The reasoning I was taught was that some sch 40 nipples could break with long arm overs /drops.
Sent from my iPad On Sep 6, 2013, at 8:56 AM, Charles Thurston <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello All, > > For some reason we still have about half a box of 1/2" x Close Sch 80 nipples > in the warehouse I ordered a while back. I remember seeing that somewhere but > can't find it in NFPA 13 2010 or 2013. I know I would not have spent the > extra money for them if I did not have to... > > Friday, September 6, 2013, 9:41:27 AM, you wrote: > >> As an "Old Time Fitter" from the early 70's to the 90's before I got >> into design, I was taught to use Sch 80 nipples for the additional >> strength that they had over the standard Sch 40. > >> On 9/6/2013 5:53 AM, Bobby Gillett wrote: >>> Duane, > >>> As I mentioned, I was going off of memory. Not sure where exactly the Sch. > >>> 80 came from, maybe it was an old requirement for seismic areas before the > >>> limitation of 1" diameter nipples was enforced?? May have been a company >>> requirement before that as where I was before was in a "seismic zone"...not >>> quite sure. Anybody else out there ever hear of that? > > > >>> Bobby Gillett >>> *Living Water Fire Protection, LLC* >>> 1160 McKenzie Rd. >>> Cantonment, FL 32533 >>> (850) 937-1850 >>> livingwaterfp.com <http://livingwaterfp.com/> > > >>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Johnson, Duane (NIH/OD/ORS) [C] < >>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>> They are using an existing 1/2" outlet (likely an upright) to supply a >>>> relocated sprinkler (likely a pendent)...completely legitimate. > >>>> 8.15.20.4.1 (2013) When pipe schedule systems are revamped, a nipple >>>> not exceeding 4 in. (100 mm) in length shall be permitted to be installed >>>> in the branch line fitting. >>>> 8.15.20.4.2 All piping other than the nipple permitted in 8.15.20.4.1 >>>> and 8.15.20.4.3 shall be a minimum of 1 in. (25 mm) in diameter in >>>> accordance with Figure 8.15.20.4.2. >>>> 8.15.20.4.3 When it is necessary to pipe two new ceiling sprinklers >>>> from an existing outlet in an overhead system, the use of a nipple not >>>> exceeding 4 in. (100 mm) in length and of the same pipe thread size as the >>>> existing outlet shall be permitted, provided that a hydraulic calculation >>>> verifies that the design flow rate will be achieved in accordance with >>>> Figure 8.15.20.4.3. >>>> 8.15.20.4.4 Where an armover is attached to connect to a sprinkler, the >>>> use of pipe nipples less than 1 in. (25 mm) in diameter shall not be >>>> permitted where seismic design is required on the system. > >>>> By the way, where did the sch 80 requirement come from? I have never been >>>> able to locate that in code. > >>>> Duane Johnson, PE >>>> Program Manager >>>> Division of the Fire Marshal (Contractor) >>>> Office of Research Services >>>> National Institutes of Health >>>> 301-496-0487 > >>>> "Protecting Science - One Sprinkler at a Time" > > >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Bobby Gillett [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2013 10:46 PM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: Shoulder Nipple > >>>> Hoping they are requesting sch 80 and they are not in a seismic zone. > >>>> Sent from my iPhone > >>>> On Sep 5, 2013, at 9:12 PM, "JSM Fire Pro" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> You’re a third party glancing over a bill of materials for an >>>>> add/relocate day job. You notice one of the line items is calling for >>>> several ½” >>>>> shoulder nipples. > > > >>>>> What goes through your mind? > > > >>>>> J. Scott Mitchell, PE > >>>>> B&W Technical Services Pantex > >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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-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 > > >>> ----- >>> No virus found in this message. >>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >>> Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3222/6641 - Release Date: 09/05/13 > > > > >> _______________________________________________ >> Sprinklerforum mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > > > -- > Best regards, > Charles mailto:[email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > 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
