Contact US

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!

*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

Noncomformity between NFPA and Sprinkler Catalogue

Noncomformity between NFPA and Sprinkler Catalogue

Noncomformity between NFPA and Sprinkler Catalogue

Dear Experts,
I am confused about maximum coverage distance of sidewall sprinkler when we put two sidewall sprinkler at the opposite walls(throw):
- As per NFPA section 8.9 and 8.7 maximum throw distance of single extended coverage sidewall sprinkler is 4.3 m (see photo below)
- at the technical catalogue it is stated that same sprinkler can throw upto 6.1 m. (see photo below)

I am little bit confused. Which information should i follow in the FF design. Any recommendation?

RE: Noncomformity between NFPA and Sprinkler Catalogue

If it is listed which I am assuming, you follow the data sheet. You may refer to 1.5, 1.5.1, 1.5.2 for that. But make sure these sprinklers will be installed and not something else.

RE: Noncomformity between NFPA and Sprinkler Catalogue

UFT12 gave the correct answer.

These sprinklers are UL listed for light hazard only.

RE: Noncomformity between NFPA and Sprinkler Catalogue

Thanks for feedback. But still there are big difference between Catalogue (6.1 m) and NFPA 13 (4.3 m) standard. :(

RE: Noncomformity between NFPA and Sprinkler Catalogue

There's no discrepancy. Your first chart is for standard spray HSW sprinklers. You're using extended coverage sprinklers so you're in the wrong section.
Manufacturer's are not going to violate what NFPA 13 states (they're required to abide by it) but their listing do, in a sense, trump '13.

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! Already a Member? Login


Low-Volume Rapid Injection Molding With 3D Printed Molds
Learn methods and guidelines for using stereolithography (SLA) 3D printed molds in the injection molding process to lower costs and lead time. Discover how this hybrid manufacturing process enables on-demand mold fabrication to quickly produce small batches of thermoplastic parts. Download Now
Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM)
Examine how the principles of DfAM upend many of the long-standing rules around manufacturability - allowing engineers and designers to place a part’s function at the center of their design considerations. Download Now
Taking Control of Engineering Documents
This ebook covers tips for creating and managing workflows, security best practices and protection of intellectual property, Cloud vs. on-premise software solutions, CAD file management, compliance, and more. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close