The intention is to provide a buffer zone between two dissimilar hazards where the higher density extends 15 ft beyond the physical end of the higher hazard. This way if a fire began at the edge of the higher hazard area, the higher discharge sprinkler system is more likely to respond than if you ended the sprinkler systems right at the imaginary line which physically separates two different areas of use.
It has nothing to do with where you place the hydraulic design area. That's dependent on your layout. Craig L. Prahl, CET Fire Protection CH2MHILL Lockwood Greene 1500 International Drive Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax - 864.599.8439 CH2MHILL Extension 74102 [email protected] On May 8, 2013, at 9:14 AM, Ralphy Henderson <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, NFPA 13 quoted at bottom w/ the relevant code section: > > With the 15 ft. extending into the lesser hazard is the intention to make > this extended area part of the hydraulic design area (to be included in > calcs) or simply to extend the results of the calculations into this area? My > impression is the latter but I would like to see if people concur with that. > > Thanks, > RB > > > > > > NFPA 13: 2007 > > 11.1.2 > > (1) Where areas are not physically separated by a barrier or partition > capable of delaying heat from a fire in one area from fusing sprinklers in > the adjacent area, the required sprinkler protection for the more demanding > design basis shall extend 15 ft (4.6 m) beyond its perimeter. > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
