OHIOFIRE Archives

February 2000

OHIOFIRE@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
International Association of Campus Fire Safety Officials <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 17 Feb 2000 08:16:32 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
We have had it used in one application here and we most definately want
to stay away from it.  We have had problems with it.  We've had a
grounded line it it which took several days to find.  Then we found many
nicks and cuts in the cable when they pulled it through like in the
ducts and stuff.  For troubleshooting purposes it makes it harder then
conduit because we have no grounding reference.  I would advise you not
to use it if at all possible

-----Original Message-----
From: M. Murray [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2000 6:23 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Fire Alarm Raceway


I would appreciate information about use of metallic raceway/conduit for
fire alarm systems in University buildings.  A value engineering report
for a major library renovation proposes plenum rated cable in lieu of
raceway to save $70K in construction cost.  Our standard has been to use
raceway for all FA system...regardless of minimum code requirements.

My specific question...what is the practice at your University, and if
your standards exceed the Fire Alarm Code and/or NEC, what is the
justification?

Mark D. Murray, PE                      University of Washington
Manager                                 Environmental Health & Safety
[log in to unmask]                Box 354400
206-543-0465                            Seattle, WA 98195-4400
                                        http://www.ehs.washington.edu

ATOM RSS1 RSS2