How do you know that we didn't harden ANY buildings after 9/11? Data on all buildings in the world? You jump your mentor over no data, then make a claim as all-encompassing as that? I'd be surprised if SOMEONE didn't do SOMETHING to harden their building after that terrible catastrophe. It's a really big world to make NO, ALL, NEVER and ALWAYS work correctly in a sentence. I'll always bet there's ONE exception to a general statement like that. I don't believe "harden" is defined as making a building able to survive a 747 hit, so wouldn't a couple concrete barriers at the entry "harden" them?
We protected the Army Heritage and Education Center (AHEC) at the War College in Carlisle, PA. Art and Tommy D are grinning, they've been to Carlisle. Anyway, there was a rep from the anti-terrorist task group in attendance at every meeting. There's not a swale that can hide a terrorist and the building was secure and protected far beyond what would have been before 9/11. That's one. I've often installed valves at service entrances out of my pocket since it's the right thing to do. IF you need it, it's there. Fully get it doesn't have to be there, agree a WFS doesn't have to be. But I don't want an open 2.5" FHV on an unsupervised standpipe filling th4e stair tower so we have WFS at the entrance. So I've wasted $500 of my money numerous times in the past. I sleep well at night-priceless. I am glad my daughter's no longer working at the Empire State Building, tho her living in NYC, routinely riding the subway at night, doesn't bother me a bit. George L. Church, Jr., CET Rowe Sprinkler Systems, Inc. PO Box 407, Middleburg, PA 17842 877-324-ROWE 570-837-6335 fax g...@rowesprinkler.com -----Original Message----- From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 10:11 PM To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org Subject: Re: Shutoff at Service Entrance Hard to take a swing at my friend and mentor here but anecdotal without data to suggest this is a common problem worth addressing. Would the WFS not been installed if the pipe ran outside the wall? If the mis-installed connection came loose (there are thousands of flexible couplings out there that have not let loose and every catastrophic coupling failure I've ever seen--no more than half a dozen--have all been installation errors although I suppose there is an occasional defective part) before opening and it was outside the wall the damage would have been as severe. Everything is entropic. All organized structures want to disorganize. That means buildings want to fall down, parts want to break, installers want to cut corners. What level of quality control do we need to lessen the effects of entropy, and for how much? Prescriptive codes establish a minimum level that we can't go below. We can certainly spend more to mitigate but it's the owner's money, not ours, and we'd better be able to justify extras, redundancies, higher quality of materials than those that just meet a minimum, with real arguments that the man with the money can understand and make informed decisions from. Not only didn't we harden every big building in America after 9-11, but we didn't harden any buildings. Had 9-11 been followed by an airplane hitting the Seats Tower, and then the Trans-america Building, the Statue of Liberty, the Golden Gate Bridge, etc., then at some point the reoccurrence of iconic American structures collapsing might have sent us to a different assessment. On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Ed Vining <edvinin...@gmail.com> wrote: > We had a designer who insisted on having a waterflow indicator inside > the building wall when this situation existed. He even set it up with > a longer retard than the system WFI's and a circuit that squashed the > main WFI when a system WFI operated. No sense confusing the FF's. A > flexible connection let go very early one morning, before the building > was occupied. The building owner was grateful for the WFI. > > Ed Vining, retired, guest. > 4819 John Muir Rd > Martinez CA 94553 > 925-228-8792 > Cell 925-787-0465 > > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Jarron Gass <jg...@zoominternet.net> > wrote: > > > My concern is probably shifting more to whether or not this should > > have a flow switch for that portion of the piping. I can accept > > that there is a shutoff outside in the meter pit, but i feel like > > this should be > monitored. > > That is probably more a want than a need. > > > > ~Jarron > > > > Sent from my Verizon Wireless Droid > > > > > > -----Original message----- > > From: jhoff...@kcp.com > > To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.**org > > <sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org > > > > Sent: Thu, Sep 13, 2012 22:12:31 GMT+00:00 > > Subject: Re: Shutoff at Service Entrance > > > > Well for a real life situation where this exists, albeit in a very > > large building in Kansas City --- picture a 1000 feet by 2000 feet building. > > 10-inch fire mains running east-west and north-south through the > > building with takeoffs for manifolded sprinkler systems of from 2-3 > > risers each, typically. The mains are looped and fed by fire pumps. > > Lots of > potential > > for a super flood if you postulate the main breaking. Leaks, unless > > large, are not going to be picked up by a flow switch anyway. > > > > We also have the situation described where an underground lead-in > > enters the building, goes up and overhead out to a manifold about a > > 100 feet > into > > the building - no valve at the outside wall, yard post valve, but > > there > is > > a drain at the low point at the exterior wall. > > > > It has been like this since 1942 and no major problems. Yes pipe > > can > leak > > but 8 and 10-inch pipe won't rust through before the 6, 4, and > > smaller > pipe > > will. Whether the code prohibits this or not, not sure how else you > would > > sprinkler a place like this. > > > > John Hoffman P.E. | Fire Protection Engineer | Facility Engineering > > Services, KCP, LLC - Burns & McDonnell Engineering | National > > Nuclear Security Administration's Kansas City Plant | Operated by > > Honeywell FM&T > | > > 2000 E. 95th St | Kansas City, MO 64131 | ph 816-997-7213 | > > jhoff...@kcp.com > > > > ______________________________**_________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.**org > > <Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org> > > http://fireball.firesprinkler.**org/mailman/listinfo/**sprinklerforu > > m< > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum> > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was > > scrubbed... > > URL: <http://fireball.**firesprinkler.org/mailman/** > > private/sprinklerforum/**attachments/20120913/e85ce981/**attachment. > > html< > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attac > hments/20120913/e85ce981/attachment.html > > > > > > > > > ______________________________**_________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.**org > > <Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org> > > http://fireball.firesprinkler.**org/mailman/listinfo/**sprinklerforu > > m< > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum> > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was > scrubbed... > URL: < > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attac > hments/20120913/5564bca0/attachment.html > > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org > http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu 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/20120913/21857050/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
