I think your asking if it is acceptable to convert an existing pipe
schedule with standard response sprinklers to quick response
sprinklers. Although you aren't required too change them since it is
existing, if I were you AND the sprinklers were going to be changed
anyways, I'd go that route.
Good question since the schedule was defined using the SR sprinklers.
Lets start with 13:22.5.1.2 (2010 ed) which only restricts the k-
factor, not the thermal response. To put your mind at ease in case
you were thinking that it could mean that the TC just has been asked
or thought about this issue, read on. Unlike storage (where we have
a faster growing, more challenging fire that could cause too many
sprinklers to open), LH or OH would only benefit from a faster
response (as shown by the same density but smaller area for all spray
sprinklers).
Roland
NFPA required caveat that this is my opinion and not that of NFPA or
any of its technical committees.
On Jul 2, 2012, at 8:14 AM, Todd - FPDC wrote:
I am recommending replacing all of the sprinklers on a pipe schedule
system in a school. SR or QR heads?
Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
