-combustible and limited or low
> fuel
load argument as a valid application of sprinkler omission.  Maybe thats
just my narrow focus or perhaps its because I've been to alot bigger fires
in non-sprinklered buildings than sprinklered buildings.  The closer you get
to the gun - the bigger the bullet.
>
> Thanks & Happy New Year
> Dave P.
> Fireman first and always.
> _______________________________________________
> 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)
>



--
Ron Greenman
at home....
_______________________________________________
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)

CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY:
This email message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity
to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged and
confidential, nor is it, unless specifically stated, intended to be relied
upon by any person or persons other than the individual or entity named
above and no warranties or representations are made or intended to persons
or entities not named above.  If the reader is not the intended recipient,
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of
this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone, return
this message to the address above and delete all copies.  Thank you.

_______________________________________________
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)

_______________________________________________
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)
_______________________________________________
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)

_______________________________________________
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)

Reply via email to