Where is the requirement to connect the suppression system of a commercial kitchen hood to the fire Alarm System and how long has that requirement existed? Is this a requirement that existing installations should have to comply?
-
Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades
Connection of Hood to Fire Alarm
- Thread starter retire09
- Start date
Coug Dad
Platinum Member
Re: Connection of Hood to Fire Alarm
Welcome to the board.
IBC (2006) Section 904.3.5. I think it has been in the code for quite a long time
Welcome to the board.
IBC (2006) Section 904.3.5. I think it has been in the code for quite a long time
Gene Boecker
Gold Member
Re: Connection of Hood to Fire Alarm
Actually, the 904.3.5 only requires monitoring; it doesn't say if it should be by supervisory signal or alarm signal. I think the question is whether or not the building alarm system is required to activate if the hood discharges. That is a bit more nebulous. Section 904.3.4 requires local alarms and a connection to audible alarms per 907.9.2. However, the only thing that 907.9.2 does is tell you what the decibel level should be - not if the building alarm system is required to activate.
Even in the new 2009 edition, Section 907 doesn't identify cooking hood suppression systems directly. It boils down to what NFPA 72 calls an alarm condition. Since discharge has occurred, it is considered an alarm and would normally be treated as such.
In rare situations we have asked for (and received) permission to treat the hod discharge as a supervisory signal rather than an alarm signal. This was for large facilities with open communication between areas. Instead of having a hood discharge in one corner of the building initiate evacuation by alarm, the discharge notification calls the fire department by does not initiate an alarm unless a second device activates. Thus, if the fire is not contained by the hood system, the sprinkler system will initiate the occupant notification. This was only done in large facilities where the risk for injury by crush or people movement was high enough to offset the need to immediately notify. My point is that the code isn't crystal clear which allows for this type of negotiation. Generally, activate the alarm.
Actually, the 904.3.5 only requires monitoring; it doesn't say if it should be by supervisory signal or alarm signal. I think the question is whether or not the building alarm system is required to activate if the hood discharges. That is a bit more nebulous. Section 904.3.4 requires local alarms and a connection to audible alarms per 907.9.2. However, the only thing that 907.9.2 does is tell you what the decibel level should be - not if the building alarm system is required to activate.
Even in the new 2009 edition, Section 907 doesn't identify cooking hood suppression systems directly. It boils down to what NFPA 72 calls an alarm condition. Since discharge has occurred, it is considered an alarm and would normally be treated as such.
In rare situations we have asked for (and received) permission to treat the hod discharge as a supervisory signal rather than an alarm signal. This was for large facilities with open communication between areas. Instead of having a hood discharge in one corner of the building initiate evacuation by alarm, the discharge notification calls the fire department by does not initiate an alarm unless a second device activates. Thus, if the fire is not contained by the hood system, the sprinkler system will initiate the occupant notification. This was only done in large facilities where the risk for injury by crush or people movement was high enough to offset the need to immediately notify. My point is that the code isn't crystal clear which allows for this type of negotiation. Generally, activate the alarm.
Coug Dad
Platinum Member
Re: Connection of Hood to Fire Alarm
Retire09
Does you name reflect an ambition delayed? :cry:
Retire09
Does you name reflect an ambition delayed? :cry: