I would have thought that if the contractor is to provide an NFPA 13 compliant system, then I would think the listing of a product would have to specifically state that it is listed for use in an NFPA 13 system (maybe it does, I haven't seen the datasheet on the valve in question); without getting into dealing with it as an 'Equivalency'.
Most of the LPCB Approvals I have seen are for installation in accordance with EN12845, but maybe the product being discussed has LPCB Approval for NFPA 13 also. There are so many aspects that NFPA 13 & EN12845 (which is is the Installation Standard that LPCB usually seem to 'Approve' components for use), are so very different that it would seem strange to think you can just start using LPCB Approved parts in an NFPA 13 system. Example 'Conventional Sprinklers' (aka 'Old Style' sprinklers) are approved and common place in EN12845 in a lot of occupancies. The also only require 5 psi minimum sprinkler pressure rather than 7psi. They allow sprinklers at different distances from the ceiling... In the past I have not used parts that have not specifically mentioned on the product datasheet that the listing in for use in an NFPA 13 system (or EN12845/FM 2-0 when working on those projects). Have I been incorrect in this regards? Regards. Damien Shannon. On 16 June 2015 at 13:46, Cahill, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: > Just to be clear this is a Listed product, not a whole lot of debate here. > Nowhere does it say UL Listing. The only requirement really where the AHJ > comes in is "included in a list published by an organization that is > acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction". The only debate might be > if LPCB is acceptable to the AHJ. I believe an AHJ (US Fire Marshal or the > like) would lose every time if they tried to not accept. You need approval > of LPCB, not the application of this product. > > That said I agree with those questioning the need for anything but a plain > wet head. Whenever faced with this I ask the owner how they were dealing > with a power outage or roof leak as examples. With some thinking they > always back off and put their money toward protecting their valuable > information from ALL causes of loss not just an irrational fear of > sprinklers. > > Chris Cahill, PE* > Associate Fire Protection Engineer > Burns & McDonnell > Phone: 952.656.3652 > Fax: 952.229.2923 > [email protected] > www.burnsmcd.com > *Registered in: MN > > > Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Pat Thompson > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 11:40 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: > > We have used this set up for up to 3 sprinklers in 'computer rooms'. > Approval was given by local AHJ of the idea after some discussion as it is > not a listed application. > > A good idea is to install a small drain (1/2 inch) on the drop nipple to > the sprinklers to allow draining after testing or activation; after all the > idea is to keep water out of their precious room. Also, a gauge downstream > of the solenoid to allow visual indication of the pipe being charged. Both > these features are located above the drop tile ceiling. > > The AHJ asked for a UL listed 24VDC solenoid that is normally open - power > holds it closed. By doing so it is 'fail safe', that is to say that in the > case of panel failure or power loss the water will reach the sprinklers. A > small conventional control panel with smoke or heat detection for automatic > activation is all that is needed, the solenoid circuit is on a relay that > opens upon fire detection. > > One drawback is that 24 hours of standby is required in the battery set in > order to hold the solenoid. Because of the current draw of the solenoid > this results in the batteries being larger than what will fit into the > panel enclosure, requiring a separate battery cabinet to house the > batteries. > > Cheers, > > Pat Thompson > ATS Alaska > Direct: 907-375-4176 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of > teemsprinkdave > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 7:09 AM > To: FORUM > Subject: > > Needing a little help, I have a customer wanting to make a small room into > a computer server room. One sprinkler in the room. Has anybody used > a solenoid valve, normally closed, and activated by a heat detector? Trying > to save the expense of a pre-action system. > DAVE GROVER > Teem Sprinkler Co. > Superintendent > NFPA 25 Level II Inspector > P 336-650-9005 > F 336-650-9007 > C 336-399-9006 > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- *Damien Shannon* _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
