# Good resource for plumbers



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

For anyone thinking about including residential sprinklers in their plumbing business, the American Society of Plumbing Engineers (ASPE) and International Code Council (ICC) have a book on sprinkler systems for 1- and 2-family dwellings that was written with plumbers in mind. The title is "Residential Fire Sprinkler Systems: Design, Installation and Code Administration." I don't have the ASPE web site, but the ICC web site is www.iccsafe.org. The book is available on their online bookstore and the Item No. is 7405S. It think it runs around $48.00 for non-members and around $38.00 for members.


----------



## plumber666 (Sep 19, 2010)

Admit it, you wrote that book didn't you?:thumbsup:


----------



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

plumber666 said:


> Admit it, you wrote that book didn't you?:thumbsup:


Yeah, I did. I was an ICC employee at the time, so I don't make any money on sales. I left them several months ago, one reason being that the powers that be didn't want to risk their relationships with the sprinkler industry. Totally frustrating. Integrating sprinklers with plumbing fixtures on the cold water distribution pipe reduces costs. Plumbing contractors can install them, which saves time and leaves builders with one less subcontractor to coordinate. And, homeowners get a system with superior hydraulics.

Since going independent, I created a one-day seminar on plumbing-based fire protection and will be writing a book with the same title. You can download a flyer about the seminar at www.fdexcellence.com.


----------



## BROOKLYN\PLUMB (May 21, 2010)

I'm not a fan of combined domestic/sprinkler system. Here are combined system just means they use the same main but they tee off and are a separate system, which I believe is superior for a bunch of what if? reasons. Price should not be a factor in matters of safety. That being said any system is better then none.


----------



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

BROOKLYN\PLUMB said:


> I'm not a fan of combined domestic/sprinkler system. Here are combined system just means they use the same main but they tee off and are a separate system, ... .


The definition of muitipurpose piping in NFPA 13D, the installation standard for dwelling sprinklers, is so loose that what you describe can be called multipurpose. Water authorities usually require backflow preventers for these systems, and that adds significant material and maintenance costs. Plumbing-based systems with all potable water are the way to go.

To me, PEX manifolded grids have the best hydraulics (for both plumbing fixtures and sprinklers), can be installed faster and for less cost. At least two of the five PEX manufacturers in the US and Canada design manifolded grids. All the water in the system flows when a plumbing fixture operates, thus no standing water anywhere. For plumbing fixtures, manifolded grids waste less water in delivering the desired temperature water at a fixture. They also eliminate temperature/pressure shock that occurs on Trunk and Branch plumbing. There are other advantages, but I'm getting too windy!


----------



## DesertOkie (Jul 15, 2011)

But that orange pvc looks so cool.


----------



## Mississippiplum (Sep 30, 2011)

What happens if the water authority shuts the water off to the house for lack of payment, then your fss Is useless, having a seperate meter and tap for the sprinkler system eliminates that issue, or am I missing something here? Because the water dept. Ain't gonna shut the water off to a main designated to feed the sprinkler system, because if the building burns down the water dept. Can be at fault. This is what I've been told, tell me if I'm not understanding things right.


----------



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

Mississippiplum said:


> What happens if the water authority shuts the water off to the house for lack of payment, then your fss Is useless, having a seperate meter and tap for the sprinkler system eliminates that issue, or am I missing something here? Because the water dept. Ain't gonna shut the water off to a main designated to feed the sprinkler system, because if the building burns down the water dept. Can be at fault. This is what I've been told, tell me if I'm not understanding things right.


I hear the same from time to time, but water authorities can easily resolve their concerns.

Every water authority tarriff or contract that I have read includes a statement that they do not guarantee minimum volume or pressure, anyway. All they need to do is add a statement that the person who signs the tarriff agreement, in this case the homeowner, understands that shutting off the water due to lack of payment will render the sprinkler system inoperable as well as the plumbing system.

We went through similar concerns with smoke alarms. As more jurisdictions required wired alarms, electric utilities voiced concern over their liability if they shut off the electricity. NFPA 72, the installation standard for residential smoke alarms, has required wired alarms for years. Here we are 40 years after residential smoke alarms were introduced, and I have not seen one lawsuit about electric utility shutoffs and lack of protection from wired smoke alarms. But like I said, water authorities can add language to their tarriffs that will protect them from liability in the event of a shutoff, just as they avoid liability from the lack of sufficient volume or pressure.


----------



## Mississippiplum (Sep 30, 2011)

Paddy said:


> I hear the same from time to time, but water authorities can easily resolve their concerns.
> 
> Every water authority tarriff or contract that I have read includes a statement that they do not guarantee minimum volume or pressure, anyway. All they need to do is add a statement that the person who signs the tarriff agreement, in this case the homeowner, understands that shutting off the water due to lack of payment will render the sprinkler system inoperable as well as the plumbing system.
> 
> We went through similar concerns with smoke alarms. As more jurisdictions required wired alarms, electric utilities voiced concern over their liability if they shut off the electricity. NFPA 72, the installation standard for residential smoke alarms, has required wired alarms for years. Here we are 40 years after residential smoke alarms were introduced, and I have not seen one lawsuit about electric utility shutoffs and lack of protection from wired smoke alarms. But like I said, water authorities can add language to their tarriffs that will protect them from liability in the event of a shutoff, just as they avoid liability from the lack of sufficient volume or pressure.


I see what your saying it makes sense, here the smoke alarms must have a battery back up built into them, but it makes sense that the contract can be worded to protect both sides, thank you for the reply I just learned something new lol


----------



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

DesertOkie said:


> But that orange pvc looks so cool.


Fortunately, CPVC pipe will be covered, except in unfinished basements. The same goes for PEX. The funny thing is that most people won't notice exposed bright orange CPVC, let alone white PEX. I installed a CPVC system in our new home back in the early '90's. When we put it up for sale, 24 couples walked through the home. Not one of them noticed the semi-recessed sprinklers on the main and upper floor ceilings, nor did they notice the exposed CPVC in the basement. The couple who bought the home had no idea that it was protected with fire sprinklers. I had to explain how they had superior fire protection - and about their future insurance savings.


----------



## sprinklertech (Oct 24, 2010)

Mississippiplum said:


> What happens if the water authority shuts the water off to the house for lack of payment, then your fss Is useless, having a seperate meter and tap for the sprinkler system eliminates that issue, or am I missing something here? Because the water dept. Ain't gonna shut the water off to a main designated to feed the sprinkler system, because if the building burns down the water dept. Can be at fault. This is what I've been told, tell me if I'm not understanding things right.


Combined systems for residential are far superior for a variety of reasons. 

In an article *"Residential Sprinkler Systems"* found on the NIST website:



> The purpose of a residential sprinkler system built to the standard is to “provide a sprinkler system that aids in detection and control of residential fires, and thus provides improved protection against injury, life loss, and property damage.” *From a performance perspective, if the room of fire origin is sprinklered, a sprinkler system designed and installed in accordance with the residential sprinkler standards is expected to prevent flashover and improve the occupant’s opportunity to escape or to be rescued.*


These systems are not designed to protect property but only prevent flashover so the occupant has more opportunity to escape.

As further evidence residential fire sprinklers are not installed to protect property as demonstrated by the water supply requirements contained in Chapter 6:



> Chapter 6 Water Supply
> 6.1 General Provisions.
> 6.1.1 Every automatic sprinkler system shall have at least one automatic water supply.
> 6.1.2 *Where stored water is used as the sole source of supply, the minimum quantity shall equal the water demand rate times 10 minutes unless permitted otherwise by 6.1.3.*
> ...


With a stored water supply all we need is 7 minutes for a single story dwelling less than 2000 sq. ft..

Residential sprinklers are not there to protect property but to save lives.

The thought is if nobody is in the building let it burn down. 

If water is shut off for non-payment the thought is people are not going to live in the residence or, if they do, they are not going to stay there very long. Without water my wife can live in a house maybe four minutes.

In my opinion combined systems won't need the inspections normal systems do which is good because I just don't see inspections happening in a home. 

Fireman Bob is not going to come into my home once a year without a warrant. For a residence Fireman Bob will not get a warrant.

Once installed residential sprinklers might go 30 years between inspections. How best to insure the water is always on and and the system is operational? Make it as simple as possible integrating it into the plumbing making it impossible to disable the fire sprinkler without shutting down water to the entire house. This serves as a built in alarm the system is not operational.

Think of it, a kid breaks a head in the bedroom and if the water can be stopped by shutting a sprinkler only valve that is what will be done. If the water stops why would the homeowner pay $200 for a new sprinkler when all he has to do is leave the valve closed? Right, he won't.


----------



## Mississippiplum (Sep 30, 2011)

sprinklertech said:


> Combined systems for residential are far superior for a variety of reasons.
> 
> In an article "Residential Sprinkler Systems" found on the NIST website:
> 
> ...


Thank you for the link and post it makes sense to me now, I can see the reasoning behind a combined system, we worked at a house last week that was 15 years old and the fire sprinkler system wasn't flushed or tested since the house was built, scary right, atleast with a combined system if a leak arises or a head brakes the homeowners are gonna have to fix it or they will be without water. And the sprinkler system is inavertanly maintained when work or maintaince is done on the domestic system.


----------



## sprinklertech (Oct 24, 2010)

Mississippiplum said:


> Thank you for the link and post it makes sense to me now, I can see the reasoning behind a combined system, we worked at a house last week that was 15 years old and the fire sprinkler system wasn't flushed or tested since the house was built, scary right, atleast with a combined system if a leak arises or a head brakes the homeowners are gonna have to fix it or they will be without water. And the sprinkler system is inavertanly maintained when work or maintaince is done on the domestic system.


As part of my job I can perform inspections for fire sprinkler systems in accordance with NFPA 25 "Standard for the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection Systems" and it is cut and dried what we are supposed to look for.

A short list:

1. Gauge pressure and change/calibrate gauges every five years.

On a residential system I don't think gauges are required on multipurpose systems. I am not totally sure on this, I had a busy day and I am to lazy to look it up, but I don't think they are required. If Gauges aren't there then there is nothing to inspect.

2. Main drain test.

The purpose of a main drain test is to detect blockage, such as a closed or partially closed, gate or control valve. 

But a multipurpose system doesn't have a main drain so there is nothing to do.

3. Internal check valve inspection every five years.

On multipurpose systems there are no check valves to inspect.

4. Flow water through an inspectors test connection to test alarms.

On multipurpose systems there are no alarm requirements, you don't want any because every time someone flushed the toilet the waterflow switch would activate calling the fire department to our house. Since no alarms an inspectors test connection is not required so nothing to do here either.

5. Backflow inspection. If there is one its on plumbing so as far as sprinkler goes nothing to do here either.

6. Anti-Freeze systems are prohibited so nothing to do here.

For your information anti-freeze systems are allowed under the 2002 standard but were prohibited under the 2010 standard. The reason is obvious, the maintenance issue and *the beauty of a multipurpose system is there is no maintenance!*

If you were to call me in to perform an inspection on a combined system what would there be for me to do? The only thing I could do is walk around making sure the sprinklers hadn't been painted. If someone did require an inspection it would take me all of 4 minutes to walk around the house feeling like a rip off idiot.

The whole beauty of the combined systems is the nearly total lack of maintenance required. There isn't any that I can think of.

Ok, I had to check the gauge requirements and I was right.



> 7.3 Pressure Gauges.
> 7.3.1 Where a dry system is installed, a pressure gauge shall be installed to indicate system air pressure.
> 7.3.2 Where a pressure tank is used for the water supply, a pressure gauge shall be installed to indicate tank pressure.


You are not gong to find a dry system or pressure tank on a multipurpose system. No gauges required so nothing to check, calibrate or replace.

The only bad thing I can ever see happening is paint.

Mississippiplum, you mentioned "the fire sprinkler system wasn't flushed" and I thought I would mention flushing requirements of normal sprinkler systems.... there aren't any and in fact you don't want to flush a normal sprinkler system.

Most commercial systems are black steel pipe and you all know what would happen if you tried running domestic water through black steel pipe (wouldn't last very long) but it is different on sprinkler systems.

We don't have running water though our pipe unless there is a fire. Best thing you can do is fill the system with water, place it in service and leave it alone! By leave it alone I am talking 25, 35, 50 and 75 years leave it alone. Don't drain or flush it to "freshen it up" because it is the *worst* thing you can do.

Sprinkler water in black steel pipe will get real funky over time, the smell is distinctive and stains never come out but after a bit, a few months maybe, all the oxygen in the water is used up and it becomes an inert atmosphere. A metal rod placed in a very moist room with an atmosphere of 100% nitrogen will never rust, it takes oxygen.

The oldest system I ever worked on was for a wire factory built in 1913. When we took the pipe apart the inside looked as good as it did the day it was installed.

If a customer flushes his system with nice clean water every month he'll more than likely be replacing that system inside of five years.

Remember, funky water is good!:thumbsup:

I am really off topic for this forum but you will have to pardon me because I am on a roll.

Flushing will remove the protection some specifically listed sprinkler pipe comes with to guard against MIC.

Like *Dynaflow M-COAT* by Allied Pipe



> The internal surface of all black Allied Tube & Conduit fire sprinkler pipe products are coated with M-COAT, an advanced MIC coating that is FBC™ system compatible for hybrid sprinkle systems. FBC system compatible indicates that this product has been tested, and is monitored on an ongoing basis, for chemical compatibility with FlowGuard Gold®, BlazeMaster®, and Corzan® pipe and fittings.*


A nice product to have especially in areas like Mobile, Alabama where MIC is a real problem on sprinkler systems. But I know the M-COAT does not last forever and I remember reading in a Factory Mutual article it was good for about 50 system flushes and fill ups. 50 doesn't sound like much but once every 3 years and it will last a long time.

File this under the "for what it is worth" department.


----------



## Mississippiplum (Sep 30, 2011)

Same goes with the black pipe on closed loop heating systems oxygen is bad, the house I mentioned had a copper riser but Idk what the rest of the system was plumbed with.


----------



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

*Inspection and maintenance*

Regarding sprinklertech's comments on inspecting and testing sprinkler systems, systems installed under IRC P2904 or NFPA 13D make them the owner's responsibility. 

IRC P2904.7. "Instructions and signs. An owners manual for the fire sprinkler system shall be provided to the owner."

NFPA 13D, 4.2. "Maintenance. The installer shall provide to the owner/occupant instructions on inspecting, testing and maintaining the system."

The manuals come from the manufacturers and cover stuff like, "do not paint sprinklers or hang stuff from them" etc. 

Regarding drain valves, multipurpose systems with a lot of standing water in branch lines should have drain valves. On plumbing-based systems, operating a plumbing fixture moves water through all of the water distribution pipe and there are no dead end branch lines, so every plumbing fixture is a drain.

The only caveat to owner-testing and maintenance is when systems have backflow preventers. Many water authorities require them on systems with dead end branch lines. They must be tested annually by certified technicians, which adds to the costs. That is just one of several reasons why I prefer plumbing-based systems over other multipurpose systems.

One note about pressure gauges. They are required on sysstems with backflow preventers, and they serve a good purpose. On such systems, water hammer can increase the pressure on the system side of the check valve. A friend in CA told me he saw gauges that hit 300 psi and burst. The solution to this problem is to install a relief valve on the system side, set to operate when the pressure exceeds the normal system pressure.

Plumbing-based systems do not have check valves, so the pressure from water hammer simply dissipates.


----------



## NewSchool (Jan 8, 2012)

Thanks for the info. I am currently waiting on my test for the Texas residential fire suppression endorsement on my license. I took a 24 hr class ad am currently studying the NFPA13D for the test.


----------



## bobbyhutchinson (Jan 10, 2012)

*res sprinklers*

great thing to do, just think how many lives we can save:thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

People do not appreciate an important fact about how plumbing-based sprinklers make them much less expensive than traditional systems. In plumbing-based sprinkler systems, the cold water distribution pipe makes up for nearly one half of the pipe that is needed for the sprinklers. Every home will have cold water distribution pipe whether sprinklers are installed or not. Being a portion of the cold water distribution pipe makes sprinklers much less expensive than opponents claim. I am doing a "side by side" analysis of a home that will document this fact.


----------



## damnplumber (Jan 22, 2012)

Mississippiplum said:


> What happens if the water authority shuts the water off to the house for lack of payment, then your fss Is useless, having a seperate meter and tap for the sprinkler system eliminates that issue, or am I missing something here? Because the water dept. Ain't gonna shut the water off to a main designated to feed the sprinkler system, because if the building burns down the water dept. Can be at fault. This is what I've been told, tell me if I'm not understanding things right.


 
If you don't pay your fire insurance bill... you have no coverage hince you you don't pay your water bill ... no protection just my 2-cents


----------



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

damnplumber said:


> If you don't pay your fire insurance bill... you have no coverage hince you you don't pay your water bill ... no protection just my 2-cents


True, that. The lack of running water renders a home uninhabitable. There is no duty to provide sprinkler protection to people who occupy an uninhabitable home, just as there is no duty to provide them with potable water.


----------



## jeffreyplumber (Dec 7, 2009)

As for lack of water causing a house to be uninhabitable . Some areas do not allow the utility company to turn off the water due to lack of payment , for the exact reason they would be causing a home with children or handicapped to become uninhabitable by turning off water. they just keep providing it and lein the property for the bill.
The combined potable and fire sprinkler will provide a cheaper system therefore providing fire protection in homes that otherwise would not be so equipt. 
As for cost not being a factor in fire saftey I cant disagree more. I have never seen a single family home get firesprinklers installed that wasent forced to. We have several citys that require them and in some high fire area they are sometimes required. 
I mean we got laws requiring smoke detectors and they cost like 10 bucks nobody would ever buy and install them if it werent law . So I think the price has a lot to do with it.


----------



## AkonJakson (Feb 7, 2013)

I will surely do it..


----------



## phishfood (Nov 18, 2012)

Post an intro, is that what you will surely do?


----------



## Plumb26 (May 18, 2013)

Mississippiplum said:


> What happens if the water authority shuts the water off to the house for lack of payment, then your fss Is useless, having a seperate meter and tap for the sprinkler system eliminates that issue, or am I missing something here? Because the water dept. Ain't gonna shut the water off to a main designated to feed the sprinkler system, because if the building burns down the water dept. Can be at fault. This is what I've been told, tell me if I'm not understanding things right.


seems to me like it would be the moron who didn't pay their water bill. the sprinkler system would just be piped into the potable water.... would be no more need for separate systems, backflows, etc. b/c it's the same water you're drinking and bathing with anyway. If the water company has to shut the water off and the house burns dow, just consider it a form of population control.


----------



## ASUPERTECH (Jun 22, 2008)

Plumb26 said:


> seems to me like it would be the moron who didn't pay their water bill. the sprinkler system would just be piped into the potable water.... would be no more need for separate systems, backflows, etc. b/c it's the same water you're drinking and bathing with anyway. If the water company has to shut the water off and the house burns dow, just consider it a form of population control.


Lol


----------



## wyrickmech (Mar 16, 2013)

sprinklertech said:


> As part of my job I can perform inspections for fire sprinkler systems in accordance with NFPA 25 "Standard for the Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection Systems" and it is cut and dried what we are supposed to look for. A short list: 1. Gauge pressure and change/calibrate gauges every five years. On a residential system I don't think gauges are required on multipurpose systems. I am not totally sure on this, I had a busy day and I am to lazy to look it up, but I don't think they are required. If Gauges aren't there then there is nothing to inspect. 2. Main drain test. The purpose of a main drain test is to detect blockage, such as a closed or partially closed, gate or control valve. But a multipurpose system doesn't have a main drain so there is nothing to do. 3. Internal check valve inspection every five years. On multipurpose systems there are no check valves to inspect. 4. Flow water through an inspectors test connection to test alarms. On multipurpose systems there are no alarm requirements, you don't want any because every time someone flushed the toilet the waterflow switch would activate calling the fire department to our house. Since no alarms an inspectors test connection is not required so nothing to do here either. 5. Backflow inspection. If there is one its on plumbing so as far as sprinkler goes nothing to do here either. 6. Anti-Freeze systems are prohibited so nothing to do here. For your information anti-freeze systems are allowed under the 2002 standard but were prohibited under the 2010 standard. The reason is obvious, the maintenance issue and the beauty of a multipurpose system is there is no maintenance! If you were to call me in to perform an inspection on a combined system what would there be for me to do? The only thing I could do is walk around making sure the sprinklers hadn't been painted. If someone did require an inspection it would take me all of 4 minutes to walk around the house feeling like a rip off idiot. The whole beauty of the combined systems is the nearly total lack of maintenance required. There isn't any that I can think of. Ok, I had to check the gauge requirements and I was right. You are not gong to find a dry system or pressure tank on a multipurpose system. No gauges required so nothing to check, calibrate or replace. The only bad thing I can ever see happening is paint. Mississippiplum, you mentioned "the fire sprinkler system wasn't flushed" and I thought I would mention flushing requirements of normal sprinkler systems.... there aren't any and in fact you don't want to flush a normal sprinkler system. Most commercial systems are black steel pipe and you all know what would happen if you tried running domestic water through black steel pipe (wouldn't last very long) but it is different on sprinkler systems. We don't have running water though our pipe unless there is a fire. Best thing you can do is fill the system with water, place it in service and leave it alone! By leave it alone I am talking 25, 35, 50 and 75 years leave it alone. Don't drain or flush it to "freshen it up" because it is the worst thing you can do. Sprinkler water in black steel pipe will get real funky over time, the smell is distinctive and stains never come out but after a bit, a few months maybe, all the oxygen in the water is used up and it becomes an inert atmosphere. A metal rod placed in a very moist room with an atmosphere of 100% nitrogen will never rust, it takes oxygen. The oldest system I ever worked on was for a wire factory built in 1913. When we took the pipe apart the inside looked as good as it did the day it was installed. If a customer flushes his system with nice clean water every month he'll more than likely be replacing that system inside of five years. Remember, funky water is good!:thumbsup: I am really off topic for this forum but you will have to pardon me because I am on a roll. Flushing will remove the protection some specifically listed sprinkler pipe comes with to guard against MIC. Like Dynaflow M-COAT by Allied Pipe A nice product to have especially in areas like Mobile, Alabama where MIC is a real problem on sprinkler systems. But I know the M-COAT does not last forever and I remember reading in a Factory Mutual article it was good for about 50 system flushes and fill ups. 50 doesn't sound like much but once every 3 years and it will last a long time. File this under the "for what it is worth" department.


number 3 should be internal pipe inspection every 5 years


----------



## plumber78 (Nov 14, 2013)

I installed an uphonor combination system in my house when I built. It was designed so that water circulated through the entire system so that you did not have to worry about stagnant water. It was challenging to install because of the design of my house accompanied by the fact that you cannot have any branch longer than 18" (I believe that is min length). 

According to Uphonor, it was the first system like it's kind installed (with their products and design). Uphonor sent a designer, installer, and a couple of salesmen to see the install. We also put on a demonstration on the operation of it. We invited the fire department as well as inspectors, fellow tradesman, and media. We even build a shed with a sprinkler head in it that we hung cardboard curtains in. My dad climbed in and sat on a chair after setting the cardboard on fire and waited in there until the sprinkler head popped and soaked everything including him lol. It turned out to be a lot of fun and we even made the evening news. We didn't promote our company as were trying to make people aware that residential systems were feasible and economical and a great way to help protect families from fires. 

Unfortunately, that was in 2008 and the economy was not interested in building let along adding any cost to a house. I know I am very glad I have a sprinkler system in my house. I have four kids so knowing that I have around an extra 10 minutes to get them out of the house if there is ever a fire is well worth the extra cost.


----------



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

I did some work for Wirsbo (now Uponor) back in the day, and may have been there. I still promote their system, and have more information about installation costs at my blog site, www.fdexcellence.com. These systems cost about one half the cost of stand-alone sprinklers. There are two big reasons. First, half of the pipe is also plumbing pipe, which is going to be there regardless. Second, they eliminate all of the tees, elbows and couplings needed for rigid pipe.

Paddy


----------



## plumber78 (Nov 14, 2013)

Pardon my horrible spelling on UPONOR lol. Very small world if you had been there. Yes combination systems are pretty reasonable. I think we figured that for a 2500 sq ft house, we could have it designed and installed for between seven and eight grand. That included tenting the water lines in the attic with bubble wrap insulation to protect the lines from freezing. When you factor it into a 30yr mortgage, it really isn't much when you are thinking about the safety of your family. Plus it does get you a discount on homeowner's insurance.


----------



## plumber78 (Nov 14, 2013)

I dug out the old UPONOR design for my house. This was the original design and was altered slightly because of jobsite conditions and me deciding to finish the basement almost completely. Each loop feeds down to plumbing fixtures on each level to ensure that water is constantly being circulated through the loop and thus keeping water from becoming stagnant. 2nd floor loop was located in attic. 

Since we were in Ohio, we had to worry about freezing. We used bubble wrap to tent over the pipe so that 12" of insulation could then be blown on top. Simply blowing insulation on the pipes will not keep it from freezing...all that will do is keep heat from getting to the piping. By tenting over it you provide an air pocket between the heated space and the blown in insulation and thus keeping the piping from freezing. This may be common sense to some, but it seems many people think that putting insulation around a pipe is what keeps it from freezing.


----------



## sprinklertech (Oct 24, 2010)

plumber78 said:


> Pardon my horrible spelling on UPONOR lol. Very small world if you had been there. Yes combination systems are pretty reasonable. I think we figured that for a 2500 sq ft house, we could have it designed and installed for between seven and eight grand. That included tenting the water lines in the attic with bubble wrap insulation to protect the lines from freezing. When you factor it into a 30yr mortgage, it really isn't much when you are thinking about the safety of your family. Plus it does get you a discount on homeowner's insurance.


Between seven and eight grand seems a little high to me.

But let me address separate systems and the "what if" the water utility shuts off water for non-payment of a bill.

Residential systems, unlike commercial systems, are not designed to protect property or even keep a house from burning down. Granted, many homes have been saved because they were equipped with residential systems but this wasn't by "design" so much as "accident".

Residential sprinklers heads are designed to discharge water in such a way it will prevent flash-over and allow the occupants 10 minutes to escape the house. 

From NFPA 13D 



> 6.1 General Provisions.
> 6.1.1 Every automatic sprinkler system shall have at least one automatic water supply.
> 6.1.2 Where stored water is used as the sole source of supply, the minimum quantity shall equal the water demand rate times *10 minutes* unless permitted otherwise by 6.1.3.
> 6.1.3 Where stored water is used as the sole source of supply, the minimum quantity shall be permitted to equal the two-sprinkler water demand rate times *7 minutes* where dwelling units meet the following criteria:
> ...


If my sprinkler demand is 28 gpm then I need a stored water supply of 280 gallons unless my home is less than 2000 sq ft, and one story in height, in which case I could reduce the stored water requirement to 196 gallons.

In most areas of the country the water will run out before the fire department arrives.

We don't care about the house.... we just want to buy time for the occupants to get out before the room flashes over. That's it, that is all there is.

For non-payment of a utility bill more than likely the home will be unoccupied. Just think of your wife going without water for 24 hours and she'll be moving out too. Not only that but if people living in Ohio don't pay their water bill most likely they won't pay for heat either in which case you would want the sprinkler system shut down.

In any event it is assumed the dwelling would be unoccupied if water is not available.


----------



## plumber78 (Nov 14, 2013)

sprinklertech said:


> Between seven and eight grand seems a little high to me.
> 
> But let me address separate systems and the "what if" the water utility shuts off water for non-payment of a bill.
> 
> ...


 
That is how mine is designed...combi system allowing us time to get out of the house. Correct me if I am wrong, but the flow requirements are just to one head...maybe?

The system in and of itself would not cost that much, but that number allows for larger water service, upgraded meter cost, and cost to insulate in the attic. My system had around 35 heads as my house has 3 finished floors. A small ranch house would require much less work. As someone has shown, a system that would work could be done for much less. However, if you needed to have a system design to pass a building official's approval, it is going to cost a little more.


----------



## wyrickmech (Mar 16, 2013)

plumber78 said:


> That is how mine is designed...combi system allowing us time to get out of the house. Correct me if I am wrong, but the flow requirements are just to one head...maybe? The system in and of itself would not cost that much, but that number allows for larger water service, upgraded meter cost, and cost to insulate in the attic. My system had around 35 heads as my house has 3 finished floors. A small ranch house would require much less work. As someone has shown, a system that would work could be done for much less. However, if you needed to have a system design to pass a building official's approval, it is going to cost a little more.


isn't cost figured around 200 to250 per head?


----------



## plumber78 (Nov 14, 2013)

wyrickmech said:


> isn't cost figured around 200 to250 per head?


To be honest with you, my house is the only such system we have done and that was five years ago. We made that estimated price up back then based on what it took on my house. I wish I had better data to go off of. It just hasn't caught on residentially like I hoped it would. We do very little with sprinkler systems...If we quote a big commercial job that requires a plumbing and sprinkler combined quote, we will sub out the sprinkler.


----------



## sprinklertech (Oct 24, 2010)

wyrickmech said:


> isn't cost figured around 200 to250 per head?


Yeah, seven to eight thousand seemed to me to be a little high so I worked it out and it's about right.

I think I counted 38 heads @ $200 each plus some bubble wrap and it's about right where it should be. His house is a little larger than normal. Actually twice as big which tells me plumbers do well in this economy.

Most I have done have 12 to 15 heads and they run $2500 to $3500.



plumber78 said:


> That is how mine is designed...combi system allowing us time to get out of the house. Correct me if I am wrong, but the flow requirements are just to one head...maybe?
> 
> The system in and of itself would not cost that much, but that number allows for larger water service, upgraded meter cost, and cost to insulate in the attic. My system had around 35 heads as my house has 3 finished floors. A small ranch house would require much less work. As someone has shown, a system that would work could be done for much less. However, if you needed to have a system design to pass a building official's approval, it is going to cost a little more.


For 13D systems it is all the heads in a compartment up to a maximum of two (2) sprinklers.

There is a fancy definition of a compartment in 13D but basically it is a room where the lintels of doors extend down a maximum of 12" I think.

Density is .05 gpm / sq ft so with maximum spacing allowed of 20'x20' the most water you generally will need is 20 gpm for pendent sprinklers. If the spacing gets less then less water is needed but with two sprinklers flowing at 20 gpm 40 gpm total is generally the total of all you would ever need.

Most of them I've done, I have done a few 13D systems but not a whole lot, I generally end up needing a total of 25 to 30 gallons per minute because in nearly all homes you will have at least one compartment need more than one sprinkler.

The amazing thing about these little systems is they certainly do work in keeping a room of flashing over if properly installed. On a lot of cases they'll put the fire out which really isn't their job but they've certainly done it.


----------



## plumber78 (Nov 14, 2013)

sprinklertech said:


> Yeah, seven to eight thousand seemed to me to be a little high so I worked it out and it's about right.
> 
> I think I counted 38 heads @ $200 each plus some bubble wrap and it's about right where it should be. His house is a little larger than normal. Actually twice as big which tells me plumbers do well in this economy.
> 
> ...


I know when we put on our demo, I was amazed how fast it put the fire out. It was instantly. Now granted that was on cardboard in a small space so the water was more concentrated. The fire was pretty big though by the time it got the head up to temp. The system may not be designed to put out a fire, but it is nice to know that it certainly can.


----------



## sprinklertech (Oct 24, 2010)

plumber78 said:


> I know when we put on our demo, I was amazed how fast it put the fire out. It was instantly. Now granted that was on cardboard in a small space so the water was more concentrated. The fire was pretty big though by the time it got the head up to temp. The system may not be designed to put out a fire, but it is nice to know that it certainly can.


This was put up recently showing a demonstration from March of this year.

Look at what happens just *two minutes* into the fire.... room flash-over and it's surprising how fast it happens.


----------



## plumber78 (Nov 14, 2013)

sprinklertech said:


> This was put up recently showing a demonstration from March of this year.
> 
> Look at what happens just *two minutes* into the fire.... room flash-over and it's surprising how fast it happens.


 
Great video! If builders would show that to every homeowner, I am sure they would be able to sell a lot of systems. I can't understand why the builders are so against residential sprinklers. I understand they don't want them required (and I agree they shouldn't be) but it could be an easy upsell for them.


----------



## wyrickmech (Mar 16, 2013)

plumber78 said:


> Great video! If builders would show that to every homeowner, I am sure they would be able to sell a lot of systems. I can't understand why the builders are so against residential sprinklers. I understand they don't want them required (and I agree they shouldn't be) but it could be an easy upsell for them.


 it would be worth the extra cost. Builders around here fought tooth and nail against the fire chief on city ordinance to require houses over 5000 square feet to be sprinkled. I wish the would watch this video.


----------



## sprinklertech (Oct 24, 2010)

plumber78 said:


> Great video! If builders would show that to every homeowner, I am sure they would be able to sell a lot of systems. I can't understand why the builders are so against residential sprinklers. I understand they don't want them required (and I agree they shouldn't be) but it could be an easy upsell for them.


My main argument is with plumbers doing the work it should be a lot less expensive than if a full fledged fire sprinkler company does it.

Plumbers are already mobilized on the job whereas if I do the work we're going to have $1,000 wrapped up in mobilization alone.

Full sprinkler companies like mine have someone hired to do all the design work which I agree with except when it comes to 13D residential systems. When I design a 100,000 sq ft mixed use occupancy building with plastic injection presses and exposed Class A non-expanded baled plastic commodity to 16' high in a building having roof height of 28'-6" I can tell you my calculations are going to get very involved. I've done plenty of jobs just like this and it is common to end up with 100 pages of calculations alone.

But there is no reason for any of this on a residential system. All a guy like me will do is add a lot of costs onto the project without really needing it.

I like the way some state have set it up giving licenses to plumbing companies having demonstrated attending some much needed classes. A professional plumber that appreciates the seriousness of his job should be able to be competent with 5 days of classroom study. 

If I was giving a class my focus would be on the importance of spacing and clearances from light fixtures, ceiling beams and proper distance away from fire places and cooking surfaces. I shouldn't have to teach anyone here how to avoid freezing because you know this probably better than I do. If we are going to freeze we simply put in a dry system where the plumber doesn't have that luxury.


----------



## plumber78 (Nov 14, 2013)

sprinklertech said:


> My main argument is with plumbers doing the work it should be a lot less expensive than if a full fledged fire sprinkler company does it.
> 
> Plumbers are already mobilized on the job whereas if I do the work we're going to have $1,000 wrapped up in mobilization alone.
> 
> ...


 
I completely agree it is much more feasible and economical for plumbers to do the work. I would hope that plumbers would have to go through a serious testing procedure in order to design their own systems. I have seen what some so called plumbers do and try to cut corners. I would be afraid what would happen when some of these hacks do in trying to design a sprinkler system. It's not rocket science, but it does take some planning.


----------



## sprinklertech (Oct 24, 2010)

plumber78 said:


> I completely agree it is much more feasible and economical for plumbers to do the work. I would hope that plumbers would have to go through a serious testing procedure in order to design their own systems. I have seen what some so called plumbers do and try to cut corners. I would be afraid what would happen when some of these hacks do in trying to design a sprinkler system. It's not rocket science, but it does take some planning.


I am most concerned about spacing and clearance rules which do get very involved especially for residential sprinklers. If you haven't read the rules it gets a lot more involved and technical than you probably think.

*TMB - Plumbing Engineer - Columns: October 2009: Fire Protection*

For example you have a ceiling light with a 16" diameter bulb.... what is the closest you can be to that light without having to add an additional sprinkler on the other side? Answer: 64" or 5'-4" (four times rule).

Decorative ceiling beams can be especially troublesome. In fact they can be a real pain and scary.

There has to be some specialized training and certification for the plumber... no different than if I tried to design a plumbing stack (now that would be a real treat).


----------



## plumber78 (Nov 14, 2013)

sprinklertech said:


> I am most concerned about spacing and clearance rules which do get very involved especially for residential sprinklers. If you haven't read the rules it gets a lot more involved and technical than you probably think.
> 
> *TMB - Plumbing Engineer - Columns: October 2009: Fire Protection*
> 
> ...


Yes there are a lot of rules...I remember getting them fed to me as I was installing my system lol. I did not mean to minimize the technical aspect of your job . All of those rules are extremely important to protect lives if a fire should happen.


----------



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

I have two comments. First, plumbers do not have to design the systems. The PEX pipe manufacturers provide that. Second, plumbers can learn the spacing and distance rules in a two-day class.


----------



## plbgbiz (Aug 27, 2010)

I have never seen a 16" diameter bulb. Are you referring to the overall size of the fixture?


----------



## sprinklertech (Oct 24, 2010)

plbgbiz said:


> I have never seen a 16" diameter bulb. Are you referring to the overall size of the fixture?


Yes.

I will make up some examples and post them here later this evening.


----------



## Redwood (Sep 8, 2008)

Biz he's talking about something like this....


----------



## sprinklertech (Oct 24, 2010)

Redwood said:


> Biz he's talking about something like this....


I would urge anyone going into this line of work to spring the bucks and purchase the *NFPA 13D, NFPA 13R, and Automatic Sprinkler Systems for Residential Occupancies Handbook Set, 2013 Edition*

Yeah, it isn't cheap but it is something you are going to need and it doesn't matter if you are doing the design or someone else is.

Most of you will have someone else do the design for you but that doesn't relieve you of the responsibility to insure everything is done the right way. We've all seen it, what a happens if the original drawings show a surface mounted light fixture that suspends 0'-3" down from the ceiling but the owner doesn't like it and she says "change it to one that is bigger and hangs down 0'-7" from the ceiling."? I know, hard for all you guys to with a housewife changing things around but they do that sort of thing.

(That was tongue and cheek, on your typical job I would imagine a bathroom can be changed around a half dozen times but you get my drift).

Understand that there are differences between the standards but for here all I will address is the clearance requirements for NFPA 13D.

From the handbook (a handbook you should have if you do the work).










That is "at least" three feet.

And then there is the "beam rule" we see below:










That beam you see doesn't have to be a classic beam it can be any obstruction and one we always see is a surface mounted 4' or 8' long fluorescent light fixture. For our purposes you may as well call that light fixture a beam because to us that is exactly what it is.

In the majority of homes your sprinklers will most likely be semi-recessed or flush concealed. Yeah, we could find the old #402 two pice escutcheons like you see in the older K-Mart stores but homeowners are not going to go for that look.

With a flush head the deflector drops down about 1/2" and the same is true for semi-recessed. I think it would be safe to say most sprinkler heads you will install will have deflectors right at half an inch down from the ceiling.

So you have a 2 bulb surface mounted florescent light fixture and measuring you discover the bulb is 3" down from the ceiling. What is the closest you can position a sprinkler to the light without having to add an additional sprinkler on the other side of the light fixture?

Answer: *Not less than 3'-0" and that is from the edge of the light.*

Remember what you are looking for is the difference between the deflector that is already 1/2" down and the bottom of the "beam" obstruction.

Your biggest challenge is going to be when someone likes the look of fake wood beams in the family room. This can get really tough and tiresome so what you will make sure you do is get the designer all the information he needs. The designer needs to know where the lights are, where the beams are and what size lights and beams he is dealing with so he can make a proper decision. 

From a designers standpoint don't be sending me floor plans because floor plans are next to useless to me... what I have to know is what the reflective ceiling plan looks like, what the measurements are and I really need to know the particulars on where you lights are and what size you have. Your designer will do you a good job but it is up to you to insure he has all the information he needs to do you a good job.

When something gets messed up it is going to have something to do with these clearance rules and you can avoid a lot of trouble if you take the time to read up in the handbook these clearance rules for beams, lights and fans.


----------



## GAN (Jul 10, 2012)

In Municipal Code adoptions in my area (St. Louis Metro) you will find the 2009 I.R.C. was not adopted by any municipality because of "section P2904" the 13D requirements.

There have been multiple seminars and meetings about this with local building departments and NFPA as well as fire department personnel. The fire industry appears to be pushing for it, most municipal departments are reluctant to.

You have to remember the I.R.C. is a "model code" and may be altered by ordinance to suit the municipalities needs. Unlike the 2004 Illinois Plumbing Code which has been voted on by the Illinois General Assembly and is law. The residential sprinkler system may be dropped by any municipality during their code adoption process.

The Illinois State Fire Marshall was pushing the 13D, and dropped it when a large uproar came from municipalities against mandating it, then the Chicago Fire Marshall (fairly sure about this have the E-mail) came out against the mandate within the past few months.

In Illinois a system larger than 5 heads must be designed & installed by licensed personnel, not a plumber, unless they have went through the testing and secured the proper license.

This said 13D is a knock down system only. I believe it should be for about 15-20 minutes. Since you can provide a stand alone tank system with a pump to comply if you are in an area that does not have a public water supply ( a well system). In our area we have bids that average out from $2.00 to $2.75 per square foot for residential installation without a tank & pump, since the basement is also required to be sprinkled and the vast majority of residential units in our area have basements.

Another NEW section in the 2012 I.R.C. is 501.3 "floor protection". This system is only mandated for "I-joist" construction;

R501.3 Fire protection of floors. Floor assemblies, not
required elsewhere in this code to be fire-resistance rated,
shall be provided with a 1/2-inch (12.7 mm) gypsum wallboard
membrane, 5/8-inch (16 mm) wood structural panel membrane,
or equivalent on the underside of the floor framing member.
Exceptions:
1. Floor assemblies located directly over a space protected
by an automatic sprinkler system in accordance
with Section P2904, NFPA13D, or other
approved equivalent sprinkler system.
2. Floor assemblies located directly over a crawl space
not intended for storage or fuel-fired appliances.
3. Portions of floor assemblies can be unprotected
when complying with the following:
3.1. The aggregate area of the unprotected portions
shall not exceed 80 square feet per
story
3.2. Fire blocking in accordance with Section
R302.11.1 shall be installed along the perimeter
of the unprotected portion to separate
the unprotected portion from the remainder
of the floor assembly.
4. Wood floor assemblies using dimension lumber or
structural composite lumber equal to or greater than
2-inch by 10-inch (50.8 mm by 254 mm) nominal
dimension, or other approved floor assemblies demonstrating
equivalent fire performance.

So if you use dimensional lumber, it negates the requirement for floor protection, or if you have fire rated trusses this section is also negated., or if 1/2" drywall covering the "I-Joists".

Our municipality voted to "not require" the installation of a residential fire protection system, but left it optional. IF you put one in it must comply. NO OTHER municiplaity in our area has addressed this issue yet. Most all of the ones I have talked to will not require the 13D system when they adopt their code, at least this is the feeling from the majority of building & zoning department people I have talked to and the members of the Code Enforcement Officials of Southern Illinois, who I am member of.


Are they a good idea yes. The big difference is not how the home is built (except the "I" joist factor) but the all the materials used in modern furniture, appliances, TV's, etc. that populate the home. Your flash over time went from 30 minutes or well beyond back in the 1960-1970's to 20 minutes or less with modern materials.

As far as the "I" joist factor, my municipality has kept the I.R.C. section 501.3 in place but have dropped the mandated 13D installation for all new residential construction in our recent 2012 I.R.C. code adoption. I bet you will find this true in the majority of municipalities in my area when they finally update to newer version of the I.R.C.

There are several spray on applied completely safe materials that can be sprayed on I-joists to basically render them fire proof. I have seen a 10 minute burn with a map gas torch go out as soon as the flame is pulled away from plywood that this material was sprayed on. We are currently putting together material to put before our Village Board to see if we will also accept this as the AHJ being acceptable for the 501.3 floor protection in the 2012 I.R.C.


----------



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

Two thoughts. First, plumbing contractors must demonstrate that they know the NFPA 13D requirements for sprinkler installation. That can be accomplished with a 2-day class on spacing and obstruction rules. Second, plumbing contractors do not need to hire licensed designers because the PEX pipe manufacturers retain designers who meet state licensing regs.

The big problem? State regulations that prevent or inhibit qualified plumbing contractors from installing plumbing-based sprinklers.


----------



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

plumber78 said:


> I have seen what some so called plumbers do and try to cut corners. I would be afraid what would happen when some of these hacks do in trying to design a sprinkler system. It's not rocket science, but it does take some planning.


I know of sprinkler contractors who glued sprinklers to the ceiling instead of connecting them to the water supply, and others who installed branch lines that were not hooked up to the water supply. In other words, every trade has hacks who diminish the value of their crafts.

Citing the small percentage of contractors who ignore the installation standards is not an excuse for keeping plumbers out of the residential sprinkler business. Like most sprinkler contractors, most plumbing contractors are devoted to installing quality systems that comply with codes. It is up to regulators to identify the scofflaws in both professions and get them out of business.

In my experience, plumbing contractors can qualify to install NFPA 13D systems with a 2-day class that ideally includes a half-day in a home under construction.


----------



## wyrickmech (Mar 16, 2013)

Paddy said:


> Two thoughts. First, plumbing contractors must demonstrate that they know the NFPA 13D requirements for sprinkler installation. That can be accomplished with a 2-day class on spacing and obstruction rules. Second, plumbing contractors do not need to hire licensed designers because the PEX pipe manufacturers retain designers who meet state licensing regs. The big problem? State regulations that prevent or inhibit qualified plumbing contractors from installing plumbing-based sprinklers.


give more detailed info on this two day corse. Who where when. Is it threw the NFPA? Everything here has to be designed by licensed sprinkler engineer. They must have state PE stamp. Does the pex manufactures keep engineers from all 50 states?


----------



## Paddy (Sep 2, 2011)

Sounds like you are in New York. The PE stamp requirement is a joke, since most PE's know nothing about sprinkler systems. The NFPA class on residential sprinklers purports to cover multipurpose systems, but does not include plumbing-based sprinklers. The International Code Council training covers plumbing-based sprinklers. But it also covers traditional residential systems and takes five days. 

For plumbers, that is overkill. In my 25 years experience with residential sprinklers, a two-day class on NFPA 13D provides all the information they need to install plumbing-based sprinklers.

I missed one point in your message. It is up the PEX manufacturers to comply with state regulations for sprinkler system designers.


----------



## wyrickmech (Mar 16, 2013)

Paddy said:


> Sounds like you are in New York. The PE stamp requirement is a joke, since most PE's know nothing about sprinkler systems. The NFPA class on residential sprinklers purports to cover multipurpose systems, but does not include plumbing-based sprinklers. The International Code Council training covers plumbing-based sprinklers. But it also covers traditional residential systems and takes five days. For plumbers, that is overkill. In my 25 years experience with residential sprinklers, a two-day class on NFPA 13D provides all the information they need to install plumbing-based sprinklers. I missed one point in your message. It is up the PEX manufacturers to comply with state regulations for sprinkler system designers.


 I am not in New York but we do require sprinkler engineer to design system and stamp it with a PE stamp. Liability is to high not to. Even though I could follow nfpa requirements and have the knowledge to install the required heads and pipe with flow rates considered I will not. Engineers need to design systems or somebody will get hurt.


----------



## sprinklertech (Oct 24, 2010)

wyrickmech said:


> I am not in New York but we do require sprinkler engineer to design system and stamp it with a PE stamp. Liability is to high not to. Even though I could follow nfpa requirements and have the knowledge to install the required heads and pipe with flow rates considered I will not. Engineers need to design systems or somebody will get hurt.


Some states, I can think of half a dozen among them are Florida, New York, Arizona, New Mexico (I think) and a couple others. California it depends where you are located if you will require a PE stamp.

Some, *such as Santa Clara*, require either a FPE, that is a professional engineer that is certified a specialist in fire protection, or a NICET IV certificate holder to design systems. NICET is the *National Institute for Certification in Engineering Technologies* and is a division of the society of professional engineers. States that require NICET include about everything that does not require a professional engineer. 

A good number of fire protection engineers obtain NICET certification because of its portability across state lines. I have Level IV certification and with that I can legally design systems in 80% of the country working across state lines.

In some parts of the country, Georgia is a good example, you don't need any license to install a 13d system because the state building code specifically excludes one and two family dwelling units so legally you can knock yourself off and install away but I would strongly advise against this. If something bad happens the lawyers are going to be looking at you and without errors and omissions insurance, which you can not obtain unless you are a PE or NICET, you are completely naked to law suits. 

What I would strongly advise is Uponor because they do have the PE's and NICET people who have the errors and omissions insurance.


----------

