Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Design Criteria’

AFSA 38th Convention, San Diego 2019

October 4th, 2019

AHJ Only: Rough-In Inspection & Final Acceptance Tests

Steven Scandaliato, SET, SDG, LLC; Ken Wagoner, SET, Parsley Consulting

Room: America CD

CEU 0.2 | CPD 2.0 | CH 2.0

AHJ Track

Among the many milestones found in the process of sprinkler system design and installation, the rough-in inspection is arguably the most important. Rarely are sprinkler systems inspected and tested by the same personnel that performs the shop drawing review. As a team, installers and fire service inspectors are our last chance to “get it right” regardless of design intent and plan review accuracy. This seminar explains the synergy required in the design and installation process exposing critical areas of each needed to ensure that lives and property will be saved. A detailed discussion regarding activities included in this inspection and the importance they play will be presented.

Upon the conclusion of this seminar, the participant should be able to:

  • Identify construction types by definition(s) for each compartment and validate the approved shop drawings
  • Recognize and apply proper obstruction types and associated rules based on the construction definitions
  • Compare critical portions of the actual installation with the approved shop drawings

From <https://www.firesprinkler.org/afsa38/Details/Seminars_Speakers/afsa38/Seminars_Speakers.aspx?hkey=9a6ea547-73a2-4f60-8c6f-945d3c437a29>

AFSA 38th Convention, San Diego 2019

October 4th, 2019

AHJ Only: Fire Sprinkler Systems Plans Review

Steven Scandaliato, SET, SDG, LLC; Ken Wagoner, SET; Parsley Consulting

Room: America CD

CEU 0.4 | CPD 4.0 | CH 4.0

AHJ Track Track

Review of automatic fire sprinkler system plans has become very complex as the 2016 edition of NFPA 13 was expanded to provide more information than before on fire sprinkler system design and installation. The seminar guides AHJs in a discussion of requirements for plans and calculations contained in Chapter 23, and includes an exercise in hands-on review of a fire sprinkler system plan, including overall design concept, hydraulic calculations, and underground supply system. Evaluation of decisions made by the system designer dealing with hazard and commodity classification, sprinkler selection & spacing, and materials selection are among the topics of this review.  This seminar relies heavily on attendee participation and generates a list of items requiring further clarification or revisions.  A question and answer session will follow completion of the plan review. Plan reviewers and field inspectors should find this seminar helpful, and will most likely find areas where their own review checklist can be modified or improved.  An architect’s scale and a copy of the 2016 edition of NFPA 13 are strongly recommended for attendees.

Upon completion of this seminar, the attendee should be able to:

  • Demonstrate ability to accurately read a set of fire sprinkler plans
  • Perform a thorough review to determine compliance, or lack thereof, with the requirements for fire sprinkler systems in NFPA 13, and their own jurisdiction
  • Calculate the coverage area for each sprinkler, using the SxL=A method from NFPA 13, and identify fire sprinkler locations exceeding coverage limits of NFPA 13
  • Discuss items on the plan in conflict with each other
  • Solve equations to develop minimum flow and pressure requirements for each sprinkler
  • Identify differences between obstructed and unobstructed construction and their impact on sprinkler system design
  • Complete a detailed letter informing the contractor of non-compliance, advising of resubmittal process, describing items deemed non-compliant with references from the standard to support that conclusion.

From <https://www.firesprinkler.org/afsa38/Details/Seminars_Speakers/afsa38/Seminars_Speakers.aspx?hkey=9a6ea547-73a2-4f60-8c6f-945d3c437a29>

AFSA 38th Convention, San Diego 2019

October 3rd, 2019

Special Hazards Fire Protection: A New Look at System Design & Fire Fighting Foam

Steven Scandaliato, SET, SDG, LLC

Room: America AB

CEU 0.2 | CPD 2.0 | CH 2.0

Install/Design Track

There have been significant issues with the use of AFFF over the past few years including a ban on fluorine foams. As a result, several new products and technologies have entered the market and with them, new rules, design methods, and system costs. This seminar introduces Fire Fighting Foam in traditional and special hazards fire protection. Specific emphasis is presented on advantages and disadvantages for each giving the contractor and engineer a clear understanding of what best fits the hazards and project restraints they are dealing with.

Upon the conclusion of this seminar, the participant should be able to:

  • Identify special hazards and systems available to protect them
  • Recognize the difference in foam product types available and how to apply them
  • Describe the new system of technology available and where it is applicable

From <https://www.firesprinkler.org/afsa38/Details/Seminars_Speakers/afsa38/Seminars_Speakers.aspx?hkey=9a6ea547-73a2-4f60-8c6f-945d3c437a29>

AFSA 38th Convention, San Diego

October 2nd, 2019

Spot the Dot: Sprinkler Design Using NFPA 13, 2019 Ed.

Steven Scandaliato, SET, SDG, LLC

Room: America CD

CEU 0.2 | CPD 2.0 | CH 2.0

Install/Design Track

This seminar focuses specifically on major sections of NFPA 13 influencing sprinkler layout in the 2019 edition. Topics such as construction definitions, obstruction rules, ceiling pockets, and clouded ceilings are included. We will review real project examples that do not fall neatly into those found in the standard, as well as changes in these sections with the new edition.

Upon completion of this seminar the participant should be able to:

  • Identify construction definitions without using the standard
  • Compare differences between construction definitions and the impact on the design
  • Identify the four major obstruction classifications and apply the rules for each
  • Identify pocket and clouded ceilings and apply the rules for each

From <https://www.firesprinkler.org/afsa38/Details/Seminars_Speakers/afsa38/Seminars_Speakers.aspx?hkey=9a6ea547-73a2-4f60-8c6f-945d3c437a29>

Seismic Design For Fire Sprinkler Systems – Part 2a: The Objective of Seismic Restraint

January 27th, 2009

Part 2: The Fundamentals of Seismic Design and the Design Features Involved.

Continued from Seismic Design For Fire Sprinkler Systems – Part 1d: A Word About Responsibility

Seismic Design Part 2

In the first part of this series, I discussed the “if” aspect of seismic design for fire sprinkler systems. The article reviewed International Building Code (2003) Section 1614 where the requirement for seismic design is made and each of the six exemptions to this requirement. Now it is time to discuss how to actually do this in your sprinkler system designs.

Let’s first review the process thus far. IBC Section 1621 references a document called ASCE 7, which is published by the American Society of Civil Engineers and used by structural and civil engineers for building component design criteria, among other things. ASCE 7 Chapter 9.6, “Architectural, Mechanical and Electrical Components and Systems,” is where the exemption for fire sprinklers is found if the Seismic Category as determined in IBC is an A or B. (Remember that fire sprinkler systems in Seismic Category C cannot be exempt from the seismic restraint requirement because they are considered life safety systems and therefore are given a higher rating than standard mechanical and electrical systems.) Having determined that seismic design is required, the “how” of the process begins.

A Word About Terminology
While almost everyone is familiar with the concept of sway bracing, it is important to standardize the language of this design process. For years specifying engineers and other entities have referred to seismic design by simply stating “provide earthquake bracing as required” or “sway bracing shall be provided as required in NFPA 13 [Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems]” or “when bracing is required, it shall be installed per NFPA 13.”

I must stress that you immediately remove any such canned or standardized language in your company’s specifications. Such vague wording is very misleading. Seismic design for fire sprinkler systems includes several components in addition to bracing. While bracing is one of the most familiar methods, it certainly does not provide the necessary restraint for a system to meet the level of performance intended.

The Objective of Seismic Restraint
Understanding the purpose behind seismic design is the next step in the process. As with other aspects of sprinkler system design, plenty of gray areas make following the rules difficult. I believe that a designer must understand the overall objective behind a code or standard to better provide a solution for those times when the rules do not readily apply.

The objective of seismic design for a fire sprinkler system is twofold. The first goal is to minimize stresses in piping by providing flexibility and clearances at points where the building is expected to move during an earthquake. The second is to minimize damaging forces by keeping the piping fairly rigid when supported by a building component expected to move as a unit during an earthquake, such as a floor/ceiling assembly. The idea is to design a system that gives and moves as the building is designed to move. You want the system rigid where the building is rigid and flexible where the building is flexible. According to the standards, the
systems attached to the structure of the building all should work together as one unit.

That being the case, let’s look at each element required to make this happen. NFPA 13 Chapter 9.3 is where all the standard installation requirements for seismic design can be found. The chapter is organized by each required category: couplings, separation, clearance, and sway bracing.

Continued at Seismic Design For Fire Sprinkler Systems – Part 2b: Couplings and Seismic Separation