I think the 16 square feet came from when I was doing research on the donut fryer and the most flow points I could get over deep fat fryers (erroneously extrapolating multiple restaurant fat fryer criterion to industrial cooking equipment) added up to 16 square feet. I may also not have been too thorough and quit looking when it dawned on me I was looking for love in the wrong place and the systems were not appropriate for these applications. And by the way, I believe Tyco was unable to meet all the criteria of UL300 with the EA-1 (1/4) (the 1/4 being the only EA-1 style listed for commercial cooking) and deleted the restaurant application cut sheet from the catalogue in November of 1992 (Tyco guys out there for confirmation?). Since UL does not "un-list" things, systems utilizing EA-1 (1/4) that are still in service are still listed. I have a couple of brand new (OEM) EA-1 (1/4) manufactured prior to November 1992 if anyone needs them and wants to make a large contribution to my retirement fund.
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 10:29 PM, David de Vries <[email protected]> wrote: > Ron: > > You are right about the vegetable oil and high efficiency deep fryer issues > that led to the UL 300 standard and predominance of wet chem systems. 17A is > the standard for pre-engineered wet chem systems whose application is for the > protection of commercial cooking operations. The pre-engineered part really > amounts to what the manufacturer sets as the limit for their system and UL > tests to determine that it meets it. As far as I know, all the mfrs. of wet > chem systems focus on typical restaurant appliances, not the large, > production cooking equipment that has been the topic of this thread. > > As to a hard limit of 16 square feet; I don't think so. For example, one > mfr. has a listed 6 gallon system that can cover 18 flow points. A nozzle to > protect a typical single well deep fryer is 2 flow points, while a typical > two to four burner range can be protected with a 1 flow point nozzle. So, if > you had a gang of range tops and protected four burners per nozzle, you could > have about 12 four burner range tops of about 4 sq ft each for 48 sq feet of > appliances, plus the plenum and duct nozzles, protected by a 6 gallon > system. There are, of course, other limitations like total volume of piping, > length of the detection cable, etc. that could further limit the system. On > the other hand, at least one mfr. has an option for ganging cylinders > together to cover up to 48 flow points. > > Bottom line, if the mfr. does not have instructions that is part of their UL > listing for protecting a particular appliance, then a wet chem 17A system is > not appropriate, as you pointed out. > > Disclaimer: The above is my opinion only and is not the opinion of NFPA or > the Tech Comm on Dry and Wet Extinguishing Systems. > > > Dave > > David A. de Vries, P.E., CSP > Firetech Engineering Incorporated > > > > --- On Fri, 10/23/09, Ron Greenman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Ron Greenman <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Re[2]: Report: Antifreeze sprinkler system may > havecontributedtofatalexplosion > To: [email protected], "Coastal" <[email protected]> > Date: Friday, October 23, 2009, 8:57 PM > > > Charles, > > 17A does not address any dry chem at all but I'll assume you meant 17. > In truth 17 is merely a dry chem standard and 17A one for wet chem. > Neither say where they can be used. UL 300 is the listing protocol for > systems protecting cooking appliances. Cooking lines using only animal > fats or not having a tilting tray skillet, flat grill or deep fat > fryer could use dry chem. Only wet chem have been able to meet the > protocols that include vegetable oils and the described appliances > above. Since none of these scenarios are likely to occur there is no > incentive for manufacturers to list anything but wet chem. The big > issues are the vegetable oil and it's higher auto ignition point and > the increased insulation on the appliances that delays the cool down > so much that reflash occurs. As far as I know the largest surface area > that any wet chem restaurant system is listed for is 16 square feet. > Kitchen restaurant systems are not appropriate for industrial > applications under their prescriptive installation manuals. I suppose > you could have systems engineered with any protection scheme. I once > did a donut fryer with H-Ex foam that satisfied the fire department. > Lots of numbers and lots of critical thinking. > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Coastal <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hello Craig, >> >> Kitchen hoods procted to NFPA 17A standard are now UL300 and are a wet >> chemical for the appliance protection and have been for a few years. Yes Dry >> chem is still allowed by NFPA 17A for the duct and plenum BUT the >> manufactures do not allow that combo anymore. >> >> Friday, October 23, 2009, 12:01:03 PM, you wrote: >> >>> See that makes no sense. In kitchen equipment hoods it's usually always >>> some kind of DC or CO2, never water. >> >> >>> 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 Fletcher, Ron >>> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 11:57 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: RE: Report: Antifreeze sprinkler system may >>> havecontributedtofatalexplosion >> >>> It's vegetable oil. >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >>> [email protected] >>> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 8:55 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: RE: Report: Antifreeze sprinkler system may >>> havecontributedtofatalexplosion >> >>> If the oil is not miscible, good luck with that scheme. What did the >>> insurer use as the basis for that idea? >> >>> Typically for oil quenching or dip tanks or similar you would use local >>> app. DC or Foam or maybe CO2 depending on conditions and MSDS data. >> >> >> >> >>> 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 Fletcher, Ron >>> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 11:45 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: RE: Report: Antifreeze sprinkler system may have >>> contributedtofatalexplosion >> >>> It isn't a very thin layer of oil. We are doing 4 fryers that are 6 ft wide >>> by 18 ft >>> long and hold about 250 gallons of oil at 325F. They run potato chips >>> through on a >>> conveyor. I'm not sure but I think the oil is at least 4-6 inches deep. I >>> even have a >>> letter from an FM type insurance company confirming the water deluge for >>> the fryers. >> >>> One of my concerns was amount of free board in the fryers. At about 150 gpm >>> we will >>> over flow the free board in a couple minutes. Then everything goes to the >>> trench drain. >> >>> We priced deluge, LP CO2 and Hifog. Deluge was least expensive, CO2 double >>> the cost of >>> deluge and mist was double the cost of CO2. The owner chose deluge. >> >>> Ron Fletcher >>> Aero Automatic >>> Phoenix, AZ >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Roland >>> Huggins >>> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 7:40 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: Report: Antifreeze sprinkler system may have >>> contributedtofatalexplosion >> >>> that's for a flat surface (thin layer of oil) verses a pan of oil (or deep >>> aft fryer) >> >>> Roland >> >>> On Oct 23, 2009, at 5:51 AM, Fletcher, Ron wrote: >> >>>> Interesting video. Have you seen FM Data Sheet 7-20 Oil Cookers? It >>>> says to put a deluge system discharging at 0.5 gpm per sqft over the >>>> hot oil surface. >> >>>> Ron Fletcher >> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://fireball.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 >>> [email protected] >>> http://fireball.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 >>> [email protected] >>> http://fireball.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 >>> [email protected] >>> http://fireball.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 >>> [email protected] >>> http://fireball.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) >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Charles Thurston >> Coastal Fire Protection >> Coastal mailto:[email protected] >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://fireball.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, WSAFM > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.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 > [email protected] > http://fireball.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, WSAFM _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.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)
