Larry, Can't disagree with any of that regarding the cooler and in the end, as I keep saying I'm seeing an appliance, completely manufactured and then shipped as an essentially plug and play unit. As you say my comments are purely theoretical also. As to the salt bath the building housed nothing but the unit, was of non-combustible construct and, at least on the sides, a decent overhang of a canopy would be with two or three feet of the building walls and no more than ten at the ends. A canopy was used and cost multi thousands of dollars. It all ended up sort of being a salt bath in the middle of a field (at least a hundred feet away from any buildings) with an unsprinklered shed above it and then enclosed in a slightly larger building surrounding it. I don't recall the dimensions but say 20 x 40 on the machine, 26 x 46 on the hood and 30 x 60 on the building. I just don't think the potential loss or threat to (non-existing) adjacent buildings justified the requirement for the sprinklers which became another cost on top of the hood. Enough for this one. Enjoy your Sunday.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 6:25 PM, larryshulman <[email protected]> wrote: > Ron; most modern, insulated foam core refrigeration sandwich panels in use > today use an expanded or extruded plastic foam on a metal or wooden frame > with either a foil, aluminum, or steel facing. The loss control challenge > is that when exposed to a heat source; the metal can expand or warp, > exposing the combustible foam to surface burning. The solution is using a > minimum thickness metal skin that will resist thermal caused movement and > has adequate mechanical fastening to prevent buckling. Without these, the > installation of automatic sprinklers could be warranted, even if the > occupancy is noncombustible and not needing sprinklers. > > My commentary in this thread is entirely theoretical, because I am not > acquainted with the specific cooler and the surrounding occupancies. If I > were, I might immediately agree sprinklers are not warranted. In my 32 > years with Factory Mutual, it was infrequent to see coolers not needing > sprinklers, but it did happen occasionally. > > Flame spread ratings are terribly misunderstood and applied. They only give > a relative value of combustibility against a particular benchmark and are > determined under very controlled laboratory conditions that may be totally > irrelevant to the way the product is used in an installation. That's why FM > Global developed its well known corner test decades ago to more accurately > measure the true fire spread potential of plastic products used in > construction features. > > The salt bath issue does have a commonly used solution: Place a > noncombustible canopy over the bath to shield the sprinkler water from > above. I believe this solution has been in the standards a long time. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman > Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 3:03 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Walk-in cooler > > Larry, > > Now we're on the same page except we don't know there's any foam or > plastic involved and if there is how is it rated. My household > refrigerator has a plastic interior and a metal exterior but I haven't > a clue as to the insulation between wherein I've seen enough walk-in > coolers to take an educated guess if I see another that it's made with > light metal cladding on a wooden frame with fiberglass insulation. > Because I can enter the one and use it to store anything in large > quantity it makes sense to sprinkler it due to it's contents or > potential contents (powdered zirconium being kept below it's > auto-ignition point of about 70 degrees (I believe, might have my > powdered metal wrong) or perhaps only blocks of ice) whereas my little > appliance with sheets of thin plastic for walls, but enclosing a small > volume behind closed doors) is hardly a fire load worth considering. > But even if I have a plastic lining or foam insulation what is the > flame spread rating of the product? I was once required to sprinkler > over a molten salt bath even though the manual said in bold print in > multiple places not to do so. The AHJ was immovable stating that the > building had to be protected as well as the occupants. The fact that > the footprint of the building was about five feet all around larger > than the machine, that the building was of non-combustible > construction with the worst being a limited combustible insulating > material, that the 1000 degree salt was being used to clean and etch > metal parts before powder coating in a different building, that the > building sat alone in an industrial park and posed no exposure threat, > and that water hitting the salt posed a far greater and more immediate > danger to the five guys in the building than any fire likely to occur > meant nothing. Somehow the local AHJ had a better clue than all the > engineers and lawyers that brought this product to market. We respond > similarly when we equate one thing with another due to apparent or > assumed equivalency based on some superficial manifestation and then > begin to deduce logically from there. > > On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 1:32 PM, larryshulman > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ron; thanks for the explanation, as it helps quite a bit. If it is indeed >> portable (like the coke machine you compare it to) and there is no fire >> potential, then I agree there is no need for sprinklers within. But, I >> remain unconvinced that construction is noncombustible because the skins > are >> metal. They may be insufficient or improperly anchored to prevent the > foam >> beneath from burning. >> >> >From FM Global Data Sheet 1-57: >> >> "The intent of thermal barriers and/or metal sheathing (not foil facing) > in >> sprinklered applications is to delay ignition of the plastic for 10 to 15 >> minutes to allow sprinklers time to control the fire. In noncombustible >> occupancies, thermal barriers (not metal skins) allow non-FM Approved >> plastic building materials to remain without sprinkler protection. For the >> thermal barrier to be effective, it must remain in contact with the foam > (or >> the panel skin. When EPS or board stock polyurethane sheathing or > sandwich >> panels are used, the smooth surface will allow the use of board stock >> thermal barriers. These barriers are not suitable for polyurethane that is >> sprayed in place. The uneven surface resulting from this application will >> not allow proper contact with the sheathing. >> FM Approved coatings or Portland cement plaster, 1/2 in. thick, will > provide >> an adequate thermal barrier for polyurethane or EPS. To ensure adhesion, >> metal lath secured to the building structure is used with cement plaster." >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron > Greenman >> Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 12:35 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Walk-in cooler >> >> Larry, >> >> For some reason this thread has been entitled walk-in cooler which is >> not what Tony described. Instead he described a beverage >> cooler/dispenser, very large I'll grant you, but he also said it was >> completed full of beverages when loaded and (I suppose) those tilted >> beverage racks when empty. Sounds a lot like my refrigerator. I once >> had an AHJ pull this same interpretation on me (probably why I'm still >> caring while Tony dropped the topic days ago) and the device was >> essentially a very large coke machine, fork-lifted into place (just >> like a refrigerated deli counter would be) then connected to power. >> Sprinklering this thing required penetrating two steel walls >> (structural of about 20 or 22 gauge) exposing the heretofore metal >> encapsulated insulation to the building and the interior of unit to >> protect against a potential fire in a three foot deep metal box >> resting on the floor with glass doors that contained steel shelves >> holding glass bottles and metal cans containing beverages comprised of >> mostly water. The only way to call this an occupancy would be to use >> it for something it wasn't designed for. It has never been referred to >> as walk-in and it's always been seven feet high, three feet deep and >> thirty feet long. I'd even be willing to tentatively bet its three >> units side by side. Now all this is predicated on what I'm imaging >> this thing to be based on the description, but even if its a built in >> place box of the dimensions described it's still a little box with no >> appreciable fire load (non-combustible construction with >> non-combustible contents (and not being useful for any other use >> without going to extraordinary means) in the middle of a presumably >> sprinklered building. >> >> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 11:32 AM, larryshulman >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Regrettably, this section of NFPA 13 is poorly written. The word >> "occupancy" >>> here is not preceded by the word "human". The term "occupancy" is > defined >>> by the NFPA in their Glossary of Terms, found at: >>> http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF/GlossaryA2004.pdf >>> >>> Occupancy is simply the purpose or use of a building or part thereof. >>> >>> The section also uses the words "portable" and "attached to the finished >>> structure" in nearly the same breath. This is doublespeak and leads to >>> confusion, which allows the reader to make any of multiple >> interpretations. >>> Not a good direction to go and it needs to be fixed. >>> >>> A cooler such as the one discussed is really a substructure, very similar >> to >>> an ordinary hard wall/hard ceiling room. The fact that it might be >>> preassembled and use insulated core walls and ceiling does not make it >>> "furniture" under this section. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Fairchild, >>> Jack >>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 1:52 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: RE: Walk-in cooler >>> >>> You are correct, industrial ovens where pre-heated, high pressure oil is >>> present requires sprinklers as do some flammable liquid storage cabinets. >>> This is neither of those. >>> >>> >From NFPA 13, 2007: >>> >>> (7) Furniture, such as portable wardrobe units, cabinets, trophy cases, >> and >>> similar features not intended for occupancy, does not require sprinklers >> to >>> be installed in them. This type of feature shall be permitted to be >> attached >>> to the finished structure. >>> >>> >>> Jack Fairchild, CFPS | Fire Protection Designer | Ballinger | v >>> 215.446.0596 | f 215.446.0597 | 833 Chestnut Street Suite 1400 >>> Philadelphia, PA 19107 | >>> www.ballinger-ae.com<http://www.ballinger-ae.com> >>> larryshulman larryshulman at earthlink.net >>> >> > <mailto:sprinklerforum%40firesprinkler.org?Subject=Walk-in%20cooler&In-Reply >>> -To=44587969A9EB6A458C2664D74F80F9FB3D57B6D1%40mail-3> >>> Fri Apr 24 15:10:01 CDT 2009 >>> >>> >>> I'm confused how if the space is inhabitable should be a criterion for >>> >>> installing sprinklers. After all, sprinklers are installed inside >>> >>> industrial ovens and flammable liquid storage cabinets all the time. >> Nobody >>> >>> in this discussion thread has asked if the cooler construction warrants >> the >>> >>> installation of sprinklers. Although the surface of the cooler walls and >>> >>> ceiling may be metal lined, what happens if it is exposed to heat, warps, >>> >>> and exposes the foam insulation beneath? That's why UL Listed or FM >>> >>> Approved panels need to be used, to ensure the construction materials >> don't >>> >>> contribute to the fire load. >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> >>> From: sprinklerforum-bounces at >>> >> > firesprinkler.org<http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerf >>> orum> >>> >>> [mailto:sprinklerforum-bounces at >>> >> > firesprinkler.org<http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerf >>> orum>] On Behalf Of Fairchild, >>> >>> Jack >>> >>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 11:13 AM >>> >>> To: sprinklerforum at >>> >> > firesprinkler.org<http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerf >>> orum> >>> >>> Subject: RE: Walk-in cooler >>> >>> >>> >>> I don't see how a 10' deep box could not be a walk-in style. There's two >>> >>> main problems. The required slope of the shelves would drive the height >> of >>> >>> the box beyond 7' and loading the box from the front would very difficult >> to >>> >>> manage. It's too much weight to push. It could be front loading from > all >> 4 >>> >>> sides of the box. Personally if you can walk inside, you need a >> sprinkler, >>> >>> otherwise it's really large furniture. Also at 7' high it's likely the >>> >>> required 18" clearance isn't going to be met. >>> >>> >>> >>> Jack Fairchild, CFPS | Fire Protection Designer | Ballinger | v >>> >>> 215.446.0596 | f 215.446.0597 | 833 Chestnut Street Suite 1400 >>> >>> Philadelphia, PA 19107 | www.ballinger-ae.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> George, >>> >>> >>> >>> I don't recall it being described as "big insulated panel box.' In >>> >>> fact I think Tony said he hadn't seen it. Go back a post or two. My >>> >>> thought is that if this thing is a factory manufactured device that >>> >>> is brought out on a truck, dropped off and plugged-in (even if it >>> >>> comes in large sub-assemblies that just plug into each other) then >>> >>> it's a big reefer and not a room or space. >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>> >>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum >>> >>> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: techsupport at >>> >> > firesprinkler.org<http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerf >>> orum> >>> >>> >>> >>> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:Sprinklerforum-request at >>> >> > firesprinkler.org<http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerf >>> orum> >>> >>> (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) >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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) >> > > > > -- > 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) > -- 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)
