Okay, you've got my attention. What formulas do you think I need to use, besides the countless ones I already do? Do you think your (highly theoretical) impeller formula is of some substantive use to me? How would it add value to my firm's services? What metrics would it help me derive to improve our product or life safety in general? Just because it's a technical forum and you throw down a bunch of alpha-numeric equations (that may or may not be accurate), it doesn't add up automatically to a good practice or even information of value; much of the time, it seems like you need attention and you simply post these formulas because you like having people comment on them. You've said as much yourself on this forum.
For my sake, I absolutely don't need to see my opinions or own words in print. When I contribute, I think most people would agree that I'm on point, stay on topic and generally add to the conversation. I don't have a problem with people not agreeing with me and I don't need credit for getting stuff right and I'm really good about learning from my mistakes, which starts with admitting when I'm wrong. I think I'm discriminating with my posts, which I don't think that you are and this isn't the first time that you've postulated regarding stuff that makes no sense. Like your comment that sprinklers likely wouldn't have saved most or all of the lives lost in the Ghost Ship fire. All I'm saying is to be more thoughtful and stop posting for the sake of posting. What happens is that a thread like this one goes off on a tangent and people disengage. I'll bet I'm not the only one that doesn't want to have to guess whether the next email is going to be worth opening or not. The original question was very simple and about whether or not there was a restriction about putting a PRV downstream of a pump discharge control valve. Please tell me how the formula v=2*pi*r*f gets me to a solution on this issue. And while you're at it maybe throw out another formula for the spool piece you say we'll need ... supposedly, I need to start using more formulas. SML -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 4:26 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: PRV after pump discharge control valve One of these days you are going to have to start using some formulas and numbers youself Steve, because like you said, this is a technical forum, not a who can blow their own horn the loudest forum. Brad @ Quoting Steve Leyton <[email protected]>: > Have you ever noticed that a single pump series can be applied > across what seem like an incredibly wide spectrum of flows and > pressures? That’s because they can be paired with a variety of > drivers of different HP ratings and multitude of impellers. AND > THEN LISTED AS ASSEMBLIES. The idea that we have a plug-and-play > impeller variety pack or that we’ll buy one for now and one for when > junior grows out of this year’s school clothes (and put it in > cabinet in the pump room with a sign that says, “Install Me at Some > Point”) is not reality based. As this is a technical forum and > since we’re using up bytes and storage space on AFSA’s server, I > just think it’s a good idea to keep to reality-based stuff, like > widely accepted good and best practices, listed products, > prescriptive codes, and whatnot. It’s one thing to promote a > theory or design concept that’s truly outside-the-box, but this is > not in that context. I reiterate the question, who’s going to do > the work? Why are we talking about such an extreme measure when > there’s already a simple solution on the table? > > Failures in sprinkler systems occur when a link in the chain of > events fails. And it’s usually a simplistic link. Rebuilding a > listed fire pump – or even talking about it those terms - is pretty > radical surgery when all the patient needs is a splint. Keep in > mind Anthony, pumps fail WAY more frequently than pressure reducing > valves, especially if they’re not meticulously maintained. > > SL > > From: Sprinklerforum > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Fire Design > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 3:36 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: PRV after pump discharge control valve > > Brad said to check w/ the pump manufacturer so I don't know what the > all the keyboard punching is about. I thought it was a nice outside > the box approach. The manufacturer offers different size impellers > for a reason. Feasible or not I don't know - call the pump guys to > find out. > > Anthony > > > > [https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif]<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> > > Virus-free. > www.avast.com<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link> > > > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 1:54 PM, Steve Leyton > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > You gotta let go of this Brad. You're now having a visual fantasy > about what can only be described as a reach at best or more > critically, a bad practice. Please go back to thermal layers or > something ... this is ridiculous. Have you given the future > impeller an actual name for the plate, or would that be a blank > that's just put in the cabinet so it can be appropriately named by > whoever swaps it out? > > I have gotten calls from people (including attorneys) who have found > and to varying extents vetted me using web searches. I recently > got hired to present a seminar series for the FD of one of the > largest cities in the USA because they found me on the web; they > told me that my name association with AFSA and NFPA conventions > caught their eye and they also saw excerpts of posts I've made to > the forum regarding standpipes. You should Google "Brad Casterline > Sprinklerforum" ... it's long list of hits. The stuff we say on > this forum isn't confined to the subscribers on the list-server. > > So if/when somebody finds this stream-of-consciousness and decides > to use the now-and-future impeller basis of design, and then they > get sued ... you can send your formulas to their defense team I > suppose. I'm intentionally being histrionic and sarcastic but it's > to make a point: We need to promote best practices here. This is > an exchange of ideas, yes. But we cannot allow the conversation to > turn to the purely speculative or the convenient or two an unsafe > level of compromise. This association, this forum and we as > industry activists are the means to setting the standard of care > higher. We strive do it right, ESPECIALLY when nobody's watching. > > I think it's time to put the impeller-in-a-cabinet idea into a > permanent sleep. > > > SML > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum > [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] > On Behalf Of > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2018 1:19 PM > To: > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: PRV after pump discharge control valve > Thank you Kyle, it means a great deal to me for you to say. > I was curious about the application too, and saw a 1250 gpm, 2600 rpm > with a range of 69 psi based solely on impeller diameter. > Both impellers would need to be purchased and certified up front, and > every one having signed off on the idea. > I even imagined a note on the enlarged pump room plan, "mount future > impeller and name plate in locked cabinet next to spare sprinkler > cabinet". > > Brad > Quoting "Kyle.Montgomery" > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>: > >> I found the formula interesting. >> >> Also, I didn't think that Brad was suggesting the fitter would >> modify the impeller (were you?). I assumed he was just showing that >> it was another possibility to explore (to be performed by pump rep). >> You wouldn't modify the existing impeller, but replace it with a new >> one. >> >> I do know it is possible (and not entirely uncommon) to have the >> pump manufacturer "trim" the impeller to make small modifications to >> the pump curve, to dial in the pressure. Not sure if it would work >> for the kind of pressure differences the O.P. is looking at. >> >> If it is feasible, I think that (generally speaking) it might be >> considered a preferable approach to the PRV. Less parts and pieces, >> etc. However, the nice thing about a PRV is you can really dial in >> the pressure and you get that wide, flat pressure curve. But there >> are drawbacks as well. >> >> Kyle Montgomery >> >> Aero Automatic Sprinkler Co. >> 21605 N. Central Ave. >> Phoenix, AZ 85024 >> Direct: 623.580.7820 >> Cell: 602.763.4736 >> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected]<mailto:[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
