I'd say you chose wisely! Plastics are not that good in fire resistance, most are fire retarded to reduce ignition propensity, smoke developed index and fire spread speed after ignition. Cheers
Jack Cahit KILAVUZ +973-3910-7131 +905344140772 Sent from IPhone > On 22 May 2015, at 18:16, David Bitton <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for your response Brad, > > I've decided to take the conservative approach and treat it as an expanded > Group A plastic commodity despite the fire resistance treatment. > > David > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Brad Casterline > Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 9:43 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: "Fire Resistant" Foam > > http://www.mail-archive.com/sprinklerforum%40lists.firesprinkler.org/msg4094 > 9.html > > David, > > I found the above link in the archives. There is no definitive answer but > the responses got me thinking that if the use of a different commodity > classification were allowed the question would then be "OK, what, Class II?" > > I think in order to see the effect of fire resistance treatment, the same > full scale tests that quantify Quantity, Combustibility, and Heat Release > Rate of the non treated commodity, for classification purposes, would have > to have been done to the treated commodity. > > Perhaps I am all wrong but when I think 'Combustibility' I think Fire Growth > Rate, for instance, if LH is a "t^2 Slow" fire then OH1 might be a "t^2 > Medium" fire, etc., so 'resistance' would only make the growth rate slower, > but eventually the water application rate required for control or complete > extinguishment would be based on the Quantity and HRR of the non-treated > commodity... or not! :) ! > > Sorry this is of no help, but I hate to see anyone out there flapping in the > Forum Breeze. > > Brad > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of David Bitton > Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 11:27 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: "Fire Resistant" Foam > > Hello, > > > > I am looking at a warehouse with rack storage of foam used for seat cushions > on mass transit systems (rail and bus). To be used in such applications, > the foam must be tested for smoke generation (ASTM E662), rate of heat > release (ASTM E1354), horizontal burn test (DOT FVSSS 302), and vertical > burn test (FAR 25.853 (2)). The product in question was tested and approved > in accordance with these requirements. My question is does any of this > permit the use of a commodity classification other than expanded Group A > plastic? > > > > Thank you. > > > > David Bitton, ing. > > Les services de prévention des sinistres Quest inc. > > Quest Loss Control Services Inc. > > 5100, rue de la Savane, bureau 200 > > Montréal, QC H4P 1T8 > > (514) 341-4545 > > www.questlosscontrol.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
