It is a mixed bag. Take whateverworks for you. BS, ISO, FM, NPFA, performance-based, GCC. Listings and approvals seem to go with what the EoR knows. sure, you can say, I want UL/FM listings.But are they going to pay? Are they going to wait? Saudis, Kuwait and Qatar may. Not all will play that way. Europe is closer, and sells many products that are better. I see products coming in from East and West and the North of us.
By proximity, you end up getting most items tested to European standards, which as we know, has some fire tests that are superior, some that are not as relevant. Which Code to use is a grab bag. Responsibility seems to fall mostly on the designer. I don't think the judicial system is set up formally for class action lawsuits. On the other hand, if your design is bad and someone in authority thinks you have played a bad hand, well, how you plan to get out of that land? As a note: I would keep designs as simple and reliable as possible. The probability of keeping complicated systems in working status should be a serious consideration. Most sprinkler systems require pumps, so right there, a big question is raised in my mind in terms of reliability. clean agent systems sound so sexy. i really wonder how many saves we will see, from these costly multi-layered systems, that are not getting a reliable back-up. There also seems to be a fear of water damage from sprinklers based upon --- lack of experience with sprinklers. this fear is permeated in european as well as pan-Asian decisions. scot deal excelsior fire _______________________________________________ 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)
