Todd, is it possible to run a flow test at the end of the copper line to simply measure the real thing instead of degrading it?
We'd had an AHJ want to degrade DI UG down to C=80 or 90, until we removed a section and showed it to him- clean as a whistle, allowed C=140 after all. glc -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd Williams Sent: Monday, December 21, 2009 7:16 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: C factor in old copper pipe I have no problem with C120 for the pipe from a technical standpoint, but it does make the calcs go over the curve. (2/3 of the system friction loss is in the underground). I have no idea how old the pipe is and there is no cathodic protection that I am aware of. As far as where they came up with the adjustment, see my Botox comment in the previous post. At 08:39 AM 12/18/2009, you wrote: >The book I looked in was a Mechanical >Engineering Reference Manual. It has a wider >range of materials listed than 13, so I checked >there. I don't know that 13 requires any >downgrade for copper - I don't really run into >copper sprinkler pipe all that often. The only >thing that I could say is that from a standpoint >of the actual performance of the pipe, it is >possible that it could have aged to a point >where its c-value is 120. Out of curiosity: how >old is the pipe? Also, how did the water company >come up with the adjustment? Do they have >cathodic protection of their underground copper lines? > >Does the change have a major effect on your calcs? > >Matt Grisé PE*, LEED AP >Sales Engineer >Alliance Fire Protection >*Licensed in KS & MO > >913.888.0647 ph >913.888.0618 f >913.927.0222 cell >www. AFPsprink.com > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] >[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd Williams >Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 5:59 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: RE: C factor in old copper pipe > >The 13 handbook commentary for 14.4.4.5 (2002) >does not include any decrease for copper and I >have never used one. 2010 has similar language. >The FP handbook does not address it. My >questioning is on the degradation of copper pipe >and decrease in C Factor because of it. Never >heard of it before. This water department person >tends to pull things out of his Botox, but I want >to be sure before I challenge him. > > >At 06:28 PM 12/17/2009, you wrote: > >My reference manual lists the range for copper > >as 150-120. So I would say it is within reason. > > > >Matt Grisé PE*, LEED AP > >Sales Engineer > >Alliance Fire Protection > >*Licensed in KS & MO > > > >913.888.0647 ph > >913.888.0618 f > >913.927.0222 cell > >www. AFPsprink.com > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: [email protected] > >[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Todd Williams > >Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 5:08 PM > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: C factor in old copper pipe > > > >I am working on a 13D system which is fed by a copper pipe from the > >public supply. I have been asked by the water company (who has review > >authority in this situation) to decrease the C factor for the copper > >pipe from 150 to 120 due to age. I have done this several times in > >steel and CI pipe, but never in copper. Is this appropriate? > > > >Todd G. Williams, PE > >Fire Protection Design/Consulting > >Stonington, Connecticut > >www.fpdc.com > >860.535.2080 > >_______________________________________________ > >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) > >Todd G. Williams, PE >Fire Protection Design/Consulting >Stonington, Connecticut >www.fpdc.com >860.535.2080 >_______________________________________________ >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) Todd G. Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, Connecticut www.fpdc.com 860.535.2080 _______________________________________________ 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)
