Matt, I agree with you to a point. I do think you have to be at least conversant in the IBC. Here’s an example:
I am putting a price together on a 3 story wood frame apartment building. The cover sheet on the building plans says “To be sprinklered”. At first look, you might think 13R as it meets the occupancy and height requirements, based on NFPA standards alone. However, if you look into the Code (IBC), The area of the building is greater than is allowed for a building of Class VB construction with a 13R system, therefore it has to be a full 13 system. If this was designed as 13R and submitted, what is going to happen when it gets rejected? Remember, NFPA documents (except 5000) are standards, they tell you how to design and install a system. Codes tell you where they have to go and reference what standard to design to. Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT 860-535-2080 (tel:860-535-2080) (ofc) 860-554-7054 (tel:860-554-7054) (fax) 860-608-4559 (tel:860-608-4559) (cell) > > On Oct 28, 2024 at 10:22 AM, <Matthew Willis1 > (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > > > I knew I was going to take some fire with my response. > > Hell, I even asked Craig to send his directly as I cannot receive his > responses for some reason. > > > > I had typed a response and then deleted it thinking Nah, to long-winded for > a Friday. > > > > However since John picked up his copy of 13 and beat me about the head and > shoulders with it, just kidding my friend, I have re-created my initial > response below. > > > > Yes. if there has been a change in occupancy, which is what this may seem > like, then an engineering analysis is required in accordance with NFPA 13. > > > > However, too many times we as sprinkler designers receive information from > the architectural/engineering design team and a somewhat filled out owners > information certificates, to be used in making our decisions based on NFPA 13. > > > > We receive this information from the professionals. We then use NFPA 13 to > arrive at a decision based on the information presented to us by these > professionals. In the ever-disappearing time frame before us. I am not > allowed to speak to IBC as that is beyond my purview as a fire sprinkler > designer. So, it doesn't even come into play. It is actually very dangerous > if I choose to speak to IBC in these situations. So, I use the information I > have to the best of my abilities. This is done wholly within the confines > that are NFPA 13. I fully understand the Annex. BUT the information Is > present. It may not be "legal". But it was provided for a reason. Otherwise, > I make a motion to delete the annex. > > > > We then present this information to the authority having jurisdiction, > another professional, for their review and acceptance or rejection. If this > then comes back to me for reevaluation, I can at that point then kick it back > with suggestions for further consideration. > > > > Have I let others take these kinds of projects? Absolutely. And I will > continue to do so. Just did this recently on one that made me shake my head > so hard, I had to take Ibuprofen afterwards. > > Many times I will even call the authority having jurisdiction prior to > submission and sometimes prior to design to express my concerns. As you might > imagine, Owners and GC' Really appreciate this. SMH > > > > My whole take is that the problem is getting proper engineering up front. > Requiring it at the back end and linking it to a fire sprinkler designer's > responsibility to handle is not the proper way to handle this. But it is the > Norm, more than the excption. > > > > So, we should focus on the real problem which is getting the engineering > evaluation upfront and not waiting and placing it on a fire sprinkler > designer's shoulders. > > > > I know, and have worked with, many of the PE's on this forum. To a person, > they are on the same page. > > > > It just seems like otherwise this happens far to often. Engineers have E&O. > Why are their feet not held to the fire with this blatant shift of Liability? > > > > My question is why? Why isn't this being addressed where it needs to clearly > be.. > > > > Hope this clarifies where I was intending to come from. > > > > R/ > > Matt > > > > > > > > Matthew J. Willis, CWBSP, C.E.T. > > > > Ferguson Fire Design, LLC > > > > D: (602) 337-0721 ((602)%20337-0721) C: (307) 236-8249 > ((307)%20236-8249) > > > > [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) > > > > > > > > > > From: John Denhardt <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, October 28, 2024 7:12 AM > To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers > <[email protected]> > Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Re: Metal manufacturing > > > > > > Caution: This email originated from outside of the organization. DO > NOT click links or open attachments unless you recognize and trust the sender. > Matt - Please be careful in what you state. > > > NFPA 13 only references you stated are in the annex which are typical > suggestions. The annex list is not to be used without fully understanding > the specific process and the actual descriptions in the body of the standard. > Relying on the annex for your determination of a hazard could lead to an > issue. > > > > I also want to state that I really like what I'm reading from other > posts. I have been beating the drum for over 5 years categorizing the > hazard, water supply evaluations, and other items are engineering. In the > real world where lawyers are involved, a technician who does not have a > professional engineers license is exposing themselves to liability. The > SFPE Position paper 2020-1 which has been endorsed by many associations > including AFAA, AFSA, ASCET, NICET, NFSA, NSPA, and others is very clear.. > The "Design Basis - Owner Certificate" is the owner's or owner's agent > responsibility. Period! NFPA 13 requires this certificate to be > submitted with the working plans. A contractor or an AHJ moving forward > with a properly signed certificate is asking for increased liability. > > > > NFPA 13 -2025 - 28.1.1.1 (http://28.1.1.1) - Working plans submittals shall > include the following: (4) - Signed owner's certificate > > > > Heck - this requirement has been around for a bit. The concept of the > Owner's Certificate was included in the 2002 edition of NFPA 13. > > > > As part of your proposal and contract for a project, insist on a properly > filled and executed certificate. The sample in the annex is a starting > point. If you feel the need to add information, make a form and have the > responsible party take the liability off you. > > > > Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions on this topic. > AFSA's position is clear.and my technical team understands this position. > > > > SFPE position's paper is available on the web by searching SFPE Position > statement 2020-1, PS 2020-1 The Engineer and the Engineering Technician > Designing Fire Protection Systems > > > > > > > > > > > > The above is my opinion and has not been processed as a formal > > > interpretation in accordance with the NFPA Regulations Governing > > > Committee Projects. This is provided with the understanding that the AFSA > > > assumes no liability for this opinion or actions taken on it and they are > > > not to be considered the official position of the AFSA, and/or NFPA or > > > its technical committees.AFSA cannot provide design or consulting > > > engineering services, and this opinion should therefore not be > > > considered, nor relied upon, as such. > > > > > > Thanks, > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John August Denhardt, PE > > > > Vice President, Engineering and Technical Services > > > > > American Fire Sprinkler Association > > > > > m: p: > > 301-343-1457 > 214-349-5965 ext 121 > > w: > > firesprinkler.org (http://firesprinkler.org) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Enroll Now for Level 2 VIP Classes > > > > AFSA’s Virtual Instruction Program (VIP) for apprentices is live classroom > training that comes straight from our expert instructors. They lead the way > to ensure your men and women are trained, letting you focus on OJT. A new > Level 2 class begins Oct. 8, 2024. Click here > (https://www.firesprinkler.org/sprinkler-fitter-apprentice-training-vip/) > to learn more and enroll! > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 4:51 PM <[email protected] > (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I love all you guys. I really do. (Even you Todd) > > > > > > > > But, Hire an Engineer, or Should be provided by an Engineer, just does not > > work out here in the trenches. > > > > > > > > The answer is there in 13. Even "extruding" by a 3-D printer is extruding. > > I had to do Metal Working for folks cutting 4x8 sheets of aluminum. > > > > There is not a distinction. Some AHJ's see that and live by it. > > > > > > > > IS it the intent? Probably not. > > > > > > > > But it IS what the book says. > > > > > > > > Which is the only thing we have in most cases. > > > > > > > > I really wish we could kick it back. But more times than not, they just go > > to the next person in line. > > > > > > > > Just saying. Those are not really answers to the questions. > > > > > > > > Rant over.. > > > > > > > > R/ > > > > Matt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Matthew J. Willis, CWBSP, C.E.T. > > > > > > > > Ferguson Fire Design, LLC > > > > > > > > D: (602) 337-0721 (http://(602)%20337-0721) C: (307) 236-8249 > > (http://(307)%20236-8249) > > > > > > > > [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Craig Hanson <[email protected] (mailto:[email protected])> > > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2024 12:48 PM > > To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers > > <[email protected] > > (mailto:[email protected])> > > Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Re: Metal manufacturing > > > > > > > > > > > > Caution: This email originated from outside of the organization. > > DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you recognize and trust the > > sender. > > They need to provide for you the hazard analysis that should have been > > done by an FPE and in accordance with IFC 104.7.2 and NFPA 13: 4.2(2022). > > The AHJ should have requested that information also. These are tricky > > operations as dissimilar metals create a deflagration issue. the design may > > also be outside the scope of the NFPA 13 due to the process involved. > > Their insurance company should also be requiring a hazard analysis. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Craig D. Hanson, CFPS > > > > > > > > Fire Division Manager > > > > > > > > West Coast Code Consultants, Inc. (WC³) > > > > > > > > Meridian Satellite Office > > > > > > > > C: 253.225.9977 | E: [email protected] | www.WC-3.com > > (https://www.wc-3.com/) > > > > > > > > Teaming With Your Community to Make a Difference > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 12:21 PM Fpdcdesign <[email protected] > > (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 for Tim Stone. Too often the contractor or their estimator are asked > > > to figure out design criteria. That should fall upon the FPE. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Todd Williams > > > > > > > > > Fire Protection Design/Consulting > > > > > > Stonington, CT > > > > > > 860-608-4559 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 24, 2024 at 1:04 PM, <Tstone52 (mailto:[email protected])> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It should be recommended that an “Architect” or “Engineer of Record” > > > > should provide you with a Code Review. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or hire a “Fire Protection Engineer” to assist you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > G. Tim Stone > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > G. Tim Stone Consulting, LLC > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > NICET Level III Engineering Technician > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fire Protection Sprinkler Design > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and Consulting Services > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 117 Old Stage Rd. - Essex Jct., VT. 05452 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > CELL: (802) 373-0638 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > (mailto:[email protected]) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Bobby Welch <[email protected] > > > > (mailto:[email protected])> > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2024 12:57 PM > > > > To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers > > > > <[email protected] > > > > (mailto:[email protected])> > > > > Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Metal manufacturing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have a building were they are making metal products by multiple > > > > processes including Metal Casting of steel, Metal Forging, Additive > > > > Manufacturing and hot rolling. Most of the building is open warehouse > > > > where they are producing metal products with 3D printers. NFPA has > > > > metal workings listed as ordinary hazard but also has Die Casting and > > > > Metal extruding under Extra hazard group 1. Does anyone know where I > > > > would start to figure out what hazard is required for this building? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bobby Welch | Sprinkler Systems Designer > > > > KOORSEN FIRE & SECURITY > > > > 8090 N Dixie Dr, Dayton, OH 45414 > > > > P 937.641.8403 | Ext. 0318 | M 937.594.8457 > > > > [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) > > > > |www.koorsen.com (http://www.koorsen.com) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 24x7x365 Service: 937.660.7050 |[email protected] > > > > (mailto:[email protected]) > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________ > > > > SprinklerForum mailing list: > > > > https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org > > > > To unsubscribe send an email to > > > > [email protected] > > > > (mailto:[email protected]) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________ > > > SprinklerForum mailing list: > > > > > > https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org > > > To unsubscribe send an email to > > > [email protected] > > > (mailto:[email protected]) > > _________________________________________________________ > > SprinklerForum mailing list: > > > > https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to > > [email protected] > > (mailto:[email protected]) > > _________________________________________________________ SprinklerForum > > mailing list: > > https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to > > [email protected]
_________________________________________________________ SprinklerForum mailing list: https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
