Nope. Escalators are a convenience appliance so no standpipes required at escalator landings. They don't count for squat in the egress plan and are pretty much always open ...
Steve Leyton Protection Design & Consulting San Diego, CA -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd Williams Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 4:36 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: side by side standpipes So if you have a 4-story mall with escalators, you have to put a standpipe on each of these as well? At 07:07 PM 3/25/2009, you wrote: >ignoring convenient stairs as already addressed, it I certainly would >not be the one ATTEMPTING to argue just because the design added more >exits than minimally required I can leave out standpipes just because >of such loose wording. IF you provide extra exits they all are >treated as full fledge exits and get all the bells and whistles of the >other exits. There is room to dance but I suggest to my members to >keep their butts in the chairs until a better song starts. > >Roland > >On Mar 25, 2009, at 3:36 PM, Chris Cahill wrote: > > > Dude, the standard is clear in every required exit stair. Even the > > IFC uses > > similar language. If it ain't required you don't need a standpipe. > > As a FF > > I of course think that would be bad design as I would have no idea > > when the > > building is on fire which stairs are required and which aren't. > > Thus I > > wouldn't know where to find standpipes. As an FPE I agree with > > myself the > > FF. Further I'd walk from a job (in a normal economy) where the > > standpipes > > weren't in every stair leading to an egress. In this economy I'd > > certainly > > write lotsa CYA letters for the only job we would have. (Sorry I do > > need to > > eat). As a former AHJ I'd fight for every stair until the judge > > overruled. > > My only case lost as AHJ was over an exterior standpipe for a > > Cathedral > > copper reroofing job where the Chief wanted a standpipe to reach the > > top > > (over 250' above grade no access from the inside). Tactically the > > Chief was > > right but the City Council sided with God's representative. Once that > > happened the City couldn't proceed to a judge. I assume I'm going > > to Hell > > anyway so arguing against God really didn't chance anything. > > > > Now I can't think of a place where a stair was there but not > > required, but > > it is certainly theoretically possible. (Assuming something can be > > "certainly theoretical") Closest comes to mind is a convenience stair > > connecting several floors. Some might go to street some might not. > > > > In a legal contest the required part is going to be key if all the > > experts > > like the architect show up and have all the exiting calc's done > > showing the > > stair in question is not required. My money is on the NFPA committee > > believes all stairs get standpipes but that is not what they wrote - > > Steve..... > > > > > > In a legal deposition (or worse on cross in front of the judge) on > > the side > > of the standpipe how are you going to answer the questions along the > > line of > > > > > > Mr. Huggins have you reviewed the Architects exiting analysis? > > > > Assuming you had the follow up is - > > > > Mr. Huggins is there anything wrong with the analysis as it applies > > to the > > minimum requirements of the Code? > > > > Assuming there wasn't - > > > > Mr. Huggins does the analysis show the stair in question is required? > > > > And you wouldn't have gotten this far if it was required - > > > > Does the IFC and NFPA 14 refer to standpipes in required stairs? > > > > You really are in a corner to say yes - > > > > And finally Mr. Huggins what does the LAW say about non-required > > stairs? > > > > I'd guess you'd respond "nothing, but...." > > > > And your counsel will have no choice but to drop the matter. > > > > I try to use my powers for good so let's change the IFC and NFPA 14 to > > change this loop hole. Might be as simple as dropping the word > > required. > > > > Now I don't know if Greg's stairs are required or not. I tend to > > think they > > are required so really the discussion is mute but it does reveal a > > flaw in > > the code that until now I had not thought of. > > > > 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 Roland > > Huggins > > Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 4:36 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: side by side standpipes > > > > Just because the design exceeds the minimum number of exits needed to > > meet the travel distance does NOT allow you to say the extra exit is > > not REQUIRED so no standpipe in it. If it is an actual stairway exit, > > it is considered required. > > > > Roland > > > > On Mar 25, 2009, at 9:46 AM, Greg McGahan wrote: > > > >> This is an unusual case - it is not for volume or congestion - there > >> are 4 stairs, (2 sets) within 50-60 feet of each other in an > >> amusement building. You pay to go up but you get to come down for > >> free. > >> > >> My thoughts were since the hose valves are serving the same area it > >> is overkill to calc 1,000 gpm at an elevation of only 50' - manual > >> wet should be allowed per law, but the EOR says auto is what he > >> wants, serving about 14,000 sqft per floor. > >> > >> But Ok, I got what I needed - thanks. > >> > >> Greg McGahan > >> Operations Manager > >> > >> Living Water Fire Protection > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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) Todd G. Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, Connecticut www.fpdc.com 860.535.2080 _______________________________________________ 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)
