"Limited" combustibles above ceiling of church.

[SprinklerDesigner2]

This used to be addressed in older editions of NFPA #13 but I can't find it now.

I have a new church where the structural framing is non-combustible bent metal purlins and metal siding/roofing. The inside walls are wood stud with drywall to just above the proposed lay in ceiling line. Wood studs above the ceiling will remain exposed.

Two photos.

http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/4602/churchceiling.jpg

The builder is telling me the competition is saying sprinklers are not required due to limited combustibility which I tend to disagree with. To install sprinklers is going to be a mess as the plan is to place insulation on top of the suspended ceiling creating an unheated space above meaning sprinklers would have to be on a dry pipe system.

You used to have to run a line of sprinklers along one side of the exposed studs but, as I said, I can't locate that requirement.

 

[cdafd]

That does look limited to me

As an ahj my call is if I see wood you sprinkle

Limited is defined in 13. 2002. 3.3.14


Simple either sprinkle or continue the sheet rock up the wall

Is there an ahj involved??

 

[SprinklerDesigner2]

Is there an ahj involved??

Not one that can provide a definitive answer that I would feel comfortable with. Thing is I could probably talk the local AHJ into anything but I don't like doing that.

This job is going to be a mess. Dry system, steeply pitched roof and not so hot water supply is always lots of fun.

 

[byrnesf]

This would not be considered limited combustible in my juridiction. I would have thought mixing wood and metal would have been caught during plan review, unless someone changed the type of building material after the plans were reviewed. I have encountered the latter in my career.

 

[cdafd]

So show them the price for a system

Then let them come up with a price for a few sheets of sheet rock plus labor and let them compare the two prices

 

[pipesnpumps]

Tell the building owner that this could be a potential show-stopper on getting an occupancy permit from the AHJ.

That is the truth. I use the definition of 'a concealed space of exposed combustible construction' found in 8.15.1.1. If the studs are fire retardant (treated not coated), then its sprinklered..

Here is my standard comment:
"Provide sprinklers in all concealed spaces having any exposed combustible construction that do not meet NFPA 13 exceptions. This must include sprinklers for.. [ describe space that is not exempt ]. Reference: NFPA 13, 2010 version, section 8.15.1. Resolution: Revise design to show sprinklers for these areas, or revise construction to be non-combustible."

You run the risk at any time, for an AHJ to "smarten up" and actually read the standard and apply it literally.

 

[pipesnpumps]

"if the studs are NOT fire retardant"... (sorely need edit function)

 

[skdesigner]

"You used to have to run a line of sprinklers along one side of the exposed studs but, as I said, I can't locate that requirement."

NFPA 13 2010 8.15.1.5 When otherwise non-combustible or limited combustible concealed spaces that would not require sprinkler protection have localized exposed combustible construction, or contain localized areas of exposed combustibles, the combustibles shall be permitted to be protected as follows:

(1) If the exposed combustibles are in the vertical partitions or walls around all or a portion of the enclosure, a single row of sprinklers spaced not over 12ft apart nor more than 6ft from the inside of the partition shall be permitted to protect the surface. The first and last sprinklers in a row shall not be over 5ft from the ends of the partitions.

 

[chicopee]

Check your State fire code as you may be required to have sprinkler protection in public place of assembly. If not required sheet rock the exposed wood to a proper fire resistant rating.