I am seconding Roland's comments. The answer you received is incorrect. I also better use the NFPA caveat for technical committee members and say that this is just my opinion and shall not be taken as an official interpretation of the NFPA or any of its technical committees.
However Roland and I are members of the committee that covers this topic. John Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 22, 2014, at 6:37 PM, "Roland Huggins" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > You need to contact NFPA again and ensure they correctly understood your > question. If you get the same answer, then make sure you ask for Matt Klaus > so he can educate the junior staff. Ron hit it on the nose. Combine with > Ken’s reference to the definition of ceiling height with 11.1.1 that states > the design basis can apply to a PORTION of the system. Also means a system > can have more than one design basis (a common occurrence). > > I better use the NFPA caveat for technical committee members and say that > this is just my opinion and shall not be taken as an official interpretation > of the NFPA or any of its technical committees. > > Roland > > Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering > American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives > Dallas, TX > http://www.firesprinkler.org > > > > > >> On Aug 21, 2014, at 4:34 PM, Steven P. Biship <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I actually called NFPA a couple weeks ago for an "unofficial interpretation" >> for this exact subject with regards to ESFR sprinkler installations. I was >> told that the term "Maximum Ceiling/Roof Height" found in the tables applies >> to the maximum building height of the structure, regardless of the area of >> storage. I personally don't agree but that was what I was told. >> >> Steven P. Biship, FPE, CFPS >> 4214 Floyd Drive >> Corona, Ca. 92883 >> >> P: 951-427-3781 >> F: 951-427-3655 >> C: 714-984-4346 >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] >> On Behalf Of Parsley Consulting >> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 3:57 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: ESFR Table 17.2.3.1 NFPA 13 2013 >> >> Greg, >> I would look at the definition of ceiling height in 3.3.3: >> >> 3.3.3 Ceiling Height. The distance between the floor and the >> underside of the ceiling above (or roof deck) within the area. >> >> It would seem to me that this definition backs up the perspective that Ron >> has added. >> >> Has nothing to do with the roof height, only the height of the ceiling in >> the area of storage. >> >> If a storage area in a high rise had an 28' ceiling, and yet the building >> was 22 floors high, you certainly would not design based on a 22 story >> "ceiling height." >> >> Just one perspective. >> *Ken Wagoner, SET >> *Parsley Consulting*** >> *350 West 9th Avenue, Suite 206 >> *Escondido, CA 92025-5053 >> *****Phone 760.745.6181* >> Visit our website <http://www.parsleyconsulting.com/> *** On 8/21/2014 3:46 >> PM, [email protected] wrote: >>> I would say the maximum height is meant to apply the area of storage and >> not the maximum height of the entire building. "A.17.2.3 Storage in >> single-story or multistory buildings can be permitted, provided the maximum >> ceiling/roof height as specified in chapter 12 is satisfied for each storage >> area." If there were a high bay above 48' with in racks and the remainder of >> the building was at <40' would you use area density with in racks in the 40' >> area because there are no ESFR's listed for greater than 48'? >>> Ron F >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Sprinklerforum >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >>> Gregg Fontes >>> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2014 2:06 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: ESFR Table 17.2.3.1 NFPA 13 2013 >>> >>> A question has come up that in Table 17.2.3.1 the column that states >> Maximum Ceiling/Roof Height applies to the maximum Ceiling/Roof height of >> the building, not the storage area. As an example, if a warehouse has >> cartoned expanded plastics storage to 25' high in a portion of the warehouse >> that has a roof/ceiling height of under 32', but the ridge height of the >> building is 33'-0, they are suggesting that the cartoned expanded plastic >> cannot be stored in the building because the ridge height (not the area of >> storage) is above 32'. There reasoning is that the table applies to the >> entire building, not the area of storage. Therefore if the highest point of >> the building exceeds the list table height, even though the storage area >> roof height is under the table height, the table cannot apply. Is this a >> correct assumption or is the maximum height meant to apply to the area of >> storage? >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Gregg Fontes >>> Cen-Cal Fire Systems, Inc. >>> 209-334-9119 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
