I believe tommy d could fill you in on a lot of local horror stories. Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 3, 2013, at 10:24 AM, "Todd - Work" <t...@fpdc.com> wrote: > What exactly is the purpose of a forward flow test on a backflow preventer? > This is not required on other check valve devices such as alarm valves, riser > checks, water meters, etc. Has there been a history of problems that this > seems to solve? > > Todd G Williams, PE > Fire Protection Design/Consulting > Stonington, CT > www.fpdc.com > > On Jun 3, 2013, at 10:03 AM, <rfletc...@aerofire.com> wrote: > >> NFPA 13 and 24 only require the forward flow test. Maybe they could be >> changed to require a "means" to forward flow test? Around here most BFP's >> are installed at the property line so they are not in the FP contractor's >> scope. >> >> Ron F >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org >> [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Mark A. >> Sornsin, P.E. >> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 6:13 AM >> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org >> Subject: RE: test header >> >> Moreover, the engineer could specify Ron's solution up front. Doesn't help >> the design-build jobs - but you as the contractor could offer it up >> front...in such a way that makes you look like you're helping the customer, >> not just seeking a means to get more money out of them (easy to say...). >> >> I've been asked why we spec these test outlets on our jobs. When I ask the >> contractor how they do their annual full-flow testing thought the backflow >> assemblies, they answer with a description like we've discussed here - >> except that it is clear that they are answering a theoretical situation - >> they normally aren't doing the forward flow testing of the backflow >> assemblies - neither at the end of a job, nor during their annual testing. >> >> >> Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. | Karges-Faulconbridge, Inc. | Fire Protection >> Engineer | Fargo, ND | direct: 701.552.9905 | mobile: 701.371.5759 | >> http://www.kfiengineers.com >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org >> [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ron >> Greenman >> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 2:41 PM >> To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org >> Subject: Re: test header >> >> By the time toy've drained the system, removed the FDC and put in a spool, >> removed the FDc, done the flow, drained everything again, replaced all the >> parts, probably be compelled to do a hydro on the FDC line, and then are >> nearly due to do it again, you could have just put in a test header, or >> mech-teed a couple of fire hose valves onto the FDC line, or the riser >> quicker and for less money, and nobody has to go through that nonsense again. >> >> >> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 12:22 PM, G. Tim Stone <tston...@comcast.net> wrote: >> >>> Take the flappers out or just remove the FDC fitting. >>> >>> Regards, >>> G. Tim Stone >>> >>> G. Tim Stone Consulting, LLC >>> NICET Level III Engineering Technician Fire Protection Sprinkler >>> Design and Consulting Services >>> >>> 117 Old Stage Rd. - Essex Jct., VT. 05452 >>> CELL: (802) 373-0638 TEL: (802) 434-2968 Fax: (802) 434-4343 >>> tston...@comcast.net > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
