Horizontal Carousel Protection 1

[fsdg73]

I have a client that required ESFR protection in the RFP for a large warehouse with a maximum deck height of 38’-0”. I later found that part of their storage arrangement included open top five sided combustible containers on horizontal carousels with storage height at 8’-0”. The applicable building code is UFC 3-600-01 and the fire sprinkler code is NFPA 13, 2010. UFC 3-600-01 requires the use of FM data sheet 8-33 for protection of the carousel.

Does anyone have any suggestions for protection without the use of a horizontal sub ceiling at 3’ to 10’ above the carousel with sprinklers in the sub-ceiling, sprinklers above the sub-ceiling at the roof deck, and in-rack sprinklers in the carousel? (This is now a $250,000.00 change order they are trying to avoid)

The client has offered to switch to non-combustible five sided containers with holes punched in the bottoms of them to allow water to penetrate through to lower levels of storage but I am not sure if this meets the intent of the code. Can I still use the ESFR sprinklers above the carousel if they provide the previously mentioned non-combustible containers. Are they still considered “five sided” containers if they punch holes in the bottom of them. If yes how much would they have to punch out to make it acceptable 50%, 75%?. Any opinions/suggestions on this issue will be appreciated. Thanks.

 

[pipesnpumps]

UFC 3-600-01 is not a building code, it is a criteria document for fire protection engineering.

You need to ensure that any alternate arrangement is approved by the AHJ. This is NOT the base fire chief or the end building user who are not full time employed to manage these types of technical decisions. The AHJ for UFC 3-600-01 depends on what branch of the DOD it is; see section 1-3.6.

You might be able to get buy-in from whoever you /think/ the AHJ is, and then later is it goes through technical review and gets reviewed by someone with NAVFAC, Corps of Engineers, Air Force Civil Engineers, etc. who requires 100% compliance with the criteria, codes, and standards listed in the RFP and rejects the approach.

If you don't have approval back through those channels (NAVFAC, COE, etc.) from their AHJ listed in UFC 3-600-01, section 1-3.6, and the design approach is at all questionable, then your time and effort may be wasted as they (the AHJ) can simply disallow the approach and say you must meet all requirements of UFC 3-600-01 per your contract, regardless of what side deal you had made with someone verbally.

It sounds to me like your 'client' and you need to get written approval for an alternate approach that provides equivalent protection, change the planned storage configuration, or the client should pay for the difference to meet all the requirements to the letter.

Cutting holes in the bins sounds like a bad idea to me. Any solid object could plug or cover the holes, holding up the water.

And again to re-emphasize, no matter who you are dealing with and what they tell you, ultimately you are responsible for meeting UFC 3-600-01 and all its referenced codes, standards, and criteria, and must do so using a professional standard of care, such that any of your peers would agree you have an installation that is in full compliance. In other words, if it is questionable at all, don't go there.

 

[stookeyfpe]

Is it me or am I missing something? It sounds like DOD wants ESFR to protect bin boxes. If its bin box and DOD wanting ESFR, the specification should be challenged. The hole drilling scheme, as elucidated by pipesandpumps, is weak and will fail.

 

[fsdg73]

@ pipesnpmps, with regard to the UFC 3-600-01 I meant fire code in my original post I apologize for the confusion.

stookeyfpe you are correct the DOD sent out an RFP for ESFR protection and then as far as I can tell approved the bin box carousel storage arrangement after the fact. We are adding a Horizontal barrier at 3'-0" to 10'-0" above the carousel with K8 sprinklers below the horizontal barrier. The overhead sprinklers above the carousels are being changed to quick response K8 sprinklers. Thanks for the responses.