RE: fire pump test header size
OK To follow up with my mistaken theology on this issue Tom at AFSA has straightened me out. When you calculate using the form A.5.19.3.4(2) from NFAP #20 you are adding the Pitot pressure in so the pressure you calculate is actually what you need at the pump discharge. In my case it is approximately 70 psi and I have 120 psi available. Thanks, Greg McGahan Living Water Fire Protection, LLC 1160 McKenzie Road Cantonment, FL 32533 850-937-1850 Fax: 850-937-1852 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
RE: fire pump test header size
Any one has a collective file of common mistakes of sprinkle system design that he/she would like to chair with us? Thanks in advance. JABER. M. AL-HAJI [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
RE: fire pump test header size
See the appendix Figure A.5.19.3.4(2) in NFPA 20 2007 edition for the method I used. I need 43 psi at required pump discharge. The pump is rated @ 185 psi @ 750 gpm. At 150% flow we will have approx. 120 psi at pump discharge. Am I looking at this wrong or does this mean that we basically need 163 psi at pump discharge in order to get the 150% flow? So if we have 43 psi flowing 1125 gpm at pump suction, we got it. If not, we don't? I can not think clearly anymore so let me know where I am wrong if I am wrong. Thanks, Greg Living Water Fire Protection, LLC 1160 McKenzie Road Cantonment, FL 32533 850-937-1850 Fax: 850-937-1852 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Duross Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 3:22 PM To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: fire pump test header size What did you calculate for an outlet? Just the manifold (5-10'), tee (5-15'), nipple(?) and valve (5-25')? At what flow per 2.5 outlet? 250 per? What happens when you put 50-75-100' of hose, playpipe, monster or meter on it? I'm sure the upsize rule is to minimize friction loss. If it's in the standard, it must be done. Interesting thing I just noticed this afternoon. I just got home from an acceptance test just now. I used 4 digital flowmeters on a derby cap for a 1500 GPM diesel. They have pressure gauges on them for FDV testing. We had a gauge on the 8 to the derby with (6) 2.5 angle valves just inside the wall at the butterfly header valve. At 2250, we had a 16 PSI drop from the gauge on the 8 to the gauges on the meters. I thought that was substantial. We pretty much balanced the flow between the four meters but a drop that great was surprising to me. 3' of 8 to a derby (this is like a bullhead tee hydraulically I would imagine) and a 2.5x5 nipple and angle valve. 16 PSI at roughly 550 GPM. I thought this to be substantial and they all read the same and are almost new. Tom Duross Living Water Fire Protection, LLC 1160 McKenzie Road Cantonment, FL 32533 850-937-1850 Fax: 850-937-1852 This is from the 2007 edition of NFPA #20. 5.19.3.4 Pipe Size. The pipe size shall be in accordance with one of the following two methods: (1) Where the pipe between the hose valve header and connection to the pump discharge pipe is over 15 ft (4.5 m) in length, the next larger pipe size than required by 5.19.3.1.3 shall be used. (2)* This pipe is permitted to be sized by hydraulic calculations based on a total flow of 150 percent of rated pump capacity, including the following: (a) This calculation shall include friction loss for the total length of pipe plus equivalent lengths of fittings, control valve, and hose valves, plus elevation loss, from the pump discharge flange to the hose valve outlets. (b) The installation shall be proven by a test flowing the maximum water available. I just calculated a test header located approx. 65' from a 750 gpm pump and it seems to work easily with 6 pipe flowing 1,125 gpm in lieu of increasing the pipe to 8. Has anyone got experience using this method? Space is the issue and 6 works much better then 8 in this situation. Thanks, Greg McGahan ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
RE: fire pump test header size
Greg, I have calc'd numerous test headers at distances from 16ft to more than 100' from the fire pump discharge. I have never had an instance where the calc's did not work with. I am sure there must be a situation that has concerned the NFPA committees enough to include the requirement, but I do not know what it is. Thanks, Ray Vance Chief Engineering Tech Wayne Automatic Fire Sprinklers, Inc. www.waynefire.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg McGahan Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 2:54 PM To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org Subject: fire pump test header size Living Water Fire Protection, LLC 1160 McKenzie Road Cantonment, FL 32533 850-937-1850 Fax: 850-937-1852 This is from the 2007 edition of NFPA #20. 5.19.3.4 Pipe Size. The pipe size shall be in accordance with one of the following two methods: (1) Where the pipe between the hose valve header and connection to the pump discharge pipe is over 15 ft (4.5 m) in length, the next larger pipe size than required by 5.19.3.1.3 shall be used. (2)* This pipe is permitted to be sized by hydraulic calculations based on a total flow of 150 percent of rated pump capacity, including the following: (a) This calculation shall include friction loss for the total length of pipe plus equivalent lengths of fittings, control valve, and hose valves, plus elevation loss, from the pump discharge flange to the hose valve outlets. (b) The installation shall be proven by a test flowing the maximum water available. I just calculated a test header located approx. 65' from a 750 gpm pump and it seems to work easily with 6 pipe flowing 1,125 gpm in lieu of increasing the pipe to 8. Has anyone got experience using this method? Space is the issue and 6 works much better then 8 in this situation. Thanks, Greg McGahan ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
RE: fire pump test header size
What did you calculate for an outlet? Just the manifold (5-10'), tee (5-15'), nipple(?) and valve (5-25')? At what flow per 2.5 outlet? 250 per? What happens when you put 50-75-100' of hose, playpipe, monster or meter on it? I'm sure the upsize rule is to minimize friction loss. If it's in the standard, it must be done. Interesting thing I just noticed this afternoon. I just got home from an acceptance test just now. I used 4 digital flowmeters on a derby cap for a 1500 GPM diesel. They have pressure gauges on them for FDV testing. We had a gauge on the 8 to the derby with (6) 2.5 angle valves just inside the wall at the butterfly header valve. At 2250, we had a 16 PSI drop from the gauge on the 8 to the gauges on the meters. I thought that was substantial. We pretty much balanced the flow between the four meters but a drop that great was surprising to me. 3' of 8 to a derby (this is like a bullhead tee hydraulically I would imagine) and a 2.5x5 nipple and angle valve. 16 PSI at roughly 550 GPM. I thought this to be substantial and they all read the same and are almost new. Tom Duross Living Water Fire Protection, LLC 1160 McKenzie Road Cantonment, FL 32533 850-937-1850 Fax: 850-937-1852 This is from the 2007 edition of NFPA #20. 5.19.3.4 Pipe Size. The pipe size shall be in accordance with one of the following two methods: (1) Where the pipe between the hose valve header and connection to the pump discharge pipe is over 15 ft (4.5 m) in length, the next larger pipe size than required by 5.19.3.1.3 shall be used. (2)* This pipe is permitted to be sized by hydraulic calculations based on a total flow of 150 percent of rated pump capacity, including the following: (a) This calculation shall include friction loss for the total length of pipe plus equivalent lengths of fittings, control valve, and hose valves, plus elevation loss, from the pump discharge flange to the hose valve outlets. (b) The installation shall be proven by a test flowing the maximum water available. I just calculated a test header located approx. 65' from a 750 gpm pump and it seems to work easily with 6 pipe flowing 1,125 gpm in lieu of increasing the pipe to 8. Has anyone got experience using this method? Space is the issue and 6 works much better then 8 in this situation. Thanks, Greg McGahan ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
RE: fire pump test header size
Pressure is measured at the pump and flow at the nozzles so why does the friction loss from the pump to the nozzles matter so long as the 150% capacity is observed. Ron Fletcher Aero Automatic Sprinkler Phoenix, AZ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Duross Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 2:22 PM To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: fire pump test header size What did you calculate for an outlet? Just the manifold (5-10'), tee (5-15'), nipple(?) and valve (5-25')? At what flow per 2.5 outlet? 250 per? What happens when you put 50-75-100' of hose, playpipe, monster or meter on it? I'm sure the upsize rule is to minimize friction loss. If it's in the standard, it must be done. Interesting thing I just noticed this afternoon. I just got home from an acceptance test just now. I used 4 digital flowmeters on a derby cap for a 1500 GPM diesel. They have pressure gauges on them for FDV testing. We had a gauge on the 8 to the derby with (6) 2.5 angle valves just inside the wall at the butterfly header valve. At 2250, we had a 16 PSI drop from the gauge on the 8 to the gauges on the meters. I thought that was substantial. We pretty much balanced the flow between the four meters but a drop that great was surprising to me. 3' of 8 to a derby (this is like a bullhead tee hydraulically I would imagine) and a 2.5x5 nipple and angle valve. 16 PSI at roughly 550 GPM. I thought this to be substantial and they all read the same and are almost new. Tom Duross Living Water Fire Protection, LLC 1160 McKenzie Road Cantonment, FL 32533 850-937-1850 Fax: 850-937-1852 This is from the 2007 edition of NFPA #20. 5.19.3.4 Pipe Size. The pipe size shall be in accordance with one of the following two methods: (1) Where the pipe between the hose valve header and connection to the pump discharge pipe is over 15 ft (4.5 m) in length, the next larger pipe size than required by 5.19.3.1.3 shall be used. (2)* This pipe is permitted to be sized by hydraulic calculations based on a total flow of 150 percent of rated pump capacity, including the following: (a) This calculation shall include friction loss for the total length of pipe plus equivalent lengths of fittings, control valve, and hose valves, plus elevation loss, from the pump discharge flange to the hose valve outlets. (b) The installation shall be proven by a test flowing the maximum water available. I just calculated a test header located approx. 65' from a 750 gpm pump and it seems to work easily with 6 pipe flowing 1,125 gpm in lieu of increasing the pipe to 8. Has anyone got experience using this method? Space is the issue and 6 works much better then 8 in this situation. Thanks, Greg McGahan ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
Re: fire pump test header size
Because you loose so much flow to friction, it appears the pump fails. It's like testing a fire pump from the roof. Tom Pressure is measured at the pump and flow at the nozzles so why does the friction loss from the pump to the nozzles matter so long as the 150% capacity is observed. Ron Fletcher Aero Automatic Sprinkler Phoenix, AZ What did you calculate for an outlet? Just the manifold (5-10'), tee (5-15'), nipple(?) and valve (5-25')? At what flow per 2.5 outlet? 250 per? What happens when you put 50-75-100' of hose, playpipe, monster or meter on it? I'm sure the upsize rule is to minimize friction loss. If it's in the standard, it must be done. Interesting thing I just noticed this afternoon. I just got home from an acceptance test just now. I used 4 digital flowmeters on a derby cap for a 1500 GPM diesel. They have pressure gauges on them for FDV testing. We had a gauge on the 8 to the derby with (6) 2.5 angle valves just inside the wall at the butterfly header valve. At 2250, we had a 16 PSI drop from the gauge on the 8 to the gauges on the meters. I thought that was substantial. We pretty much balanced the flow between the four meters but a drop that great was surprising to me. 3' of 8 to a derby (this is like a bullhead tee hydraulically I would imagine) and a 2.5x5 nipple and angle valve. 16 PSI at roughly 550 GPM. I thought this to be substantial and they all read the same and are almost new. Tom Duross 5.19.3.4 Pipe Size. The pipe size shall be in accordance with one of the following two methods: (1) Where the pipe between the hose valve header and connection to the pump discharge pipe is over 15 ft (4.5 m) in length, the next larger pipe size than required by 5.19.3.1.3 shall be used. (2)* This pipe is permitted to be sized by hydraulic calculations based on a total flow of 150 percent of rated pump capacity, including the following: (a) This calculation shall include friction loss for the total length of pipe plus equivalent lengths of fittings, control valve, and hose valves, plus elevation loss, from the pump discharge flange to the hose valve outlets. (b) The installation shall be proven by a test flowing the maximum water available. I just calculated a test header located approx. 65' from a 750 gpm pump and it seems to work easily with 6 pipe flowing 1,125 gpm in lieu of increasing the pipe to 8. Has anyone got experience using this method? Space is the issue and 6 works much better then 8 in this situation. Thanks, Greg McGahan ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
