Chris asks the pertinent questions. My read is no different but stated in somewhat different terms. There is NO requirement in 13D to sprinkler garages at all and therefore the document is silent as to an appropriate strategy. Since there is no guidance in the standard (presumably adopted with your building code and therefore a part of that code) what guidance should you use? If you go to the only places where guidance occurs (13R & 13) how would your garage fit either criteria (one of the three versions in 13R or OH1 in 13)? Will your AHJ declare on paper that it is one of the two documents that will guide the design and choose which one thereby giving you, the contractor guidance beyond the prescription that you would otherwise have to follow or be engaging in engineering without a license? Or will he declare on paper that he has engineered a garage system not prescribed and has decided a 0.05 density with 2 heads flowing will be adequate no matter what should happen? Who is doing this engineering outside the guiding documents and who will be left holding the bag? Maybe we're OK 'cause the structure is all concrete and there will just be cars, but a commercial parking garage just has cars. Maybe in 13R you can get away with less than OH1 in some configurations because we presume the garage will be small and there will not be more than two cars. Maybe it has nothing to do with the cars but more to do with the wide open spaces. I don't know. And I know you don't know 'cause you're worried. And I doubt the AHJ knows. If he is going to tell you to do something beyond the scope of the prescriptive document I'd want that in writing along with my own letter stating my concerns.
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Chris Cahill <[email protected]> wrote: > 13D does not contain a reference to OH. 13D is the standard for SFH. 13D > does not contain a sq.ft. limit for application. Here’s a question or two. > > Do, in your opinion, feel the intent to delay flashover will be met with a > 13D in the garage? Do you believe 13D has a clear intent to the treatment > of a garage (nothing actually required, right)? Do you believe 2 head 13D > calc is MORE than required? Do you believe more time will be afforded to > occupants by providing a 13D in the garage even if it does not control the > fire as the intent of the higher 13 standard? Do you believe your actions > put anyone in danger from providing LESS than what the law requires? Sure > the system might not control the fire and people could get hurt but that > would occur faster if you did nothing as the standard allows, right? The > annex support this approach. > > Those are all the reasons why this is OK legally and even morally, IMHO. > > You can certainly give the base and offer the higher level in the garage. > Then you at least have a positive vs. implied assumption of risk when > declined. > > Life is an STD for your parents and a terminal disease for you. > > 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 Greg McGahan > Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 5:03 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: 13D Large Garge Revisited > > I know this is a very controversial issue (large 13d houses) so I am trying > to get feedback from those who have already evaluated this type of > situation. > > The lowest level of this house on pilings on the beach is enclosed and lands > at about 8,500 sq ft. It is being called a "Garage" and has a poured in > place concrete ceiling that consists of roughly 14' x 14' bays in which the > beams are about 14" deep - therefore it is obstructed construction. > > The AHJ is asking for us to provide steel pipe and perform a 2 head 13D calc > since he considers it no more hazardous than a normal home garage. We have > not been awarded this contract and the bid war is still on or I would throw > caution to the wind and say that it needs to be OH and calc accordingly. > However, that would require a separate fire main and all that includes as > the intended 2" Domestic line would not supply an OH calc. > > My though was to do a 4 head calc and use SSU sprinklers. Would I space them > at 130 sqft or 225 sqft if I were to attempt this arrangement. Or is there > any factual data to say that we must go to OH in this instance? > > Thanks for your help. > > Greg McGahan > > Living Water Fire Protection > (850) 937.1850 | Fax (850) 937.1852 | Cell (850) 554.3231 > > _______________________________________________ > 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, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC _______________________________________________ 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)
