Please bear with me for not letting this topic go but I need to confirm
something. I cannot remember the last time I dealt with adjacent hazards that
were not separated by a partion.
NFPA 13 '10 A11.1.2 leads me to believe that if a .3 density hazard requires
2500 s.f. then the remote area for that hazard would take in that area and as
much of the .2 density hazard area as necessary to fulfill the 2500 s.f.
(understanding that the .3 would not be required for the .2 area).
That doesn't seem just to me. If the .3 area plus the 15' border doesn't cover
enough area to attain 2500 s.f. then use only all the area it does involve plus
the border because the .2 occupany isn't the same fire threat.
Does that make any sense?
Russell
________________________________________________________________
Sent via the WebMail system at brownautomatic.com
_______________________________________________
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)
