Questions for You on the Open Sprinkler Spec

5/15/2024

This week we have progress and are continuing the effort to create an open, easy-to-edit and easy-to-digest basic sprinkler specification.

The first week we touched on the need and developed the general criteria. Last week we expanded on the feedback and introduced equipment to the spec.

This week we’ve adapted the specification based on feedback from you (thank you!) and are adding in the ‘means’ portion of the specification.

THE GOAL OF A SPEC
Our goal here is to have a simple baseline specification that answers the most critical questions which a specification should resolve, and otherwise stay out of the way. A great specification should:

Be clear, unambiguous, and concise
Address key questions for the scope of work
Be clear about owner expectations that exceed code minimum
Not include redundant, extra, unenforceable, or extraneous information

OUR INTENT
This specification is not intended to replace consultant’s own customized specifications that are well thought out, intentional, relevant, and updated.

They are intended to be a free, easy-access alternative to stand in for specifications that are boilerplate, don’t answer critical questions, or haven’t been updated in twenty years.

Based on your feedback, this week’s updates include references to water storage tank, using an imperative tone, cleaning up portions of the system, adding standpipe and dry system references, and incorporating your comments.

YOUR INPUT NEEDED
Here are the key areas I'd love to hear from you about as we take the next step in building the specification:

FIRESTOPPING
How would you wish to see firestopping addressed in a specification? What advice would you have on who should provide firestop for pipe penetrations? How would you like to see this addressed?
SLEEVES
What methods should be included in the specification? What advice would you have for who can provide the sleeves, and who should provide the sleeves?
QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
How do you define a Professional Engineer who is qualified to sign/seal shop drawings? Any professional engineer? A Fire Protection Engineer? Or draw a line somewhere in-between?

Engineers are required by state law to only practice in their areas of competency – but is that bar ensuring that qualified PE(s) are involved in the work?

This is a much larger question, but worth asking as part of this discussion. What options should exist for the specification? What would you recommend as practical options for a specifier?
PART 3 – PERFORMANCE
As a contractor, what do you want answered in Part 3 (the performance and quality control of the work performed)?

What issues do you often have with the means portion of the specifications, and how would you prefer to see this handled?

THE 'SPEC GENERATOR' IDEA
One of the ideas we threw out initially along with an open-specification was a new specification generator. The basic concept is that you'd play a game of "20 Questions" and in less than a minute you'd have a fully-edited specification.

Most contractors I speak don't believe that specification editing actually takes any time at all - mostly because they're used to reading copy/paste boilerplate specification.

But consultants know that a well-edited, accurate specification can take hours on each project between selection, making the edits, QC, formatting, and updates. Depending on how many people are involved in the process and how complex the job is, this sometimes takes 2-4 hours just in specification editing.

The concept we're working on in parallel with this is a basic specification generator that does the editing for you, and provides meaningful tips on editing along the way. My intent is to pop this right into MeyerFire University with the other tools there about as soon as we're done with the open-spec.

Here's a short video on the concept:

Don't forget to comment below on the questions we posed. I am very grateful for your input and willingness to push the industry ahead, as always!

- Joe

Chris Miller

5/15/2024 01:23:30 pm

1. Firestopping should refer to division 7. Ever project does it differently, but all the requirements should be in one place. I believe firestopping should be installed by each trade as part of their full and complete work.
2. For Sleeves.....I am thinking through concrete walls/floors. I think the Sprinkler fitter should control the setting of sleeves for Fire pipe. The sleeves are part of the fire system in my opinion.
3. I suggest you request a one page fire protection resume for the PE (that is not FPE), as an equivalent to the NICET cert or FPE license. That will be enough to show experience. No absolute year requirement.
4. I do expect the fire contractor to COORDINATE with other trades....I dont know how to right that in part 3, but I hate it when the sprinkler pipe makes everyone move because they got there first and end up with ugly duct, pipe or conduit.
5. Spec generator can work nice and has to be constantly updated as standards change. In my opinion a good fire sprinkler spec will not take long to write (1 hour max) as so much of it is standard from job to job. The 'design' of the system to figure out what is needed can take many hours. The spec generator could be design tool in that it asks the questions that make you think (what is my hazard, what is my storage height, what is my water supply). I Meyers university checklist would work well to get all of your data together before you start the generator.
6. Coordination with Fire Alarm system can sometimes be a pain. The Fire alarm folks bid devices in our area, and the sprinkler person bid performance. That means there can be a difference on how many tamper switches are needed. How do we resolve that?

James Art, FPE

5/15/2024 02:31:08 pm

Chris,
The person doing the specs should be an Engineer, as you said.

Ideally an FPE,
or some one with SKA: Skills, Knowledge, and Ability.

Several big fires I have investigated had fire sprinklers
that were NOT suitable for the hazard, and some were specified by Mechanical Engineers,
who should have known better.

I recently learned the Home Depot that burned to the ground in San Jose had a sprinkler system suited for Ord Haz.

I don't follow why there would be a different number of tamper switches.
Seems like ANY valve that can shut down or disable the fire sprinkler or standpipe system must be supervised,
where supervision is required or specified?

Casey Milhorn

5/15/2024 04:15:50 pm

If you are creating an open source, free to use spec, I would consider having the spec items in BLACK and questions in BLUE ITALICS as you will have a lot of variables based on geography, local licensing, local applicable code, local amendments to codes/standards, etc.... OR the spec generator idea, but I would definitely charge for that feature. That sounds really awesome.

1. Firestopping is typically addressed in the shop drawings, at least around where we do business. I would keep it simple, that all penetrations through all fire rated assemblies must be firestopped equivalent to the rating of the assembly. A listed firestopping assembly must be used. It's been a trend in certain areas to have a "firestopping sub" do this work, so that might be considered as a question in blue for the spec creator.

2. Sleeves are misunderstood by many engineers and they just spec them for all penetrations as a coverall. In my opinion, specs should only be used when part of a listed firestopping assembly, when used to preserve a spot in a poured concrete slab/wall, or when required by other AHJ at lead-ins, walls, etc... I would limit sleeves to being required only under these conditions. They are an added unnecessary expense and can actually create an issue with voiding the listing on listed firestop assemblies where sleeves aren't required. Many of the most common firestop assemblies don't show sleeves, or at best they are optional.

3. From my experience, most states don't require shop drawings to be signed/sealed by a PE. It is only the design intent/contract drawings that need a PE stamp. Most states allow any professional PE to sign/seal the design intent drawings, again from my experience. This part of the spec is going to be very dependent on the local requirements. Do they require a RME signature on shop drawings? A PE for shop drawings? A qualifying agent? A NICET level III or IV? Again, a great place to add that question in blue italics about knowing what is required at the state/local level.

4. NICET designers are industry standard and typically the shop drawing creators, or at least technicians under a NICET, are creating these. But whether it's someone in India creating these shops or a registered FPE, at the end of the day this is not something the EOR on the project can verify. In my opinion, the EOR should create good, applicable design intent/contract drawings, good/simple specs, and tie the design/work to NFPA standards, special owner needs, and local standards/codes. The liability of performing good quality work is mostly a function of economics and some code enforcement. Companies that do poor work, don't follow their contracted scope, or have overall poor quality or take shortcuts, just don't survive. They get sued into oblivion or become unprofitable to rework. This is a company culture issue and NOT a Union vs Non-Union issue.

Overall I a firm believer in the KISS method. Keep It Simple Stupid.

Comments are closed.

Questions for You on the Open Sprinkler Spec

ALL-ACCESS

SUBSCRIBE

AUTHOR

FILTERS

ARCHIVES