Code Basis for No Sprinklers at 100-ft Overhang?

4/19/2023

I have sprinklers at an exterior overhang over 100 feet above the floor (ground) it protects. There will not be anything stored directly beneath the overhang.

There is occupiable space above the overhang. It's noncombustible construction; a mid-rise office tower.

Questions have been brought up about heat collection, and the effectiveness of sprinkler spray: if there was a fire on the ground level, will enough heat be collected at the overhang 100-ft up in order to operate an intermediate temperature sprinkler that is 286 degrees F?

What will happen if there are high winds (common for this area)?

And if the sprinklers do discharge, will the water spray droplets evaporate before reaching a proximity of effectiveness?

Will a "cooling effect" even happen?

The AHJ will allow the sprinklers to be omitted. I'm not seeing anything specific to very high ceilings in NFPA 13 (2016).

My question to you all: Where can I find the science to backup their decision?

Do you know of any resources where this scenario has been studied, evaluated, or fire-modeled? (FM or non-FM?)

Obtaining a PE review is not a desirable option. (I am aware that FM datasheets address this scenario as requiring sprinklers.) Thanks in advance.

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

9 Comments

Pete H

4/19/2023 07:05:21 am

If the AHJ is allowing the heads to be omitted (as they should, there is zero chance any heat collection happens to make these things go off), I'm pretty sure there's an item of code that points out the AHJ has final say.

But, they have a combustible overhang 100 feet up? (If it's noncombustible material, 8.15.1.2.18.4 in NFPA 13 2016 gets you out. Even if the building is combustible construction, check the construction of the overhang.)

chad

4/19/2023 07:25:36 am

Yeah code aside, there is no point in sprinklers up there unless its less than 10' from another structure

Jesse

4/19/2023 08:06:01 am

If the AHJ is amenable to omitting automatic sprinkler in this area, I would. Its non-combustible with no combustible material underneath.

Todd E Wyatt

4/19/2023 08:33:01 am

Are Fire Sprinklers Required for a Canopy?

https://www.meyerfire.com/blog/are-fire-sprinklers-required-for-a-canopy

Dewayne Martinez

4/19/2023 08:36:12 am

As pointed out in a previous Meyer Fire post https://www.meyerfire.com/blog/are-fire-sprinklers-required-for-a-canopy

Projections above the only means of egress or exterior ceilings where the building is occupied above is also suggested to require sprinklers (NFPA 13 2007-2016 Annex A.8.15.7.2, 2019 A.9.2.3.2). Either of these arrangements, if not protected, could reasonably compromise the egress ability or occupied areas above and could be justification for providing sprinklers.

I agree that it is up so high that common sense should prevail and sprinklers be omitted.

SCHULMAN

4/19/2023 09:05:56 am

Around here, If the canopy is non-combustible and there is no permanent "furniture" below or storage (it's not a loading area), there should be no need for sprinklers regardless of the height above the ground.

Dan Wilder

4/19/2023 05:42:21 pm

Considering nearly all fire departments can't even put manpower that high in a truck, not to mention the poor service fitter going back out to stick on some escutcheon, I would request the omission/variance with the substantiation of height, expected wind, service, and overall lack of effectiveness for putting a system in 9-10 stories above a non-combustible area.

Alex

4/19/2023 06:01:25 pm

Do you have an observation deck or something similar? As others mentioned, no requirement for sprinklers below the projection.

Quentin M Maver

11/29/2023 10:37:56 am

NFPA requires sprinkler protections under projections 4'>. NC-IFC does not specify width, "any projection requires sprinkler". I had a new store that had projection 3'11" and they stored combustibles underneath. They provided a set of plans; I advised them that North Carolina was not a NFPA state and uses IFC. They installed the sprinklers.

I use common sense, if the projection is like a foot and no storage is under the projection, I would not push the issue.
I suspect this business uses the same set of plans for all buildings in all states. Their designers should use the applicable code for the judication they are in.
Currently, I have a sprinklered church that wanted to install a large overhang and use it for storage. They were told that could not store under the canopy. They tried to skirt the code by not connecting to the building, but design still would trap heat. Waiting on how the FM will make out. Church members are also town officials

Code Basis for No Sprinklers at 100-ft Overhang?

Leave a Reply.

ALL-ACCESS

SUBSCRIBE

COMMUNITY

YOUR POST

PE EXAM

FILTERS

ARCHIVES

PE PREP SERIES