I have seen them prohibited under nfpa 13 6.4.6.1 because they are not a one-piece fitting (the saddle and also the strap). I did not agree with the interpretation, but that was the given reason.
Matt Grisé PE*, LEED AP, NICET II Sales Engineer Alliance Fire Protection 130 w 9th Ave. North Kansas City, MO 64116 *Licensed in KS & MO 913.888.0647 ph 913.888.0618 f 913.927.0222 cell www. AFPsprink.com -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 9:50 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Mechanical Tees REPLY Ladies/Gentlemen: As designers/specifiers (former fitter/installer), I see no reason to prohibit mechanical tees from (vitually) any commercial project. Our PE/FPE's do not restrict their use and, frankly, they can come in pretty handy at times. If anyone knows of an actual "Code"/NFPA-13 citation, I would sure love to hear it. That said - and engineering "judgement" acknowledged - if the project spec's prohibit MT's - then they cannot be used, in my opinion. They are used on our projects all the time. Also, our inspectors (retired State Fire Marshals) have no 'grievances' against MT's. "Roust-a-Bout" fittings - now that is a different matter. Are they still used?? Regards to all, Jerry [email protected] Jerry D. Watts, SFPE President & Co-Founder ACCENT FIRE ENGINEERING INT'L. Ltd.* Santa Fe, New Mexico USA (800) 503.1961 *Licensed Fire Engineers - Architects/Inspectors/Fire Investigators: AZ CA CO NM NV NY TX UT KS MD MS _______________________________________________ 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
