Do you people ever sleep? Todd G Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT 860-535-2080 www.fpdc.com
On Jul 30, 2013, at 9:58 PM, Dwight Havens <[email protected]> wrote: > Let's go back to the beginning of this thread, was it the AHJ or the owner's > representative who was requiring the sign, and was it in the job > specification, or required on a whim? > > Dwught > > > > ________________________________ > From: Greg McGahan <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 6:19 PM > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test - > MELTDOWN ALERT > > > LOL well, Booby started the thread becasue we couldn't find a sign....we > made one - done - close it up and go home. > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Steve Leyton > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I think this is different from the flushing thread, but my energy is >> focused at this moment on the fact that emails bearing the subject, " >> SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test" have been >> coming into my mailbox for what now, 10 days? The standard says what >> it says. My entrepreneurial self sees a business opportunity, as the >> standard now requires that we sell an additional hour-and-a-half or two >> of service. The problem, as always, is that if you raise your proposal >> by $175 or whatever it costs, the idiot competitor who gets the work >> will not have included that. So ... go to the level of enforcement. >> Cold call the fire official and say, "Hey! The standard requires this, >> you (or the state) have adopted this standard, I'm trying to undertake >> the prescriptive requirements that you are telling me to and I'm getting >> killed out here." Do what you can to get the enforcers to enforce, >> tool up and then explain to your clients that the first pass at this >> flow test may require a one-time modification of the system to create >> the requisite connection. And then SELL, SELL, SELL. >> >> But let's at least change the name of the thread to something more >> honest like, "Change makes us uncomfortable." >> >> SML >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron >> Greenman >> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 3:02 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test >> >> Yeah Steve, like dribbling despite high or low residual pressure, or >> good flow but big residual drop, or...but wait, those are reasons to >> suspect impairment during the main drain test. I also notice in 25/11 >> you don't need to measure if the backflow is before a fire pump that's >> has annual flows through a test header or test loop, nor do you have to >> measure riser 2" or less if the backflow is at least that size. This is >> sounding like another thread from today where an AHJ wants all the brand >> new heads removed and inspected for damage because something might have >> damaged them because pipe didn't have the outlets sealed before the >> heads were attached. >> So essentially this AHJ wants new heads replaced with new heads since >> the book says toss 'em if you remove 'em. I had an AHJ want all single >> shot heat detectors in a system heat tested, not because shorting the >> contacts didn't prove the system, but because he wanted to make sure the >> heat detectors worked. I'm off on a tangent but to come back I'm again >> failing to see much utility in these details. If a main drain test is >> good enough to prove that an alarm check or a single detector check out >> at the street is working, why does it take some convoluted set of rules >> full of exemptions to do the same thing for a backflow? >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:51 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-firesp >>>>>> rin >>>>>> > > 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-firesprink >>>> ler >>>>> .o >>>>>> > rg >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> > >>>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink >>>> ler >>>>> .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-firesprink >>>> ler >>>>> .org >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink >>>> ler >>>>> .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-firesprink >>>> ler >>>>> .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-firesprink >>>> ler >>>>> .org >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink >>>> ler >>>>> .org >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprink >>>> ler.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-firesprink >>>> ler.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) >> >> >> >> -- >> 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 > > > > -- > 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 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
