![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
In order to eliminate confusion with the "Sprinkler Head" article, and to align the definitions of both articles with modern terminology (e.g., NFPA), the title of this article should be changed to "Fire Sprinkler System", and the title of the "Sprinkler Head" article should be changed to "Fire Sprinkler". But as I am new, I don't know how to get this accomplished. Fireproeng 22:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
I have seen criticisms of sprinkler systems on several grounds including (a) supposed tendency to go of accidentally or due to sabotage, causing economic damage that isn't quantified. [I observe that agencies charged with saving life aren't generally charged with balancing cost or inconvenience, but a higher agency must as e.g. in the argument that many lives would be saved if cars could not go over 20 mph.] (b) sprinklers represent a danger where there is electrical equipment (i.e. just about everywhere). [I observe that sprinklers originated in the US where the domestic voltage is much less dangerous than in Europe]. I don't know whether these criticisms are valid, but as more moves to compulsory sprinklers in the UK appear, I would like to see some analysis. At any rate, a neutral article should deal with common criticism. I have tried to research this myself on the web, but without any particular conclusions. Notinasnaid 13:14, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
The section on water mist fire protection systems is just not correct:
If water damage or water volume is of particular concern, a technique called Water Mist Fire Suppression may be an alternative. This technology has been under development for over 50 years. It hasn't entered general use, but is gaining some acceptance on ships and in a few residential applications. Mist suppression systems work by lowering the temperature of a burning area through evaporation rather than "soaking". As such, they may be designed to only slow the spread of a fire and not extinguish it. Some tests, that may or may not be biased, showed the cost of resulting fire and water damage with such a system installed to be dramatically less that conventional sprinkler systems.
Water mist fire protection systems are not just selected where water damage or water volume is a particular concern, although this is one of the features of water mist. It has entered general use and now the major fire giants all have water mist systems... it is fully approved on ships for most areas (accomodation, machinery rooms, galley areas, bilge etc etc), and most new cruise ships are fitted with this system... many thousands of land applications are already protected by water mist systems... lowering the temperature is just one of the mechanisms used in fighting the fire (also local oxygen inerting and radiant heat blocking and to a lesser extent the soaking as well)... they are not designed to slow the spread of the fire, some are designed for suppression and control, some for extinguishment... the biased or not statement is a bit ridiculous! -- Watermistfireprotection 11:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. We could use a much expanded section explaining where mist is used, listing some of the main groups and players, existing and emerging standards, and some of the new residential applications -- Amh15 ( talk) 06:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I removed this from the article:
Someone should do the research and put some facts in the article about sprinkler damage. The only ax I have to grind is making this a better encyclopedia. Good information on comparative costs of fire damage and danger versuse sprinkler damage and danger would make for a better article. Unsupported opinions don't. Ortolan88 19:55, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
When adding temperature/volum/distance information, please include metric values. Remember, Wikipedia is an international effort! Brutulf 22:43, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)
I would go along with including a FAQ section it would answer a large number of questions which then could be later expanded if required -- Jsm25 ( talk) 23:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Condensed the article, removed repeated information, etc. I still think it needs more work, possibly a section on either Contraversy and/or Myths. Eg spell out that with sprinkler systems (except Deluge systems) only the sprinkler activated goes off. Possibly quote the failure rate (1 in 16 million or something similar). Also point out the other side of the coin, forkhoists in warehouses have an unexplainable gravitational attraction to sprinkler heads, usually with a very wet result. -- Zaf 06:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Oh, and can someone please tell me how the bulb chart can be done better. Before it was in the text and left a large white space, and didn't seem to flow well. I think the best bet would be an image style border/small text caption, but I can't figure how best to do this, or even if it will look ok. Zaf 06:57, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
"whereas a fire appliance takes an average of eight minutes"
How about some information on new or alternate types of fire sprinklers? Like a "dry fire suppression system" that uses gasses? (something like http://www.e1.greatlakes.com/wfp/product/jsp/fm200_works.jsp ) Or the water wall method that I heard was popular at trade shows here is a good link to some different types of fire suppression systems ( http://www.uos.harvard.edu/ehs/ih_fire_detection.shtml ) and some reasons to use or not use Gas ( http://searchdatacenter.techtarget.com/columnItem/0,294698,sid80_gci1148917,00.html ) I think it might be good to consider starting a page for Fire Suppression Systems that could link to this page and others that exist like Gaseous fire suppression already Andrew Powell 20:44, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Could someone fix that space so that the text wraps around the picture? Nwwaew 12:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
I added a to the page that Wood's metal is used as a fusible metal, which is now marked as {{ fact}}. Why? Several other Wikipedia articles mention this, and a web search for sprinkler "wood's metal" yields hundreds of hits. Maybe it should be rephrased as fusible metal (often Wood's metal) since also Field's metal seems to be used. Han-Kwang ( t) 15:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
I would think that the air leaving the system via the activated sprinkler head would add oxygen to the fire causing it to grow even larger. Is this yet another disadvantage to these systems or are they filled not with air but with nitrogen or some other inert gas? -- Pascal666 ( talk) 00:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Will an editor view http://firesprinklernews.com and add it to external links? Baldeagle4031 ( talk) 17:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm sure I could do it but I read in the guidelines not to link to your own website let an existing editor do it. Baldeagle4031 ( talk) 09:30, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
This article from January 12th looks interesting and relevant, but I'm not sure how to work it into our article. It is about a proposal to add a sprinkler requirement to the Minnesota building code, and discusses the relative benefits of sprinklers versus smoke alarms, increasing the cost of housing versus housing affordability, and cost per life saved. GRBerry 21:48, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
In Boston, I have observed that new fire sprinkler systems in multistory commercial buildings have some kind of major backup pump, usually installed in the basement or a utility space on the ground floor. The backup system consists of a large diesel engine, an array of lead-acid batteries to start it, a fuel oil tank, and an alarm/control system. There are provisions for combustion air intake and diesel exhaust, with ducting to the outside air. I think there are requirements to start and run the engine briefly on some periodic basis, to verify that the system is operable.
Anyway, there does not seem to be much coverage of this aspect of fire sprinkler systems in the article. I would write something, but I'm not yet knowledgeable enough about this, and hope that better-informed editors could add coverage of the topic to the article. Reify-tech ( talk) 12:50, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
The article is very informative and allows an understanding of how the sprinkler system was introduced etc.. also the various types of sprinklers in use. As per the Indian Building Code it is now mandatory for all Malls,Hotels, High Rise buildings and offices, Hospitals etc to install an effective detection system as also an effective suppresion system, like the sprinkler system mentioned. I however would like an additional research to be done to find how many times and why the suppresion system did not work, even when there was a fire. Secondly, in the Wet Type, is there a need to periodically flush the sprinkler system so that it does not clog in case the presurrised water in the pipe is kept, say over a period of one year plus? If yes, how is it done? If not, why not? 122.180.1.117 ( talk) 10:09, 31 January 2013 (UTC).
With some help from someone in the industry, I would like to help with the addition of information about calculating C sub p as shown in the building code document NFPA 13 PDF file that I will provide the link to here. The area is described in this pdf on page 13-74 in the section 9.3.5.6.2. As I understand it, Sprinkler projects in California (and perhaps other states using NFPA 13) require an ADJ or government web site to provide the S sub s that is used to enhance the sprinkler system based on Seismic maps and the tables and calculations shown in the PDF File. This link is as follows: https://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/AboutTheCodes/13/13-A2006-ROC.pdf Eweezeke ( talk) 02:46, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
START OF PASTE ------------------------------------
Generally speaking, Earthquake seismic factors are used to determine the required strength of the braces that carry the fire sprinkler system pipe and load. There are certain circumstances, determined by the adopted building code, by which the project is governed, that require the system to meet Seismic standards, and in which case, beside possible design factors, will require the acquisition of a parameter multiplier, used to modify the overall system pipe weight which will in turn modify the required brace load capacity. And in such cases, this parameter, if not provided by the AHJ (Authority Having Jurisdiction), is provided by a Seismic map using the latitude and longitude of the project. There are also some cases where the system pipe weight is modified by a FM factor (Factory Mutual) determined by an insurance company. There is also a case where it is can be modified by a factor provided by OSHPD (office of statewide health planning and development) which applies to health care facilities where special care is needed.
Ref:
http://www.scandaliato.com/seismic-design-for-fire-sprinkler-systems-part-1a-the-seismic-shift/
END OF PASTE------------------------------------ Eweezeke ( talk) 19:28, 5 May 2018 (UTC)Eweezeke
Reference number 6 is a broken link and could possible be replace by the following web url: https://www.canutesoft.com/Information-and-Resources/history-of-fire-sprinkler-systems.html Eweezeke ( talk) 04:34, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
There are several broken links which I would like to help fix - with someone's permission Eweezeke ( talk) 20:09, 7 February 2018 (UTC)