Where the hose stream allowance is taken downstream of the backflow, such as a site hydrant. Which would make a pretty convenient location from which to take your forward test flow. If you have standpipes, those might work well too.
Steve L. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Greg McGahan Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 2:54 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test Didn't Roland say that we have to include the hose stream? On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Ron Greenman <[email protected]> wrote: > Since my friction loss table has a multiplier for demands up to 335 > gpm I'm guessing that my 2" main drain can flow that much, and since > it probably won't have too much loss from the main I'm good to 0.2 > over 1500 sqft or ordinary 2. > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Greg McGahan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Steve, > > > > The probelm is how vague it is - some AHJs want flow Pitot'd, Some > > say a > 2" > > main drain is fine for everything, some say prove the size before > > you > pull > > a permit.... > > > > I simple chart would be awesome - IN THE BOOK - so we have something > > to point to. > > > > Greg > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Steve Leyton < > [email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > The required flow is the highest system demand. This has been in > > > 25 > for > > > (somebody help me out here) at least two cycles, I believe? You can > > > use the main drain if you can develop enough flow, you can modify > > > the main drain connection possibly to create multiple connections, > > > you can modify and existing riser, put a permanent or temporary > > > valved connection on the downstream side of the backflow (interior > > > or > exterior) > > > ... This AIN'T rocket science, y'all. > > > > > > Steve L. > > > Trippin' on da backflows > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [email protected] > > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > > > Of [email protected] > > > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 2:23 PM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow > > > Test > > > > > > So basically, nobody has a clue what is really required or how to > > > accurately measure how to properly "exercise" the backflow. Looks > > > like 2" main d rain test works for me until I'm told otherwise. > > > I'll just keep the hose monster in the back of the truck just in case. > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 7/29/2013 5:18:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > > > [email protected] writes: > > > > > > This is kind of like the story where a guy in a bar asks the > > > shapely young thing on the next barstool if she'd sleep with him > > > for $100,000.00. She answers with an enthusiastic yes. He then > > > asks if she'd sleep with him for $10.00. Her response is an > > > indignant, "what > do > > > you take me for, a whore?" > > > His reply is, "we've already established that. Now we're just > > > negotiating price." > > > > > > This was an illustrative metaphor Steve, not a dirty joke. > > > > > > We've established that a forward flow is required. And > > > surprisingly we've actually got a fairly definitive description of > > > what we're testing for by the committee in the next edition. To > > > me it's in two parts though. First we're not testing so much as > > > "exercising" a component, which to me is a maintenance issue. In > > > the process though we're also testing as we're determining if said component is working. > > > But when you do a "test" you need a standard of performance. That > > > brings us to part 2 and that standard appears to be "at system > demand." > > > That requires a measurement for verification and the comparative > > > baseline standard. So, and to me only, this new language is as > > > convoluted as the old and doesn't give me a clear directive. Am I > > > exercising or comparing results, or both? Can I say that a > > > 15 head design, using nominal 1/2 inch orifices has a total > > > surface area of > > > 2.94 square inches and a nominal 2 inch main drain has a surface > > > area of > > > 3.14 square inches so I'll easily flow as much through my 2 inch > > > main drain as system demand? Or do I have to calculate BOR flow > > > demand, > test > > > and measure (pitot or buckey) for flow there at acceptance for > > > verification, and then do that same procedure each year for > > > confirmation? Or can I just see a good stream from the main > > > drain, > note > > > the pressure are consistent with the acceptance test and > > > say,"That there no backlow thingie is workin' > > > just fine."? > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Depends on the edition of the standard a local jurisdiction has > > > > adopted, as well as any local amendments - but yes, forward > > > > flow tests of the backflow assembly are required by NFPA 13 and 25. > > > > > > > > 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: [email protected] [mailto: > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of > > > > [email protected] > > > > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 3:49 PM > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow > > > > Test > > > > > > > > Is this "forward flow test" now part of the required code? I > > > > was > just > > > > > > > on > > > a > > > > job the other day. New Construction. I noticed that all the > > > > systems had a setup with (2) 2 1/2" hose valves after the > > > > backflow and > alarm > > > > > > > valve, > > > in > > > > addition to the 2" main drain. I take it that these 2 1/2's > > > > are for this test? > > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 7/29/2013 3:57:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight > > > > Time, [email protected] writes: > > > > > > > > That isn't what the intent of the code is as stated.....just > > > > flow > at > > > > > > > system demand. I can only speak for us, but we do a LOT of > > > > risers with > > > only > > > > a 250 gpm or so demand...sometimes even less. > > > > > > > > A 4" drain is well over what we need to open it up enough for > system > > > > > > > demand. I would bet a 2" drain gets really close. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:52 PM, David Autry > > > > <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Wouldn't it be easier, if you have a 4" backflow preventer > > > > > you > run > > > 4" > > > > > out the wall, 3" BFP, 3" out the wall, etc... > > > > > That should open her up all the way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > David Autry > > > > > > > > > > Meininger Fire Protection Inc. > > > > > 2521 W L St. Suite No.4 > > > > > Lincoln, Ne 68522 > > > > > Voice (402) 466-2616 > > > > > Fax (402) 466-2617 > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: [email protected] > > > > > [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf > > > > > Of > > > > Greg > > > > > McGahan > > > > > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 2:35 PM > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward > > > > > Flow Test > > > > > > > > > > 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-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.org > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> [email protected] > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.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-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.org > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>>>> > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.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-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.org > > > > > > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>>> > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.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-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.org > > > > > > > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > >>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>> > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-fires > > > > prin > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.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-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.org > > > > > > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > >>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > > > > >>> [email protected] > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.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-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.org > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.org > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.org > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.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-firespr > > > > > > in > > > > > > kl > > > > > > er.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-firesprinkl > er > > > .o > > > > > rg > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er > > > .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-firesprinkl > er > > > .org > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er > > > .org > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email > > > > Security.cloud > > > service. > > > > For more information please visit > > > > http://www.symanteccloud.com__________________________________________ > __ > > > __________________________ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er > > > .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-firesprinkl > er > > > .org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er > > > .org > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er.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-firesprinkl > er.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-firesprinkl > er.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 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
