Currently Brad Casterline is frantically working up a model, give it a few days and I’m sure he will post a response 😊
Rocci Cetani III, CET Senior Designer Water-Based Fire Protections Systems Layout, Nicet Level III Northern California Fire Protection Services Inc. 16840 Joleen Way Bldg. A Morgan Hill, CA 93037 P-(408) 776-1580 EXT.111 F-(408) 776-1590 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> www.norcalfire.com<http://www.norcalfire.com/> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message and any document accompanying it may contain confidential information belonging to the sender. The information is intended only for the use of individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying or taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by telephone to arrange for return of the documents. From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 3:43 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: QR/SR Sprinklers John, you can’t mix them. So is it the bulb size I can’t mix or the listing in the application? What if it’s a fast response link in a typically QR sprinkler that is listed SR in this application? I think your reasoning and Nick’s and mine all have merit, but I think we’re trying to parse out what this all means in 13. I’m just reading the rules without concern for which is best in an actual situation because then you gave to ask which works first and then if more than one goes which is best. I don’t think the code can tell us that. On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 3:28 PM John Denhardt <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: My 3 cents. I would us the QR. The other sprinklers are QR but in this application, they only receive the SR. QR provides better protection in my opinion. John John August Denhardt, P.E. Strickland Fire Protection On Feb 15, 2018, at 5:28 PM, Ed Kramer <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Reference section 8.3.3.2 of the 2013 edition of NFPA 13: “Where QR sprinklers are installed, all sprinklers within a compartment shall be quick-response unless otherwise permitted in 8.3.3.3.” Section 8.3.3.3 isn’t applicable for this question. I’m protecting an OH II sales area with EC sprinklers spaced (mostly) at 18’x18’. This particular sprinkler is listed as SR at that spacing, but is listed as QR for 14’x14’ and smaller spacing. This sales area has a small 20 sf nook (not a separate compartment) that requires an additional sprinkler. My intent is to protect that nook with a K5.6 sprinkler. Should the K5.6 sprinkler be SR or QR? The answer is probably SR since the EC sprinklers are installed at a spacing that has a SR listing. But that would be mixing a standard-response element with a fast-response element – something I’ve been led to believe is not cool. The 2016 flavor of NFPA 13 has a new section 8.3.3.5 that allows mixing a SR listing with a QR listing as long as it’s the same sprinkler (and therefor both have the same fast-response element). Anybody want to give their 2 cents? Ed Kramer Bamford Fire Sprinkler Co., Inc. 5134 Merriam Dr./Shawnee Mission, KS 66203 Phone: 913-432-6688 Fax: 913-432-5294 Cell: 785-766-4894 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org -- Sent from Gmail Mobile
_______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
