I had a similar situation in a Library children’s play area where there were 8 or 10 disc/lighting features all at different heights and some overlapping and 2m to 4m diameter. They were suspended below the ceiling 0.5 to 1.5m . All exceeded our Rules 1m maximum width for obstructions below sprinklers, so required sprinkler protection under and as they were not co-planar and close to each other could not fit the US research on “Cloud Ceilings”.
My understanding is the current US tests on clouds were based on eliminating sprinklers above the clouds when they were in close proximity to the solid ceiling above. Also the clouds were co-planar and in close proximity to each other. In our case we installed sprinklers in each of the cloud discs and fully protected ceiling above. For design purposes we operated two cloud sprinklers and the rest of the design number of sprinklers on the ceiling above to make up the required design area/number. Regards, Russell Gregory Christchurch New Zealand From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tony Silva Sent: Thursday, 7 March 2019 5:15 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Clouds This is for a question I have been asked, and would like to get other opinions. The building is a museum that has 5 to 6 feet diameter clouds simulating a tree canopy. There are so many of them at different elevations, that sprinklering below the clouds is not practical. Has anyone else come across this situation? If so, what has been the solution? I was thinking, instead of providing sprinklers below the clouds, increasing the occupancy of the roof level sprinklers to OH2. Any other thoughts? Tony
_______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
