Criticism -> change: "ChatGPT can pass the bar exam" Probably (Pb > 0.8) false, but remains unproven. "ChatGPT passed a law school exam" True
Scot Deal Excelsior Risk & Fire Engineering gms: +420 606 872 129 On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 9:16 AM å... .... <[email protected]> wrote: > Does air volume matter? It depends. Consider a plastic commodity that > when packaged, is 99% air by volume (exclusive of air in the expanded > plastic). I would not count such a dominant air volume in my consideration. > Consider another plastic commodity that is 9% air by volume. This time, > not counting this air volume would be for me, parsing with too much > granularity. > > > Commodity classification involves judgment-with-uncertainty (as > wrote Bellamy, O'Conner and Steppan, Gates [1,2,3]), and that is good > because it is job security. ChatGPT can pass the bar exam; AI can replace > most of our jobs (if we can only find an acceptable way to program human > corruption into its code). NFPA is just one commodity classification tool. > FM has a different version, and Fig. 3 of DS 8-1 (revision Apr 2021) may be > just the ammo for you to be good to go. However, if AI were doing our job, > I would program it to consider longer time boundaries than only today. Does > your client want flexibility in selling their structure in the future? Will > client packaging remain the same forever? What level of risk tolerance does > the client have? What risk tolerance does the engineer-of-record have? > > > In general, plastic storage containers and pallets drive the fire > protection. You did not mention pallets, but Matsuda did. You did however, > mention cardboard containers, and this is a favorable factor (tip that hat > to old school). > > > Beware the man of but one book. NFPA is good. But a stakeholder by > definition has a stake; NFPA wraps themselves in immaculate > indemnification. Take a look at FM D-S 8-1; Figure 3 and Table 2, they will > help you. FM: they got skin in, and in some instances, the very talented > employees there will share their expert opinion. > > > Crowdsourcing this judgment-with-uncertainty is brilliant. Crowdsourcing > has proven improvements in accuracy. We need more open judgments, not > closed-door decisions (aka Redlands and Evansville grounders). Advancement > comes from change. Change comes from criticism. Criticism comes from open > judgments. Democracy and accuracy die in darkness. > > ------- > > [1]. Bellamy, T. “How to Determine Commodity Classification It’s Not as Easy > as You Think”, www.telgian.com > > [2]. O’Conner, B., “Commodity Classifications in NFPA 13” Jan 18,2022, > www.nfpa.org > > [3]. Steppan, D. Gates, C., “Reassessing the Fire Risk of Changing > Commodity and Packaging”, Aug 17, 2017. www.sprinklerage.com > > > > Scot Deal > Excelsior Risk and Fire Engineering > gms: +420 606 872 129 > Civilization is a race between education and extinction h.g. wells > > > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 7:29 PM Rick Matsuda <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I’m old school and I find it difficult to read and interpret the current >> codes so I make my best WAG’s based on what I believe to be the intent. My >> basis is from the old 231 storage definitions that didn’t have the >> percentage of volume requirements that are so difficult to calculate. >> >> Class 1- noncombustible so it doesn’t burn. >> Class 2- Class 1 in a box or crate that will burn. >> Class 3- combustible so it burns. >> >> You should upgrade one or two classes if there is an “appreciable” amount >> of Group A plastic packaging or if the storage is on plastic pallets >> instead of wood pallets. >> >> So your metal product is a Class 1 and you upgrade to Class 2 with the >> plastic tubes. To be safe, you can upgrade to Class 3 cause your system can >> still protect it. >> >> Class 4- Class 1, 2, or 3 with “appreciable” amount of plastics. >> >> Therefore, my WAG’s says that it’s a Class 3 commodity. >> Just cause I’m curious, what exactly is this metal piece that’s packed in >> a plastic tube? >> >> Rick Matsuda >> >> >> On Feb 1, 2023, at 12:21 PM, Scott Futrell <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Keep in mind that depending upon the IFC edition that is adopted the IFC >> used to have tables that did NOT match NFPA 13. So, if you haven’t, look at >> the IFC, too. >> >> >> >> Scott >> >> >> >> *From:* Fpdcdesign <[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 1, 2023 11:45 AM >> *To:* Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers < >> [email protected]> >> *Subject:* [Sprinklerforum] Re: Definition of Volume >> >> >> >> To complicate matters further, this project is in a jurisdiction using >> the 2013 edition of 13, which only states 5% by weight or volume of Group A >> or B plastics. No difference between expanded or non-expanded. >> >> >> >> Todd G Williams, PE >> >> Fire Protection Design/Consulting >> >> Stonington, CT >> >> 860-535-2080 (ofc) >> >> 860-554-7054 (fax) >> >> 860-608-4559 (cell) >> >>
_________________________________________________________ SprinklerForum mailing list: https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
