In a jurisdiction near Bruce there was one Ron Greenman ...On the phone
On Oct 15, 2012, at 12:49 PM, "Bruce Verhei"<[email protected]> wrote: > The jurisdiction I worked for has had a whole series of these fires. Fire > burns up till attic is reached, and attic is burned off. On occupied floors > windows break out and fire bursts into living areas. Heads operate on each > floor. We've only had three floor structures, not four, with this scenario > (at least sprinklered). 10-22 heads total operate. Fire is controlled in the > living areas. This includes systems installed back with the old PB heat fused > systems, as well as listed CPVC. > > Structures stripped down to the framing, new roof trusses, some ceilings > joists removed and replaced, or sistered in, building dried in, structural > members dehydrated for awhile, then units rebuilt, has been typical. Oh, > first electrical and sprinklers isolated so adjacent stacks can be occupied. > > Bv > > > Sent from my Motorola ATRIX™ 4G on AT&T > > -----Original message----- > From: Tom Duross <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Mon, Oct 15, 2012 22:28:04 GMT+00:00 > Subject: RE: 13R balcony protection > > 10-12 years back, apt complex called the Rosecliff 1/2 mile south down > Willard Street from NFPA. BBQ on 2nd level (called a Balcony in the news), > up the exterior and into the unsprinklered attic (13R). Nobody died > thankfully. > I've had Owners argue that the plan says 'deck', so why do I need to > sprinkler? > Wishing I was in HI... > TD > > > Chris, in Eastern CT, we had 2 fires (in the same city) where unprotected > porches added significantly to the extent of fire damage. That was one of > the deciding factors here. > > > At 08:53 AM 10/15/2012, you wrote: >> Curious on the addition of balconies. It has been that way (without > balconies) in 13R for 20 years...what caused the change now? >> >> >> The 2009 edition of the IBC added the balcony must have a roof or deck >> above regarding required sprinkler protection. Nothing regarding >> whether the overhang on the top floor is a driver. Additionally, the >> 2013 edition of NFOA 13R finally acknowledge the supremacy of the code over > standards in driving such matters and added the below text. >> >> >> 6.6.5* Except as provided for in 6.6.5.1, sprinklers shall not be required > in any porches, balconies, corridors, carports, porte cocheres, and stairs > that are open and attached. >> >> 6.6.5.1 Where a roof or deck is provided above, sprinklers shall be > installed to protect attached exterior balconies, attached exterior decks, > and ground floor patios serving dwelling units in buildings of Construction > Type V. >> >> 6.6.5.1.1 Where sidewall sprinklers are installed beneath decks or > balconies constructed with open wood joists, sprinklers shall be permitted > to be installed with deflectors not less than 1 in. (25 mm) or more than 6 > in. (152 mm) below the structural members, provided that the deflector is > not more than 14 in. (356 mm) below the underside surface of the deck. > systems, or other reliable means capable of maintaining a minimum > temperature between 40°F and 120°F (4°C and 48.9°C). >> >> Roland >> >> >> >> >> On Oct 8, 2012, at 4:50 AM, Todd Williams wrote: >> >>> The Connecticut Fire Safety Code (at least the part that is based on >>> the IFC) includes a requirement that exterior balconies and patios be >>> sprinkelred in 13R occupancies. However, this is being interpreted >>> that they have to be protected regardless if there is any structure >>> above or not. Consequently, we have to install sidewall sprinklers >>> under 9" door moldings because they open on to a patio or deck (just >>> got a plan rejected for this). This make no sense to me because they >>> would most likely never activate, but this is being enforced as the >>> law. Anybody else run into this? >>> > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachments/20121015/46a273e2/attachment.html> > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
