I separated sliding along the curve from in 'design approaches' from 1.2 wording in 'calculation procedure'
-----Original Message----- From: Travis Mack, SET [mailto:tm...@mfpdesign.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 2:48 PM To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org; bcasterl...@fsc-inc.com Subject: Re: Calc Area Brad: I think you would only have to re-evaluate your lengths if you modified your density. If, because my head layout is irregular, my remote area turns out to be 1620 sq ft and I base my design criteria on 0.10/1500 then I am fine with a minimum remote area length of 1.2*(1500^.5). However, if I interpolate my density to something such as 0.098 / 1640, then I am going to need to have 1.2*(1640)^.5. This is the same as if I am required to do a 3000 sq ft calc. I can reduce my density to 0.07 / 3000, but my remote area length must be a minimum of 1.2*(3000^.5). Am I missing something here? On 4/20/2010 12:44 PM, Brad wrote: > I was shocked when first confronted with the idea 8 years ago--- let us see > what others have to say... > > -----Original Message----- > From: ParsleyConsulting [mailto:parsleyconsult...@cox.net] > Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 2:35 PM > To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org > Subject: Re: Calc Area > > Brad, > > I was intrigued by your remarks about having to re-evaluate the minimum > length of the remote area parallel to the branch lines if you were to > end up with a remote area of a different size than where the standard > initially had you start. > > I can't find anything in my copy of the NFPA-13 handbook, or the > Hydaulic Design text book by Pat Brock from Oklahoma State which even > remotely suggests this is a requirement. > > I've never done this, and I want to be sure I haven't missed something > critical. I need to be sure I understand what you're saying, because > for me the implications are huge for the plans I review on a daily basis > for a number of AHJ's. > > Are you stating that if in order to meet the requirements for a 1,500 > square foot remote area I were to end up with a remote area of 1,600 > square feet I then have to make an evaluation to make sure that the > length of the remote area parallel to the branch lines is at least 1.2 x > sqrt of 1,600? In effect, I need at least 48'-0", not the 46'-5" I > started with? If that's your position, can you give me some idea of how > you determined that such an additional requirement is necessary? > > I've got to tell you that if that is truly the case, I'm in seriously > deep trouble, as I've been doing calculations and plan reviews based on > a flawed premise, and that makes me really nervous. > > Can you give me/us some background on how you came to that conclusion? > > I'd really appreciate the help. > _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
