Two things that stand out for me are: 1) I see no ref to NFPA 255 in their testing data or Tech. spec 2) I see no interface with the APA for use with light weight construction referred to in their promo.
If it hasn't been tested to 255 it won't replace fire sprinklers. And if they haven't checked with the APA how will they know if it's compatible with the glues and resins used for TJI's LVL's ML's PSL's or any other composite including plywood and wafer board. Mo question's than answers. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Fox Duane T. (FireMarshal) Sent: Friday, November 19, 2010 8:14 AM To: '[email protected]' Subject: RE: Fire retardant coating The No Burn folks came to Delaware a few years ago wanting to "treat" a wood truss roof to omit sprinkler coverage. We looked at their research. Their product I believe was tested more as an interior finish type application. You should really look at the listing and testing they have done. The wood needs to meet the same specs with No Burn applied as fire treated lumber from the factory. The real issue was the field application. Fire treated lumber which can be used as an exception in NFPA 13 is treated at the factory to certain specifications. We questioned who would be applying, and who would be certifying if the wood trusses were "treated" properly. There are application thickness requirements for the product to meet the testing criteria. Then we questioned a re-application need down the road. Because the product was to be applied at the job site we did not allow it. Duane T. Fox, Jr., CFPS, CFI, CFPE Asst Chief, Technical Services DE State Fire Marshal's Office _______________________________________________ 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)
