|
I have an R-2 convent with existing 120v smokes in the sleeping areas and they are installing a new FACP including low frequency notification in the sleeping areas.
I’ve read the commentary for IBC 907.5.2.3.3. Would you say based on this section that they would need to either replace the existing 120’s and install system smoke detectors, or change the existing 120’s to a combo audio/visual model? I'm trying to determine if the intent behind this is that the existing 120v smoke alarms now would also be required to activate visible signaling as well. Appreciate your input! Moderator: Link Directly to IBC 2021 907.5.2.3.3 Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
2 Comments
We have an atrium on our project, and due to some changes in the interior design, fabrics (half circles drops) were added as shown in the attached pictures. This has an impact on my sprinkler coverage and obstruction. Can those fabrics (450mm depth) be considered as obstructed construction under NFPA 13 Section 11.2.4.1.2 (2) – NFPA 13 (2019 or 2022)? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe  I am working on a fire pump station project.
As the water tank ( 2 x 50,000 gal) is dedicated to the fire pumps only, a possible stagnation is expected, and hence, a recirculation pump for the tanks will be the best solution. I saw in many forums or searches that an 8-hour refill needs to be incorporated for the pump sizing, however, I couldn't find anything solid on NFPA 22 documents regarding recirculation. Can someone direct me to the NFPA reference for the recirculation requirements? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Why is there a drastic change for limiting an NFPA 13R sprinkler system from a four-story, maximum 60 feet height above grade plane in IBC 2018 to the maximum of the top floor being only 30 feet above fire department access in IBC 2021?
Here, we have many townhomes (R-3 group) that could easily comply with the 2018 edition of the IBC, but they will exceed the top floor 30-foot limit of the 2021 edition of IBC. Also, the 2024 IBC tries to fix the drastic change by providing an exception for Group R-2 buildings by raising the top floor height limit from 30 ft to 45 ft. That's great and all, but townhouses are still considered R-3 buildings and do not qualify for the exception. How would you proceed for a townhome with a top floor over 30 feet above fire department access? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe NFPA 72 (2016) Section 17.7.5.3 says a duct smoke detector is required in the supply air duct; on the other hand, the IMC (2020) Section 606.2.1 says a duct smoke detector is required in the return air duct.
Which should I follow? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Per 5.3.1.1.1.3, NFPA 25, 2014 Edition, states that sprinklers manufactured using fast-response elements that have been in service for 20 years shall be replaced or representative samples shall be tested and then retested at 10-year intervals."
What is the common practice for doing a 20-year sprinkler test sample on a multistory office building built 20 years ago that has undergone numerous tenant renovations, where sprinklers have been replaced and added throughout the years? My thoughts would be that maybe the common areas would have original sprinklers, but what would be the best way to approach this? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe UFC 3-600-01 (with change 6, 2021), Section 4-29.2.1 requires a manually activated smoke exhaust system for Limited-Access Structures three stories or more in height, with 6 air changes per hour throughout the entire building.
NFPA 101 (2024), Section 11.7.3.1.2 and 11.7.3.2 outlines that if there are no unobstructed operable openings, openable from both the exterior and interior of the building, the building is defined as a Limited-Access Structure. Most DoD buildings have security requirements that do not permit operable windows, especially not from the exterior or the interior. Therefore, most DoD structures over two stories in height would require these post-fire smoke purge systems; however, I have not seen them actually being implemented on projects. Is there an alternative code path I am missing, or have you designed and installed these systems in UFC projects? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe For a deluge system with pilot sprinkler detectors in a column (5 levels), where is the pilot line required?
At what levels do we need detection? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe In-Rack Horizontal Barriers according to FM Global Data Sheet.
Were can I find any details about how to place the horizontal barrier using FM Global Data Sheet 8-9 Scheme 8-9a? In NFPA 13, there is a figure (NFPA 13-2016 Figure 17.1.2.9.4.2(A) ) showing this, but I can´t find any such figure in the Data Sheet. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe What is the design criteria for exterior openings protected by a water curtain in IBC 2021?
Section 705.8.2 (protected openings in exterior walls) says that opening protection is not required when the building is sprinklered in accordance with NFPA 13 and when the exterior openings are protected by a water curtain approved for that use. "Water curtain" is not defined in the IBC or NFPA 13. NFPA 13 (2019 edition) gives design approach requirements for water curtains in Section 19.4.3, but none apply to protecting openings in exterior walls. What is the intention of the IBC here? Window sprinklers? Exposure protection sprinklers? Is there a different NFPA standard that covers the design of this water curtain? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Is there any listed stainless steel fire sprinkler pipe, hangers, rod, or fasteners?
Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I designed an in-rack system, and due to the available pressure, I needed 3" diameter pipe feeding the sprinklers.
The fitter, who I respect as a knowledgeable person, thought that sprinklers were not permitted to be installed directly off of pipe greater than 2-1/2". He was not able to provide a code reference. I searched NFPA 13 and came up with nothing to confirm or deny what he was saying. I'm wondering if anyone else is familiar with this limitation. Thanks! Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Is sprinkler protection required at the top of a roof access shaft?
This would be located in a stairwell that is otherwise protected. We'll say the shaft is 2'x3' in plan view, and 5' from the stair ceiling to the rooftop hatch. This is in a steel structure building, with concrete block stair shaft walls finished with gypsum. A permanently attached ladder is provided. Thanks! Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe In NFPA 25 (2013), Table 13.1.1.2 directs us to the Testing requirements for Pressure-Reducing "Hose connections," with a frequency of 5 years.
Does this apply solely to 2.5-inch PRV Hose Valve outlets, or does it include the 1.5-inch PRV Hose Valve outlets on Class II (and Class III) systems as well? Can't seem to find specifics on that. Thank you. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Section 503.1.2 of the IBC seems pretty clear that the intention that two buildings on the same lot can be considered 1 building if the comply with the height and aggregate areas comply with the height/area limitations.
However, does that also apply to Chapter 9 requirements? For example, if Building A requires a sprinkler system based on its size/occupancy, does Building B need one even if its size and occupancy wouldn't require it? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Does NFPA 72 (or other standards) have any limit for the environment in which the beam detector is allowed to be installed?
Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I don’t often dabble in NFPA 30, so I have some specific questions regarding the protection of flammable and combustible liquids that I am having issues finding straight answers to.
I have a sprinklered general-purpose warehouse that stores flammable liquids in container sizes less than or equal to those indicated in NFPA 30 (2021) Table 12.8.1. The total quantities (MAQs) of these containers are also less than those shown in Table 9.6.1. NFPA 30 (2021) Section 12.8.1 indicates that “The liquid-container combinations listed in Table 12.8.1 shall be permitted to be stored in a general-purpose warehouse without quantity limits if protected in accordance with Chapter 16." An older version of NFPA 30 (2015) Section 12.8.1(1) indicates that if “the applicable provisions of NFPA 13 for 20ft high storage of Class IV commodities based on the storage configuration of the liquids” is used for protecting these containers, no additional protection criteria is required barring the storage arrangements are in line with the rest of the Section 12.8. My questions are as follows (per NFPA 13 -2021): 1. If combustible liquids are stored in amounts under the MAQs stated in Section 9.6.1 (and IFC) are the additional requirements of Section 16 (NFPA 30) required, no matter what? 2. If combustible liquids are stored in container sizes less than or equal to those set forth in Table 12.8.1 (NFPA 30), are the requirements of Section 16 still required? 3. Will the storage of these commodities within liquid storage cabinets negate the requirements set forth by Section 16? The bones of the matter is that I am having a hard time finding a section directly indicating that the requirements of Section 16 are not required. Most if not all sections I can find only indicate that Section 16 is to be used when something is stated. Thank you all ahead of time. As always this forum has always been a wealth of information. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I am trying to find how far to provide sprinkler coverage past the edge of the above-ceiling mechanical service area. There will be mechanical units and duct work in this area, the floor is covered with 3/4" fire resistive plywood over metal studs. I would also like to know where to reference this in NFPA 13 for future use. I attached the drawings for reference the hatched area is the service area. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe  Hi all, I am looking for a sanity check on a water supply calculation for water main with significant elevation delta.
We ran a hydrant test on a dead-end run for a new development that is fed from a city main at the top of a hill. The two furthest hydrants were tested, the flow hydrant at the dead-end and pressure hydrant mid-way down the hill. City Main = EL 500 Pressure Hydrant = EL 450 Flow Hydrant = EL 400 Proposed FFE = EL 425 The Freeman Flow equation bases hydrant flow on pitot pressure (PSIG) which is relative to the hydrant elevation. To calculate R20 (ie 20PSIG) at that hydrant elevation we use a ratio of PSIG values from the pressure hydrant normalized to 1.85 power multiplied by the hydrant flow rate from Freeman equation. It is at this point that I begin second-guessing: the ratio that is being used does not take into account the elevation delta as it is PSIG. I have calculated the HGLs for the three pressures based on converting PSIG at its respective elevation. My initial thought is that the pressure hydrant PSIGs (based on EL 450) should be converted to PSIGs at the flow hydrant (ie based on EL 400) by means of HGL - Hydrant Elevation and then using those "adjusted" PSIG static/residual values as the scaling terms for R20 at the flow hydrant. Then to get a theoretical R20 for a future hydrant at FFE I would repeat the same process, this time normalizing pressure hydrant static/residual HGLs to FFE elevation, holding the Freeman Flow value constant, and using a "new" R20 = 20PSIG at FFE. On the face I get reasonable values, but would like to get feedback from the group. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I am looking for a little help with a storage commodity.
We have a client that is adding in-rack sprinklers to an existing sprinklered facility and is planning on storing tubes of Adseal 1940 adhesive sealant in boxes, in racks up to 15ft. According to the MSDS sheet, it is a solid (paste) that is primarily made up of Calcium Carbonate, which in itself is non-combustible, and the flammability hazard rating is “(1) Slight”. The existing hydraulic placard indicates the existing system was designed to a density of .29/2000, which is about equivalent to Single-Double Row Rack Storage of Class I-IV Commodity per NFPA 13, 2019 edition: Per Table 21.4.1.2 and Figure 24.4.1.2(d), 8ft aisles and 286 deg F sprinklers, the base design density would be +/- .495/2000. Then, applying a 60% reduction of the density for 15-ft high storage, the final design criteria would be .297/2000. My only concern is that the commodity would be classified as a Group A Nonexpanded since there is a huge jump in design density. Per NFPA 13 2019 Table A.20.4(b), it mentions that “Bottles or jars (except PET) up to 1 gal containing noncombustible solids” are classified as Group A Nonexpanded. It also calls out such things as “Powders, non-combustible in plastic bottles or jars up to 1 gal; cartoned” as Class IV commodities. So, I am kind of on the fence on this one between Class IV vs Grp A. Has anyone ran into having to protect adhesive sealants before or anything similar and would be willing to share their decision process? Thank you in advance! Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Thank you for ending the month with some great discussions! Special shout-out to our Top Contributors in October 2024:
For those of you familiar with the HyrdraCalc program; does the Node Analysis section on the calculation report detail the demand that the sprinkler system requires?
Or does it list the current calculated condition of the various nodes of the sprinkler system? I recently received two reports from a consultant that used HydraCalc to show the current conditions with an existing fire pump, and the 2nd report shows the system with a proposed increased capacity fire pump. On both reports, the Node Analysis showed the same parameters for each of the nodes when compared to each other. As an example, Node 1 (existing pump report) Pressure at Node – 7, Discharge at Node 14.82. Node 1 (new increased capacity pump report) Pressure at Node – 7, Discharge at Node 14.82. It was explained by the consultant that the Node Analysis page details the demand that the sprinkler system requires which is why both reports show the same parameters. Not being familiar with this program, I wasn’t 100% sure if the explanation was correct. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe |
ALL-ACCESS
SUBSCRIBESubscribe and learn something new each day:
COMMUNITYTop Nov '25 Contributors
YOUR POSTPE EXAMGet 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
FILTERS
All
ARCHIVES
December 2025
PE PREP SERIES |
RSS Feed
