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
  • STORE
  • OUR CAUSE
    • ABOUT MEYERFIRE
    • JOB OPENINGS
    • BECOME AN INSTRUCTOR
    • HELP/SUPPORT
Picture

Mix Standard Response with Fast-Response?

2/27/2024

9 Comments

 
NFPA 13 (2019) Section 9.4.3.2 states that quick-response sprinklers shall not be mixed with any standard-response within a compartment unless some conditions apply.

Section 9.4.3.2 Where quick-response sprinklers are installed, all sprinklers within a compartment shall be quick-response unless otherwise permitted in 9.4.3.3, 9.4.3.4, or 9.4.3.5.

If a quick-response sprinkler is a type of fast-response sprinkler, then not all fast-response sprinklers are quick response.

So my question is: can I mix standard-response with fast-response heads?


Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
9 Comments
Pete H
2/27/2024 06:38:56 am

Depends if the fast response sprinkler is listed as quick response or not.

For example, a reliable F1FR is a fast response sprinkler, but it is listed as quick response as it has a thermal element with an RTI of 50 (meter-seconds)^(1/2) or less and is listed as a quick-response sprinkler for its intended use (the definition of quick response as per NFPA 13, 2016 edition, 3.6.4.7).

But then there are extended coverage sprinklers that have fast response elements that are listed for standard response at extended coverage. For example the Reliable J112 is listed as quick response for light hazard, but in ordinary hazard it is quick response for 14 x 14 spacing and standard response for spacings up to 20 foot.

Basically, see what the listing of the sprinkler head on the catalog cut says.

Reply
Dan Wilder
2/27/2024 07:04:19 am

Yes, but only if you meet one of the exception criteria. A good example would be an overhead system with standard response sprinklers and in-racks utilizing fast response (Section 25.1.6.3 & 25.6.2.2 for example)

The intent of 9.4.3.2 is to keep the RTI similar between sprinklers, in this case less than 50 as the defined upper limit per NFPA. This is to prevent things like sprinklers outside area of the fire from activating (skipping) or more sprinklers than necessary activating (leading to more open sprinklers overall, potentially over-taxing the water supply)

While residential, quick response, and fast response all have different RTI's, they all fall under the 50 threshold and are allowed to in the same compartment (solely based on their response element, other factors may prevent mixing such as approvals, listings, and of course NFPA). There is a notable section 12.1.4 that requires all sprinklers installed within a compartment to be residential, however that is more addressing the spray patterns of the sprinklers than the response time.

Good breakdown below:

https://cdn.viking-emea.com/document_files/Automatic20Sprinkler20Thermal20Sensitivity.pdf

The JOB site (maker of the thermo bulbs)

https://www.job-group.com/produkte/job-thermo-bulbs/

https://www.job-group.com/en/products/job-thermo-bulbs/ (English chart)

Reply
Anthony
2/27/2024 08:15:22 am

What does mixing mean in this instant? can one portion of a warehouse be ESFR and one be OH2, sure.

Can you go every other sprinkler on a line a different sprinkler head type, NO. Each hazard should have its own design and consistent head type.

If it's a sprinkler replacement job for a single (few) then just match what is there now.

Reply
Glenn Berger
2/27/2024 08:23:42 am

IMO, It is not proper to mix sprinkler types (response or orifice types) within a "compartment." Unless you want to provide the building owner with zero flexibility to adapt the compartment to meet the Owner needs.

The majority of clients will not fix their sprinkler systems unless they get caught.

Reply
Jeremy S
2/27/2024 11:01:14 am

I have a situation where a warehouse has an existing ESFR system. The tenant is splitting the building and adding a Riser Room to separate the space. This riser room has caused the ESFR heads to be over spaced from the new wall. There isn't enough room to properly space ESFR head to this wall.

because the area needing new spacing has a door, it is designated as non-storage and can have a standard 8k head.

Does this area get standard response heads or quick response as the ESFR heads are "Fast Response."

Reply
Glenn Berger
2/28/2024 08:19:05 am

Where walls are modified, the sprinkler system on both sides of the new construction needs to be evaluated. The storage side would need ESFR sprinklers and the Riser Room being in a separate compartment it can have stand response standard sprinklers.

Jesse
2/27/2024 02:19:40 pm

Yes and no.

You can have areas with a warehouse that are ESFR (fast) and OH2 (standard). You can't intermix different responses on the same BLs for example.

Reply
Franck
2/27/2024 03:03:20 pm

NFPA 13 is very clear on that specific topic.

Sprinklers with different coverage types, K-factors, orientations, RTI ratings, and/or temperature ratings should not be mixed within the same area.

There are anyway some possible exceptions where the situation can be considered acceptable.

For example, ceiling-level pendent and upright sprinklers can be installed in the same area if they are used to protect two adjacent occupancy hazards that require different sprinkler designs.

An upright sprinkler can be substituted for an obstructed pendent sprinkler if:
• The upright sprinkler has the same attributes as the pendent sprinkler (other than orientation), and
• The upright sprinkler is an acceptable option to protect the occupancy hazard.
The same applies to substitute an upright sprinkler with a pendent sprinkler.


Ceiling-level sprinklers with the same K-factor, orientation, RTI rating, and coverage type attributes, but with different nominal temperature ratings can be installed in the same area if isolated ambient temperature conditions (such as near unit heater outlets) require a higher sprinkler temperature rating.


Standard sprinklers and quick response sprinklers should not be mixed in the same compartment.
Where quick response sprinklers are installed, all the sprinklers within the same compartment should be quick response.
The only exception is to provide quick response sprinklers inside rack storage arrangement with standard sprinklers at the ceiling level.

As a general rule, quick response sprinklers operate significantly faster than standard response sprinklers under the same conditions.
If sprinklers with different RTI are randomly installed throughout a compartment, sprinklers remote from the fire my operate prior to sprinklers in the immediate vicinity of the fire. This phenomenon is referred to as skipping, which can be detrimental to system performance.

Ceiling level sprinklers with different RTI ratings can be installed in the same area if:
A minimum 0.6 m (2 ft) deep solid noncombustible draft curtain is installed to separate the area protected by quick-response sprinklers from the area protected by standard-response sprinklers, and
A minimum 2.3 m (7-1/2 ft) wide space, measured away from the draft curtain, clear of combustibles is provided on the side of the draft curtain protected by standard-response sprinklers.

Ceiling level sprinklers with different RTI ratings can be installed in the same area if:
There is a minimum 0.6 m (2 ft) elevation difference between adjacent ceilings, and
Standard-response sprinklers are installed beneath the higher elevated ceiling, and
A minimum 2.3 m (7-1/2 ft) wide space, measured away from the elevation difference, clear of combustibles is provided on the side protected by standard-response sprinklers.

Now, there is the situation mentioned by Jeremy where you may need to mix ESFR with standard spray sprinklers.
It is normally not a good idea, as they have different K-factor, different RTI, possibly different orientation and different temperature ratings.
So, if you have an area protected by ESFR, adjacent to an area protected by standard spray sprinklers, these 2 areas should either be physically separated (by a wall) or the areas should be separated by a draft curtain or barrier located above an aisle, horizontally at a minimum distance of 600 mm (2 ft) from the adjacent hazard on each side.
The minimum height of the draft curtain should be at least 600 mm (2 ft).
Note that there is no specific requirement for the fire rating of the draft curtain. It should only be capable of stopping the heat from the higher hazard area from opening sprinkler heads in the lower hazard area.

But in no way you can have standard spray sprinklers (designed on the control mode, i.e. with an expected large area of operation) mixed with ESFR (designed on the extinguishing mode with a limited niumber of operating sprinklers - generally 12) in the same area.
A fire in the "standard spray area" may operate ESFR before the standard spray and then compromise the overall control of the fire.




Reply
Rob B
2/28/2024 07:37:50 am

This is spot on

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 Oct '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 12259-1
    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 850
    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

    November 2025
    October 2025
    September 2025
    August 2025
    July 2025
    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
  • STORE
  • OUR CAUSE
    • ABOUT MEYERFIRE
    • JOB OPENINGS
    • BECOME AN INSTRUCTOR
    • HELP/SUPPORT