The Navy does not allow them. No reason provided If my old memory is working I think they originally required a hanger within 3' of a horizontal mechanical tee. It at some point was modified to no horizontal mechanical tees then to no mechanical tees on new work. I never heard any reason for the changes
David Canham Fire Systems Solutions Sent from my iPhone On Jul 19, 2013, at 2:05 PM, Charles Thurston <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Craig, > > Been done in North of the border in South Carolina also. > > Friday, July 19, 2013, 11:28:18 AM, you wrote: > >> South of the border I've seen entire systems installed with nothing >> but mechanical tees. They didn't fabricate anything. > >> 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] > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Matt >> Grise >> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 11:04 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: RE: Mechanical Tees REPLY > >> 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 >> _______________________________________________ >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > > -- > Best regards, > Charles mailto:[email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > 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
