Mobile X-Ray Equipment a Sprinkler Obstruction?

8/18/2021

Have you ran into issues where you get cited from the AHJ because movable X-Ray equipment can potentially end up right in the location below one of the sprinklers in the room (just 3 to 4 inches below)?

I have two rooms with a sprinkler at each end of the table, and the AHJ surveyor is citing it as a potential obstruction.

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

9 Comments

Pete

8/18/2021 06:31:56 am

I'd say that you shouldn't have this issue because NFPA 13 (2016) 8.5.5.3.2 - Sprinklers shall not be required under obstructions that are not fixed in place, such as conference tables, and you identified the equipment as movable....

But, I'm not the AHJ, and what the AHJ says goes... so either move the x-ray equipment or spray around it like an obstruction.

Alex

8/18/2021 07:15:18 am

HI Anonymous,

This is a tough one. We all know the AHJ is going to get the final word in this fight.

NFPA 13 (2016) 8.5.5.2.1 states that “continuous or noncontinuous obstructions less than or equal to 18in. below the sprinkler” shall be treated as an obstruction. In this case, I imagine the AHJ is treating your equipment as a noncontinuous obstruction. Is it possible for you to hang a sign stating that the equipment cannot be left near the sprinklers)?

Best of luck!
Alex

8/18/2021 08:18:05 am

Yes this happens all the time at hospitals. We typically add extra sprinklers or space the sprinklers outside of the area where the equipment can be moved.

David Kendrick

8/18/2021 08:39:41 am

I seem to remember that the purpose of fire sprinklers was to notify qualified personel to address and contain a fire incident.

A single (1) obstructed sprinkler could operate with the machine directly beneath the sprinkler head. Activation would signal the need for qualified personel.

Only special design systems are intended to extinguish a fire. The remaining systems are to be ever present guardians.

Just an opinion.

Dan Wilder

8/18/2021 09:30:21 am

This is my personal opinion and I may be reading much more into this, however:

Please don't get into the "AHJ gets what they want" mentality.

They are there to site things that are wrong and provide the section of the adopted/amended Code and/or Standard that is the problem.

They identified a potential obstruction issue, NFPA has a specific section on this as noted above by others. Your job isn't to play what if...what if they fill the room with mattresses, what about 50 O² cylinders, what if the kitchen decides they need a room to store all their styrofoam cups and plastic silverware while they wrap each box in a plastic bag.... that small room rule spaced QR 1/2" sprinkler looks to be a big issue now right?

If they want peace of mind, offer a solution to the GC/Owner and get paid to add the sprinkler or get them (GC/Owner) to provide a letter stating that they won't store the equipment beneath the sprinkler (put tape on the ground, hang a sign...). The surveyor does have a point of a potential issue, let's mitigate it without blind compliance.

I have lots of respect for AHJ's, I do not respect the power trip that some try to instill because they "want" something.

Clinton Summers

8/18/2021 11:55:21 am

AHJ have always been fun to deal with in certain areas. I have been in Fire Protection for 49 years (Local 669 fitter Owner/Designer) and worked for a local department for 31 years (F/F) so good luck with your issues I had mine over the years

Jesse

8/18/2021 09:54:18 am

I spent almost 20 years in the fire service before getting into fire protection / HPR engineering. I used to say, what the AHJ doesn't know about automatic sprinkler systems can fill a book. And we call that book NFPA 13. The AHJ is expected to be a jack-of-all-trades and a master of none. I have never lost a fire code appeal 1) because I choose my battles wisely and 2) because I know my profession.

2016 NFPA 13 8.5.5.3.2 discusses obstructions and says that sprinklers do not need to be under that are not fixed in place like conference tables.

The illustration of a conference table is important, because its presumes the table isn't 3-4 inches from the sprinkler deflector. As such, I would submit 8.5.5.3.2 doesn't apply, and 8.5.5.3 does. 8.5.5.3 doesn't qualify the obstruction as being portable - just an obstruction.

I think the AHJ is correct here.

Dave

8/18/2021 10:50:46 am

^^ ^^

Especially if the table is usually located in the same spot, the term "potentially" made it unclear to me.

Randy

8/19/2021 09:18:59 am

As an AHJ, we are not always right. We interpret the Codes as best we can but the engineers and installers often have more in-depth than us. AHJ’s do not have to take detailed sprinkler design/install tests, just tests on reading and applying the Codes. That said, most AHJ’s are open to professional discussions on Code interpretation. Don’t argue, just cite Code details and common sense approaches. That goes a long way. And yes, unfortunately there are bad AHJ’s just like in any profession, that feel it is their way or nothing. Sorry.

Leave a Reply.

Home
Our Cause

The Blog
The Forum

PE Exam Prep
The Toolkit
MeyerFire University

Pricing
Login
Support
Contact Us

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 © 2016-2024 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.

Mobile X-Ray Equipment a Sprinkler Obstruction?

Leave a Reply.

ALL-ACCESS

SUBSCRIBE

COMMUNITY

YOUR POST

PE EXAM

FILTERS

ARCHIVES

PE PREP SERIES