I've seen two answers so far that rely on Aristotelian logic. The first with how something operates and the second political. While both may ultimately be correct, the tight sheetrock may act as the escutcheon ring and the rules behind this may be political we don't know. What we do know is that not having the escutcheon means that in this case a part of a rated assembly is not present and that that assembly was tested and listed with that part present. We also know that UL is satisfied enough with the results of testing to grant this sprinkler head a listing (I'm presuming it's a listed assembly) to put their name on it and that the manufacturer is willing to say that if installed properly this product will work as advertised. It may very well work but we can't know if it's missing a part. So maybe turns into won't function as a conservative default. As for the big, scary government and silly rules Hud has standards and it's incumbent upon an owner, reaping whatever benefit he gains by putting himself under HUD oversight, to comply with those rules. I see no difference in that than me replacing my old shake roof with composition to gain an insurance benefit. It's their policy to charge X for shakes and Y for comp. Or taking it to the extreme paying Ethnic Johnny every week so "accidents" don't happen. Each level of this has decreasing government oversight, but each level has it's own rules of engagement that I must meet to play.
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Paul Johnson<[email protected]> wrote: > Jay, > > This looks like another example of our government dollars hard at work. > > I am not aware of anything that states a sprinkler will or will not operate > without the escutcheon. Maybe a manufacturer's rep would be willing to > write a short statement explaining that while sprinklers and escutcheons are > listed assemblies, the sprinklers will operate without the escutcheon in > place. Whether or not that gets the 17-point ding removed will be another > issue. > > Paul Johnson > Bardane, Inc. Visioning a competitive workforce > (407) 401-7154 - Office > (407) 399-5081 - Mobile > [email protected] > www.bardane.net > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jay Stough > Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 9:42 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Escutcheons > > I have a customer that was hit by HUD as having a sprinkler that will not > operate because it is missing the the trim ring on a semi-recessed > sprinkler. They have since put one on, but the problem is they got hit with > 17 points out of a hundred for not having a working sprinkler. Under HUD, > there is no re-inspection until the next time it is due. So you take a hit > with all other types of ratings due to this inspection. I didn't see > explicitely that the trim ring is required in 25, and I know it is part of a > rated assembly from the manufacturer, but does any one have any ideas for a > rebuttal to help get this reduced or removed as a major deficiency? They > can contest the finding, but replacing the trim ring does not count, you > need to show that the sprinkler will operate. The funny part is, in the > picture it looks like the installing contractor did not put the escutcheon > on because the drywall was too tight around the base ring! > > > Jay Stough > _______________________________________________ > 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 Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Bates Technical College Tacoma, WA Member: SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA AFAA _______________________________________________ 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)
