# Metal  Fire  Sprinkler  Piping



## globe trekker

Is above ground, metal fire sprinkler piping required to be bonded, as per

NEC 250.104, 2008 Edition, ..or NFPA 13, or both?

If you have a section in NFPA 13, please provide that section or sections.

Thanks!

.


----------



## mtlogcabin

http://www.thebuildingcodeforum.com/forum/residential-fire-codes/8964-why-would-fire-official-not-want-sprinkler-system-bonded-per-nec.html


----------



## fatboy

The confusion lies in understanding the difference between bonding and grounding. Yes, 250.104 requires the system to be bonded. Don't know where it resides, but somewhere states can't use the sprinkler piping as a grounding electrode. We went through this with some fire inspectors quite a few years back, they were running around requiring buildings to disconnect the bonding means on the sprinkler piping.


----------



## globe trekker

> why would a fire official not want a sprinkler system bonded per with the nec


mtlogcabin,It's not so much that "they" do not want it, it's more of "they" do not know of the

requirement, ..until now! Mmmmmooooowhaaa Haa Haa! :devil

.


----------



## globe trekker

Any input on where the bonding connection on the sprinkler piping is typically installed?

At the fire riser only, at multiple points throughout the structure, both, other?

Again, .."thanks" to ya'll !

.


----------



## fatboy

We typically see it in the riser room, which was part of the problem with the fire inspectors.


----------



## globe trekker

fatboy,

Please elaborate!    Also, does anyone know if there are multiple points of attachment to the

above ground, (metal) fire sprinkler system, or just one?

Any other information regarding the bonding of these complex water systems will be

greatly appreciated!    

.


----------



## globe trekker

As part of my OP, I have an existing fire riser in a facility.   As part of an addition project to

the (overall) facility, the owners will have to install an additional fire riser right next to the

existing fire riser, because of the low flow calculations.  The existing fire riser & associated

sprinkler piping is too small to be able to adequately cover the entire facility (including the

"new" addition).     The "new" fire riser piping will be interconnected with the existing one.

I am assuming that the existing fire riser will also require a separate bonding attachment

back to the electrical panel buss bar.

Any thoughts from the audience ?

.


----------



## gfretwell

You can bond it to building steel if that is closer. It may also allay the fears of a fire inspector if it is not going near the electrical equipment.


----------



## globe trekker

gfretwell,

Thanks for the input!   Right now, I am flying blind (so-to-speak).   I do not have

any plans indicating any sort of bonding, or the other requirements associated

with the "new" or existing fire risers.   I am performing the due diligence in

researching what is required so that I can communicate with the RDP's on this

subject.  Neither the RDP's or the fire sprinkler contractor has submitted any

information regarding Article 250.104.

FWIW, I think this is an interesting topic and discussion!

.


----------



## codeworks

we always hit the riser in the sprinkler room. i had a heck of time convincing the city fire marshall here that sprinkler piping shall be bonded. he didn't understand it . when i explained "hot" water as in electrically charged, he got the picture


----------



## jwelectric

If the system is of this type;

http://www.vikinggroupinc.com/pricelist/UScurrent/T_VGSGroovedPipingSystem.pdf

Just how much good would any type of bonding be worth?


----------



## codeworks

take a continuity meter and drop in on either side of the coupling. you'll get dcontinuity. the rubber seals the rolled edge of the pipe, the fitting will make contact, the pipe sections generally make end to end contact.  hit the riser in the sprinkler room wirh a bond of appropriate size.


----------



## mtlogcabin

Depending on the minerals in the water you can get contunuity through the water in a plastic pipe system


----------



## jwelectric

Continuity means little, conductivity means everything. Just how much conductivity is there in sprinkler pipes?

Here is something from long ago concerning this issue.

QUESTION: "We are installing a fire sprinkler system in an apartment building using NFPA 13R criteria. The electrical contractor is attempting to place a bonding wire at the base of the sprinkler system riser and connect to the neutral bar in the main electrical fuse panel, then connect to the building ground rod. Can the electrical bonding wire at the base of the fire sprinkler system violate NFPA 13, paragraph 5-14.4.3.5, and what detriment to the fire sprinkler system will result if the electrical bonding is allowed to remain in place?"

ANSWER: In response to your question, we have reviewed NFPA 13, NFPA 13R, and NFPA 70, 1999 editions, as the applicable standards. Our informal interpretation is that using the fire sprinkler system piping as a grounding electrode is prohibited by NFPA 13; however, NFPA 70 requires interior metal piping to be bonded in some situations.

NFPA 13R does not address this issue nor does it refer the user to NFPA 13. However, in good practice the user should refer to NFPA 13 and other applicable standards for guidance. There are two reasons for connecting a conducting wire from the neutral bar of an electrical panel to sprinkler system piping. One is where the sprinkler system is intended to be used as "grounding electrode" for the electrical service. This is prohibited by 13:5-14.4.3.5. The other is where the sprinkler system has the likelihood of becoming energized and "bonding" is necessary to prevent the occurrence of an electrical potential difference between the sprinkler system piping and other conductive material in the building. This bonding requirement is given in NFPA 70, paragraph 250-104©. It is important to note here that if the sprinkler system is not connected to other electrical equipment, conductors, etc., it is unlikely that the piping will become energized; thus bonding is not required. FPN to paragraph c indicates that bonding all piping and metal air ducts within the premises will provide additional safety.

Using the sprinkler system piping as a grounding electrode is prohibited by NFPA 13. This is to prevent degradation of the piping resulting from electrolysis. Bonding the sprinkler system may result in electrolysis and subsequently degradation of the piping only in the presence of stray or leakage currents. Examples of these events include high voltage crossover between high- and low-voltage systems, lightning strikes, voltage induction, and electrical equipment insulation failures. The degree to which the piping will degrade is difficult to predict. The exact effect depends on numerous variables like soil conditions, electrical system integrity, event voltage and duration, etc. Also, there are methods to protect the sprinkler piping from stray currents. For example, installing a dielectric (nonmetallic) fitting between the overhead sprinkler piping and the underground supply piping will prevent stray ground currents from entering the overhead piping. Also, if the dielectric fitting is used, the sprinkler system piping loses its grounding electrode capabilities.

In summary, using the sprinkler system piping as a grounding electrode is prohibited. Bonding the sprinkler system piping is only required when it may become energized.

Personally I do not bond or connect anything to the sprinkler line and will spend hours teaching an inspector just why I don’t.


----------



## rnapier

In the 2007 and 2010 NFPA 13 it is 10.6.8


----------



## globe trekker

> Personally I do not bond or connect anything to the sprinkler line and will spend hours teachingan inspector just why I don’t.


May I please ask which Article or exception do you cite to not bond the sprinkler piping?

.


----------



## Francis Vineyard

Here the bonding jumper is usually from the adjacent metal water pipe (grounding electrode system); or the building steel where convenient with additions and remodels.

http://www.thebuildingcodeforum.com/forum/commercial-electrical-codes/6320-grounding-bonding-2-price-one.html

Francis


----------



## gfretwell

Don't sprinkler systems usually have electrically connected flow sensors and maybe solenoid valves?

If you you could bond to the EGC going to that equipment.

250.104(B)



> The bonding jumper(s) shall be sized in accordance with 250.122, using the rating of the circuit that is likely to energize the piping system(s). The equipment grounding conductor for the circuit that is likely to energize the piping shall be permitted to serve as the bonding means.


----------



## globe trekker

> You can bond it to building steel if that is closer. It may also allay the fears of a fire inspector if it is not going near the electrical equipment.


As long as the point of connection to the building steel is accessible (RE: Article 250.104, 2008 NEC).

gfretwell,

My concern is the voluminous amounts of rigid steel piping that might become energized

with a lightning strike. Shouldn't the bonding be at the fire riser, or at the fire risers in

my case, ...or should points of bonding be in multiple locations for all of the sprinkler

piping installed ? FWIW, this area of the U.S. has a very high, regular occurrence of

lightning strikes.

.


----------



## cda

Francis Vineyard said:
			
		

> Here the bonding jumper is usually from the adjacent metal water pipe (grounding electrode system); or the building steel where convenient with additions and remodels.http://www.thebuildingcodeforum.com/forum/commercial-electrical-codes/6320-grounding-bonding-2-price-one.html
> 
> Francis


normally low voltage


----------



## Francis Vineyard

250.104(A)(1) in accordance with T250.66 is applicable for sprinklers

Francis


----------



## codeworks

it's req'd by nfpa 70,


----------



## gfretwell

> Personally I do not bond or connect anything to the sprinkler line and will spend hours teaching an inspector just why I don’t.





> 250.104(A)(1) in accordance with T250.66 is applicable for sprinklers


I'm just going to watch this one


----------



## Wayne

Re: Metal  Fire  Sprinkler  Piping

Dumb question but if fire sprinkler piping requires grounding, does metal hydronic piping require grounding?


----------



## jwelectric

globe trekker said:
			
		

> may i please ask which article or exception do you cite to not bond the sprinkler piping?.


 250.104(b)


----------



## jwelectric

globe trekker said:
			
		

> As long as the point of connection to the building steel is accessible (RE: Article 250.104, 2008 NEC).gfretwell,
> 
> My concern is the voluminous amounts of rigid steel piping that might become energized
> 
> with a lightning strike. Shouldn't the bonding be at the fire riser, or at the fire risers in
> 
> my case, ...or should points of bonding be in multiple locations for all of the sprinkler
> 
> piping installed ? FWIW, this area of the U.S. has a very high, regular occurrence of
> 
> lightning strikes.
> 
> .


This is the job for 250.52(A)(1) through (8) not a 250.104


----------



## gfretwell

250.52 (the electrode) can't protect the sprinkler pipe if it is not connected per 250.104


----------



## jwelectric

gfretwell said:
			
		

> 250.52 (the electrode) can't protect the sprinkler pipe if it is not connected per 250.104


Why does it need to be protected from a lightning strike? Is it highter than the roof of the building in which it protects from fire?


----------



## gfretwell

I didn't bring up the lightning.

I actually did reference 250.104(B), which might require bonding.

I do wonder why you think this is not a "water piping system" tho. (just academically)

Personally I think it is a non-issue 99.9% of the time because the sprinkler system is effectively bonded by all of the hangers attached to building steel but they are not listed connectors..


----------



## jwelectric

gfretwell said:
			
		

> I didn't bring up the lightning.


 Lightning is an electrode thing and the sprinkler is not an electrode





			
				gfretwell said:
			
		

> I actually did reference 250.104(B), which might require bonding.


 And is bonded with the EGC installed with any branch circuit that is likely to energize it





			
				gfretwell said:
			
		

> I do wonder why you think this is not a "water piping system" tho. (just academically)


 There is no water in the pipes of a dry system. IF it is a wet system see the answer above 





			
				gfretwell said:
			
		

> Personally I think it is a non-issue 99.9% of the time because the sprinkler system is effectively bonded by all of the hangers attached to building steel but they are not listed connectors..


A lot of connectors are not listed. What does this have to do with anything


----------



## Dennis

I believe all the sprinkler pipes are grounded thru the water pump connected to the sprinkler system.  The code does not allow the sprinkler system to be used as an electrode.  In order for the sprinkler pipe to be an electrode it must be in the earth for 10' or more.  A plastic pipe feeding an indoor metallic sprinkler system would not make the sprinkler system an electrode.


----------



## gfretwell

I think we all agree, the sprinkler system is not an electrode.

The real question is whether it is a water piping system (wet or dry) in 250.104(A) and whether it is likely to become energized any more than a gas pipe a steam/hydronic heating pipe. (250.104(B))

I suppose the real question would by why you should not bond the sprinkler system. It certainly is not electrolysis. You have steel pipe and a steel building.


----------



## Francis Vineyard

gfretwell said:
			
		

> I'm just going to watch this one





			
				gfretwell said:
			
		

> I think we all agree, the sprinkler system is not an electrode.The real question is whether it is a water piping system (wet or dry) in 250.104(A) and whether it is likely to become energized any more than a gas pipe a steam/hydronic heating pipe. (250.104(B))
> 
> I suppose the real question would by why you should not bond the sprinkler system. It certainly is not electrolysis. You have steel pipe and a steel building.


NFPA 13 is water (wet) base. Read the proposals;

*http://ecmweb.com/qampa/code-quandaries-march-2010*



Q. Do I need to ground/bond to the metal fire sprinkler piping systems?

A. The metal water piping system must be bonded as required in 250.104(A)(1), (A)(2), or (A)(3). The bonding jumper must be copper where within 18 in. of earth [250.64(A)], securely fastened to the surface on which it's mounted [250.64(B)], and adequately protected if exposed to physical damage [250.64(B)]. In addition, all points of attachment must be accessible [250.104(A)].

In response to a Code change proposal in 2008, the technical committee stated in its _NEC Report on Proposals_, "A metallic fire sprinkler piping system is a metal water piping system that is covered by Section 250.104(A). Section 250.104(A) does not differentiate or exclude between the various types of metal water piping systems that might be present in a building or structure." Refer to proposal 5-240 Log #1448 for more information.

*NFPA 70 Report on Proposals A2007 — Copyright, NFPA*

*Recommendation: *Add text to read as follows:

FPN: For further information see NFPA 13, Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems and NFPA 24, Standard for the Installation of Private Fire Service and Their Appurtenances, for the limited use of these systems as grounding electrodes.

*Substantiation: *In the 2001 ROP code Proposal 5-165 (Log #3313) included a recommendation to revise section 250-52(A) by adding “Water Based Fire Protection Piping Systems” to be prohibited as a grounding electrode.

The panel rejected the recommendation concluding the following statement applies, “The intentional bonding of all the utilities in a building creates an equipotential ground plane that minimizes the voltage differential between the different systems under normal and abnormal operating conditions. The result is an environment safer from the hazards of electrocution and fire. (Excerpt from January/February, 2000, NFPA Journal article “Grounding, Bonding, and Sprinklers”, by John Caloggero).

There is no disagreement that the bonding of all systems results in a safer environment, however, there is a distinct difference between grounding and bonding as defined in Article 100 of the NEC.

Currently, the NEC does not appear to reference the limited use of these piping systems as part of the grounding electrode system. Therefore, the insertion of a FPN in Part B of this section referencing the limited use of these piping systems would not only be prudent, it will provide continuity between NFPA publications while achieving a more user friendly document.

*Panel Meeting Action: Reject*

*Panel Statement: *These metal water piping systems that meet the criteria in 250.52(A)(1) are grounding electrodes naturally, and as such are required to be bonded to the grounding electrode system. A provision that allows these piping systems to be isolated from the grounding electrode system is not substantiated. The NEC does not differentiate between the various water piping systems that qualify as grounding electrodes, neither does it exempt any.

*Number Eligible to Vote: 15*

*Ballot Results: *Affirmative: 15

*Submitter: *Ryan Jackson, West Valley City, UT

*Recommendation: *Revise as follows:

(B) Other Metal Piping. Where installed in or attached to a building or structure, metal piping system(s), including gas piping and fire sprinkler piping , that is likely to become energized shall be bonded to the service equipment enclosure, the grounded conductor at the service, the grounding electrode conductor where of sufficient size, or to the one or more grounding electrodes uses. The bonding jumper(s) shall be sized in accordance with 250.122 using the rating of the circuit that is likely to energize the piping system(s). The

equipment grounding conductor for the circuit that is likely to energize the piping shall be permitted to serve as the bonding means. The points of attachment of the bonding jumper(s) shall be accessible.

FPN: Bonding all piping and metal air ducts within the premises will provide additional safety

*Substantiation: *There is a long-standing debate as to whether fire sprinkler piping is a 250.104(A) or 250.104(B) type of piping. I have spoken with several code experts on this issue, including multiple members of Panel 5, and have received different answers on this issue. Accepting this proposal would end this debate, and would be a step forward in the uniform interpretation of this rule, which is something that we should all be striving for.

*Panel Meeting Action: Reject*

*Panel Statement: *A metallic fire sprinkler piping system is metal water piping system that is covered by Section 250.104(A). Section 250.104(A) does not differentiate or exclude between the various types of metal water piping systems that might be present in a building or structure. Section 250.104(B) covers metal piping systems other than those metal water piping systems covered by 250.104(A).

*Number Eligible to Vote: 15*

*Ballot Results: *Affirmative: 15

Francis


----------



## gfretwell

Interesting


----------



## jwelectric

Francis Vineyard said:
			
		

> NFPA 13 is water (wet) base. Read the proposals;


 Could you explain just what 7.2 of NFPA 13 is addressing.


----------



## rnapier

jwelectric said:
			
		

> Could you explain just what 7.2 of NFPA 13 is addressing.


If you read 3.4.5 of NFPA 13 the ultimate function of a dry system is upon activation "the water then flows into the piping system and out the sprinkler sytem" making it a water system as compared to chemical systems.


----------



## Francis Vineyard

jwelectric said:
			
		

> Could you explain just what 7.2 of NFPA 13 is addressing.


NFPA 13 is for "Water-Based Fire Protection System" (see 1st page; NFPA 13 Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems). The Dry Pipe Sprinkler System (see definition) referenced 7.2 is a component or part of the NFPA 13 water based system.

Thanks rnapier for the definition while I was framing my response.

Francis


----------



## codeworks

so how about we ponder a fire stuation in a sprnklered building, fire starst up in ceiling area, causes ceiling partial ceiling collap[se before first responders arrive, as this happens, suspnede fixture ( 2x4 troffers fall) ,  in doing so the mc pulls apart, exposes a hot conductor which lands on a spriknler pipe and energizes it.  if it's bonded, good thing, if it's not, not a good thing. open to more discussion?


----------



## Francis Vineyard

codeworks said:
			
		

> so how about we ponder a fire stuation in a sprnklered building, fire starst up in ceiling area, causes ceiling partial ceiling collap[se before first responders arrive, as this happens, suspnede fixture ( 2x4 troffers fall) , in doing so the mc pulls apart, exposes a hot conductor which lands on a spriknler pipe and energizes it. if it's bonded, good thing, if it's not, not a good thing. open to more discussion?


Excellent point codeworks; could make a lesson for a good blog IMO!

I'm not sure, however I'm aware the POCO will be called to disconnect and PW to shut off gas supply, but Fire pumps do not have main overcurrent disconnects; same with emergency back-up generators to run during these events.

Francis


----------



## jwelectric

So I have a sprinkler system that has a diaphragm that prevents water from entering the body of the system until a head releases and some inspector wants this bonded by 250.104(A)? I don’t think at the time of inspection there is a foundation to require this.

As to the example of during a fire the light drops down is completely funny. I think my worries would not be about bonding but instead it would be on getting the hell out of there.


----------



## cda

USSS Guysss could solve this fiscal cliff thing, with no problem!!!!

Not electrical, but is conduit bonded??????

just a question


----------



## gfretwell

jwelectric said:
			
		

> So I have a sprinkler system that has a diaphragm that prevents water from entering the body of the system until a head releases and some inspector wants this bonded by 250.104(A)? I don’t think at the time of inspection there is a foundation to require this.As to the example of during a fire the light drops down is completely funny. I think my worries would not be about bonding but instead it would be on getting the hell out of there.


If you believe NFPA that this is water pipe, you are bonding the water piping system, not the water. The piping system is there whether it is full of water or not.

I doubt most electrical inspectors could tell the difference between a wet pipe system and a dry pipe system anyway unless they were also cross certified as a fire marshal. It is certainly not part of the certification process or CEUs that you have to take.


----------



## jwelectric

gfretwell said:
			
		

> If you believe NFPA that this is water pipe, you are bonding the water piping system, not the water. The piping system is there whether it is full of water or not.I doubt most electrical inspectors could tell the difference between a wet pipe system and a dry pipe system anyway unless they were also cross certified as a fire marshal. It is certainly not part of the certification process or CEUs that you have to take.


If there hant no water in the pipe but instead it is full of air then it is an air pipe not a water pipe. Even inspectors are smart enough to know this.


----------



## cda

jwelectric said:
			
		

> If there hant no water in the pipe but instead it is full of air then it is an air pipe not a water pipe. Even inspectors are smart enough to know this.


So where does metal conduit full of air and insulated wire fall in??

Does it have to be bonded??


----------



## codeworks

yup. thats why the requirement for bonding is in there. "that are likely to become energized"


----------



## jwelectric

cda said:
			
		

> So where does metal conduit full of air and insulated wire fall in??Does it have to be bonded??


Well with all that wire on the inside it might become energized. Take out the wire and I would see no need to bond.


----------



## codeworks

put 15 inspectors in aroom, ask one question, you'll get 16 answers. someones going to swap positions after hearing m,ore than he's familier with. get 50 on website, it never ends. happy new year


----------



## codeworks

jw, you really need to talk to a firefghter before making foolish remarks like "the light falling is ridiculous" it happens speak with a firefighter. worse happens speak with a fire fighter. thase codes re for protection of property, and the public that use them, sometimes they affects those who come in in response to disaster


----------



## jwelectric

I have never known of a fire fighter entering a burning building while the power is on. Is this something special in your area?


----------



## codeworks

you're side stepping the point. it can and does happen, what about those in the building working to get out? when a fire starts does the power "magically shut otself off? i think not


----------



## cda

jwelectric said:
			
		

> I have never known of a fire fighter entering a burning building while the power is on. Is this something special in your area?


Delaware County, Pa. Firefighter Shocked Battling Raging House Fire


----------



## codeworks

right on, thank you


----------



## jwelectric

codeworks said:
			
		

> you're side stepping the point. it can and does happen, what about those in the building working to get out? when a fire starts does the power "magically shut otself off? i think not


I don't think that they are swinging from the sprinkler pipe either


----------



## jwelectric

cda said:
			
		

> Delaware County, Pa. Firefighter Shocked Battling Raging House Fire


He didn’t follow procedure and pull the meter first. This is always the first thing done during a fire call, power goes off first.


----------



## Dennis

jwelectric said:
			
		

> He didn’t follow procedure and pull the meter first. This is always the first thing done during a fire call, power goes off first.


 Pulling a meter does not always cut the power esp. in some older homes and commercial buildings where a CT meter is used.  Sometimes the disco is in a basement so the fire fighter cannot shut the power- it must be done at the transformer.  Of course they don't want to wait for the poco.


----------



## gfretwell

Just for some gee whiz info. I asked my wife. In Bonita Springs Florida, "bonding of sprinkler pipe" is on the checklist the fire inspector wants to see.

I guess it is different in North Carolina.


----------



## ICE

It got a little too hot to pull this one.






It is still live.


----------



## jwelectric

Dennis said:
			
		

> Pulling a meter does not always cut the power esp. in some older homes and commercial buildings where a CT meter is used.  Sometimes the disco is in a basement so the fire fighter cannot shut the power- it must be done at the transformer.  Of course they don't want to wait for the poco.


Pull the meter is a phrase like saying kill the power. Sometimes they will pull the fuse at the transformer but they won't spray water on a live circuit.


----------



## jwelectric

ICE said:
			
		

> It got a little too hot to pull this one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is still live.


They should have bonded the sprinkler.


----------



## codeworks

i thought you said it was un necessary?


----------



## globe trekker

codeworks,

I think that s/he is being facetious!

It appears that the requirement to bond the sprinkler piping is a valid requirement in most places.

Thanks to all for the input!

.


----------



## Francis Vineyard

http://www.westroane.com/content/documents/usfa-coffee-break-fire-training/cb-fp-2010-16-Bonding-and-Grounding-to-Sprinkler-Systems.pdf

Francis


----------



## jwelectric

codeworks said:
			
		

> i thought you said it was un necessary?


 No what I said was that I don't bond them. In my area most are dry systems.


----------

