Seems I recall that this type issue has come up in the past -- perhaps it was smoke alarms or heat detectors, or some such. In any event the owner was VA or other large, multi-building owner and they developed a program that was statistically sound in reducing the frequency of testing without substantially altering the reliability of the system. The concept went thru an NFPA committee (wish I could remember which) and was accepted. Closest thing I can find in 25 is Section 1.3 and A.1.3. My suggestions (as long as the full 10 minute run time is not showing signs of overheating or unusual noise/vibration): - talk to the owner about budgeting for a pump replacement in next few years, - continue doing weekly starts, but cut the run time to a few minutes, just long enough so that pressure is built up and the seals are wetted (determine the length of run time based on those criteria and anything else suggested by forum members - Tom D., George C., Thom M. etc. thoughts??), - do the full 10 minute run test once a month, - document, document, document, - promptly repair any anamoly that shows up. If the weekly test run time gets down to 1 to 2 minutes 3 times per month, the total time for the month has been reduced by more than half and may extend the life of the pump. Problems with starting on pressure drop, not running at all, not building up pressure, etc. will be apparent even with the reduced run time. BTW I cannot tell you how many owners I have come across who rely solely on the annual pump test. It does not run the rest of the year. When I ask them for records of their weekly tests, I get "huhhh???" in response. Dave
David A. de Vries, P.E., CSP Firetech Engineering Incorporated --- On Mon, 9/28/09, Ron Greenman <[email protected]> wrote: From: Ron Greenman <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Fire Pump Testing NFPA 25 requirements To: [email protected] Date: Monday, September 28, 2009, 8:37 PM Richard, I don't think you have the authority to grant deviation from 25, assuming 25 specified IT&M is required in your jurisdiction. If so only the AHJ could grant special dispensation. On the other hand a piece of safety class equipment that's wearing out should be tested more frequently than less since it's already showing a propensity for future failure. Better yet is replace it now or budget for it and replace it soon since it's obviously on it's way out. I'll bet everyone on this forum that has dealt with pumps will have a war story about starting a pump that hasn't had regular IT&M and it didn't start or just sat there and smoked. Kudos to this owner for doing the right thing. He has maintained a piece of equipment properly and made the necessary repairs as they were discovered and has probably gotten a longer life span out of this machine than had he skipped this maintenance. He may get some extra life out of this device by having the authorized reps come out and overhaul the pump and the driver. Same thing applies to other equipment he may use in his business. He may have a vehicle fleet and as they age lessening maintenance certainly won't increase their usable lives. On another note, for some reason the committee has determined that weekly is the minimum frequency that pumps must run to be reasonably expected to function properly when called upon to do so during an emergency. For all I know the decision was really based on the concept of sucking more dollars out of the owners for unnecessary testing (I'll refrain from making the obvious analogy) but I'd like to believe the committee members play at a higher level. Not knowing why the weekly frequency was chosen I can't refute it nor suggest a reasonable alternate. Again this takes us back to the AHJ for a decision. But if 25 is not the standard that must be met my experience is that monthly provides a good cost/benefit balance. On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Tom Duross <[email protected]> wrote: > If an opinion is requested, considering the situation I would tend to > support it. > I have several clients I've given instructions to, placed directional > signage, given logbooks to, who do it monthly. > I look at it as it's better than nothing, or a start. I always tell them of > the code requirements and to talk to the AHJ and their insurer. > I would never pass judgment or waive a requirement. Some have only one guy, > little funds, etc., and I look at it as a step in the right direction. > What happened the 15 years before they started weekly tests? > Tom > > > I have been asked a question by a facility owner, as to if they could > conduct monthly in service pump checks rather then the NFPA 25 required > weekly test as outlined: > > The question is of unique note in that this facility has been conducting the > required weekly test for over 15 years. (We have the witnessed test records > - by fire marshal) > It begs to the underlying question of, is the code to demanding? the pump > and motor have had problems over the years; shaft alignment, bearings worn, > relief valves having to be replaced. The pump and motor are the original > installed in 1977. The facility operator is concerned that the pump/motor is > wearing out? We also have witnessed annual fire pump tests record and the > pump had to be rebuilt a few years back. Water supply strainer replaced and > so on with minor problems. I would dare to say that this record is fairly > complete with information. The pump is showing signs of a lower output but > still meeting required flow output. > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] > > To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Bates Technical College Tacoma, WA Member: SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA AFAA, WSAFM _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
