Whether each floor is supplied through a floor control valve, or piped
vertically from a common horizontal main on the 1st floor, I believe that
the compelling factor is in the typical spaces, pipe sizing, routing, etc.

Another scenario would be where the floors are zoned separately (from a
standpipe) and are not typical; however, a proven limitation on how many
sprinklers can be supplied through a given size of branch line is
calculated.  Hope this doesn't muddy up the conversation too much.

Curtis


-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Leyton [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 12:29 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Calculating Typical Floors

"... obvious by comparison ..."    That's pretty simple for an
experienced technician or plans reviewer, but perhaps not so simple to
someone with less experience or who's intent on the most literal and trying
interpretation and enforcement of the standard.

Again, what information is gained by calculating typical floors that are of
similar (or typical) layout and sizing, except for the static head
gain or loss between floors?   The annex material notwithstanding,
what's the point?   I'd ask that question in writing ...

SL



 




-----Original Message-----
From: Sprinklerforum
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Duane
Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 10:22 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Calculating Typical Floors

You can try (although I wouldn't) using this paragraph too. I have typically
used this to request additional calcs, but you can try it for your
situation...by comparison, it should be obvious that you selected the
hydraulically most demanding and therefore you do not need additional calcs.
Good luck.

A.23.4.4.6 When it is not obvious by comparison that the design selected is
the hydraulically most remote, additional calculations should be submitted.
The most distant area is not necessarily the hydraulically most remote.

Duane Johnson, PE
Design Manager
Strickland Fire Protection
5113 Berwyn Road
College Park, Md. 20740
301-474-1136 Office
301-455-0010 Cell
[email protected]



-----Original Message-----
From: Sprinklerforum
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Duane
Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 1:16 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Calculating Typical Floors

I agree with you on the hydraulically most demanding area needs to be
calculated. One should be able to use reason that if the floors are the
same, and the highest floor works hydraulically, the others will have a
larger safety factor because there is less friction loss due to elevation.
Likewise in a warehouse with multiple risers, one typically does not provide
calcs for each riser/zone.


As far as your defined system goes...

A.3.3.22 Sprinkler System. As applied to the definition of a sprinkler
system, each system riser serving a portion of a single floor of a facility
or where individual floor control valves are used in a multistory building
should be considered a separate sprinkler system.
Multiple sprinkler systems can be supplied by a common supply main.

Duane Johnson, PE
Design Manager
Strickland Fire Protection
5113 Berwyn Road
College Park, Md. 20740
301-474-1136 Office
301-455-0010 Cell
[email protected]



-----Original Message-----
From: Sprinklerforum
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve
Leyton
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 12:42 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Calculating Typical Floors

NFPA 13 states in 23.4.4.1, "For all systems the design area shall be the
hydraulically most demanding based on the criteria of Chapter 11, Chapter
12, or the special design approaches in accordance with the requirements of
Chapter 22."

So unless each floor is defined as a "system" (which we know not to be the
case), then the standard only requires that you pick THE most demanding area
for each system.  Sometimes, we do multiple calculations but it's generally
because we don't want to size all the Light Hazard rooms for the few OH or
limited storage that may occur as accessory use
elsewhere under the same system.   So picking the uppermost of a series
of typical floors is consistent with that intent, so long as the lower
floors are sized per the uppermost one.

What is the plans reviewer's substantiation for the requirement, i.e.
what do they think they're going to find out beyond the static head gain
by going down a floor at a time?   Are designers in this jurisdiction
taking the pressure gain and re-sizing pipe as they drop floor by floor in
buildings such as this?

SL

 




-----Original Message-----
From: Sprinklerforum
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Curtis
Tower
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:14 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Calculating Typical Floors

We have had several projects rejected by the plans examiner recently because
we didn't hydraulically calculate each floor.  These are multi-story
residential projects with typical floor plans.  Some of the projects are
zoned per floor, but others are piped with the main on the first floor and
supplied with the CPVC branch lines running vertically through the walls.
This is possible, as mentioned, due to the identical nature of the unit
layout of each floor.

 

The Section Manager of the sprinkler review department evidently interprets
the standard to require hydraulic calculations for every floor, regardless
of typicality.  Does anyone see this as a correct interpretation or
necessary?  I've asked him to provide the section of the standard that he is
relying on to justify this.  

 

It seems somewhat burdensome, considering all things remaining the same
except a drop in elevation, one could reasonably expect an increase in
available pressure to the system on the floor below.

 

Curtis Tower

Sr. Fire Protection Specialist

Central Fire Protection

Office:  (214) 496-9797

Mobile:  (682) 667-0323

Fax:  (214) 496-9201

 

_______________________________________________
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


_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Reply via email to