Schedule 40 per ANG ETL 01-1-1 paras 15.6.12.1 and 15.6.12.13. Ryan Hinson Burns & McDonnell Direct: 952-656-6003 Ext 3662
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brad Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 10:49 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: C factor change for Foam solution piping I think the ...kept flooded at all times... IS talking about the solution piping--- with deluge this would not be the case- so now what do you use if the gov does not want galv down stream? -----Original Message----- From: Hinson, Ryan [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 10:41 AM To: '[email protected]' Subject: RE: C factor change for Foam solution piping They are Hi-Expansion Foam deluge systems. I am referring to the distribution piping and this is a military project so no galvanized piping downstream of the proportioner is allowed per ETL 02-15 or ANG ETL 01-1-1. Ryan Hinson Burns & McDonnell Direct: 952-656-6003 Ext 3662 -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 10:36 AM To: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: RE: C factor change for Foam solution piping Careful now, the SS pipe referenced there is the pipe carrying the concentrate from the bladder tank to the proportioner, this wording is not referring to the distribution piping (mains and branches). NFPA 11, 2010 is limiting you to galvanized pipe @ C=120, The NFPA 13 reference is for other corrosion resistant piping that is referred to in NFPA 13 which could basically be only S.S. since you'd never see a plastic or copper foam system installed. There are some environmental conditions that would require the pipe to be SS. The viscosity of the water with a 3% solution of foam is not significantly different than straight water. That is why there is no real difference in C-values for foam-water systems versus water alone. NFPA 13, 12.11 is referring to the installation of High Expansion Foam systems which have different requirements than automatic sprinklers, hence the reference. Is HEF what you're designing? This also states HEF systems that ARE INSTALLED IN ADDITION TO AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS.... so yeah kind of circular, each group trying to cross reference each other to make sure the bases are covered. No harm done. What kind of foam system is actually being designed? Craig L. Prahl, CET Fire Protection Specialist Mechanical Department CH2MHILL Lockwood Greene 1500 International Drive Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax - 864.599.8439 [email protected] http://www.ch2m.com -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brad Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2010 10:30 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: C factor change for Foam solution piping Maybe it has something to do with ...kept flooded at all times..., similar to dry C=100, except dry galv C=120, anyway, you are probably aware of this, but I wanted to copy (from Chemtron I think) and paste it here: PIPING MATERIALS Stainless steel 304, 316, brass, galvanized and black steel pipe are suitable for use with foam solutions. The black steel pipe is only recommended for use with foam concentrates when the pipe is kept flooded at all times. Stainless steel pipe is suitable for use with foam concentrates at all times. Galvanized pipe cannot be used with foam concentrate. -----Original Message----- From: Hinson, Ryan [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 1:45 PM To: '[email protected]' Subject: C factor change for Foam solution piping NFPA 11 (2005) section 4.7.2.5 says black steel piping in foam solution piping is to be 100. No delineation is made as to the type of system. Hence, I've been specifying worst case of 100. NFPA 11(2010) section 4.7.2.5 states only the requirements for galvanized foam solution piping and refers back to NFPA 13 for other C-values. NFPA 13 (2010) table 22 4.4.7 indicates C of 120 allowable for deluge systems such as those feeding foam systems. Also, NFPA 13 (2010) section 12.11.1 states to install in accordance with NFPA 11. Seems a bit circular. Anyone know the reason for the change? Am I interpreting it correctly? Thanks, Ryan L. Hinson, EIT, NICET III Fire Protection Engineer, Aviation & Facilities Group Burns & McDonnell Minneapolis-St. Paul Office 8201 Norman Center Drive, Suite 300 Bloomington, MN 55437 Direct: 952-656-6003 Ext 3662 Fax: 952-229-2923 [email protected] www.burnsmcd.com<BLOCKED::www.burnsmcd.com> Proud recipient of PSMJ's Premier Award for Client Satisfaction _______________________________________________ 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) _______________________________________________ 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)
