I agree with JH's logic, but I am struggling with this pressure gain from a 20 ft drop idea. Isn't the net effect due to elevation 0 since the pressure gets changed by the same amount at the riser, or wherever it goes up in elevation, before it comes back down? All that matters is the source elevation and discharge elevation. Any elevation changes beyond that will net to 0, unless there are outlets discharging at varying elevations, then that is another story.
I still think the original argument stands, and it wouldn't matter if the 1" pipe were a 20 ft vertical drop, a 20 ft horizontal armover, or 20 ft of equivalent piping due to a flexdrop, the net friction loss would all be the same, and I think this is the point just about everyone is trying to make. I still don't want to be the one to remove the heads on the 20 ft drops. Thanks, Skyler Bilbo 217-819-6404 Cell On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 5:56 PM Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum < [email protected]> wrote: > Right, which is why I was only allowing a PSI or so as an allowance for > the "credit" back from hard piped drops. Apples to apples, you'll have > the same Pe for both a hard piped or flexible drop. > > SL > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Matt Grise > via Sprinklerforum > Sent: Monday, August 02, 2021 3:16 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: Matt Grise <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: Flexible hose head connectors on a pipe schedule system > > One thought to your point - > > A 20 foot hard pipe drop has the advantage of also dropping 20 feet. You > will gain a substantial amount of pressure from the elevation change that > should more than overcome the flow demand of a light hazard pipe schedule > standard coverage pendant. > > A 20 foot equivalent drop does not have the same hydraulic advantage. > > It seems like you should be able to use flex drops on a pipe schedule > system. The ones that I have surveyed and calculated always come up with > plenty of safety. That does not mean I would be ok making substantial > changes to the hydraulics without a close examination at a minimum. > > Matt > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum <[email protected]> On > Behalf Of J H via Sprinklerforum > Sent: Monday, August 02, 2021 5:07 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: J H <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Flexible hose head connectors on a pipe schedule system > > I'll be devil's advocate. Pipe scheduled systems don't have limits on drop > lengths and I've seen a few scheduled warehouse systems with 30 to 40 ft. > roof decks with sections of office spacing below at 10 ft. with pendents > feeding them. So if you can do it per the pipe scheduled method you should > be able to do it with a shorter 6 ft. flex hose with the same equivalent > feet that you might find in a hard piped system. > > JH > > On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 11:07 AM Sean Lockyer via Sprinklerforum < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Can flexible hose head connectors (I.E. - "Flexheads") be used on a > > pipe scheduled system ? Since calculations were not performed due to > > it being a scheduled system, the friction loss would be superfluous, > > correct ? Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > > > Thanks > > Sean Lockyer > > AIT Life Safety > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected] > > > > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2flists.firesprinkler > > .org%2flistinfo.cgi%2fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org&c=E,1,yJy0FkmWv > > 8kAJnTMsneav8pMYCXQyB51SLZNS6LoNvcWkygfvZGinfj8b8hSd1vKMMaxWK8DPJRtJW1 > > RinlHD5v5CnYW6HpqRbi2sK9qGsnk8r1tgA,,&typo=1 > > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2flists.firesprinkler.org%2flistinfo.cgi%2fsprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org&c=E,1,qqPjQ536SLPWlZ6fljifsKteUsfO-D3vceU1ulLIpavUOfR6x8WCalfKvRdFsgup6SEESABKWeFtBmXyhbjWSbAsnn0BdIMROrZQszUa3x0G5kcfQEhYLKe6Nw,,&typo=1 > _______________________________________________ > 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
