50-Year Replacment or Test Req't (NFPA 25)

[Silentpadna]

Hello all,

I apologize if this has been brought up before, but I'm doing a little historical digging. Our facility is well over 50 years old and good majority of the buildings are 50+ - some aren't; I've been here 5 years and we are just now trying to determine whether to replace or test sprinkler heads. In the largest building in question, we are talking about 30,000 plus sprinklers.

I have a few questions:

1. How long has the 50-year requirement existed? (Stakeholders want to know).

2. With several hundred risers in a single building, what would constitute a representative sample for testing?

3. What kind or results are common in testing?

Thanks in advance - and if this has been spoken of before, please bear with me as this the first time for me use these forums.

 

[cdafd]

Have you checked the price of testing?

 

[cdafd]

Check page 5 , this is a 2012 document

https://s0.hfdstatic.com/p/losscontrol/files/private/1287778284655.pdf

Can get you NFPA wording later

 

[Silentpadna]

"Have you checked the price of testing? "

We are looking into that now. It looks like it will be substantially less than replacement, but that would depend on results too.

 

[RanHam]

1. At least since 2002 NFPA 25. Most likely much longer, but that's when I came into the sprinkler industry, so I'm not sure of the exact timing.

2. One percent of each sprinkler type installed, with a minimum of four sprinkler per sample. For multiple riser locations, I remove and test 1% of each type installed on each riser, taking samples from different locations and tagging them accordingly. (Note: The sprinklers will be activated during testing and must be replaced with similar sprinklers when removing)

3. Our results have been very successful with testing versus full replacement. That said, one failure creates the need to replace all of that type installed.

With such a large facility neither option is going to be cheap, but I recommend contacting a local sprinkler contractor to start estimating pricing of testing.

Take care,
Randy

 

[cdafd]

the testing requirement was in the first edtion of NFPA 25, 1992 edition

 

[TravisMack]

You may have to dig into old NFPA 13A (no longer exists) documents to find when it first came into existence. But, I can say it has been well over 25 years that the requirement has been around.

It's all about cost / benefit ratios. Sure, it may be cheaper to test individually and buy some time. But, as noted above, one failure and you replace all of that type of sprinkler.

Travis Mack
MFP Design, LLC

http://www.mfpdesign.com

"Follow" us at

https://www.facebook.com/pages/MFP-Design-LLC/92218417692

 

[LCREP]

Make sure the sprinklers you send for testing are not painted, corroded, bent, loaded, etc as they will fail. The 1st they do is a visual and if any of the conditions noted are present they fail. Also make sure each head is marked as to the exact location so you know where the potential problem is located. The pass rate on old sprinklers is high so chances are you will be OK.

 

[fireguy519345]

http://contact.ul.com/contact-ul-life-safety-and-security

Contact above. They will send you information as to the current cost, shipping, ordering tags for used sprinkler heads. When you remove the old heads, fill out the tags they send you. Keep a copy of the filled tags and the head info. I do not remember the cost or time frame from shipping to UL and the receipt of the report. The report was easy to understand and all of the heads, 8, passed.