LMAO! No soup for me ehJ. Not like that at all Roland. It was good advice given to me by a wise man; and if I was a betting man I would take it ;)
I guess I’m maybe looking at this a bit differently as many jurisdictions here (Ireland at the moment); will allow FM Datasheets in lieu of NFPA (sometimes they use EN10255). When dealing with a jurisdiction that has adapted FM Datasheets in the specification for a project, it is used in entirety without looking at NFPA or EN. That being the case (i.e. purely using FM Datasheets), I would think that you can use an ‘ESFR’ as a non-storage sprinkler in a non-storage occupancy utilizing the non-storage criteria within FM 2-0, including the obstruction criteria (provided the sprinkler is FM Approved as both a Storage Sprinkler and a Non-Storage Sprinkler. However this would also involve utilizing the hydraulic criteria that accompanies said non-storage occupancies (density/area type versus number of sprinklers at end sprinkler pressure). Pending water supply, sprinkler K Factor, etc. it may be unfeasible, however I would think that it would be in compliance with FM Datasheets if you can calculate as such. If you are required to meet both NFPA & FM, then it would seem if you can space and calculate it to meet requirements of NFPA and can simultaneously space and calculate per the non-storage spacing and calculation requirements of FM (Area/Density), then you could treat obstruction per NFPA ESFR requirements and use FM non-storage criteria for obstruction criteria for FM compliance (as you’d be treating it as HC-whatever). Pending project criteria there might still be a substantial saving in not having to provide the 4’x4’ spacing requirement in FM, etc. It would partially depend on how many obstructions are less than 4’ but greater than 2’, flat continuous/non-flat non-flat obstruction and such. Messy stuff when mixing booksJ. Best Regards. Damien Shannon. On 11 June 2015 at 22:23, Roland Huggins <[email protected]> wrote: > You make me sound like the Soup Nazi - lmao. My closer friends on the > Forum make a point of beating me about the head and shoulders every chance > they get. Even Brad and I occasionally exchange emails off Forum and he’s > the closest I have ever come to trying to skin someone alive and I don’t > expect him to agree with me either. So any time the mood strikes, break > out the bat. I currently don’t see where we have a disagreement unless you > are saying that the obstruction rules for ESFR are not required to be > applied. > > FM and NFPA 13 criteria have diverged in their individual methodologies > and the two are now so different that they’re effectively speaking > different languages. > > NFPA 13 has allowed ESFR and CMSA to be used in ordinary hazard > occupancies for some time (typically expected to occur when an occupancy > change occurs with an existing system). It wasn’t until the 2013 edition > that their use in a light hazard occupancy was blessed (see section 12.6.7). > > With NFPA 13 being the standard required by the building codes, we still > have to ensure that the requirements of 13 are also satisfied. > > Roland > > > > > Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering > American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives > Dallas, TX > http://www.firesprinkler.org <http://www.firesprinkler.org/> > > > > > > > On Jun 11, 2015, at 12:45 PM, Damien Shannon <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Now I know for sure that I have been specifically warned not to disagree > > with Roland :) however just to throw my 2 cents in... > > > > My understanding is that if you are utilizing FM Datasheets, that really > we > > shouldn't be using the term ESFR (although manufacturer's datasheets > still > > title them as such). However it is not a term used in FM 2-0/8-9. Rather > > they simply use the term 'Storage' or Non-Storage'. In the FM Listing > > section of some ESFRs (e.g. > > http://www.vikinggroupinc.com/databook/sprinklers/storage/060198.pdf < > http://www.vikinggroupinc.com/databook/sprinklers/storage/060198.pdf>), > they > > are specifically listed for Non-Storage as well as Storage. My > > understanding is that you can utilize these sprinklers per the > requirements > > of Tables 1-3 of FM 2-0 and the respective obstruction criteria when > > dealing with HC1 thru HC3 occupancies. The K-Factors in those table (HC 1 > > thru 3) would indicate that they are including 'ESFR' (aka Storage) > > sprinklers in their HC1 thru HC3 criteria. > > > > With all respect. > > > > Damien Shannon. > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > -- *Damien Shannon* _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
