# Coating on exterior sprinkler head



## Inspector 102 (Jul 8, 2010)

The local fire inspector has asked me about a wax type coating on an exterior sprinkler head at a local nursing home. It appears the coating is there for weather protection. The installation is probably 30 years old and the State Fire MArshall wants the head changed out. Can anyone offer some information on what was an acceptacle weather protection requirements from this old of an installation. Thanks.


----------



## cda (Jul 8, 2010)

did not know it was required

just check the heads annualy and change IF needed

seems like if it was wax coated from the factory it should be legal??????????

ask the kind inspector to give you a section of nfpa 13 that is requireing it to be replaced


----------



## Gene Boecker (Jul 8, 2010)

If the sprinkler is 30 years old it needs to be replaced.  The current guideline is 10 years - changed from 15.  It's 2-3 times past its effective life.

The wax isn't the issue.


----------



## Inspector 102 (Jul 8, 2010)

Gene -

Is the timelimit based on the exterior location. I thought that 50 years was a the standard for replacing heads. I will look into NFPA 13, but if you could shoot me the refrence section, it would cut down on the time it takes me to find it. Thanks


----------



## Gene Boecker (Jul 8, 2010)

Actually, I jumped the gun.

The requirement is in 5.3.1.1.1 of NFPA 25.  Yes, replacement is every 50 years.  However, testing is every 10 years.  If the exterior sprinklers (which are 30 years old) have not been pulled and tested then it is likely that they need to be.  And, if pulling a sprinkler to test it, the sprinkler replacement is needed (probably without wax).

But, 5.3.1.1.1.5 requires dry sprinklers to be replaced every 10 years.

So, have any of the exterior sprinklers with the wax coating been testing in the past 10 years?  If so, and the tests show that the sprinklers are still within parameters, leave them alone.  If they haven't been tested, then pull and test.  But if it's a dry sprinkler, pull and replace.


----------



## Coug Dad (Jul 8, 2010)

Gene,

Isn't the 10 year testing for quick response sprinklers.  I will have to look it up in NFPA 25 but I thought older standard heads were good for 50 years and then replacement or testing beyond that.


----------



## Gene Boecker (Jul 8, 2010)

Replacement without testing varies on the type.  Dry type requires replacement or testing at 10 years (5.1.1.1.5).  So if it's exterior, it's likely a dry pendant or dry sprinkler system.

All sprinklers will be moving to the 10 year test cycle.

There's going to be a change in the next edition as well to address o-ring type sprinkler replacement based on research by UL.  In that research they validated the 10 year test cycle.


----------



## cda (Jul 8, 2010)

25 does not specificaly seem to address wax heads

from 13::

6.2.6 Special Coatings.

6.2.6.1* Corrosion Resistant.

6.2.6.1.1  Listed corrosion-resistant sprinklers shall be installed in locations where chemicals, moisture, or other corrosive vapors sufficient to cause corrosion of such devices exist.

6.2.6.1.2*  Unless the requirements of 6.2.6.1.3 are met, corrosion-resistant coatings shall be applied only by the manufacturer of the sprinkler and in accordance with the requirements of 6.2.6.1.3.

6.2.6.1.3  Any damage to the protective coating occurring at the time of installation shall be repaired at once using only the coating of the manufacturer of the sprinkler in the approved manner so that no part of the sprinkler will be exposed after installation has been completed.

are they dry heads or wet heads???

5.3 Testing.

5.3.1* Sprinklers.

5.3.1.1*  Where required by this section, sample sprinklers shall be submitted to a recognized testing laboratory acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction for field service testing.

5.3.1.1.1  Where sprinklers have been in service for 50 years, they shall be replaced or representative samples from one or more sample areas shall be tested. Test procedures shall be repeated at 10-year intervals.

5.3.1.1.1.1  Sprinklers manufactured prior to 1920 shall be replaced.

5.3.1.1.1.2  Sprinklers manufactured using fast-response elements that have been in service for 20 years shall be replaced, or representative samples shall be tested. They shall be retested at 10-year intervals.

5.3.1.1.1.3*  Representative samples of solder-type sprinklers with a temperature classification of extra high 325°F (163°C) or greater that are exposed to semicontinuous to continuous maximum allowable ambient temperature conditions shall be tested at 5-year intervals.

5.3.1.1.1.4  Where sprinklers have been in service for 75 years, they shall be replaced or representative samples from one or more sample areas shall be submitted to a recognized testing laboratory acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction for field service testing. Test procedures shall be repeated at 5-year intervals.

5.3.1.1.1.5*  Dry sprinklers that have been in service for 10 years shall be replaced, or representative samples shall be tested. They shall be retested at 10-year intervals.

5.3.1.1.2*  Where sprinklers are subjected to harsh environments, including corrosive atmospheres and corrosive water supplies, on a 5-year basis, sprinklers shall either be replaced or representative sprinkler samples shall be tested.

5.3.1.1.3  Where historical data indicate, longer intervals between testing shall be permitted.

5.3.1.2*  A representative sample of sprinklers for testing per 5.3.1.1.1 shall consist of a minimum of not less than four sprinklers or 1 percent of the number of sprinklers per individual sprinkler sample, whichever is greater.

5.3.1.3  Where one sprinkler within a representative sample fails to meet the test requirement, all sprinklers within the area represented by that sample shall be replaced.

5.3.1.3.1  Manufacturers shall be permitted to make modifications to their own sprinklers in the field with listed devices that restore the original performance as intended by the listing, where acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction.


----------



## cda (Jul 8, 2010)

so what state are you in??

and the temp of these outside heads??

http://www.vikinggroupinc.com/databook/sprinklers/010201.pdf


----------



## FM William Burns (Jul 8, 2010)

I would tend to agree with Geneo and it's most logically a dry pendant  on a dry system or anti-freeze loop and the wax coating is for corrosion protection in accordance with code.  Need a little more detail to establish opinion since this is basically educated speculation at this point.


----------



## AegisFPE (Jul 8, 2010)

Manufacturers may offer listed corrosion-resistant sprinklers with a coating other than wax (such as Teflon).


----------



## Insurance Engineer (Jul 8, 2010)

I do not know about the 10 year replacement on all sprinklers. I do not recall hearing that in NFPA 25 committee meetings. I have had many, well over 500 heads tested over the years at many different locations and occupancies and find few that fail! Except ones that are painted, corroded, loaded etc. Dry pendents are a problem, few pass after 10 years.

I do not think any sprinkler mfgs made a wax coated dry pendent 30 years ago. My guess it is on a antifreeze loop or dry system. I have no problem with the wax coated head. I see many chrome sprinklers that have turned green from the atmosphere. Wax is good! Let is go another 20 years and send one out to UL for testing.


----------



## cda (Jul 8, 2010)

""""is for corrosion protection in accordance with code""""

But how many ahj's require corrision protection for heads that are outside???


----------



## cda (Jul 8, 2010)

Inspector 102  has not stated if these are wet or dry pendant heads


----------



## Gene Boecker (Jul 8, 2010)

Right, cda!

If these are dry  then they should be looked at very carefully since they've been sitting around for 3 times the test cycle.


----------



## RJJ (Jul 8, 2010)

As Aegispe stated: Most I see are Teflon. Wax coated have to be at least 10 years. It would be nice to have a little more info on this. dry or wet?


----------



## FM William Burns (Jul 8, 2010)

> But how many ahj's require corrision protection for heads that are outside???


This one does if applicable..........;-)


----------



## cda (Jul 8, 2010)

OK FM I will play

just because a head is outside do you require protection??

or, under what circumstances would you require them???


----------



## fireguy (Jul 9, 2010)

We recently changed some leaking pipe in a pool maintainence room.  My tech wrote them up for corroeded heads.  I thought the heads should be OK, because we changed them about 5 years ago.  They were OK, he had just not seen wax coated heads. But I gave him credit for looking at the heads.   The only problem w/wax heads is the wax coating is easily damaged if you do not use the right wrench.  We have recently changed to polyester coated heads because of the delicacy issue.  Besides, white polyester heads are prettier.


----------



## FM William Burns (Jul 9, 2010)

> under what circumstances would you require them???


 In areas where exposed to weather and or high humidity, exposed to industrial processes, or exposed to corrosive water supply. Nothing worse than missing it and coming back three years later and seeing the aqua colored funk:
	

		
			
		

		
	

View attachment 151


View attachment 152


View attachment 151


View attachment 152


/monthly_2010_07/572953b8031c2_CBPUWaterTreatmamp10.jpg.bd4d2ba4ad2df958be29a88357deaeb7.jpg

/monthly_2010_07/572953b809092_CBPUWaterTreatmamp10.jpg.dbb0b09e17584d30c8001cb79a01b58f.jpg


----------



## FM William Burns (Jul 9, 2010)

> under what circumstances would you require them???


 In areas where exposed to weather and or high humidity, exposed to industrial processes, or exposed to corrosive water supply. Nothing worse than missing it and coming back three years later and seeing the aqua colored funk: *Edit:* Had to change names on Pics to protect myself 
View attachment 153


View attachment 153


/monthly_2010_07/572953b80c212_CorrodedSprinklamp1.jpg.45c0c2465727b6d879c4d5a07516f48c.jpg


----------



## Gene Boecker (Jul 9, 2010)

FM William Burns said:
			
		

> *Edit:* Had to change names on Pics to protect myself


Was it the sprinkler at your house?


----------



## FM William Burns (Jul 9, 2010)

Nice one....ROFLOL....no but IT might be watching and this one cut close


----------



## cda (Jul 9, 2010)

FM

sorry you live in a corrosive atmosphere

is this problem more with older heads then ones installed today??


----------



## fireguy (Jul 10, 2010)

FM William Burns said:
			
		

> In areas where exposed to weather and or high humidity, exposed to industrial processes, or exposed to corrosive water supply. Nothing worse than missing it and coming back three years later and seeing the aqua colored funk:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


An area with corroded heads is the cutting room of meat markets, or other food processing areas that are washed down with a bleach solution.  Bleach vapors will turn the heads green.


----------



## FM William Burns (Jul 10, 2010)

FG,



Hence “industrial processes” which classifies as the use of bleach, chlorine etc. since we also require them in the meat departments of groceries and super centers and hotel pool areas and equipment rooms. 



Cda,



Like someone said before regarding the wider use of Teflon coatings, we request information regarding corrosion potentials and if their submittals indicate the manufactures coating is listed for corrosive atmospheres we accept them but if they turn aqua at a later date, they get replaced.


----------



## cda (Jul 10, 2010)

FM.       Ok something else to add to plan check list

Glad we are not in a to corrosive place


----------



## RJJ (Jul 10, 2010)

Well I'll be! I thought they were decorator heads in antique copper high lights!

Just had 12 of them replaced. Only been in about two years.


----------

