×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Hydraulic Calcs for Sprinklers above / below Cloud Cielings

Hydraulic Calcs for Sprinklers above / below Cloud Cielings

Hydraulic Calcs for Sprinklers above / below Cloud Cielings

(OP)
Do you include every sprinklers above and below a dropped cloud cieling located in the design area in the calculation?

NFPA 13 (2007) section 22.4.4.6.3 indicates that only the above or below level is required to be included in the calc.

This does not seem conservative enough since this open floor plan has rather large spaces between cloud ceilings and many sprinklers both abaove and below.

Any advice?

RE: Hydraulic Calcs for Sprinklers above / below Cloud Cielings

If you were protecting under large ducts, would you include heads at both levels, or just one of the levels?  I see the clouds as no different.  I will calculate the heads at just one level.  That is what I understand NFPA 13 to require as well.  However, I could be wrong and that - and it wouldn't be the first or last time smile

Travis Mack
MFP Design, LLC

RE: Hydraulic Calcs for Sprinklers above / below Cloud Cielings

Just my opinion, but I do not believe that NFPA 13 has actually addressed how clouds affect the fire plume, and how activation times and discharge patterns may be affected, nor whether additional heads need to be accounted for in hydraulic calculations.

Short of any guidance from the NFPA 13 committee, the only literal way to look at it currently, is that you are first responsible for protection at the highest ceiling/deck, then, as Travis has suggested, you must add heads for any obstruction to discharge using the available rules in NFPA 13 for obstructions.  

This would typically (not always) lead to adding heads into/under any "cloud" or other obstruction that is wider than 4-ft. and obstructs the heads at the higher level.

It is my personal opinion that while this position may be defendable legally, it is not necessarily supported by reality.  More testing/study needs to be done to determine the effects of clouded ceilings, since it does not appear that our Architect buddies plan to stop designing them into the projects that we have to protect.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources