What would be simple and helpful would be a table similar to the one used for sizing fire pump Suction/Discharge/Relief Valve Piping etc.
Since you are not measuring pressure, you could say 2" up to X gallons, 2.5" for Y etc.... A 2-1/2" Main drain is much easier and cheaper than some of the arrangments left / required on backflow preventers. Greg On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Ron Greenman <[email protected]>wrote: > Better but it is still interpretable as requiring a measured flow be > established (if using the main drain location then the BOR design data). > Then you'd need a port that flowed that much, main drain or otherwise, and > then measure your annual test against anticipated flow to make sure you are > meeting or exceeding the required flow. Or am I missing something? I'm > pretty certain that newer fire service rated backflows don't fail any more > often than normal FS checks, and that that type of failure is either > catastrophic (doesn't open or barely opens) wouldn't a simple main drain > test with decent flow demonstrate that the valve is working? just a Forum > question as this is a done deal and I wasn't invited to join the exclusive > 25 club. > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Roland Huggins > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > the next edition has been cleaned-up on this issue. > > > > _______________________________________________________________ 25-271 > Log > > #CP15 Final Action: Accept > > (13.6.2.1, 13.6.2.2 (New)) > > _______________________________________________________________ > Submitter: > > Technical Committee on Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of > Water-Based > > Systems, > > > > Recommendation: Revise 13.6.2.1 to read as follows: > > 13.6.2.1 All backflow preventers installed in fire protection system > > piping shall be exercised annually by conducting a forward flow test at a > > minimum flow rate of the system design. > > Add new 13.6.2.2 and renumber subsequent sections accordingly: > > 13.6.2.2 Where hydrants or inside hose stations are located downstream of > > the backflow preventer, the forward flow test shall include hose stream > > demand. Substantiation: This change was needed to better reflect that the > > backflow preventer is not a precise test whereby the flow through it must > > be measured but effort to exercise the device at flows as near as > possible > > to the system demand. > > Committee Meeting Action: Accept > > Number Eligible to Vote: 33 > > Ballot Results: Affirmative: 32 Negative: 1 > > Explanation of Negative: > > > > RAY, R.: This proposal should have been accepted in principle: the > wording > > “at a minimum flow rate” is confusing and should be reworded. > > _______________________________________________________________ 25-272 > Log > > #121 Final Action: Accept > > > > (13.6.2.1.1) > > > > _______________________________________________________________ > Submitter: > > Roland J. Huggins, American Fire Sprinkler Association, Inc. > > Recommendation: Delete the following text: > > > > 13.6.2.1.1 For backflow preventers sized 2 in. (50 mm) and under, the > > forward flow test shall be acceptable to conduct without measuring flow, > > where the test outlet is of a size to flow the system demand. > > Substantiation: This section implies that a measured flow is required for > > Backflow preventers (BFP) larger than 2 in when nothing in 13.6.2.1 > states > > such a requirement. There are other means to identify that the system > > demand is flowing through the BFP as discussed in A.13.6.2.1 It also > needs > > to be kept in mind that we are simply exercising the BFP to ensure it > will > > fully open at approximately the system demand. A high degree of accuracy > > regarding the volume of water is not warranted. Additionally, BFP’s are > > subjected to an annual internal inspection as part of the cross > connection > > protection program. Committee Meeting Action: Accept > > Number Eligible to Vote: 33 > > Ballot Results: Affirmative: 33 > > > > > > > > Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering > > > > American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives > > Dallas, TX > > http://www.firesprinkler.org > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 26, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Dwight Havens <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Then they ought to say that in the code language. > > > > > > Dwight > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: John Denhardt <[email protected]> > > > To: "[email protected]" < > > [email protected]> > > > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 3:07 PM > > > Subject: RE: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test > > > > > > > > > While I do disagree to some extent of what the NFPA 25 committee has > > done, Roland statement is correct. I have had numerous discussions with > > NFPA 25 committee members where they have stated the intent was to > exercise > > the device at near system demand. The key word to me was "Exercise". > > > > > > John > > > > > > John August Denhardt, P.E., FSFPE > > > Strickland Fire Protection Incorporated > > > 5113 Berwyn Road > > > College Park, Maryland 20740 > > > Office Telephone Number: 301-474-1136 > > > Mobile Telephone Number: 301-343-1457 > > > FIRE SPRINKLERS SAVE LIVES - Can you live without them? > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [email protected] [mailto: > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Forest > Wilson > > > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 2:42 PM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test > > > > > > Here is an email on this topic that Roland addressed in the past: > > > > > > Im not going to say it was one of those casual assumptions that all > > > systems are calculated nor that all risers have placards. The main > > > thing to keep in mind that the intent is simply to fully EXERCISE the > > > BFP at what os expected to be the system demand. If no data > > > available, a discussion with the AHJ is warranted. As for benchmarks, > > > only the flow is pertinent and pressure is irrelevant. > > > > > > Roland > > > > > > On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:44 PM, Matthew J. Willis wrote: > > > > > >>> > > >>> On a more important matter: If a system was retrofitted with a > > >>> backflow, > > >> and > > >>> there is no hydraulic calc plaque attached to the riser, and NFPA > > >>> requires > > >>> forward flow testing of backflows, how can you conduct the test > > >>> without a > > >>> benchmark to test against? > > >>> > > >>> What is the recommended practice in this scenario? > > >>> Forest Wilson > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > > On Jul 25, 2013, at 12:16 PM, Ron Greenman <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > >> Then subjective good flow demonstrates a working valve? If so all the > > >> numbers bantered around are pretty meaningless. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Forest Wilson <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > >> > > >>> No. > > >>> The intent is not to pitot the output but to exercise the valve. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Sent from my iPhone > > >>> > > >>> On Jul 25, 2013, at 10:56 AM, Ron Greenman <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Forest. What were you flowing to discover these failures? Main drain > > or > > >>>> some special test header? Would a sign with the data requested by > the > > >>>> customer that started this thread have had any utility in helping > you > > >>>> discover the problem? > > >>>> > > >>>> Then back to that perennial question of what's a "full flow " test > and > > >>> how > > >>>> do you do one? I think Roland said the intent was to flow an > > equivalent > > >>> to > > >>>> the design discharge criteria. How do you do this? Do we run a pitot > > >>>> somewhere on the system? Do we catch and measure discharge? If so, > > from > > >>>> where? How do we arrange the test port(s)? Do we flow the design > area > > or > > >>>> simulate it elsewhere? Do we need results of at least or better flow > > or > > >>>> right on the money flow? If not either of those how do we judge? > > >>>> > > >>>> Doesn't the hydraulic data plate note the required psi per the calcs > > at > > >>> the > > >>>> BOR and the static? Isn't the difference the residual drop at that > > point > > >>>> relative to the design area? Wouldn't a main drain with good flow > at a > > >>> psi > > >>>> around the BOR rating, and returning to close to the noted static > when > > >>>> terminated suggest a fully open valve, or an adequately open valve > if > > the > > >>>> UG is oversized? In the latter case the partially open valve is > > >>> equivalent > > >>>> to fully open for the system I just described. Am I missing > something > > >>> here? > > >>>> An erroneous a priori? My understanding of hydraulics wrong? Main > > drains > > >>>> are too small to simulate the result of all design area heads > flowing > > as > > >>>> the water passes through the BOR? > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:34 AM, Forest Wilson < > [email protected] > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> I still have the check valve from a Ames that failed to open. > > >>>>> It was jammed shut, discovered when I was called out because they > > >>> couldn't > > >>>>> do the fire pump test. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> In another case, I tested a backflow and it failed (on a Best Buy > > >>> store). > > >>>>> I opened the valve up and the check was damaged, would only open a > > >>> third. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Sent from my iPhone > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Jul 24, 2013, at 8:53 PM, Ron Greenman <[email protected]> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Worked well for plumbing and process piping applications as they > are > > >>>>>> constantly being exercised. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Dwight Havens < > > [email protected] > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I do remember the ones with the rods in the center of the valve > > being > > >>>>>>> particularly poor. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Dwight > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> ________________________________ > > >>>>>>> From: Ron Greenman <[email protected]> > > >>>>>>> To: [email protected] > > >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 11:25 PM > > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow > > Test > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> By the mid-nineties you have the early Ames models purpose built > > for > > >>>>>>> sprinklers readily available, but many units being installed are > > still > > >>>>> not > > >>>>>>> listed for fire service as many jurisdictions don't consider the > > fire > > >>>>> line > > >>>>>>> a fire line until after the backflow, and a n on-listed device is > > >>>>> cheaper > > >>>>>>> than a listed one. Plus many go back to the seventies and many > used > > >>>>> weights > > >>>>>>> instead of springs and complicated lever systems for joining the > > >>>>> clappers > > >>>>>>> and weights. Wish I could post a picture. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Dwight Havens < > > [email protected] > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Give me a time frame. My best recollection is the mid '90's. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Dwight > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> ________________________________ > > >>>>>>>> From: Ron Greenman <[email protected]> > > >>>>>>>> To: [email protected] > > >>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 9:12 PM > > >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow > > Test > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Were these the plumbing type before fire service listed devices > > >>>>> existed. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Dwight Havens < > > >>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Yes, yes, and yes. The original proposal was based on observed > > >>>>>>> failures > > >>>>>>>>> of BFPAs to operate properly during main drain testing. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Glendale, AZ public library specifically comes to mind. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Dwight > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> ________________________________ > > >>>>>>>>> From: Todd Williams <[email protected]> > > >>>>>>>>> To: "[email protected]" < > > >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> > > >>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 9:32 PM > > >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow > > Test > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Has there ever been an instance of system failure due to the > > >>> backflow > > >>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>> properly opening? How about detection of a BFP problem during a > > full > > >>>>>>> flow > > >>>>>>>>> test. How about something subsequent to the initial acceptance? > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Todd G Williams, PE > > >>>>>>>>> Fire Protection Design/Consulting > > >>>>>>>>> Stonington, CT > > >>>>>>>>> 860-535-2080 > > >>>>>>>>> www.fpdc.com > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > >>>>>>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > >>>>>>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>> 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) > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > >>>>>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > >>>>>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>> 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) > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > >>>>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > >>>>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> 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) > > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > >>>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > >>>>> [email protected] > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> -- > > >>>> 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) > > >>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > >>>> [email protected] > > >>>> > > >>> > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > >>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > >>> [email protected] > > >>> > > >>> > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> 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) > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > >> [email protected] > > >> > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected] > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > > > > > -- > 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) > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > -- Greg McGahan Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com> 1160 McKenzie Road Cantonment, FL 32533 850-937-1850 fax 850-937-1852 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
