I see every point here but again if im correct there is no situation in which 
just putting a single swing check valve at the remote area of a wet system with 
no backflow orevention or loop is allowed?
 
J. Blocker
EFPS
(303) 353-9712




________________________________
From: Forest Wilson <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thu, January 21, 2010 2:24:29 PM
Subject: Re: Antifreeze Backflow Prevention

Ohio will only allow a ethylene glycol with air gap seperation.
I know that proptlene glycol is non toxic but coming from the field I 
have experienced fitters using the ethylerne glycol in sprinkler 
systems. Mostly because they are not educated on the hazards.
It is for that reason I agree with Ohio EPA requirement for RPZ on 
antifreeze loops.

Forest Wilson Project Manager Cherokee Fire Protection Co. 1855 
Bellbrook Ave. Ste C
Xenia OH 45385
ph: 937-376-2333 fx: 614-455-4324 cell: 937-307-5647 . Visit our blog: 
www.cherokee-fire.blogspot.com NOTICE: The information contained in 
this email is intended to be solely for the use of the named individual 
or entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is 
privileged or otherwise confidential. It is not intended for 
transmission to, or receipt by, anyone other than the named addressee 
(or a person authorized to deliver it to the named addressee). It 
should not be copied or forwarded to any unauthorized persons. If you 
have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete 
it from your system without copying or forwarding it, and notify the 
sender of the error by reply email or by calling Cherokee Fire 
Protection Co. at 888-347-3079 toll free.


-----Original Message-----
From: Roland Huggins <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 12:19:04 -0800
Subject: Re: Antifreeze Backflow Prevention

bloody RPZ's have that annoying spitting characteristic too.

As a sidebar, an RPZ is required for protection against toxic
compounds but even non-toxic chemicals (like propylene glycol) get
pushed into using it.  SInce an RPZ is for toxic compounds, a cycle or
two ago I attempted to delete the restriction against ethylene glycol
when an RPZ is used.  Needless to say, the TC decided not to depend on
the RPZ that strongly.  To be honest, I didn't do an extensive review
to see how stringent the IPC is on compounds that actually are toxic
since I knew it would fly like a lead balloon.

Anyone that plays with systems with nasty compounds that takes water
from a potable supply, feel free to send me an off-Forum email
educating me further.

Roland

On Jan 21, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Matt Grise wrote:

> Sorry...unclear wording.
>
> I meant that you could use either:
>
> 1) an RPZ at the riser, and a drilled check valve at the loop
> 2) a double check bfp at the  riser and an RPZ at the loop
>
> We sometimes use the second setup since RPZ's cost so much more than
> DC BFP's. If the primary riser is 4,6,8" and the antifreeze loop
> only needs a 1.25" RPZ, it can be less expensive to use 2 bfp's.
>
> Matt Grisé PE*, LEED AP

_______________________________________________
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)


      
_______________________________________________
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)

Reply via email to