That's for class I-IV commodities. I've got plastics. I believe the plastics (and tires, and rolled paper, and idle pallets) mentioned in table 12.1.10.1.1 are when you are there for misc storage. I'm too big for the def. of misc. storage.
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 Parsley Consulting Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:48 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Loading docks Chris, Is there any particular reason that 12.2.2.1.2 doesn't apply? Seems to me your storage is less than 12' high, which sends you - eventually - to table 12.1.10.1.1, where there's a series of protection methods for Group A plastics < 12' high. What you end up with for Group A, solid (unexpanded), exposed, storage 5'-0" or less has a density requirement of 0.20 gpm/sqft over 1,500 sqft. That would most likely be not nearly as demanding as your 25/35 rack storage. That's the way I'd approach it. PARSLEY CONSULTING Ken Wagoner, SET 760.745.6181 voice 760.745.0537 fax [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> e-mail www.ParsleyConsulting.com <http://www.ParsleyConsulting.com> website Chris Cahill wrote: > I got a loading dock in a freezer. It's open to an area of 25' rack > storage. All plastics, including exposed small totes. The HPS design is > rather straight forward. My issue is the loading dock. Would one normally > call a loading dock storage in accordance with '02 ch 12? It's too large an > area to call misc storage because of the 4,000 sq.ft. (it is under 10% of > the building). > > > > Normally the question doesn't make a difference. But in this case I have a > 35' building. So 5' in a 35' building causes 12.2.3.1.5.2 design for 20' > clear. Thus I look at the plastics table and have a 0.85/2600 density > (15'/35', group A, non-expanded, exposed). And because it is open to the > racks I get to carry this density over the racks for 15' which should make > the balancing of the in-racks fun. Did I mention this is an existing > situation? Probably can make it work with the existing supply. But will > need to tear out the whole thing including the PA valve and protecto wire. > > > > This is where the code seems to take me. Any suggestions on is this right > or a better way to look at it that doesn't get this costly? > > > > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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) > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.437 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2936 - Release Date: 06/13/10 19:45:00 > > _______________________________________________ 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)
