FPE's for installation companies - From doitright06's post 3

[SprinklerDesigner2]

In a different thread I ran across this:

doitright06 (Mechanical)
23 Mar 08 2:10

Therein lies the problem. Have you represented yourself or your firm to your client as capable to solve or consult on this issue, when clearly, as you have implied, you are not an FPE??

Again, without a qualified FPE involved, you are grasping at straws trying to interpret NFPA 13 for yourself.

===============

A "qualified FPE" is sometimes what I would like to have involved but how to get one without muddying up the works?

I'm certified NICET IV in sprinklers with over 30 years experience on the board or computer and do consider myself qualified in some areas but not others.

I can handle 13R systems, most mercantile as long as it isn't a big box store, office buildings and the like. These are pretty straight forward situations where the design criteria can be taken right out of the NFPA standards.

For some larger projects, Factory Mutual for example, the design criteria is almost always given by an account engineer knowledgeable in the area.

But then there are jobs where I just don't know. The peanut butter warehouse I did last year is a prime example where I got pointed in the right direction. If the product is more then 50% oil then it's to be treated as a class A plastic. I asked, the owner told me content was 55% oil so that one I got right.

What would happen to me if I had designed the warehouse for a Class III commodity and they had a fire that killed someone? Like it or not I did real engineering work I know I shouldn't have done. I don't want to do this anymore.

The idea a designer is a carryover from 30 years ago where all we had was upright and pendent sprinklers on pipe schedule systems on plans that were always reviewed by ISO, FM or IRI. 30 years ago the many states weren't involved in reviewing sprinkler systems we just went and did it.

While I feel I am qualified to lay the system out I oftentimes doubt my qualifications to accurately determine what the proper design should be.

Sometimes I lay awake at night wondering and to tell the truth I don't want that responsibility. I shouldn't have that responsibility, because I don't have the qualifications, but designers take on that responsibility ever day. It's crazy. Sometimes I get scared. If you think about fires, someone getting killed and lawyers you have good reason to be scared.

The Society of Fire Protection Engineers has a white paper dealing with the relationship between the layout technician and fire protection engineer. Many in the installation arena bristle when this paper is mentioned but I think the Society is spot on in this issue.

I think part of the resistence to having a FPE involved stems from dealing with some PE's (not FPE's) and architects in the past. We've all seen things come out of architectural and engineering first that's garbage... for to long that end has shoveled the responsibility over to installation companies.

I don't do design for free and don't expect a FPE to work for free either.

Where I work we're not required to have someone slap a seal on sprinkler drawings. All that's needed is a NICET III or IV signature.

We're a small company doing between $1 and $2 million a year so we can't bring an FPE aboard for full time employment but we need one. I think every installation company needs access to one.

So my questions is for the FPE's that visit.

How do I go about ending the insanity?

Do any you FPE's have a relationship with an installation company and how does that work?

Sorry I got so long winded but the issue really bothers me.

 

[SprinklerDesigner2]

Don,

"My understanding is you have to be NICET certified to be certified asa fire protection system designer. "

Yep, since the early to mid 1990's NICET is required but when the program first started, I think this was 1984, the state decided not to recognize NICET opting to create their own test. They also decided to grandfather the lot of us as long as we could prove we had experience which was "proven" by showing you laid out at least 2,000 sprinklers.

New ones coming up took a test that lasted an hour or two. Very basic questions that anyone with a year or two experience could answer.

Under the grandfather we had fitters receive the designers license and to keep it all these years all they had to do was pay their $100 a year. With the passage of time there isn't a whole lot of these guys left but there's a few.

 

[TravisMack]

I guess I should throw my $0.02 in.

First, the insurance issue. You can obtain E&O insurance as a NICET Eng Tech. I recently obtained $1M coverage. It is relatively inexpensive.

Doing calculations is simply a mathematical exercise. If the densities are known, there is no reason why a NICET tech can't do calculations. With modern day computers, it is a breeze. The issues arise when the pipe sizes you "think" should work don't and you have to tweak the system to work. That just comes with experience of doing calculations. I don't think it requires a FPE to do this.

As far as choosing densities and design criteria, that can be simple or require a PE. If you have a simple office building / hotel / basic mercantile store, it is not that hard to choose the density. It is in NFPA 13 in black and white. Storage gets a little tricky. I do a fair amount of storage buildings and I would say that the vast majority have the density prescribed by a PE. In the rare cases it doesn't, it is usually a shell building where the owner wants an ESFR system for the shell. It is then up to the future tenants to determine if the ESFR system is adequate for their business. This should be done by an FPE.

With the volume of fire sprinkler work going on, there are barely enough qualified sprinkler designers to do the work. I assume that sprinkler designers outnumber FPEs about 50 to 1 or greater. If an FPE is required on every project or maybe even only 25% of sprinkler projects in the country, how is the FPE community going to handle the excess volume of work? What I have seen is FPE's hiring a NICET IV in sprinklers to do the project in house and the FPE stamps it. How is that much different than what is going on in most cases?

I would truly love to have an FPE involved in the majority of projects. However, there just aren't enough of you guys to go around in the country. That project in PA that Stookey mentioned is a prime example. The owner wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars on something that likely wasn't needed. It was probably because they were not educated that they needed an FPE in the beginning. Projects like these need an FPE, no doubt. The new office complex going in down the street can be done by a sprinkler tech applying NFPA 13.

Travis Mack
MFP Design, LLC

 

[SprinklerDesigner2]

Travis,

There aren't enough qualified sprinkler designers to do the work, never has been and it's only getting worse. I would estimate a third or more of sprinkler companies would immediately hire a qualified tech if one were to present hiself. I would go farther estimating 80% of the companies doing more then $7 million gross would hire a qualified tech given the chance.

I've never heard of a qualified tech being unemployed unless it was his choice to be.

I think the FPE's understand this but by, calling for PE's do do hydraulics and direct supervision, it appears some PE's, at least those not directly in the fire side, don't.

 

[sixt1vette]

Interesting posts by all. As a point of interest that may relate to the question of who is authorized to specify what protection and when etc, from stookey's description of December fire, I think I can offer an interesting perspective on that one.
I believe that the fire to which you're referring was the Tupperware fire in December which was not in NC but in SC. It involved a huge automated bin box storage facility that I actually designed early in my career in the mid-1980's. The automated warehouse had 16 levels of plastic totes stored in a 400' x 300' building: 300,000 totes in all.
At that time Factory Mutual - nor anybody else - had absolutely no idea as to how that facility should have been protected. It was a "lights out" facility in that no people at all worked in the builing. Everything was automated. FM finally came up with a spec for us that told us to install 3 levels of sprinklers (not every level as reported in Stookey's post) plus solid steel draft barriers at every level of sprinkler protection. The thinking was that if the sprinklers ever went off it would tear down the building as well due to the added wieght of the water that would collect in the totes and rack.
Everybody did the best they could on that install with the knowledge and codes available at the time. It took >25 years for an accident to happen and thankfully nobody to my knowledge was hurt (which was one of the things everyone was also counting on given the remoteness of the facility and that nobody worked in the building).
My only point of posting is that even with the best intentions of complying with code, sometimes there isn't a definitive answer and you have to go with the best you can do.