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

Sprinklers Required Below Group of Pipes?

1/27/2020

10 Comments

 
I have an obstruction question regarding what I feel is a gray area of NFPA 13. I'm looking at obstructions greater than 18 inches below sprinklers.

NFPA 13 states that any obstruction over 4 ft wide requires sprinkler protection under the obstruction. What if you have multiple parallel obstructions that are less than 4 ft wide with gaps in between?

For example, multiple 36-inch diameter parallel pipes with 6 inches of space between each pipe.

I feel that even if these obstructions do not require sprinkler protection below per code, they would still significantly alter the listed spray pattern of the sprinkler. I have seen some info regarding a 50% rule, but I can only find that in code as it relates to ceiling fans.

I am curious what other opinions are. Thanks!

​​​Posted anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
10 Comments
Randy
1/27/2020 09:59:34 am

I would agree that the code does not require additional sprinklers beneath these particular pipes. You use the word "significant" - but 4' is inherently defined as the width threshold for being "significant"

If you are the designer, nothing prevents you from applying your best judgment and exceeding the code

Reply
Alex
1/27/2020 10:43:01 am

Great question. One thing to consider is the ability for the obstruction to form a layer of hot gas beneath it in a sufficient manner for a head to operate. A bank of large diameter piping can probably cause turbulence in the buoyant gases, but is not likely to "hold down" a layer of hot gas like a continuous 4 ft obstruction would.

I think the best design practice would be either to locate a row of heads directly above the obstruction or to place a row of heads on either side, with the obstruction splitting the distance.

Reply
Franck
1/27/2020 02:17:30 pm

As you said, this is the grey area. Each pipe individually is not an obstruction, but all together doesn’t make you feel comfortable
If there are too many (sense of judgement, arbitrary decision, whatever you call it), I would consider it as an obstruction and put sprinklers on either side (if possible) or above and below the « obstruction »

If your « gut feeling » says it is not good, then it is not good...

Reply
Franck
1/27/2020 02:22:35 pm

The 50% rule (sometimes it is 70% or even 80%) is often a reference for shelves in racks (when do we consider open shelves or solid shelves)

There are also some criteria in nfpa 13 regarding the position of sprinklers above (and below) open steel gratings at the ceiling level. As they can also affect the sprinkler distribution pattern.

Reply
Wayne Ammons
1/27/2020 03:25:51 pm

If there are no clear guidelines outlined in chapter 8 of NFPA 13 (prior to the 2019 edition) on how to address the continuous and/or noncontinuous obstructions in a specific scenario, interpretation can tricky and may require discussion with the engineer of record and AHJ. You could try getting a formal interpretation from NFPA or utilizing NFSA's Expert of the Day service to help determine an appropriate protection scheme.

FM Data Sheets have been developed through fire testing and could also be a useful resource when criteria is unclear or absent from NFPA standards. Below is the definition of an "individual object" that I keep in mind when evaluating closely spaced runs of pipe, conduit, duct, etc.:

Individual Object (Obstruction): An object can be considered an individual object for obstruction purposes when the horizontal distance between it and the nearest object is more than 3 times the objects least dimension. Otherwise the width of the object, for obstruction evaluation purposes, would be based on the width of both objects least dimensions plus the horizontal distance between them. An example of an individual object would be a 3 in. (75 mm) wide service pipe that is located at least 9 in. (225 mm) horizontally away from any other object.

In your example, just two runs of 36 inch diameter pipe with a 6 inch separation would create an obstruction 78 inches wide. If I were designing for that particular scenario, I would provide protection below. I seem to recall NFPA addressing this somewhere, but I am having a hard time putting my finger on it...

Reply
Matthew King
1/28/2020 11:39:00 am

An obstruction is anything that changes the discharge of a sprinkler head.

The width of the obstruction include the gaps between piping, outer edge to outer edge (e.g. is not the sum of pipe ODs alone).

4ft or more wide and 2 feet or more above ground qualify as a not permitted obstruction.

I do not the grey, you have a permitted obstruction by letter of the code, as long as the owner does not specify otherwise.

As the owner, I have recently specified this in a project in design where I work.

The intent of code is fire safety

Reply
Ed
1/29/2020 01:11:50 pm

Just came across this very same issue on one of my jobs. The AHJ suggested I install heads above and below to remedy the situation.

Reply
Matthew King
2/3/2020 11:50:20 am

I agree. On the job I reference above, they are adding pipe runs. Our overhead sprinklers were obstructed, they are add heads below. We have had several comparable situations when making modifications to duct runs.

Reply
Björn Rylander
12/7/2022 04:25:20 am

We have a situation in a light hazard occupancy. Sprinklers at ceiling level are obstructed by about eight 4" pipes with clearence 2-3" between, located 3 feet below ceiling. We have installed additionell sprinklers below the pipes. Now the inspectors demands a "roof" to be built above the pipes because otherwise the sprinkler can not be activated they claims. We can not find anything in NFPA 13, 2019 about a requirement for a "roof" above a obstruction like this?

Reply
Glenn Fulton
4/26/2024 08:42:34 am

On my Project we a Mechanical Room, we have stacked ductwork of equal width of 48", is over\under coverage required?

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 April '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

    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