Home
Store
Membership
Codes, Standards & Guidelines
Education
Certification & Testing
 
 

Bulletin Board Archive

Bookmark and Share
ICC Bulletin Board   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» ICC Bulletin Board » Code Chat » Building and Residential Codes -- Non-Structural Issues » Fire suppression system FM200

   
Author Topic: Fire suppression system FM200
Examiner
Frequent Contributor


Member Rated:
3
 - posted      Profile for Examiner           Edit/Delete Post 
Will a building that has a FM200 sprinkler system be allowed to delete a fire rated Exit Access Corridor? It is my understanding that the FM200 is similar to a halon system but not as lethal. I am told that the alarm goes off and you have 30-seconds to exit the building before the entire system releases the fire suppression material. The building in question is mostly computer mainframes with some offices attached. They want to put the system in all rooms/spaces of the building inlieu of a wet system. If the occupant load is 30 or more then the corridor would require a rating without a NFPA 13 system.

[ 07-27-2009, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: Examiner ]

--------------------
Chaos, Panic, Disorder....my work is done here.

Posts: 148 | From: USA | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
cda
Frequent Contributor


Member Rated:
4
 - posted      Profile for cda           Edit/Delete Post 
FM Burns
The language was changed from "fully suppressed' to "fully sprinklered" in the 1990 BOCA code, carried forward to IBC, to clarify that for tradeoffs the entire building needed to be sprinklered and clean agents could not substitute for sprinklers.

If the smoke detector actuated clean agent system works as designed the sprinkler heads never fuse. IF the fire is large enough to fuse heads then the sensative electronic equipment is already toast.

Clean rooms and computer rooms in sprinklered buildings here have all been sprinklered since 1992 including a major semiconductor fabrication and testing facility.


http://www.iccsafe.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=001972

Posts: 6255 | From: Had to move to parent's basement without code compliant escape window | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged
hazmatpoobah
Frequent Contributor


 - posted      Profile for hazmatpoobah           Edit/Delete Post 
No credits are permitted for an alternative fire extinguishing system for anything in the IBC - and that's a good thing.

And, don't take offense, but FM 200 is not an automatic sprinkler system. You need some fire protection CE.

If you have means of egress issues, consider a pre-action sprinkler system to solve those problems. As long as it meets NFPA 13, you're as golden as a new born puppy.

*****
Lawyers are like other people--fools on the average; but it is easier for an ass to succeed in that trade than any other. Mark Twain quoted in Sam Clemens of Hannibal

[ 07-27-2009, 09:24 PM: Message edited by: hazmatpoobah ]

Posts: 555 | From: South Austin Texas | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
FM William Burns
Frequent Contributor


Member Rated:
4
 - posted      Profile for FM William Burns           Edit/Delete Post 
Cda,

Let’s not get carried away....... The code does permit exempt locations (901.2 and 903.3.1.1.1 #2) even though the conflict exists in the section (don’t have the 09 on this work station to see if the conflicting detail was removed). I fully understand the “fully sprinkled” theory in the transition from the legacy to the IBC however, it still remains in the IBC and since it does the model code (if not amended during adoption) allows it. The mere existence of the exempt locations in the specific code text means …… one can not apply the “total sprinkler coverage” of the referenced standard NFPA 13.

Since the requirement for detection is met for typical clean agent applications consistent with (907) the code allows the exemption of water based sprinklers from the area exempted through specific code text or have I missed something?........JMHO

--------------------
"Practice fire safety, the life saved may be your own" "Fire suppression is a failure in prevention" ....... Arsnman4

Posts: 1403 | From: My Happy Place! | Registered: Apr 2008  |  IP: Logged
Frank Castelvecchi
Frequent Contributor


Member Rated:
4
 - posted      Profile for Frank Castelvecchi           Edit/Delete Post 
Generally that section would not be approved by the fire code official here for a data processing center or clean room. Would need an occupancy that sprinklers would be considered ineffective in such as water reactives.

[ 07-28-2009, 10:13 AM: Message edited by: Frank Castelvecchi ]

Posts: 1476 | From: Henrico, VA | Registered: Apr 2000  |  IP: Logged
FM William Burns
Frequent Contributor


Member Rated:
4
 - posted      Profile for FM William Burns           Edit/Delete Post 
Frank,

Thanks.....had to dig up the commentary and the key is "Incapatible". Wish I would see sprinklers around here in those areas.

--------------------
"Practice fire safety, the life saved may be your own" "Fire suppression is a failure in prevention" ....... Arsnman4

Posts: 1403 | From: My Happy Place! | Registered: Apr 2008  |  IP: Logged
   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


ICC Home Page

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3