-
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
Residential range-top fire suppression system
- Thread starter mark handler
- Start date
RFDACM02
Bronze Member
I must have misinterpreted what you were addressing. I don't see mandating these kitchen suppression systems, but if people want them, fine, but I would not support using them to eliminate the need for sprinklers as has been suggested by others and the kitchen system folks.
Secondly, it's not that I think you or anyone is too stupid, quite the contrary, but I grow weary of needing to dig up stats to prove my points, there readily available if you need them, I'm confident in my support of sprinklers and choose not to fight every minute detail. Too often when facts are brought out, then the details of those facts are not good enough. Again, my point was not to think something made for kitchen issue could eliminate residential sprinklers. I feel very strongly that we have the solution to most residential fire deaths and they should mandated nationwide, as every major code set has recognized the benefits and made them a requirement.
RFDACM02
Bronze Member
So require they be operational. Make a rule for 10 year inspection/recertifications, they need very little interaction. 60% over the life of a building? What was the life span they used? I can't imagine that every part of a building is likely to see the same degradation. Will 60% of buildings have safe electrical systems over their total life span?
RFDACM02
Bronze Member
conarb
Registered User
Well RFDACM02, whatever your name is, you haven't been around long enough to know what we've been through on this issue, including the Minneapolis code hearing wherein sprinklers were adopted, we saw the bribery that the coalition of fire sprinkler manufacturers engaged in to corrupt the process, several here who took the bribes were served FOIA requests but noting was done about it. As a matter of fact the Canadian National Mortgage Association (a government agency) did a series of studies showing that sprinklers were a waste of money in comparison to much more effective uses of the money to save lives. .I think the 2005 study is one of the latest, this entire issue has been cloaked in fraud from the beginning, for instance the coalition of sprinkler manufacturers claimed that they could be installed for something absurd like $2 a square foot, I got bids on installing them in a new 4,000 square foot house and the sprinkler system alone cost $200,000 plus another $21,000 for 15,000 more gallons of well storage, that amounted to $55 a square foot instead of $2 a square foot. Just for your information here in California sprinklers must be installed by journeyman sprinkler fitters, and many areas require copper or black steel pipe, it's interesting now that Apple's new spaceship headquarters is being built the plumbers are on strike wanting $20 an hour more to install plastic pipe.
You mentioned airbags, I drive a Viper for my sports car, production is ceasing after the 2017 model year for 2 reasons, first the government is requiring they purchase carbon credits, Marchione agreed to buy credits from Tesla and keep the car going, then they are requiring side airbags in all 2018 cars, and the way the car is built there is no way absent redesigning the entire car they can fit side airbags in it, people who buy and drive Vipers know they are very dangerous cars and are not risk averse people. We all take risks every day, we are not all risk averse, the risk averse should not be allowed to dictate how others live their lives or spend their money.\ said:
¹ http://www.mercurynews.com/cupertino/ci_29680397/cupertino-union-workers-protest-unfair-wages-at-apple
steveray
SAWHORSE
Statistics? Here you go:
Per NFPA's own study in 09-13 99.6% survival rate with HW smokes regardless of occupant screwing them up. Add sprinklers and it goes to 99.8%...We are talking about 0.2% increase we could outlaw smoking, lower the speed limits by half, have an IQ test to own a home or operate power tools or thousands of other things and save more lives if that is really the intent....I can send the PDF to anyone that needs it.
Per NFPA's own study in 09-13 99.6% survival rate with HW smokes regardless of occupant screwing them up. Add sprinklers and it goes to 99.8%...We are talking about 0.2% increase we could outlaw smoking, lower the speed limits by half, have an IQ test to own a home or operate power tools or thousands of other things and save more lives if that is really the intent....I can send the PDF to anyone that needs it.
mark handler
SAWHORSE
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
http://www.nfpa.org/research/reports-and-statistics/fires-in-the-us
In 2014, there were 1,298,000 fires reported in the United States. These fires caused 3,275 civilian deaths, 15,775 civilian injuries, and $11.6 billion in property damage.
•494,000 were structure fires, causing 2,860 civilian deaths, 13,425 civilian injuries, and $9.8 billion in property damage.
•193,500 were vehicle fires, causing 345 civilian fire deaths, 1,450 civilian fire injuries, and $1.5 billion in property damage.
•610,500 were outside and other fires, causing 70 civilian fire deaths, 900 civilian fire injuries, and $237 million in property damage.
The 2014 U.S. fire loss clock a fire department responded to a fire every 24 seconds. One structure fire was reported every 64 seconds.
•One home structure fire was reported every 86 seconds.
•One civilian fire injury was reported every 33 minutes.
•One civilian fire death occurred every 2 hours and 41 minutes.
•One outside and other fire was reported every 52 seconds.
•One highway vehicle fire was reported every 3 minutes 8 seconds.
Three of every five home fire deaths resulted from fires in homes with no smoke alarms (38%) or no working smoke alarms (21%).
The death rate per 100 reported home fires was more than twice as high in homes that did not have any working smoke alarms (1.18 deaths per 100 fires), either because no smoke alarm was present or an alarm was present but did not operate), as it was in homes with working smoke alarms (0.53 per 100 fires).
The death rate from reported fires in homes that had at least one smoke alarm (0.59 deaths per 100 fires) was one-third (36%) lower than in homes that had no smoke alarms at all (0.98 deaths per 100 fires).
The death rate was much higher in fires in which a smoke alarm was present but did not operate (1.89 deaths per 100 fires) than it was in home fires with no smoke alarms at all.
In reported home fires with smoke alarms:
Almost half (46%) of the alarms were powered by battery only.
Two-thirds (67%) of home fire deaths were caused by fires in homes with smoke alarms powered by battery only.
In reported home fires large enough to activate the alarm,
Hardwired smoke alarms operated 94% of the time.
Battery-powered smoke alarms operated in four out of five (80%) fires.
http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/files/research/fact-sheets/smokealarmsfactsheet.pdf?la=en
http://www.nfpa.org/research/reports-and-statistics/fires-in-the-us
In 2014, there were 1,298,000 fires reported in the United States. These fires caused 3,275 civilian deaths, 15,775 civilian injuries, and $11.6 billion in property damage.
•494,000 were structure fires, causing 2,860 civilian deaths, 13,425 civilian injuries, and $9.8 billion in property damage.
•193,500 were vehicle fires, causing 345 civilian fire deaths, 1,450 civilian fire injuries, and $1.5 billion in property damage.
•610,500 were outside and other fires, causing 70 civilian fire deaths, 900 civilian fire injuries, and $237 million in property damage.
The 2014 U.S. fire loss clock a fire department responded to a fire every 24 seconds. One structure fire was reported every 64 seconds.
•One home structure fire was reported every 86 seconds.
•One civilian fire injury was reported every 33 minutes.
•One civilian fire death occurred every 2 hours and 41 minutes.
•One outside and other fire was reported every 52 seconds.
•One highway vehicle fire was reported every 3 minutes 8 seconds.
Three of every five home fire deaths resulted from fires in homes with no smoke alarms (38%) or no working smoke alarms (21%).
The death rate per 100 reported home fires was more than twice as high in homes that did not have any working smoke alarms (1.18 deaths per 100 fires), either because no smoke alarm was present or an alarm was present but did not operate), as it was in homes with working smoke alarms (0.53 per 100 fires).
The death rate from reported fires in homes that had at least one smoke alarm (0.59 deaths per 100 fires) was one-third (36%) lower than in homes that had no smoke alarms at all (0.98 deaths per 100 fires).
The death rate was much higher in fires in which a smoke alarm was present but did not operate (1.89 deaths per 100 fires) than it was in home fires with no smoke alarms at all.
In reported home fires with smoke alarms:
Almost half (46%) of the alarms were powered by battery only.
Two-thirds (67%) of home fire deaths were caused by fires in homes with smoke alarms powered by battery only.
In reported home fires large enough to activate the alarm,
Hardwired smoke alarms operated 94% of the time.
Battery-powered smoke alarms operated in four out of five (80%) fires.
http://www.nfpa.org/~/media/files/research/fact-sheets/smokealarmsfactsheet.pdf?la=en
conarb
Registered User
As we know Mark Twain said: "There are three kinds of lies, lies, damned lies, and statistics", the validity of the statistics is reliant upon whom created them, taking some sources:
View attachment 2191
One could make the case from the U.S. Fire Administration that fire deaths have gone up since the sprinkler mandate became law, I'm not making that case but using it to illustrate how statistics can be manipulated to make a point.¹ One could also present that chart to new homeowners and recommend that they turn their sprinklers off, we are already telling them to open windows at all times in new homes because the code is mandating that we seal up buildings to save energy and the result is people are getting sick in their new "Green Homes", I guess through the use of statistics I could make the case that: "Codes kill"Another statistical graph this time from the NFPA, an NGO in the fire business:View attachment 2192
In reliance upon the NFPA, we can assume that hafl of all fires are caused by cooking.²Looking further at NFPA statistics we can see that most home fires occur in certain southern states plus Alaska:
View attachment 2192
/monthly_2016_03/usfa.jpg.9a42bf05b183d4e7b1266ec6095479c7.jpg
/monthly_2016_03/nfpa.jpg.0de4198d38ecc05a2acc225a5a83be57.jpg
View attachment 2191
One could make the case from the U.S. Fire Administration that fire deaths have gone up since the sprinkler mandate became law, I'm not making that case but using it to illustrate how statistics can be manipulated to make a point.¹ One could also present that chart to new homeowners and recommend that they turn their sprinklers off, we are already telling them to open windows at all times in new homes because the code is mandating that we seal up buildings to save energy and the result is people are getting sick in their new "Green Homes", I guess through the use of statistics I could make the case that: "Codes kill"Another statistical graph this time from the NFPA, an NGO in the fire business:View attachment 2192
In reliance upon the NFPA, we can assume that hafl of all fires are caused by cooking.²Looking further at NFPA statistics we can see that most home fires occur in certain southern states plus Alaska:
As an on observation southerners tend to fry food at a much higher rate than most others, since cooking causes most of the fire deaths and those seem to come from frying food it would make more sense to ban frying pans. On a personal note we have turned on neither our oven nor our cook top in 10 years when my mother passed away at 101, everything here is cooked in the microwave, fried food is unhealthy and I would venture to guess that more lives could be saved by banning frying pans than by stopping fires, and banning frying pans would certainly save more lives than all the fire sprinklers in the world could ever hope to save.¹ https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/res_bldg_fire_estimates.pdf² http://www.nfpa.org/research/reports-and-statistics/fires-in-the-us/overall-fire-problem/unintentional-fire-deaths-by-state³ http://www.nfpa.org/research/reports-and-statistics/fires-in-the-us/overall-fire-problem/unintentional-fire-deaths-by-stateView attachment 2191\ said:
View attachment 2192
/monthly_2016_03/usfa.jpg.9a42bf05b183d4e7b1266ec6095479c7.jpg
/monthly_2016_03/nfpa.jpg.0de4198d38ecc05a2acc225a5a83be57.jpg
JBI
Registered User
"As an on observation southerners tend to fry food at a much higher rate than most others, since cooking causes most of the fire deaths and those seem to come from frying food it would make more sense to ban frying pans. On a personal note we have turned on neither our oven nor our cook top in 10 years when my mother passed away at 101, everything here is cooked in the microwave, fried food is unhealthy and I would venture to guess that more lives could be saved by banning frying pans than by stopping fires, and banning frying pans would certainly save more lives than all the fire sprinklers in the world could ever hope to save."
conarb - You crack me up! LOL
conarb - You crack me up! LOL
conarb
Registered User
Yeah but JBI, I proved my point with statistics, every decent college has a mandatory class in lying with statistics.
JBI
Registered User
Statistics are a mathematic method to reach a pre-determined conclusion.
conarb
Registered User
Very true, we've all just seen the most extreme abuse of that in the global warming scam, after Climategate NASA was asked about their results and it was determined that their raw data was adjusted in space and there was no way they could provide the raw data to peer review scientists, they were instructed to go back to space and bring back unadulterated data, the first two launches failed, a conspiracy inclined person might think that deliberate, but eventually they succeeded, after bringing back 18 years of cooling they "adjusted" the data with ground based measurements to reach the predetermined conclusion the government demanded. The excuse is that all data has to be adjusted for extant conditions, in all instances of a posteriori knowledge an almost infallible way to analyze it is the old tried and true "FOLLOW THE MONEY" method, look where the money flows, with fire sprinklers it flows to the sprinkler manufacturers, from there it flows back to the fire service and their unions, why do you think firemen make so much more money than building inspectors? I was standing a a building department counter talking to the retiring head plan checker, I said: "Now you get to go out traveling around the world on all that pension money we have paid for you.". He looked at me with a disgusted look and said: "Not me, I've still got a son in medical school, those guys get all the money", as he pointed to a low table with the fire marshal sitting going over plans with another contractor.
I do have to give our building inspectors credit though, back when Gray Davis was governor the NFPA "bribed" the entire Building Standards Commission to adopt the NFPA 5000 instead of the ICC Codes, fortunately Davis was recalled and the Commission offered the resignations to the new governor and he accepted them and appointed a new commission that immediately repealed the prior commission's adoption of the NFPA 5000 and adopted the I Codes. Unfortunately nobody was prosecuted, I bet a deal was cut, resign quietlly and we'll forget the whole thing. During the period when the NFPA 5000 was set for adoption the local firemen went to our building inspectors offering to take them into their union so they could get the same much higher salaries and pensions as the firemen get, our inspectors refused, I personally congratulated a few of them for their honesty.
JBI
Registered User
" I bet a deal was cut, resign quietly and we'll forget the whole thing."
In my home county, two of the top DPW guys were caught with their hands in the cookie jar. They were offered what you described.
The one who accepted retired with his pension.
The other one chose to fight the charges because 'everyone does it'. No pension, few job prospects (NONE in government).
I applaud the Code Officials who wouldn't be bought.
In my home county, two of the top DPW guys were caught with their hands in the cookie jar. They were offered what you described.
The one who accepted retired with his pension.
The other one chose to fight the charges because 'everyone does it'. No pension, few job prospects (NONE in government).
I applaud the Code Officials who wouldn't be bought.
tmurray
SAWHORSE
I recently looked into the times when fires occurred the most in relation to the most fire deaths. Based on NFPA documents, most fires occurred around 5-6PM, but this correlated with the least amount of deaths. The most deaths correlated with a very low fire start time around 3AM. This appears to indicate that it is more important to notify occupants there is a fire inside their home so they can exit the building rather than attempt to extinguish the fire. Additional measures for fire suppression should be promoted, but not required by code.
NikonJ2
Member
CDA wrote.... "It is the building contents"
True statement. But it is added protection which would also help to limit deaths. As we know, many people can't be bothered to replace the battery of their smoke detector and I have experienced homes, with sprinklers, being shut off due to the fact that there was a repair issue that they didn't want to address. To me, a would rather have a functioning smoke detector, which would sound an alarm quicker (due to the smoke) than a sprinkler system which would take longer to alert me of a fire. But as I had stated before, the pros and cons of this is really not the subject here. I do find this system interesting and can see why it is not widely utilized here in Massachusetts. But it is out there. Of note, I do recall seeing, what I would call, mini-ansul systems for stoves at an ICC conference in either Baltimore. That was something to see. Nice and condensed. I bet it weighed a ton! :chuncky:
Steveray, I would like to get that PDF.
Conarb, regarding the Minneapolis code hearing, many building officials from Massachusetts went to that hearing and also reported back on the "joke" of that vote. As I recall, for many years afterwards, that issue has come up at following ICC sessions; trying to figure out a way to prevent it from happening again.
True statement. But it is added protection which would also help to limit deaths. As we know, many people can't be bothered to replace the battery of their smoke detector and I have experienced homes, with sprinklers, being shut off due to the fact that there was a repair issue that they didn't want to address. To me, a would rather have a functioning smoke detector, which would sound an alarm quicker (due to the smoke) than a sprinkler system which would take longer to alert me of a fire. But as I had stated before, the pros and cons of this is really not the subject here. I do find this system interesting and can see why it is not widely utilized here in Massachusetts. But it is out there. Of note, I do recall seeing, what I would call, mini-ansul systems for stoves at an ICC conference in either Baltimore. That was something to see. Nice and condensed. I bet it weighed a ton! :chuncky:
Steveray, I would like to get that PDF.
Conarb, regarding the Minneapolis code hearing, many building officials from Massachusetts went to that hearing and also reported back on the "joke" of that vote. As I recall, for many years afterwards, that issue has come up at following ICC sessions; trying to figure out a way to prevent it from happening again.
JBI
Registered User
As a smoker I make every effort to be conscientious of where my butts go...
RFDACM02
Bronze Member
So $55 sqft to sprinkler 4000 sq.ft.home? Sorry a bit more than the highest prices we see here in an area where only the individual municipalities have adopted the requirements. Highest I've heard locally was $8/sqft. and that was off the supply grid and small overall square footage. Of course we don't require anything more than 13D requires, so it appears you can thank those who have driven the price up by adding on onerous requirements basically pricing safety out. Our state requires certified plumbers be licensed 13D installers but stop short of requiring sprinkler contractors, just a sprinkler engineers plans. I suspect the Unionized plumbers want more money as they see the speed and lower cost of plastic cutting into their long-term profit.
As for the Canadian National Mortgage Assoc. I'd think you'd see the obvious bias they might have in the price of any home going up by any dollar value. But of course they must be free of bias, their governmental right?
I've seen sprinkler work first hand, and I have no stake in the installation field, so I guarantee you aren't changing my thought process, and it appears that your convinced they're not worth it, so I fine agreeing to disagree.
RFDACM02
Bronze Member
I'd love the link or pdf on that NFPA stat. Both those numbers are much higher than the highest effectiveness I've ever seen quoted anywhere.Statistics? Here you goer NFPA's own study in 09-13 99.6% survival rate with HW smokes regardless of occupant screwing them up. Add sprinklers and it goes to 99.8%...We are talking about 0.2% increase we could outlaw smoking, lower the speed limits by half, have an IQ test to own a home or operate power tools or thousands of other things and save more lives if that is really the intent....I can send the PDF to anyone that needs it.
conarb
Registered User
RFDACM02:That home was a full steel frame with cathedral ceilings as much as 25 feet high, plastic pipe not allowed, the bids I got were for copper because steel would have been even harder to get through the steel. In addition to that the local fire department has onerous requirements requiring three stainless steel 5,000 tanks for storage on site. Actually it's cheaper on a well than for homes served by municipal systems that require a separate meter for as much as $234,600 for a 2" meter required in the large home I build. This map was from a few years ago when we were arguing this before.
View attachment 2194
View attachment 2194
/monthly_2016_04/ebmud3.jpg.0319e58a52934cabf6f37f59f89d7b0f.jpg
View attachment 2194
View attachment 2194
/monthly_2016_04/ebmud3.jpg.0319e58a52934cabf6f37f59f89d7b0f.jpg
conarb
Registered User
RFDACM02:
That home was a full steel frame with cathedral ceilings as much as 25 feet high, plastic pipe not allowed, the bids I got were for copper because steel pipe would have been even harder to get through the steel columns and beams. In addition to that the local fire department has onerous requirements requiring three stainless steel 5,000 tanks for storage on site. Actually it's cheaper on a well than for homes served by municipal systems that require a separate meter for as much as $234,600 for a 2" meter required in the large home I build. This map was from a few years ago when we were arguing this before. One of my biggest gripes is that the sprinkler manufacturers' coalition was taking prices from a low priced state like South Carolina building $100 a square foot homes when we are building $1,000 a square foot homes in our high priced area.
I don't know how this happened but I tried to edit before posting and this software split it into two posts.
That home was a full steel frame with cathedral ceilings as much as 25 feet high, plastic pipe not allowed, the bids I got were for copper because steel pipe would have been even harder to get through the steel columns and beams. In addition to that the local fire department has onerous requirements requiring three stainless steel 5,000 tanks for storage on site. Actually it's cheaper on a well than for homes served by municipal systems that require a separate meter for as much as $234,600 for a 2" meter required in the large home I build. This map was from a few years ago when we were arguing this before. One of my biggest gripes is that the sprinkler manufacturers' coalition was taking prices from a low priced state like South Carolina building $100 a square foot homes when we are building $1,000 a square foot homes in our high priced area.
I don't know how this happened but I tried to edit before posting and this software split it into two posts.
steveray
SAWHORSE
PM me your email....
steveray
SAWHORSE
PM me your email...NFPA protecting their stuff and I don't have a direct link...