Dan, the new pipe c=120 is very conservative I personally conducted tests
with 10" dia pipe in laboratory conditions in the 1000...2000 GPM flow
rates with accurate mercury pressure gauges and measured c=140..150
values. for old cast iron piping (unlined) most civil engineering handbook
recommend reduced c factors like:
new pipe C=130, 10 years old pipe C=110, 20y C=90, 30y C=75, 40y C=65.
These numbers are pretty close for practical purposes but the best is the
actual flow test. Example the c=130 versus C=90 for a 20 years old pipe
about doubles the actual calculated friction loss in the 20years old cast
iron piping. Looks like the same calculation adjustment does not apply for
cement lined piping "C=140"?!
Peter Nadhazy Cell (508)493-3933
Marathon Fire Protection, Inc.
578 Arcade Avenue
PO BOX 160
Seekonk, MA 02771
(508)336-4300
Fax :(508)336-4232
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.marathonfire.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "danarbel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 12:23 PM
Subject: RE: C-Factor for old piping
OK,
It seems that it is all based on assumptions.
Is there anybody that made tests to prove assumptions are right,
particularly for old piping?
I did some tests.
In two 15-20 years pipe mains, 6" and 4" pipes, appears to deliver 25%to
30%
of the calculated flow with C-100.
In a new 600 ft 8" pipe I got pressure loss more than 2 times the
calculated
value. The pipe was flushed several times with a flow of 1600 gpm.
Yesterday, I got 40% loss of pressure over a service connection. This
appears to be normal. I already use this as a rule of thumb.
Dan
Dan Arbel
Tel: 972-4-8243337
Fax: 972-4-8243278
M: 972-52-2810593
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron
Greenman
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 6:03 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: C-Factor for old piping
That is my understanding and that we use C100 for dry systems because
they are more prone to quicker deterioration. This is a prescriptive
method of accounting for degradation over the life of the system. If
we are then inspecting per the prescriptive document NFPA 25 we will
be visually inspecting for unusual deterioration every five years.
These values and frequencies have been determined by the committees
(ergo professionals) to meet a minimum standard of care relative to an
acceptable level of risk. If someone responsible for a system (owner,
AHJ, Doris the Lunch Lady) determines that a greater risk exists than
these values and frequencies address then a more stringent set of
criteria can be set up. A great example is NFPA 96
(...Ventilation...(for)...Commercial Cooking....) wherein cleaning
frequencies are determined by inspection and inspection frequencies
are determined by the type and amount of cooking done. There's also an
annex entry that states that if the prescribed inspection frequencies
suggest that more frequent inspections or cleanings are determined to
be needed then that should be considered.
On Feb 13, 2008 6:50 AM, Matthew J. Willis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Isn't C for new steel 150. We use 120 to "semi"-account for degradation.
If
the pipe is flushed IAW 25, and all the stuff done that is SUPPOSED to be
done, then you should have a good idea on internal condition. As Scot
said,
the end resulting flow is the final indication of pipe condition.
R//
Matt
Matthew J. Willis
Living Water Fire Protection, LLC.
1160 McKenzie Rd.
PO Box 877
Cantonment, FL. 32533
850-937-1850 Voice
850-937-1852 Facsimile
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- >-----Original Message-----
----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
----- >Behalf Of å... ....
----- >Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 8:34 AM
----- >To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
----- >Subject: C-Factor for old piping
----- >
----- >i may not be following your point,
----- >but if you are concerned that the actual C-factor of old
----- >UG pipe is less than the idealized C-factor
----- >
----- >what does it matter
----- >as long as you take your source where ever your gauge hydrant is?
----- >
----- >the waterflow test will account for any aging in the
----- >pipes, automatically.
----- >
----- >it is another thing,
----- >to extend this thinking,
----- >downstream of the
----- >guage hydrant though.
----- >There you will need
----- >professional judgement
----- >to bring
----- >value engineering.
----- >
----- >scot deal
----- >excelsior fire
----- >
----- >
----- >
----- >On Feb 13, 2008 1:19 PM, danarbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
----- >
----- >>
----- >>
----- >> According to 22.4.4.7 Friction Loss, The C-Factor used
----- >for black steel
----- >> pipe is 120.
----- >>
----- >> My question is:
----- >>
----- >> In case of using old pipe system Mains for water
----- >supply of sprinkler
----- >> system,
----- >>
----- >>
----- >> Is there in the code any requirement to find out by
----- >actual testing
----- >> that the piping determined as adequate by the
----- >hydraulic calc procedure
----- >> is indeed adequate?
----- >>
----- >> Thanks
----- >>
----- >>
----- >> Dan Arbel
----- >> Tel: 972-4-8243337
----- >> Fax: 972-4-8243278
----- >> M: 972-52-2810593
----- >>
----- >> No virus found in this outgoing message.
----- >> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
----- >> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.4/1275 -
----- >Release Date:
----- >> 12/02/2008
----- >> 15:20
----- >>
----- >>
----- >> _______________________________________________
----- >> Sprinklerforum mailing list
----- >> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
----- >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
----- >>
----- >> To Unsubscribe, send an email
----- >> to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- >> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
----- >>
----- >_______________________________________________
----- >Sprinklerforum mailing list
----- >Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
----- >http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
----- >
----- >To Unsubscribe, send an email
----- >to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- >(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
--
Ron Greenman
at home....
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.4/1275 - Release Date:
12/02/2008
15:20
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.4/1275 - Release Date:
12/02/2008
15:20
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
