So anyone would take the word of a fire official?  Really?  Sure there are a 
few that know what they are talking about but the vast majority not so much.  
Oh and OP said Fire Chief, not fire official , even less credibility on 
average.  

And questionable water is a dumb statement IMO any way.  Nearly all systems 
have about 5-10 psi safety margin, right?  So it doesn't matter if there is 20 
psi in the street or 120 psi in the street they ALL are questionable the day 
they were put in.  And what does questionable even mean, so there is no ability 
to add a pump on weak water?  And you end up with 5-10 psi safety. There are 
water thieves that steal water from otherwise good tank and pump systems (that 
originally had 5-10 psi safety)?  Did the Fire Chief think the water was 
involved with organized crime?  Maybe they weren't sure it was two hydrogens 
and an oxygen as the primary constituent? Grain alcohol looks like water. Heavy 
water or light water because they are near a nuclear reactor of that flavor?  

I agree, the owner rarely has the original plans.  What about the original 
contractor, sprinkler or general?  What about the City?  Is it a licensed 
facility?  Licensing agency?

This is an addition = new construction.  I don't even see the question on 
determining the water supply and sizing the pipe.  Where in NFPA 13 does it say 
anything but NFPA 291?  Where in NFPA 291 does it talk about drain test?  

If you want to use existing pipe fine, trace it and model the relevant 
portions. In many cases the plan will only get you in the neighborhood anyway.  
I'd want you to actually verify the existing piping is as show on the existing 
drawing in the relevant areas.   

Let me save you the trouble of asking about the rant portions of the above, YES:

Its just one of those days (weeks, months....)
When you don't wanna wake up
 Everything is @#%#$%
 Everybody sux
 You don't really know why
 But you want justify
 Rippin' someone's head off
 No human contact
 And if you interact
 Your life is on contract
 Your best bet is to stay away @#$#%&^&^&
 It's just one of those days!! 

Chris Cahill, PE*
Associate Fire Protection Engineer 
Burns & McDonnell
Phone:  952.656.3652
Fax:  952.229.2923
[email protected]
www.burnsmcd.com
*Registered in: MN


Proud to be #14 on FORTUNE's 2014 List of 100 Best Companies to Work For





-----Original Message-----
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of Aaron Peck
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2014 7:22 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: No hydraulic name plate, no existing plans

I agree Scott. A fire official saying it was the water supply is "questionable" 
throws red flags up. Even if he said it was questionable after 13 years of 
being in service it would mean, to me, the contractor should definitely make 
sure they do their due diligence in make sure that the system is acceptable as 
life safety.  And not assume.

--
AMP Fire Protection Design
Aaron Peck, SET  •  Freelance Designer
C: (202) 407-9079 NICET Certified NFPA Member **Currently in Manama, Bahrain 
UTC/GMT +3:00 hours (7:00 Hours ahead of EST)** **Bahrain Number 
#(+973)39605669 Skype forwards to this #**



-----Original Message-----
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of Scott A Futrell
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2014 6:08 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: No hydraulic name plate, no existing plans

This has been an interesting thread.



It's a retirement home so the sprinkler system would seem to be essential to 
me, not that any aren't, but...I’d like to know my parents were living 
somewhere that had a sprinkler system installed properly and not by cutting 
corners, or making guesses.  And, doesn’t “questionable” water supply bother 
anyone other than me?



The correct and only answer is, 1)take a water flow test in accordance with 
NFPA 291, not messing around with a main drain.  2)Survey the existing system 
in accordance with NFPA 13 and determine all of the existing pipe size and 
as-built routing to the new addition.  3)Calculate the new addition with the 
existing pipe size and fittings, valves, elevation, and so on back to the flow 
test location.



Anything less would not be minimum standard of care sprinkler system design, 
would it?



Scott Futrell



Office: (763) 425-1001 x 12

Cell: (612) 759-5556



-----Original Message-----

From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On 
Behalf Of Douglas Hicks

Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2014 3:17 PM

To: [email protected]

Subject: No hydraulic name plate, no existing plans



I have been asked to extend sprinkler coverage to an addition, 17.5’ long x 13’ 
across.  The ceiling is a cathedral ceiling, 13’ 2” at the ceiling and 9’ 3 “ 
high at the sidewall.  The existing sprinkler piping is behind the 13’ wall, 
pointing down the 17.5’ length.  No body can find plans from the original 
construction, there is not a hydraulic nameplate on the sprinkler system.  The 
Fire Chief remembers that during construction, the water supply was 
“questionable”.    There is not a forward flow port so  I can not get a water 
GPM/psi measurement.  There is a 1.5 “ FDC at the front of the building. There 
is a fire hydrant across the parking lot, about 75 feet away.  The 5 year 
average for the static pressure is 34 psi and the residual is 27 psi, through 
the main drain.



The building is about 13 years old and is a retirement home.



My concern is the lack of information about the water supply.  The building is 
on a hill, about the level of the municipal water tank, which is on another 
hill.



Can I get an accurate reading on the water supply from the fire hydrant, or the 
2” main drain?  Or should I put a Forward Flow test port in before doing 
anything else?  And if I do get a good water reading, I still will not know 
what the system demand is.  So then do I need to hire someone to crawl the 
attic and take measurements of the piping?









_______________________________________________

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

Reply via email to