You are being redirected because this document is part of your ASTM Compass® subscription.
    This document is part of your ASTM Compass® subscription.


    Automatic Sprinklers Versus Direct Applied Fire Protection: Can There Be Trade-offs?

    Published: 0

      Format Pages Price  
    PDF (132K) 10 $25   ADD TO CART
    Complete Source PDF (2.3M) 162 $55   ADD TO CART

    Cite this document

    X Add email address send
      .RIS For RefWorks, EndNote, ProCite, Reference Manager, Zoteo, and many others.   .DOCX For Microsoft Word


    Trading off one form of fire protection for another is becoming a common place occurrence in construction today. On both a national and local level, building codes are allowing direct substitution of one form of fire protection for another. The objective of this paper is to question the justification of this concept as it applies to automatic sprinklers versus direct applied structural steel fire protection. It is important to keep in mind that structural steel fire protection is intended to maintain structural integrity in a fire while automatic sprinklers are a mechanical extinguishing system. The end result is that both systems complement each other and were never intended to replace one another.


    fire protection, fire resistant materials, steel construction, sprinkler, building codes, fire safety, fire resistive coatings

    Author Information:

    Anderson, GT
    Fire protection product manager, W. R. Grace and Company, Cambridge, Mass.

    Committee/Subcommittee: E06.21

    DOI: 10.1520/STP31899S