>From the IBC (free online): 903.3.5 Water supplies. Water supplies for automatic sprinkler systems shall comply with this section and the standards referenced in Section 903.3.1. The potable water supply shall be protected against backflow in accordance with the requirements of this section and the International Plumbing Code.
Duane Johnson, PE Program Manager Division of the Fire Marshal (Contractor) Office of Research Services National Institutes of Health 301-496-0487 "Protecting Science - One Sprinkler at a Time" -----Original Message----- From: Cesar Lira [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2014 11:20 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Steeply pitched roof Hi, everybody. Where can I use or where INEED to use a back flow preventer there is any rule for that???.. Regards.. -----Mensaje original----- De: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] En nombre de Todd - Work Enviado el: jueves, 03 de abril de 2014 02:31 a.m. Para: [email protected] Asunto: Re: Steeply pitched roof I ran into this situation with a sanctuary in a historic church several years back. The geometry was such that not all of the requirements of NFPA 13 could be met. We handled this similar to what has been described here. Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT www.fpdc.com 860-535-2080 (ofc) > On Apr 3, 2014, at 5:19 AM, "Dan Arbel" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ronald, > > This is a very old provision. > > The sprinkler spray is clearly disturbed. > > Do you know if this provision is based on any test? > > Dan > > > www.riskmanage.com > Tel: 972-4-8243337, 972-777-504-011 > Fax: 972-4-8243278, > [email protected] > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Roland Huggins > Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 11:26 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Steeply pitched roof > > I would not focus on the phrase shall be permitted (which taken by > itself means optional). I would focus on the portion that states to > maintain a horizontal distance of 24 inches. Combine this with Figure > 8.6.4.1.3.3 that dictates the 4 ft separation is a minimum leads to > the interpretation that you must be 2 ft away on each side and you are allowed to exceed the 36" > vertical maximum to accomplish it. > > Roland > > > Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering > American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives > Dallas, TX > http://www.firesprinkler.org > > > > > >> On Apr 2, 2014, at 11:17 AM, Juan Munguia <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> My opinion is section 8.6.4.1.3.3 requires a minimum horizontal >> clearance of 24 inches, and therefore allows the deflector to be >> located at a vertical distance greater than 36 inches down from the peak. >> >> Juan Munguia > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er.org > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er.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
