Do you have a link? I'm being (L)azy today as I'm on (b)reak and it (s)nowed. The RG equation is 1b + 1s = 3L
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 8:08 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Todd, > Nothing is "snuck" in and there is definitely no entrapment. It is in plain > English in the spec. It is the contractor's responsibility to read all of > the specification and ask for any clarification that he thinks is needed. A > clarification or amendment for one also for all bidders. > > Quite frankly, it does help to clarify the reasoning, on this forum, behind > some of the requirements. I like open discussions such as these. However, > always remember that the spec is a contract document regardless of what it > requires no matter how ridiculous it may seem. Everybody bids the same set > of contract documents. > > By the way, Hazen-Williams is not all some believe it is. It works fairly > well with water based sprinkler systems as long as it is applied correctly. > New sprinkler systems with reasonable flows, pressures, velocities, and > temperatures will do OK with H-W. > > One example is working with aged versus new pipe. There is no clear cut > methodology to compensate for the added roughage other than lowering the > C-factor. Once you try to get below C=100 you are in no man's land. I > suggest that everyone reads the original works of H&W and see for > themselves. It is free on Google Books as the copyright has expired. > > > > Rahe Loftin > Sent from my Blackberry > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Todd Williams [[email protected]] > Sent: 12/29/2010 10:39 AM EST > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: USACE Velocity > > > > If you want a safety factor in the design include ONE plainly stated safety > factor and be done with it. They all typically accomplish the same thing, so > keep it simple. Unless you are trying to trip up contractors in the bidding > process to keep the prices down, there is no reason to do sneak all of this > little stuff in a spec. > > At 09:57 AM 12/29/2010, you wrote: >> >> One last thing to note about the velocity restrictions: their use helps to >> continue the myth throughout engineering circles that they are a necessity. >> I am certain most engineers who see a GSA spec with the velocity >> restrictions aren't thinking it is there merely to give a larger safety >> factor. Instead they are thinking things like :'high velocity is bad for >> pipes'; 'it is too noisy'; 'the H-W equation is invalid at high velocities', >> etc. So they continue to keep it within THEIR specs, which are seen by other >> engineers and AHJs - and the myths of velocity restrictions continue. >> >> And if there is a desire to keep the restrictions in place strictly for >> the more robust design, then please explain it in the specs, so the myths >> aren't promulgated. 'As an additional safety factor, all pipe velocities >> shall be limited...' At least then if the design goes awry the >> designer/engineer can come back and explain why the restriction should be >> lifted for their particular case. >> >> Mark A. Sornsin, PE | Fire Protection Engineer >> Ulteig Engineers, Inc. |Fargo, ND >> Direct: 701. 280.8591 | www.ulteig.com >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman >> Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 5:40 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: USACE Velocity >> >> Given your argument maybe the oversized main/velocity restriction is >> just a simpler way to get desired results in most cases but your >> example points to the less than most cases and is valid. And maybe a >> simple way to beat the devil isn't any more warranted than designing >> to the extreme least costly. Comes back to the fact that some projects >> are less critical than others and lend themselves to the low bid at >> any cost philosophy, some have higher goals that can be dealt with by >> using rule of thumb requirements, and some are so high value that >> neither approach works, but since each project is unique until >> defined. Each has to be analyzed and assessed, the cost of that >> assessment being commensurate with the benefit of paying for it.Mark's >> example requires a lot of value engineering to avoid very high >> unnecessary costs, a strip mall or the latest Meth Lab Manor apartment >> complex needs to be low-balled, while most projects may be somewhere >> in between. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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, CT > 860.535.2080 > www.fpdc.com > > _______________________________________________ > 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) > -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 [email protected] http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ 253.680.7346 253.576.9700 (cell) Member: AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) _______________________________________________ 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)
