aaaugh bugger IRC codes 2012 every new house to have sprinklers

[UK4X4]

More codes I have to wade through on top of all the rest

Now I need a sprinkler system ...only issue is local water is sporadic at best - oh well another tank- some pumps and some steel piping to learn about !



http://beta2.imaginasium.net/docs/literature/tfp490_01_2006.pdf

[flyingvan]

Mine's all CPVC.  I insulated the pipes against freeze and will still charge the system with an antifreeze made specifically for that purpose.  It really wasn't that big a deal to install and I get a big break on insurance

[UK4X4]

do you have details on the gear you installed rough cost / building size ?

as need to add this added unwanted extra to my budget .......I can see its pretty easy to install- just another plumbing circuit- I'm an instrument engineer by trade so have no technical issues -

just hate the you have to have another X by law for a vacation home

[Squirl]

Is it in your local jurisdiction?

I knew only three states adopted it state wide.
http://www.firesprinklerinitiative.org/Legislation/Sprinkler-requirements-by-state.aspx

[UK4X4]

local county adopted IRC 2012 which has sprinklers included - that I can see.....More research required I guess and an e-mail to county building department

[MountainDon]

UK..... The 2009 IRC also includes the section on fire suppression systems. It's in Chapter 29. However, like all sections of the IRC they may be changed or omitted by each state. Local governments can not opt out of something that has been included at the state level, IIRC. Local governments can choose to add in something the state has not chosen to make mandatory. 

We have that here where we live. Our local city government adopted the fire suppression system for those people wanting to operate a child care facility in their home for 7 to 12 children. Six and under no need for sprinklers. Over that you need to retrofit if you don't have a home with them; and no residences do at this point. Just the city governments way of saying they don't want anyone to be able to do 7 - 12 kids in their home. One more reason why we'll never move to another home unless we quit working completely. No attempts by those idiots to try and make any existing permit holders do it, thank goodness.

So you may be worrying about nothing unless you find they have included the whole of chapter 29.  It's section 2904 that addresses fire sprinklers.

[MountainDon]

Flyingvan, you are fortunate to receive a discount. Someone here in WA state installed a system then was told by their insurer that the rate wouldn't change because they were concerned about water damage from the sprinklers.   

How much if you don't mind... we got 10% off for our metal roofing.

[flyingvan]

   I'm not certain how much just for the sprinklers, but it was 24% total for all the fire resistive things---Class 'A' roof, cemetitious siding, enclosed eaves, all exposed timber min. 4x6, sprinklers, all windows tempered in and out, all vents fire brand protected.     I spent a little over $700 for my system, which included materials, (pipe, glue, riser stack, check valve, alarm system, heads, panel) design, instruction, and an inspection by the company to assure it was all correct.
   The house is 714 square feet.
   Your sprinklers all have to be a certain distance from walls, and from each other.  If your bathroom is under 80 sq ft you don't need a sprinkler there.   If you plan on using crawl space or attic for storage or appliances, you need them there, too.  I'm going with the flush mount heads but I know the industrial look with exposed galvanized pipe is in right now too.

Do:  Buy a set of PVC pipe cutters.  It's the only way to get a good, clean, square cut.
        Glue both the end and the fitting, insert, give it a quarter turn, and HOLD IT for a minute or it will back itself out.
        Insulate all the pipes with the good neoprene pipe insulation.  Add a wrap of PVC tape here and there in case the self adhesive seam wants to let go.
       
Don't: Stress the pipes.  When you do your runs and such don't force the pipes a direction they don't want to go.  This goes for when you finish the ceiling,
           too---if the hole doesn't quite clear the head, don't flex the head to meet the hole---just trim the hole.  These plastic pipes will be subject to water
           hammer, and a stress point is asking for trouble
           Be intimidated.  If you've ever installed lawn sprinklers you can do this
           Use your PVC cement.  It isn't the same as CVPC cement. 

        These sprinklers are a good idea.  As much as I hate the government protecting us from ourselves, they do keep small fires small.  Grumble about putting them in, but be glad your neighbor on the other side of the woods put them in his house, so when he leaves a candle unattended it's limited to a small room fire and water damage.  Many forest fires started as cabin fires.

   

[MikeC]

oh boy.

A friend 3 yrs ago started his house. The county adopted code requiring residential sprinklers, after build was started.  Thus, he was required to include sprinklers as a condition of occupancy permit.  Fight in court or get occupancy - your choice. 

Sprinklers installed - but although he built the house, only a certified installer was allowable.  Sprinklers tested - worked fine BUT now the new well which was perfectly adequate to operate sprinklers and otheer uses needed to be supplemented to increase flow & duration - new more productive well + cistern installed. Friend extremely pi$$ed at this point, and poorer, but the county was not yet finished.  "Code" now required a paved driveway for the fire trucks, although the county road to his house was gravel, just like his driveway.  Complied with, poorer yet again. 

Then, the county rescinded the code adoption.  Haha.

Had he built 1/2 mile away - another county - only a building location permit would have been required.

just somethings to consider - all these things were rolled out one after another

[devildog]

 The building ins. here in Va. said if a building permit was paid for before the change of code was added I only had to go by the last one. You'd think it would be like that everywhere.

[flyingvan]

   I don't have a reference for this, and it would probably be a good stand alone topic, but my understanding is one of your rights is you have the right to build your own home.  Whenever some stage comes up where you have to be certified to accomplish it, it gets challenged... I had to insist the sprinkler company let me do my own install.  They were very hesitant and kept saying, "Well. technically you can, but we don't recommend it".  Out of all the steps involved in building fire sprinklers were way down the list on difficulty level.

[Erin]

I would double check that, too, UK.
My state has adopted the 2009 code, (IIRC) which does include sprinklers.  However, it also very specifically excludes single family dwellings from that aspect of the code.
More importantly, my county requires no codes/inspections/etc. once you're outside city limits. 

[fcpnorman]

I posted about this topic awhile ago,and since I have learned a great deal. I will be doing an "off the grid" cabin in Northern California. I was quoted over the phone a cost of about $1200-2000 for a system for an 1100 sq. foot cabin. The system will have to have a separate storage(from domestic) tank- probably about 200 gallons. The tank will have a small booster pump that will supply pressure and need to be tied to a back up generator. The mixture in the system to prevent freezing will be a 50% glycol solution. This "should" keep the pipes from freezing. The systems are not designed to extinguish the fire, only to keep it from getting large. In California if you are not on a municiple water supply( with fire hydrants) you are required to have 2500 gallons of water storage on site. Not sure if you can tie that storage into the sprinklers?? I will be checking on that. It would be nice to get a break on insurance, but the reality is that water damage can be far worse than fire damage, and if glycol is released into the building it may be a total loss.

[Don_P]

The glycol (glycol is flammable) in the mix now, I believe everywhere, cannot exceed 40% due to combustability concern. That level of antifreeze is insufficient here. There are some brands of chemicals to fill the system that do claim they can make it down to my temps, these generally call for a system flush and refill annually. Aside from the cost what do we do with the toxic drain and flush.

Erin, if your state has adopted the code I don't believe the county can unadopt a state law. They may choose not to have a sheriff and not to enforce the law, but the law is still there. Perhaps a fine point but sometimes an important distinction.

[fcpnorman]

Don_P,

There was an issue with the glycol being placed into a system in Truckee, California that caused a serious situation. When the system activated the glycol was discharged  and caused an explosion. It was dtermined that that the glycol solution was 100 %. When the system is charged the inspector will verify that the glycol is a 50 % solution( maybe 40??). Some communties are going to tie the system to a toilet, so every time it is flushed the system will move water to prevent air gaps and stagnation. That will not work in rural areas. The idea for fire sprinklers is a good one with roots in safety, it is just being poorly implemented in California.
In commercial properties sprinkler systems are inspected every five years and must have routine maintenance. There will be no re-inspection for residential systems............

[Danfish]

How about a "dry stack" system.  They do make installations where the system is charged with air pressure rather than water.  When the sprinkler heads are activated by high temperature the pressure bleeds off and the water is turned on.  You only have water in the main feed to the system.  Reports are that there have been failures and damage when the system developed an air leak. 

I set in on the meeting in Truckee on adoption of the new code and there was a lot of controversy on the subject of fire sprinklers in cold climates.  After the incident with glycol , local fire jurisdiction were considering banning its use for freeze protection in these systems.  Fire officials made it quite clear that the only reason there had been a push to implement the sprinkler requirement was to give occupants a chance to get out and reduce the situations where their people would have to enter a burning structure.  As designed, residential systems will not likely save the structure....and you will have major water damage.

That is why I pushed to get my permit application in before adoption!

[Erin]

Erin, if your state has adopted the code I don't believe the county can unadopt a state law. They may choose not to have a sheriff and not to enforce the law, but the law is still there. Perhaps a fine point but sometimes an important distinction.

Very true. 
And by that rationale, there isn't a single corner left in the entire country that has no code requirements since every state has adopted them... 

[Don_P]

Exactly, bear this in mind when people post that they have no codes (written laws) to follow, oh yes they do. To me this has less to do with liberties and more to do with liabilities.
The implications of that live with the house, just something to keep in mind. I get to know inspectors blind spots pretty quickly but if something ever goes wrong and I've built outside of standards it doesn't matter that I fooled him, I was outside of the law. I'm not saying I've not been there just be aware of where you are. Many of the codes are insurance related. This one is bad law, it was pushed by industry for profit, they gamed the system. The call went up, "they are going to stuff the ballot box, come vote!" Where were we?Rather than sneaking around, ducking and hiding as a people, we need to stand on their foot, lean in nose to nose, and say "not today". On the state by state level this is what happened, people organized, lobbied the state legislatures and most chose not to adopt that portion of the national model code. I've seen something similar with stairs, remember 7-11? All stairs were going to be 7" rise x 11" run, great idea, doesn't work in the real world, repealed in the next code cycle. Windows in my jurisdiction cost thousands more per house, to no real benefit for the occupants, for 3 years until our inspector helped overturn that one.