# combustible concealed space sprinklers



## cda (Aug 11, 2011)

Apparently someone has been doing some testing and came up with another sprinkler head, and somewhat of a code section to match it.

Just wondering if anyone has run into a system with these heads.::

http://www.vikinggroupinc.com/databook/sprinklers/special/110503.pdf

http://www.tyco-fire.com/TFP_common/CC1-2.pdf

if the head is used a draft curtain is required::

"""" Draft curtains or heat collection baffles or solid walls are required using wood or other product that will not allow heat to escape. The maximum detection space shall be limited to 1000 sq ft (93 sq m). The draft curtain is required to protrude down from the top deck surface as specified herein. """"""""

and the section of nfpa 13 2010:

2nd:"8.15.1.6 Sprinklers used in horizontal combustible concealedspaces (with a slope not exceeding 2 in 12) with combustiblewood truss or wood joist construction having a combustibleupper surface and where the depth of the space is lessthan 36 in. (914 mm) from deck to deck or with double woodjoist construction with a maximum of 36 in. (914 mm) betweenthe top of the bottom joist and the bottom of the upperjoist shall be listed for such use."

              """""" shall be listed for such use """"""""


----------



## cda (Aug 14, 2011)

Anyone seen these heads used????


----------



## JustReid (Aug 15, 2011)

I had not seen these heads yet.

Where is the draft curtain reference coming from? What (if any) issues are you seeing with them? (Other than another specialty head that probably costs more).

I imagine one of the big issues would be installers (and potentially plancheckers) missing this new requirement and maybe finding it during inspection.


----------



## cda (Aug 15, 2011)

It is a requirement as part of the listing and found in the sprinkler head spec sheet

This has been a requirement of nfpa 13 since 2002

Just found out about it


----------



## RBK (Aug 15, 2011)

I see them quite often.  They have been around at least 10 years, though the UL listings have been through some revisions.  I think the justification behind the NFPA 13 section was that they are more effective at protecting those type of spaces, partly because they are closer to the fire (max spacing is 12', instead of 15').  But I'm sure it didn't hurt that manufacturers have members on the committee and a code requirement certainly helps sell the sprinklers.  One of the benefits is that they can be used with CPVC piping in some situations.  Material costs are higher, but labor savings can often more than makes up the difference.


----------

