Fighting with myself this morning on whether interior horn/strobes are required for a project going on in my jurisdiction.

It's a 14,000 sqft tenant space in a sprinklered strip mall. The landlord fire alarm panel only monitors sprinkler system and three duct detectors.

Under the 2018 IBC / IFC, no manual fire alarm system is required. Section 907.2.7.1 adds confusion for me regarding occupant notification. It allows an exception for a constantly attended locations to provide instructions in the event of alarm activation from manual pull OR waterflow.

Given no constantly attended location exists, would the sprinkler system in this case require interior horn/strobes within the tenant space?

The exterior bell is on the rear of the building with a landlord maintenance space in-between.

If there was a sprinkler flow in the adjacent tenant space, how would the space in question be notified to evacuate?

The architect on the project feels nothing is required inside the space. Maybe I'm taking a common sense approach to this but want to be sure I have code to back me up in requiring interior occupant notification. This is for a discount retail tenant.

​Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

The local fire department wants us to document that a facility provides the minimum fire flow for their outdoor mulch storage piles.

I can't find any NFPA requirements for wood chip or mulch storage; only setback distances.

Anyone have input on how to establish minimum Fire Flow for outdoor storage like this?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Does the IFC or NFPA standard dictate if a old system has to brought up to code if a new permit has been issued for a tenant improvement?

For example adding 5 flex drops to an existing system? Seismic , hanger support are the issue. Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Long question - in essence - is Fire Flow considered on top of a flowing sprinkler system?

Recently there was a great discussion on the forum here about whether a water storage tank size needs to include Fire Flow in addition to sprinkler demand. There were some great points made (www.meyerfire.com/daily/must-water-storage-tank-include-site-fire-flow).

I have just come upon a project where we do have a municipal water supply, but it tapers off very steeply. The flow test in the area was 52 psi static, 25 psi residual at only 650 gpm. This would put the available Fire Flow around 712 gpm at 20 psi for the site.

In order for the AHJ to reduce the required Fire Flow under the IFC, the building(s) nearby need to be sprinkler-protected. This would bring down the Fire Flow requirement to 1,000 gpm at 2-hours, for this setup. The sprinkler system isn't designed yet, but we'd estimate around a 550-650 gpm demand with a fire pump. This gets really interesting based on the prior discussion.


When the fire department shows up on site during a fire, and then starts to pull water, is this Fire Flow in addition to the flowing sprinkler system, or considered separate?

In other words, is the 1,000 gpm (for 2 hours) for Fire Flow on top of a 600 gpm demand for sprinkler (for 60 minutes)?


If the water storage tank needs to meet the demand of the sprinkler and Fire Flow separately, then the calculation comes down to ~300 gpm needed to fill the shortage on Fire Flow, multiplied by 2-hours. That's a tank in the ballpark of 35-40,000 gallons.

If the water storage tank needs to meet the Fire Flow as the sprinkler system is operating, that's a flow of around 1,600 gpm to fight a fire. That's as much as ~900 gpm x 2 hours to a ballpark of 100-115,000 gallons. Huge difference.


I can't find any relevant code that stipulates one way or another, only that the tank must supply the sources it is connected to. 

Am I looking at this correctly? I see sprinkler and Fire Flow needing to be met by a tank that they're connected to, but is the Fire Flow robbing the sprinkler system, or vice-versa?

Thanks so much for reading. This is obviously TLTHFR (too long, thank-you-for-reading).

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a 3-family building with parking garage and three floors over parking for a total of four floors.

According to the IBC, a standpipe is required; my question is - is the standpipe required in all stairs?

We have two stars which are less than 30-feet between the stairs. 

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Our customer stores pieces of metal u-channel strut and all thread rod that are stacked on steel cantilever racks. There are no pallets. Packaging is by wrapping of steel bands. Everything is non-combustible.

Since the commodity is non-combustible, Table 435.5.1 for high piled racking does not apply, correct?

It seems to apply only to combustible commodities. Therefore the 12-foot high limitation triggering high-pile storage requirements would not apply, right?

We hope to avoid the requirements of Table 435.5.1 since the building does not meet the fire department access door requirements even though it does meet the requirements for automatic sprinklers as well as smoke and heat removal.

I can't find a code section to cite to AHJ for what is not required on non-combustible commodities. Like proving a negative. Any suggestions would be appreciated!

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Architect here with a fire code question. We have a fully sprinklered building (ESFR), of Type II-B, tilt concrete construction.

The fire pump room is located on an exterior wall, and the only door into the pump room is from the exterior. We have 1-hr rated construction separating the fire pump room from the rest of the building.

The fire marshal is telling us that the exterior wall and door also have to be rated. I responded by pointing out the fire pump is required to be protected from the surrounding building, and that it does not need to be protected from the exterior, so exterior wall and door should not have to be rated.

Fire marshal disagrees and pointed to NFPA 20 4.14.1.1.2. That section does not specifically state that separation is required from the rest of the building, although Section 4.14.1.1.1 right before it does make that distinction, just like IBC/IFC do.

We have solid concrete walls that are inherently fire rated construction, so typically I would just say ok and label them rated. The issue is we are required to have ventilation in the pump room per NFPA 20, so we have a makeup air louver in the exterior wall. If we rate the wall, then my understanding is we will have to put a fire/smoke damper on that louver, which is added cost and unnecessary in my opinion.

Is your understanding that all walls have to be rated as the fire marshal is saying, or just the walls between pump room and rest of building?

I've done many buildings of this type in multiple states and this is the first time I've been told this. I'd appreciate your insight, thanks.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Four-story office building wants to shut down five large air handlers nightly. Purpose is to lower energy costs when building is unoccupied. This will cause all fire/smoke dampers (FSDs) to close (the smoke detectors in return ducts need minimum operational air velocity).

The FSDs are mostly original from 1985-1988. Only UL tested for 5000 cycles and no dynamic.

I cannot find a code reference to prohibit this and believe that the FSDs are already near the end of their functional lifespan. Many have been replaced due to bad actuators, binding jack shafts and missing blades.

Anyone know of a code reference to prohibit this use or when a FSD must be replaced?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a multistory hotel building with the rooms opening to an exterior corridor. There is Exterior Insulation Finish System (EIFS) along the walls of the exterior corridor.

NFPA 13 (2022), Section 9.2.3.3 allows omission of sprinklers from exterior exit corridors where the exterior wall of the corridor is at least 50% open and where the corridor is entirely of noncombustible construction.

It seems from research that EIFS is considered combustible and would require sprinkler protection along the exterior corridor.

Has anyone done more research on this or has this come up before for other projects with EIFS in the exterior corridors and ultimately required sprinkler protection?

​Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

My community has a number of fire pump pressurized fire loop systems that include private fire hydrants.

These facilities are large industrial structures and require pressures in excess of 200 psi for their sprinkler systems. The hydrants are needed to provide water access within code required distances.

To avoid injury to fire personnel and damage to our pumper trucks, is it possible to decrease the fire pump pressure to a manageable pressure once we have arrived on site and assessed the situation?

This would allow us to operate normally while the existing sprinklers, though not at full discharge, are still adding water to the situation.

I am looking for solutions that don't involve millions of dollars or running hose for a quarter mile or more.

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I'm working with a city inspector who is adamant that we add a second non-rising stem valve (NRS) in the fire sprinkler service main just before the building. The first valve being in the street at the live-tap location with the roadway box.

Is a valve required on the service main before the building?

The requested location would place the valve under the sidewalk, accessible by T-handle wrench only, prohibiting reliable supervision of any kind.

I can't seem to find any language in NFPA 24 that I can use to argue against the second unsupervised valve. I don't see any value in the position the inspector has taken and requested a copy of the city ordinance requiring the additional valve.

Installing the second valve wouldn't be a huge deal but certainly seems like an unnecessary opportunity for an unsupervised valve to get closed or fail. I would like to hear what others in this community think and if anyone has something to offer.

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

From a firefighting perspective, I'm looking at determining how to calculate flow and pressure needs with hose lines. 

How much water can flow through 6-inch Yellow Storz hose line? Is there a psi associated with it?

How much water can flow through 8-inch Yellow Storz hose line? Is there a psi associated with it?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Contractor is proposing using a single head system using IFC 903.3.8 Limited Area Sprinkler Systems to satisfy the sprinkler requirement from IFC 5306.2.2 One-Hour Interior Room.

Oxygen cylinder storage at vet clinic, "120 gal" tanks, total of "1644 cu. ft.".

Section 903.3.8 only allows LH or OH1 hazards. It was originally proposed as EH1, revised to OH1 but has not substantiated with code. OH2 comes up in multiple locations (NFPA 13-19 26.11.1.1, NFPA 400 21.2.10.2).

Is there a special provision, or some other way OH1 is appropriate here?

At this point the only solution appears to be relocating the room to an exterior wall which allows a "single head for cooling", which seems to not require any specific density, or to provide a full building system with OH2 in the oxygen room.

Thanks for helping me sort this out. 

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

A lot of office buildings and public transit depot buildings are being designed with "quiet" or "wellness" rooms for tired employees to take a break and "rest," leading a lot of AHJs to ask if these rooms are R occupancies.

The designed use is not a sleeping room and many clients "prohibit" sleeping but everyone agrees that it could be used as a sleeping room.

Typically they're size for 1-5 people and have lounge chairs (no beds) so they fall under the accessory use category to the rest of the building. For example, assume a multi-story office building where each floor has one of these rooms, less than 500 square feet, no beds just chairs, room is entirely open inside.

How would you treat these rooms and how would you address the requirements for corridors in the building assuming its a sprinklered building?

​Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a customer who is building a storage building that includes flammable liquids.

The liquids are Class I-B flammable (as classified under NFPA 30).

I understand that there are limits for the quantity that is allowed within one control area. The Maximum Allowable Quantity (MAQ) is 120 gallons, from NFPA 30 tables. The reading can be increased 100% when a sprinkler system is used. 

So the limit increases to 240 gallons with sprinkler protection.

The number can increase even more when stored in approved liquid storage cabinets or safety cans, which I assume the customer would prefer.

So the final MAQ becomes 240 gallons x 2 = 480 gallons.

The biggest storage room is 2,000 square feet and the customer wants to exceed the MAQ to be above 480 gallons in that storage room.

I have understood that exceeding the MAQ is permitted if the building is classified as an H-3 Occupancy (High Hazard). This occupancy applies more restrictive requirements. 

Is there any numerical value for a new MAQ limit in that case?

My current path is as follows:
Class I-B liquid storage in Storage occupancy > maximum MAQ exceeded > building re-classified as H-3 Occupancy > but where is the new MAQ?

Thanks in advance for your input. I usually design under SFS and CEA standards, and they don't have the same MAQ concept within those standards.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

This feels like a silly question, but we have high-piled, non-combustible storage, with open-grate or solid level single/double row permanent racks with Extra Hazard Group 2 overhead system.

I'm trying to identify the actual code verbiage that says nothing is required from an code/NFPA standpoint.

The product is metallic car parts with no added materials, just exposed solid metal, no plastic gaskets or spacers, etc.

The 2015 IFC is the highest code in my jurisdiction, so starting with that, Chapter 32 is for High-Piled "Combustible" Storage and provides no avenue for code justification.

NFPA 13-2013 defines "Noncombustible Material & Automotive Components on Portable Racks" but also gives no criteria for non-combustible storage.

FM Global Data Sheet 8-1 actually lists noncombustible as a commodity classification, unlike NFPA 13, but does not provide a criteria stating no coverage.

Is this just the simple scenario where code or NFPA standards don't list a requirement or criteria because it just doesn't require anything?

Again I feel like it's a silly question given the commodity but I believe the only rules to follow would be obstruction rules and distance from deflector to storage.

Thoughts?

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Thanks for answering my previous questions; I have another one today.

Is the life safety electrical demand on the generator, for the electrical engineer, based on the normal-duty load (346 bhp), motor load (500 bhp), or the maximum locked-rotor road (572 bhp)?

Is there a governing standard that dictates this (IFC/NFPA 20/NFPA 70)?

We have a 2,000 gpm, 185 psi rated electric fire pump. Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

When a building is 84-feet from an existing public fire hydrant located across a 2-lane 45mph roadway, can we assume it is standard practice to use it in an event of a fire?

Or would the owner be required to add a personal-use fire hydrant or water storage device on their side of the road?

In the latter case, how far would the fire hydrant have to be placed from the building?​

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We are a structural engineer currently work for an architect on a small assembly hall project; a wedding venue that will seat over 99, which will require sprinkler protection.

The roof structure will be wood scissors trusses, 5’-7” deep at the center – see below.

​I mentioned to the architect that they will have to protect the “attic” space also with sprinklers.

In response, the architect said the owners want to finish the ceiling and insulate the attic space.

Where is it written about the maximum cavity size without sprinklers? Is it any cavity?

If so possibly we fill the entire attic space, which is small because of the unique scissors trusses. I don’t think this would be economical or practical.

But, what would the cavity depth have to be (underside of roof deck to top of batt or blown insulation) so that sprinkler protection of that concealed combustible space is not required?

I assume if this space is not sprinkler protected that “attic” compartments would be required. Any guidance on this matter would be appreciated. Thank you.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I'm a plan reviewer for a project that's coming into our area. We have a local gym/special amusement facility that has several foam pit areas.

What is an appropriate sprinkler design criteria for a foam pit?

The plans call for a 5-ft platform, which leads us to believe the pit is 5-ft or less in depth, but we're not sure about the building on the platform of other foam pads; so there's a chance this depth could exceed 5-ft when it's all said and done and measured with a tape.

Best I can relate to for this type of situation is in NFPA 13 2022 edition, Section 4.3.1.7.2.4, which references Table 4.3.1.7.1.1. Also, I've referenced IFC 3203.7.1 for classification.

Is there any other information that you can point me to for guidance?

If so, it would be greatly appreciated.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

We have a situation where we'll have a piece of equipment in one control area that has a closed-use pipe arrangement with oxidizing gases that goes through different control areas. I've gotten conflicting feedback on this.

How do you figure the amount of "in-use" for each control area? 

Here's a sketch of the concept:

The equipment that is using the oxygen is on the fourth floor Control Area 2. The tanks that feed it are (2) 200 CF oxygen tanks that are in the second floor Control Area 1.

Which of the following two scenarios is the proper way to tally up the "in-use" quantity for the fourth floor Control Area 2 when comparing against the Maximum Allowable Quantities (MAQs)?

• Concept #1: The "in-use" amount is only the gas within the equipment itself, and only the gas within the piping to the extent of the control area wall.
• Concept #2: The "in-use" amount is all of the gas within the equipment itself, and all of the gas within all of the piping, and all of the gas within the (2) oxygen tanks which are actively hooked up to it.

 
My initial gut reaction was that the second option is correct, but now I’m not sure. My reasoning being that if there is an event in 4th floor control area 2 that causes a leak or something like that, it’s not going to just leak out what is physically within the control area… it’s going to leak out everything in all of the piping, all of the equipment, and all of the hooked up tanks. This is all presuming there are no safety devices to stop this from happening.

Assuming my initial gut reaction was correct, is there a way to limit the amount so that it stops at the control area wall?

As in: is there a safety device such as an automatic shutoff valve we can put at the wall such that in the event of a leak or other event, the automatic valve will shut off and then we only have to count the amount of gas between the equipment and the shutoff valve?

I’ve looked in the IBC and its commentary for more info, but couldn’t find anything helpful. I’ve also reached out to a number of different people and there seems to be a variety of different opinions on it.

Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

Has anyone dealt with the robotic parking garages?

The 2021 IFC/IBC Section 903.2.10.2:
​
Mechanical-access enclosed parking garages. An approved automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout buildings used for the storage of motor vehicles in a mechanical-access enclosed parking garage. The portion of the building that contains the mechanical-access enclosed parking garage shall be protected with a specially engineered automatic sprinkler system.

Some of the articles I read indicated a water mist with foam. Completely new thought processes to go through for these since there is very little access for fire personnel.

Any thoughts on where to begin or what to read would be appreciated. Thanks.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

There was a warehouse that was struck by a tornado in 2021 which is in my jurisdiction, and we are now seeing some warehouses wanting to place pre-built tornado shelters within their buildings (which is great).

My question is: do the pre-built shelters need to have sprinkler protection?

My feelings are that the shelters are non-combustible, the only fuel-load would be from the 5-gallon bucket-style water closet and a privacy drape.

Obviously, a fire in this unit while occupied would not be tenable long before a sprinkler head would activate. I also understand that if a portion of a building that would normally be sprinklered (a school hallway) and is "hardened" to make it qualify as a shelter would still require sprinklers.

Thanks in advance for any help or guidance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I’ve been reviewing standards to determine the equivalency between fireproofing thickness and the fire resistance rating.

This is for an industrial plant structure. I realize there are many factors but at some point I need a reference to determine what the rating is required to be.

What is the process to determine what the required fire-resistance-rating of a component needs to be?

In this case, it is for structural steel supporting columns of the open structure. The structure is composed of the main support columns and those supporting vessels, etc. The structure is about 5-6 levels tall.  For simplicity I wanted to address the main columns starting on floor 1 where a pool fire may start.  If I could find the standard / guidance for this then I can adapt for vessel supports, etc.  

I’ve been through calculations and information from API 2218 to determine the fireproofing thickness for a certain hour rating. However, I have yet to determine or find the hourly rating requirement.

I’m assuming it will be 1-3 hours, for example, using API 2510 (LPG) as a guide with reference to UL 1709. It does specify a 1½ hour time rating which then gives a fireproofing thickness. Further, the fire protection requirements will come from a risk assessment of the system. I have to be able to give guidance to the risk team to help them come to suitable answers.

What can I use to provide a best answer to an hourly rating, hopefully, chapter and verse?

Thank you for your help in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

I have a highrise that exceeds 400-ft in height. The engineer designed a combination riser with all of the floor control assemblies coming from one riser, and not alternating as is in code. 

I'm wondering if there's something I'm missing - any way around alternating the floor control assemblies, like upper-level pumps being considered separate systems or something of the like?

​Looking for better understanding here and being sure I'm not missing something bigger picture. Thanks in advance.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe