MeyerFire
  • Blog
  • Forum
  • TOOLKIT
    • ALL TOOLS
    • BUY THE TOOLKIT
  • UNIVERSITY
    • ALL COURSES
    • JOIN THE UNIVERSITY
  • PE Exam
    • PE Forum & Errata
    • PE Store
    • PE Tools
    • PE PREP SERIES
    • PE 100-Day Marathon
  • LOGIN
    • TOOLKIT-ONLY LOGIN
    • UNIVERSITY LOGIN
  • PRICING
    • SOFTWARE & TRAINING
    • STORE
  • OUR CAUSE
    • ABOUT MEYERFIRE
    • JOB OPENINGS
    • BECOME AN INSTRUCTOR
    • HELP/SUPPORT
Picture

Cloud Ceiling & Sprinkler Protection Clarification?

6/27/2019

11 Comments

 
I have other smaller cloud ceilings that do not exceed 4 ft., however I do not think the sprinklers above have the 18” above the cloud to develop their sprinkler spray, so my gut tells me that means sprinklers are required below the cloud.  I think I have seen an NFSA informal interpretation that agrees. 

However, what about  8.6.5.3.2 (2016)?

NFPA 13 - 2016
  • 8.6.5.3 Obstructions that Prevent Sprinkler Discharge from Reaching Hazard
  • 8.6.5.3.2 The requirements of 8.6.5.3 shall also apply to obstructions 18 in. (450 mm) or less below the sprinkler for light and ordinary hazard occupancies.
  • 8.6.5.3.3 Sprinklers shall be installed under fixed obstructions over 4 ft (1.2 m) wide.

Does that mean it does NOT really need the 18” in order for it to qualify for the following 8.6.5.3.3 rule for obstructions over 4 ft. wide?  In other words, my cloud is not over 4 ft. wide, so doesn’t need sprinklers, even if the sprinklers above do not reach full spray development?

Posted anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
11 Comments
Jonathan Joseph
6/27/2019 10:31:08 am

I believe that if the sprinklers that are less than 18" from the obstruction, you would have to use the "three times rule" 8.6.5.2.1.3 (2016).

Reply
Colin L
6/27/2019 10:41:46 am

Exactly the opposite....8.6.5.3.2 that you reference specifically says that the obstruction rules of 8.6.5.3 ALSO apply to obstructions less than 18" below the sprinkler for LH and OH....therefore, if your clouds are less than 18" below the sprinklers and are obstructing the spray pattern, 8.6.5.3 applies, and you must have a sprinkler in the cloud....in other words, you must treat a small could within 18" from the sprinkler the same as if it were a 4-ft cloud more than 18" below the sprinkler.

Reply
COLIN L
6/27/2019 10:53:20 am

And I agree with Jonathan, in order to determine whether or not the obstruction within 18" of the ceiling is going to affect the sprinkler spray pattern, you could either use the 3x rule of 8.6.5.2.1.3, or you might treat the cloud like a soffit and use 8.6.5.1.2 (2016) to ensure that the horizontal distance from the sprinkler to the edge of the cloud is sufficient so as not to obstruct the spray pattern.

Reply
Dave
6/27/2019 11:14:14 am

Thanks, that is the exact struggle I am having - Like Jonathan, I believe that by being within 18 inches, I would not be able to meet the 3x rule, and with no room for that spray development, I'd better get sprinklers below the clouds. The Annex commentary appears to reinforce this. But parsing-out the section numbers ("the requirements of the [entire] 8.6.5.3 shall apply"), it appears to be what I think Colin is saying - A small cloud does NOT require protection beneath, even if the cloud is within 18" of the sprinklers below. Because 8.6.5.3 says to do so only if it is over 4 ft wide (8.6.5.3.3). Further thoughts?

Reply
Colin L
6/27/2019 11:28:45 am

Dave, where did I say sprinklers are not required in the cloud? I'm not sure where you're getting that, as that is the exact opposite of what I said. To quote from my earlier response, "8.6.5.3 applies, and you must have a sprinkler in the cloud...." not sure how I could be much clearer

Reply
Dave
6/27/2019 11:51:42 am

Colin, I think I merely mis-read / misattributed your line "Exactly the opposite." So consensus appears to be that if spray pattern is not developed (and one does not meet the 3x rule, partition rule, etc.) then sprinklers shall be provided beneath the cloud(s). That is logical.

Colin L
6/27/2019 12:01:51 pm

No worries....Yes sir, that seems to be the consensus!

Jonathan Joseph
6/27/2019 11:57:51 am

It seems to me the clouds are not dense enough to reference 8.15.24 Cloud Ceilings and eliminate the above sprinklers. So you would have sprinklers above and below the clouds if you cannot meet the "three times rule" Use a strategic method of spacing the sprinklers. Good luck!!

Reply
Dave
6/27/2019 12:03:26 pm

Yes, I have rarely been able to eliminate the sprinkler above the clouds, although that appears to be the emphasis in the code sections.

...Allow me to take it one step further, because I run into this a lot when reviewing plans. Once it is deemed that sprinklers are required in the clouds, if one has an array of clouds, I find designers try to save sprinklers by spacing the cloud sprinklers out to the max, "skipping" clouds in-between. I would think the only way one could justify this would be if the gaps were smaller than the maximum 1 in. per 1 ft. in height threshold, derived by the FPRF cloud ceiling study, and implied by the 2016 Table 8.15.24.1 for maximum spacing.

Reply
Dave
6/27/2019 12:09:40 pm

P.S. - Thanks all, for taking the time to reply. Sometimes when it feels like a brick wall, all it takes is some sleep, a new day, and a fresh perspective from you guys.

Reply
Eric Tatum
9/21/2022 07:12:44 am

What about Fabric clouds? I have several 4ft round clouds that are fabric with uprights well above 18" I have seen these omitted in the past.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    SUBMIT A QUESTION
    Picture
    Why Sponsor?

    ALL-ACCESS

    Picture
    GET ALL OUR TOOLS

    SUBSCRIBE

    Subscribe and learn something new each day:
    I'm Interested In:

    COMMUNITY

    Top May '25 Contributors
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    SEE LEADERBOARD

    YOUR POST

    SUBMIT A QUESTION

    PE EXAM

    Get 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
    SIGN ME UP!

    FILTERS

    All
    A1171
    ABA
    ADA
    ASCE 7
    ASME A17.1
    ASTM E1354
    Blog Thread
    Daily Discussion
    Design-documents
    EN 12845
    Explosion Protection
    Explosion-protection-prevention
    Fire Detection And Alarm Systems
    Fire Dynamics
    Flammable And Combustible Liquids
    Flammable-combustible-liquids
    FM Global
    Human-behavior
    IBC
    ICC 500
    IEBC
    IFC
    IMC
    IPC
    IRC
    ISO
    Means Of Egress
    NBC
    NFPA 1
    NFPA 10
    NFPA 101
    NFPA 11
    NFPA 110
    NFPA 1142
    NFPA 1221
    NFPA 13
    NFPA 13D
    NFPA 13R
    NFPA 14
    NFPA 15
    NFPA 16
    NFPA 17A
    NFPA 20
    NFPA 2001
    NFPA 214
    NFPA 22
    NFPA 220
    NFPA 24
    NFPA 241
    NFPA 25
    NFPA 291
    NFPA 30
    NFPA 307
    NFPA 30B
    NFPA 31
    NFPA 33
    NFPA 37
    NFPA 400
    NFPA 409
    NFPA 415
    NFPA 45
    NFPA 495
    NFPA 497
    NFPA 5000
    NFPA 502
    NFPA 54
    NFPA 55
    NFPA 654
    NFPA 68
    NFPA 70
    NFPA 701
    NFPA 72
    NFPA 75
    NFPA 770
    NFPA 82
    NFPA 855
    NFPA 90A
    NFPA 92
    NFPA 96
    NICET
    OBC
    OSHA
    Passive Building Systems
    PE Prep Guide
    PE Prep Series
    PE Sample Problems
    Poll
    Smoke Management
    Special Hazard Systems
    UFC 3-600-01
    UFC 4-021-01
    UFC 4-211-01
    UPC
    Updates
    Water Based Fire Suppression
    Weekly Exams


    ARCHIVES

    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016


    PE PREP SERIES

    SEE LEADERBOARD

    RSS Feed

Picture
​Home
Our Cause
The Blog
The Forum
PE Exam Prep
The Toolkit

MeyerFire University
​Pricing
Login
​Support
Contact Us
Picture

MeyerFire.com is a startup community built to help fire protection professionals shine.
Our goal is to improve fire protection practices worldwide. We promote the industry by creating helpful tools and resources, and by bringing together industry professionals to share their expertise.

​MeyerFire, LLC is a NICET Recognized Training Provider and International Code Council Preferred Education Provider.

All text, images, and media ​Copyright © 2016-2025 MeyerFire, LLC

We respect your privacy and personal data. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. 
The views, opinions, and information found on this site represent solely the author and do not represent the opinions of any other party, nor does the presented material assume responsibility for its use. Fire protection and life safety systems constitute a critical component for public health and safety and you should consult with a licensed professional for proper design and code adherence.

Discussions are solely for the purpose of peer review and the exchange of ideas. All comments are reviewed. Comments which do not contribute, are not relevant, are spam, or are disrespectful in nature may be removed. Information presented and opinions expressed should not be relied upon as a replacement for consulting services. Some (not all) outbound links on this website, such as Amazon links, are affiliate-based where we receive a small commission for orders placed elsewhere.

  • Blog
  • Forum
  • TOOLKIT
    • ALL TOOLS
    • BUY THE TOOLKIT
  • UNIVERSITY
    • ALL COURSES
    • JOIN THE UNIVERSITY
  • PE Exam
    • PE Forum & Errata
    • PE Store
    • PE Tools
    • PE PREP SERIES
    • PE 100-Day Marathon
  • LOGIN
    • TOOLKIT-ONLY LOGIN
    • UNIVERSITY LOGIN
  • PRICING
    • SOFTWARE & TRAINING
    • STORE
  • OUR CAUSE
    • ABOUT MEYERFIRE
    • JOB OPENINGS
    • BECOME AN INSTRUCTOR
    • HELP/SUPPORT