Smoke Detector Location

[iwire]

Must be incredibly hard to bid a job from town to town, what with all the indigenous information one would have to acquire.

Not so tough, provide what is on the approved prints, when the FD asks for more we provide it and write up an extra sheet.

One large town near me the FD provided me with a very detailed list of what they expected for fire alarm systems, I also had to make sure I was working from the FD stamped drawings. One of the items in the requirements was that only 3 fire alarm panels were acceptable. So of course we purchased one of the acceptable systems only to fail the first inspection as they would not accept the pull stations. I had to install a certain brand of non addressable station and put in addressable modules to interface them with the addressable system.

 

[peter d]

Not so tough, provide what is on the approved prints, when the FD asks for more we provide it and write up an extra sheet.

And as you said, even with approved plans there is an inevitable "gotcha" at the end. How does that work? :roll:

 

[GUNNING]

NO such thing as a stupid questions, just solutions.

NO such thing as a stupid questions, just solutions.

I agree with all the different codes. They are customized with the local conditions and education. The rural volunteer fire marshal would be lost in a big high rise city and the requirements would be beyond his knowledge base. The NYC fire marshal would go bazerk if he was to try to fire proof a barn full of hay.
Different areas need different codes and rules and addendum's. No cookie cutter here. I think if you try to get a committee involved in standardizing nationally you would end up asking for a horse and getting a camel.
Ask the locals. They know whats going on and required.

ICC NFPA NYC sheesh.

 

[celtic]

I had to install a certain brand of non addressable station and put in addressable modules to interface them with the addressable system.

Where is the logic in that?

 

[iwire]

Where is the logic in that?

I am telling you the truth here.

The difference was the ones we installed where 'dual action' and the FD required 'double action'. .............. Seriously.

Basiclly the FD wanted the person pulling the station to have to use two hands.

It did not matter I was already instlling "Stopper II" covers on them.

 

[celtic]

I am telling you the truth here.

The difference was the ones we installed where 'dual action' and the FD required 'double action'. .............. Seriously.

Basiclly the FD wanted the person pulling the station to have to use two hands.

It did not matter I was already instlling "Stopper II" covers on them.

:-?
Did your head explode ?
:smile:

 

[iwire]

:-?
Did your head explode ?
:smile:

No, I was only the guy in the field getting it done.

Our PM on the job did explode, at the office, at the job and at the Fire station. He was a screamer anyway and this just made him crazy.

In the end he brought me the stock I needed to make it happen. Would you think less of me if i told you I ripped the Firelite addressable module off the Firelite stations and installed them on the new ESL pulls?

 

[peter d]

In the end he brought me the stock I needed to make it happen. Would you think less of me if i told you I ripped the Firelite addressable module off the Firelite stations and installed them on the new ESL pulls?

How dare you violate the listing like that!

 

[celtic]

Our PM on the job did explode, at the office, at the job and at the Fire station. He was a screamer anyway and this just made him crazy.

I think that is a requirement for PMs :wink:

Would you think less of me if i told you I ripped the Firelite addressable module off the Firelite stations and installed them on the new ESL pulls?

If that's what the big heads wanted - that's what the big heads get :roll:

 

[Pierre C Belarge]

Fred
I am aware of what is "supposed" to be enforced in NYS.
My post was more general in nature based on the variety of people/jurisdictions that read the forum.


It still goes back to what I posted before. Seek out the proper information and read it. There are many people here who are not required to follow the same requirements. That does not make them wrong from one jurisdiction to another, it just makes them confused.

 

[wbalsam1]

Not so tough, provide what is on the approved prints, when the FD asks for more we provide it and write up an extra sheet.

One large town near me the FD provided me with a very detailed list of what they expected for fire alarm systems, I also had to make sure I was working from the FD stamped drawings. One of the items in the requirements was that only 3 fire alarm panels were acceptable. So of course we purchased one of the acceptable systems only to fail the first inspection as they would not accept the pull stations. I had to install a certain brand of non addressable station and put in addressable modules to interface them with the addressable system.

iwire, are you saying that if a fire detection system is designed by a FPE who is duly licensed to practice in MA and has submitted plans to your local FD, the local FD can reject otherwise code-compliant plans due to their notion of what pull station they will accept? In other words, can the FD reject UL listed components at their own whim?

Fred
I am aware of what is "supposed" to be enforced in NYS.
My post was more general in nature based on the variety of people/jurisdictions that read the forum.

It still goes back to what I posted before. Seek out the proper information and read it. There are many people here who are not required to follow the same requirements. That does not make them wrong from one jurisdiction to another, it just makes them confused.

You did mention your local jurisdictions, though. That's why I wondered what they were up to. :smile:

By the way, our Fire Code addresses the RCNYS's rules at 907.3.2.1.2, so there is continuity between the Fire Code and Residential Code on smoke alarms. I'm only talking about smoke alarms, though this post is leaning into fire detectors and away from smoke alarms.

 

[George Stolz]

In other words, can the FD reject UL listed components at their own whim?

Welcome to the real world.

If Bob shows you that, I'll show you a drunk that requires us to bond fiberglass boxes.

 

[Pierre C Belarge]

By the way, our Fire Code addresses the RCNYS's rules at 907.3.2.1.2, so there is continuity between the Fire Code and Residential Code on smoke alarms. I'm only talking about smoke alarms, though this post is leaning into fire detectors and away from smoke alarms.

Fred
Check your section number and repost it, I am interested in what you have to say.

 

[iwire]

iwire, are you saying that if a fire detection system is designed by a FPE who is duly licensed to practice in MA and has submitted plans to your local FD, the local FD can reject otherwise code-compliant plans due to their notion of what pull station they will accept? In other words, can the FD reject UL listed components at their own whim?

Regardless of who designs the system it gets turned into the FD for approval once they approve it I can start work following those FD approved drawings.

When the FD comes in to inspect they will add or change anything at all. Yes, we might be able to fight it but 99 times out of 100 we need the CO much sooner then the time it would take to fight.

The Fire Chief is the top official in most towns.

They often add exit signs, EBUs, or emergency fixtures, add pull stations, change the location of duct smoke remote test switches or how duct smokes respond.

At one store the approved prints showed one zone reporting any type of alarm to the master box. Then the FD changed it to four zones so my vendor reprogrammed the panel for that. Then the FD changed it to 12 zones and my vendor had to come up with 8 more addressable relays and the programing to trip them.

It's a real fun time.

 

[stickboy1375]

I thought I answered this in post #2. :roll: Like the energizer bunny, still going....

 

[wbalsam1]

Fred
Check your section number and repost it, I am interested in what you have to say.

By the way, our Fire Code addresses the RCNYS's rules at 907.3.2.1.2, so there is continuity between the Fire Code and Residential Code on smoke alarms........

Pierre, look in the FC. They're the same as our RCNYS.

 

[wbalsam1]

I thought I answered this in post #2. :roll: Like the energizer bunny, still going....

You did. (But what's that got to do with it?)

 

[GUNNING]

Talk about beating a dead horse.