You are forgetting about the actual droplet hitting the unfused head. That is 
the reason there are minimum spacing requirements. It takes some time even in 
the hottest part of the plume to transfer a droplet to steam.  The time it 
takes to evaporate the water is dependent on the initial droplet size.  We are 
rightfully moving in a direction of encouraging larger droplets (more so 
storage).  It doesn't take a lot of not quite vaporized droplets hitting the 
unfused heads to keep them from fusing.  Yes, in a theoretically large fire, 
eventually the unfused head does operate.  But if we are waiting for it to grow 
to theoretically large we probably better call our insurance company to get the 
investigators to the black hole while the evidence is fresh.    

And ponder this.  Last time I read the UL testing they tested at 6' apart and 
the same elevation at 100 psi.  But in real life adjacent heads could be 11" 
vertical and almost 175 psi.  Makes me think there could be some issues in some 
probably rare circumstances.  I looked into this once when I saw the heads 
running along the BL  two up, one down due to where they landed in the trusses. 
Granted the pipe of the one down does offer some protection but made me think 
anyway.    

Chris Cahill, PE*
Senior Fire Protection Engineer, Aviation & Facilities Group
Burns & McDonnell
8201 Norman Center Drive
Bloomington, MN 55437
Phone:  952.656.3652
Fax:  952.229.2923
[email protected]
www.burnsmcd.com

Proud to be one of FORTUNE's 100 Best Companies to Work For
*Registered in: MN




-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brad 
Casterline
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 7:47 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: baffles

I would argue baffles not required. It is a special situation any time you 
can't get 6' min, probably using 'Special Sprinklers'. I believe 6' is the 
generic situation. Since they are already there, uhhh... I'm looking at an exit 
sign right now with heads on both sides of it. Any time a head operates the 
nearby heads are cooled by water vapor in the ceiling jet. If the fire in these 
special situations is not controlled by one head, it will 'un-solder' the one a 
few feet away, seems to me. We should put the cost toward avoiding obstructions 
to the pattern, not fabricating approved ones!

-----Original Message-----
From: AKS-Gmail-IMAP [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 10:25 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: baffles

The baffle is supposed to be able to stay in place. First compare the softening 
temerature point for the plastic and the sprinkler temperature rating. The more 
expensive plastics soften at a temperatures way above typical sprinkler 
temperatures. Even if the plastic is not melting away it may have lost enough 
strength so that it no longer functions as a baffle at first blast, where upon 
it will become rigid again in a deformed state if it is still there. That is 
the nature of a plastic. This takes you to the next item. How the baffle is 
held in place influences how well the baffle will stay in place in its greatly 
temperature reduced strength state. In case you are thinking glass, the problem 
with glass is that it needs to survive a temperature change shock and may 
itself drop out of its holder onto people below. You cannot drill bolt holes in 
some heat resistant glass.  So you are pretty much stuck with plastic if you 
want it clear. Get a candy thermometer and heat up water i  n a large cooking 
pot to 150 F or so. Put the baffle in there and leave it for a long enough time 
so that it has become as soft as it will get. That might be 8 minutes or more 
at least. Pull it out and use some vise grips gripping it in the way it will be 
attached to see how soft it really is.
That test should tell you a lot. Let us know what you find out.

By the way, and it is probably too late now, only the more expensive hard 
plastics, like what might be used in a hockey rink, will not be scratched so 
easily from the wiping down cleaning it might get.

Allan Seidel
St. Louis, MO
 

On May 13, 2013, at 11:56 PM, A.P.Silva <[email protected]> wrote:

> NFPA 13 requires baffles (between sprinklers) to be non-combustible or 
> limited-combustible. The contractor has installed plexi-glass baffles, 
> and claims that is what is normally used and has been approved on 
> previous projects.
> 
> Any comments?
> 
> Tony
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Reply via email to