AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION BY GORHAM DANA, S. B. MANAGER, THE UNDERWRITERS^ BUREAU OF NEW ENGLAND, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS SECOND EDITION NEW YORK JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC. LONDON: CHAPMAN & HALL, LIMITED 1919 3 5 COPYRIGHT, 1914, 1919, BY GORHAM DANA Stanhope $ress F. H.GILSON COMPANY BOSTON, U.S.A. PREFACE THIS book is based on a series of lectures delivered by the writer before the Insurance Library Association of Boston in the spring of 1913. These lectures covered the third year course in the subject of Fire Protection as outlined by the Insurance Institute of America. In this book the lecture notes have been greatly amplified in an effort to cover more thoroughly all phases of the subject. There has been added an appendix- in which all sprink- ler heads, about which any information could be ob- tained, are listed alphabetically, and briefly described. Several years ago the writer listed and photographed the sprinkler heads shown in the first edition of the Crosby- Fiske Hand Book of Fire Protection, these being taken largely from the collection owned by the Underwriters' Bureau of New England. These were afterwards re- photographed and a number were added. The authors of the Hand Book have kindly loaned these cuts for use in the appendix. A number of new types and variations of old types have been added to this list but as the names and numbers as given in the Hand Book have become quite generally recognized throughout the country, care has been taken not to change these and fractional num- bers have in some cases been used to designate sprinklers that have come to notice since these photographs were taken. Having been a member of the Committee on Automatic Sprinklers of the National Fire Protection Association for several years, the writer has had an opportunity to keep in touch with all the late developments in this interesting art. iii iv PREFACE The aim of the book is to cover the subject in such a way that it can be used as a text book for person^ study- ing sprinkler protection and as a reference book%r those already versed in it. Assistance, which is gratefully acknowledged, has been received from Mr. E. V. French, Vice-President of the Ark- wright Mutual Insurance Company; Mr. Q W. Mowry, Engineer, Factory Mutual Ins. Cos. ; Mr. Russell Grinnell, Vice-President of the General Fire Extinguisher Company; Mr. J. C. Meloon, Mechanical Engineer with the same company, Mr. A. M. Lewis of the Associated Automatic Sprinkler Co., and others. Mr. C. J. H. Woodbury's report on Automatic Sprinklers made in 1884 has been ^freely quoted and much valuable information was obtained from this and other articles by Mr. Woodbury. Mr. C. C. Johnson of the American District Telegraph Company and Mr. George H. Spooner gave valuable assistance on the subject of Sprinkler Supervisory Systems. To Messrs. Fiske and Crosby, the General Fire Ex- tinguisher Company, several other sprinkler companies, the American District Telegraph Company and others the writer is indebted for many of the illustrations. Much val- uable data on English sprinklers was obtained from Mather & Platt, Ltd., Londoi^ Agents for the Grinnell devices. It has been very difficult in some cases to verify the data obtained from doubtful sources and for this reason cor- rections and criticisms will be especially welcomed by the author. r _ GORHAM DANA. January, 1914. w In preparing the second edition the text was thoroughly revised and information on new devices was added. New chapters have also been added on Combined ITeat and Sprinkler Systems and Sypho Chemical Sprinkler Sys- G. D. May, 1918. & . TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION ix CHAPTER I. PERFORATED PIPES 1 Francis; Whiting; Grinnell; and Hall systems. Pipe scheme. Defects. Fire Record. CHAPTER II. EARLY AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS AND SPRINK- LERS 10 Godfrey; Carey; Congreve; Macbay; Pratt; Souther and Meehan systems. Harrison; Parmelee; Conant; Buell; Barnes; Bishop; Burritt; Whiting; Granger; Brown; Mackey; Harris; Kane; Draper; Walworth; Ruthenburg; Grinnell; and other sprinklers. CHAPTER III. LATER DEVELOPMENTS IN AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS 42 Types. Mascot; Nagle; Shaw; Bishop; Brown; Buell; Star; Clapp; Hill; Gray; Hibbard; Harkness; Kane; International; Associated; Evans; Kersteter; Mackey; Manufacturers; Neracher; N. Y. & N. H.; Newton; Phoenix; Pierce; Rockwood; Walworth; Esty; Babcock; Grinnell; and other sprinklers. CHAPTER IV. TESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SPRINKLERS. 67 Woodbury tests. Sprinkler solder. Leakage. Fire rec- ord. Later Mutual tests. Approved sprinklers. Size of orifice. Failures from age. Limit of age. Corrosion. Painting. Rotating deflectors. Valve discs. High-test heads. Defective heads in use. Cost of equipments. Tests for acceptance. Requirements for construction. Test specifications. CHAPTER V. INSTALLATION RULES 88 General information. Location. Circulation in pipes. Service connections. Painting. Hanging and piling of stock. Extra sprinklers. Hand hose. Spacing. Pipe Vi CONTENTS PAGE CHAPTER VI. LAYOUT OF EQUIPMENTS 107 Feed mains and risers. Valves and fittings. Hangers. Test pipes. Drip , pipes. Pressure gages. Protection against freezing. Water supplies. Waterworks. Meters. Gravity tanks. Pressure tanks. Steam pumps. Ro- tary pumps. Centrifugal pumps. Electric pumps. Steamer connections. Underground pipe. CHAPTER VII. ALARM VALVES 137 Types. Installation. Rules for designing alarm valves. Installation rules. Fire record. Associated; Carpenter; Crowd er; Evans; Gray; Globe; Grinnell angle; Grinnell English; Grinnell Straightway; Harkness Tee; Inter- national; Manufacturers or Venturi; Neu; Niagara; Rock- wood; Wai worth alarm valves. CHAPTER VIII. DRY VALVES 184 General features. Types. Installation rules. Early systems. Requirements for a dry valve. Associated; Brown; Cataract; Clapp; Clayton; Crowder; Dixon; Dodge; Globe; Gray; Grinnell bellows; Grinnell No. 12; Grinnell Straightway; Hibbard; Higgins; Ideal; Inde- pendent; International; Kane; Kersteter; Linn; Mackey; Manufacturers; Nagle; Neracher; Nyasco; N. Y. & N. H.; Niagara; Phoenix; Richmond; Rockwood; Shaw; Steck; U. T. D. ; and Walworth dry valves. Combined sprinkler and heating system. CHAPTER IX. SPRINKLER SUPERVISORY SYSTEMS 260 Installation rules. Description of devices. Water flow apparatus. Gate valve attachment. Pressure indicator. Water level device. Temperature device. Supervision by water flow. CHAPTER X. MAINTENANCE AND FIRE RECORD 288 Inspection methods in use. Care of valves. Drip valve tests. Tanks and pumps. Dry valves and alarm valves. Sprinkler systems. Tests of sprinkler heads. Self-in- spection. Fire record. Important fires. CHAPTER XI. SPRINKLER LEAKAGE 310 What should be inspected. Policy form. CONTENTS vii PAGE CHAPTER XII. AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AS A PROTECTION TO LIFE 322 Record of loss of life in sprinklered risks. Need of legis- lation. CHAPTER XIII. COMBINED HEAT AND SPRINKLER SYS- TEMS 326 CHAPTER XIV. SYPHO CHEMICAL SPRINKLER SYSTEM 340 APPENDIX I 353 List of over 250 sprinklers described and rated. Result of tests on 6277 old types of sprinklers. APPENDIX II 439 Standard report blank for Inspection by the assured. INTRODUCTION AUTOMATIC sprinklers have now been on the market for over forty years and while the early types were crude and unreliable they have now been so perfected that little remains to be desired. The development was due largely to the ingenuity of a number of inventors, includ- ing Parmelee, Grinnell, Barnes, Bishop, Buell, Gray and HENRY S. PARMELEE. FREDERICK GRINNELL. Kane, but also in no small degree to the work of the fire protection experts connected with the fire insurance com- panies. The thorough tests made in the insurance labora- tories, the advice given as a result of these tests and the study they involved were important factors in the develop- ment. The rebate allowed by the insurance companies for sprinkler protection was undoubtedly the most power- ful factor in the growth of the business and without this rapid increase in their use, the development of the devices would have been much slower. ix X INTRODUCTION While the first practical automatic sprinkler was de- signed in England, it may be considered an American in- vention for the first sprinkler to be used in practice was invented here .and most of the early development took place in this country. The Stock Insurance Companies were rather slow in taking up the idea and much of the early development is due to the Associated Factory Mutuals a group of mutual insurance companies devoting most of their at- tention to large manufacturing plants. The foresight of their officials and the exhaustive tests made by their laboratory staff did much to bring the sprinkler into prominence. The National Board of Fire Underwriters, comprising all the leading Stock Insurance Companies doing business in this country, appointed a committee in 1875 to report on this subject. This committee consisted of Wm. H. Ross, John E. Kahl, James Nichols, Geo. P. Field and John A. Child. The following quotation is taken from their able report: "Another patented improvement on this principle comes up for examination, viz. the Automatic -Fire Extinguisher and Alarm which appears to be nearly all that is required, an apparatus in all places, sufficient in itself, always ready, always there to act entirely by itself and which cannot go to sleep or make blunders." No further action was apparently taken by the Stock Companies for about 10 years, although some of the in- dividual companies did take some interest in property so protected. In 1886 the New England Insurance Ex- change, the rating body for New England, appointed a special committee to report 011 Automatic Sprinklers. As a result of this report the Factory Improvement Committee was appointed the same year "to prescribe requirements, approve devices, encourage standard con- struction, and fix rates." INTRODUCTION xi Mr. U. C. Crosby of Boston, Chairman of this Com- mittee was one of the first Stock Company insurance rep- resentatives to become interested in the device and his work, together with the valuable tests made by his son Everett U. Crosby at the Underwriters' Bureau of New England, did much to popularize the sprinkler among Stock Companies. In the early days, tests for acceptance were made by a number of local boards and bureaus and different devices were approved in different parts of the country. In 1901 the Underwriters' Laboratories, Incorporated, of Chicago, a corporation supported largely by the National Board of Fire Underwriters, took over practically all the testing of sprinklers for the Stock Companies. The splendid work of this organization has done much to bring automatic sprinkler protection to its present high state of development. AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION CHAPTER I PERFORATED PIPE SYSTEMS Francis System. The first form of sprinkler to be used in practice was the perforated pipe. These systems were first used in this country about 1852, the idea having been apparently imported from England. The first installation on record was made at a plant of the Pro- prietors of the Locks and Canals on the Merrimack River at Lowell, Mass. The early equipments were installed to protect the roofs of mill buildings only; but later they were extended to picker, card and spinning rooms of textile mills. In 1859 the Locks and Canals Company was requiring perforated pipes in all hazardous and cer- tain inaccessible rooms in their mills. Mr. James B. Francis, the hydraulic engineer for this company, early saw the possibilities of such a system and made experi- ments to determine the best size and location of per- forations; the proper size of feed pipes and branch lines; and the best location of the pipes.* He developed a system in which the piping was placed close to the ceiling, running across the mill in the center of each bay. The pipe was perforated with holes T V inch in diameter, placed 9 inches apart alternately on differ- ent sides and at a point a little above the horizontal center of the pipe. This caused the water to be dis- charged toward the ceiling at an angle which would wet the ceiling to advantage as well as properly cover the floor below. In order to reduce the friction loss of the water in the pipes it was found necessary to grade * See Journal of Franklin Institute, April, 1865. 1 , " .*2.' *': : . ; Atnr.9ivfATiG l SPRINKLER PROTECTION the pipe sizes so that the area of the cross section at any point was about twice the area of the perforations to be supplied. Such a system under 20 pounds pressure would discharge enough water to cover the floor to a depth of T \ inch in a minute. r V i :, o - - 4 I , I r (V. :. a- 5 iff ^ COU^U,M. K> t' i I 1 ELEVATION FRANCIS SYSTEM of perforated pipes installed by Providence Steam and Gas Pipe Co. Prior to 1870 the Providence Steam & Gas Pipe Com- pany became interested in fire protection ?,ud began in- stalling the Francis system of perforated pipes in mill property. Soon after 1870 the Francis system was, in existing installations, very generally extended to cover PERFORATED PIPE SYSTEMS picker, card and spinning rooms as well as other rooms where processes of a hazardous nature were carried on. The Boston Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Com- pany bulletin for 1880 advised the Assured to make cer- 4- >F * 1 -e ! ^r? i i ^ &-- C-J . , - - i PLAT^THICK. GRINNELL SYSTEM of perforated pipes installed by Providence Steam and Gas Pipe Co. tain that the pipe sizes of their perforated pipe systems, where supplied from a reservoir, were of such a size that the area of the orifices would not exceed 50 per cent that of the area of the pipe that fed them; but 4 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION that where the supply was from pumps, the area of the orifices might be 66 per cent that of the area of the pipe. Whiting System. Mr. William B. Whiting modified this system by using holes T V inch in diameter and plac- ing them 3 inches apart alternately on the top of the pipe and at a point 30 degrees from the vertical on each side. The pipes were run across the bays and under the beams. Grinnell System. About 1873 the Providence Steam & Gas Pipe Company further modified the system by using holes -fa inch in diameter in three rows 12 inches apart on the row and staggered, so that the holes were 4 inches apart between centers on the line of pipe. The center row of holes was at the top of the pipe and the two side rows were at an angle of 60 from the vertical. Standard wrought-iron pipe was used for all the lines that were perforated. Boiler tubing with fine threads and long bend fittings was used for the feed pipes. In 1875 Frederick Grinnell, president of the Providence Steam & Gas Pipe Company, devised a countersunk orifice for the perforations which tended to prevent clogging of the outlets by corrosion. In 1878 he still further improved the system by using a non-corrosive orifice consisting of a thin plate f inch in diameter and ^3 inch thick with a ^-inch hole in the center. This was placed over the outlets in the pipe and held by being peened into the pipe with a hammer. Hall System. Between 1870 and 1875 there was con- siderable competition in the business and Hall Brothers of Boston began to install systems where the perforated pipes were of galvanized sheet metal with slip joints similar to stovepipe joints. These were attached to wrought-iron feed pipes. This made a cheap installa- tion but the sheet-iron pipe was not well suited to with- stand severe corrosion or heavy pressure. Many of PERFORATED PIPE SYSTEMS 5 the joints pulled out under pressure and the system was soon given up. Pipe Scheme. In all these systems the general scheme of piping was the same. Starting at one end of a -room the piping was run in parallel lines 10 feet or less apart beginning with f-inch pipe and gradually enlarging so that the diameter of the pipe at any point would com- ply with the rules given above. These lines of pipe connected with a feed pipe which in turn was enlarged until the riser or upright pipe feeding the entire floor was reached. This riser passed down through the floors or on the outside of the building to a controlling valve. Each floor had a separate riser and controlling valve. These valves were located in a group, each one being labelled, showing which floor or section it controlled. In the best laid out systems these valves were housed in a valve house at a safe distance from the mill building. The valves being underground were operated by hand wheels on a spindle and a light was constantly kept burn- ing so that the labels could be quickly read. In other systems the valves were either in the building or on the outside according to the location of the risers. Some- times the valve stem extended through the wall. Where the valves were in stair towers the arrangement was much safer than where they were in the main building. Any location except the detached valve house was unde- sirable and this defect of location was the cause of many failures, owing to the impossibility of reaching the valves after the fire was discovered. The valves were, of course, kept closed and in well laid out systems the water was under constant pressure in the pipes up to those controlling valves. If there was a hydrant system in the yard the per- forated pipe system could be connected with the hydrant piping provided it was of sufficient size and capacity, 6 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION care being taken to keep all piping up to the valves below frost line. The water supplies used were generally reservoirs or pumps, but sometimes public waterworks systems and elevated tanks were used. Where elevated tanks were used it was quite necessary to have pumps in reserve in order to obtain sufficient capacity to supply the system for any length of time. Systems depending upon pumps alone were not as desirable on account of the delay that would probably be experienced in start- ing the pumps. The operation of the system was as follows: When a fire was discovered at any particular point the valve con- trolling that floor and section was opened. The water issued from the perforations in the pipe, flooding the entire floor. If the fire spread to another floor the valve for that floor could be opened, although the water supply was not always sufficient to supply many floors at once. Defects. A very undesirable feature of a system of this kind was the fact that the water was not concen- trated where needed but would wet down the whole floor irrespective of the extent of the fire. This not only caused a heavy water damage in locations where no fire existed but it wasted the water so there was often not enough available at the seat of the fire. Another feature was the possible clogging of the per- forations by rust, paint and sediment. Pipe scale is very apt to form on the inside of wrought-iron pipe, which washed along by the current of water may readily clog any holes as small as these. Such a system could not ordinarily be tested on account of the heavy water damage that would result. It was therefore- impossible to determine accurately whether or not the orifices were in a condition to properly discharge water. This feature did not apparently cause much trouble in practice and PERFORATED PIPE SYSTEMS 7 was improved in some of the later equipments by drill- ing the holes larger than the size desired and inserting brass bushings with orifices of the proper size. This tended to prevent corrosion at the outlets and made them less liable to be clogged by paint. Trouble occasionally occurred from a perforated pipe valve being opened, through error or malice, thus caus- ing great water damage. Then again the valves some- times leaked, thus allowing the water to fill the pipes gradually and cause damage either by wetting down the building or by freezing and breaking the pipes. This trouble was overcome in many systems by putting a small pet cock in the pipe just above the controlling valve and keeping it open. This allowed the leakage from the valve to waste away at a safe point and yet did not allow too much water to be lost when the system was put into operation. Perhaps the most unsatisfactory feature of these systems as compared with automatic sprinkler systems was the fact that they were not automatic in action. In many of the fires that occurred in mills so equipped, the valves were either forgotten or were not opened soon enough so that the equipment failed to hold the fire. In rooms where corrosive vapors were present, Mr. Wm. B. Whiting used brass rosettes or rose sprinklers attached to the pipes instead of perforations in the pipe itself. These were placed about 10 feet apart, in much the same way as in modern automatic sprinkler systems. The rosettes consisted of perforated brass caps similar to watering-pot nozzles but with somewhat larger holes. A cap without perforations fitted loosely over the rosette thus protecting it from dust and corrosion. When the water was turned on, the pressure forced off the outer cap and the water was distributed through the holes in the rosette. Perforated pipe systems in spite of their many defects 8 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION were quite extensively used from 1852 until about 1885 especially in the New England cotton mills insured in the Factory Mutuals. Insurance Companies. They were a considerable factor in fire protection until about 1875, and while they have practically disappeared from mill property they are still used to some extent in New York City. Though in many cases they failed to control the fire, they were at times quite successful. A brief description of a few fires, taken from the valuable book compiled by Mr. E. V. French in commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the Arkwright Mutual Fire Insurance Company, will give an idea of the practical value of the device. Fire Record. In 1885 a large fire occurred in the plant of the Plymouth Cordage Company, Plymouth, Mass. Mill No. 1 was equipped with perforated pipe sprinklers and these were successfully used, assisting greatly in saving the mill. The fire started in the picker house, which was just being equipped with automatic sprinklers, and burned this, together with Mill No. 3, which was so equipped. A fire in the Cocheco Mfg. Co., Dover, N. H., in 1887, started in a cloth drier and spread so rapidly that the employees had barely time to get out. There were per- forated pipes in the attic only. These were apparently of some value although the fire was finally extinguished by hose streams. The loss was about $170,000. At a fire in the Border City Mill in Fall River in 1877, the perforated pipe system was turned on but no water was delivered. It was afterwards found that there was another valve in the pipe back of the controlling valve and that this was closed. This was a good exam- ple of the need of carefully laying out such a system with as few valves as possible and of having all valves up to the controlling valve kept open at all times. The loss was $398,000. PERFORATED PIPE SYSTEMS 9 Another fire occurred in the Flint Mill, Fall River, in 1882, starting in the engine room and spreading rapidly through beltways to all floors. The perforated pipes covering the three upper floors were put into use but failed to hold the fire as the large number of floor equipments used at the same time overtaxed the water supply. The mill was destroyed with a loss of about $569,000. At a fire in the Sagamore Mfg. Co., Fall River,' in 1884, the perforated pipe system was ineffective as the fire started in the basement and quickly spread to the tower where the valves were located so that they could not be opened. A similar case occurred at the Dunnell Mfg. Co., Pawtucket, in 1890. CHAPTER II EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS An automatic sprinkler may be denned as a device that when heated to a predetermined point will auto- matically release and distribute a stream of water. In all modern sprinkler heads this releasing is accomplished by the melting of low-fusing solder which is used in the construction of the device. In some of the older types of heads the releasing was accomplished in other ways, such as by the burning of a cord, the explosion of gun- powder, the expansion of a volatile liquid in a closed receptacle or the expansion of wax. None of these de- vices however, except those depending upon the melting of solder, have been of any importance in a commercial sense. While therefore the main principle underlying all successful automatic sprinklers has been essentially the. same, the details of construction have varied so widely that one can hardly recognize any resemblance between some of the types. The time spent and the ingenuity displayed in the invention of sprinkler heads has been prodigious. The patent records show that over 450 patents have been taken out in the United States since 1872, and there have probably been a great many more invented that were never patented. Yet out of this vast array there are today on the approved list of the National Board of Fire Underwriters only 11 heads and of these but 5 or 6 are being extensively used. There are a large number that have been quite generally and successfully used in years past but that have been superseded by improved types and gradually eliminated from use. 10 EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 11 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS Godfrey. The first automatic fire extinguisher of which we have any record was patented in England in 1723 by Ambrose Godfrey, a celebrated chemist. It consisted of a cask of fire-extinguishing liquid containing a pewter chamber of gunpowder. This was connected with a system of fuses which were ignited, exploding the gunpowder and scattering the solution. In the quaint old patent record the inventor says, " the said vessells so filled and prepared ... to be made use of by firing the said fuse and then flinging the said vessell into the place where the fire is broke out, which upon the ex- plosion of the gunpowder, blasts out all the flame, and the water or other ingredients which were in the vessell are forcibly driven by the gunpowder against the parts that were on fire, and do damp and suffocate the same so effectually that any man may safely enter the place, and with the proper implements may totally extinguish the remaining fire." This device was probably used to a limited extent, as Bradley's Weekly Messenger for November 7, 1729, refers to its efficiency in stopping a fire in London. Carey. The first automatic device using water through a system of pipes appears to have been invented by John Carey in 1806. The device was for " the ex- tinguishment of fires in gentlemen's apartments and warehouses, etc.," although there seems to be no reason why it could not have been used in more hazardous places. It consisted of a number of rose or perforated sprinklers connected to pipes supplied with water from an elevated tank. There was a valve in the main pipe normally closed but connected to a system of cords and weights in such a manner that in case the cord was burned the valve would be opened by a counterweight. This was a very crude and impractical device, for the stretching 12 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION of the cord would probably have caused the valve to leak, unless, as was quite likely to be the case, the valve became stuck in place so that it would neither leak nor open. Congreve. In 1809 Sir William Congreve, a hy- draulic engineer and Member of Parliament, further developed this idea and patented a sprinkler system consisting of rose sprinklers with combustible cords lead- ing to valves in a place of " outside security and arrange- ments for a further supply of water by water mains or hose connections to fire engines." In 1812 he substi- tuted for burning cords, a cement fusible at 110 degrees or less. The patent described an automatic sprinkler as "an apparatus for extinguishing fires which shall be called into action by the fire itself at its first breaking out and which shall be brought to bear upon the precise part where the flames exist." Apparently the mechan- ical details were not worked out in a way which would realize this much to be desired result. This patent included an alarm attachment operated by the dropping of a weight. Smith. Other systems operating upon the same gen- eral principle were patented in England in 1855 by James Smith who employed burning cords or gutta percha as a releasing agent. He also stated that " wire fusible at a low temperature or lime chemically prepared to render it easily ignitable may be employed for the same purpose." In 1861 Lewis Roughton invented a system which used fusible metal; and in 1863 Roger Dawson used per- forated pipes with rose or fan-tail outlets. Macbay. In 1852 William Macbay patented a de- vice which more closely resembled the automatic sprink- ler. It consisted of a system of piping having outlets closed by caps of fusible metal, gutta percha or other substances that would melt at a low temperature. EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 13 Pratt. The first patent upon an automatic sprinkler system in this country was apparently the one taken out in 1872 by Philip W. Pratt of Abington, Mass. This device consisted of two revolving hollow arms containing perforations. These arms were attached to a pipe con- taining water under pressure and there was a valve just above the connec- tion ordinarily kept closed. There was a system t of cords and fuses attached to the valve in such a way that when any fuse melted the valve was opened. Souther. In 1872 John Souther of Boston advocated an auto- matic fire extinguisher PRATT SpRINKLER SYSTEM . consisting of perforated Af va i ve . B, cord. C, distributor, brass steam pipes. Steam was turned on automatically by the expansion of the pipe or by the burning of cords. A steam whistle was sounded at the same time. Meehan. In April, 1873, J. C. Meehan of Spring- field, Mass., patented an automatic steam sprinkler operated by fuses running to a small cylinder of gun- powder. When this exploded a valve was opened. AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER HEADS Harrison. The first automatic sprinkler head, as the term is used today, was undoubtedly invented by Major .A. Stewart Harrison of the First Engineer London Volun- teers in 1864. While this device was never patented and was never apparently put upon the market, it not only 14 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Rubber Valve showed a very marked advance in the art but was actu- ally superior to the devices that followed it for several years. The head consisted of a hollow brass casting shaped like a flattened sphere with an internal diameter of 3 inches. This contained a large number of counter- sunk holes T V inch in diameter, located J to J inch apart. At the upper; end, the head contracted into a cylinder 1 inch in diameter threaded on the outside so that it could be screwed into a pipe. Inside of this was a valve in the form of a cup-shaped piece of soft rubber which when closed held back the water. The inside of the head at this point was tinned to prevent the rub- ber from sticking to the brass. The valve being of rubber and cup-shaped, the water tended to make the joint tighter as the pressure increased. The valve was held in place by a spindle which extended down through the head and through a wooden projection on the under side, to a shoulder at the lower extremity. Here it was held by low-fusing solder under compression. The wooden projection was put on, in order to insulate the solder joint from the brass casting and make the head more sensitive to heat. When the solder fused, the spindle and valve were pushed down by the water pres- sure and the water was discharged through the per- forations. The particular features in which this head -urpassed many that followed it were as follows: 1. A cup-shaped rubber valve that tended to tighten under pressure. Wood Solder HARRISON SPRINKLER. (Section.) EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 15 2. A solder joint insulated from the brass casting and from the piping by a gpod non-conducting material. 3. A valve that had to slide a short distance before any water could be discharged, thus tending to prevent a small stream of water from being discharged before the solder joint had fully parted and chilling or " freez- ing " the solder so that the head would not open fully. 4. Low-fusing solder under compression rather than tension or shearing strain. This last point is important from the fact that sprink- ler solder melting at a low temperature is subject to cold flow and is not well adapted to withstand, for a long continued period, either heavy tension or shearing strains. , The only serious defects in this remarkable sprinkler were the distribution, which is never satisfactory from a rose or perforated head; the possibility of the holes becoming clogged with pipe scale and sediment; and the soft rubber valve which would only last a few years before becoming hard and brittle. Major Harrison planned to overcome the last trouble by replacing the valves every two or three years. It was planned to install these heads in much the same way that sprinklers are installed today, spacing them 6 to 10 feet apart according to the combustibility of the contents of room to be protected, and attaching them to the under side of pipes fed by an elevated tank. The inventor also planned an alarm valve in the system actuated by the flow of water when a head operated. The Harrison head was of the so-called " sensitive " type, as distinguished from the " sealed " or water-joint sprinkler. That is, the solder joint was not in contact with the water in the pipes as was the case in most of the early sprinklers. In the " sealed " type the water in the pipes and the piping nearby has to be heated nearly to the melting point of the solder before the head 16 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION can open. This makes them much slower in operation than those of the sensitive type. Major Harrison's sprinkler was far in advance of its time and it is surprising that it was not imitated more closely by other sprinkler inventors who followed him. Parmelee. To Mr. Henry S. Parmelee of New Haven, Conn., belongs the credit of inventing the first automatic sprinkler head to be used extensively in prac- tice. It is said that Mr. Parmelee objected to the high rates of insurance charged for his piano factory after the Chicago and Boston conflagrations and that he determined to find some form of protection that would warrant a reduction in rate. His first idea was a sprinkler depending upon the burning of a cord. This, however, was apparently given up after a conference with Mr. Foskett of Messrs. Foskett, Bishop & Co., New Haven. In the words of Mr. Rounds, Secretary of the Company: " Mr. Henry Parmelee visited the shop one morning and exhibited his sprinkler, which contained a spring, to Mr. Foskett. Mr. Foskett . . . told him that his idea of having a releasing device, consisting of a jute or tow string, made it necessary for a flame to be present, and in his opinion an automatic sprinkler should be operated by heat as well as flame, and suggested to him that if he would, wait a few minutes he would make him a sprinkler and, with his own hands, turned a cap and attached it to a rose head by means of fusible solder." Mr. Parmelee took out his first patent in August, 1874. This covered a device which consisted of a per- forated head containing a valve which was held closed against water pressure by a heavy spring. This spring was held in place by two eyes made of low-f vising mate- rial. These eyes were protected from water thrown from the other sprinklers by a hood. The device was greatly complicated by an auxiliary valve in the main supply EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 17 pipe which shut off the water supply from the head so that when it first opened it was fed only by a small PARMELEE "A" SPRINKLER. auxiliary pipe. This valve was then automatically opened by the dropping of a piston which was ordinarily held up by the water pressure in the small pipe. PARMELEE SPRINKLER 1. A, fusible link. This sprinkler was of the sensitive or non-water-joint type and was so far as known never used in practice. 18 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION The first sprinkler which had actual use in his factory was of radically different design. It consisted of a perforated distributor and a valve, the valve being held in place by a spindle which rested against a lever. One end of the lever was pivoted and the other was attached to the casting with a heavy spring and fusible link. PARMELEE 3. (Section.) This design was changed a little later so that the valve was held in place with a wood strut bearing at the upper end against a fusible washer. In 1875 an entirely new type was developed in which a brass cap was soldered over a distributor. This was one of the simplest sprinklers ever made but was not as sensitive as the previous type because water rested against the inside of the solder joint. This head was designed to screw onto a, nipple and was threaded on the inside. In 1878 the sprinkler was further modified by sub- stituting a rotating slotted turbine for the perforated PARMELEE SPRINK- LER 2. E, distributor. B, fusible washer. EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 19 PARMELEE 4. Fig. i. Fig. 2, ACTUAL SIZE. ACTUAL SIZE, PARMELEE 5. 20 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION distributor, thus improving the distribution and giving less chance for clogging by sediment. The same year the head was redesigned by Mr. Grinnell and made more sensitive by hollowing out the base so that much less of the solder joint was in contact with the water in the pipes. It was also threaded on the outside to fit a i-inch pipe fitting. These heads were screwed into the* upper side of pipes suspended from the ceiling and spaced about 10 feet apart in each direction. When the head and the piping became heated to the fusing point of the solder (about 160 Fahr.) the pressure would force the cap off from the head and water would be distributed by the revolv- ing turbine. The method of piping originated by Mr. Parmelee and used for many years in his systems was the so-called " tree " system. The main feed pipes were placed about 20 feet apart and the branch lines were of f-inch pipe 5 feet long spaced about 10 feet apart on the feed pipe. This brought the heads about 10 feet apart in each direction. This plan was developed so that each sprinkler would be on a dead end and would not be cooled by water flowing past it in case of fire. In mill construction the feed pipes usually ran across the tim- bers and the branch lines ran along the center of each bay. The feed pipe was enlarged where the branch lines connected so as to give enough capacity to feed practically all the heads on a floor at once. Instead of a riser for each floor, as in the perforated pipe systems, one riser was sufficient for all floors and it was large enough to feed the greatest number of heads on any one floor. This was done on the theory that only one floor would be on fire at a time and this same principle is in use today. The Parmelee system also contemplated an alarm valve which would operate a -bell or a whistle in case one EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 21 or more sprinklers opened. This consisted of a flapper check valve placed in the main riser near its base. A lever connected with the hinged end of the check extended through a stuffing box and was connected by a wire to a steam whistle or to a mechanical gong. When the check valve was lifted by the flowage of water the steam whistle or the gong was put into oper- ation. This system was first installed by the piping firm of Foskett, Bishop & Co., of New Haven, Conn. The first regular installation, outside of an experimental one in the plant of the Parmelee Piano Works, was in the risk of M. Seward & Son, New Haven, Conn. Later Mr. Parmelee made arrangements with the Providence Steam & Gas Pipe Company for installing this system, and this company continued to install these heads until about 1882 when Mr. Frederick Grinnell invented an improved type of sprinkler which bears his name. It is said that some 200,000 of these Parmelee heads were installed, mostly in mills located in New England. The Parmelee catalogue for 1881 gives a list of 214 plants equipped with the device. Of these 140 were in New England, 17 in New York, 14 in Pennsyl- vania and the rest scattered through the southern states and Canada. This cata- logue also gives a list of 19 fires successfully BRQ ^ N AND FQ ; KETT SPRINKLEB< controlled by these AjVaJvedisc . B , releasing device, heads between 1877 c, distributor, and 1881. Brown and Foskett. J. R. Brown and Wm. A. Fos- kett of New Haven, Conn., took out a patent in August, 1875, for a sprinkler of the sensitive type. It was an 22 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION elbow head with a valve in the horizontal pipe to which the rose sprinkler pointing up was attached. The valve was held closed by a piston extending through packing and released by the fusing of solder. There was also a spring to assist opening the valve when the water pressure was light. Top View CONANT SPRINKLER. Conant. In the same month Hezekiah Conant of Pawtucket, R. I., patented a crude and carubersome device consisting of a globe valve A, held closed against the water pressure in the pipe. The stem B of the valve extended through a stuffing box C for some dis- EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 23 tance, terminating in a short cross arm E. It was held in place by light cords or cotton skeins F wound around the cross arm and a corresponding projection G on the other side of the head. When this cord burned the water pressure opened the valve and water was dis- charged through a spherical distributor D filled with holes. In a later type a manual attachment in the form of a knife blade was added. This blade was attached to a pivoted arm from which hung a cord that could be reached from the floor. When it was desired to open the head by hand the cord was pulled and the knife blade was drawn across the cord, cutting it and releasing the valve. This type of head was installed in the plant of the Conant Thread Company at Pawtucket, R. I., but prob- ably nowhere else. It was one of the largest sprinklers ever put on the market and weighed 2 pounds 15 ounces. Like the majority of the earlier heads its most undesir- able feature was the possibility of sticking at the valve. One of these heads was taken apart about 25 years after it was made and the valve was found stuck so hard that it was very difficult to loosen it. No head having the valve spindle passing through a stuffing box can be depended upon to work properly for many years. Buell. Mr. Charles E. Buell invented a sprinkler that was made in New Haven, Conn., in 1873. A few of these were installed in the shop of James Buel, Woburn, Mass., in September, 1881. This was probably the first head of the sensitive type to be put into practical use. It was also said to be the first head to use the modern principle of distributing water coming through an open outlet by means of a splash plate or deflector. To quote Mr. Buell: "The sprinkler with the spring strap, like sugar tongs, was the first of its class and was made first in New Haven, Conn., in 1873. It comprises a valve 24 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION closing the otherwise open outlet in a manner to be discharged without any friction. The spring strap is, like the sugar tongs, a lever of the third class and by leverage removes strain from the film of solder that in turn is removed from the chill of the water. The spring of the strap gives a thrust to the releas- ing parts and with the exception of not being as conveniently put in place, this form will do all that modern sprinklers will do." This, says Mr. Buell, was the first of the class of open outlet sprinklers and the first to deliver a stream of water against a deflector secured in front of the outlet. This sprinkler was of the elbow type, that is, it was designed to screw into the side of a pipe, and the water turn- ing a right angle was distributed on a splash plate at the lower side. The outlet was closed by a round metal cap BUELL SPRINKLER, containing a lead washer. This was A, valve cap. held against the outlet by a screw pass- B, solder joint. mg through a small hole in the deflector ' ' and fastened to the sugar-tong spring. This spring was of thin brass and extended up over the body of the sprinkler. Here the two ends were soldered together with low-fusing solder but the joint was insulated from the body of the head by a thin strip of wood. The deflector was a thin brass plate about 1J inches in diameter, held in front of the orifice by two arms extending out from the lower side of the head. This head, while crude in design, contained, like the Harrison head, many advanced principles and theoret- ically at least was superior to many heads that followed it. Barnes. Mr. Charles Barnes of Cincinnati was one of the group of early inventors in this field. He patented EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 25 his first sprinkler head in 1879. This was of the sensi- tive type and somewhat resembled the Harrison sprink- ler although it lacked many of the good features of the latter. It consisted of a hollow brass casting perforated with small holes and with the valve located inside at the upper end. The valve stem ex- tended down through the head and was threaded through a nut of low- fusing solder attached to the lower side of the casting. In 1881 he improved the head by discarding the fusible nut and sub- stituting a horizontal lever D for holding the stem in place. One end of the lever was hinged and the other was held in place by a latch fastened by low-fusing solder B. The solder joint was well placed to receive the heat quickly, but the head was weak in the matter of distribution and in the construction of the valve. BARNES A. (Section.) A, valve. B, fusible nut. C, distributor. D, stem. D BARNES 1. (Section.) BARNES 2. (Section.) In 1885 Mr. Barnes invented a valve sprinkler with a deflector. In this head, known as Barnes No. 2, the deflector and valve, which were in one piece, consisted 26 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION of a small brass disc with a raised toothed edge and with a few small perforations near the outer edge. This was held against the orifice by a long lever hinged at one end and connected to an arm projecting from the cast- ing, by a fusible link. The valve could be set up tight against the orifice by a set screw. The brass against brass valve was not well adapted to withstand the ten- dency to leak. Otherwise, except for its bulk, this was a well-designed head. Bishop. Mr. John W. Bishop of New Haven, who was quite prominent in the early development of sprink- lers, took out his first patent for such a device in 1879. BISHOP SPRINKLERS. (Section.) This was a sealed head of complicated design containing a balanced sliding valve around which was a small by- pass. This was apparently never used, but in 1883 he patented an improved head, generally known as the Bishop No. 1 head, which attained considerable promi- nence. This was probably the first head to use the principle of the interior or sleeve distributor. It con- sisted of a brass pipe-shaped casting threaded at one end for a half-inch fitting and with a thin*Jyrass cap soldered over the other end. Inside was a sleeve con- taining helical slots. When the cap was released, this sleeve was pushed forward a short distance from the EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 27 orifice by the water pressure and held at that point by an interior shoulder. The water passed through the sleeve and was distributed from the helical slots. Later this head was rendered more sensitive by making the releasing device in the form of a thimble soldered to the inside of the orifice. A washer of insulating material was placed between the thimble and the sleeve. This kept the water away from the soldered joint and allowed both sides of the joint to be exposed to the heated air. In 1884 this head was radically changed by doing away with the interior sleeve and substituting a deflec- tor with perforated edge. This deflector was attached to the head by two bars running to a collar surrounding the head. There was a light spring inserted under the collar to hold the deflector close to the orifice. The pressure of the water pushed the deflector a short dis- tance away during the time that the head was in opera- tion. In this head, known as the Bishop No. 2, the screw thread was made for a f-inch fitting but the orifice was bushed down to J inch. Burritt. A. M. Burritt of Waterbury, Conn., invented several sprinklers, the first of which was patented in 1881. This was a rose sprinkler of the sealed or water- joint type. The orifice pointed inward from a hollow casting and was closed by a metal thimble soldered in place. ' The head was spherical in shape with perforations covering about half of the sphere. It was threaded on the inside for a pipe connection. The so-called Burritt No. 1 was a slight modification of this and had the thread on the outside and a loose fitting cap which covered the rose distributor to keep out dust and dirt. In 1882 the Burritt No. 2, a slight modification of No. 1, was used, but in 1883 an entirely new type, known as No. 3, was adopted. This was of the sensitive type and consisted of a rectangular-shaped 28 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION casting with a slotted deflector surrounding the orifice. The valve was a round metal disc with a stem extending to the lower part of the frame where it was held by a BURRITT SPRINKLERS. lever, one end of which was hooked to the main casting, and the other soldered to a projection on the frame. The water was distributed by striking the flat circular valve seat and being thrown back onto the deflector. Whiting. Mr. F. M. Whiting of Chelsea patented a sprinkler in 1881, which in the original and modified form was used to some extent in New England. The Standard. Hub. WHITING SPRINKLER. original head, sometimes known as the Standard, was fan-shaped in cross section with a curved perforated distributor inserted near the large end. Over this was soldered a cap, of a similar shape, turned up at the edges EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 29 to fit the large end of the head. This solder joint, like that in the last type of Parmelee head, was exposed to the heated air on two sides and was thus more sensitive than many heads of this type. This head was simple in construction but the distribution was limited to a comparatively small angle. The modified form known as the Hub was very similar to the first type except that the distributor and cap were conical in shape and there was a layer of felt between the two. This tended to keep the water away from the solder joint and make the head more sensitive. In both these heads the solder joint, unlike that in most of the early heads, was under tension stress only. Granger. Mr. A. M. Granger of Boston, afterwards agent for the General Fire Ex- tinguisher Company at Buffalo, N. Y., invented a sprinkler in 1881 of the elbow type. The valve stem was capped with a disc of fusible metal against ~ ... .111 GRANGER SPRINKLER. which rested a stiff spring hold- . , , ... *j e A, valve. B, solder joint, ing the valve closed. When c turbine. the fusible disc melted the water pressure opened the valve. The water was dis- tributed through a reactionary turbine located on the top side of the head. Brown. Mr. J. R. Brown of Bridgeport, Conn., form- erly with the P. S, & G. P. Co., and who invented several early heads in conjunction with W. A. Foskett, patented a head under his own name in 1881. This was a valve sprinkler in which the valve was held closed by a cap soldered over the lower end. The valve stem was hol- low; the water entering this hollow space through slots at the top was distributed through holes or slots in the lower end when the head opened. In 1883 this head was slightly changed and this 30 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION pattern, known as Brown No. 1, was quite extensively used. In this head the valve was conical in shape and seated against a ring of softer metal which was wedged by the water pressure between the interior of the head and the valve, thus making a tight joint. The valve stem extended down through the head and was attached to a solid deflector with grooves on the upper surface. Open (section.) Closed. BROWN SPRINKLER No. 2. The deflector was beveled on the edge and fitted tightly into a lower side of the head which was beveled in the same way. This deflector, soldered in place, held the valve closed. When the solder fused, the deflector dropped about f inch and was then held by an enlarge- ment in the stem wedging into a hole in a bridge sup- ported in an enlargement of the head. About the same time the Brown No. 2 head was patented. In this head the valve and deflector were in one piece, the valve seat being at the lower side of the head. The deflector was held in place by two curved levers hinged at the upper end and soldered together at the lower ends. A short strut, which could be adjusted to take up any play, extended from the deflector to the levers. The deflector was held from dropping too far EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 31 by a spindle as in the former head. The solder joint was well placed in this head so as to make it quite sensitive to heat. Both of these heads were assigned to the Automatic Fire Alarm ancj. Extinguisher Co. of New York. Harris. A. C. Harris of Chelsea, Mass., patented a sprinkler in 1881 of the sealed or water-joint type. This was quite similar to the Whiting head except in the manner of soldering the cap over the outlet. The head was fan-shaped in section with a curved perforated rosette for distributing the water. A thin brass cap covered the rosette extending slightly over the edge where it was soldered with low-fusing solder. In 1882 Mr. Harris took out a patent on a valve or sensitive type head. The valve stem extended through the head and was soldered to two curved springs projecting from the body of the head. 3 2 HARRIS SPRINKLERS. (Section.) Neither of these heads were used in practice so far as is known but a third type patented in 1883 did have considerable use. In this head a six-sided deflector was attached to sprinkler by arms extending downward from a collar. In the center of the deflector was a hole through which the valve stem passed. The orifice, which extended down nearly to the deflector, was closed 32 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION HARRIS 3. by a valve with a stem extending down through a hollow tube at the bottom of the head. A thimble was soldered into the end of the tube to hold the valve in place. The principal defect in this head, in common with all heads having this form of release, was the tend- ency of the thimble to bind in the tube and not slide out readily when the solder fused. In case the tube was slightly bent or in- dented it would almost surely cause the thimble to stick. Kane. John and William Kane were very prominent in the sprinkler business in Philadel- phia for a number of years. They, separately and together, invented many heads. A large number of these heads were in- stalled especially in Philadelphia and near-by sections. The Wm. Kane Fire Extinguisher Co. in- stalled the early heads and the Universal Automatic Fire Ex- tinguisher Co. installed some of the later types. The first patent of John Kane was taken out in 1881 and was one of the most curious heads ever invented. It was a valve sprinkler with a long stem ex- tending down below the casting. KANE CARTRIDGE SPRINKLER. B, cartridge. C, distributor. D, valve stem. The distributor was in the form of four curved arms which rotated when the water passed through them. EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 33 The most extraordinary feature, however, was the releas- ing device. An ordinary ball cartridge was clamped to the head with the ball end pointing down. A hole was bored in the ball end and through this hole a short rod projected. This rod was fastened to the stem of the valve by means of a set screw, thus holding the valve in place. The explosion of the cartridge was necessary to open the head and if anyone happened to be under the head at the time he might have suffered from a bullet wound. The sprinkler was never used so far as known. In 1882 John and William Kane patented a sprinkler in which the valve was held in place by a spring passing over the' end of the. head. This spring was hooked to a projection at one side and soldered to a projection at the other side. This head slightly modified is generally known as the William Kane head No. 1. The head known as the William Kane Eclipse or No. 2 was apparently patented by John Kane in 1886, KANE 2. (Section.) although it is said to have been in use as early as 1882. It was a large cumbersome head containing a globe valve with a spindle held in place by a complicated system of levers, one of which was curved and extended a considerable distance beyond the head. Distribution was by means of a small revolving deflector attached to a rod at the lower end. A loose cap fitted over the deflector when the head was closed. Draper. In 1884 F. H. Prentiss of Boston patented a sprinkler depending in its operation upon the expan- sion of ether and other volatile materials. The valve opened against the water pressure so that the pressure in the pipes tended to keep the valve closed. The spindle of the valve was attached to one side of a closed 34 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION DRAPER. receptacle containing ether and alcohol. This receptacle had corrugated sides and when the volatile contents expanded from heat these sides were forced apart. This motion pushed up the valve, thus opening the sprinkler. The water was distributed from a flat plate, though in the later types a thin cor- rugated ring was installed to break up the stream. The closed receptacle was pro- tected from the possibility of getting wet by a metal hood. In the earlier pat- terns of this head there was no device for locking the valve open and it was apt to close too soon from the cooling of the air around it. Later a latch was provided to hold the valve up after it had once opened. This head was usually known as the Draper head and, though ingenious, had but little use in this country. It was submitted for approval in England under the name Draper-Hetherington, but G. H. Bailey, who made tests upon a number of heads in 1889, reported that acceptance should be refused as it failed to fulfill the requirements for an efficient sprinkler. In these tests the head opened as low as 110 F., although it was sup- posed to open at 140 F. This was, of course, too low an operating point to be safe in warm weather. In several of the sprinklers tested, leakage of ether occurred when the sealed receptacle was greatly warmed, in one case to such an extent that the vapors ignited. The heads submitted apparently had no locking device as they closed again in two or three minutes. The valve so obstructed the outlet that the amount of water dis- EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 35 charged was much less than would come from a J-inch free outlet. The principal objection to such a head is the danger of the volatile ether leaking out owing to corrosion, age or slight defects, thus making the head useless. Walworth. In 1883 C. C. Walworth and O. B. Hall of Boston patented the first type of Walworth sprinkler. This head was modified and improved at intervals until 1899, but the same characteristics were carried through all the modifications. The head was installed by the Walworth Manufacturing Company of Boston until 1900 when the business was sold out to the Manufac- turers Automatic Sprinkler Company of Syracuse, N. Y. This head was extensively used and was especially popu- lar in the New England field. One reason for this popularity was the fact that, in all but the original type, the head was so constructed that it could be used again after it had operated by simply replacing the old link. This feature, while appealing to the factory owner, was later found to be undesirable from the fact that it led to frequent adjustments in the field. On this account the stresses on the parts, particularly in the soldered link, were of unknown and variable quantity; there were occasional leaks due to too light a stress being applied, as well as sticking at the seat due to too heavy stresses. The first Walworth head had a |-inch orifice closed by a valve disc with a lead seat. This was held in place by a lever which, when in its normal position, was parallel to the frame of the sprinkler and was soldered to it. This was not a very sensitive head, for as the solder joint was not in any way separated from the main cast- ing, it was necessary to heat the entire head before the solder would fuse. During the same year the head was improved by replacing the soldered arm with a link of fusible solder which fitted over the top of the lever and held it to a 36 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION projection on the main casting. This, the so-called solder link or No. 2 model, was found defective in that the link stretched under pressure and allowed the head to leak. In order to overcome this difficulty the third type, known as the drop c deflector type or 2 A, was put out a little later. In this head the link was made of two U-shaped pieces of brass soldered together with one piece entirely inside the other. This link was found unsatisfac- (bection.) *.'- .. f . ,. . _ ., tory because the inner section of A, valve disk. B, solder ,, v , , , , , ,. , ,, link. C, deflector. the lmk tended to spread slightly, thus forming a wedge-shaped joint that created too much friction when the two pieces form- ing the link parted. The link was later changed so. that the two pieces were soldered to- gether side by side and tended to separate more freely when the low-fusing solder melted. In the No. 2 Walworth head the deflector and valve were all one piece and the deflector, guided by the up- rights of the main casting, dropped to the bottom of the frame when the head opened. The No. 3 type, dated 1885, was similar except that the deflector was fastened to the frame about half an inch below the orifice and the valve spindle passed through a hole in the center of the deflector. Mackey. The first Mackey sprinkler, patented in 1885, was the first type of the well-known Manufacturers heads which have been used for many years. This head went through a development of four types '4feader the name Mackey and seven more types under the name of Manufacturers, finally emerging as the Manufacturers type C, which is on the approved list today. 1 2 WALWORTH LINKS. EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 37 The first type, known as No. 1, was threaded for a f-inch outlet but the orifice was bushed down. The valve was cone-shaped with a short spindle extending through the deflector. Two curved levers passing through bosses on the under side of the deflector held the valve in place. They were released by the fusing of a link somewhat similar to that used in the Wai- worth head except that the two outer ends were longer and ex- tended around part of the end of .. . MACKEY AND MANU-* the other link. FACTURERS LINKS. The deflector was about half an inch from the orifice and contained small perforations and a corrugated surface. Ruthenburg. Another cumbersome head was the Ruthenburg, patented by Marcus Ruthenburg of Cin- cinnati in 1885. It was, however, simple in construction, consisting of a casting containing an orifice and with a RUTHENBURG. (Section.) deflector fastened to the frame by bolts. The valve was a rubber sphere and was held in place by a thin lever about 6 inches long. This lever was held to a similar projection by a fusible link. The head was used to considerable extent in the West. Grinnell. To Mr. Frederick Grinnell of Providence should be given the credit of doing more than any other one man to develop the art of sprinkler protection. His company, the Providence Steam & Gas Pipe Co., was 38 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION one of the first to install perforated pipes and sprinklers and the scale of pipe sizes and method of erecting the piping inaugurated by this company was the generally recognized standard for many years. This company originally installed the Parmelee sprinkler and contin- ued to do so until 1882 when the first Grinnell head was invented. Mr. Grinnell took out a vast number of patents covering perforated pipes, sprinkler heads, deflectors, solder joints and many other details. Under his con- trol the Providence Steam & Gas Pipe Co., afterwards the General Fire Extinguisher Co., became the leading sprinkler company in the country. In 1880 he patented a sprinkler somewhat resembling the Harrison head in principle, but this was never used so far as known. In 1882 he invented a sprinkler which was a radical departure from anything that had been made up to that time. Instead of a nozzle, he used a plate orifice or, in other words, a thin brass plate or diaphragm, containing a T Vinch hole, for discharging the water. This diaphragm was inserted in an enlarge- ment of the casting and had a total diameter of a little over an inch. As it was quite thin, a stiff spring plate was inserted just under it so as to insure a strong spring action to the levers and to prevent the diaphragm from collapsing when the sprinkler was not under pressure. The edges of the orifice in the diaphragm were bent over to form a seat ring about J inch wide. The valve and deflector were in one piece, the center of the deflec- tor being depressed and filled with a disc of lead to form the valve. The deflector itself had teeth projecting at right angles around the edge to distribute the water. The valve was held in place by a pair of compound levers, the first being held at one end by a notch in the yoke and at the other end by the second lever. The latter was hooked under a notch in the other side of the yoke EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 39 and soldered at the extreme lower end by fusible solder reinforced by an L-shaped piece of wire. Perhaps the best feature of this head, and one that was confined to Grinnell heads for many years, was the arrangement of the diaphragm discharge whereby the increase of pressure it leak, making pressure exposed in place GRINNELL. (Section.) tightened the valve instead of tending to make as in most heads. This was accomplished by the area of the diaphragm exposed to the water larger than the area of the valve which was to water pressure. The valve was held rigidly by the levers but the diaphragm was flexible. 40 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Thus the pressure of the water being greater on the dia- phragm than on the valve (on account of its larger area) the tendency of increasing the pressure was to make the joint tighter. The first type of Grinnell head was only used a few weeks when a few minor improvements were made and the so-called Grinnell type A head was put upon the market. Three other types were put out at intervals, namely, the type B in 1884, C in 1886 and D in 1888. They were all similar in principal, however, the changes being only in details such as the width of the valve seat ring and the metal used in the valve disc. The Grinnell head soon became the standard sprinkler of the country and was very extensively used. It is one of the few early heads that after numerous develop- ments and changes is still on the market. ODD DEVICES In this first decade of the history of sprinkler protec- tion a number of patents were taken out upon odd devices that were never used in practice but are interest- ing to note. Miller. Joseph A. Miller of Providence patented a head in 1878 in which the releasing device was actuated by the expansion of rods and the expansion of oil in a closed receptacle. Briggs. In 1882 R. Briggs of Brooklyn invented a head in which the melting of the solder was supposed to be accelerated by placing some highly combustible substance like sulphur close to it. j Delmage. C. L. Delmage of Woonsocket, R. I., took out a patent in 1883 for a head, which was covered with a glass ball. There was -a small pivoted hammer actu- ated by a spring so arranged that when a fusible link melted the hammer was released, and striking the glass ball shattered it and released the water. EARLY AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS AND SYSTEMS 41 A similar device was patented by R. L. Cumnock and P. J. Marrs in 1892. Ashcroft. In 1886 E. H. Ashcroft of Lynn, Mass., patented a head with a very novel form of distribution. The water issued from four small outlets arranged around the head and each stream played onto a bell- shaped deflector fastened just below the outlet. CHAPTER III LATER DEVELOPMENTS IN AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS TYPES The first decade of the history of automatic sprinklers may be said to have ended in 1885. It was a period of prolific invention in which many heads of widely differ- ent types were thoroughly tested by field experience. The more important of these types were as follows: 1. Heads depending upon the burning of cords. Example: Conant. 2. Rose heads of the sealed or water-joint type. Examples: Whiting, Harris and early types of Burritt. 3. Rose sprinklers with valves. Examples: Harrison, Brown & Foskett, Barnes. 4. Sealed type with turbine or slot distribution. Examples: Parmelee 5, Bishop. 5. Valve sprinklers with deflectors and operating by the fusing of solder. Examples: Buell, Grinnell, Burritt 3, Mackey. The latter type might be divided into several sub- types as follows: (a) Those with valve held in place by soldered thimble under direct strain. Examples: Harris, Bishop 2, Gray. (6) Those in which valve is held by levers and a link. Examples: Bishop, Mackey, Walworth, Ruthen- burg. 42 LATER DEVELOPMENTS, ETC. 43 (c) Those in which valve is held by levers soldered in place. Examples: Brown 1, Burritt 3, Grinnell, Kane. The developments which followed 1885 were more along the lines of perfecting old types rather than creating new ones. For reasons too obvious to dwell upon the types depending upon the burning of cords and those with rose distributors were very soon given up. The use of the turbine and slot distributors was also short lived and was practically limited to the Parmelee and early Bishop heads. The use of the sealed or water-joint types was discarded on account of their lack of sensitiveness. Thus it was that after 1885, there were practically no sprinklers made except those of the last type, namely, valve sprinklers with deflectors. The development after this date consisted largely of improve- ments in the sub-types under this general heading, al- though one rather distinct sub-type was created, namely, the valve held closed by a strut composed of several pieces of metal held together by low-fusing solder. Several important inventions were made in the form of valve and in the orifice such as the hollow valve disc, valve discs of glass and porcelain and diaphragm orifices; but the heads in which these were used were all of the same general type. While a few heads of radically different types were patented they were as a rule unsuc- cessful and had but a short life. ODD TYPES Before discussing the further development of the fifth type of sprinkler it might be well to mention briefly three sprinklers of other types that are of interest, namely, the Mascot, Nagle and Shaw. Mascot, 1 88 1. This was an elbow sprinkler with a valve and a deflector. The valve was located inside 44 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION of a hollow casting and was held against its seat by a number of hinged levers which when in the normal position formed a strut. At the upper side of the head there was a small chamber containing a wax which expanded under heat. A piston extended from this chamber to one of the levers which formed the strut. The wax receptacle was so adjusted that when the wax expanded the piston was moved forward and pushed the lever, against which it rested, sufficiently to throw the hinged levers off centre, and thus relieve the pressure on the valve. This allowed the valve to be opened by the water pressure and pushed forward a sufficient dis- tance to allow the water to be discharged from a J-inch hole in the side of the hollow casting. The deflector was held in front of this outlet at a distance of about J inch from it. The water turned a right angle as it passed through the head so that the sprinkler had to be screwed into the side of the supply pipe in order to have the deflector parallel to the ceiling. There was also an alarm attachment. This head though interesting in principle was crude in con- struction and was of little importance practically. Nagle i, 1890. This was a valve sprinkler with a deflector and was operated by the melting of solder. The valve was at the end of the screw fitting and, like the Draper, opened a- NAGLE. (Section.) gainst the water pressure. A spindle was attached to the inside of the valve and ex- tended into a closed metal cylinder where there was a long steel spring like a clock spring. One end of this spring was attached to a nut into which the spindle of LATER DEVELOPMENTS, ETC. 45 the valve was threaded; the other end was attached to the inside of the cylindrical casing. Two arms extended from the nut to the outside of the casing and were soldered with low-fusing solder to projecting brackets. When these arms were released by heat the spring un- coiled and the motion it imparted to the nut screwed the spindle forward and threw the valve off its seat. As the valve fitted into a groove and was cemented in place with asphaltum or some similar material the chance of sticking seemed to be great in spite of the strong spring that was supposed to release it. Shaw, 1901. This was a valve sprinkler with a toothed deflector and a frame of modern design. It operated upon a principle similar to the Mascot, except that the actuating device which caused the parts of the strut to fall apart was a small receptacle containing alcohol or ether instead of an expansive wax. When the alcohol or ether expanded, the side of the thermostatic chamber was pressed outward and this movement threw out a key which allowed the strut to collapse. Like the Draper, this head could SHAW. readily be made inoperative by corrosion, blows or other means which might allow the leakage of the expansive fluid. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PRINCIPAL TYPES Bishop. In 1885 the fourth Bishop sprinkler known as No. 2| was first made. This was a valve sprinkler with a deflector, the valve being held closed by a stem extending to the lower end of the head and held in place by a plug soldered into a collar surrounding the spindle. This head, together with the other five types of Bishop heads, made between 1884 and 1888, was threaded for a J-inch fitting. This is also true of the Gray, Harkness 46 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION No. 1, the New York & New Haven, and all Mackey heads. The last of these heads was made in 1889 and after- this the business became standard- ized to the extent that all heads, with the single exception of the Manufacturers, were made for a half -inch fitting. The type of Bishop head, known as No. 3, was very similar to the 2J head, the deflector of each sliding on a spindle and being held up by a light spring. BISHOP 2. When the head operated, the deflector (Section.) was p US hed down on guides a short dis- tance by the water. Two other types of Bishop heads No. 3| and 4 followed in 1887 and 1888. These were quite similar to the previous types except that the valve spindle was held in place by two hinged levers, these being held together by a fusible link. Brown. In one of these heads, patented in 1884, Mr. Brown used a very novel principle, namely, that of having water pressure on two valves, one at each end of the strut that held the valves closed. To accomplish this, the water passage of the sprinkler was split and ran to two opposing outlets. One outlet was enlarged and covered by a flexible diaphragm which acted as a deflector. The strut which held the valve against the other outlet consisted of a small cylinder soldered into a cup-shaped receptacle. The lower end of the strut rested on the flexible deflector and the water pressure acting on this created a balanced pressure and tended to keep the valve tight. This head was never used so far as known. Buell. The Buell head known as No. 3, made in 1884, was unique in the method of distribution. The head was in the form of a hollow ring with a small orifice, about J inch in diameter at the bottom and a larger orifice, about | inch in diameter, at the further or upper LATER DEVELOPMENTS, ETC. 47 BUELL 3. side facing the first one. The. size of the two orifices was supposed to be figured so that, allowing for friction loss, each orifice would discharge the same amount of water. The valves which closed these two outlets were apparently in the form of a single strut with the component parts held together with fusible solder. When the strut melted the two streams of water were released and these striking each other distributed the water with- out the aid of any deflector. The No. 4 head was similar except that it was in the form of a half ring, the water coming only in one direction to each outlet. The orifices were about f inch in diameter. The last two types, No. 5 and No. 6, were similar to each other and contained f-inch orifices closed by a valve, the stem of which extended through the deflector. This was held by a fusible joint consisting of a horizontal plate into which the stem was screwed and two levers with corrugated surfaces soldered together. Star. Patented by W. T. Mont- gomery in 1886. This was a valve sprinkler with a conical valve fit- ting into a J-inch orifice. The stem of the valve was held by two levers, the shorter one being soldered to the frame. The solder joint was protected to some extent from being wet by a flat disc in the* casting. The deflector was star shaped. Mr. Montgomery formed a company and installed these heads for a few years. Later he became Boston Agent of the General Fire Extinguisher Co. STAR SPRINKLER. h, valve cap. j, k, levers, n, solder joint, r, disc to protect solder joint. 48 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Clapp. Joseph Clapp of Chicago invented a head in 1887 and another in 1890, the latter being quite exten- sively used. Both were valve sprinklers with fixed deflectors. In the first head the deflector was supported CLAPP SPRINKLERS. by an arm extending over the orifice. The valve was held in place by a complicated strut consisting of several levers with a fusible link attached to the arm. The second head was of modern design with a strut bearing against a valve disc at one end and the deflector at the other end. Hill. Patented by John Hill of Columbus, Ga., in 1885. This was a valve sprinkler with an oscillating deflector. The fusible release con- sisted of two semi-circular plates sol- dered to a hollow base. The spindle from the valve had a conical-shaped point resting in a hole between the two soldered plates. When the solder melted these plates were pushed to either side allowing the valve to drop. HILL. (Open.) The conical point dropped into a (Section.) depression and the deflector was so shaped that the water gave it an oscillating motion about the end of the spindle as a center. The Hill LATER DEVELOPMENTS, ETC. 49 Company installed a considerable number of equip- ments but finally sold out to the General Fire Extin- guisher Co. Gray. The Gray head was installed for some years by the Edward Barr Co., of New York, but was sold to the General Fire Extinguisher Co. There were several types of Gray heads but they were quite similar. The releasing device consisted of a thimble soldered to the inside of a hollow tube which constituted the lower end of the head. The defect of this type of construction has already been noted. This company had a very elaborate dry system for use in unheated buildings. It consisted of an auxiliary system of piping of small size, placed parallel with the main , r ' piping and containing small fusible plugs at intervals. Air was pumped into these small pipes and when a plug melted the reduction of the air pressure was made to open a dry valve controlling the sprinkler system. Hibbard. The first Hibbard sprinkler was invented by Mr. Geo. E. Hibbard of Chicago in 1893. It was an upright sprinkler with conical-shaped deflector. The valve was held in place by two long levers hooked to the frame and extending around the deflector to the top of the head where they were held together by a fusible link of corrugated metal. (See appendix.) It was installed in the vicinity of Cincinnati. In 1894 the No. 2 head was invented which was of quite different construction. This had a perforated deflector attached to the outside of the frame. A hollow valve cap was held in place by two toggle-joint levers, these being secured by a fusible link. In 1897 the head was slightly modified by lengthening the levers and using a stronger valve disc which had more spring action. This was known as No. 3. In 50 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION 1898 a slight modification was made by arranging the toggle joint to move on pivots. This is called 3 A. In 1901 a head, made by the Niagara Fire Ext. Co., but labeled Hibbard, was installed. In this the toggle- joint levers were straighter and less ornate. The link was of different design, being hollow with a horizontal section in the center. The Hibbard sprinkler was made by four different concerns, three of these operating simultaneously, so that there are several variations that are rather hard to distinguish from one another. These companies were: American Fire Extinguisher Co., Chicago. Mailers, Allen & Frazer, Chicago. National Fire Extinguisher Co., Kansas City. Niagara Fire Extinguisher Co., Akron, O. In 1902 the Niagara Fire Extinguisher Co., secured full control of the head and changed the name to Niagara- Hi bbard. Soon after this a new form of link was adopted. In 1903 the general form of the frame was radically changed and the new form was approved in 1904. The largest number of the Hibbard heads was put out by the two Chicago concerns. Those made at Akron were of a later date and were more reliable than the older ones. Many Hibbard heads have failed on test during the last few years due principally to the following causes: 1. Levers too near a " dead center." 2. Wedging at fulcrum of levers. 3. Defects in links. 4. Sticking of valve. 5. Sticking of washers, thus cutting dow$. the dis- charge about 20 per cent. In 1911 Mr. Hibbard submitted a new head known as the Hibbard I for approval. He formed a new com- LATER DEVELOPMENTS, ETC. 51 pany under the name of Geo E. Hibbard & Co. This head was quite similar to the Niagara-Hibbard head but was made distinctive by two fins cast onto the out- side of the frame. It was withdrawn from approval in October, 1912, and its manufacture was discontinued. Harkness. The Harkness head was used to a large extent through- out the Middle States. The first type, made in 1887, was distinc- tive but the other three types, made in 1889-1890 and 1895, were all quite similar to each other. The No. 1 head was large and was threaded for a f-inch con- nection. The valve and the de- a ft i .1 . HARKNESS 1. fleeter were all one piece and this was held in place by a heavy lever ?' 7 alve c * p " .$*' 8iTui ' J J , L, lever. N, solder joint, soldered onto an angle-shaped projection on the frame. The solder joint was thin and well located to receive the heat quickly. The three other types were smaller heads threaded for J-inch fittings. The valve was separate from the deflector but the valve spindle passed through a hole in the deflector and was held in place by a lever some- what similar to but of better construction than that in the first type. The only important difference in these three heads was the shape of the solder joint which was L-shaped in the first, rectangular in the second and V-shaped in the third. Kane. John and William Kane of Philadelphia in- vented several sprinklers subsequent to the No. 2 or " Eclipse." In 1888 the No. 3 "Bulb Root" was put on the market. In this head there was a hollow casting, the valve seating on a ring inside of the casting. The valve spindle extended through a T V m ch outlet in the 52 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION base of the casting and there was a small rotating deflector on the end of the spindle. The spindle was held in place by two levers, the second of which was held to a projection on the casting by a fusible link. This head distributed the water in a very fine spray but the interior valve caused a considerable friction loss. The W. Kane No. 4 and the J. Kane No. 1 and No. 2 were quite similar to each other, being valve sprinklers with the spindle held in place by levers and a link similar to those used in the "Bulb Root" head. The J. Kane No. 3 and No. 4, dated 1900 and 1902, respectively were heads of a modern design similar to the present International. The frame was of circular shape, the orifice being at the bottom and a toothed deflector being attached to the outside of the frame at the top. The metal valve cap was held over the orifice by two levers of the toggle joint type and a fusible link, consisting of two thin plates of brass, fitted into grooves at the ends of the levers. John and William Kane operated under the name of the Universal Automatic Sprinkler Co. for a number of years but this company was sold and taken over by Clark Merchant & Co. in 1899. John Kane continued in business under the name of the John Kane Fire Extinguisher Co. until 1902, when he sold out to the International Sprinkler Co. International. The International Sprinkler Co. was organized in 1899 by Clark Merchant & Co., with Mr. Powell Evans as President, and A. M. Lewis as Secretary. This company at first installed the Universal sprinkler but in 1900 began the manufacture of the No. 1 Inter- national head. This was very similar to the Universal sprinkler but had a somewhat narrower frame. In 1902 the head was slightly modified and was known as type A. This type gave trouble by breaking open LATER DEVELOPMENTS, ETC. 53 owing to weakness of the link. In 1904 type B with a wider link was used. This was installed very exten- sively by the International Sprinkler Co. of Philadelphia until 1911 when the company was absorbed by the " Automatic" Sprinkler Co. of America. It is now be- ing used in some parts of the country. The nu- merous devices of this com- pany were also installed by the following licensees: New England: Rhode Island Supply & En- gineering Co., Provi- dence, R. I. Chicago and the North- west : Kellogg Makay- Cameron Co., Chicago, 111. Canada: W. J. McGuire & Co., Ltd., Montreal and Toronto. Central and Southwest District: Standard Fire Ex- tinguisher Co., Kansas City, Mo. Francis Bros. & Jollett, Inc., were also licensed to install these systems within a district covered by an agreement. The International Company also had approved alarm valves and dry valves. Associated. Some of the gentlemen formerly con- nected with the International Sprinkler Co. formed, early in 1913, a new company known as the Associated Automatic Sprinkler Co. A sprinkler which was a dupli- cate of the International head, except for shape of frame, width of link and minor details, known as issue A, was approved by the Underwriters Laboratories in 1913. INTERNATIONAL. (Section.) 54 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Soon afterwards this head was replaced by the issue B sprinkler which was very similar except that the link was altered and made stronger by means of a depression and the deflector was redesigned. ASSOCIATED A. This sprinkler was approved by both the Underwriters Laboratories and the Mutual Companies and was used to considerable extent till 1916, when the Associated Automatic Sprinkler Company merged with the Globe Automatic Sprinkler Company. Evans. Mr. Powell Evans, formerly president of the International Sprinkler Company, invented a sprinkler in 19 J3 which was quite similar to the International LATER DEVELOPMENTS, ETC. 55 sprinkler, although easily distinguished from it by the curved levers and thin deflector. In 1915 this head was slightly changed and was known as issue B. These heads together with alarm and dry valves were in- stalled by the Merchant and Evans Co. of Philadelphia until 1916, when this company also merged with the Globe Automatic Sprinkler Company. CLOSED EVANS A. KERSTETER 1. Kersteter. Mr. Charles W. Kersteter of Chicago in- vented three sprinklers that had considerable use in the Middle West. They were all valve sprinklers with fixed deflectors. In the first head, patented in 1888, the valve was held closed by two levers, one on either side of the frame, the lower ends being hooked 9nto pro- jections on the casting and the upper ends being held by a fusible link spanning the top of the head just over the deflector. The deflector was a large thin plate filled with triangular-shaped holes and teeth. The two later types, dated 1893 and 1898, were of modern design, the valve being held by a strut composed of several small pieces soldered together. About 1896 Mr. Kersteter started a company in 56 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Cleveland, financed by Messrs. Corning & Chisholm, which soon sold out to the General Fire Extinguisher Co. Later he formed the Niagara Sprinkler Co. in Akron, O., but left this to organize the Phoenix Sprinkler Co. with Mr. Cook. This company put in devices patented by Jarvis Hunt for a few years. He left this company and returned to the Niagara Sprinkler Co. In 1910 he went to Milwaukee and became associated with the Rundle Spence Co. Mackey. John C. Mackey of Syracuse, N. Y., in- vented in 1883 the No. 1 Mackey head which has al- ready been mentioned. The No. 2 Mackey, dated 1885, was patented in 1889. In this head a metal valve disc closed an interior valve seat located inside of a hollow cylindrical casting. The valve spindle extended down through the orifice and as the stem was over J inch in diameter and the orifice was only J inch, the amount of water which this head could discharge was much below the normal. The valve stem was held in place by a link at the lower end of the head. In 1888 the head was improved and the No. 3 and No. 4 models were put on the market. In these heads the releasing device was somewhat changed so that there were two levers instead of one. The solder joint, which is similar in prin- MACKEY 4. ciple to that used in the modern Man- ufacturers head, consisted of a slot in one of the levers through which a narrow projection from the casting passed. A V-shaped piece of thin brass was soldered to the end of this projection and overlapping the sides of the slot held the lever in place. All four of these heads had a metal to-metal valve and were threaded for a J-inch pipe outlet. Manufacturers. The first three types of Manufac- turers sprinklers, sometimes known as the " Manu- LATER DEVELOPMENTS, ETC. 57 facturers Mackey " type, were very similar to the last Mackey head. Some of these heads were made with " non-corrosive " agate or glass valves, and the last two types had an unthreaded projection about J inch long extending beyond the threaded section. This was done to prevent sediment lodging in the head, but unless the pipe was of ample size at that point it was liable to obstruct the flow of water. The last four types of Manufacturers sprinklers were quite similar to each other but of entirely different design from the former types. The J-inch orifice was closed by a non- corrosive porcelain valve, thin cop- per and lead rings being used to make a tight seat. A hollow metal cap was placed over the porcelain valve and this was held in place by two levers of the toggle joint type. The ends of the levers were slotted and a fusible link, shaped like a double T, formed two shoulders against which the levers rested and by which they were held together. Trouble was experienced in the earlier form of links from binding when the solder, fused. In the later types, " B " and " C, " the link was redesigned to overcome this trouble. There is still a considerable sliding motion in the link before the parts actually separate and this is a feature of design that is liable to allow the solder to become " frozen " by leakage from the valve before the solder joint is entirely free. This is more apt to happen in old heads where the metal has lost its elasticity. There is also a coiled spring under the edge of the porcelain disc fitting into a groove in the casting. This tends to throw the disc up quickly when the head fuses. While this spring is embedded in wax it is liable after MANUFACTURERS. (Section.) 58 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION years of exposure to corrode so as to lose its effective- ness. This, however, should not prevent the head from operating properly. The Manufacturers Automatic Sprinkler Co. bought out the sprinkler business of the Walworth Manufac- turing Co. of Boston in 1901, and in 1911 they combined with the International Sprinkler Co. and the Niagara Fire Extinguisher Co. to form the " Automatic" Sprinkler Co. of America. This company installs all three types of sprinklers. Neracher. Mr. William Neracher of Cleveland, 0., invented seven types of sprinklers between 1884 and 1903, some of which were extensively used. He sold out to the General Fire Extinguisher Co., and was for many years their Cleveland agent. The first and second heads were drop deflector types, the valve and deflec- tor being one piece. In the first head the valve was held against the orifice by a simple strut composed of two pieces, one of which was at a slight angle to the direction of thrust. This was held in place by a horizontal member soldered to the frame. The second head, dated 1887, was similar except that the lower part of the strut had a long arm extend- ing horizontally and held to a projection on the frame by a triangular-shaped link. This style of link with slight modi- fications was used in all the later types. The four later types were all quite similar to one another. A metal valve cap closed the orifice and was held in place by a four-piece set of levers, the two long levers extending to the top of the head and being held in place by a link. This was a very elastic head and was par- ticularly popular in sugar refineries because of its ability to withstand corrosion and the gumming effects of sugar, NERACHER 3. LATER DEVELOPMENTS, ETC. 59 and because the fusible link could be easily cleaned. The latest type is on the approved list but is not being extensively used as it is controlled by the General Fire Extinguisher Co. who ordinarily use the Grinnell head. New York & New Haven. The two heads, known as the New York & New Haven, both dated 1889, were very similar and of the elbow type. The interior valve was N. Y. & N. H. 2. (Section.) fitted with a long spindle and rested against a shoulder in two hinged or hooked levers. These levers were held together by a fusible link, of much the same design as the last Bishop head. They were installed by the New York & New Haven Co. and by Foskett & Bishop of New Haven, Conn. Newton. Robert Newton of Providence, R. I., in- vented a head in 1894 that was used quite extensively in Rhode Island and Eastern Massachusetts. It was a metal valve head with fixed perforated deflector. The valve was held in place by a balanced strut con- sisting of two parts set at an angle and bearing against two flat plates soldered onto a horizontal plate. The pressure tending to throw the plates off when the solder fused was small and the design was not well adapted to resist corrosion. This was rather NEWTON. 60 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION a short lived sprinkler, and after about ten years these heads failed to open properly and practically all were removed. Phoenix. This head made by the Phcenix Fire Ex- tinguisher Co. of Chicago was submitted for approval in January, 1908, and approved on recommendation of the Underwriters' Laboratories later in the year. It was in- stalled for about four years by the above company and then withdrawn as the manufacture was discontinued. The head resembled the Grinnell glass disc very closely except that the strut was of slightly different design, the diaphragm of dif- ferent shape and the valve disc was metal instead of glass. Pierce. Octavius Pierce of Chicago patented a sprinkler in 1894 which was assigned to the Underwriters' Fire Sprink- ler Co. It was a valve sprinkler with a strut built upon somewhat the same prin- (Section') ciple as the Newton head. It was used to some extent in the West. Rockwood. Geo. I. Rockwood of Worcester patented a sprinkler head in 1906 which was modified and approved J ROCKWOOD B. ROCKWOOD D. (Section.) < in 1907. This was a valve sprinkler with a silver washer under the brass valve cap. The valve was held in place by a four-piece strut in the form of a triangle with the LATER DEVELOPMENTS, ETC. 61 vertical member a little off center. The deflector was a " double decker," part being under and part over the main casting. This head was slightly modified during the next two years, the new designs being known as issue B, C and D. In the issue C head the solder joint was strengthened. In the issue D type the double deflector was abandoned and a single deflector on the outside of the frame was substituted. This head was originally installed by the Worcester Fire Extinguisher Co., the company being later reor- ganized as the Rockwood Sprinkler Co. The head is being extensively used today all over the country. The issue A type gave some trouble by opening prema- turely, on account of the weakness of the solder joint. These were practically all replaced by the makers. The other types are entirely satisfactory. Walworth. This sprinkler was very extensively used, especially in New England, from the time it was in- vented, 1883, down to 1901. There are nine distinct types recognized besides a few minor modifications which are not important. In all these types the same general characteristics were retained. Up to 1888 it was distinctly a pendent head and would not operate properly in any other posi- tion. In that year the first upright heads were made, a spring being inserted to throw up the deflector and hold it in that position. In 1892 a specially designed upright head, known as No. 5, was made in which the valve was held closed by a lever with an upright arm. The deflector, which was perfectly smooth, was attached to the upper part of the frame. In 1894 this head was improved by making the deflec- tor cup shaped, with perforations near the edge and by putting on a double link to lessen the danger of prema- ture opening. In 1898 the pendent head was improved and a new 62 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION head, known as No. 8, with a greatly improved deflector was substituted. The next year the upright head was improved in a similar manner. All the later types had double links and it was customary to wire these two links together. Occasionally these were wired on the side (long dimension) instead of on the end, thus bind- ing the sliding parts together and preventing the proper operation of the head. The Walworth head was generally approved by local boards and the Factory Mutual Insurance Companies and was extensively used until 1901 when the Walworth Manufacturing Co. sold the sprinkler business to the Manufacturers Automatic Sprinkler Co. and the head was no longer made. This head had a good record up to about 1911 when tests showed that its age limit had been about reached, as many heads that were tested about that time either stuck or were very sluggish in action. It did not resist corrosion as well as many types and in many in- stances there were defects in work- manship. Numerous cases have been discovered where high-test solder was carelessly used on low- test heads. It is today considered defective and is being very gen- erally replaced. Esty. This head was patented by William Esty of Laconia, N. H., in 1895. It was a valve sprinkler with a solder joint of The first four types, known as the ESTY 5. and "pin," were ex- the duck-bill type. "plain," "corrugated," "knob, perimental types and but few of them were installed. In 1896 the No. 5, or spring type, was invented in which the duck bills were soldered together for part of LATER DEVELOPMENTS, ETC. 63 their length, the rest of the surface being cut out to form a pocket in which a steel spring was inserted. This pocket was filled with wax to protect the spring against corrosion. In 1903 the head was slightly modified and the new type was known as No. 6. This head was never approved by the Underwriters Laboratories. The issue B sprinkler made in 1912 was approved and this type has been extensively in- stalled since then. They are made by the Esty Sprinkler Co. of Laconia, N. H., and are installed mostly by the H. G. Vogel Co. of New York and Montreal. Babcock. The Babcock sprinkler was patented by E. F. Steck of Chicago in 1897. It was installed by the Fire ^ Extinguisher Manufacturing Co. of Chicago. A few thousand were installed. After a few years these heads gave trouble on test by sticking of the strut BABCOCK. levers and sticking at the seat and most of them were removed. The head was of modern design, the valve disc being hollow, and held in place by a strut. Grinnell. The General Fire Extinguisher Co. is per- haps the best-known sprinkler company in the country, and in fact in the world. There have been more Grin- nell sprinklers than any other make installed in this country and they are very extensively used abroad. Starting with the Providence Steam & Gas Pipe Co. a small piping concern in Providence, R. I. Mr. Frederick Grinnell, by his ingenuity as an inventor and ability as an organizer, soon made the company famous through- out the world. In 1893 the company was reorganized as the General Fire Extinguisher Co. with offices and factory at Provi- 64 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION dence, R. I., and plants at Warren, 0., and Charlotte, N. C., Mather & Platt, Ltd., were appointed agents for Great Britain and. the continent with a factory at Manchester, England. The General Fire Extinguisher Co. was the first com- pany to put on the market a full line of automatic sprinkler system devices including, besides the sprinkler head, a dry-pipe valve and an alarm valve. GRINNELL GLASS Disc. View. Section. The four types of Grinnell metal disc sprinklers were made from 1882 to '88, and were all similar in construc- tion. The principal differences were in the kind of metal used for the valve disc and the width and shape of the seat ring. In 1890 the Grinnell glass disc sprinkler, which is essentially the same as the head now used, was invented. This was quite different from the metal disc heads in appearance but embodied many of the same LATER DEVELOPMENTS, ETC. 65 principles. The same style of diaphragm was used but the valve cap, instead of being of metal and seating on a raised rim formed in the diaphragm, was of glass and projected into the J-inch hole in the diaphragm. The GRINNELL SPRINKLERS IN A DEPARTMENT STORE. PIPING CON- CEALED AND CEILING DECORATED BY ROSETTES OF A SIMILAR SHAPE TO A SPRINKLER. ROSETTES OMITTED AT PROPER PLACES AND SPRINKLERS SUBSTITUTED. diaphragm was made thicker so that it needed no aux- iliary plate to prevent collapse when the pressure was released. The glass disc was semi-spherical in shape, the curved side resting in the orifice and the flat side being protected by a metal cap. The orifice was faced with hard solder so that a tight joint could readily be secured. 66 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION The valve was held in place by a strut composed of three interlocking pieces of metal soldered together. The deflector was quite small in diameter and had a row of teeth projecting from the circumference at almost a right angle. The head was improved in 1903 by mak- ing the frame heavier and the deflector thicker but no change was made in the principles involved. The head is especially neat and symmetrical in ap- pearance and is particularly well adapted for decora- tive effects with concealed piping. It has now been on the market for twenty-three years practically in its present form and has very seldom failed to operate from the effect of age alone. The General Fire Extinguisher Co. has absorbed many of its competitors, including the Neracher, Hill, Granger, Gray, Star, Jahn, Swan and Harkness companies. While the approved sprinklers of today may not be perfect it is certain that they have been developed to a point where there is little in the way of improvements that can be suggested. The test of time may show defects that cannot now be predicted but, taken as a whole, the automatic sprinkler is an extremely reliable device. CHAPTER IV TESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SPRINKLERS WOODBURY TESTS The first important tests upon automatic sprinklers made by the insurance interests were those of the Factory Mutual Fire Ins. Cos. in 1884. These tests were made by Mr. C. J. H. Woodbury, Inspector, and afterwards Vice-President of the Boston Mfg. Mutual Ins. Co., assisted by Mr. F. E. Cabot, Inspector and afterwards Secretary of the Boston Board of Fire Underwriters. These tests were extremely comprehensive and were reported in a pamphlet covering 58 pages. The follow- ing heads were tested: Parmelee 5, Grinnell "B," Brown standard (sealed type), Brown sensitive, Walworth soldered arm, Walworth solder link, Burritt sealed (rose type), Burritt sensitive 3, Bishop sealed 1, Bishop sealed 1J, Bishop sealed 2, Bishop valve deflector with cup joint, Bishop valve deflector with conical sleeve, William Kane Eclipse 2, Harris deflector, Harris closed, Whiting Hub, O. C. Heath (revolving head), Ruthenburg. The results and conclusions are summarized as follows : " 1st. That time and pressure has not affected the strength and fusion point of the solder during an experience of twelve years. 2nd. Portions of sprinklers where corrosion might interfere with prompt action should be protected, preferably by heavy mineral oil. 3rd. The distribution of water between three and thirty-six pounds pressure is such that water is directed upon a smooth ceiling and upon each square foot of floor, with all of the sprinklers used in these experiments. 67 68 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION 4th. The concentration of water at the beginning of a fire is greater than by any other form of inside apparatus. 5th. Where tanks are used for a first supply for sprinklers, the bottom of the tank ought not to be less than ten feet above the sprinklers. Qth. As a matter of practical application, sprinklers have worked at 131 mill fires in seven years without any known instance of their failure. 7th. The results of the experience in respect to automatic sprink- lers demonstrate that their efficiency is not liable to become impaired by time, and prove the good judgment of those underwriters who advocate their introduction as a safeguard against loss. 8th. It is essential that valves be so arranged that the proper persons can readily know that a full-water pressure is upon the sprinklers. Valves with traveling stems are preferable on this account. Valves with stationary stems can be fitted to show their position by winding around the valve stem a line with a weighted tag at the end. When the valve is open or shut, the tag will hang in a corresponding extreme position of the line. Left-hand valves should not be used in sprinklers. It is well to secure the valves open with a riveted strap; if it is necessary to shut the valve on account of mishap, anybody can cut it; but do not use a lock and chain, as the key will, in the- nature of things, be lost, and the valve spindle bent, in the efforts to sunder the chain." Sensitiveness. Tests on sensitiveness were made as follows : "With the purpose of employing a method which would give precise results, the following apparatus was devised for the object of learning the relative sensitiveness of automatic sprinklers under pressure: A box of thirty cubic feet capacity, measuring three by four feet, and two and a half feet deep, was swung top downwards over a large table. A Par melee sprinkler head projected through the center of the table, and was connected with a piece of four-inch pipe about two feet long, which was beneath the table, and capped at both ends. Water was placed in the lower end, and connections were made with a steam supply and a steam gauge. This arrange- ment served to furnish a supply of saturated steam at any desired pressure, and therefore the quantity of heat and its temperature could be known and controlled. The sprinklers were screwed into a framework of fittings which was placed on the table, so that the sprinklers under trial were about two feet above the table. The TESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SPRINKLERS 69 sprinklers were filled with water at the temperature of the room, and weights applied in such a manner as to be equivalent to a water pressure of fifteen pounds to the square inch upon the sprinklers. Electric apparatus was attached, so that when any sprinkler opened, a bell corresponding to each sprinkler would ring in an adjoining room. On making a trial, the box was lowered upon the table, and the temperature increased very slowly to 112 degrees, and then the valve was opened and steam blown through the Parmelee sprinkler head into the box. It required two minutes to increase the temperature within the box one hundred degrees, and the circu- lation of the steam was so rapid that thermometers inserted through orifices in various parts of the box varied less than one degree from each other. Although this was not the heat proceeding directly from a fire yet it enabled the use of constant conditions, and the results with any one sprinkler, as given in the record, do not vary from each other more than would correspond to varying masses of solder in the joint. " Tests on sensitiveness showed the following time neces- sary to open the different heads.. Averages. Time in seconds. With Grinnell as 100. Grinnell 15 100 Kane 15 103 Walworth link 17 116 Bishop sensitive, with cup 18 123 Bishop sensitive, with sleeve Brown sensitive . 19 21 132 140 Burritt sensitive 26 180 Bishop sealed upright 30 202 Walworth soldered 31 212 Bishop sealed deflector 34 236 Burritt rose, open base 38 260 Parmelee 52 357 Burritt rose (hard solder) 63 432 Brown standard 80 548 Harris deflector 85 581 Bursting Strength. The tests on bursting strength showed a wide variation, the heads leaking at from 70 to 6000 pounds per square inch. Some of the heads were new and some had been in use for 3 years or less. 70 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Distribution. The tests on distribution showed that under 3, 13, 22 and 36 pounds pressure the heads ranked as follows: 3 pounds per square inch. 13 pounds per square inch. 22 pounds per square inch. 36 pounds per square inch. Parmelee Parmelee Parmelee Parmelee. Grinnell Burritt rose Burritt rose Burritt rose. Burritt rose Grinnell Grinnell Grinnell. Kane Bishop sealed de- Brown sensitive Burritt sensitive. flector Brown sensitive Brown sensitive Bishop sealed de- Kane. flector Grinnell placed up- Burritt sensitive Burritt sensitive Brown sensitive. right Bishop upright Grinnell placed up- Grinnell placed up- Bishop sealed de- Burritt sensitive Bishop sealed de- right Walworth Kane right Bishop upright Walworth flector. Bishop upright. Walworth. flector Walworth Bishop upright Kane Discharge. The cubic feet of water discharged per minute under 3, 20 and 50 pounds pressure including 5 feet of J-inch pipe and one elbow was as follows: Name. 3 pounds. 20 pounds. 50 pounds. Parmelee 83 2 14 3.38 Burritt rose . . .09 2.81 4.44 Burritt open base .48 3.82 6.03 Bishop .28 3.29 5.21 Bishop sealed . .70 4.38 6.92 Brown standard 06 2.75 4.35 Heath 01 2.61 4.12 Whiting (Hub) 0.94 2.41 3.82 Grinnell . 0.96 2.48 3.93 Burritt sensitive 1.10 2.83 4.47 Brown sensitive 1.20 3.09 4.88 Walworth 1.33 3.43 5.42 Bishop (valve) 1.65 4.25 6.72 Kane (Eclipse). 1.07 2.76 4.36 Harris deflector 1.26 3.26 5.16 Harris (closed) 0.90 2.31 ?.65 Ruthenburg 1 30 3.35 ^>.29 TESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SPRINKLERS 71 The following is also noted: "Sealed sprinklers should not be connected directly to distributing pipes, in the manner of valve sprinklers, because the circulation of water after one sprinkler has opened is sufficient to cool the sprinkler and prevent the prompt operation of the remaining sprinklers; and it is only when placed at the ends of branch pipes in the proper manner, that sealed automatic sprinklers should be approved for protection against fire." SPRINKLER SOLDER It might be well to describe here the low-fusing solder used in automatic sprinklers as it has been practically the same in all makes from the earliest heads to those of modern times. Strange to say there has been prac- tically no improvement in this detail of sprinkler con- struction, perhaps because none was needed. It was Sir Isaac Newton, in 1699, who first discovered that cer- tain alloys possessed a lower melting point than their constituents. He devised a mixture of bismuth 5 parts, lead 3 parts, and tin 2 parts, which melted at 212 F. Barnabas Wood of Nashville, Tenn., took out a patent in 1860 upon which the composition of sprinkler solder was afterwards based. The usual formula is: Bismuth 4 parts Lead ; 2 parts Cadmium 1 part Tin 1 part This has a melting point of about 165 F., though it granulates a few degrees lower. Woodbury in his tests found that when a mass of this solder is cooled slowly there will be a variation in the different portions of the bar, due to the tendency of mixtures of metals to separate into well-defined alloys. He tested 19 samples of solder from nine manufac- turers and found the melting points of the low-test solder varied from 161 to 172 degrees. Solder cooled in ice water began to soften at 6 degrees lower temperature 72 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION than when cooled slowly. He also found a variation of from 2 to 26 degrees between the point at which the solder softened and at which it actually melted. By changing the proportions of the above formula slightly, a melting point of 159.8 can be obtained. Lower melting temperatures can be obtained by adding an excess of bismuth but this makes the solder too brittle. The above formula gives the lowest melting point that is sufficiently hard, ductile and permanent for sprinkler work. The melting points of the constituents are: Cadmium 600 F. Lead 504 F. Bismuth 476 F. Tin 421 F. LEAKAGE The matter of leakage from sprinkler heads has been an important consideration ever since sprinklers were first installed. It was frequently used as an argument by mill owners against installing the device, and the comparatively few cases where trouble did occur were brought forward to support the argument. The matter was investigated by the Factory Mutual Fire Insurance Cos. in 1885. Letters were sent to plants equipped with sprinklers and replies were received as follows: Total number of replies received 224. Number of leaks not due to accident 22 Number causing no damage 16 Number causing slight damage _J> 22 Number of leaks caused by accident 41 Number causing no damage 27 Number causing slight damage 14 41 , _ Total number of leaks 63 Many of the older heads developed slight leaks which did no damage. A large part of these old heads were TESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SPRINKLERS 73 adjustable so that when they began to leak the valve could readily be tightened. FIRE RECORD A record of fires in buildings equipped with sprinklers and buildings not so equipped was tabulated by the same organization. In the sprinklered class only fires starting in sections equipped with sprinklers were in- cluded. The results were as follows: 1877-1887 1877-1894 Average loss per fire sprink- lered buildings $1,081 (205 fires) $1,360 Average loss per fire unsprink- lered buildings $17,613 (759 fires) $16,104 Mr. Woodbury states in his report that sprinklers of the sensitive type cause less water damage than those of the sealed type because fewer of the former operate. Fire Record of Old Heads. The record of some of the earlier types of sprinklers in actual fires between 1877 and 1885 was tabulated in his report as follows: Head. Number of fires. Loss per fire. Wai worth 6 $2487 Harris 3 972 Brown 3 4040 Barnes 3 611 Kane 2 45 Parmelee 83 262 Grinnell 102 112 Burritt 17 1207 LATER MUTUAL TESTS A second series of tests was made in 1886 and was also in charge of Mr. Woodbury. The tests on sensitive- ness were made by placing the heads in a building 20 by 30 feet and 10 feet high. Six sprinklers were installed 74 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION on piping near the roof, under a pressure of 35 to 40 pounds. They were subjected to heat from a fire con- sisting of i barrel of shavings to which excelsior was added if necessary. The time necessary to open the different heads under these conditions was as follows: Grinnell 1 minute, 4 seconds Granger 1 minute, 33 seconds Gunn 1 minute, 34 seconds Star 4 minutes, 36 seconds Kane (Excelsior) 6 minutes, 12 seconds Walworth 6 minutes, 55 seconds Braman Dow (Jordan) 7 minutes, 38 seconds Buell, stuck in 3 cases out of 5. Kane (reversible), stuck in 1 case out of 4. APPROVED SPRINKLERS The approved list of the Mutuals in 1886 included the following: Grinnell, Buell, Kane, Walworth and Gunn. Later the Clapp, Neracher and Hill heads were added. Those approved in 1894- were: Grinnell, Hill, Neracher, Clapp, Wm. Kane (all put in by the General Fire Extinguisher Co.), Esty, Walworth, J. Kane, Newton and Kersteter. The heads approved by the New England Insurance Exchange were as follows : In 1892, Buell, Grinnell (metal and glass disc types), Harkness, Hill, Kane, Neracher, Mackey, New York & New Haven, Walworth. In 1896 the Buell, Harkness, New York & New Haven had been taken off the approved list and the Newton and Esty added. In 1900 the following heads had been added: Jahn, Hibbard, Babcock and Universal. List of approved sprinklers of the National Board of Fire Underwriters, Jan., 1918: TESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SPRINKLERS 75 Crowder, A, Crowder Bros., St. Louis, Mo. Esty, B, Esty Sprinkler Co., H. G. Vogel, sole agents, New York City. Globe, C, Globe Automatic Sprinkler Company, Philadelphia, Pa. Grinnell, Improved, General Fire Extinguisher Co., Providence, R. I. Independent, A, Independent Min& Sprinkler Co., Philadelphia, Pa. International, B, International Sprinkler Co., New York City. Lapham, B, Ohio Sprinkler Co., Yoiingstown, Ohio. Manufacturers, C, Automatic Sprinkler Company of America, New York City. Neracher, Improved, General Fire Extinguisher Co., Providence, R. I. Niagara, B, Automatic Sprinkler Co. of America, New York City. Rockwood, D, Rockwood Sprinkler Co., Worcester, Mass. SIZE OF ORIFICE The J-inch diaphragm or ring-nozzle outlet has been taken for the standard and practically all sprinklers as made today comply with this standard. A few heads with 1-inch outlets, called jumbo heads, have been made for use at the top of elevators and similar places but these heads are much less sensitive and it is considered better practice today to install several smaller ones in place of one large head. There is a slight difference in the discharge from the different makes of heads but the following table gives a fair average. 76 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION DISCHARGE FROM SPRINKLERS Pressure at sprinkler, pounds. Water discharged, gallons. 5 15 10 19 15 24 20 28 25 31 Failures from Age. The limit of life of a sprinkler is something that is generally overlooked by the prop- erty owner who puts in an equipment. It is quite commonly assumed that so long as no fire occurs they have no work to do and should last indefinitely. As a matter of fact they are called upon to do work all the time, namely, to hold back the water pressure in the pipes, and like any other machine they have a limited life. One reason for this misconception is the fact that sprinklers do not show their age and defects to the casual observer. A head that has been in use for 20 years may appear to be as good as new except that it is not so bright and clean; yet when it is heated it may be found that owing to the constant strain, the metal has lost its elasticity or certain parts may have stuck together so that it will not operate. The greatest number of failures in old sprinklers are those due to sticking of the valve where some soft metal like lead has been used for a valve disc. The disc be- comes so indented that it may require a pressure of 100 pounds or more to force it off especially when the orifice has a sharp edge or burr. All the Grinnell metal disc sprinklers used lead or some similar soft metal for the valve disc but after a very successful career of from 20 to 30 years they have been found in such an unsatisfactory condition that they have all been condemned as defective. The Walworth TESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SPRINKLERS 77 head contained a lead valve disc covered with a copper washer. This was certainly better than lead alone, yet after giving good service for 10 to 25 years many of them have been found to stick at the seat so as to utterly fail on test. Perhaps the next most important defect is the design that allows of the slow opening of a head and does not protect the solder joint from water leaking from the head. Unless the sprinkler opens promptly and with a snap, a small stream of water is liable to be liberated when the head starts to open that may strike the solder joint and chill it. This would ordinarily cause a com- plete failure of the head. This has occurred in many of the older heads where the parts are liable to lose their elasticity, notably the Walworth. Any joint where there is considerable sliding action before it parts is undesirable for this reason. Sticking and binding- of the movable parts after the solder has fused is another important defect that develops in many of the older designs. This is due to imperfect design and workmanship but is much less noticeable in modern heads. This has occurred in some of the earlier types of Manufacturers heads, in the Newton head and in the Grinnell metal disc heads. Another feature that has caused a great many heads to open prematurely is the tendency of the solder joint to give way owing to excessive strain on the soft solder. This feature is often difficult to judge without the test of time although the laboratories are able to imitate the actual conditions upon an exaggerated scale so that the results can be observed in a comparatively short time. Sprinkler solder is soft and will not with- stand heavy tension and shearing strains. It is also more or less viscous and will flow very slowly, like a glacier, when under strain. It is necessary therefore to arrange the leverage of the releasing parts so that 78 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION the solder will not be overstrained and yet will be under sufficient strain to allow a quick sharp action when it fuses. Limit of Age. It is difficult to give any reliable data as to the limit of age of sprinklers as different types vary greatly and heads of the same type vary in differ- ent localities and under different conditions. In gen- eral it may be said that for heads in dry, clean, locations not subject to corrosive influences the earlier types re- mained in good condition for about 10 years. Heads of a later date, made from 20 to 25 years ago, were mostly in good condition for 20 years. Modern ap- proved heads have not been in use long enough to allow the effects of age to develop but it seems probable that they will last much longer than those of the older types. Corrosion. There are many corrosive influences which affect sprinklers, amongst .which are nitric and hydrochloric acids, chlorine, sulphurous and ammonia fumes. Some forms of ' fiyflft corrosion act on the surface of the solder, coating it with a hard crust which holds the moving parts together and prevents the solder from flowing after it has melted. Other forms act on some of j the ingredients of the solder, generally the bismuth or cadmium, changing them CORRODED WAL- chemically and making the whole mass WORTH SPRINK- of golder hard and brittle. The most active forms attack the whole sprinkler, forming a heavy coating which prevents the moving parts from being released. Certain of the older types of sprinklers like the Wai- worth, Draper and old Manufacturers were especially susceptible to corrosion, but all heads on the approved list today are constructed so as to reduce the chances of trouble from this source to a minimum. TESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SPRINKLERS 79 There have been many plans suggested for prevent- ing corrosion of sprinklers including painting and coat- ing with various kinds of wax. Paint is undesirable as it tends to cause sticking of the moving parts. Wax coatings have proved quite satisfactory where the right kind of wax was used, and when it was properly applied. It should have a melting point below that of the fusible solder and yet not so low that it will soften or run in hot weather. Paraffine has been used but it has too low a melting point. A preparation of ozokerite (min- eral wax) has been found most satisfactory and most of the sprinkler companies now supply a coating of this kind. The head is dipped in hot wax, care being taken that this is hot enough so that it will cover the head evenly and yet not so hot that it will melt the solder. The heads should be carefully treated and it is much safer to leave this work to the manu- facturers. In screwing the head into the fitting this coating is apt to become cracked or broken and it is necessary to go over all broken places with a hot knife in order to make the coating complete and effec- tive. If this is carefully done the head should last for many years, even in very corrosive locations. No coating has yet been put on GRINNELL SPRINKLER the market that is suitable for high- WITH test heads in hot places. The Gen- eral Fire Extinguisher Co. has recently put out a glass- covered head, which is a modification of a former device of the same company, and which seems to fill a long felt want. The frame of the sprinkler has been enlarged to make room for a groove in the circular casting outside the arms. This groove is filled with a thick non-drying 80 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION grease and an oval-shaped glass flask, which covers the upper part of the head, fits into this groove, making a corrosion-tight joint. When properly installed this is very effective in preventing corrosion and can be used on high- as well as low-test heads. The heat radiates through the glass so rapidly that the melting point of the head is only raised a few degrees. When the head fuses, the pressure of the water throws off the glass cover. Painting. Both paint and whitewash seriously affect the operation of sprinklers and the moving parts should never be coated with these materials. If a ceiling is to be painted with a spraying machine, the sprinklers can be covered with small paper bags during the operation. Rotating Deflectors. In many of the older heads the deflectors were made to rotate when the stream from the orifice struck them, in order to improve the distribution. In modern heads the deflectors have been so per- fected that this is no longer necessary. In fact, it is now considered "an un- desirable feature because the vibration in certain buildings, like weave sheds, will set the deflector in motion and this constant motion will frequently wear ESTT SPRINKLER ,, , ,, ,, *, , WITH DEFLECTOR the P arts SO badl 7 that the ^ become WORN BY VIBRA- loose and defective. A number of TION. sprinklers have been taken from the weave sheds of cotton mills where the deflectors were missing, having been so badly worn by constant vibration that they dropped off. In the case of one upright Esty head the deflector was almost cut through by becoming loose and dropping onto the sharp duck-bill lever which holds the valve disc in place. TESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SPRINKLERS 81 Valve Discs. Mr. C. J. H. Woodbury, in his first report on automatic sprinklers in 1884, stated that " Lead is the only material which has been used with success in sensitive automatic sprinklers " for valve discs. The test of time has thrown an unexpected light on this subject, for the experience of 35 years has shown that this is one of the few metals that is not suitable for this purpose. The art of sprinkler construction has advanced so that it is entirely practical to make a tight joint with a harder metal that will afford much less chance for sticking. Brass against brass is not entirely satisfactory as it is hard to keep the joint tight. The most successful valve discs have been glass, as used in the Grinnell head; porcelain with a copper and lead washer, as used in the Manufacturers head; brass with silver washer, as in the Rockwood ; and brass with copper washer, -as used in the International and other heads. High-test Heads. The ordinary sprinkler has a melting point of about 160 F. Experience teaches that it is not safe to install such heads in locations where the temperature frequeAtly exceeds 110 F. This is because at this temperature the solder is more subject to cold flow than at lower temperatures so that in the course of years the head is liable to open. It is, of course, frequently necessary to install sprinklers in rooms that are hotter than this, so that high-fusing sprinklers are necessary. In the early days each manufacturer made the high-test melting points to meet his own ideas and there was considerable variation. The Walworth Com- pany, for instance, used solders melting at approxi- mately 200 F. and 300 F. Many of the older heads were unmarked and some were incorrectly marked and were therefore liable to be incorrectly installed. The General Fire Extinguisher Co. early adopted the follow- ing melting points which have now become universal: 212, 286 and 360 F. 82 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION A safe rule for installing high-test heads is to allow 60 to 80 degrees leeway. That is, if the temperature in the room exceeds 100 F., but does not exceed 160 F., use 212 heads. This head is usually safe in boiler rooms, hot engine rooms and skylights. If the tem- perature exceeds 160 F. but does not exceed 210 F., use a 286 head. This is suitable for most dry rooms. If the temperature exceeds 210 F., use a 360 head. The 286 head is slow in operation and therefore somewhat unreliable. It should never be used unless absolutely necessary and even then the protection cannot be considered first class. There are several cases on record where disastrous fires have occurred in rooms equipped with these heads, where the only prob- able explanation was the slowness of the heads in operating. The 360 heads give but poor protection and should only be used in rare cases where a very high tempera- ture is maintained, such as in extra hot dry rooms. The Underwriters' Laboratories and the Factory Mutual Laboratories require all high-test heads to be plainly marked to show their operating point, both by stamping this temperature on the head arid by paint- ing the frame with a distinguishing color. For 212 heads, white is used; for 286 heads, blue; and for 360, red. Defective Heads in Use. Amongst the heads that are found to some slight extent in risks today and that should be, in general, considered defective are: Grinnell metal disc. Walworth all types. Manufacturers A. Mackey all types. Babcock. Hibbard certain types. Hill. Buell all types. Newton. TESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SPRINKLERS 83 Cost of Equipments. The cost per head of equipping a building with sprinklers has gone up very rapidly the last few years; while formerly an equipment could be put in for $3.00 to $4.00 a head, the cost today is nearer $10.00 a head. This is due to an increase both in stock and in labor and is probably a temporary condition. The type of building has considerable effect on the price "and under some conditions the cost may go up to $15.00 or $20.00 a head. Extra sprinklers cost about $1.00 each. TESTS FOR ACCEPTANCE Up to 1901 the testing and approving of sprinklers was done by the local insurance boards, and bureaus. As the art of making and installing the device improved and as their success in extinguishing and holding fires became more marked, the insurance interests were will- ing to give more and more discount in rates for the in- stallation of sprinklers. It was evident from the first that some makes had more merit than others and that only those that, after careful and disinterested tests, were found to be free from important defects should be given credit. The local boards who made the rates therefore found it necessary to make tests on the different heads submitted before they could properly pass on their merits. This resulted in a good deal of confusion for a head approved in one territory might be barred out in the adjoining territory. In 1901 the Underwriters' Laboratories of Chicago began the testing of sprinklers and other fire appliances. They took up the work in a much more thorough and systematic manner than had ever before been attempted, and their findings, as promulgated by the National Board of Fire Underwriters, were almost universally 84 AtTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION adopted by the local organizations. This and the draw- ing up of rules for the installation of sprinklers by the National Fire Protection Association in 1896 were the two greatest steps ever taken toward uniformity in the auto- matic sprinkler industry. REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS The following rules for the construction of an auto- matic sprinkler head give a fairly complete outline of the requirements which an approved head should fulfill. 1. Discharge Capacity. As a basis for these rules, it is required that each automatic sprinkler have an unobstructed outlet of such size and form that with 5 pounds pressure maintained at the sprink- ler, it will discharge approximately 12 gallons per minute. 2. Pressure Test. An automatic sprinkler upon original test must not leak at or under a pressure of 300 pounds hydrostatic pressure. 3. Water Hammer Test. Sprinklers upon original test must not burst or leak by suddenly increasing the pressure from to 300 pounds, repeated 500 or more times. 4. Fusing Point. An automatic sprinkler when intended for ordinary use must, when immersed in hot fluid, fuse at not less than 155 F., nor more than 165 F. Head not to be under pres- sure in this test. "Hard heads," in like manner, must fuse at not less than 275 F. or more than 300 F. The fusing point of solder should not change with age. 5. Action in Opening. On original test an automatic sprinkler on fusing must open without perceptible halt or hesitation at any point of the opening action. All freed parts must be thrown clear. This test to be made without subjecting the sprinkler to pressure, or depending upon the action of a coiled spring. 6. Position. An automatic sprinkler must be designed to open and spray satisfactorily in an upright or pendent position. 7. Distribution of Water from Sprinklers. Sprinkler upright or pendent with deflector 4 to 6 inches below smooth ceiling and 10 feet above smooth floor: TESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SPRINKLERS 85 (a) Shall, under 5-pound nozzle pressure, wet ceiling over an area of not less than 3 to 4 feet in diameter. (6) Shall, when under 5-pound nozzle pressure, throw approx- imately 90 per cent of water inside an area 10 feet square on floor. (c) Shall, when under 50-pound pressure, throw not less than 75 per cent of water inside the 10 feet square area. (d) Distribution in both above tests to be approximately uniform over the 10 feet square area. (e) Water should not be cut up into fine spray. (/) Rotary deflectors are allowable, but the distribution must be satisfactory with deflector fixed. (g) The distribution in any direction shall not be obstructed by yoke, levers or other parts of sprinkler. 8. Materials. Automatic sprinklers must contain no iron, steel or fibrous material subject to the effect of corrosion. The following is a brief summary of the tests and examinations made by the Underwriters' Laboratories on new sprinklers submitted for approval. TEST SPECIFICATIONS AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS 1. Hydrostatic Pressure. (a) Leakage. Heads are tested under a hydrostatic pressure ram with gage readings from to 2400 pounds. Readings are taken of leaking points and any heads leak- ing under 300 pounds are noted. Similar readings are taken at intervals of 30 to 300 days. (b) Steady Pressure. Heads are put under a constant pressure of 300 pounds for 3700 hours (154. days), and any leakage noted. (c) Water Hammer. Sprinklers are placed on piping connected to a cylinder with a plunger. A weight is dropped onto the plunger from a predetermined point. 2. Hot-air Oven. Tests are made in a cylindrical water-jacketed copper gas heated oven. Diameter 10 inches, height 30 inches. Heads attached to pipe and tested under a hydrostatic water pressure of 5 pounds. 86 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION RATE OF HEATING Time. Temperature. 100 1 150 . 2 190 3 218 4 235 5 250 Clean heads are tested and also heads subjected to ammonia fumes, sulphurous fumes, chlorine fumes, hydrochloric acid fumes, nitric acid fumes, two coats white lead and boiled oil, four coats shellac, three coats asphaltum, two coats calcine. For corrosion of seats a saturated solution of sal ammoniac under 5 pounds pressure is held against the seats during a period of 30 days and the head is then dried.' 3. Hot Fluid. (a) Fusing Point in Water. Heads are immersed in 1 gallon of water and temperature raised gradually to 100 F. Temperature is then raised at a rate not exceed- ing 2 F. per minute. Opening temperature of sprink- ler is noted. (6) Plunge in Water. Heads are allowed to stand at least 1 hour in water of 60 F. Then removed and im- mersed in a water bath at 175 F. Time of fusing under these conditions noted. High-test heads are tested in a similar manner in melted leaf lard. 4. Intermittent Flame. Heads are tested under 5 pounds hydrostatic pressure by gas flame, 10 inches long, coming from a 1-inch orifice under 6-inch pressure applied intermittently. Record taken of the number of applica- tions of flame before heads open. 5. Distribution. Heads are tested under 5 and 25 pounds nozzle pressure and record made of the diameter TESTS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF SPRINKLERS 87 of circle wet on ceiling and on floor; also per cent of water falling within a 10-foot circle, etc. 6. Design and Construction. Heads are examined for effect of blows, effects of excessive tension and com- pression, uniformity of parts and workmanship. 7. Record in Service. Includes number in service, length of time in service and record. CHAPTER V INSTALLATION RULES The rules of the National Board of Fire Underwriters for the installation of automatic sprinklers are the stand- ard for all stock companies interests in the country. The rules of the Associated Factory Mutuals are prac- tically identical. These rules give in detail the information necessary for the proper installation of sprinkler equipments and as they are subject to revision every few years care should be taken to use the latest edition. In the follow- ing pages an attempt is made to give all the essential rules, and in many cases the reasons therefor, in a form that is less technical and perhaps more easily under- stood by the beginner, than that in the pamphlet of the National Board. GENERAL INFORMATION SECTION A Buildings vary greatly in their adaptability to sprink- ler protection and some buildings require a great many structural changes before they can become good sprink- lered risks. The fundamental idea to be borne in mind is that sprinklers should be so located throughout a building that there is no unprotected place, however unexpected, where a fire can start. In other words, no matter where a fire starts there must be one or more sprinklers so located in relation to that particular point that the heat rising from the fire will open a nead and allow the water that issues therefrom to strike the seat of the fire. Furthermore, there should be no direction 88 INSTALLATION RULES 89 that the fire could spread in which it will not encounter other sprinklers to stop its progress. It is evident therefore that sheathing, resulting as it does in hollow walls and floors, in which it is not prac- tical to place sprinklers, is very undesirable from the standpoint of sprinkler protection; for should a fire work into such a hollow space it might spread for a considerable distance without opening sprinklers or without coming within the radius of the water thrown by them. Such sheathing should therefore be removed whenever possible, and if this is not done, the concealed spaces should be stopped off at intervals with tight fire stops designed to stop the spread of fire in any direc- tion. These stops should be preferably of brick or other non-combustible material, but wood can be used if it is made sufficiently thick and is fitted in so tightly that no fire can work around the edges. In hollow ceilings the stops should be placed about every 30 feet, and in walls, at each floor level. In a similar way large hanging shelves, wide benches, and numerous partitions are undesirable as they all tend to prevent the proper distribution of water from sprinklers. Highly inflammable sheathing, like cloth and paper, allows fire to spread rapidly along the sur- face and is detrimental to good sprinkler protection because it may cause the opening of many more heads than would otherwise occur. Pitch roofs, leaving low studded or concealed spaces at the eaves, are undesirable as the heat from the fire tends to flow toward the peak and to open sprinklers at some distance from the flames. Such places are also very apt to become filled with storage that will obstruct the proper distribution of the water, and they are usually very inaccessible to hose streams from the outside. Unprotected openings in floors are also bad features 90 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION as they tend to augment draughts from floor to floor, thus allowing the fire to spread quickly and also to prevent the banking up of heat around the sprinklers which is so necessary for their prompt operation. Such openings should be stopped off or enclosed in a standard manner. If for any reason this is impractical, curtain boards extending 12 to 18 inches below the ceiling around the opening offer an effectual means of banking up the heat in case of fire. All floors should be made tight so that fire will not readily spread through any cracks and so that water from sprinklers will not leak rapidly through to the floors below. All sheathing that remains on the walls or ceilings should be made perfectly tight so as to retard the spread of fire into the concealed spaces which it forms. All floor openings, such as stairs, elevators, dumb waiters, etc., should be tightly enclosed or stopped off with traps. Partitions should be cut down or if possible should be entirely removed. Benches should be set away from walls at least 3 inches so that the water can wet both sides and thus prevent a fire under- neath from spreading. The rule requiring 24 inches clear space between sprinkler heads and any storage is of particular impor- tance in order to give the sprinklers sufficient space in which to operate effectively. This is a matter that is frequently forgotten or disregarded by the property owner and has to be carefully looked out for at inspec- tions. High-studded rooms, like auditoriums of theatres, are not adapted to good sprinkler protection for the reason that the heat rising from a fire is liable to be deflected to one side by draughts and thus open* sprink- lers that are so far away that the water they discharge cannot reach the fire. Then again the heads do not open as promptly under these conditions, because the INSTALLATION RULES 91 heat is dissipated to a greater extent and because there is a much larger amount of air to be heated before the melting point of the solder is reached. There have been many very disastrous fires in saw mills using logs as raw stock, largely due to the fact that these buildings are not well adapted to sprinkler control. They are usually high studded and with open ends so that the draught conditions, especially if there is any wind blowing, are very severe. Very large areas cannot be as well protected by sprink- lers as those of moderate or small size as there is more apt to be draughts which will carry the heat away from the sprinklers above. This means that more sprinklers will have to open to control the fire and thus more damage will result. For this reason fire walls or non- combustible partitions dividing the area into smaller sections are very desirable in such buildings. While no exact figure can be given, it is generally considered good practice to keep the floor area of fire sections down to 10,000 square feet or less. It is also very essential to partition off any unsprinklered section, such as a vacant part of a basement by a fireproof or solid plank partition, so as to prevent a fire from getting h'eadway where there are no sprinklers to control it. For the same reason when an unsprinklered building adjoins or communicates with one equipped with sprinklers there should be a standard fire wall between them. Where there is a space between the buildings, the sprinklered building should be protected by standard shutters, wired glass windows or open sprinklers. Curtain boards can be used to advantage in large area sections where solid walls cannot be used to cut up the area; as, for instance, in electric car barns. These should be preferably non-combustible and should extend from the ceiling a distance of at least 6 inches, preferably 1 to 2 feet below the sprinkler heads. These tend to 92 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION prevent draughts at the ceiling level and to pocket or bank up the heat where it is needed. In certain classes of risks sprinklers are at a perma- nent disadvantage on account of the nature of the proc- esses or the stock used. These include risks where the stock is stored in deep hollow piles, such as empty bar- rels in tiers, and cold storage plants where the piping and heads are kept at a very low temperature ; also risks using large amounts of benzine, especially in exposed tanks; and those using celluloid or explosives, where a rapid flash fire is possible. Most important of all is the rule stating that sprink- lers should be installed in all parts of a plant. Mr. Edward Atkinson once said that if we could only tell where a fire was going to start we could place one sprinkler over that spot and that would be sufficient. Unfortunately this is a fact that we never can deter- mine unless perchance we are connected with the " Ar- son Trust." Fires start in the most unexpected places as will be seen in the following illustrations. A serious fire in Berlin, N. H., about 25 years ago started at the main water wheel bearing in the sub- basement of a saw mill. It was a dark wet spot and the keen eyes of the inspectors would hardly have looked for trouble there even if they had succeeded in reaching such an inaccessible place. Yet this was where the fire started and as there were no sprinklers there it soon gained such headway that the entire plant was destroyed. In Norwich, Conn., one building of a large group was built directly over a raceway. The ground floor was 3 or 4 feet above the water and was open to the weather. No one had ever suggested placing sprinklers over running water, yet in this case they were needed. Trouble developed in an oil pipe in the yard and a lot of oil escaped into the raceway. This oil became INSTALLATION RULES . 93 ignited and flowing under the building set it on fire causing a heavy loss. It was formerly thought unnecessary to install sprink- lers in one-story beam houses and tan yards connected with tanneries. These contain only vats of water and wet hides where one might think a fire could not start. In Peabody, Mass., a few years ago a serious fire occurred in one of these beam houses caused by working men's overalls, or burlap, being carelessly thrown behind steam pipes. After that experience, the beam house was equipped and it is now quite customary to equip all buildings of this character. It is clear, therefore, that all parts of a plant should be equipped before the sprinkler protection can be con- sidered good. The only important exceptions to this rule are the following: fireproof sections containing wet work or no readily combustible contents ; low vacant basements that are tightly partitioned off and not used for any purpose, even for non-combustible storage; fire- proof stair towers except at the top; fireproof dynamo rooms containing nothing but electrical machinery. LOCATION OF AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS SECTION B Heads should point up on the pipe except where construction or occupancy of the room makes it prefer- able to have them point down. Most of the older heads were constructed so that they had to point down but it was found that when in this position they were more apt to be injured by blows than when they were above the pipe and were protected by the piping below. Fur- thermore, such a system could not be readily drained and was therefore not suitable for dry-pipe installations. A pendent head was more liable to be clogged with sediment and was also somewhat less sensitive as the solder joint was further from the ceiling. For these 94 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION reasons the rules now prohibit pendent sprinklers except in special cases. As the bulk of the water is thrown in an umbrella- shaped spray from the head it is necessary to have the deflector parallel to the ceiling or surface under which the head is located in order to give the best protection. Under peak roofs or sloping stairs this requires turning the head so that the deflector is parallel to the slope of the roof, ceiling or stairs. The line which comes directly in the peak should, however, point up as it cannot be parallel to both the surfaces that it is to protect. SKETCH OF PEAKED ROOF SHOWING DISTRIBUTION OF SPRINKLERS IN AN UPRIGHT POSITION (ON LEFT) AND THOSE WITH DEFLEC- TORS PARALLEL TO SLOPE (ON RIGHT). The distance of the sprinkler from the ceiling is also important. If it is too close the spray will not cover a large enough area of the ceiling and is unduly obstructed by joists or beams. If it is too far away, not enough of the water will reach the ceiling and the sensitiveness will be lessened. The rules state that the deflector shall be between 3 and 10 inches from the ceiling or bottom of joists, preferably 6 to 8 inches. If the ceil- ing is of fireproof construction a 50 per cent greater distance is allowed as in this case it is not important that the ceiling be sprayed. INSTALLATION RULES 95 It is of particular importance that sprinklers should not be placed too close to a joisted ceiling as the obstruc- tion of. the joists to the spread of water greatly affects the distribution in the direction across joists. There is a great temptation to do this in dry systems, especially the end heads on a line, in order to get good drainage. There are many concealed spaces like belt boxes, gear boxes, chutes, cupboards, etc., which should have sprinklers inside unless the tops can be removed. Cloth or paper tops are frequently allowed instead of placing sprinklers inside, on the theory that if a fire starts in such a place, the top will quickly burn off so that the ceiling sprinklers outside can control the fire. Sprinklers should be placed beneath large shelves or tables, especially if there be shafting or any similar hazard there. No exact rule can be given for the limit of width which calls for sprinklers but in most cases the line should be drawn at about 4 feet. Benches or shelves of a less width need not usually be equipped, al- though care should be taken that they are set clear from walls or partitions. Where there is a wide bench with shafting under the center it is often possible to get good protection by taking out the boards in the center of the bench, leaving an open strip 8 inches or more wide over the shafting. The question frequently arises whether sprinklers should be installed in dynamo and switchboard rooms. The owner frequently objects to sprinklers in such places, as water on electrical machinery is apt to do more damage than fire, and, in addition, to endanger life. If the room is fireproof or is small and thoroughly cut off it is generally desirable to omit sprinklers. In other cases it is better practice to install them though permission is frequently given to keep the water shut off by a well-located, quick-opening valve that can be opened without delay in case of need. 96 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION In vertical shafts of combustible material, such as wood-enclosed elevators or chutes, it is necessary to install heads at intervals along the vertical walls as well as at the top. Fire travels very rapidly up shafts of this kind and ,if sprinklers were placed at the top only, they would not open promptly enough to prevent the spread of fire; neither would they throw enough water to thoroughly wet all walls for their entire length. Therefore heads are called for at each floor level where practicable and in any event at least one for every 200 square feet of inflammable surface. MISCELLANEOUS RULES SECTION K Circulation in Pipes. Sprinkler pipes should be used for sprinkler service only. The circulation of water in pipes causes corrosion and may bring in sediment. It may also cause condensation of moisture on the pipes which in many classes of risks will result in considerable damage to stock. There is a growing tendency on the part of water departments to require meters in sprinkler connections on account of the illegal use of water from these pipes. This is undesirable on account of the cost of the meters and the possible obstruction to the pipes. By strictly enforcing the rule that sprinkler pipes be used for no other purpose and by metering the domestic service connections, there would be less cause for com- plaint from the water departments. Service Connections. Where the domestic service pipe is small, say 1 inch or less, and the street connec- tion is larger than the riser it supplies, there is no par- ticular objection to taking the domestic service pipe off the fire service connection back of all valves provided there is a valve and meter on the domestic service connection close to the main pipe. Painting and Bronzing. It is often desirable to paint or bronze sprinkler pipes both to prevent corrosion and INSTALLATION RULES 97 to improve the appearance of the piping. There is no objection to doing this providing the moving parts of the sprinklers are not coated. Paint of any kind on the soldered portions will render them less sensitive and may cause the moving parts to stick. In case a ceiling is to be painted or whitewashed with a spraying machine the sprinkler heads should be protected during the process. This can easily be done by tying a small paper bag over each head, care being taken to remove these bags as soon as possible. Piling of Stock. Sprinklers should have a clear space of at least 2 feet in which to operate. That is, all storage should be kept at least 18 inches below sprinkler pipes, assuming that the piping will be about 6 inches below the ceiling. In city buildings or others where floor space is particularly valuable, this means a loss of storage space which may be worth a good deal of money. This feature should be fully understood before an equipment is installed so that when an inspector orders the storage lowered there can be no cause for complaint. In a like manner, stock so piled as to greatly obstruct distribution, such as on high wide racks, is undesirable, and special care must be taken in arranging sprinkler heads so as to give proper protection. Hanging of Stock. The rules prohibit the hanging of stock, clothing, etc., on sprinkler pipes, both because of the obstruction to distribution which might result and on account of the danger of loosening or breaking the pipe supports. Extra Sprinklers. The rules call for at least six extra sprinklers to be kept on hand at all times to replace any that may have been fused or injured. Where there are high-test heads in the equipment there should also be extra heads of all the different fusing points which might be needed. Extra heads should be kept in engine room, or some other well-known place so that 98 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION they can be quickly found when needed. Several persons connected with the plant, including watchman if there be one, should be instructed as to the location, and it is well to have this information posted on placards. The need of having extra sprinklers readily available was well illustrated by the Phelps Building fire in Springfield, Mass., in 1907, described under Fire Record. Hand Hose. Hand hose is allowed to be connected to the sprinkler equipment under certain restrictions. Hose to be 1J inches and nozzle not larger than J inch. Pipe nipple and hose valve to be 1 inch and hose to be connected to piping not smaller than 2J inches. It is self-evident that hose should never be connected to dry- pipe systems. The reason that l^-inch hose is called for with 1-inch nipple is because 1 inch is the largest out- let that it is thought desirable to make to a sprinkler equipment on account of the possible loss of pressure that would result when the hose was in use. The friction loss in 1-inch linen hose is however considerable and 1^-inch hose is preferable on this account. Hand hose installed as above specified is considered a very desirable form of protection and is, of course, very inexpensive. It is strongly recommended in hazardous rooms like picker and card rooms of cotton mills. Hose of 25-foot lengths located about every 40 feet down the length of a building is a desirable arrangement. Hand hose should, however, be used sparingly in case the primary water supply is weak. SPACING OF AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS SECTION c The spacing of sprinklers varies greatly according to the construction of the ceiling under which they are placed. In general, it may be said that they should be so located that no head will have to cover, under most conditions, over 80 square feet floor area and under no conditions more than 100 square feet. In no case INSTALLATION RULES 99 should the distance between heads exceed 12 feet, nor should the distance to walls or partitions exceed half the distance between the heads. Under " mill " or plank and timber construction the lines should run in the center of the bay, and the heads should be from 8 to 12 feet apart depending upon the width of the bay. In narrow bays of 5 to 8 feet, heads can be 12 feet apart, and in bays 11 to 12 feet wide, heads should be 8 feet apart. For intermediate widths the spacing should be such that one head will not have to cover more than 100 feet. In bays wider than 12 feet, two lines are required, although where the width of bay is between 12 and 13 \ feet, good protection can often be secured by placing one and two lines alternately in the bays. Mill construction, strictly speaking, includes only widths of bays between 5 and 12 feet, but semi-mill and special forms of construction are frequently found with bays or spaces between supporting beams of greater or less amount than this. Where bays are less than 5 feet, good protection can be obtained by running the feed lines across timbers and placing a head in every other bay, staggered on alternate lines. Bays of less than 4 feet are usually treated as joisted construction. Under plank and timber pocket construction, that is where cross beams cut. the ceiling into squares and ob- longs, special rulings should be made for each particular case. In general it is safe to consider each pocket as a short bay and space the heads accordingly, but in cases where this arrangement would give an excessive number of heads, good protection can generally be ob- tained by alternating one and two or two and three heads in a pocket. Under open-joist construction the distance between heads should not exceed 8 feet across joists and 10 feet with joists. By " across joists " is meant the direc- tion at right angles to the direction the joists run and 100 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION -- T 1 , - - -- -- -0- S -6'-. f e t *-9' 3 _i_ -- --H -- C -- -- - t*. -- J* jfAfo/ more /' for fire-proof tHstta/tnqs /l_" 12" Slow-burniey >i J \ El Jj^VvW/M o r METHOD OF SPACING SPRINKLER HEADS En larqec/ section AA. FIREPROOF CONSTRUCTION TX20FT TAG&EJREO-ALTERNM-E BAN ANOBEAH - /ess mart Ei av *c o Incffca+fS a sprmtr/er OF SPACING UNDER CtillN&S OF St-OW-BURNiNo ANO TIRE PROOK CONSTRUCTION AA SPRINKLER SPACING. INSTALLATION RULES 101 by " with joists " is meant the direction parallel to that of the joists. The requirement for a closer spacing across joists is due to the fact that fire travels much more readily along than across joists, and also to the fact that the water from the sprinklers is thrown further and more effectively in the direction parallel to the joists. For the same reason the rules require that the sprinklers be " staggered " across joists; that is the heads on one line should come half way between the' heads on the adjoining line measured in a direction parallel to the joists. With this arrangement it is possible for a fire to spread along joists half way between the heads on one line, but when the next line is reached there will be a head directly in its path to stop further progress. In other words the staggering of the heads gives the fire a path only 4 feet wide in which it can travel along between joists without coming directly in contact with some sprinkler. Without staggered spac- ing this path would be 8 feet wide. This rule, which has been in effect since 1896, is a very important one and equipments installed under the previous rules which did not require staggered spacing cannot be con- sidered as entirely satisfactory today. In laying out an equipment under open joists it is better and usually cheaper to run the lines of pipe at right angles to the joists. The best method of proce- dure is as follows: First line, end head to be 4 feet from wall; second head, 8 feet from first; third, 8 feet from second, etc. Second line, first head, 2 feet from wall; second head, 6 feet from the first; third head, 8 feet from the second, etc. Third line, same as first and fourth line, same as second. In this way perfect stagger- ing is obtained. Where joists are supported by timbers forming bays, one line is allowed in a bay up to a width of llj feet. It is customary to double this rule, that is to allow two 102 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Hot "illlllliillliiiiiiii" fpi f EN JOISTS METHOD OF SPACING SPRINKLER HEADS UNDER Open JOIST CEILINGS IN BUILDINGS OF ORDINARY CONSTRUCTION SPRINKLERS STAGGERED f /{ I . -7 V r/Of/nore fflO/7 fS' ' . .^ Id METHOD OF SPACING SPRINKLER HEADS Wot more than Sy~ \Sprinkler UNDER CtiUN&S OF SLOW-BURNING AMD En/orgec* section AA FIRE PROOF CONSTRUC .ON | tnd/cafes a sprinkler B/vxS SnxZO TT r SpriNKLERS STA&GtREO IN M_TEHN*TE BAYS, SPRINKLER SPACING. INSTALLATION RULES 103 lines in widths up to 23 feet. In either case the heads should be placed sufficiently close on the lines so that no head will have to cover more than 80 square feet. In bays 11 J to 13 feet wide, fairly good protection can often be obtained by alternating one and two lines in a bay. In cases where there are partitions running across joists it is impossible to strictly follow the rule that the distance from the head to a partition shall not exceed one-half the distance between heads, without installing an excessive number of heads. The rule is frequently modified by Underwriters having jurisdiction in this case. Under smooth finish ceiling, such as lath and plaster or fireproof construction, heads can be placed 10 feet apart in each direction. Such ceilings are, however, often cut up by timbers or girders, in which case the heads should be placed with due reference to these obstructions. Under pitch roofs fires are more difficult to control than under horizontal surfaces, and the rules are there- fore somewhat more exacting. Where the slope is steep (one foot in three or over) a line is required in the peak and one within 3| feet of the eaves on each side. The intermediate lines to be not over 10 feet apart measured on a line parallel to the roof. Where condi- tions make it desirable, two lines not over 2J feet from the peak may be used instead of the line at the peak. In saw-tooth roofs the end sprinkler on branch line ought to be not over 2J feet from peak of saw tooth so as to properly protect the steep side of the saw-tooth which, unlike a side wall, is seldom or never vertical. Under fireproof construction the spacing may be somewhat modified to suit conditions, bearing in mind that it is the contents rather than the building which should be protected and that under no conditions should a sprinkler on one line exceed 12 feet to a sprinkler on an adjoining line. 104 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION PIPE SIZES SECTION D The original pipe sizes for sprinkler equipments were undoubtedly the outgrowth of those used for perforated pipe systems. The most common schedule of pipe sizes in the early equipments was that designed by the Providence Steam and Gas Pipe Company. This schedule which was the standard for many years was as follows: 1-3-6 SCHEDULE .Pipe, inches. Head. .Pipe, inches. Head. i u 1* 2 2| 1 3 6 10 18 28 3 3* 4 5 6 48 78 115 150 200 It is generally known as the 1-3-6 or P.S. and G.P. schedule. There were, however, various other rules both for pipe sizes and spacing used in different parts of the country up to 1896. In that year the National Fire Protection Association was organized and one of the principal reasons for its formation was the demand for a standard set of rules for automatic sprinklers. The pipe sizes first adopted by the Association called for considerably larger pipes than were used in the 1-3-6 schedule, as it had been found by experiments and by actual practice that these caused too much friction loss under moderate and lightwater pressures. The 1896, or 1-2-4 schedule, was as follows: 1-2-4 SCHEDULE r - p r' inches. Head. Pipe, inches. Head. i H it 2 2* 1 2 4 8 16 28 3 3* 5 6 48 78 110 150 200 INSTALLATION RULES 105 These rules limited the number of sprinklers on a branch line to 6 unless the sizes were increased beyond the 6th head to one size larger than the schedule spec- ified. This was done because it was felt that even with these increased sizes there was some question whether the end head on a long line would receive enough water when all the other heads on the line were operating. Meanwhile the Factory Mutual Insurance Companies had adopted a new schedule of sizes which was still larger. This schedule, known as the 1-2-3 schedule, was adopted by the National Fire Protection Association, and promulgated by the National Board of Fire Under- writers in 1905. Since then it has been the standard in all parts of the country and for all interests. This schedule, which does not limit the number of heads on a line, is as follows: 1-2-3 SCHEDULE .Pipe, inches. Heads. .Pipe, inches. Heads. I 1 3 36 1 2 3 55 u 3 4 80 1* 5 5 140 2 10 6 200 2 20 The number of sprinklers on a given size pipe refers to the number on a floor of a fire section or building, as all equipments are installed upon the supposition that only one floor will be on fire at once. A fire that will open a large number of heads upon more than one floor is usually beyond the control of sprinklers. In other words the same size riser is allowed for an eight-story building as for a one-story building provided the number of heads on a floor is the same. 106 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION In the case of blind attics containing unprotected openings to the floor below it is frequently necessary to install the piping by running up offsets at each head from the piping below. In this case the system may be installed without increasing the pipe sizes except those under 3 inches in diameter. CHAPTER VI LAYOUT OF EQUIPMENTS FEED MAINS AND RISERS SECTION E The best and usually the most economical method of arranging feed pipes to sprinklers is to have the riser near the center of the group of sprinklers that it supplies and to have the branch lines short. In the center central scheme, which is the most desirable one, the riser is near the center of the building, the main feed lines run lengthwise of the building, near the center, and the branch lines run across the short dimension of the building. In this case the cross lines cover only one- half of the short dimension of the building. In the side central scheme, which is perhaps the next best, the riser is near the center of one of the long sides of the room and the main-feed lines run lengthwise of the room but at one side. In this case the cross-feed lines run parallel to the short dimension of the building, but are twice as long as in the previous case. Another scheme of piping is shown in the sketch and explains itself. The only unapproved schemes are those in which the riser is located in the corner of the building thus giving end side or across end feed. In either case the friction loss is excessive as compared with the approved methods. For small buildings this scheme of feed lines is of little importance and where there are less than 50 heads on a floor it need hardly be considered. It is a. feature that usually takes care of itself, for it is more economical for the sprinkler contractor to lay out the equipment in an approved way because it takes a smaller amount of the 107 108 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Center Central Feed to Automatic Sprinklers .Side Central Feed to/Iutomatic Sprinklers, Across Cnter Feed to Automatic SprinKlerS o shows d SprinKler . 9 shows Riser. LAYOUTS OF FEED MAINS AND RISERS. LAYOUT OF EQUIPMENTS 109 larger pipes. It is, however, always desirable to arrange the piping so that there will not be over 8 heads on a branch line. There should be a separate riser for each building and for each fire section in a building. It should be of ample size to supply the maximum number of heads on any floor and preferably a little larger so as to allow for additional heads which may be needed in the future due to structural changes. Stair and other similar towers should be piped as though they were all one floor. That is, the sizes, beginning at the top, should be increased as each head is added. A fire in such a place is liable to open the heads on all floors. Except where tanks on the building are the only auto- matic supplies to the system, the supplies should feed in at the bottom of the riser. This is required so that the valves, including gate valve and alarm valve or dry valve, can be conveniently located at the lower level and so that one gate valve may be arranged to shut off all the supplies from the system. Great care should be taken to thoroughly fasten together the cast- and wrought-iron pipe as this is apt to be one of the weakest parts of the system. If wrought- iron pipe is connected to bell and spigot cast iron the joint should be strapped with heavy metal straps clamped to the pipe. If possible flanged and spigot pipe should be used as with this a stronger joint can be obtained. It is desirable to have the underground pipe laid to the base of the riser so that there will be but one elbow and so that the riser will be well supported. VALVES AND FITTINGS SECTION F Shut-off valves are needed in sprinkler systems to shut off the water in the pipes after a fire has occurred, or in case of leakage or repairs. The only type of valve approved is the so-called outside screw and yoke gate 110 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION valve. In this valve there is a free water way when the valve is open and therefore practically no friction loss. The outside screw and yoke feature consists of a rising stem threaded on the outside which shows by its posi- tion the condition of the valve. When the valve is closed the stem is down and but little of it is visible. When the valve is open the stem is exposed and shows this fact plainly from a considerable distance. This is the simplest and best form of indicator yet devised and was therefore adopted as a standard. The older types of indicators consisted of sliding or swinging targets attached to the valve stem usually by a threaded nut. These were somewhat unreliable as they could in many cases be set in the wrong position and were quite liable to get out of order. While many of these indicator valves are still found in old equipments, they have not been installed to any extent since the present requirements went into effect some 20 years ago. Underground valves if not located in pits should be post valves of an approved indicator pattern. These consist of a hollow iron post attached to the valve, extending about 3 feet above ground with the spindle extending up through the post to a wrench head located at the top. This can be operated either by a movable wrench or a permanently attached hand wheel. The post is arranged with a frost-proof casing so that it will not be thrown out of place by frost, and a target indicator is attached which is usually covered by a small glass plate. In fenced yards or other locations where it is not liable to be tampered with, the permanent hand wheel is advised as it is always ready for use and gives a means of sealing or strapping open the valve. In public streets or other exposed places a removable wrench is prefer- able. LAYOUT OF EQUIPMENTS 111 Check valves are devices which work automatically, allowing water to flow through in one direction but not in the other. Several styles are on the market, but the simplest and best type for sprinkler use is the straightway swing type. In this type there is a clapper, which is a disc hung from a pivot in such a way that in its normal position it rests against a valve seat placed at a slight angle with the vertical. The water coming in one direction pushes the valve against the seat making a tight joint and preventing any flow in that direction. In the other direction the water tends to swing the valve off the seat and allow a flow. If the flowage is sufficient, the valve is swung into a practically horizontal position, in which case it causes but little obstruction to the pipe in which it is placed. The clapper or valve should be of brass and have a good clearance so that there will be no danger of corrosion or sticking. (See rules of National Fire Protection Association for Hydrants and Valves.) When two sources of supply feed one sprinkler system it is necessary to have a check valve in each so that the water will not back up or flow from one source back through the other supply. Without a check valve the water from a supply of heavy pressure, such as a water- works system, would flow back through the pipes of a supply of lighter pressure, such as a gravity tank, and overflow the latter. Again if the pressure in the water- works mains should drop for any reason, such as a break, to below the tank pressure, the tank would be drained through the break unless the flowage in that direction was safeguarded by a check valve. The rules, therefore, require that a gate valve and a check valve be provided on each source of supply, the gate valve to enable one source to be shut off inde- pendently of the other source, for repairs or testing purposes, and the check valve to prevent one supply 112 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION from backing up into the other. The gate valve should be located as close to the source of supply as practica- ble so that as much of the piping as possible may be shut off. Otherwise it might be difficult to make repairs in case of a break at some point back of the gate valve. In the case of a tank supply, this would mean that the gate valve should be placed right under the tank or as near the tank as would be readily accessible; while in the case of a waterworks connection, the valve should be as near the street main as possible. In practice gate valves are located close to pressure tanks but not always close to gravity tanks. If the tank is in a tower, the valve can be located close to the tank, but if it is on a .trestle over a building, the gate valve can be more conveniently located in the building on the top floor. If the tank is on a detached trestle the gate valve is usually located underground at the foot of the trestle and a post-indicator valve is used for the purpose. The check valve should be located as far from the source of supply as possible so that in case of a break as much of the piping as possible will be protected. If, for example, the check is located close to a tank, a break in the tank pipe anywhere between the check valve and the connection with the system would allow both sources of supply to waste away through the break; while if the check is located close to the connec- tion to the system, all of the piping between that point and the tank is protected by the check so that in case of a break only the tank supply will be lost. In most cases, of course, the gate valve would be closed before much water had been lost, but occasionally the leak would not be discovered in time to do this; while if the break occurred during a fire the consequences might be very serious. It is desirable when possible to arrange the check valve so that it can be examined or repaired without LAYOUT OF EQUIPMENTS 113 STREET iq*Water worHs mahi TIT Xlxn PIPE SCHEME 1 City Plant with waterworks pressure tank ana steamer connection. STOREHOUSES f If M PIPE SCHEN1E Z Country Plant with gravity tank and steam pumps 8" loop containing repair valves and private hydta. KEY -f- Hub valve -f- Indicator valvt -4- Post Indica- tor valve *- Check valve. Water flows indi- rection of arrow. =>= Alarm valve Dry valve - Sprinkler riser Undergrounc pipe pipe privatehydt. with valves on outlets ^ Two way public hydt. - Standard fire door I] Hose house I Boiler IB Chimney -*3 Steamer connection C3 Pressure tank ^ Gravity tank 114 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION shutting off the other supply or, in case of a tank, with- out draining the tank. For this reason it is desirable to have a gate valve on each side of a check valve when located on waterworks, reservoir or large tank supplies. In connections from waterworks systems there is usu- ally a gate valve put in by the water company and located on the connection close to the main. This, while not readily accessible, can be used in case of repairs and therefore does away with the need of one of these private gate valves.; In supplies from pumps, only one gate valve is usually necessary, for unless the pump is automatic, there is ordinarily no pressure on the pump side of the check. All gate valves should be located where easily visible and readily accessible; permanent ladders and platforms should be provided where necessary. Check valves should, where possible, be located so as to be accessible. When underground, it is desirable to locate them in pits, but this is not always practicable on account of the danger of freezing or of flooding the pit and some- times on account of the expense. In case there is no pit, a permanent marker of stone or iron should be in- stalled to show the exact location of the check. When a pump is not in a fireproof pump house but is subject to damage by falling walls, the check valve on the pump discharge should be underground and a post valve should be located in the pipe just beyond the check and at a safe distance from the building. The ideal arrangement for most classes of risks is to feed a sprinkler system through an underground pipe containing a post valve located at a safe distance from the building but with no valves inside of the building. This makes it possible to shut off or turn on the supplies without going into the building. Occasionally in case of a serious fire the sprinkler piping will become so badly broken that it is desirable to shut off the con- LAYOUT OF EQUIPMENTS 115 nection and utilize the entire supply for hose streams. Without a post valve this would usually not be possible as the heat would prevent close approach to the inside valve. Again, in case of repairs, post valve control is sometimes of vital importance. A fire at the Arm- strong Cork Co. a few years ago brought out this point very forcibly. There was an inside and outside valve on the sprinkler connection to one of the buildings but during repairs the inside valve was closed. A fire occurred and the inside valve could not be reached on account of the heat. As a result a serious fire occurred and the building was nearly destroyed. Had the post valve been used during repairs the water could have been turned on after the fire was discovered. As a general proposition the fewer valves the better. A multiplicity of valves makes a complicated system and gives more chance for a valve being closed by mis- take. In risks where the contents are very susceptible to water damage, inside valves may be desirable in addition to post valves because in case of emergency they can usually be closed more quickly. In most risks the single post valve located outside the building is sufficient. The post valve should, whenever possible, be located at a safe distance from the building. By this is meant a distance that will not permit damage by falling walls and that will not be too hot to approach in case of fire. For the average 3- or 4-story building this distance should be 40 to 50 feet while for small 1 -story buildings it might be as close as 20 feet. In city risks post valves are generally out of the question, for if installed they would have to be located on a sidewalk where they would be quite close to the building and where they might readily be tampered with. It is possible in some cases to loop the pipe back across the street and locate the valve on the opposite 116 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION sidewalk, but this is rather expensive and causes addi- tional friction loss. It is therefore usually necessary in such risks to have the controlling valves inside the build- ing. The best arrangement of valves inside a building will vary greatly according to circumstances and but few general rules can be laid down. Where possible it is desirable to locate all controlling valves, alarm valves, dry valves, etc., together in a fireproof room accessible from outside. Occasionally, shut-off valves are located on each floor of a building, but, as a general rule, they are not desirable as they make the system more complicated and give further chance for trouble from closed valves. In de- partment stores, or other risks where the care of fire appliances is first class and where any delay in shutting off the water would cause a heavy water loss on suscep- tible stock, floor valves are recommended. A valve is placed close to the riser shutting off all the sprinklers on- the floor, and it should be made readily accessible by a permanent ladder. Long-bend fittings are now required on all feed lines. They cost a little more than short bend fittings, but cause much less friction loss and are therefore very desirable. All fittings should have standard threads. Extra heavy fittings should be used where the pressure exceeds 150 pounds. Hangers. The rules require either U-type hangers made of round wrought iron or malleable cast iron, ring clips or approved adjustable hangers. Flat U- hangers are allowed when the metal is T Vinch thick or more. The size of screws and the size of hangers for different sizes of pipes are specified in detail in the rules. Drive screws are allowed only in a horizontal position as in the side of a beam. Hangers should be located about 12 inches from the LAYOUT OF EQUIPMENTS 117 sprinkler heads so as not to obstruct distribution, except round hangers which may be located as close as 3 inches under mill or fireproof construction. Two hangers are required for J-inch pipe at the end of lines where such pipe is over 6 feet long. For concrete construction cast-iron inserts should be used or hangers should be attached directly to the steel beams. In buildings already constructed expansion bolts satisfactory to the Inspection Department having juris- diction may be used, preferably in a -horizontal position. Test Pipes. A test pipe is required at the top of the riser on all wet-pipe systems. This is installed so that a test can be made to see that the water is on the system and under full pressure. This should be of a capacity equivalent to one sprinkler head so that in testing a system in which there is an alarm valve, the test will show whether the alarm valve is adjusted to operate with one head open. To this end a f-inch pipe should be used with as few angles as possible and a |-inch brass bushing should be attached at the end. An open sprink- ler head with the deflector removed can be used for this purpose. Half -inch pipe has been generally used in the past for this purpose, but is unsatisfactory in testing an alarm valve, especially if it contains many angles, as it will discharge considerably less than one sprinkler head. The test pipe is connected to the top of the riser so as to prevent sediment and corrosion being drawn into the branch lines when a test is made. The writer has seen a case in a town where the water was very muddy at certain times in the year, where the frequent use of a test pipe attached to a branch line finally filled the line completely with mud. Drip Pipes. Arrangements should be made to thor- oughly drain all parts of a sprinkler system so that when the water is drawn off for repairs or in case of shut down 118 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION there would be no water remaining in the pipes which might cause trouble by freezing. To this end all pipes should be pitched not less than J inch in 10 feet, and all branch lines should drain back to feed lines and risers. When possible one drip pipe should be arranged to drain the entire system. This should be located at the base of the riser just above the main controlling valve, or in cases where the system is controlled by a post valve, at the lowest practical point in the system. It should be 2 inches in diameter and should extend out- side of the building or to some point where the flow of water will do no damage. In some city risks it is necessary to connect drip valves to the sewer but this is not recommended as it frequently prevents accurate tests and occasionally causes trouble by back pressure from the sewer. In some cities a section of glass is required in the drip pipe when it runs direct to a sewer, so that in case the drip valve should leak, this fact could be readily ascer- tained. When this is done great care should be taken to prevent a possible blow-out or breaking of the glass as this might result in heavy water damage. A few systems have been installed with indirect connection to the sewer; that is the drain is run to a blind well which is connected to the sewer. This is undesirable because any clogging of the pipe between the blind well and the sewer would be hard to determine on inspec- tion and might cause the overflowing of the blind well on test. When the drip pipe extends out of doors it should be fitted with a hood or turned-down elbow to prevent clogging with ice.. When it extends under a building, care should be taken to so locate it that the discharge of water will do no damage. This is especially important in cases where a riser .comes up through an unheated basement and is boxed to prevent freezing. If the LAYOUT OF EQUIPMENTS 119 drip pipe discharges too close to the boxing it is liable to wash away the earth from the pipe below the boxing and allow it to freeze. Pressure Gages. Standard 44-inch dial spring-pressure gages are required on all systems in the following places: Discharge pipe from each supply. Above and below each alarm valve. Above and below each dry valve. At air pump supplying pressure tank. At pressure tank. At each independent pipe from air supply to dry- pipe system. Gages to be located in a suitable and convenient place where not subject to freezing. A controlling cock with square head to be located on each gage connection; also a plugged tee or pet cock between each gage and cock. The gages are required so that the water or air pressure can be readily noted at any time, thus giving a means of discovering closed valves or clogged pipes. The plugged tee or pet cock is installed so as to allow for putting on another gage for purposes of comparison and to allow drawing the pressure off the permanent gage to see that the needle comes back to zero. Drip valves and pressure gages properly arranged are of great value to inspectors in making tests on water supplies, and without them it is frequently impossible to determine accurately the condition of the supply. The exact location of the gage is of great importance for if it is located on or close to the drip pipe, the suction caused by the flowage of water past the gage connection is liable to make the reading much too low. Care should be taken therefore to locate the gage on the main riser and where possible at least a foot above the drain pipe. The method of making the test will be described in the chapter on maintenance. 120 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Protection Against Freezing. In unheated basements or other places where pipes cannot be buried below frost line, they should be thoroughly protected against freezing in some other way. Pipes running above ground from one building to another can often be boxed with a steam pipe inside of the boxing. This is a satisfactory arrangement provided the boxing is tight and that adequate steam pressure is constantly Loose trap door for inspection of pipe an4 filling leavy earth (no gravel) METHOD OF PROTECTING SPRINKLER PIPE IN UNHEATED BASEMENT BY BRICK PIT FILLED WITH EARTH. kept up in cold weather. Where this is not practical, a triple frost-proof boxing with air spaces, such as is called for in the rules for protecting discharge pipes from gravity tanks, can be installed. (See rules for Gravity Tanks.) A riser coming up through an unheated basement can be protected by enclosing it in a brick, concrete or LAYOUT OF EQUIPMENTS 121 wooden well extending from below frost line to the ceiling of the basement. The top can be left open so that warm air will circulate or steam pipes can be installed inside. Another method is to put in triple boxing, as mentioned above, running it below frost line. In some cases it can be surrounded by sufficient earth to make it safe. A thickness of three feet on all sides extending up to the under side of the floor should, in most cases, be enough. In a partially heated basement less protection may be necessary but it is desirable to be on the safe side. Water Supplies Section I The water supplies commonly used are: 1. Waterworks. 2. Gravity tanks or reservoirs. 3. Pressure tanks. 4. Steam pumps. 5. Rotary pumps. 6. Centrifugal pumps. In addition to the above, steamer connections are occa- sionally installed although they can seldom be con- sidered as an additional supply. In England the hydraulic injector is frequently used although its use is apparently limited to that country. The principle on which it operates is similar to that of any injector; namely, heavy pressure with small volume is used to raise the pressure in a supply of compara- tively low pressure and large volume. The high-pressure source is the hydraulic mains which are quite common in the larger cities of England. They were installed for the transmission of power before the advent of electricity and were used to operate elevators and similar devices. The mains are small in size but carry water under a pressure of from 600 to 700 pounds per square 122 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION inch. A small jet of water under this pressure is used to induce a higher pressure in a connection from the regular waterworks supply, which is usually under as low a pressure as 20 to 30 pounds. The exact pressure can be accurately regulated and is controlled by an automatic attachment. For standard protection two independent water supplies are necessary so that if anything happens to one supply there will be another one to fall back upon. In the case of town water, there is a chance it will be shut off on account of breaks in the mains, for making new connections for laying new mains, for cleaning reservoirs, etc. In the case of tanks they have to be occasionally drained for painting, cleaning and repairs. Pumps are particularly liable to be out of commission on account of repairs. Another reason for the double supply is that it gives additional water in case of a large fire. Many water- works systems are of insufficient capacity to give more than a few hundred gallons of water per minute without causing an undesirable drop in pressure. Most gravity tanks are not large enough or of sufficient elevation to give good hose streams for any length of time. In either of these cases a good pump would be a very desir- able secondary supply as it would furnish a large supply of water under a heavy pressure in case the primary supply became overtaxed. The rules require that one of the supplies be automatic and that one be capable of furnishing water under heavy pressure. One or more of the supplies should be capable of giving a pressure of at least 25 pounds on the highest sprinklers. The value of a supply is not to be judged, however, entirely by the static pressure. There should be sufficient capacity so that under a moderate flow there will not be an excessive drop in pressure. An excessive drop in pressure is difficult to define but in a LAYOUT OF EQUIPMENTS 123 general way it might be said that it should not exceed 25 per cent with a 2-inch drip pipe wide open. Waterworks Systems. In large cities, where there is a water works supply of heavy pressure and where the mains are of large size, and are well gridironed, a connection from the public mains with no secondary supply may generally be considered satisfactory for good sprinkler protection. In addition to the above, the water system should be under good management so that the chance of shutting off any particular section for repairs will be small. Where a connection can be made from two different street mains, so arranged with valves at the intersection of streets that it would not be necessary to shut off both streets for repairs, even better protection can be secured. While this cannot be con- sidered the equivalent of two independent supplies it is certainly much better than one. Such an arrangement is frequently better than two supplies as found in some country risks which have to depend upon the limited supply furnished by tanks and pumps. Connections from street mains to sprinkler risers should be at least as large as the risers they supply. Such a connection is usually cast iron while the riser is wrought iron. It is more liable to become clogged with sediment than is the riser and in the course of years this and corrosion may have considerable effect upon its capacity. For this reason it is desirable to use pipe of at least 6-inch diameter, although if the build- ing is so small as to require not over a 4-inch riser and the distance to the street main is short, a 4-inch pipe may be satisfactory. In order to constitute a standard water supply, a waterworks system should give at least 25 pounds pressure, at all times, on the highest line of sprinklers. The street main should be at least 6 inches in diameter and preferably fed from both directions. Street mains 124 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION fed one way, or in other words running to a dead end, are unc'esirable both from the fact that the supply of water is not as good and because trouble from water hammer is much more likely to occur. Water hammer is due to the sudden stopping of the flowage in a pipe and the larger the flow in proportion to the size of the pipe the worse is the effect of the hammer. Hydraulic elevators and the filling of locomotives cause a heavy flow for a short time and are particularly liable to cause water hammer in the mains from which they are supplied. When such connections are made with street mains running to a dead end there- is almost sure to be trouble. Water hammer may affect a sprinkler system by operating alarm valves or dry valves and occasionally by actually breaking pipes or sprinkler heads. Modern sprinklers are seldom affected by water hammer, but it is not uncommon to have old types of heads set leaking from this cause. There is no very effectual remedy for this trouble except possibly by extending the street main so as to do away with the dead end. In the case of a railroad filling pipe the trouble can often be obviated, or at least lessened, by putting in a slow-moving valve so that the water cannot be shut off too quickly. Relief valves connected to the system are also of some value although the impulse is often so quick that the valve does not have time to operate. While street mains smaller than 6-inch diameter can- not be considered as affording a standard water supply, yet where the plant does not require a larger riser than 4 inches and where the main is fed both ways or where the distance to a larger main is short, such a supply may give very fair protection. Tests should be made to determine the actual efficiency of any such supply. Meters. The rules state that no meters or pressure- regulating valves should be installed on sprinkler con- LAYOUT OF EQUIPMENTS 125 nections without special consent. Pressure regulators are seldom necessary but it is not uncommon for a water department to insist on meters. There is a grow- ing tendency on the part of water departments to call for meters and while they are undesirable from a fire protection standpoint, their importance from a water- works point of view should not be overlooked. The demand for their introduction has been due almost entirely to the misuse of water from sprinkler connec- tions. If all domestic service connections were metered and kept separate from fire service connections there should be but little need of meters on the latter. There are, however, cases where, on account of the size of the yard system, there is liable to be considerable leakage from underground joints and occasional drawing of water from hydrants. Under these circumstances it is not unreasonable to ask for meters on the fire service connection. Where, however, there is no yard piping, the separation of the domestic service pipe and the installation of an alarm valve on the sprinkler connec- tion would seem to be ample safeguard to prevent the misuse of water from the sprinkler connection. In some cases, where additional protection was de- sired, small meters have been installed in the J-inch pipe between the alarm valve and the alarm connections in order to give an indication of the amount of water that passes through the system. Where a meter must be used, one of the detector type is desirable from a fire protection standpoint. Such a meter consists of a weighted check valve around which there is a small by-pass containing an ordinary meter. The weighted check valve is placed in the sprinkler con- nection and is of the same diameter as the pipe. For the 6-inch size the by-pass is about 3 inches in diameter. All small flows are taken care of by the by-pass and are measured on the ordinary meter. When more water 126 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION HERSEY DETECTOR METER. 1IW 200 300 400 5MI 1WO ."jOli if.00 1700 1800 19(10 2tipu= lattonS fjeretn nameb and of Dollars Premium Does insure '. for the term of from the day of. 19 . . t . , at noon, VHIp to the day of 19 , at noon, standard time at the place where the property herein described is located, against all direct loss or damage by sprinkler leakage, except as herein- after provided, to an amount not exceeding Dollars, SPRINKLER LEAKAGE 317 to the following described property while located and contained as de- scribed herein, and not elsewhere, to wit Subject to the following stipulations and conditions: Wherever in this policy the word " insured " occurs, it shall be held to include the legal representatives of the insured; wherever the word " loss " occurs, -it shall be deemed the equivalent of " loss or damage; " wherever the term " sprinkler leakage " occurs, it shall be held to mean leakage, discharge or precipitation of water from the automatic sprinkler system, or tanks supplying it (including accident caused by freezing), in or on the buildings now erected and described herein, whether the accident occurs in the portion occupied by the insured or not. This company shall not be liable for loss by fire, however caused; nor for loss resulting from the leakage of water, if such leakage is caused directly or indirectly by fire; nor for loss due to stoppage or interruption of any work or plant unless liability for such loss is specifically assumed herein; nor for loss caused by lightning (whether fire ensues or not), cyclone, tornado, wind-storm, earthquake, ex- plosion, or blasting; nor for loss caused directly or indirectly by invasion, insurrection, riot, civil war or commotion, or military, or usurped power, or by order of any civil authority; nor for loss by theft; nor for loss caused directly or indirectly by the neglect of the insured to use all reasonable means at the time of an accident to save and preserve the property; nor for loss caused directly or indi- rectly by the fall or collapse of any building or any part thereof, unless such fall or collapse is caused by the accidental leakage of water from the automatic sprinkler system, or the tanks supplying it. This company shall not be liable for loss to accounts, bills, cur- rency, deeds, evidences of debt, money, notes or securities; nor to an amount exceeding ten per cent of this policy for loss to patterns, models, plans and lasts, unless liability is specifically assumed thereon for a stated amount under a separate item mentioning no other kinds of property. This company shall not be liable beyond the actual cash value of the property at the time any loss occurs, and the loss shall be ascer- tained or estimated according to such actual cash value, with proper 318 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION deduction for depreciation however caused; and shall in no event exceed what it would then cost the insured to repair or replace the same with material of like kind and quality; said ascertainment or estimate shall be made by the insured and this company, or, if they differ, then by appraisers, as -hereinafter provided; and, the amount of loss having be'en thus determined, the sum for which this company is liable pursuant to this policy shall be payable sixty days after due notice, ascertainment, estimate (including an award by apprais- ers when appraisal has been required), and satisfactory proof of the loss have been received by this company in accordance with the terms of this policy. It shall be optional, however, with this com- pany to take all, or any part, of the articles at such ascertained or appraised value, and also to repair, rebuild or replace the property lost or damaged with other of like kind and quality within a reason- able time on giving notice, within thirty days after the receipt of the proof herein required, of its intention so to do; but there can be no abandonment to this company of the property described. Ordinary minor repairs and alterations usual and necessary to the care and maintenance of the automatic sprinkler system, building or premises are allowed, but this company shall not be liable for any loss resulting from unusual repairs or extensions to or alterations in the automatic sprinkler system, the buildings, or the premises, unless otherwise provided by agreement endorsed hereon or added hereto. This policy shall be void if the property described herein is sold , GRAL--2 2-About 1886. Very similar to No. 1 but with arms of frame at a slight angle. Both crude and easily stuck. Distribution faulty, A considerable number were installed mostly on the Gray dry system. See page 49. Obsolete. Present rating: Very unreliable. APPENDIX I 383 3-1899. F. Gray and Charles D. Cox of Chicago patented an upright valve sprinkler. Valve held in place by four-piece strut. Large perforated deflector. Never used so far as known. 4-1904. Upright valve sprinkler. Perforated de- flector on outside of frame. Valve disc held in place by toggle-joint levers and link. Never used so far as known. Note: There were several other types of Gray sprinklers varying but little from one another. Also one having a soldered lever for a releasing device. GREW English Sprinkler. 1900. Submitted to Underwriters' Laboratories, Chicago, in 1900. Found to be inoperative in test. All features criticized. A large cylindrical sprinkler. Never used in this country so far as known. GRINNELL Patented by Frederick Grinnell, Providence, R. I. Installed by Providence Steam & Gas Pipe Co. up to 1893, after which time by the General Fire Extinguisher Co. 1-1881. Pendent valve sprinkler. Valve and de- flector all one piece. Valve disc seated on raised ring | inch wide in a thin metal diaphragm. Diameter of outlet ^ inch. Stiff plate under diaphragm. Valve held in place by yoke and lever, the yoke being hooked under a notch in the frame and the lever being hooked under a similar notch on the other side. Lever soldered to frame with no reinforcing key. Later the end of the lever was bent over the frame to give greater strength. Deflector had 20 teeth or lobes. A-i882. Same as No. 1, except a key was used to strengthen solder joint. Deflector had 24 teeth. 384 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION In 1883 orifice was enlarged to \ inch. Valve disc of lead. Seat ring f inch wide. 6-1884. Same as A, except seat ring was A mc h wide. Valve disc of tin. C-i886. Same as B, except seat ring was ^ inch wide. In December, 1886, upright heads of this type with perforations in the deflector were first made. (Section) GRINNELL LJSRINNELL-A-B-C-D . UPRIGHT. D-i888. Similar to C, except babbitt metal was used for the valve disc and seat ring was -^ inch wide. Re- cess in deflector for the valve disc was f inch in diameter while in the older types it was | inch. Upright heads of this type were also made, there being holes in the deflector. About 1895 the issue C type was found to be defective as the narrow seat ring caused indentation of the valve disc and sticking of the valve. About ten years later the A and B types were rated as unreliable on account of sticking at the seat and sticking of the levers. A few years later the issue D type was quite generally con- demned for the same reason, so that today all these heads having given good service for twenty years or more are considered defective. Nearly all have now been re- placed. A few have opened prematurely on account of weakness of solder joint. See page 39. APPENDIX I 385 Present rating of all Grinnell metal disc sprinklers: Unreliable. Glass Disc, 1890. Upright valve sprinkler. Heavy diaphragm with J-inch orifice. Valve of glass and semi- spherical in shape. Releasing device in the form of a three-piece strut. In the earliest heads the strut was narrow and with parallel sides. Later it was widened and made bulging in the middle. Key slightly changed in 1893. (Section) i&L CRINNELL GLASS Disc. IMPROVED. In 1897 the material of the "hook" in the strut was changed from German silver to bronze and it was made thicker. This was done on account of some breaking and cracking at this point. Some trouble was also caused by cracking of the glass disc. After 1896 annealed glass (with a bubble) was used which obviated all trouble. After 1894 metal discs were used in high test heads. Field experience satisfac- tory except in some of the earlier heads. See page 64. Rating: Generally reliable. Improved, 1903. Similar to previous type but with heavier deflector containing fewer teeth. Approved by the Underwriters' Laboratories in 1903. Rating: Standard. Picker Trunk, 1903. Provided with longer base casting and smooth deflector for use in picker trunks and conveyors. Rating: Standard. 386 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Glass Cover, 1912. Releasing device protected by a glass cover fitting into a groove filled with non-drying compound, in the body of the casting. For use in cor- rosive locations. See page 79. Rating: Standard. GRINNELL Canadian General Fire Extinguisher Co., 1200 Dundas St., Toronto, Ontario. Improved, 1903. A duplicate of the sprinkler made by the American Company with letters CAN. on lower part of frame. Approved by Underwriters' Labora- tories. Rating: Standard. GUNN John Gunn, Webster, Mass. 1885. Pendent valve sprinkler. Drop deflector type. Valve held in place by hinged levers fastened to projection on casting by a fusible link. Deep cup-shaped deflector. Used to a limited extent locally. Obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. HARKNESS Patented by Wm. Harkness, New York. Installed "by Harkness Fire Extinguisher Co., New fy)rk. Some systems installed with non-freezing solution nor- mally in the pipes. A-i885. Pendent valve sprinkler of drop deflector type. Deflector had teeth on the edge and soft metal valve disc in the middle. Valve held in place by cross- APPENDIX I 387 shaped strut, the two horizontal arms being soldered to the frame. A small spring tended to throw out the vertical members-, when solder fused. Threaded for f-inch fitting. Never used so far as known. HARKNESS--2 HARKNESS--3 1-1887. Similar to above but strut held in place by horizontal lever soldered to a projection on the frame. Threaded for f-inch fitting. See page 51. Present rating: Unreliable. 2-1889. "L" joint. Smaller head than No. 1 threaded for J-inch fitting. Valve covered a hole in cir- cular diaphragm. Valve stem held by bent horizontal lever and small ball. Lever soldered to projection on frame by L-shaped joint. Large fixed deflector with teeth on the edge. Present rating: Unreliable. 3-1890. Same as No. 2 but with rectangular-shaped solder joint. Present rating: Unreliable. 4-1894. Same as No. 2 with V-- shaped joint. Present rating: Unreliable. Field experience of all types fairly satisfactory. Now practically ob- solete. HARKNESS-4 388 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION HARRIS Patented by A. S. Harris, Chelsea, Mass. 1-1881. Water-joint type. Cap soldered over per- forated distributor. Never used so far as known. 2-1882. Pendent valve sprinkler. Hollow valve stem extended to bottom of casting and was soldered to two small strips of metal projecting downward. Water distributed through perforations protected by a loose cap. Never used so far as known. See page 31. 3-1883. ' Pendent valve sprinkler with toothed de- flector. Valve stem extended through hollow tube and was held by a thimble soldered into end of tube. Direct strain on solder joint. See page 31. Some of these heads were installed by the Walworth Manufacturing Co. previous to the manufacture of the Walworth head. Obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. . HARRIS^-.. >'!,. HARRJS.QA ...... ; HARRISON Stuart Harrison, England. 1864. Pendent valve sprinkler with rose distributor. Soft rubber cup-shaped valve held in place by stem APPENDIX I 389 bearing against a solder joint. Solder insulated from main casting by a projection of hard wood. Never used so far as known but a remarkably good sprinkler for that date. See page 14. HEATH Ozro C. Heath, Providence, R. I. 1-1881. Pendent, water-joint type with revolving distributor. Cap fastened to top of head by means of fusible pins. 2-1882. Pendent valve sprinkler with fixed toothed deflector. Valve held in place by stem threaded to a nut, the latter being soldered to a hole in the frame. 3-1882. Pendent valve sprinkler with similar dis- tributor. Cap was screwed onto a collar, the collar being attached to the head by low-fusing solder. This enabled the cap to be unscrewed from the collar in order to examine the interior of the head. None of these heads were ever used so far as known. HIBBARD Geo. E. Hibbard, Chicago, III. Manufactured by Geo. E. Hibbard, Chicago; Geo. E. Hibbard & Co., Chicago; American Fire Extin- guisher Co., Chicago; National Fire Extinguisher Co., Kansas City; Niagara Fire Extinguisher Co., Akron, Ohio. Installed by Mailers, Allen and Frazier, Chicago; Francis Bros, and Jellett, Philadelphia; Macauley Bros., Grand Rapids, Mich.; W. H. Littlefield, San Fran- cisco; Bowles and Warwick, Richmond, Va.; and W. T. Montgomery, Boston. 1-1893. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve held in place by two hooked levers bearing on edge of valve cap and extending around edge of deflector to top of sprink- 390 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION ler. Levers held together by a two-piece fusible link either straight or" corrugated. Fixed conical-shaped de- flector. First installed in vicinity of Cincinnati but these have probably all been replaced. See page 49. Obsolete. Rating : Unreliable. 2-1894. Upright valve sprinkler. Hollow valve button held in place by short levers, almost on dead center, and two-piece straight link. Hexagonal wrench head. Lower lever had an arched lower bearing. Two- piece fusible link. Seriously affected by corrosion. HlBBARD 1. (Section.) HlBBARD 2. Structurally weak. Not approved, but a good many in use. Field experience only fair. Age limit about reached. Tests should be made to determine reliability. Out of 97 recently tested by the Underwrite' Labora- tories 29 per cent failed, partly due to levers being on dead center. See page 49. Rating : Uncertain. 3-1897. Same as No. 2 except for longer levers, square wrench head, and heavier frame. Seriously APPENDIX I 391 affected by corrosion and loading. Paper discs in some samples. Caps and discs liable to adhere to seats. Field experience fairly satisfactory. Tests should be made on heads from each equipment to determine relia- bility. Out of 193 recently tested by the Underwriters' Lab- oratories 55 per cent failed, partly due to levers on dead center. Rating : Unreliable. HlBBARD 3. HlBBARD 3A. 3A-i8p8. Same as No. 3 except for pivoted lower bearing on lower lever and temperature and date marks usually found on fusible link. Same defects as in No. 3. Soft white metal gasket under valve. This is liable to stick to seat and cut down the discharge about 20 per cent. Out of 599 recently tested by the Underwriters' Lab- oratories 32 per cent failed from adhesion at seat, etc. Rating: Unreliable. 4-1901. Same as No. 3 A except for cross piece in fusible link and straight arm levers. Manufactured by 392 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Niagara Fire Extinguisher Co. only and used mostly in the West. Especially subject to corrosion. Out of 294 recently tested by the Underwriters' Lab- oratories 34 per cent failed. Rating: Unreliable. HlBBARD 4. 5-1909. Similar to Niagara-Hibbard B except that "Nia-Hib " on wrench head was changed to "Hibbard." Manufactured by Geo. E. Hibbard & Co., Chicago. Not approved. Rating: Uncertain. 1-1911. Upright valve sprinkler, very similar to Ni- agara Hibbard B except for fins on lower ends of arms of casting to give means for distinguishing the head. Manufactured by Geo. E. Hibbard & Co., Chicago. Approved by Under- writers' Laboratories, April, 1911. Withdrawn Oct., 1912. Manufacture discontinued. Used principally in Middle West. Rating: Satisfactory. HIBBARD--H & I APPENDIX I 393 HILL John Hill, Columbus, Ga. Manufactured by John Hill and by Hill Automatic Sprinkler Co. of Columbus, Ga. Later by Neracher & Hill Sprinkler Co., Warren, Ohio, and General Fire Extinguisher Co. 1890. Pendent valve sprinkler. Oscillating deflec- tor. Has restricted discharge and is some- what subject to leakage owing to spread- ing of solder joint. Not standard. Field experience generally satisfactory. Has now about reached its age limit and recent tests show frequent failures. Out of 184 heads of the light pattern re- cently tested 20 per cent failed. See page 48. Present rating : Unreliable. Note: This head was first patented in 1885 and was sljghtly modified in patents taken out in 1887, 1890 and 1892. Several types were made varying but slightly from one another. Mr. Hill combined with William Neracher in 1890 and the business was moved from Atlanta, Ga., to Warren, Ohio. A few Hill sprink- lers were made at the latter plant. The company sold out to the General Fire Extinguisher Co. in 1892. HOFFMAN Hoffman Sprinkler Co., Ltd., Manchester, England. Upright valve sprinkler with diaphragm. Very similar to Grinnell glass disc, except that jet is used instead of glass for the valve disc. Approved and used exten- sively in England. Agencies in Belgium, HOFFMAN, France, Germany, Norway and India. 394 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION HOLLAND Made by the Holland Automatic Sprinkler Company of New York. 1914. Upright valve sprinkler with rectangular strut composed, of several levers soldered to- gether. Criticized by the Underwriters' Labora- tories in November, 1914, as follows: 1. Design of parts. 2. Reliability of operating. 3. Deterioration from corrosion and loading. 4. Sensitiveness. 5. Distribution. 6. Possibility of premature opening. 7. Inability to withstand or- dinary abuse. 8. Lack of uniformity in manufac- ture. 9. Construction details. Never used so far as known. HOLLAND. HORACK Chas. L. Horack, Brooklyn, N. Y. Mr. Horack took out several patents between 1882 and 1885 for sprinklers of various types. None ever used so far as known. HOXIE Edmund Hoxie, Everett, Mass. 1891. Pendent valve sprinkler, the valve being of glass and held in place by two large levers soldered together at two points. Deflector was a flat plate supported about half an inch in front of orifice by five metal bars. Never used so far as known. IDEAL Made by Ideal Automatic Fire Extinguisher Co., Phila- delphia, Pa. 1912. Upright valve sprinkler with diaphragm. Metal disc closed outlet in diaphragm and was held in place by strut. Experimental sample submitted to Underwriters' Laboratories for approval. Features criticized: APPENDIX I 395 1. Halt or hesitation in normal operation. 2. Deterioration resulting from corrosion or loading. 3. Possibility of premature operation under sustained service pressures. 4. In- ability to withstand ordinary abuse. 5. Lack of uniformity in manufacturing. 6. Materials em- ployed. 7. Construction details. Never used so far as known. Feb., 1913. Experimental sample simi- lar to No. 1, but with different deflector and strut. Features criticized all but 1 and 4 of the above. Also normal opera- _____ tion of hard and extra hard degree rating I DE AL A sprinklers. A-IQI4. Similar to previous type but with key on releasing device extending around edges of strut. Not used to any extent so far as known. INDEPENDENT Independent Sprinkler Co., Philadelphia. Independent Mtna Sprinkler Co., 2323 No. Eleventh St., Philadelphia. A-igi6. Upright valve sprinkler of the lever and link type. A phosphor bronze cap with copper washer closes the orifice and is held in place by two bronze levers. The levers are held by a fusible link consisting of three bronze plates, the two outer ones having a semi- spherical depression and the in- ner one having a round hole for the reception of a ball key ^V of an inch in diameter. Approved by the Underwriters' Labora- tories, 1916, and by the Associ- ated Factory Mutual Fire In- surance Companies. Rating: Standard. INDEPENDENT SPRINKLER. 396 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION INTERNATIONAL Manufactured and installed by the International Sprink- ler Co. of Philadelphia. Also installed by several licensees in this country and by the Sprinkler Com- pany, Ltd., abroad. Head office of latter com- pany in London. Branch offices in Amsterdam, Brussels, Milan, Calcutta, Shanghai, Mexico, South Africa, North China, Yokohama and other places. The International Sprinkler Co. was founded in 1899, succeeding the Universal Sprinkler Co. and at first in- stalled the Universal Sprinkler. See page 52. 1-1900. Patented by J. C. Scott. Upright valve sprinkler similar to the Universal No. 2. Link \ inch wide. Cast metal valve disc. Field experience fairly satisfactory. JNTERNATIONAL-1 INTERNATIONAL-B Criticized by the Underwriters' Laboratories in 1902: (1) Releasing device, (2) cap, (3) solder, (4) construction details. Not approved. Rating : Uncertain. A-IQO2. Patented by Powell Evans. Similar to No. 1 except link was made of bronze instead of brass and projections were placed on frame where link would touch it. Approved, 1902, by Underwriters' Laboratories. Some trouble experienced from those made in 1902- 1904, by premature opening due to cold flow of solder in link. A large number were replaced. Present rating: Satisfactory except danger of premature opening. APPENDIX I 397 A-2 1905. Same as A but link made wider (Jf inch). See page 53. Replaced by B in 1900. Rating: Satisfactory. B-igo6. Same as A-2 except slight changes in marking. Rating: Standard. Note: Special deflectors are also made for aisle lines in car barns, one to distribute in two directions to go between cars, and one to distribute in one direction to go along walls. This company was bought out by the " Automatic " Sprinkler Co. of America in 1911. JAHN F. G. John, New York. Made by Standard Equipment Co., New York. 1891. Pendent, solid head sprinkler. There was no valve in this sprinkler but a groove was cut in the solid casting at the point "where a valve would ordinarily be introduced. There was a heavy lever hinged at one end and attached to the piping by means of a fusible link. When the weight dropped, the lever forcibly broke open the head at the groove. Fixed toothed de- flector. Never used so far as known. 1891. Upright valve sprinkler. Porcelain valve cap held in place by four-piece strut, two mem- bers of which extended horizontally. Toothed deflector. Not used to any extent so far as known. Obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. JORDAN Wm. S. Jordan, Worcester. Assigned to Braman, Dow & Co., of Boston. 1885. Pendent valve sprinkler, drop deflector type. A large hollow casting contained interior guide for valve which was held against seat by a series of hinged levers bearing against adjustable spindle. Levers tripped by the melting of a short iJt^J * JORDONj bar of solder under tension. Never used so far as known. 398 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION KANE Patented by John and William Kane of Philadelphia. Installed by Wm. Kane Fire Extinguisher Co.; Univer- sal Automatic Sprinkler Co. and John Kane Fire Extinguisher Co. W. KANE 1-1881. Pendent valve sprinkler.* Valve held in place by a yoke hooked to a projection at one side of the head and soldered to a projection ori the other side. Loose cap covered the lower end when the head was closed. Obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. 1^-1881. Similar to No. 1 except that there was an arm extending from one side of the head. The yoke was hooked at one end as in No. 1, but at the other end it hooked over a lever which passed through the arm and was soldered to a projection at end of the arm. Obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. : 2-1882 Eclipse. Pendent valve sprinkler of globe valve type. Horizontal valve held in place by a compli- cated system of levers. Loose cap over lower end. See page 33. Obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. APPENDIX I 399 3-1888 Bulb Root. Pendent valve sprinkler. Inte- rior valve held in place by two levers. One lever held to projection on casting by two-piece link. Nearly obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. ' W. KANE-4 4-1892 Perfection. Pendent valve sprinkler of drop deflector type. Valve held by levers and link similar to those in No. 3. Out of 28 recently tested by the Underwriters' Labora- tories 7 per cent failed. , Nearly obsolete. Present rating: Doubtful. Note: In 1893 the William Kane Fire Extinguisher Co. sold out to the General Fire Extinguisher Co. and the No. 4 Perfection head was made at the Warren, Ohio, shop of that company for some months. J. KANE Made by Universal Automatic Sprinkler Co. 1-1892 Universal. Pendent valve sprinkler. Similar to Wm. Kane No. 4, but with fixed toothed deflector. Out of 6 recently tested by the Underwriters' Labora- tories 33 per cent failed. Nearly obsolete. Present rating: Doubtful. .400 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION 2-1892 Universal. Frame similar to No. 1. Drop deflector similar, to Wm. Kane No. 4. J.KANE-1 J. KANE--2 Out of 139 recently tested by the Underwriters' Lab- oratories 16 per cent failed from adhesion at seat, etc. Present rating: Doubtful. 2^-1892. Similar to No. 2 with fixed toothed deflec- tor. Present rating: Doubtful. 3-1900. Made by Niagara Sprinkler Co. and later by John Kane Automatic Fire Extinguisher Co. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve cap held in place by toggle-joint levers and link. Liable to leakage. Field experience otherwise fairly satisfactory. Present rating: Uncertain, 4-1902. Upright valve sprinkler. Similar to No. 3 but with levers farther apart. Liable to leakage. Field experience otherwise fairly satisfactory. APPENDIX I 401 Out of 74 recently tested by the Underwriters' Labora- tories 5 per cent failed. Present rating: Uncertain. JL.KANE-4. J.KANE--4; 4^-1902. Similar to No. 4 but with longer levers. Present rating: Uncertain. Note: The J. Kane Automatic Fire Extinguisher Co. sold out to the International Sprinkler Co. in June, 1902, and the latter company manufactured a few J. Kane No. 4 heads until Nov., 1902. KERSTETER Chas. W. Kersteter, Chicago, III. A-i888. Single arm type. Valve sprinkler with valve held by a horizontal lever hooked at one end, the other end being hooked to a vertical lever soldered at the upper end to the frame. Deflector supported by a single arm. But few installed. Practically obsolete. .Present rating: Unreliable. 1-1889. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve held in place by two levers hooked at lower end to frame and held together at upper end by a fusible link spanning the head. Perforated toothed deflector. See page 55. Practically obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. 2-1893. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve held in place by strut. Crude in workmanship and lacking in sensitiveness. Present rating: Unreliable. 402 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION 3-1898. Manufactured by Niagara Fire Extinguisher Co., Akron, Ohio. Upright valve sprinkler similar to No. 2, but somewhat larger. Subject to crawling and leaking. About 30,000 made. Many replaced by manu- facturers. Nearly obsolete. Not made after 1899. Present rating: Unreliable. k^ _ JCERSTETER-4 LJ^RSTiTER--2 IKERSTETER-3 J 4-1897. Upright valve sprinkler, patented by E. M. Cook of Indianapolis. Assigned to Charles W. Kerste- ter. Valve held by three-piece strut. Never used so far as known. 5-1898. Similar to No. 3 but with four-piece strut. LACONIA See Vogel. LANGFORD Wm. S. Langford, Baltimore, Md. 1898. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve cap held by strut. Never used so far as known. LAPHAM Valentine Lapham, Chicago. Made by Lapham Auto- matic Fire Extinguisher Co., St. Louis, Mo. Later types by Johnson-Rowe-Paige Co., Omaha, Neb.; McCrum-Howell Co., Chicago; and Ohio Automatic Sprinkler Co., Youngstown, Ohio. APPENDIX I 403 1-1890. Upright valve sprinkler with valve cap held in place by three-piece strut of angular shape. Fixed perforated deflector. Rating : Unreliable. 2-1894. Upright valve sprinkler. Rating: Unreliable. 3-1897. Modification of No. 2. Valve cap extended over edge of valve seat with spring underneath. Rating : Unreliable. 4-1902. Upright valve sprinkler. Toggle-joint lev- ers. Experimental sample submitted to Underwriters' Laboratories. Criticized as follows: 1. Releasing device. 2. Effects of corrosion and loading. 3. Solder in high degree pattern. 4. Marking. 5. Distribution. 6. Structural weakness. Never on the market so far as known. Rating : Unreliable. A-I9IO. Upright valve sprinkler similar to No. 4 but with toothed deflector, flatter frame and heavier link. Made by Johnson-Rowe-Paige Co. Submitted to the Underwriters' Laboratories and criticized as follows : 1. Defects in soldering. 2. High and variable leakage point. 3. Inaccuracy in construction. 4. Distribution. 5. Marking. 6. Coloring. A few of these heads were used in the Middle West. Out of 33 recently tested 3 per cent failed. Rating: Questionable. B-I9H. Slight modification of A, but much the same in appearance. Approved by the Underwriters' Labo- LAPHAM--B ratories. Made by Ohio Automatic Sprinkler Co. Rating: Standard. 404 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION LYNDE Jas. H. Lynde, -Manchester, England. 1-1887. Pendent valve sprinkler with interior toothed deflector which dropped when head opened. Never used in this country so far as known. 2-1893. Pendent valve sprinkler similar to No. 1. Valve held in place by levers attached to a projection in frame by a two-piece rivet-shaped link. Never used in this country so far as known. MACDANIEL Valve sprinkler. Large deflector attached to valve disc. Held by strut with spring to throw it off center. Never used so far as known. MACKEY John C. Mackey, Syracuse, N. Y. Installed by Manu- facturers Automatic Sprinkler Co. 1-1883. Pendent valve sprinkler. Conical shaped valve disc held in place by short strut bearing against brass wire levers. Levers held by two-piece curved link. Fixed deflector. Threaded for f-inch fitting. See page 36. Now obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable, 2-1885. Pendent valve sprinkler. Interior valve at top of hollow casting. Stem T \-inch diameter passed APPENDIX I 405 through T Vinch hole in casting and was held by lever bar hooked at one end and soldered at other end. Fixed deflector. Threaded for f-inch fitting. Water way ob- structed. See page 56. Now obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. 3-1887. Similar to No. 1 but shorter and with valve stem held by two-piece lever, hooked at one end and held at other end by U-shaped piece of brass soldered around a projection which extended through a slot in lever. Now obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. 4-1888. Patented by M. C. Pierce in 1891. As- signed to Manufacturers Automatic Sprinkler Co. Interior valve sprinkler somewhat similar to No. 3 but longer and with toothed deflector. Valve of copper composition or white metal. Deflector f inch from frame. See page 56. Practically obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. Note: There was also an upright sprinkler made by Baker, Smith & Co., New York, about 1883, while Mr. Mackey was with them, that greatly resembled the Mackey head. MANUFACTURERS-1 MANUFACTURERS-.^ MANUFACTURERS-^ MANUFACTURERS Made by Manufacturers Automatic Sprinkler Co., Syra- cuse, N. Y. These succeeded the Mackey heads. 406 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Some patents were in the name of C. W. Silver. This company was succeeded by the "Automatic " Sprinkler Co. of America in 1911. 1-1892. Pendent valve sprinkler. Very similar to Mackey No. 4, except that deflector was further from frame (| inch). Valve of metal, agate or glass. Head was marked "Non Corrosive." Made for f-inch fitting. See page 56. Out of 14 recently tested 64 per cent failed. Nearly obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. 2-1895. Pendent valve sprinkler. Very similar to No. 1 but with an elongated boss at end of threaded portion. Threaded portion f inch in diameter. Out of 30 recently tested 23 per cent failed. Nearly obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. 3-1896. Pendent valve sprinkler. Similar to No. 2 but longer and with a smaller deflector. Elongated boss as in No. 2. Out of 12 recently tested 67 per cent failed. Practically obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. 4-1893. Long lever type. Upright valve sprinkler of toggle-joint type. Valve of porcelain held in place by two long levers. A double T-shaped link fitted into slots at end of levers. See page 37. Later issues had spiral spring under porcelain valve. See page 57. Field experience not satisfactory.. Extremely subject to failure by corrosion and sticking of link* But few now in use. The Underwriters' Laboratories have tested- 25 heads of this type which averaged 14 years in service and 40 per cent failed. Rating : Unreliable. APPENDIX I 407 A-i8g5. Upright valve sprinkler. Similar to No. 4 but with shorter levers. Spring under valve. The link [ *' 'MANUFACTURERa 4 OR LONG LEVER. MANUFACTURERS-A as in No. 4 was composed of a T-shaped piece with another piece of similar shape wrapped horizontally around the inner portion. This form of link has been found defective under continued strain and especially if subject to corrosion. Criticized by Underwriters' Laboratories in 1902 as follows: 1. Releasirg device. 2. Solder in high degree patterns. 3. Construction details. Tests by the Underwriters' Laboratories on 555 samples showed 27 per cent failures. Present rating: Unreliable. 6-1903. Upright valve sprinkler. Similar to A but with small boss projecting above center of deflector. Link of similar shape but with the outer part wrapped over the top of the inner portion. Valve cap rather close to frame so that corrosion at that point might cause trouble. This head has had a fairly satisfactory field experience, but should be carefully watched where sub- ject to any corrosion or loading. Occasional tests de- sirable. 408 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Out of 225 recently tested by the Underwriters' Lab- oratories 6 per cent failed. Present rating: Fairly reliable. MANUFACTURERS--!* MANUFACTURERS-^ -1907. Upright valve sprinkler. Similar to B but with bosses at end of lower lever so that link cannot be slipped off. Approved by Underwriters' Laboratories, 1907. Rating: Standard. Underwriters' Laboratories Caution, 1909. "Last re-examination Feb. 1909 indicates defects in construction not present in samples formerly tested and which render the latest output of these devices unduly susceptible to the influences of corrosion." These defects in construction were afterwards remedied and the head was approved unconditionally. MARTIN H. W. Martin, Ilion, N. Y. 1905. Upright valve Sprinkler. Valve of glass held by strut. Toothed deflector somewhat resembling the Grinnell sprinkler. Several variations. Never used so far as known. APPENDIX I 409 MASCOT Wm. Shaffer. 1887. Interior valve sprinkler of elbow type. Valve held in place by pivoted levers. Operated by expansion of wax in closed re- ceptacle. Levers were pushed off center by small piston actuated by expanding wax. Used but little if any. See page 43. Obsolete. Rating: Very unreliable. *m- JL&SGQX MAYALL W. Mayall & T. Thomasson, Mossley, England. 1891. Valve sprinkler. Valve and deflector in one piece. Valve held by L-shaped lever soldered at lower end to frame. Never used in this country so far as known. Installed in one mill in England but never officially approved there. JMAWJL McLAUTHLBL McLAUTHLIN Geo. F. McLauthlin, Boston, Mass. 1894. Valve sprinkler. Upright and pendent types. Valve held in place by strut composed of levers. A 410 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION heavy iron case surrounded the sprinkler, which in the upright type was in two pieces. This case was held in place by low-fusing solder. A small chain was attached to the case and to the valve strut. When heated the iron case was released and in falling pulled the strut levers off center and opened the valve. Never used so far as known. MERCHANT AND EVANS See Evans. MILLER J. A. Miller, Providence, R. I. 1878. Valve sprinkler with rose or perforated dis- tributor. Valve opened against water pressure and was operated by the expanding of brass rods placed under the sprinkler pipes. Never used so far as known. MORRIS Morris Sprinkler Co., Ltd., London, England. Upright valve sprinkler of toggle-joint lever type similar to last type of John Kane. Submitted to Underwriters' Laboratories in 1907 Criticized as follows: 1. Cold flow of solder joint. 2. Premature open- ing. 3. Distribution. 4. Marking. 5. Design of parts. 6. Strength. 7. Workmanship. Never used in this country so far as MORRIS known. Formerly approved in England but approval with- drawn. Levers poorly designed and head often failed. MORRISON Morrison Brass Co., Toronto, Canada. 1. Upright valve sprinkler very similar to the Grinnell glass disc head. APPENDIX I 411 2. Upright valve sprinkler similar to above but valve held in place by duck bill levers similar to those used in the Esty sprinkler. Neither type used to any extent so far as known. MORRISON MORRISON 2. III. Assigned to Nagle NAGLE Augustus F. Nagle, Chicago, Automatic Sprinkler Co. 1-1890. Pendent valve sprinkler. Interior valve opening against the water pressure. Valve stem threaded into a nut which was held in a closed case by NAGIE--1 NAGLE--2 a heavy coiled spring. Spring was released by the fusing of two trip pieces soldered to projections on the outside of the case. When released the spring uncoiled and screwed the valve away from its seat. Deflector was a flat plate with raised perforated edge. See page 44. Present rating: Unreliable. 412 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION 2-1891. Pendent valve sprinkler. Valve held by single lever hooked at one end and secured at other end by a three-piece link. Obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable, NAYLOR James Naylor, Jr., Boston. 1894. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve held in place by glass strut filled with fluid that was supposed to ex- pand when heated and break the glass. Never used so far as known. Another type had a strut composed of two pieces of metal soldered together. Never used so far as known. 1895. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve cap held by two levers set at an angle to the vertical. Held to frame by a fusi- ble member consisting of two thin metal NA ^ft discs soldered together. Light and easily broken. Never used so far as known. NERACHER Wm. Neracher, Cleveland, Ohio. Installed by Neracher Sprinkler Co., Neracher & Hill Sprinkler Co., and later by General Fire Extinguisher Co. A-i882. Pendent valve sprinkler. Valve held in place by lever hinged at one end and held at other end by a short trip lever. Long end of latter lever held by a plate bearing against a small vessel containing paraffine or similar material, fusing at about 120 F. Distribu- tion from four curved rotating arms. Never used so far as known. 1-1884. Pendent valve sprinkler, drop deflector type. Valve held in place by cross-shaped strut with APPENDIX I 413 horizontal arms soldered to frame. Lower part of strut placed at a slight angle with the vertical. Star-shaped deflector. Obsolete. Present rating:- Unreliable. 1^-1886. Pendent valve sprinkler. Similar to No. 1 except releasing device. Strut consisted of triangular- shaped spring with two lower ends soldered to frame. Obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable, NERACHER-.-1 NERACHER-2 2-1887. Pendent valve sprinkler. Similar to No. 1 except releasing device. Strut consisted of one short piece and one long angular piece, the long end of which was held to a projecting arm by a two-piece triangular- shaped link. See page 58. Obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. 2^-1887. Pendent valve sprinkler. Similar to No. 2 except that releasing device consisted of levers extending over lower end of frame and held together by a fusible link. Present rating: Unreliable. 3-1888. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve held in place by four-piece lever. Outer levers of brass wire 414 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION extended to top of sprinkler and were held together by a link similar to that used in No. 2. Out of 48 recently tested 17 per cent failed. Practically obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. 31-1893. Upright valve sprinkler. Similar to No. 3 except that the frame was slightly different in shape and levers were of stamped bronze. Unduly subject to the influence of corrosion. Out of 232 recently tested by the Underwriters' Lab- oratories 3 per cent failed. Rating: Doubtful. m NERACHER--3 [NERACHER-3J . 4-1895. Upright valve sprinkler. Similar to No. 3 but a much shorter head. Outer levers of stamped bronze. Toothed, perforated deflector. Reliability somewhat doubtful, due to age. Out of 52 recently tested by the Underwriters' Labora- tories 10 per cent failed from tight fit between links and parts. Present rating: Doubtful. 5-1902. Upright valve sprinkler. Similar to No. 4 but somewhat shorter. Frame not adjustable. Present rating: Not standard; generally satisfactory. APPENDIX I 415 6-1902. Similar to No. 5 but with toothed deflector. Hollow valve cap. Approved. Rating: Standard. NERACHE&-! J1ERACHER--1 NEW YORK New York Automatic Sprinkler Co. Patented by B. P. Hall of Fanwood, N. J. New York Automatic Sprinkler Co. 1911. Upright valve sprinkler with two-piece curved strut. Reported upon by the Underwriters' Laboratories, July, 1912. Features criti- cized : 1. Deterioration from loading and corrosion. 2. Probability of premature opening. 3. Distri- bution. 4. Lack of uniformity of manufacture. 5. Design. 6. Construction details. Rating: Unreliable. Assigned to NEW YORK. NEW YORK AND NEW HAVEN Made by Foskett & Bishop, New Haven, Conn.; New York & New Haven Automatic Sprinkler Co., New York; John Simmons, New York. 1-1889 (December). Mill type. Patented by V. A. Harder of Brooklyn, N. Y. Interior valve sprinkler of elbow type. Valve spindle held by two hooked levers with ends covered by a two-piece fusible link similar to 416 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION the Walworth link. Large deflector with raised slotted edge. Threaded .for f -inch fitting. Practically obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. JU..&!UL=2L 2-1889 (July)- Riveted lever type. Patented by Daniel C. Stillson of Somerville, Mass. Interior valve sprinkler of elbow type. Similar to No. 1 except that levers were pivoted and deflector was smaller with raised perforated edge. Practically obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. NEWTON Robert W. Newton, Providence, R. I. Installed by the inventor. Patents taken out in 1891-1892 and 1893 for sprinkler heads that were never put on the market so far as known. 1894. Upright valve sprinkler. Metal valve disc held in place by strut consisting of five pieces at an angle, and three hori- zontal. The horizontal pieces were soldered to a flat surface. Deflector had a raised NFWTON perforated edge. This head was used to APPENDIX I 417 a considerable extent in Rhode Island and Eastern Mas- sachusetts. After about ten years use this sprinkler gave trouble from sticking, especially when corroded. Now considered defective. Practically all have been replaced. Used to some extent in England. Practically obsolete. Present rating: Very unreliable. Note: The sprinkler was slightly modified in patents taken out in 1902-1903 and 1905, the latter being assigned to the General Fire Extinguisher Co. NEWTON Newton Fire Extinguisher Co., Ltd., London, England. Upright valve sprinkler with diaphragm outlet. Valve disc held by levers and link similar to those used in the International sprinkler. Not used in America so far as known. Used extensively in England and other parts of the world. NEWTON JIAGARA-HIBBARD-A, NIAGARA-HIBBARD Manufactured by Niagara Fire Extinguisher Co., Akron y Ohio. A-IQO2. Upright valve sprinkler. Frame similar to Hibbard sprinkler, levers and link similar to Niagara sprinkler. V joint in link. Projections on frame where 418 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION levers would touch. Stamped Niagara on one side and Hibbard on other .side. NlAGARA-HlBBARD A-1902. Underwriters' Laboratories report, 1902. Features criticized : 1. Effects of corrosion and loading. 2. Solder in high degree pat- terns. 3. Structural weakness. 4. Cap and construction details. Rating: Unreliable. NlAGARA-HlBBARD A 2 -1903. A 2 -iQO3. Similar to 1902 type but with point on link reversed (pointing inward). Date and temperature marked on link. APPENDIX I 419 Out of 55 recently tested by the Underwriters' Labora- tories 2 per cent failed. Rating: Doubtful. NlAGARA-HlBBARD B-1904. 6-1904. Similar to A but with more rounded frame, toothed deflector and longer levers. Block tin gasket in earlier issues ; copper ring gasket in later issues. Nia- Hib cast on one side of wrench head and patent date on the other side. Installed by Niagara Fire Extinguisher Co., Akron, Ohio. Approved by the Underwriters' Laboratories in 1904. Withdrawn from approval in 1912, inasmuch as name of the device was changed to Niagara when Mr. Geo. E. Hibbard withdrew from the Niagara Fire Ex- tinguisher Co. (See Niagara.) Rating: Satisfactory. NIAGARA Manufactured by Niagara Fire Ex- tinguisher Co., Akron, Ohio, and after 1912 by the Ohio Sprinkler Co., Young stown, Ohio. B-IQI2. Practically the same head as Niagara-Hibbard B. Approved by the Underwriters' Laboratories. Rating: Standard. NIAGARA--B 420 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION PARMELEE Henry S. Parmelee, New Haven, Conn. Made by J. R. Brown & W. A. Foskett, New Haven, Conn. Installed by Foskett & Bishop, New Haven, by the Prov- idence Steam & Gas Pipe Co. and others. First patent, 1874, showed a valve sprinkler held to its seat by fusible solder. Perforated distributor. Sprinkler fed by small pipe until an auxiliary valve was opened by the reduction in pressure. Never used so far as known. See page 17. 1-1874 (about). Upright, valve sprinkler. Interior valve held in place by hinged lever the end of which was fastened to an arm by means of a heavy spring and fusible link. Perforated distributor. Used in Mr. Parmelee's piano factory (probably the first automatic sprinkler equipment ever installed). See page 17. 2-1874 (about). Upright, valve sprinkler. Interior valve held in place by a wooden strut the upper end of which had a bearing against a fusible washer. Perfo- rated distributor. This head was also used to a limited extent in Mr. Parmelee's piano factory. See page 18. 3-1875. Upright, sealed sprinkler. Brass cap sol- dered over a perforated distributor. Threaded on in- side. See page 18. 4-1878. Upright, sealed sprinkler. Brass cap soldered over a rotating turbine distributor. Threaded on inside. See page 19. 5-1878. Upright, sealed sprinkler. Similar to No. 4 but redesigned by Mr. Grinnell. The head was made more sensitive by recessing under the solder joint so that the heated air could circulate on each side of this joint. Threaded on the outside for a half inch fitting. Slow in action and easily damaged. APPENDIX I 421 PHELPS 2. Field experience very satisfactory for some years. See page 19. All types now obsolete. Present rating: All types unreliable. PHELPS Fred A. Phelps, Laconia, N. H. 1-1904. Upright valve sprinkler. Metal : valve cap held in place by a seven-piece strut in the form of a double rectangle. Soldered surfaces corrugated. 2-1907. Sample similar to above tested by Underwriters' Laboratories, 1907, criti- cized as follows: 1. Deflector. 2. Markings. 3. Soldering. 4. Strength. 3-1910. Experimental sample submitted to Under- writers' Laboratories criticized as follows: 1. Features of design and construction. 2. Hard and extra hard degree solders. 3. Effects of loading and corrosion. None of the types ever used so far as known. PHENIX Albert Blauvelt, Chicago, III. 1917. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve cap a held in place by an S- shaped strut b bearing on a curved lever c. Upper end of lever fitted into a slot in curved connection strip d above the deflector e. This curved strip held in place by a capsule / containing a plunger resting on fusible solder in granular form h. Where heated the PHENIX. solder melts and allows the piston to (Section.) fall, thus releasing the curved connector strip and the lever attached to it. Fusible solder contains some mercury. 422 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Criticized by Underwriters' Laboratories, 1917, as follows : 1. Difficulty in packing and shipping without injury. 2. Dur- ability. 3. Certain parts not strong enough to withstand ordinary external strains. 4. Not entirely reliable in operation. Used to some extent in the Middle West. Rating: Not standard. PHCENIX Patented by Jarvis Hunt, Chicago. Assigned to Phoenix Fire Extinguisher Co. 1-1904. Upright valve sprinkler with diaphragm. Metal valve cap covered a raised orifice in diaphragm and was held by three-piece strut with a projection at an angle of about 45 degrees. Never used so far as known. A-ipos. Upright valve sprinkler similar to No. 1 except in shape of strut. Similar in appearance to Grin- nell glass disc sprinkler except strut and diaphragm. Approved by the Underwriters' Laboratories, 1905. Withdrawn from approval, 1909. Manufacture dis- continued. Field experience limited but generally satisfactory ex- cept in the matter of leakage and premature opening. PHOENIX-A BBKHI Out of 171 recently tested by the Underwriters' Lab- oratories 2 per cent failed from adhesion at the seat. Present rating: Fairly satisfactory. Note: The Phoenix Fire Extinguisher Co. was backed by the late Paul Morton, his brother and others. The company went out of business in 1909. APPENDIX I 423 PIERCE Octavius Pierce, Chicago, III. Assigned to Underwriters' Fire Sprinkler Co. 1894. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve held in place by four-piece strut of triangular shape. Fixed toothed deflector. Used to some extent in the Central West. Subject to crawling and leaking. See page 60. Present rating: Unreliable. PRENTISS See Draper. ROCKWOOD Geo. I. Rockwood, Worcester, Mass. Manufactured and installed by Worcester Fire Extin- guisher Co. Later by Rockwood Sprinkler Co. 1905. Patents taken out on upright valve sprinkler with single deck deflector, RCLCKWOQP-A A-i9o6. Upright valve sprinkler. Metal valve cap with pure silver washer held in place by four-piece strut of triangular shape. Double deck deflector, part being over and part under the frame. Approved in 1907 by the Underwriters' Laboratories. Field experience not satisfactory in the matter of leak- age and premature opening. Have been practically all removed. See page 60. Present rating: Unsatisfactory. 424 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Later this head was slightly changed by installing a lump of solder at one end of the soldered lever to give additional strength. B-igo6. Slight modification of A. Key placed in top of soldered lever of strut to give additional strength. Not approved by Stock Companies. Used in risks insured in Mutual Companies. Present rating: Satisfactory. C-IQIO. Similar to A except solder joint strength- ened by installing a reinforcing wire. ROCKWOOD-L ROCKWOOD--D Approved by the Underwriters' Laboratories. Many in use. Present rating: Satisfactory. D-IQII. Similar to C but with single deck deflector. Approved by Underwriters' Laboratories and the Mutual Companies. Many in use. See page 60. Present rating: Standard. RUNDLE SPENCE Made by Bundle Spence Automatic Sprinkler Co., Mil- waukee, Wis. I-IQII. Upright valve sprinkler. Almott identical with Neracher Improved 1902 sprinkler. No distin- guishing marking except that rating and year of manu- facture were stamped on link. A few were installed in the Middle West. Rating: Questionable. APPENDIX I 425 2-1912. Similar to 1911 type except that the letters R. S. were cast at an angle on the upper edge of the frame and notches were provided in levers to prevent link from coming in contact with top frame. Underwriters' Laboratories report, March, 1913, makes following criticisms: 1. Effects of loading and corrosion. 2. Adhesion of valve cap and disc to seat. 3. Inaccuracies in high test solder. 4. Factors of safety in link, frame and cap. 5. Lack of uniformity of manu- facture. 6. Construction details. Rating: Questionable. A-IQI3. Similar to 1912 type but letters R. S. in a vertical position and further from link. Rating and date stamped on link. Approved Sept., 1913, by the Under- writers' Laboratories. Withdrawn, 1915. Manufacture discontinued. Rating: Satisfactory. RUNDLE SPENCE. RUTHENBURG Marcus Ruthenburg, Cincinnati, Ohio. 1885. Pendent valve sprinkler. Rubber valve disc of spherical form held in place by long thin lever. Lever held to arm by cylindrical link of solid solder. Fixed saucer-shaped deflector. Used to a limited extent in the Middle West. Crude and subject to crawling. See page 37. RUTHENBURG Obsolete. Present rating: Very unreliable. 426 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION '^*^ SHAW SHAW C. B. ShaWj Kirkwood, Mo. Made by Shaw Manufacturing C&., St. Louis, Mo. 1-1897. Upright valve sprinkler with keyed strut. Key released by expansion of alcohol or ether in a closed vessel with corrugated sides. Slightly modified in 1899. Subject to corrosion. Unreliable principle of release. A few equipments were installed in the neighborhood of St. Louis, Mo. See page 45. Out of 14 recently tested 50 per cent failed. Present rating: Very unreliable. SIMMONS J. Simmons Co., New York. Upright valve sprinkler. Practically a duplicate of the Stantial. . Never used so far as known. SIMPLEX Made by Crowder Bros., St. Louis, Mo. 1902. Upright valve sprinkler. Por- celain valve cap held by toggle-joint levers and link. Criticized by Underwriters' Laboratories as follows : 1. Releasing device. 2. Effects of loading and corrosion. 3. Leaking point. 4. Cap. 5. Disc. 6. Deflector. 7. Marking. 8. Structural weak- ness. 9. Construction details. Never on market so far as known. SMITH Darius B. Smith, Pine Meadow, Conn. 1885. Pendent valve sprinkler of drop deflector type. Valve stem threaded SIMPLEX; SMITH. APPENDIX I 427 into two parallel vertical levers. Levers held together by two-piece link. Conical-shaped deflector. A few hundred made. Used only in Mr. Smith's own factory. Gave trouble from leakage due to turning of threaded stem from vibration. Obsolete. Present rating: Very unreliable. STANDARD Made by the National Fire Extinguisher Co., Kansas City, Mo. 1902. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve cap held by levers of toggle-joint type and fusible link. Quite simi- lar to Hibbard sprinkler. Criticized by the Underwriters' Laboratories in 1903 as follows: 1. Fusing point. 2. Releasing device. 3. Effects of corrosion and loading. 4. Structural weakness. 5. Solder in high degree pattern. 6. Marking. 7. Workmanship. Out of 77 recently tested by the Underwriters' Labora- tories 8 per cent failed from adhesion at the seat. No longer made. Rating : Unreliable. I STANT1AL i STANTIAL Oti's T. Stantial, Chicago, III. Made by Independent Fire Sprinkler Co., Chicago, III. . 1895. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve cap held in place by strut with curved projecting member. Report of Underwriters' Laboratories, 1903, criticized: 428 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION 1. Fusing point. 2. Releasing device. 3. Effects of corrosion and loading. 4. Cap. 5. Solder in high degree pattern 6. Marking. 7. Distribution. Out of 160 recently tested by the Underwriters' Lab- oratories 6 per cent failed. Used to a limited extent. Present rating: Unreliable. STAR Wm. T. Montgomery of Wakefield, Mass. Assigned to Star Manufacturing Co. of Boston. 1886. Pendent valve sprink- ler. Metal. valve with stem held in place by lever, one end being hooked to casting and the other attached to a projection by a solder pin. Large star-shaped de- flector. Installed to a consider- able extent in New England by the Star Manufacturing Co. Sold out L to Providence Steam & Gas Pipe Co. Field experience satisfactory for a number of years. Obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. STECK Ernst F, Steck, Chicago, III. Assigned to Fire Extin- guisher Manufacturing Co. 1896. Upright valve sprinkler with valve cap held in place by triangular-shaped strut. Never used so far as known. STRATTON W. H. Stratton, New Haven, Conn., and latelof Provi- dence, R. I., and Hartford, Conn. 1-1885. Pendent valve sprinkler of drop deflector type. Valve held in place by two levers hooked to frame and soldered together at lower side of head. Never used so far as known. APPENDIX I 429 2-1893. Pendent valve sprinkler. Valve held in place by spindle passing through deflector and resting on a thimble soldered to frame. All working parts of sprinkler protected against corrosion by a papier mache protecting cover. Never used so far as known. 3-1896. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve seated on a hole in flexible diaphragm. Valve consisted of a frangible stopper adapted to contain a bursting charge. Stopper was clamped in place and when heated it was broken into small pieces. Whole head enamelled to prevent corrosion. Slightly modified in 1902. Never used so far as known. SWAN Phineas W. Swan, Winchester, Mass. 1-1892. Pendent valve sprinkler. Valve cap held in place by levers of toggle- joint type curved and pointing upwards. Levers held by two-piece fusible link. Fixed toothed deflector. Never used so far as known. L__. jWAN..,, 2-1895. Upright valve sprinkler similar to No. 1 but with slotted revolving deflector. But little used, if at all. Present rating: Unreliable. TALCOTT Charles W. Talcott, Woonsocket, R. I. Installed to some extent by inventor who afterwards installed other makes of sprinklers. 1-1882. Pendent valve sprinkler. Interior valve held in place by hinged cap, the latter being held by fusible pin. Hose distributor. Obsolete. 430 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION 2-1882. Pendent valve sprinkler. Valve of soft metal held in place by two hinged levers bearing directly on the valve cap. Levers were curved and extended around bottom of sprinkler where they were soldered together. Rose distributor. Obsolete. Present rating: Very unreliable. TALCOn TESSIER Made by Joseph Tessier, New Bedford, Mass. Submitted to Underwriters' Laboratories, 1901. Un- developed device. Practically all features criticized. Never used so far as known. TITAN George Mills & Co., Ltd., Manchester, England. i. Pendent valve ^sprinkler of drop deflector type; valve held by lever and rivet-shaped fusible link. TITAN TITANJ 2. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve disc held in place by strut the parts of which are held together by a rivet- shaped fusible piece similar to that used in No. 1. Ap- parently easily clogged by dirt and corrosion. Installed in England and many other parts of the world. Not used in America so far as known. APPENDIX I 431 TURNER AND GARDINER 1895. Valve sprinkler with perforated distributor. Valve spindle held in place by long lever hinged at one end and attached to piping or to ceiling by a spring and cotton cord. Never used so far as known. UNITED STATES United States Automatic Sprinkler Co., New York City. A-iQiy. Upright valve sprinkler. Similar to the International Sprinkler. Valve held in place by toggle-joint levers held by link. Link composed of two plates soldered together, there being slight projections and indentations in each fitting into each other. Now being tested by the Under- writers' Laboratories. UNITED STATES. UNIVERSAL Universal Automatic Sprinkler Co., Philadelphia, Pa. John Kane, General Manager. Later reorganized as the International Sprinkler Co. This company previously installed the J. Kane sprinklers No. 1 and No. 2. UNIVERSAL--! UNIVERSAL--2 1-1896. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve held in place by straight strut. Perforated and toothed deflector. Not used so far as known. 432 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION 2-1899. Upright valve sprinkler. Similar to No. 1 except valve cap held by levers of the toggle-joint type with link. Present rating: Unreliable. Note: There was also a sprinkler similar to No. 1, but with an irregular-shaped three-piece strut, invented by Robert Wood. Never used so far as known. UP-TO-DATE Made by U. T. D. ( Up-to-date) Sprinkler & Supply Co., Chicago, III. 1899. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve cap held in place by strut. Small smooth deflector. Criticized by Underwriters' Laboratories, 1905, as follows : 1. Crude workmanship. 2. Subject to crawling and leakage.. 3. Distribution faulty. Out of 165 recently tested by the Underwriters' Lab- oratories 21 per cent failed. Present rating: Unreliable. ILACONIA j OK VOGE, VOGEL Made by H. G. Vogel Co., New York. 1904. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve cap held in place by double strut. Fixed toothed deflector. Two horizontal projections on casting just above threaded portion. Experimental sample criticized by Under- writers' Laboratories in 1904 as follows: APPENDIX I 433 1. Structural weakness. 2. Soldered struts. 3. Spring. 4. Distribution. 5. Markings. 6. Construction details. Never used so far as known in America. Approved in England under the name Laconia, but not used there to any extent. WALWORTH Patents by C. C. Walworth and 0. B. Hall of Boston. Made and installed by Walworth Manufacturing Co., Boston. Patents were taken out in Feb., 1883, and July, 1883, by C. C. Walworth on experimental samples that were never used to any extent. WALWORTH-1J 1-1883 (October). Soldered arm type. Patented by C. C. Walworth and O. B. Hall. Pendent valve sprink- ler. Valve held by stem resting against a rocker arm lever. Long arm of lever soldered to frame. Not a sensitive head. Obsolete. Present rating: Very unreliable. 2-1883. Solder link type. Similar to No. 1 except that whole deflector dropped when head opened. Long arm of lever held to a projection on frame by an all- solder link. This link caused leakage by stretching and later a two-piece metal link was used. See page 36. Obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. 434 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION 2 A-i883. Drop deflector type. Similar to No. 2 but with link composed of two U-shaped pieces of brass soldered together. Rating : Unreliable. WALWORTH-3 WALWORTH-4 WALW 3-1885. Soldered deflector type. Pendent valve sprinkler similar to No. 2 except that deflector was large and stationary. Valve disc passed through hole in center of deflector. There were several slight modificar tions of this sprinkler and in later types a link was used in which the two parts were placed side by side instead of one being entirely within the other. See page 36. Present rating: Unreliable. * 4-1888. Ordinary type. Pendent valve sprinkler. Similar to No. 3 but with a smaller and smoother deflec- tor. Hexagonal casting for wrench just below threaded portion. See page 61. Present rating: Unreliable. 5-1888. Upright, spring type. Similar to No. 4 but arranged to be placed upright. Steel spring tended to force valve open when link melted. Practically obsolete. Present rating: Unreliable. 6-1892. Smooth deflector type. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve cap attached to a hinged lever, the upper end of which was held to a projection on the cast- APPENDIX I 435 ing by a fusible link. Small smooth deflector. Poor distribution. Nearly obsolete. See page 61. Present rating: Unreliable. WALWORTH-6 WALWORTH-7. 7-1894. Ordinary upright type. Similar to No. 6 but with perforated deflector. Present rating: Unreliable. 8-1898. Improved pendent type. Similar to No. 6 but with improved toothed deflector, more clearance of levers, etc. Present rating: Unreliable. WAL JVALWORTH-9 9-1899. Improved upright type. Similar to No. 7 but with toothed deflector and more clearance of moving parts. Present rating: Unreliable. Note: There are several other minor variations of the above types. Most of the Walworth heads made after 1892 had double links as a safeguard against crawling of solder in the single link. These were generally wired together so that the outer one would 436 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION not slip off. A few were wired at the side instead of at the end, thus binding the moving parts of the link together and causing failure to operate. Melting points of many of the high test patterns were irregular. Walworth heads had a satisfactory field experience up to 1912, when tests showed them to be unreliable. Out of about 1500 tested by the Underwriters' Bureau of New England between 1911 and 1914, 30 per cent failed. They are now mostly replaced. WESTON A. L. Weston, Adams, Mass. 1899. Upright valve sprinkler. Valve cap held by rectangular strut composed of several pieces soldered together and with a concealed spring. Report of Underwriters' Laboratories, 1902, criticized: 1. Fusing point. 2. Structural weakness. 3. Releasing device. 4. Cap. 5. Solder in high de- gree patterns. Never used so far as known. WHITING Francis Whiting, Chelsea, Mass. 1881. Pendent, water-joint type. Perforated dis- tributor, fan shape in cross section. Cap soldered to flanged edge. Used to some extent about 1884. Sold out to Burritt Hardware Co. of Waterbury, Conn. Obsolete. Not a sensitive type. See page 28. Present rating: Unreliable. WILBER Wilber & Son, Bolton, England. 1889. Pendent sprinkler. Valve disc held in place by levers soldered together. Water distributed from a circle of holes discharging onto a loose toothed ring. Not used in this country so far as known. APPENDIX I 437 WILSON W. A. Wilson. 1882. A large thimble-shaped cap fitted over an ori- fice 'and was held in place by a strap of thin metal con- taining a fusible joint. Never used so far as known. WITTER Witter & Son, Bolton, England. i. Pendent valve sprinkler. Valve held in place by lever hooked to frame at each end and with adjusting screw passing through the center. Fusible joint con- sisted Of two flat angular parts pivoted at top and sol- dered together at lower end. Spring under valve disc. IWITTERJ E-igo6. Upright or pendent valve sprinkler. Valve disc held in place by strut. Spring under valve disc. Not used in America so far as known. Used extensively in England and other countries. WOOD Robert Wood, Philadelphia, Pa. 1896. Mr. Wood while with the Universal Sprinkler Co. of Philadelphia invented several sprinklers. The frame of the Universal sprinkler was used but the valve discs and releasing devices were of several patterns, most of which resembled those used in other sprinklers. None of these were ever used so far as known. 438 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION Summary of Tests Made on 6277 clean sprinklers from the field during the last few years by the Underwriters' Laboratories, Underwriters' Bureau of New England, Underwriters' Bureau of Middle and Southern States and the St. Louis Fire Prevention Association. Corrected to April, 1918. Type. H !! 02 I- 3 Failure. Per cent Failure. !> Babcock Cataract A 4 6 2 1 6 1 25 25 100 Clapp No 1 68 45 2 10 11 16 2 31 Clapp No. 2 Esty 5 (1896) 13 51 13 44 4 i 2 3.9 5.9 30 3 27 3 1 2 6.6 6.6 Garrett A 6 6 Grinnell, 1 5 5 A 44 20 6 4 14 31.8 40 9 B C 30 68 14 39 2 30 3 6 11 3 36.7 4.4 46.7 13.2 D 213 84 52 29 48 22.5 36 1 glass disc (1890-03) Hibbard 1 514 16 414 16 87 9 4 0.8 2.5 2 3 97 193 50 63 9 23 26 100 2 7 2.1 3.6 29 55.4 3-A 599 386 23 159 31 5.2 31 7 4 (1901) 294 13 190 13 5 35 64 21.8 33.7 Hill 184 120 27 3 34 18.4 20 1 International, 1 (1900) A (1902) 34 105 32 84 2 20 i J. Kane, 1 (Universal) " " 2 6 139 4 96 '21 2 9 '13' 9.4 33.3 15.8 3 (1900) 12 7 5 || || 4 W. Kane, 3 (Bulb Root) . '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'..'.. " 4 (Perfection) Kersteter Lapham, A (1910) 74 6 57 28 28 33 53 6 55 23 15 32 17 ' i' 3 7 3 1 1 1 1 "i 5 " 1.4 3.6 17.9 5.4 1.8 7.2 21.4 3 Mackay, 1892 (Mfgr. 1) Manufacturers, 2 14 30 3 19 2 4 3 5 6 2 42.8 6.7 64.2 23.3 3 12 4 3 5 41.6 66 7 4 7 6 1 14.3 14.3 (Long Lever) 25 9 6 1 9 36 40 A B 555 225 335 185 69 27 85 5 66 8 11.9 3.6 27.2 5.8 Neracher, 2 3 5 48 5 39 i "T ' i' 2.1 16 7 3J 232 52 208 43 18 3 3 3 6 1.3 9.6 2.6 9 6 Newton 24 13 1 10 41.6 45.9 New York & New Haven Niagara Hibbard, A (1902) A (1903) 14 91 55 5 89 54 9 1 ' i ' i 1.1 1.1 1.8 B Phanix, A 42 171 42 140 '27' 1 0.6 23 Rockwood, A Rundle Spence Shaw 10 173 14 5 170 6 5 1 1 .... i "r 6 0.6 42.8 1.2 50 Standard 77 71 6 7.8 7 8 Stantial U. T. D Walworth drop deflector, 2-A sol. def.,3 ord. pend., 4 " upr., 7 160 165 21 94 486 99 143 111 15 29 237 50 8 20 6 32 150 18 3 34 "e" 41 12 6 '27' 58 19 3.8 28.8 11.9 19.2 5.6 20.6 35.1 20.3 31 3 113 62 26 4 21 18.6 22.1 " upr., 9 290 84 84 24 98 33.8 42.1 APPENDIX II llattk for 3ln0p?rtum NAME LOCATION VALVES (Inside Gates) Note. All gate valves to be secured open with leather straps fas- tened with padlocks riveted or sealed and keys to be held by responsible parties. Each valve to be inspected by turning valve one turn to insure its being wide open and in good working order. Drip valves to be strapped closed in a similar manner. Note. Valves under approved supervisory system need not be secured. List of valves: Location. Open. Strapped. Yes. No. Yes. No. 1. 2. 3. 4, etc. VALVES (Outside Post Indicator Gates and Valves in Pits) Note. To be secured and inspected in the same way as inside valves. List of valves: Location. Open. Strapped. Yes. No. Yes. No. 1. 2. 3. 4, etc. Give numbers of any of the above valves found closed, part closed, not strapped, closed temporarily at any time since last inspection Explanation Note. Drip valves to be tested weekly. 439 440 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION DRY SYSTEMS (Dry Valves) Note. Dry valves should be tested for water column and condition of spring at least every three months. Should be tripped at least once a year. Note. When system is first set, test for water column every few days. List of Valves: Location. Air Pressure. 1. 2. 3. 4, etc. Dry valve closet in good order and properly heated Give number of any air systems into which water has entered during week Explanation Are hand hole plugs in place Is flanged dummy in place ALARM CONNECTIONS Note. All controlling valves or cocks for alarm devices to be sealed or strapped open. Special instructions to be given regarding testing alarm valves. VALVE CONTROLLING ALARM List of Valves: Location. Open. Strapped. Tested. In Order. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. 1. 2. 3. 4, &c. Give numbers of any alarm devices out of service .Explana- tion . . GRAVITY TANK Full Contents frozen Tell-tale in order, Condition of tank, hoops and supports Remedied.. When.. APPENDIX II 441 PRESSURE TANK Water Level Air Pressure Note. Gage glass cocks to be kept closed except while inspecting. STEAM PUMP Note. Pumps should be given a thorough test with rated number of hose streams at least twice a year, spring and fall. They should be started once a week, and water discharged through relief valve or other- wise to make certain pump is in order. Valves in steam connection from boilers to pump wide open Minimum steam pressure for pump during week Started Tested through -hose streams. Condition Supply of oil on hand AUTOMATIC REGULATORS Regulator controlling valves wide open water pressure main- tained Pump started and regulator operated at pounds. ELECTRIC PUMP Note. Pumps should be given a thorough test with rated number of hose streams at least twice a year, spring and fall. They should be started once a week and water discharged through relief valve or other- wise to make certain pump is in order. Any interruption of current supply Condition of contact points on all switches Started Tested through hose streams Condition Automatic controller in order Water pressure maintained Supply of oil on hand ROTARY PUMP Note. Pumps should be given a thorough lest with rated number of hose streams at least twice a year, spring and fall. They should be started once a week and water discharged through relief valve or other- wise to make certain pump is in order. Started Tested through hose streams Condition Supply of oil on hand 442 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS Steamer connection in place ready for service. Any corroded, bent, whitewashed, gilded or painted, covered with dirt or grease, distribution of water from sprinklers obstructed Is there a clear space of at least two feet below the ceiling or roof, free from storage or other obstruction. Note any exceptions Any operated since last inspection Any additions needing sprinklers. Any extra heads FIRE PAILS Number In place Full STAND PIPES Water on stand pipes Equipment for same in good condition CHEMICAL EXTINGUISHERS Note. These should be recharged at least once a year. Number in place Date tested and charged FIRE DOORS Closed and fastened nights, Sundays and holidays and all times when not in use Will all fire doors close easily Will automatic doors close when weight is released Note any fire doors in need of repairs :.-... .Automatic attachments in order SHUTTERS AND WIRED GLASS WINDOWS Closed and fastened nights, Sundays and holidays and all times when not in use Will all shutters or windows close easily Note any shutters or windows in need of repairs *H HYDRANTS AND HYDRANT HOUSES Note. Each hydrant should be given a thorough test by flushing at least twice a year, spring and fall One turn to open should be sufficient at other inspections. Hydrants open easily Free from snow and ice and easily accessible . . APPENDIX II 443 Hose, Play Pipes, Spanners, Hydrants, Wrenches, Rubber Washers, Axes, Lanterns, Nozzle Holders In their proper place and ready for use Condition Note. Each hose house or stand pipe can be numbered and re- ported upon separately. ELEVATOR AND STAIR DOORS OR TRAPS In order and kept closed when not in use . Note any exceptions Condition of latches or other hard- ware CLEANLINESS Oily waste well cared for Basements clean Yard kept free from combustible material Belt enclosures clean Clothes closets and water closets clean Shafting and bear- ings well cared for Clean under benches Note any suggestions as to possible improvements in cleanliness Remarks and suggestions. Signed, Date Supt. t INDEX A. Acid charge, Sypho Chemical system, 343. Across center feed for sprinklers, 108. Adam sprinkler, 353. Adkins sprinklers, 353. Advantages, combined heat and sprinkler system, 333. ^Etna sprinkler, 353. A. F. M. sprinkler, 355. Age limit of sprinklers, 78. Air compressor for dry systems, 191. Alarm service, efficiency of, 302. Alarm valve, Sypho Chemical system, 349. Alarm valves, types, 137. Alarm valves, installation, 143. Alarm valves, rules for design- ing, 145. Alarm valves, National Board rules, 146. Alarm valves, testing, 147. Alarm valves, defects, 138, 149. Alarm valves, fire record, 149. Alarm valves, cost of, 149. Alarm valves, tests of, 295. Albion sprinkler, 354. Alert sprinkler, 354. Alexander sprinkler, 354. Allen & Reed sprinklers, 354. Allis sprinkler, 355. Allis-Chambers-Bullock, Ltd., fire of 1911, 307. American Fire Extinguisher Co., 50. American sprinkler, 355. Approved sprinklers, New Eng. Ins. Exch., 74. Approved sprinklers, Factory Mutuals, 74. Approved sprinklers, Nat. Board of Fire Underwriters, 1914, 75. Armstrong Cork Co. fire, 115. Ashcroft sprinkler, 41. Associated alarm valve, 150. Associated Automatic Sprinkler Co., 53. Associated automatic sprinklers A, B, 54, 356. Associated alarm valve, 150. Associated dry valve, 195. Assured, inspection blank for, 439. Auditoriums, sprinklers in, 90. "Automatic" Sprinkler Co. of America, 357. Automatic sprinkler, definition, 10. Automatic sprinkler, patents, 10. B. Babcock sprinkler, 63, 357. Bach sprinkler, 358. Baltimore conflagration, 1906, 304. Barnes, Charles, sprinklers A, 1 and 2, 25, 358. Barr, Edward, Co., 49. 445 446 INDEX Beech' sprinkler, 359.. Birkett sprinkler, 359. Bishop, John W., sprinkler 2|, 45, 361. Bishop, John W., sprinklers 1, 1| and 2, 26. Bishop, John W., sprinklers A, 1, li 359. Bishop, John W., sprinkler 2, 360. Bishop, John W., sprinklers 2J, 2, 3, 3|, 4, 361. Bishop, Joseph, sprinkler, 362. Bishop sprinklers, 45. Bishop dry valve, 193. Blank, inspection by Assured, 439. Blank for sprinkler leakage, 313. Blauvelt (Phenix) sprinkler, 362. Boston Chamber of Commerce report on fire prevention, 324. Briggs sprinkler, 40. Brown, Durrell Co. fire of 1893, 303. Brown dry valve, 198. Brown, J. R., sprinkler 1, 29, 46, 3.62. Brown, J. R., sprinkler 2, 30, 362. Brown and Foskett sprinklers, 21, 363. Buel, James, sprinkler, 363. Buell alarm valve, 139. Buell, Charles E., sprinklers, 23, 46, 363. Bulb-root sprinkler (Kane), 51, 399. Burritt, A. M., sprinklers, 27, 366. C. Care of valves, 290. Carey, John, automatic system, 11. Carpenter alarm valve, 152. Cataract dry valve, 199. Cataract sprinklers, 367. Center central feed for sprink- lers, 107. Centrifugal pumps, 133. Champion Coated Paper Co. fire of 1913, 308. Charging, Sypho Chemical sys- tem, 349. Check valve, description of, 111. Check valve, Syphq Chemical system, 348. Check valve pits, 114. Check valves on tank supplies, 112. Circulation in sprinkler pipes, 96. Circulation of water, combined heat and sprinkler system, 332. Clapp sprinklers, 48, 367. Clapp dry valve 1, 200. Clapp dry valve 2, 201. Clark, A. B., & Co. fire of 1909, 306. Clark & Cooper sprinkler, 368. Clayton dry valve, 202. Clayton sprinkler, 369. Cocheco Manufacturing Co. fire of 1907, 304. Combined Heat and Sprinkler Co., 329. Comins sprinkler, 369. Conant, Hezekiah, sprinkler, 22, 369. Conclusions, Syph Chemical system, 351. Congreve, Sir William, auto- matic system, 12. Construction of sprinklers, re- quirements, 84. Converse Rubber Shoe Co. fire of 1911, 307. Cook sprinkler, see Kersteter. INDEX 447 Corrosion of perforated pipe systems, 7. Corrosion of sprinklers, 78. Cost of alarm valves, 149. Cost of gravity tanks, 129. Cost of sprinkler equipments, 83. Courtney, Dana S., fire of 1917, 308. Cox, see U. T. D. Crowder alarm valve, 154. Crowder dry valves 1 and 2, 203. Crowder sprinklers, 370. Curtain boards, use of, 91. Curved offset, combined heat and sprinkler system, 329. D. Daly sprinkler, 370. Daniels sprinkler, 370. Dawson, Roger, automatic sys- tem, 12. Defective sprinklers in use, 82. Defects found at inspections, 288. Defects of perforated pipe sys- tems, 6. Defects of alarm valves, 149. Delmage sprinkler, 40. Delohery Hat Co.fireof 1911, 307. Derby (Ideal) dry valve, 223. Detector water meters, 125. Detroit sprinkler, 370. Disadvantages, combined heat and sprinkler system, 334. Discharge from sprinkler heads, 76. Distribution system, Sypho Chemical system, 344. Dixon dry valve, 203. Dixon sprinklers, 371. Dodge dry valve, 203. Dodge sprinkler, 371. Dorais sprinkler, 371. Double lock sprinkler, 371. Dowson & Taylor alarm valve, 140. Draper sprinkler, 33, 372. Draper-He therington sprinkler, 34, 373. Drip pipes, 117. Drip pipe, arrangement of, 120. Drip pipes, connection to sewer, 118. Drip pipe test, 119. Drip valve tests, 294. Dry system, air compressor, 191. Dry system, auxiliary, 191. Dry system, air-filling pipe, 189. Dry systems, 184. Dry systems, drainage of, 188. Dry systems, early makes, 192. Dry systems, National Board Rules for, 187. Dry systems, size of, 189. Dry systems, test pipes, 190. Dry valve enclosures, 190. Dry valves, examination of, 295. Dry valves, maintenance, 187. Dry valves, operation of, 186. Dry valves, requirements for, 195. Dry valves, types of, 185. Dummy-flanged, 192. Dynamo rooms, sprinklers in, 95. E. Eclipse sprinkler (Kane), 33, 398. Effect of sprinklers in fires, 302. Efficiency of alarm service, 302. Electric pumps, 133. Enclosure for dry valves, 190. English alarm valve, 162. Estes Press Building fire of 1902, 303. Esty sprinklers, 62, 373. Evans sprinkler, 54, 55, 376. Evans alarm valve, 155. Evans, Powell, 52-54. 448 INDEX Evans dry valve No. 3, 204. Expansion, combined heat and sprinkler system, 333. Expansion chamber, Sypho Chemical system, 243. Extra sprinklers, 97. F. Factory Mutual record of loss of life in sprinklered buildings, 323. Factory Mutual (A. F. M.) sprinkler, 355. Failures from age, sprinklers, 76. Feed mains and risers, 107. Field experience, combined heat and sprinkler system, 336. Field experience, Sypho Chemi- cal system, 351. Fire record of alarm valves, 149. Fire record of Factory Mutual Insurance Companies, 1887 to 1894, 73. Fire record of National Fire Protection Association, 300. Fire record of old sprinklers, 1885 to 1887, 73. Fire record of perforated pipe systems, 8. Fire record, Sypho Chemical sys- tem, 351. Fires, important in sprinklered risks, 302. Fittings, long bend, 116. Flanged dummy, 192. Floor valves, 116. F. M. (A. F. M.) sprinkler, see A. F. M. Foskett & Bishop, 21. Fowler sprinkler, 377. Francis system of perforated pipes, 1. Francis Bros. & Jollett, 53. Freezing, protection against in cold basements, 120. Freezing tests, combined heat and sprinkler system, 330. G. Gages, pressure, 119. Garth sprinkler, 377. Garrett alarm valve and sprink- ler, see Globe. Garrett sprinkler, 378. Gas check valve, Sypho Chemi- cal system, 347. General Fire Extinguisher Co., 63, 66. Glass cover for Grinnell sprink- ler, 79. Glazier sprinkler, 379. Gleason sprinkler, 379. Globe alarm valve, 159-160. Globe dry valve A, 206. Globe dry valve 3, 210. Globe dry valve B, 208. Globe dry valve D, 209. Globe sprinkler, 380. Godfrey, Ambrose, automatic system, 11. Gorton sprinkler, 381. Gouze sprinkler, 381. Granger, A. M., sprinkler, 29, 381. Gravity tanks, 127. Gravity tanks, sizes, 127. Gray and Davis system, 328. Gray alarm valve, 157. Gray dry system, 194. Gray dry valve 1, 211. Gray dry valve 2, 212. Gray sprinkler, 49, 382. Grew sprinkler, 383. Grinnell angle alarm valve, 139, 161. Grinnell alarm device, 1888, 140. Grinnell straightway alarm valve, 165. INDEX 449 Grinnell English alarm valve 1, 162. Grinnell English alarm valve 2, 163. Grinnell English alarm valve 3, 164. Grinnell dry valves, 193. Grinnell dry valve 1 (Bellows), 213. Grinnell dry valve No. 12 (differential), 214. Grinnell dry valve C, 219. Grinnell dry valve straightway A, 216. Grinnell dry valve straightway B, 217. Grinnell, Frederick, ix, 37. Grinnell sprinklers, cover for, 79. Grinnell sprinklers, glass disc, 385. Grinnell sprinklers, later types, 63. Grinnell sprinklers, metal disc, 39, 64, 383. Grinnell sprinklers, picker trunk, 385. Grinnell system of perforated pipes, 4. Grover, R. B., fire of 1905, 304. Guard, sprinkler, 312. Gunn sprinkler, 386. H. Hall system of perforated pipes, 4. ' Hand-hose connections to sprink- ler pipes, 98. Hangers for pipes, 116. Hanging of* stock on sprinkler pipes, 97. Harkness sprinklers, 51, 386. Harkness Tee, 166. Harris, A. C., sprinklers 1, 2 and 3, 31, 388. Harrison, A. Stewart, automatic sprinkler, 13, 388. Harrison sprinkler, desirable features, 14. Harrison sprinkler, defects, 15. Harrison sprinkler, installation system, 15. Heating properties, combined heat and sprinkler system, 331. Heating system combined with sprinkler system, 326. Heath sprinkler, 889. Herald Publishing Co. fire of 1910, 306. Hersey detector meter, 126. Hibbard alarm valve, 143. Hibbard dry valve 1, 220. Hibbard dry valve 2, 221. Hibbard dry valves 3 and 4, 222. Hibbard sprinklers, 49, 389. Hibbard sprinklers, causes of failure, 50. Higgins dry valve, 222. High-test sprinklers, 81. High-test sprinklers, rules for, 82. Hill sprinkler, 48, 393. Historical sketch of alarm valves, 139. Hoffman sprinkler, 393. Holland sprinklers, 394. Horack sprinkler, 394. Hose, hand, on sprinkler pipes, 98. Hoxie sprinkler, 394. Hub (Whiting) sprinkler, 28. Hunt alarm valve, 168. Hydraulic injector, 121. I. Ideal dry valve 1 (Derby), 223. Ideal dry valves 2 and 3 (Derby), 223. Ideal dry valve "Ever ready," 223. 450 INDEX Ideal sprinkler, 394. Independent dry valve, 223. Independent sprinkler, 395. Injector, hydraulic, 121. Inspection by Assured, 290, 439. Inspection by Bureaus, 289. Inspection by installing com- panies, 289. Inspection methods in use, 289. Inspection, self, 299. Installation rules for alarm valves, 143. Installation rules for sprinklers, 88. Installation of sprinklers, general information, 88. Installation, Sypho Chemical system, 350. Installations, combined heat and sprinkler systems, 336. Insulation of sprinklers, com- bined heat and sprinkler sys- tem, 327. International alarm' valve, 142, 168. International dry valves 3 and 4, 226. International dry valve, differ- ential, 224. International dry valve, mechan- ical, 225. International sprinklers, 52, 396. International Sprinkler Co., 52. J. Jahn sprinkler, 397. Jordan sprinkler, 397. K. Kane dry valve, 229. Kane, John, Fire Extinguisher Co., 52. Kane, John, sprinklers, 399. Kane, John, Universal sprinkler, 399. Kane, John and William, cart- ridge sprinkler, 32. Kane sprinklers 3 and 4, 52, 400. Kane sprinkler, Bulb root, 51, 399. Kane sprinkler, Eclipse, 33, 398. Kane, William, Fire Extin- guisher Co., 32. Kane, William, sprinklers, 398. Kane, William, sprinkler, Per- fection, 399. Kellogg Makay-Cameron Co., 53. Kersteter dry valve 1, 229. Kersteter dry valve 2, 231. Kersteter sprinklers, 55, 401. L. Laconia sprinkler, see Vogel. Langford sprinkler, 402. Lapham sprinklers, 402. Leakage (see Sprinkler leakage), 310. Leakage from sprinklers, Fac- tory Mutuals data, 72. Life, loss of, in sprinklered plants, 323. Linn dry valve, 231. Locks and canals on the Merri- mack River, Proprietors of, 1. Long, Thomas, Co. fire, 351. Long bend fittings, 116. Loss of life in sprinklered plants, 323. Lynde sprinkler, 404. M. Macbay, William, automatic system, 12. Macdaniel sprinkler, 404. Mackey dry system, 193, 232. INDEX 451 Mackey sprinkler 1, 36, 404. Mackey sprinkler links, 37. Mackey sprinkler 2, 56, 404. Mackey sprinklers 3 and 4, 56, 405. Maintenance, Sypho Chemical system, 350. Maintenance of sprinkler sys- tems, 288. Mailers, Allen & Frazer, 50. Manufacturers alarm valve, 171. Manufacturers' Building fire of 1914, 308. Manufacturers dry valve, "Wood" type, 232. Manufacturers dry valve 3, 236. Manufacturers or Venturi alarm valve, 171. Manufacturers sprinklers, 57, 405. Martin sprinkler, 406. Mascot sprinkler, 43, 409. Mayall sprinkler, 409. McLauthlin sprinkler, 409. Meehan, J. C., automatic steam sprinkler, 13. Meloon alarm valve, 139. Merchant and Evans Co., 55. Meters, 124. Miller sprinkler, 40, 410. Montgomery sprinkler, see Star. Montgomery, W. T., 47. Morris sprinkler, 410. Morrison sprinklers, 410. Mutual system of tags, 293. N. Nagle dry valve, 237. Nagle sprinkler 1, 44, 411. National Board rules for alarm valves, 146. National Board rules for dry systems, 187. National Board rules for super- visory systems, 260. National Fire Extinguisher Co., 50. Naylor sprinkler, 412. Neracher dry valves 1 and 2, 239. Neracher sprinklers, 58, 412. Neu alarm valve, 139, 179. Newton, Robert, sprinkler, 59, 416. Newton sprinkler (England), 417. New York & New Haven dry valve, 240. New York & New Haven sprink- lers, 59, 415. New York Automatic Sprinkler Co. dry valve, 239. New York sprinkler, 415. Niagara alarm valve, 179. Niagara B sprinkler, 419. Niagara dry valve 1, 242. Niagara dry valve 2, 244. Niagara dry valve 3, 245. Niagara dry valves 4 and 5, 247. Niagara dry valve 6, 248. Niagara dry valves 7 and 8, 250. Niagara Fire Extinguisher Co., 50. Niagara-Hibbard sprinkler, 417. Nyasco dry valve, 239. O. Offsets, combined heat and sprinkler system, 328. Operation of perforated pipe systems, 6. Orifice, size of, in sprinklers, 75. Ovens for testing sprinklers, 297. P. Painting of sprinklers, 80. Panther Rubber Co. fire of 1917, 309. 452 INDEX Parks offset, 330. Parmelee, Henry S., ix, 16. Parmelee Piano Factory, con> bined heat and sprinkler sys- tem, 326. Parmelee alarm valve, 21. Parmelee sprinkler A, 16. Parmelee sprinkler 1, 17, 420. Parmelee sprinklers 2 and 3, 18, 420. Parmelee sprinklers 4 and 5, 19, 420. Parmelee tree system of piping, 20. Perfection sprinkler (Kane), 399. Perforated pipes, corrosion of, 7. Perforated pipes, defects of, 6. Perforated pipes, fire record of, 8. Perforated pipes, Francis sys- tem, 1. Perforated pipes, Grinnell sys- tem, 4. Perforated pipes, Hall system, 4. Perforated pipes, operation of, 6. Perforated pipes, pipe scheme, 5; Perforated pipes, Providence Steam & Gas Pipe Co., 2. Perforated pipes, supplies for, 6. Perforated pipes, Whiting sys- tem, 4. Phelps Publishing Co. fire of 1907, 306. Phelps sprinkler, 421. Phenix sprinkler, 421. Phenix alarm valve, 168. Phenix dry valve 1, 252. Phenix dry valve 2, 253. Phenix sprinkler, 60, 422. Picker trunk Grinnell sprinkler, 385. Pierce Bros., Ltd., combined heat and sprinkler system, 326. Pierce-Hammond Co., 328. Pierce sprinkler, 60, 423. Piling of stock, 97. Pipe hangers, 116. Pipe schemes, 113. Pipe schemes for perforated pipes, 5. Pipes, test, 117. Pipe sizes for blind attics, 106. Pipe sizes for sprinkler systems, 104. Pipe sizes 1-3-6 or P. G. & S. P. schedule, 104. Pipe sizes 1-2-4 or 1896 sched- ule, 104. Pipe sizes 1-2-3 or 1905 sched- ule, 105. Pipe, underground, 134. Pitch roofs, sprinklers in, 89, 94, 103. Pits for check valves, 114. Policy form for sprinkler leak- age, 316. Porter Screen Co. fire of 1900, 303. Post indicator valves, location, 110, 114. Pratt, Philip W., automatic system, 13. Prentiss, F. H., 33. Prentiss sprinkler, see Draper. Pressure gages, 119. Pressure needed on top line of sprinklers, 122. Pressure tanks, 129. Pressure tanks, pressure re- quired, 130. Protection against jfr-iezing in cold basements, 120. Protection to life, sprinklers as a, 322. Protectus meter, 127. Providence Steam & Gas Pipe Co., perforated pipes, 2. Pumps, centrifugal, 133. INDEX 453 Pumps, electric, 133. Pumps, rotary, 132. Pumps, steam, 131. Pumps, tests of, 295. R. Report blank for inspection by Assured, 439. Report blank for sprinkler leak- age, 313. Requirements for construction of sprinklers, 84. Requirements for designing alarm valves, 145. Requirements for designing dry valves, 195. Rhode Island Supply and En- gineering Co., 53. Richmond dry valve, 253. Risks in which sprinklers are at a disadvantage, 92. Rockingham Paper Co. fire of 1912, 307. Rockwood offset, 330. Rockwood alarm valve J5, 183. Rockwood alarm valves 1 and A, 180. Rockwood dry valves 1 and A, 253. Rockwood sprinklers, 60, 423. Rockwood Sprinkler Co., 61. Rotary pumps, 132. Rotating deflectors of sprink- lers, 80. Roughton, Louis, automatic sys- tem, 12. Rundle Spence sprinkler, 424. Ruthenburg sprinkler, 37, 425. S. Sealed sprinkler, definition, 15. Self-inspection blank, 300. Self-inspection of fire appliances, 299. Sensitive sprinkler, definition, 15. Service connections from sprink- ler pipes, 96. Shaw dry valve, 255. Shaw sprinkler, 45, 426. Shove Mills fire of 1907, 306. Show windows, combined heat and sprinkler system, 336. Shut-off valve, Sypho Chemical system, 348. Side central feed for sprinklers, 107. Simmons sprinkler, 426. Simplex sprinkler, 426. Smith, James, automatic system, 12. Smith, Darius, sprinkler, 426. Solder, sprinkler, 71. Souther, John, automatic steam system, 13. Spacing of sprinklers, 98.' Spacing of sprinklers, joisted construction, 101. Spacing of sprinklers, mill con- struction, 99. Spacing of sprinklers under pitch roof, 103. Spacing of sprinklers under fire- proof construction, 103. ' Specifications for sprinkler tests, 85. Sprinkler guard, 312. Sprinkler heads for Sypho Chem- ical system, 345. Sprinkler leakage, causes for loss, 311. Sprinkler leakage, defective sprinklers, 311. Sprinkler leakage policy, 316. Sprinkler leakage report blank, 313. Sprinkler orifice, 75. Sprinkler pipes, hanging stock on, 97. 454 INDEX Sprinkler pipes, circulation in, 96. Sprinkler pipes, connections from, 96. Sprinkler pipes, hose connec- tions to, 98. Sprinkler pipe sizes, 104. Sprinkler risers, 109. Sprinkler solder, 71. Sprinkler spacing, 98. Sprinkler spacing under fire- proof construction, 103. Sprinkler spacing under joisted construction, 101. Sprinkler spacing under mill construction, 99. Sprinkler spacing under pitch roof, 103. Sprinkler supervisory, descrip- tion of devices, 266. Sprinkler supervisory, gate valve attachment, 276. Sprinkler supervisory, limita- tions, 265. Sprinkler supervisory, National Board rules, 260. Sprinkler supervisory, pressure indicator, 280. Sprinkler supervisory, temper- ature device, 285. Sprinkler supervisory, water flow, 266. Sprinkler supervisory, water level device, 283. Sprinkler systems, test of, 295. Sprinkler tests, Mutual, 1884, 67; 1886, 73. Sprinklers, age limit, 78. Sprinklers, approved list, 74. Sprinklers as a protection to life, 322. Sprinklers, at a disadvantage in certain risks, 92. Sprinklers, coating for, 79. Sprinklers, corrosion of, 78. Sprinklers, cost of equipments, 83. Sprinklers, defective in use, 82. Sprinklers, discharge from, 70, 76. Sprinklers, distance from ceil- ing, 94. Sprinklers, effect of, 302. Sprinklers, failures from age, 76. Sprinklers, fire record of old types, 73. Sprinklers, high test, 81. Sprinklers, in dynamo rooms, 95. Sprinklers, in vertical shafts, 96. Sprinklers, installation, general information, 88. Sprinklers, leakage from, 72. Sprinklers, location of, 93. Sprinklers, number operating in fires, 301. Sprinklers, painting of, 80, 96. Sprinklers, requirements for construction, 84. Sprinklers, rotating deflectors, 80. Sprinklers, size of orifice, 75. Sprinklers, spacing of, 98. Sprinklers, tests for acceptance, 83. Sprinklers, test specifications, 85. Sprinklers, testing oven, 297. Sprinklers, tests of, 297-438. Sprinklers, types of, 42. Sprinklers, under peak roofs, 94, 103. Sprinklers, unsuitable risks for, 92. Sprinklers, valve discs, 81. Sprinklers, water supplies for, 121. Sprinklers, Woodbury tests, 67. Standard sprinkler, 427. INDEX 455 Standard (Whiting) sprinkler, 28. Standard Fire Extinguisher Co., 53. Standard Report Blank In- spection by Assured, 439. Stantial sprinkler, 427. Star sprinkler, 47, 428. Steam pumps, 131. Steamer connections, 134. Steck dry valves 1 and 2, 256. Steck sprinkler, 428. Sterling Comb Co. fire of 1903, 304. Straight offset, combined heat and sprinkler system, 320. Stratton sprinkler, 428. Summary of recent tests on sprinklers, 438. Supervisory, see Sprinkler super- visory. Supplies for perforated pipe sys- tems, 6. Swan sprinkler, 429. Sypho Chemical sprinkler sys- tem, description, 340. T. Tags for valves, 292. Tags, Mutual system, 293. Talcott sprinkler, 429. Tank, Sypho Chemical system, 342. Tanks, concrete, 128. Tanks, examination of, 295. Tanks, gravity, 127. Tanks, pressure, 129. Tessier sprinkler, 430. Tests and examinations, Sypho Chemical system, 350. Tests for acceptance, 83. Tests of temperature, combined heat and sprinkler system, 330. Tests for alarm valves, 295. Tests of drip valves, 294. Tests of sprinkler heads from the field, 297. Test on sprinklers, 438. Test pipe, 117. Test specifications for sprinklers, -85. Thompson, E. L., alarm valve, 143. Titan sprinklers, 430. Turner & Gardiner sprinkler, 431. U. Underground pipe and fittings, 135. Underground pipe, sizes needed, 136. Underground pipe, weight, 135. Underground pipe tests, 136. United States sprinkler, 431. Universal Automatic Fire Ex- tinguisher Co., 32. Universal sprinkler (Kane), 399, 431. Unsatisfactory sprinkler fires, 301. U. T. D. dry valve, 256. U. T. D. sprinkler, 432. V. Valve discs of sprinklers, 81 Valves and fittings, 109. Valves, alarm, see Alarm. Valves, arrangement of gate and check, 111. Valves, care of, 290. Valves, check, 111. Valves, for each floor, 116. Valves, post, location, 114. Valves, sealing or strapping of, 290. Valves, tags, 292. Valves, test of drip, 294. 456 INDEX Venturi alarm valve, 142, 171. Venturi alarm valve 'B, 175. Venturi alarm valve 3 D, 176. Vogel sprinkler, 432. W. Walworth alarm valve, 183. - Walworth dry valve 3, 259. Walworth dry system, 194. Walworth dry valve 1, 257. Walworth dry valve 2, 258. Walworth links, 36. Walworth Manufacturing Co., 35. Walworth sprinkler 1, 35, 433. Walworth sprinklers 2 and 3, 36, 433. Walworth sprinklers, late types, 61, 434. Warren Manufacturing Co. fire of 1895, 303. Water column of dry valves, 185. Water hammer, 124. Water meters, 124. Water pressure needed on top line, 122. Water supplies for sprinklers, 121. Waterworks supply, 123. Waterworks supply, size of pipe, 123. Weston sprinkler, 436. Whiting . sprinkler (Standard), 28. Whiting sprinkler (Hub), 28, 436. Whiting system of perforated pipes, 4. Wilber sprinkler, 436. Wilson sprinkler, 437. Witter sprinklers, 437. Wood dry valve (Manufac- turers), 232. Wood sprinklers, 437. Woodbury Shoe Co. fire of 1915, 308. Woodbury tests, 1885, 73. Woodbury tests, 1884, conclu- sions, 67. Woodbury tests, 1884, distribu- tion, 70. Woodbury tests, 1884, discharge, 70. Woodbury tests, 1884, sensitive- ness, 68. Worcester Bleach & Dye Works fire of 1910, 306. Worcester Fire Extinguisher Co., 61. FNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY i RETURN TO the circulation desk of any University of California Library or to the NORTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY Bldg. 400, Richmond Field Station University of California Richmond, CA 94804-4698 ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS 2- month loans may be renewed by calling (510)642-6753 1-year loans may be recharged by bringing books to NRLF Renewals and recharges may be made 4 days prior to due date DUE AS STAMPED BELOW MAY 1 6 1996 .000 (4/94) 20,0 o- <3'~ UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY