A favorite of mine is the small Navy base with a twelve in incoming line. The contract called for a pair of BFPs in parallel so that one could be serviced without disrupting the water supply. The contractor installed two six inchers declared it met the spec because two sixes flowed the same as a twelve. Missed the no service disruption part and got the flow through a circular orifice concept wrong. Oh, did I mention he looked really perplexed at the phrase flow through a circular orifice? Cylinder had him confused. Pipe he got but argued two times six equals twelve.
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 4:55 PM, John Drucker <[email protected]>wrote: > It's not just the plumbing officials, in one case a local water purveyor > required it hot box and all.....oh yea 10" mains feed the site. > > John Drucker > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of George > Church > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 5:29 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: RPZ for a dedicated private underground fire mains having fire > hydrants > > Makes you wonder what we did before all the DCDA, RPZ, etc. > > Oh, that's right- a single check, sometimes with a cheater meter, and/or an > ALV or DPV. > Gosh, remember how many people used to get sick and/or die from our > sprinkler systems before we added $1200 to $10,000 per system for REAL > BFPs? > Hmm....no, now that I think about it, I don't recall a single one. And I > believe we had a tread about it in the Forum's infancy, and no one else > did, > either..... > > > George L. Church, Jr., CET > Rowe Sprinkler Systems, Inc. > PO Box 407, Middleburg, PA 17842 > 877-324-ROWE 570-837-6335 fax > [email protected] > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Cahill, > Christopher > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 1:10 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: RPZ for a dedicated private underground fire mains having fire > hydrants > > Really RW? We have a few problems with corrosion and MIC in potable water. > What else might be in these RW system that is going to eat up our systems > or > I suppose might be better as a slim chance. Can the chemical makeup of RW > change over time and seasons further complicating what is does to our > systems? > > What's the FD going to wash and flush? > > Chris Cahill, PE* > Senior Fire Protection Engineer, Aviation & Facilities Group Burns & > McDonnell > 8201 Norman Center Drive > Bloomington, MN 55437 > Phone: 952.656.3652 > Fax: 952.229.2923 > [email protected] > www.burnsmcd.com > > Proud to be one of FORTUNE's 100 Best Companies to Work For *Registered in: > MN > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve > Leyton > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 11:53 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: RPZ for a dedicated private underground fire mains having fire > hydrants > > We are doing our first building system off RW at this time. From our due > diligence for the current project, we learned that in NorCal, there have > been a few building systems connected to reclaimed. There are some in the > Dublin/Pleasanton/Livermore area, if I recall correctly (Tom > McKinnon are you out there?). We've been told by the water purveyor > that no special treatment is required, but the fire dept. wants a wash & > flush station on the property. We're configuring the site main with > BFP's as if the source main was potable, and on paper everything looks > utterly conventional. > > SML > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Letterman, > Todd > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 9:38 AM > To: '[email protected]' > Subject: Re: RPZ for a dedicated private underground fire mains having fire > hydrants > > Hey Steve have you been on the design end of a Fire Protection System using > reclaimed water? If you have wanted to know what issues you ran across if > any? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Steve Leyton [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 09:33 AM > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: RPZ for a dedicated private underground fire mains having fire > hydrants > > Well ... as ridiculous as all this may sound ... > > In SoCal, we have water districts that are moving hard into reclaimed > water. Golf courses and public green areas such as parks and right of > way planters and medians, are being irrigated with reclaimed. Easiest and > most obvious application for RW as it can work quite well at low > residual pressures. But water wise thinking being as it is, and > bureaucracy being as IT is, we are now seeing reclaimed used for fire > water. > And of course, the California Dept. of Health has a few opinions on what > you > have to do with fire apparatus that has pumped RW, such as > completely clean and flush. So a BFP on a public hydrant, or on FD > suction hose is the next logical legislative "solution". > > SML > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Art Tiroly > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 9:29 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: RPZ for a dedicated private underground fire mains having fire > hydrants > > Then should public street hydrants need BFP installed? > > > Arthur Tiroly > ATCO Fire Protection Design > Tiroly and Associates > 24400 Highland Rd rm 25, CLE 44143 > 216-621-8899 > 216-570-7030 Cell > WWW.ATCOfirepro.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > AKS-Gmail-IMAP > Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 10:49 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: RPZ for a dedicated private underground fire mains having fire > hydrants > > I heard more about this today from an Illinois plumbing inspector. For > those > interested, they (or maybe just he) consider a fire hydrant as a device to > which applies Part 890 Plumbing Code Section 890.1140 "Special Applications > and Installations". The catching sections are 890.1140 e) > 1) and 890.1140 e) > 2) A) i). All the applications and installations mentioned by this section, > i.e. that which are special, are hose outlets, yard hydrants with weeps, > flush valves, laundry machines, dishwashers, medical water aspirators, > mobile homes and carbonated beverage machines. > > One would think that section title "Special Applications and Installations" > intends to single out specifically named applications and installations. > For example there is a trade distinction between Yard Hydrants and Fire > Hydrants that any reasonable tradesman would know. If this code truly > intends to apply to both Yard Hydrants and Fire Hydrants then it would not > be "special" > and the wording would be "Hydrants". Incidentally there is no mention of > any > fire protection related devices at all in the section. All mention of fire > protection devices, which surely must have special distinction to most, > occurs in a different 890 subsection. Claiming this section applies also to > fire protection is to expand its special scope to included another very > special application, thereby denying the section's purpose. > > The question stills stands for those in the Illinois area. Is this actually > the state's stance? For the case where I heard about this, the "state" will > be making another arm of the "state" put an RPZ device in a hot box on the > piping between an ordinary, existing fire hydrant and the private main it > connects to, because that one hydrant is being moved due to a new drive and > that section of existing underground is being replace, not as its own small > project but as part of a much larger project. > > Allan Seidel > St. Louis, MO > > On Jun 6, 2012, at 8:13 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The 2006 Uniform Plumbing Code 603.4.16.1requires backflows in lines > > to FP systems. RPZ's are required for systems with chemicals like > > antifreeze or AFFF and double checks for others. It says they are not > > required for private hydrant only lines that comply with city water > > main and AWWA standards. > > > > To the best of my knowledge there is no requirement in the > > International Plumbing Code. > > > > > > Ron Fletcher > > Aero Automatic > > Phoenix, AZ > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected] > > ] On Behalf Of Timothy W Goins > > Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 5:40 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: RPZ for a dedicated private underground fire mains having > > > fire hydrants > > > > Most THINK that the AWWA recommends BFP's on ALL firelines, especially > > > deadened lines over 100 feet, but the AWWA does NOT recommend backflow > > > protection on hydrant only lines. > > > > "For I am not ashamed of the gospel , , because it is God's power for > > salvation to everyone who believes..." HCS Romans 1:16 > > > > On Jun 6, 2012, at 12:56 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > > >> accounting departments see plus signs when they see marketing > >> department, lunch n learn, and regulatory agencies on the same spread > > >> sheet line lol (and some consulting engineering firms). > >> Steve- can you explain the USC friction loss graphs? there is some > >> diff in turning on and turning off? > >> Quoting Ron Greenman <[email protected]>: > >> > >>> I think the backflow prevention device manufacturers have a lot of > >>> influence with a fair share of regulatory agencies. > >>> > >>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Steve Leyton > >>> <[email protected] > >>> >wrote: > >>> > >>>> Private fire service mains in CA have required backflows for years. > >>>> The type of device varies by water authority standards, but pretty > >>>> much throughout Southern California the use of an RPDA is standard > >>>> practice. > >>>> Whether the downstream connections are sprinklers only, plus one > >>>> hydrant or with multiple hydrants, a backflow appliance is required > > >>>> on a private > >>>> fire service main. The thinking isn't that hydrants represent a > >>>> cross > >>>> connection or contamination threat per se, but that a private > >>>> property owner can make whatever connections they want in the dark > >>>> of night after > >>>> final acceptance testing. So better safe than sorry, > >>>> bureaucratically > >>>> speaking ... > >>>> > >>>> SML > >>>> In SoCal, where nothing surprises anymore > >>>> > >>>> ________________________________ > >>>> > >>>> From: [email protected] on behalf of > >>>> AKS-Gmail-IMAP > >>>> Sent: Tue 6/5/2012 7:24 PM > >>>> To: [email protected] > >>>> Subject: RPZ for a dedicated private underground fire mains having > >>>> fire hydrants > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I am hearing that in Illinois the state plumbing inspectors insist > >>>> on RPZ back flow prevention for fire hydrants on dedicated > >>>> underground private service mains. What is up with that? > >>>> > >>>> Allan Seidel > >>>> St. Louis. MO > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > >>>> [email protected] > >>>> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was > >>>> scrubbed... > >>>> Name: winmail.dat > >>>> Type: application/ms-tnef > >>>> Size: 4685 bytes > >>>> Desc: not available > >>>> URL: < > >>>> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/ > >>>> att > >>>> achments/20120605/c0c6b675/attachment.bin > >>>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > >>>> [email protected] > >>>> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> 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: > >>> ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC, WFSC > >>> > >>> They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis > > >>> Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was > >>> scrubbed... > >>> URL: > >>> <http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/ > >>> att > >>> achments/20120605/19d8453d/attachment.html> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Sprinklerforum mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attach > ment > s/20120606/015d1967/attachment.html> > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > -- 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: ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC, WFSC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachments/20120607/315b96da/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
