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

Smoke/Heat Vents Req'd w/ FM Storage Criteria?

12/1/2021

4 Comments

 
I have a high-piled storage project that falls under both the International Fire Code and FM Global. We are using FM Storage Sprinklers.

Are smoke and heat vents required?

Under the International Fire Code Chapter 32, I am directed to Section 910 for smoke and heat vents. Section 910 states that if ESFR sprinklers are used then smoke and heat vents are not required.

I have read several definitions for ESFR, and they appear to be essentially the same as FM Storage Sprinklers.

My problem is that per the interpretation, if I follow FM Global Data Sheet 8-0 and use Storage Sprinklers, then per IFC Section 910.3 I must have the architect add smoke and heat vents for every 50,000 sqft of the buliding.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
4 Comments
Anthony L Crispo
12/1/2021 08:35:42 am

So look like your question is 2 fold

1) Are ESFR sprinklers also FM Approved sprinklers for the storage application you're protecting?

2) Does this building require smoke and heat removal per IFC 910.


1) FM 8-9 (assuming it's not 8-0, typo?) will dictate the type of sprinkler you're using. In short all FM approved ESFR heads are storage sprinklers not all storage sprinkelrs are ESFR. ESFR is a special type of sprinkler that was designed specifically to handle the challenges of storage with high flow volumes and larger droplet sizes.

You sometimes can use a larger orifice head or upgrade the protection but that should be done in consultation with FM and the owner.


2) The building only needs smoke and heat removal if you do not meat the exceptions of IFC 2018-910.2. So if you do end up using ESFR or CMSA sprinkler you do not need a smoke removal system.

If this is your first time working with FM it might be worth your time contacting FM for more direction or retaining a consultant who works with them regularly for guidance.


If ESFR is not needed in this case you're going to want to know if the cost of installing ESFR worth it to remove the need for smoke evac. That will be building specific and will be determined on many factors including if a fire pump is required, size of building, storage protection flexibility from the owner ect.


Reply
Franck
12/1/2021 10:22:44 am

It is indicated in FM Global data sheet 2.0:

2.5.1.3.1 Do not install heat vents or smoke vents in buildings protected by ceiling-level sprinklers. If the installation of heat vents or smoke vents is unavoidable, use the flowchart in Figure .5.1.3.1 to determine potential corrective options due to their presence.

In good old times, FM Global had a specific data sheet for ESFR.
This was 2.2 and the following was indicated:

2.2.4 Heat and Smoke Venting
If a fire starts beneath an automatic heat/smoke vent and that vent operates before sprinklers do, the venting could result in a critical delay in sprinkler operation.
Plastic skylights that are not designed as heat/smoke vents do
not create this problem.
2.2.4.1 Do not install suppression mode sprinklers in buildings with automatic heat/smoke vents unless the vents use a high temperature-rated standard response operating mechanism.
2.2.4.2 Do not install suppression mode sprinklers in buildings with melt-out (drop-out) type vents.

2.2.6 Roof and Ceiling-Level Ventilation
Ventilation (both natural and powered) at the ceiling level can create problems similar to those caused by automatic heat and smoke vents. If a fire starts beneath a natural-draft vent, the vent can capture the fire plume , significantly delaying sprinkler operation. If air velocity at a sprinkler caused by a powered vent or air supply is too high, it can also result in a critical delay in sprinkler.
• Examples of powered ventilation include exhaust fans, air conditioning/refrigeration supply and return vents, and grated return air inlets to roof-mounted mechanical equipment penthouses.
• Examples of natural ventilation include turbine vents, vent stacks, and ridge vents.
2.2.6.1 Coordinate the location of sprinklers and the design of powered heating, ventilation and air conditioning for buildings protected by suppression mode sprinklers so that the air velocity at sprinklers does not exceed 5 ft/sec (1.52 m/sec).

Reply
Alex
12/1/2021 11:00:42 am

FM Global considers ESFR sprinklers as "storage" sprinklers.

> See FM Global Property Loss Prevention Data Sheet 2-0, Installation Guidelines for Automatic Sprinklers, Section 2.5.1.3:

2.5.1.3.1 Do not install heat vents or smoke vents in buildings protected by ceiling-level sprinklers.

(The section continues saying:) If the installation of heat vents or smoke vents is unavoidable, use the flowchart in Figure 2.5.1.3.1 to determine potential corrective options due to their presence.


I hope that answers your question.

Reply
Franck
12/1/2021 11:02:36 am

Note also that there might be a wording confusion between the standards.

Again, in the good old times, it was pretty simples. We had standard spray sprinklers with K factors up to 11.2 for ELO (Extra Large Orifice).
They could be used for storage occupancies, sometimes with additional in-racks.
They are now designated as CMDA sprinklers per NFPA 13.
Then Large Drop, that were used only for storage occupancies. As per their name, they were producing large drops because they had a larger orifice. It was better thyan calling them Extra Extra Large Orifices as they may have K-factor of 16.8 and larger. They are now designated as CMSA sprinklers per NFPA 13.
And the last ones on the list are ESFR. With even larger orifices. The good news is that NFPA designates them nowadays as ESFR.

FM Global used to have the same designation as NFPA. But they changed a few years ago when they moved from a design density over an area to an operating pressure with a number of operating sprinklers. Just a way to be different... And to confuse the world of fire protection.
And they define the protection based on the K-factor, but without indication on whether it is an ELO standard spray, a large drop CMSA or an ESFR.

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

    December 2025
    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