I'll throw in a few comments, simply to illustrate the sometimes
frustrating interaction with PE's who drive up the cost of a project
without developing better fire protection for the owner occupant.
Case in point - last year another forum dweller and I dealt with a PE
who insisted that the Tyco CC2 concealed space sprinkler was not listed
by a nationally recognized laboratory, and "it must be approved (if
there is such a thing)." The discussion began when the designer showed
a 1,300 sqft remote area for these sprinklers, as the system was dry,
which matched the design criteria from the catalog data sheet
perfectly. The reviewing PE demanded a 1,950 sqft remote area, and
refused to budge from that position.
Examples of the comments:
*Listings and approvals that only apply to the "service conditions" in
Tyco's design manual are not acceptable.
*Show me the NFPA section that you are talking about.
*AFSA has no authority in [jurisdiction] so AFSA's interpretation has
nothing to do with anything.
When asked in email if they could get on the phone and discuss the
issue, the PE responded by saying "There is nothing to talk about. I
suggest you read the comments I have sent you, again, and just do what I
ask. That would make things much simpler."
In the end, there were no changes made to the design as a result of
those comments, we went "over his head" to someone who had a better
understanding, and it was resolved. It was a scary encounter. Made
more so by the weight of those two letters.
*Ken Wagoner, SET
*Parsley Consulting***
*350 West 9th Avenue, Suite 206
*Escondido, California 92025
*****Phone 760-745-6181*
Visit our website <http://www.parsleyconsulting.com/> ***
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
