Re: resurrecting an old system
I like Mr. Hill's approach. A little quality time using his approach should narrow down the scope of necessary repairs fairly quickly. Dwight On Saturday, November 23, 2013 1:25 PM, John O'Connor jocon...@nfspk.com wrote: Mike, I would respectfully urge flushing prior to full 200# test, simply because this system contains mud and other debris, that could, still in place, allow pinhole leaks to remain undetected. Flush to eliminate debris that could be allowing a successful pressure test. Once flushed, the system may still show leaks resulting from the debris removal internally. John -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hill Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 9:58 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: resurrecting an old system You are on the right track. Test and repair as needed, then flush. I had a similar situation in an aircraft hangar about 15 years ago. System froze and there were lots of issues. The occupant's first indication of a problem was falling debris, broken fittings. We went in and fixed the obvious issues. We then put air on the system and found several large leaks. Put air on it again and still had leaks but the pressure drop took much longer, so we felt confident to put water on the system (street pressure). Found several small leaks and repaired them. When system held street pressure, we pumped it up gradually to 200 psi. I think the whole process took 3 days. If I remember correctly, we also separated the system into smaller sections before we started testing, so as to help us locate leaks. I would try to salvage as much of the existing system as possible, if only to help the owner save some money. Why discard the system because of what you think might be wrong. Find out what is actually wrong. System may be easily and confidently repaired or you may find enough issues or concerns spread out through the entire building to warrant total replacement. By proving this one way or the other you will be helping out the new owner. Mike Hill -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Todd - Work Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:02 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: resurrecting an old system I am working with a company that bought a building where the sprinkler system had been turned off about 10 years ago. The fire department is requiring that a system be turned on. The existing system was fed from a pump taking suction from a pond (disconnected and removed). There has been some cracking and splitting of fittings at low points and some heads have popped. The first step was to have a contractor come in and made a detailed visual inspection of the system, including internal. That showed that all of the pipe up high appears to be in good shape and could possibly be re-used. However, there was some mud (not scale) that had collected in some of the mains. My thought was that the next step would be to fix or cap off the broken areas and do an air test to see what the integrity of the system really is, then flush the system if all looks good. However, would you want to flush out the mains before you do an air test? If there is a problem with the mains in the area covered by the mud, would the air test not show it? On the other side, flushing would create a problem since there is no public water supply. We would probably have to get a fire department pumper involved. Also, you could have an issue if the water finds a leak and water starts spraying down on equipment Thoughts? Flush or air test first? Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT www.fpdc.com ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1432 / Virus Database: 3629/6352 - Release Date: 11/20/13 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
RE: resurrecting an old system
Do an air test, fix the obvious stuff that's broken, buy a new pump and flush/test the existing pipe with water. An air test will get most big leaks it's pretty hard to find little pin hole leaks using air if it is a large volume system. My 2 cents. Ron F -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Todd - Work Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 6:02 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: resurrecting an old system I am working with a company that bought a building where the sprinkler system had been turned off about 10 years ago. The fire department is requiring that a system be turned on. The existing system was fed from a pump taking suction from a pond (disconnected and removed). There has been some cracking and splitting of fittings at low points and some heads have popped. The first step was to have a contractor come in and made a detailed visual inspection of the system, including internal. That showed that all of the pipe up high appears to be in good shape and could possibly be re-used. However, there was some mud (not scale) that had collected in some of the mains. My thought was that the next step would be to fix or cap off the broken areas and do an air test to see what the integrity of the system really is, then flush the system if all looks good. However, would you want to flush out the mains before you do an air test? If there is a problem with the mains in the area covered by the mud, would the air test not show it? On the other side, flushing would create a problem since there is no public water supply. We would probably have to get a fire department pumper involved. Also, you could have an issue if the water finds a leak and water starts spraying down on equipment Thoughts? Flush or air test first? Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT www.fpdc.com ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
RE: resurrecting an old system
I like the replace it all option... How old is the system to start with? You need to replace all the sprinklers, if some have popped you don't know how many others may be damaged. What about gaskets in grooved couplings? Is the water supply now equal to the original pump and pond? If not, pipe size changes, right? You could minimize the liability by replacing everything... Scott (763) 425-1001 Office (612) 759-5556 Cell -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Todd - Work Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 7:02 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: resurrecting an old system I am working with a company that bought a building where the sprinkler system had been turned off about 10 years ago. The fire department is requiring that a system be turned on. The existing system was fed from a pump taking suction from a pond (disconnected and removed). There has been some cracking and splitting of fittings at low points and some heads have popped. The first step was to have a contractor come in and made a detailed visual inspection of the system, including internal. That showed that all of the pipe up high appears to be in good shape and could possibly be re-used. However, there was some mud (not scale) that had collected in some of the mains. My thought was that the next step would be to fix or cap off the broken areas and do an air test to see what the integrity of the system really is, then flush the system if all looks good. However, would you want to flush out the mains before you do an air test? If there is a problem with the mains in the area covered by the mud, would the air test not show it? On the other side, flushing would create a problem since there is no public water supply. We would probably have to get a fire department pumper involved. Also, you could have an issue if the water finds a leak and water starts spraying down on equipment Thoughts? Flush or air test first? Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT www.fpdc.com ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
Re: resurrecting an old system
The owner wants to re-use the system and we have to prove to him that it needs to be replaced, if it does. I'm thinking after a physical inspection and air test, it would tell us if we have something that could be used or not. The building is approximately 30 ft to the peak and 25 to the hip and is wide open for storage and maintenance of large equipment (demolition company). However, working on mains around the perimeter will be difficult at best. My guess is that when the system was shut down, they just opened the 2 drain and didn't bother with low points. I think most of the low stuff will have to be replaced. But it would be helpful if at least the high piping could remain. Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT www.fpdc.com On Nov 20, 2013, at 9:06 AM, Scott A Futrell sco...@ffcdi.com wrote: I like the replace it all option... How old is the system to start with? You need to replace all the sprinklers, if some have popped you don't know how many others may be damaged. What about gaskets in grooved couplings? Is the water supply now equal to the original pump and pond? If not, pipe size changes, right? You could minimize the liability by replacing everything... Scott (763) 425-1001 Office (612) 759-5556 Cell -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Todd - Work Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 7:02 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: resurrecting an old system I am working with a company that bought a building where the sprinkler system had been turned off about 10 years ago. The fire department is requiring that a system be turned on. The existing system was fed from a pump taking suction from a pond (disconnected and removed). There has been some cracking and splitting of fittings at low points and some heads have popped. The first step was to have a contractor come in and made a detailed visual inspection of the system, including internal. That showed that all of the pipe up high appears to be in good shape and could possibly be re-used. However, there was some mud (not scale) that had collected in some of the mains. My thought was that the next step would be to fix or cap off the broken areas and do an air test to see what the integrity of the system really is, then flush the system if all looks good. However, would you want to flush out the mains before you do an air test? If there is a problem with the mains in the area covered by the mud, would the air test not show it? On the other side, flushing would create a problem since there is no public water supply. We would probably have to get a fire department pumper involved. Also, you could have an issue if the water finds a leak and water starts spraying down on equipment Thoughts? Flush or air test first? Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT www.fpdc.com ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
RE: resurrecting an old system
I would air test first but I think you will need the water test to find leaks Sent from my Galaxy S®III Original message From: Scott A Futrell sco...@ffcdi.com Date: 11/20/2013 9:06 AM (GMT-05:00) To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: resurrecting an old system I like the replace it all option... How old is the system to start with? You need to replace all the sprinklers, if some have popped you don't know how many others may be damaged. What about gaskets in grooved couplings? Is the water supply now equal to the original pump and pond? If not, pipe size changes, right? You could minimize the liability by replacing everything... Scott (763) 425-1001 Office (612) 759-5556 Cell -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Todd - Work Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 7:02 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: resurrecting an old system I am working with a company that bought a building where the sprinkler system had been turned off about 10 years ago. The fire department is requiring that a system be turned on. The existing system was fed from a pump taking suction from a pond (disconnected and removed). There has been some cracking and splitting of fittings at low points and some heads have popped. The first step was to have a contractor come in and made a detailed visual inspection of the system, including internal. That showed that all of the pipe up high appears to be in good shape and could possibly be re-used. However, there was some mud (not scale) that had collected in some of the mains. My thought was that the next step would be to fix or cap off the broken areas and do an air test to see what the integrity of the system really is, then flush the system if all looks good. However, would you want to flush out the mains before you do an air test? If there is a problem with the mains in the area covered by the mud, would the air test not show it? On the other side, flushing would create a problem since there is no public water supply. We would probably have to get a fire department pumper involved. Also, you could have an issue if the water finds a leak and water starts spraying down on equipment Thoughts? Flush or air test first? Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT www.fpdc.com ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
RE: resurrecting an old system
You are on the right track. Test and repair as needed, then flush. I had a similar situation in an aircraft hangar about 15 years ago. System froze and there were lots of issues. The occupant's first indication of a problem was falling debris, broken fittings. We went in and fixed the obvious issues. We then put air on the system and found several large leaks. Put air on it again and still had leaks but the pressure drop took much longer, so we felt confident to put water on the system (street pressure). Found several small leaks and repaired them. When system held street pressure, we pumped it up gradually to 200 psi. I think the whole process took 3 days. If I remember correctly, we also separated the system into smaller sections before we started testing, so as to help us locate leaks. I would try to salvage as much of the existing system as possible, if only to help the owner save some money. Why discard the system because of what you think might be wrong. Find out what is actually wrong. System may be easily and confidently repaired or you may find enough issues or concerns spread out through the entire building to warrant total replacement. By proving this one way or the other you will be helping out the new owner. Mike Hill -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Todd - Work Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:02 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: resurrecting an old system I am working with a company that bought a building where the sprinkler system had been turned off about 10 years ago. The fire department is requiring that a system be turned on. The existing system was fed from a pump taking suction from a pond (disconnected and removed). There has been some cracking and splitting of fittings at low points and some heads have popped. The first step was to have a contractor come in and made a detailed visual inspection of the system, including internal. That showed that all of the pipe up high appears to be in good shape and could possibly be re-used. However, there was some mud (not scale) that had collected in some of the mains. My thought was that the next step would be to fix or cap off the broken areas and do an air test to see what the integrity of the system really is, then flush the system if all looks good. However, would you want to flush out the mains before you do an air test? If there is a problem with the mains in the area covered by the mud, would the air test not show it? On the other side, flushing would create a problem since there is no public water supply. We would probably have to get a fire department pumper involved. Also, you could have an issue if the water finds a leak and water starts spraying down on equipment Thoughts? Flush or air test first? Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT www.fpdc.com ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
RE: resurrecting an old system
Mike, I would respectfully urge flushing prior to full 200# test, simply because this system contains mud and other debris, that could, still in place, allow pinhole leaks to remain undetected. Flush to eliminate debris that could be allowing a successful pressure test. Once flushed, the system may still show leaks resulting from the debris removal internally. John -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hill Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 9:58 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: resurrecting an old system You are on the right track. Test and repair as needed, then flush. I had a similar situation in an aircraft hangar about 15 years ago. System froze and there were lots of issues. The occupant's first indication of a problem was falling debris, broken fittings. We went in and fixed the obvious issues. We then put air on the system and found several large leaks. Put air on it again and still had leaks but the pressure drop took much longer, so we felt confident to put water on the system (street pressure). Found several small leaks and repaired them. When system held street pressure, we pumped it up gradually to 200 psi. I think the whole process took 3 days. If I remember correctly, we also separated the system into smaller sections before we started testing, so as to help us locate leaks. I would try to salvage as much of the existing system as possible, if only to help the owner save some money. Why discard the system because of what you think might be wrong. Find out what is actually wrong. System may be easily and confidently repaired or you may find enough issues or concerns spread out through the entire building to warrant total replacement. By proving this one way or the other you will be helping out the new owner. Mike Hill -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Todd - Work Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:02 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: resurrecting an old system I am working with a company that bought a building where the sprinkler system had been turned off about 10 years ago. The fire department is requiring that a system be turned on. The existing system was fed from a pump taking suction from a pond (disconnected and removed). There has been some cracking and splitting of fittings at low points and some heads have popped. The first step was to have a contractor come in and made a detailed visual inspection of the system, including internal. That showed that all of the pipe up high appears to be in good shape and could possibly be re-used. However, there was some mud (not scale) that had collected in some of the mains. My thought was that the next step would be to fix or cap off the broken areas and do an air test to see what the integrity of the system really is, then flush the system if all looks good. However, would you want to flush out the mains before you do an air test? If there is a problem with the mains in the area covered by the mud, would the air test not show it? On the other side, flushing would create a problem since there is no public water supply. We would probably have to get a fire department pumper involved. Also, you could have an issue if the water finds a leak and water starts spraying down on equipment Thoughts? Flush or air test first? Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT www.fpdc.com ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1432 / Virus Database: 3629/6352 - Release Date: 11/20/13 ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
RE: resurrecting an old system
I would suggest a slightly modified approach. Test and repair as needed until tight. Flush and then retest. You really need to flush and retest due to the leaks that might be uncovered after proper flushing. I agree with Scott on cost. Given the total cost in the end, it might be wiser for the owner to spend the money on replacing the system. John August Denhardt, P.E., FSFPE Strickland Fire Protection Incorporated 5113 Berwyn Road College Park, Maryland 20740 Office Telephone Number: 301-474-1136 Mobile Telephone Number: 301-343-1457 FIRE SPRINKLERS SAVE LIVES - Can you live without them? -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of John O'Connor Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 11:03 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: resurrecting an old system Mike, I would respectfully urge flushing prior to full 200# test, simply because this system contains mud and other debris, that could, still in place, allow pinhole leaks to remain undetected. Flush to eliminate debris that could be allowing a successful pressure test. Once flushed, the system may still show leaks resulting from the debris removal internally. John -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hill Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 9:58 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: resurrecting an old system You are on the right track. Test and repair as needed, then flush. I had a similar situation in an aircraft hangar about 15 years ago. System froze and there were lots of issues. The occupant's first indication of a problem was falling debris, broken fittings. We went in and fixed the obvious issues. We then put air on the system and found several large leaks. Put air on it again and still had leaks but the pressure drop took much longer, so we felt confident to put water on the system (street pressure). Found several small leaks and repaired them. When system held street pressure, we pumped it up gradually to 200 psi. I think the whole process took 3 days. If I remember correctly, we also separated the system into smaller sections before we started testing, so as to help us locate leaks. I would try to salvage as much of the existing system as possible, if only to help the owner save some money. Why discard the system because of what you think might be wrong. Find out what is actually wrong. System may be easily and confidently repaired or you may find enough issues or concerns spread out through the entire building to warrant total replacement. By proving this one way or the other you will be helping out the new owner. Mike Hill -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Todd - Work Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:02 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: resurrecting an old system I am working with a company that bought a building where the sprinkler system had been turned off about 10 years ago. The fire department is requiring that a system be turned on. The existing system was fed from a pump taking suction from a pond (disconnected and removed). There has been some cracking and splitting of fittings at low points and some heads have popped. The first step was to have a contractor come in and made a detailed visual inspection of the system, including internal. That showed that all of the pipe up high appears to be in good shape and could possibly be re-used. However, there was some mud (not scale) that had collected in some of the mains. My thought was that the next step would be to fix or cap off the broken areas and do an air test to see what the integrity of the system really is, then flush the system if all looks good. However, would you want to flush out the mains before you do an air test? If there is a problem with the mains in the area covered by the mud, would the air test not show it? On the other side, flushing would create a problem since there is no public water supply. We would probably have to get a fire department pumper involved. Also, you could have an issue if the water finds a leak and water starts spraying down on equipment Thoughts? Flush or air test first? Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT www.fpdc.com ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org ___ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1432 / Virus
RE: resurrecting an old system
The other benefit to the owner with replacement is a warranty. If the system is patched back together, then it could end up being a source of constant headaches and expense if leaks start to show up. Replacing the system could end up being a faster option depending on how many rounds of testing, flushing, and patching are needed. Matt Grisé PE*, LEED AP, NICET II Sales Engineer Alliance Fire Protection 130 w 9th Ave. North Kansas City, MO 64116 *Licensed in KS MO 913.888.0647 ph 913.888.0618 f 913.927.0222 cell www. AFPsprink.com -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of John Denhardt Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 10:26 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: resurrecting an old system I would suggest a slightly modified approach. Test and repair as needed until tight. Flush and then retest. You really need to flush and retest due to the leaks that might be uncovered after proper flushing. I agree with Scott on cost. Given the total cost in the end, it might be wiser for the owner to spend the money on replacing the system. John August Denhardt, P.E., FSFPE Strickland Fire Protection Incorporated 5113 Berwyn Road College Park, Maryland 20740 Office Telephone Number: 301-474-1136 Mobile Telephone Number: 301-343-1457 FIRE SPRINKLERS SAVE LIVES - Can you live without them? -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of John O'Connor Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 11:03 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: resurrecting an old system Mike, I would respectfully urge flushing prior to full 200# test, simply because this system contains mud and other debris, that could, still in place, allow pinhole leaks to remain undetected. Flush to eliminate debris that could be allowing a successful pressure test. Once flushed, the system may still show leaks resulting from the debris removal internally. John -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hill Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 9:58 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: RE: resurrecting an old system You are on the right track. Test and repair as needed, then flush. I had a similar situation in an aircraft hangar about 15 years ago. System froze and there were lots of issues. The occupant's first indication of a problem was falling debris, broken fittings. We went in and fixed the obvious issues. We then put air on the system and found several large leaks. Put air on it again and still had leaks but the pressure drop took much longer, so we felt confident to put water on the system (street pressure). Found several small leaks and repaired them. When system held street pressure, we pumped it up gradually to 200 psi. I think the whole process took 3 days. If I remember correctly, we also separated the system into smaller sections before we started testing, so as to help us locate leaks. I would try to salvage as much of the existing system as possible, if only to help the owner save some money. Why discard the system because of what you think might be wrong. Find out what is actually wrong. System may be easily and confidently repaired or you may find enough issues or concerns spread out through the entire building to warrant total replacement. By proving this one way or the other you will be helping out the new owner. Mike Hill -Original Message- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Todd - Work Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:02 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: resurrecting an old system I am working with a company that bought a building where the sprinkler system had been turned off about 10 years ago. The fire department is requiring that a system be turned on. The existing system was fed from a pump taking suction from a pond (disconnected and removed). There has been some cracking and splitting of fittings at low points and some heads have popped. The first step was to have a contractor come in and made a detailed visual inspection of the system, including internal. That showed that all of the pipe up high appears to be in good shape and could possibly be re-used. However, there was some mud (not scale) that had collected in some of the mains. My thought was that the next step would be to fix or cap off the broken areas and do an air test to see what the integrity of the system really is, then flush the system if all looks good. However, would you want to flush out the mains before you do an air test? If there is a problem with the mains in the area covered by the mud, would the air
