Antifreeze system

[Douglas Hicks]

We installed an isolation valve on an propylene glycol antifreeze loop.  
Unfortunately, we were told the system was about 55 gallons. It was closer to 
90 gallons.  We only had enough antifreeze for 60 gallons.  We used what 
antifreeze we had, and finished the job with straight water.  My thought was to 
drain the water, monitoring the liquid until we got to the antifreeze.  Then we 
would fill the system with an antifreeze mix.

Today, we returned  to the job site with  30 gallons of antifreeze.  We closed 
the isolation valve and drained out 5 gallons.  The drained water tested  to 
15°F.  We tested the fluid at the other end of the piping.  It also tested 
15°F. I thought the antifreeze loop was a closed system.  How did the 
antifreeze and water get mixed in a closed pipe system?  

Douglas Hicks
General Fire Equipment Co of Eastern Oregon, Inc
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Antifreeze system

[Douglas Hicks]

I  have a wet sprinkler system where the entire sprinkler system is filled with 
antifreeze.  The riser comes from the floor, makes a 90 * into a backflow 
device,  to a butterfly valve, then to the attic.  The inspectors test valve 
tees off the riser to the attic.  My concern is the possible loss of antifreeze 
when opening the inspectors test valve.  Is my concern warranted?  Or should I 
move the inspectors test valve to a location between the backflow device and 
the butterfly valve?  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

Antifreeze System Expansion

[chris everett]

Hi, I have a customer with some antifreeze (glycerin) systems which were 
installed using Sections of pipe instead of bladder type expansion tanks. 
Charged with air, or not, the pipes are not cutting it. The pressure regularly 
rises to over 160# on hot days. Am trying to convince the customer to go with 
something that works, so can anyone back me up as to the advantage of bladder 
tanks?


Thanks, Chris from GS






Sent from Windows Mail
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Antifreeze system

[Forest Wilson Fire Sprinkler Contractor]

What was the concentration of the propylene glycol you filled with and its 
freeze point?


Forest Wilson
Fire Sprinkler Contractor
937-736-0425

Notice:
This message is confidential. It may also be privileged or otherwise protected 
by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you have received it by 
mistake, please let us know by e-mail reply and delete it from your system; you 
may not copy this message or disclose its contents to anyone. Please send us by 
fax any message containing deadlines as incoming e-mails are not screened for 
response deadlines. The integrity and security of this message cannot be 
guaranteed on the Internet.

 Original message From: Douglas Hicks 
 Date:10/20/2015  10:59 PM  (GMT-05:00) 
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Subject: 
Antifreeze system 
We installed an isolation valve on an propylene glycol antifreeze loop.  
Unfortunately, we were told the system was about 55 gallons. It was closer to 
90 gallons.  We only had enough antifreeze for 60 gallons.  We used what 
antifreeze we had, and finished the job with straight water.  My thought was to 
drain the water, monitoring the liquid until we got to the antifreeze.  Then we 
would fill the system with an antifreeze mix.

Today, we returned  to the job site with  30 gallons of antifreeze.  We closed 
the isolation valve and drained out 5 gallons.  The drained water tested  to 
15°F.  We tested the fluid at the other end of the piping.  It also tested 
15°F. I thought the antifreeze loop was a closed system.  How did the 
antifreeze and water get mixed in a closed pipe system?  

Douglas Hicks
General Fire Equipment Co of Eastern Oregon, Inc
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

RE: Antifreeze system

[Matt Grise]

It is possible that some of the anti-freeze moved around due to density 
differences with the water- the 'water' sample that you pulled may not be 
representative of all of the liquid in the system. It would depend on the 
layout of the piping to see if that is a possibility.

On the other hand: you were told it was a closed loop system... any way to 
verify that? You were also told it was  a 55 gallon system, so the person you 
spoke with may not have a complete understanding of the system design.

Matt Grisé PE*, LEED AP, NICET II  
Sales Engineer 
Alliance Fire Protection 
130 w 9th Ave.
North Kansas City, MO 64116

*Licensed in KS & MO 
 
913.888.0647 ph 
913.888.0618 f 
913.526.7443 cell 
www. AFPsprink.com 
 

-Original Message-
From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On 
Behalf Of Douglas Hicks
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:00 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: Antifreeze system

We installed an isolation valve on an propylene glycol antifreeze loop.  
Unfortunately, we were told the system was about 55 gallons. It was closer to 
90 gallons.  We only had enough antifreeze for 60 gallons.  We used what 
antifreeze we had, and finished the job with straight water.  My thought was to 
drain the water, monitoring the liquid until we got to the antifreeze.  Then we 
would fill the system with an antifreeze mix.

Today, we returned  to the job site with  30 gallons of antifreeze.  We closed 
the isolation valve and drained out 5 gallons.  The drained water tested  to 
15°F.  We tested the fluid at the other end of the piping.  It also tested 
15°F. I thought the antifreeze loop was a closed system.  How did the 
antifreeze and water get mixed in a closed pipe system?  

Douglas Hicks
General Fire Equipment Co of Eastern Oregon, Inc 
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Antifreeze system

[AKS-Gmail-IMAP]

According to Dow Chemical propylene glycol is completely soluble in all 
proportions in water. It “dissolved" into the water. A liquid dissolving into 
another is a notion we rarely think about. You ended up with about 90 gallons 
good for 15F. That is 25% glycol or 22.5 gallons glycol in a 90 gallon mixture. 
You had planned for 60 gallons mixed. That would be 22.5 gallons glycol in 60 
gallons total. That is about 37% glycol.  So you must have been shooting for 
about 0 F. In other words the premix was for about 0F in order for the numbers 
to make sense.

Allan Seidel
St. Louis, MO


> On Oct 20, 2015, at 9:59 PM, Douglas Hicks  wrote:
> 
> We installed an isolation valve on an propylene glycol antifreeze loop.  
> Unfortunately, we were told the system was about 55 gallons. It was closer to 
> 90 gallons.  We only had enough antifreeze for 60 gallons.  We used what 
> antifreeze we had, and finished the job with straight water.  My thought was 
> to drain the water, monitoring the liquid until we got to the antifreeze.  
> Then we would fill the system with an antifreeze mix.
> 
> Today, we returned  to the job site with  30 gallons of antifreeze.  We 
> closed the isolation valve and drained out 5 gallons.  The drained water 
> tested  to 15°F.  We tested the fluid at the other end of the piping.  It 
> also tested 15°F. I thought the antifreeze loop was a closed system.  How did 
> the antifreeze and water get mixed in a closed pipe system?  
> 
> Douglas Hicks
> General Fire Equipment Co of Eastern Oregon, Inc
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Antifreeze system

[Douglas Hicks]

I figured an open container of fluid would be the same throughout the 
container, or a homogeneous solution.  But I did not expect that a closed 
container would be a homogeneous solution.  So why do we need a test drain 
at the far end of the pipe, and why do we need another test port at 
mid-center,  if the system is 150 gallons or more?  And at what point does 
stratification become important?  Two stories, four or ten stories.  Is 
there a point where we should add a circulating pump to insure the 
antifreeze level is the same through the piping?


I have ordered more glycol antifreeze.  We will drain all the antifreeze 
into clean three 55 gallon barrels.  That will allow us to know the pipe 
capacity. After draining the system, we will connect the vacuum to the 
piping to make sure we have all the fluid out of the piping.  Then we can 
add enough antifreeze to protect the building.  What is left, we will pump 
into the sewer system.  They have their own on-site sewage treatment,  2 
open ponds.


Thanks to those who responed.


-Original Message- 
From: AKS-Gmail-IMAP

Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 9:33 PM
To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Antifreeze system

According to Dow Chemical propylene glycol is completely soluble in all 
proportions in water. It “dissolved" into the water. A liquid dissolving 
into another is a notion we rarely think about. You ended up with about 90 
gallons good for 15F. That is 25% glycol or 22.5 gallons glycol in a 90 
gallon mixture. You had planned for 60 gallons mixed. That would be 22.5 
gallons glycol in 60 gallons total. That is about 37% glycol.  So you must 
have been shooting for about 0 F. In other words the premix was for about 0F 
in order for the numbers to make sense.


Allan Seidel
St. Louis, MO



On Oct 20, 2015, at 9:59 PM, Douglas Hicks  wrote:

We installed an isolation valve on an propylene glycol antifreeze loop. 
Unfortunately, we were told the system was about 55 gallons. It was closer 
to 90 gallons.  We only had enough antifreeze for 60 gallons.  We used 
what antifreeze we had, and finished the job with straight water.  My 
thought was to drain the water, monitoring the liquid until we got to the 
antifreeze.  Then we would fill the system with an antifreeze mix.


Today, we returned  to the job site with  30 gallons of antifreeze.  We 
closed the isolation valve and drained out 5 gallons.  The drained water 
tested  to 15°F.  We tested the fluid at the other end of the piping.  It 
also tested 15°F. I thought the antifreeze loop was a closed system.  How 
did the antifreeze and water get mixed in a closed pipe system?


Douglas Hicks
General Fire Equipment Co of Eastern Oregon, Inc
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org


___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org 


___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Re: Antifreeze system

[Todd - FPDC]

Is the butterfly valve in addition to the valves on the backflow. If so, why?

I assume you have a riser manifold or something similar with a flow switch and 
test valve. I would install a check valve above that to be the start of the 
antifreeze. Don't forget to install a drain above the check as well. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 11, 2011, at 3:32 AM, "Douglas Hicks"  wrote:

> I  have a wet sprinkler system where the entire sprinkler system is filled 
> with antifreeze.  The riser comes from the floor, makes a 90 * into a 
> backflow device,  to a butterfly valve, then to the attic.  The inspectors 
> test valve tees off the riser to the attic.  My concern is the possible loss 
> of antifreeze when opening the inspectors test valve.  Is my concern 
> warranted?  Or should I move the inspectors test valve to a location between 
> the backflow device and the butterfly valve?  
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

Re: Antifreeze system

[Douglas Hicks]

 Yes, the BFV is in addition to and after the backflow valve.

-Original Message- 
From: Todd - FPDC

Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 3:50 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Antifreeze system

Is the butterfly valve in addition to the valves on the backflow. If so, 
why?


I assume you have a riser manifold or something similar with a flow switch 
and test valve. I would install a check valve above that to be the start of 
the antifreeze. Don't forget to install a drain above the check as well.


Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 11, 2011, at 3:32 AM, "Douglas Hicks"  wrote:

I  have a wet sprinkler system where the entire sprinkler system is filled 
with antifreeze.  The riser comes from the floor, makes a 90 * into a 
backflow device,  to a butterfly valve, then to the attic.  The inspectors 
test valve tees off the riser to the attic.  My concern is the possible 
loss of antifreeze when opening the inspectors test valve.  Is my concern 
warranted?  Or should I move the inspectors test valve to a location 
between the backflow device and the butterfly valve?

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachments/20110911/bb8dc583/attachment.html>

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum 


___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

RE: Antifreeze system

[Steven Stirm]

Interesting! I am not able to find it in the 2010 NFPA 13; the requirements
of installing isolation or check valve above the test and drain to isolate
the antifreeze from a system during an inspectors flow test. 
Any directive as to this being a code requirement will be appreciated.

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Douglas Hicks
Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 9:44 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Antifreeze system

  Yes, the BFV is in addition to and after the backflow valve.

-Original Message- 
From: Todd - FPDC
Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 3:50 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Antifreeze system

Is the butterfly valve in addition to the valves on the backflow. If so, 
why?

I assume you have a riser manifold or something similar with a flow switch 
and test valve. I would install a check valve above that to be the start of 
the antifreeze. Don't forget to install a drain above the check as well.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 11, 2011, at 3:32 AM, "Douglas Hicks"  wrote:

> I  have a wet sprinkler system where the entire sprinkler system is filled

> with antifreeze.  The riser comes from the floor, makes a 90 * into a 
> backflow device,  to a butterfly valve, then to the attic.  The inspectors

> test valve tees off the riser to the attic.  My concern is the possible 
> loss of antifreeze when opening the inspectors test valve.  Is my concern 
> warranted?  Or should I move the inspectors test valve to a location 
> between the backflow device and the butterfly valve?
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
>
<http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachment
s/20110911/bb8dc583/attachment.html>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum 

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
 

__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6457 (20110912) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 
 

__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 6458 (20110912) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

RE: Antifreeze system

[George Church]

Its not necessarily a code thing, it just keeps the AF from becoming diluted.


George L.  Church, Jr., CET  
Rowe Sprinkler Systems, Inc.
PO Box 407, Middleburg, PA 17842
877-324-ROWE   570-837-6335 fax
g...@rowesprinkler.com



-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org 
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Steven Stirm
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 2:24 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Antifreeze system

Interesting! I am not able to find it in the 2010 NFPA 13; the requirements of 
installing isolation or check valve above the test and drain to isolate the 
antifreeze from a system during an inspectors flow test. 
Any directive as to this being a code requirement will be appreciated.

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Douglas Hicks
Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 9:44 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Antifreeze system

  Yes, the BFV is in addition to and after the backflow valve.

-Original Message-
From: Todd - FPDC
Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 3:50 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Antifreeze system

Is the butterfly valve in addition to the valves on the backflow. If so, why?

I assume you have a riser manifold or something similar with a flow switch and 
test valve. I would install a check valve above that to be the start of the 
antifreeze. Don't forget to install a drain above the check as well.

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 11, 2011, at 3:32 AM, "Douglas Hicks"  wrote:

> I  have a wet sprinkler system where the entire sprinkler system is 
> filled

> with antifreeze.  The riser comes from the floor, makes a 90 * into a 
> backflow device,  to a butterfly valve, then to the attic.  The 
> inspectors

> test valve tees off the riser to the attic.  My concern is the 
> possible loss of antifreeze when opening the inspectors test valve.  
> Is my concern warranted?  Or should I move the inspectors test valve 
> to a location between the backflow device and the butterfly valve?
> -- next part -- An HTML attachment was 
> scrubbed...
> URL: 
>
<http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachment
s/20110911/bb8dc583/attachment.html>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum 

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
 

__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 6457 (20110912) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 
 

__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 6458 (20110912) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

RE: Antifreeze system

[Todd Williams]

It's not a Code requirement, just an idea to solve the original problem. Wait 
to install antifreeze until after the test valve. 


At 02:24 PM 9/12/2011, you wrote:
>Interesting! I am not able to find it in the 2010 NFPA 13; the requirements
>of installing isolation or check valve above the test and drain to isolate
>the antifreeze from a system during an inspectors flow test. 
>Any directive as to this being a code requirement will be appreciated.
>
>-Original Message-
>From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
>[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Douglas Hicks
>Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 9:44 AM
>To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>Subject: Re: Antifreeze system
>
>  Yes, the BFV is in addition to and after the backflow valve.
>
>-Original Message- 
>From: Todd - FPDC
>Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 3:50 AM
>To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>Subject: Re: Antifreeze system
>
>Is the butterfly valve in addition to the valves on the backflow. If so, 
>why?
>
>I assume you have a riser manifold or something similar with a flow switch 
>and test valve. I would install a check valve above that to be the start of 
>the antifreeze. Don't forget to install a drain above the check as well.
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>On Sep 11, 2011, at 3:32 AM, "Douglas Hicks"  wrote:
>
>> I  have a wet sprinkler system where the entire sprinkler system is filled
>
>> with antifreeze.  The riser comes from the floor, makes a 90 * into a 
>> backflow device,  to a butterfly valve, then to the attic.  The inspectors
>
>> test valve tees off the riser to the attic.  My concern is the possible 
>> loss of antifreeze when opening the inspectors test valve.  Is my concern 
>> warranted?  Or should I move the inspectors test valve to a location 
>> between the backflow device and the butterfly valve?
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: 
>>
><http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachment
>s/20110911/bb8dc583/attachment.html>
>> ___
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>___
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum 
>
>___
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
> 
>
>__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
>database 6457 (20110912) __
>
>The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
>http://www.eset.com
> 
> 
>
>__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
>database 6458 (20110912) __
>
>The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
>http://www.eset.com
> 
>
>___
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

Todd G. Williams, PE
Fire Protection Design/Consulting
Stonington, CT
860.535.2080
www.fpdc.com

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

Antifreeze system drops

[Craig Leadbetter]

Are dry pendent heads required in an antifreeze system that had drop pendent 
heads?



Craig Leadbetter

Safeguard of Marquette

(Office) 906-475-9955
(Fax) 906-475-5474
(Cell Phone) 906-362-5393

cleadbetter.l...@chartermi.net

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Antifreeze System Expansion

[Roland Huggins]

Compliance with NFPA 13: 7.6.3.3 requirement for a listed expansion chamber is 
a good start.  This is assuming that he has a backflow preventer on the 
antifreeze connection to the wet system (if a sub-system) which drives the wet 
system to requiring an RPZ instead of a double check.

It’s interesting that 13 only addresses sub-systems connected to wet pipe 
systems.  Application of the same requirements to a full antifreeze system is a 
reasonable expectation.


Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering
American Fire Sprinkler Assn.   ---  Fire Sprinklers Saves Lives
Dallas, TX
http://www.firesprinkler.org <http://www.firesprinkler.org/>





> On Apr 30, 2015, at 10:46 AM, chris everett  wrote:
> 
> Hi, I have a customer with some antifreeze (glycerin) systems which were 
> installed using Sections of pipe instead of bladder type expansion tanks. 
> Charged with air, or not, the pipes are not cutting it. The pressure 
> regularly rises to over 160# on hot days. Am trying to convince the customer 
> to go with something that works, so can anyone back me up as to the advantage 
> of bladder tanks?
> 
> 
> Thanks, Chris from GS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from Windows Mail
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
> http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org

Large vertical antifreeze system

[Rod DiBona]

I Am wondering if anyone has an opinion on a large ( 8" pipe) vertical 
antifreeze system. The  piping would go straight up a silo almost 300'. Do you 
think that there would be an expediated 'separation' problem? I know it is not 
the preferrable option but we are wondering if it is an option at all. This is 
in cold country. We have 7 deluge systems in a valve house at the bottom of the 
silo. We are currently looking at running seven parallel runs of galv sch 40 up 
the silo and the down the conveyors. If we could run one antifreeze filled line 
up the silo and put the valves in the heated head house that would save a lot 
of money. My gut tells me No but thought I would run it up the flagpole. 
Appreciate your thoughts.

Rod DiBona
Rapid Fire 
Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Large vertical antifreeze system

[å . . . . . . .]

Miscibility of one chemical in another is a function of mass fraction of
each component.
I don't recall what the phase diagram of glycols and glycerins in water
looks like, but
  am betting they are fully miscible at the ranges we need for the silo.

Having said that, the "separation theory between water and AF" in the
Northern California
  explosion involving anti-freeze,
mist-droplet-dispersion-from-activated-sprinkler
  becomes specious.  Not disproved, just suspect.

Looking at this from an end-user perspective...if propylene glycol is used,
  i believe this chemical is a rated toxin, if not carcinogen.  Glycerin at
high enough
  purity, is food grade, albeit more costly.  Biodiesel syn-plants are
bringing glycerin
  prices down, and if you are in farm country, odds are you have a biodiesel
plant
  somewhere near.  Might want to consider what the end user is willing
  to have spilled on their silo product (glycerin vs Prop-glycol).  Because
of the the
  environmental questions, and because of the testing intensity with AF
systems,
  I would recommend a dry system; even though it will require lots of
maintenance
  and will corrode to failure faster than a wet system.

scot deal
excelsior fire engineering
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Antifreeze system drops

[Ron Greenman]

No. Dry pendant are only required on wet systems where the head
penetrates into a cold space or on dry system drops (apart from the
one exception where the system and drop are in conditioned spaces).
Another interesting question: Could you substitute drops filled with
an anti-freeze/water mixture for dry pendants on a dry system?

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Craig Leadbetter
 wrote:
> Are dry pendent heads required in an antifreeze system that had drop pendent 
> heads?
>
>
>
> Craig Leadbetter
>
> Safeguard of Marquette
>
> (Office) 906-475-9955
> (Fax) 906-475-5474
> (Cell Phone) 906-362-5393
>
> cleadbetter.l...@chartermi.net
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>



-- 
Ron Greenman
Instructor
Fire Protection Engineering Technology
Bates Technical College
1101 So. Yakima Ave.
Tacoma, WA 98405

rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu

http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/

253.680.7346
253.576.9700 (cell)

Member:
AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC

They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis
Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Antifreeze system drops

[Craig Leadbetter]

Is there not potential for the anti-freeze solution to become diluted over the 
years? Even if the system is drained and the antifreeze mixture recalibrated  
the antifreeze in the drops is not affected. 

Craig Leadbetter

Safeguard of Marquette

(Office) 906-475-9955
(Fax) 906-475-5474
(Cell Phone) 906-362-5393

cleadbetter.l...@chartermi.net




At 12:06 PM 10/20/2010, you wrote:
>No. Dry pendant are only required on wet systems where the head
>penetrates into a cold space or on dry system drops (apart from the
>one exception where the system and drop are in conditioned spaces).
>Another interesting question: Could you substitute drops filled with
>an anti-freeze/water mixture for dry pendants on a dry system?
>
>On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Craig Leadbetter
> wrote:
>> Are dry pendent heads required in an antifreeze system that had drop pendent 
>> heads?
>>
>>
>>
>> Craig Leadbetter
>>
>> Safeguard of Marquette
>>
>> (Office) 906-475-9955
>> (Fax) 906-475-5474
>> (Cell Phone) 906-362-5393
>>
>> cleadbetter.l...@chartermi.net
>>
>> ___
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>>
>> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>>
>> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Ron Greenman
>Instructor
>Fire Protection Engineering Technology
>Bates Technical College
>1101 So. Yakima Ave.
>Tacoma, WA 98405
>
>rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu
>
>http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/
>
>253.680.7346
>253.576.9700 (cell)
>
>Member:
>AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC
>
>They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis
>Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626)
>___
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
>For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
>To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Antifreeze system drops

[Ron Greenman]

What happens in solution stays in solution.

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Craig Leadbetter
 wrote:
>
> Is there not potential for the anti-freeze solution to become diluted over 
> the years? Even if the system is drained and the antifreeze mixture 
> recalibrated  the antifreeze in the drops is not affected.
>
> Craig Leadbetter
>
> Safeguard of Marquette
>
> (Office) 906-475-9955
> (Fax) 906-475-5474
> (Cell Phone) 906-362-5393
>
> cleadbetter.l...@chartermi.net
>
>
>
>
> At 12:06 PM 10/20/2010, you wrote:
>>No. Dry pendant are only required on wet systems where the head
>>penetrates into a cold space or on dry system drops (apart from the
>>one exception where the system and drop are in conditioned spaces).
>>Another interesting question: Could you substitute drops filled with
>>an anti-freeze/water mixture for dry pendants on a dry system?
>>
>>On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Craig Leadbetter
>> wrote:
>>> Are dry pendent heads required in an antifreeze system that had drop 
>>> pendent heads?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Craig Leadbetter
>>>
>>> Safeguard of Marquette
>>>
>>> (Office) 906-475-9955
>>> (Fax) 906-475-5474
>>> (Cell Phone) 906-362-5393
>>>
>>> cleadbetter.l...@chartermi.net
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>>> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>>> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>>>
>>> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>>>
>>> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>>> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Ron Greenman
>>Instructor
>>Fire Protection Engineering Technology
>>Bates Technical College
>>1101 So. Yakima Ave.
>>Tacoma, WA 98405
>>
>>rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu
>>
>>http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/
>>
>>253.680.7346
>>253.576.9700 (cell)
>>
>>Member:
>>AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC
>>
>>They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis
>>Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626)
>>___
>>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>>Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>>
>>For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>>
>>To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>>(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>



-- 
Ron Greenman
Instructor
Fire Protection Engineering Technology
Bates Technical College
1101 So. Yakima Ave.
Tacoma, WA 98405

rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu

http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/

253.680.7346
253.576.9700 (cell)

Member:
AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC

They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis
Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Antifreeze system drops

[Craig Leadbetter]

Thanks Ron!!

Obviously i am over thinking today.


Craig Leadbetter

Safeguard of Marquette

(Office) 906-475-9955
(Fax) 906-475-5474
(Cell Phone) 906-362-5393

cleadbetter.l...@chartermi.net





At 12:26 PM 10/20/2010, you wrote:
>What happens in solution stays in solution.
>
>On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Craig Leadbetter
> wrote:
>>
>> Is there not potential for the anti-freeze solution to become diluted over 
>> the years? Even if the system is drained and the antifreeze mixture 
>> recalibrated  the antifreeze in the drops is not affected.
>>
>> Craig Leadbetter
>>
>> Safeguard of Marquette
>>
>> (Office) 906-475-9955
>> (Fax) 906-475-5474
>> (Cell Phone) 906-362-5393
>>
>> cleadbetter.l...@chartermi.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> At 12:06 PM 10/20/2010, you wrote:
>>>No. Dry pendant are only required on wet systems where the head
>>>penetrates into a cold space or on dry system drops (apart from the
>>>one exception where the system and drop are in conditioned spaces).
>>>Another interesting question: Could you substitute drops filled with
>>>an anti-freeze/water mixture for dry pendants on a dry system?
>>>
>>>On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Craig Leadbetter
>>> wrote:
>>>> Are dry pendent heads required in an antifreeze system that had drop 
>>>> pendent heads?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Craig Leadbetter
>>>>
>>>> Safeguard of Marquette
>>>>
>>>> (Office) 906-475-9955
>>>> (Fax) 906-475-5474
>>>> (Cell Phone) 906-362-5393
>>>>
>>>> cleadbetter.l...@chartermi.net
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>>>> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>>>> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>>>>
>>>> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>>>>
>>>> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>>>> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>Ron Greenman
>>>Instructor
>>>Fire Protection Engineering Technology
>>>Bates Technical College
>>>1101 So. Yakima Ave.
>>>Tacoma, WA 98405
>>>
>>>rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu
>>>
>>>http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/
>>>
>>>253.680.7346
>>>253.576.9700 (cell)
>>>
>>>Member:
>>>AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC
>>>
>>>They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis
>>>Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626)
>>>___
>>>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>>>Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>>>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>>>
>>>For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>>>
>>>To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>>>(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>>
>> ___
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>>
>> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>>
>> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Ron Greenman
>Instructor
>Fire Protection Engineering Technology
>Bates Technical College
>1101 So. Yakima Ave.
>Tacoma, WA 98405
>
>rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu
>
>http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/
>
>253.680.7346
>253.576.9700 (cell)
>
>Member:
>AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC
>
>They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis
>Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626)
>___
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
>For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
>To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Antifreeze system drops

[David de Vries]

We have investigated freeze-up failures of dry systems with pendent drops that 
were presumed to have anti-freeze in them.  Seems they did not work so well.  
Don't know whether it was dilution, inadequate anti-freeze to begin with or 
something else.  That may be why this is not an accepted 13 methodology.
 
And how often and how many of those drops do you pull to sample/test the 
anti-freeze?  Not covered in 25 and why should it be if it is not in 13.
 
If the customer does not want to heat, either a dry system or anti-freeze 
throughout are about your only options per 13.

Dave 

David A. de Vries, P.E., CSP 
Firetech Engineering Incorporated 




--- On Wed, 10/20/10, Ron Greenman  wrote:


From: Ron Greenman 
Subject: Re: Antifreeze system drops
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Date: Wednesday, October 20, 2010, 11:06 AM


No. Dry pendant are only required on wet systems where the head
penetrates into a cold space or on dry system drops (apart from the
one exception where the system and drop are in conditioned spaces).
Another interesting question: Could you substitute drops filled with
an anti-freeze/water mixture for dry pendants on a dry system?

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Craig Leadbetter
 wrote:
> Are dry pendent heads required in an antifreeze system that had drop pendent 
> heads?
>
>
>
> Craig Leadbetter
>
> Safeguard of Marquette
>
> (Office) 906-475-9955
> (Fax) 906-475-5474
> (Cell Phone) 906-362-5393
>
> cleadbetter.l...@chartermi.net
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>



-- 
Ron Greenman
Instructor
Fire Protection Engineering Technology
Bates Technical College
1101 So. Yakima Ave.
Tacoma, WA 98405

rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu

http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/

253.680.7346
253.576.9700 (cell)

Member:
AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC

They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis
Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Antifreeze system drops

[Ron Greenman]

Just a rhetorical question. I like to ask them better than answer
them. To paraphrase the wag, It's better to ask questions and appear
ignorant than to answer them and prove it.

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 6:31 PM, David de Vries
 wrote:
> We have investigated freeze-up failures of dry systems with pendent drops 
> that were presumed to have anti-freeze in them.  Seems they did not work so 
> well.  Don't know whether it was dilution, inadequate anti-freeze to begin 
> with or something else.  That may be why this is not an accepted 13 
> methodology.
>
> And how often and how many of those drops do you pull to sample/test the 
> anti-freeze?  Not covered in 25 and why should it be if it is not in 13.
>
> If the customer does not want to heat, either a dry system or anti-freeze 
> throughout are about your only options per 13.
>
> Dave
>
> David A. de Vries, P.E., CSP
> Firetech Engineering Incorporated
>
>
>
>
> --- On Wed, 10/20/10, Ron Greenman  wrote:
>
>
> From: Ron Greenman 
> Subject: Re: Antifreeze system drops
> To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> Date: Wednesday, October 20, 2010, 11:06 AM
>
>
> No. Dry pendant are only required on wet systems where the head
> penetrates into a cold space or on dry system drops (apart from the
> one exception where the system and drop are in conditioned spaces).
> Another interesting question: Could you substitute drops filled with
> an anti-freeze/water mixture for dry pendants on a dry system?
>
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Craig Leadbetter
>  wrote:
>> Are dry pendent heads required in an antifreeze system that had drop pendent 
>> heads?
>>
>>
>>
>> Craig Leadbetter
>>
>> Safeguard of Marquette
>>
>> (Office) 906-475-9955
>> (Fax) 906-475-5474
>> (Cell Phone) 906-362-5393
>>
>> cleadbetter.l...@chartermi.net
>>
>> ___
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>>
>> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>>
>> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ron Greenman
> Instructor
> Fire Protection Engineering Technology
> Bates Technical College
> 1101 So. Yakima Ave.
> Tacoma, WA 98405
>
> rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu
>
> http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/
>
> 253.680.7346
> 253.576.9700 (cell)
>
> Member:
> AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC
>
> They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis
> Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626)
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>



-- 
Ron Greenman
Instructor
Fire Protection Engineering Technology
Bates Technical College
1101 So. Yakima Ave.
Tacoma, WA 98405

rgreen...@bates.ctc.edu

http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/

253.680.7346
253.576.9700 (cell)

Member:
AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC

They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis
Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Backflow protection on antifreeze system

[Ed Kramer]

Anybody have a 2006 International Plumbing Code handy?

 

I have a client who wants to use glycerine in a small antifreeze system.
Nothing unusual about that.   But he claims that by using food-grade
glycerine he doesn't need an RP BFP and the associated expansion tank.  I
disagree,  but don't have code references to back it up.   The 2006 IPC is
applicable.

 

Thanks in advance!

 

Ed Kramer

Kramer Design, LLC

Littleton, CO

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Large vertical antifreeze system

[Travis Mack, SET]

Rod:

Just thinking out loud, could you subdivide the vertical run with check 
valves to minimize the separation.  If a 50' vertical will not cause 
undue separation, could you put in 6 check valves to have 50' of 
vertical.  You may need multiple expansion chambers or some other way to 
allow for expansion, besides a hole in the check valve.

On 5/6/2010 2:23 PM, Rod DiBona wrote:
> I Am wondering if anyone has an opinion on a large ( 8" pipe) vertical 
> antifreeze system. The  piping would go straight up a silo almost 300'. Do 
> you think that there would be an expediated 'separation' problem? I know it 
> is not the preferrable option but we are wondering if it is an option at all. 
> This is in cold country. We have 7 deluge systems in a valve house at the 
> bottom of the silo. We are currently looking at running seven parallel runs 
> of galv sch 40 up the silo and the down the conveyors. If we could run one 
> antifreeze filled line up the silo and put the valves in the heated head 
> house that would save a lot of money. My gut tells me No but thought I would 
> run it up the flagpole. Appreciate your thoughts.
>
> Rod DiBona
> Rapid Fire
> Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

[Chris Cahill]

Premixed stuff comes guaranteed not to separate.  

But also consider near freezing point or so it becomes the consistency of a
milk shake.  This is usually the temp specified you prep it at.  The actual
temp it becomes solid and breaks things is usually a lot lower.  Now in a
horizontal system I'm not too worried.  But will the pump be able to push it
out at that consistency?  How long of a delay?  Maybe I'm over thinking
because pressure is pressure vertical or horizontal.   

Anyway just explore the viscosity at the cold temps you expect 'cuz I
believe you aren't that dissimilar to me which is cold.  And put it on the
south face of the building so it doesn't get as cold for as long.  

If I did my math right that's about 12,000 lbs of pipe and liquid.  Whether
AF or not you have that covered right?

And 130 psi just in static.  Interesting on the pump and pressure limits. 

Heat tape and insulation might be an option.  We've been successful on
several unique situations with it.   

Chris Cahill, P.E.
Fire Protection Engineer
Sentry Fire Protection, Inc.
 
763-658-4483
763-658-4921 fax
 
Email: chr...@sentryfiremn.com
 
Mail: P.O. Box 69
Waverly, MN 55390
 
Location: 4439 Hwy 12 SW
  Waverly, MN 55390

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Rod DiBona
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 4:23 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Large vertical antifreeze system

I Am wondering if anyone has an opinion on a large ( 8" pipe) vertical
antifreeze system. The  piping would go straight up a silo almost 300'. Do
you think that there would be an expediated 'separation' problem? I know it
is not the preferrable option but we are wondering if it is an option at
all. This is in cold country. We have 7 deluge systems in a valve house at
the bottom of the silo. We are currently looking at running seven parallel
runs of galv sch 40 up the silo and the down the conveyors. If we could run
one antifreeze filled line up the silo and put the valves in the heated head
house that would save a lot of money. My gut tells me No but thought I would
run it up the flagpole. Appreciate your thoughts.

Rod DiBona
Rapid Fire 
Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Large vertical antifreeze system

[Ron Greenman]

Rod,

Did a retrofit to an older residential high rise that had open to the
exterior stairwells with dry class one pipes. When the high rise retro
ordinance took effect the choices were it will be a wet class three
but the the stairwell can be fully enclosed and heated or left open
(the residents liked the view of the lake) and the pipe protected. The
latter was chosen and the pipe was heat traced, insulated, and
shielded with an aluminum wrapper. We're not too cold here (never
below the teens) so we figured that there'd be enough heat migration
for the valve bases and so far (over twenty years) so good. This
approach might work for you since you don't have the pesky hose valves
every twelve or so feet and you terminate in heated enclosures. Way
better than anti-freeze in my estimation.

On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Rod DiBona  wrote:
> I Am wondering if anyone has an opinion on a large ( 8" pipe) vertical 
> antifreeze system. The  piping would go straight up a silo almost 300'. Do 
> you think that there would be an expediated 'separation' problem? I know it 
> is not the preferrable option but we are wondering if it is an option at all. 
> This is in cold country. We have 7 deluge systems in a valve house at the 
> bottom of the silo. We are currently looking at running seven parallel runs 
> of galv sch 40 up the silo and the down the conveyors. If we could run one 
> antifreeze filled line up the silo and put the valves in the heated head 
> house that would save a lot of money. My gut tells me No but thought I would 
> run it up the flagpole. Appreciate your thoughts.
>
> Rod DiBona
> Rapid Fire
> Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>



-- 
Ron Greenman
Instructor
Fire Protection Engineering
Bates Technical College
Tacoma, WA

Member:
AFT WA 4184/AFL-CIO, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Large vertical antifreeze system

[David de Vries]

Thinking outside the box, how about a set-up like an elevated tank?  Run a 
parallel line, smaller diameter connected at the top and bottom of your supply 
main and put a small circulating pump in it to keep the stuff moving.  May cut 
down on the gelling at very cold temps problem and the separation, if in fact 
that is a problem.
 
Chris, so is the pre-mixed stuff like homogenized milk?  Won't separate?

Dave 

David A. de Vries, P.E., CSP 
Firetech Engineering Incorporated 



--- On Thu, 5/6/10, Ron Greenman  wrote:


From: Ron Greenman 
Subject: Re: Large vertical antifreeze system
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org, "Rod DiBona" 
Date: Thursday, May 6, 2010, 4:44 PM


Rod,

Did a retrofit to an older residential high rise that had open to the
exterior stairwells with dry class one pipes. When the high rise retro
ordinance took effect the choices were it will be a wet class three
but the the stairwell can be fully enclosed and heated or left open
(the residents liked the view of the lake) and the pipe protected. The
latter was chosen and the pipe was heat traced, insulated, and
shielded with an aluminum wrapper. We're not too cold here (never
below the teens) so we figured that there'd be enough heat migration
for the valve bases and so far (over twenty years) so good. This
approach might work for you since you don't have the pesky hose valves
every twelve or so feet and you terminate in heated enclosures. Way
better than anti-freeze in my estimation.

On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Rod DiBona  wrote:
> I Am wondering if anyone has an opinion on a large ( 8" pipe) vertical 
> antifreeze system. The  piping would go straight up a silo almost 300'. Do 
> you think that there would be an expediated 'separation' problem? I know it 
> is not the preferrable option but we are wondering if it is an option at all. 
> This is in cold country. We have 7 deluge systems in a valve house at the 
> bottom of the silo. We are currently looking at running seven parallel runs 
> of galv sch 40 up the silo and the down the conveyors. If we could run one 
> antifreeze filled line up the silo and put the valves in the heated head 
> house that would save a lot of money. My gut tells me No but thought I would 
> run it up the flagpole. Appreciate your thoughts.
>
> Rod DiBona
> Rapid Fire
> Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>



-- 
Ron Greenman
Instructor
Fire Protection Engineering
Bates Technical College
Tacoma, WA

Member:
AFT WA 4184/AFL-CIO, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

[Rod DiBona]

Very good idea. One of our designers brought this up yesterday and I thought it 
could be a good idea but was once again caught up on it being a listed / 
approved method. Truthfully if FM signs off on it that is all we would need. 
Probably another good idea to run by them. Thanks!

Rod

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org 
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of David de Vries
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 4:04 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Large vertical antifreeze system

Thinking outside the box, how about a set-up like an elevated tank?  Run a 
parallel line, smaller diameter connected at the top and bottom of your supply 
main and put a small circulating pump in it to keep the stuff moving.  May cut 
down on the gelling at very cold temps problem and the separation, if in fact 
that is a problem.
 
Chris, so is the pre-mixed stuff like homogenized milk?  Won't separate?

Dave 

David A. de Vries, P.E., CSP 
Firetech Engineering Incorporated 



--- On Thu, 5/6/10, Ron Greenman  wrote:


From: Ron Greenman 
Subject: Re: Large vertical antifreeze system
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org, "Rod DiBona" 
Date: Thursday, May 6, 2010, 4:44 PM


Rod,

Did a retrofit to an older residential high rise that had open to the
exterior stairwells with dry class one pipes. When the high rise retro
ordinance took effect the choices were it will be a wet class three
but the the stairwell can be fully enclosed and heated or left open
(the residents liked the view of the lake) and the pipe protected. The
latter was chosen and the pipe was heat traced, insulated, and
shielded with an aluminum wrapper. We're not too cold here (never
below the teens) so we figured that there'd be enough heat migration
for the valve bases and so far (over twenty years) so good. This
approach might work for you since you don't have the pesky hose valves
every twelve or so feet and you terminate in heated enclosures. Way
better than anti-freeze in my estimation.

On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Rod DiBona  wrote:
> I Am wondering if anyone has an opinion on a large ( 8" pipe) vertical 
> antifreeze system. The  piping would go straight up a silo almost 300'. Do 
> you think that there would be an expediated 'separation' problem? I know it 
> is not the preferrable option but we are wondering if it is an option at all. 
> This is in cold country. We have 7 deluge systems in a valve house at the 
> bottom of the silo. We are currently looking at running seven parallel runs 
> of galv sch 40 up the silo and the down the conveyors. If we could run one 
> antifreeze filled line up the silo and put the valves in the heated head 
> house that would save a lot of money. My gut tells me No but thought I would 
> run it up the flagpole. Appreciate your thoughts.
>
> Rod DiBona
> Rapid Fire
> Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>



-- 
Ron Greenman
Instructor
Fire Protection Engineering
Bates Technical College
Tacoma, WA

Member:
AFT WA 4184/AFL-CIO, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

[John Denhardt]

Watch the pre-mix!  Make sure it is the % concentration you need.  Do
not take the suppliers word for it.  Ask what the temperature is when it
starts to gel and not the burst temperature.  The burst temperature does
us no good unless you do not care if the solution will flow in a fire
situation.



Thanks,

John

 

John August Denhardt, P.E.

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 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of David de
Vries
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 6:04 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Large vertical antifreeze system

 

Thinking outside the box, how about a set-up like an elevated tank?  Run
a parallel line, smaller diameter connected at the top and bottom of
your supply main and put a small circulating pump in it to keep the
stuff moving.  May cut down on the gelling at very cold temps problem
and the separation, if in fact that is a problem.

 

Chris, so is the pre-mixed stuff like homogenized milk?  Won't separate?

 

Dave 

 

David A. de Vries, P.E., CSP 

Firetech Engineering Incorporated 

 

 

 

--- On Thu, 5/6/10, Ron Greenman  wrote:

 

 

From: Ron Greenman 

Subject: Re: Large vertical antifreeze system

To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org, "Rod DiBona"


Date: Thursday, May 6, 2010, 4:44 PM

 

 

Rod,

 

Did a retrofit to an older residential high rise that had open to the

exterior stairwells with dry class one pipes. When the high rise retro

ordinance took effect the choices were it will be a wet class three

but the the stairwell can be fully enclosed and heated or left open

(the residents liked the view of the lake) and the pipe protected. The

latter was chosen and the pipe was heat traced, insulated, and

shielded with an aluminum wrapper. We're not too cold here (never

below the teens) so we figured that there'd be enough heat migration

for the valve bases and so far (over twenty years) so good. This

approach might work for you since you don't have the pesky hose valves

every twelve or so feet and you terminate in heated enclosures. Way

better than anti-freeze in my estimation.

 

On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Rod DiBona 
wrote:

> I Am wondering if anyone has an opinion on a large ( 8" pipe) vertical
antifreeze system. The  piping would go straight up a silo almost 300'.
Do you think that there would be an expediated 'separation' problem? I
know it is not the preferrable option but we are wondering if it is an
option at all. This is in cold country. We have 7 deluge systems in a
valve house at the bottom of the silo. We are currently looking at
running seven parallel runs of galv sch 40 up the silo and the down the
conveyors. If we could run one antifreeze filled line up the silo and
put the valves in the heated head house that would save a lot of money.
My gut tells me No but thought I would run it up the flagpole.
Appreciate your thoughts.

> 

> Rod DiBona

> Rapid Fire

> Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel

> ___

> Sprinklerforum mailing list

> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org

> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

> 

> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

> 

> To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org

> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

> 

 

 

 

-- 

Ron Greenman

Instructor

Fire Protection Engineering

Bates Technical College

Tacoma, WA

 

Member:

AFT WA 4184/AFL-CIO, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM,
WFC

___

Sprinklerforum mailing list

Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org

http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

 

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

 

To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org

(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___

Sprinklerforum mailing list

Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org

http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

 

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

 

To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org

(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

[Scott A. Futrell]

Chris and Dave two things.  Life expectancy of the heat tracing is
approximately 10 years, right?  Have to be aware of that.

And because both propylene glycol and glycerin are water miscible they
will form solutions at any combination of proportions.  Because both
form solutions with water they would not be expected to separate.

Scott Futrell
 



(763) 425-1001 Office
(612) 759-5556 Cell
 

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Chris
Cahill
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 4:42 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org; 'Rod DiBona'
Subject: RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

Premixed stuff comes guaranteed not to separate.  

But also consider near freezing point or so it becomes the consistency
of a
milk shake.  This is usually the temp specified you prep it at.  The
actual
temp it becomes solid and breaks things is usually a lot lower.  Now in
a
horizontal system I'm not too worried.  But will the pump be able to
push it
out at that consistency?  How long of a delay?  Maybe I'm over thinking
because pressure is pressure vertical or horizontal.   

Anyway just explore the viscosity at the cold temps you expect 'cuz I
believe you aren't that dissimilar to me which is cold.  And put it on
the
south face of the building so it doesn't get as cold for as long.  

If I did my math right that's about 12,000 lbs of pipe and liquid.
Whether
AF or not you have that covered right?

And 130 psi just in static.  Interesting on the pump and pressure
limits. 

Heat tape and insulation might be an option.  We've been successful on
several unique situations with it.   

Chris Cahill, P.E.
Fire Protection Engineer
Sentry Fire Protection, Inc.
 
763-658-4483
763-658-4921 fax
 
Email: chr...@sentryfiremn.com
 
Mail: P.O. Box 69
Waverly, MN 55390
 
Location: 4439 Hwy 12 SW
  Waverly, MN 55390

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Rod
DiBona
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 4:23 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Large vertical antifreeze system

I Am wondering if anyone has an opinion on a large ( 8" pipe) vertical
antifreeze system. The  piping would go straight up a silo almost 300'.
Do
you think that there would be an expediated 'separation' problem? I know
it
is not the preferrable option but we are wondering if it is an option at
all. This is in cold country. We have 7 deluge systems in a valve house
at
the bottom of the silo. We are currently looking at running seven
parallel
runs of galv sch 40 up the silo and the down the conveyors. If we could
run
one antifreeze filled line up the silo and put the valves in the heated
head
house that would save a lot of money. My gut tells me No but thought I
would
run it up the flagpole. Appreciate your thoughts.

Rod DiBona
Rapid Fire 
Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

[Matt Grise]

Rod,

To clarify the situation you are describing:

Is this a single, round silo (like at a farm), or a large building with several 
silos stacked together (like where grain might be loaded on to rail cars)? I am 
picturing a valve house at the bottom of a building, one large pipe comes in 
underground and then splits to a manifold of 7 deluge valves. Then the main 
deluge supply line (maybe 8" galv sch40) runs up the silo structure and then 
along a conveyor where the discharge nozzles are protecting the conveyor and 
its contents.

Can you describe the conveyors a little more? Are they horizontal at the top of 
the silo, or do run from the top of the silo to the ground?

Matt Grisé PE*, LEED AP 
Sales Engineer 
Alliance Fire Protection 
*Licensed in KS & MO 

913.888.0647 ph 
913.888.0618 f 
913.927.0222 cell 
www. AFPsprink.com 


-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org 
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Rod DiBona
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 4:23 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Large vertical antifreeze system

I Am wondering if anyone has an opinion on a large ( 8" pipe) vertical 
antifreeze system. The  piping would go straight up a silo almost 300'. Do you 
think that there would be an expediated 'separation' problem? I know it is not 
the preferrable option but we are wondering if it is an option at all. This is 
in cold country. We have 7 deluge systems in a valve house at the bottom of the 
silo. We are currently looking at running seven parallel runs of galv sch 40 up 
the silo and the down the conveyors. If we could run one antifreeze filled line 
up the silo and put the valves in the heated head house that would save a lot 
of money. My gut tells me No but thought I would run it up the flagpole. 
Appreciate your thoughts.

Rod DiBona
Rapid Fire 
Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

[Chris Cahill]

I won't argue the life expectancy in detail 'cuz it will fail some time.  A
simple solution and cheap is to run a second or even 3rd set of wires that
are not connected until the 1st fails.  There is monitoring that tells you
if it's working so you don't find out after it freezes. Couple screws and
you are back in business. They are also thermostatically controlled so you
don't run it in the warmer times perhaps extending the average life?  

So with that are you happier with 30+ years? 

And now I expect some failure examples, lol.  

Chris Cahill, P.E.
Fire Protection Engineer
Sentry Fire Protection, Inc.
 
763-658-4483
763-658-4921 fax
 
Email: chr...@sentryfiremn.com
 
Mail: P.O. Box 69
Waverly, MN 55390
 
Location: 4439 Hwy 12 SW
  Waverly, MN 55390

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Scott A.
Futrell
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 5:31 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

Chris and Dave two things.  Life expectancy of the heat tracing is
approximately 10 years, right?  Have to be aware of that.

And because both propylene glycol and glycerin are water miscible they
will form solutions at any combination of proportions.  Because both
form solutions with water they would not be expected to separate.

Scott Futrell
 



(763) 425-1001 Office
(612) 759-5556 Cell
 

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Chris
Cahill
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 4:42 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org; 'Rod DiBona'
Subject: RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

Premixed stuff comes guaranteed not to separate.  

But also consider near freezing point or so it becomes the consistency
of a
milk shake.  This is usually the temp specified you prep it at.  The
actual
temp it becomes solid and breaks things is usually a lot lower.  Now in
a
horizontal system I'm not too worried.  But will the pump be able to
push it
out at that consistency?  How long of a delay?  Maybe I'm over thinking
because pressure is pressure vertical or horizontal.   

Anyway just explore the viscosity at the cold temps you expect 'cuz I
believe you aren't that dissimilar to me which is cold.  And put it on
the
south face of the building so it doesn't get as cold for as long.  

If I did my math right that's about 12,000 lbs of pipe and liquid.
Whether
AF or not you have that covered right?

And 130 psi just in static.  Interesting on the pump and pressure
limits. 

Heat tape and insulation might be an option.  We've been successful on
several unique situations with it.   

Chris Cahill, P.E.
Fire Protection Engineer
Sentry Fire Protection, Inc.
 
763-658-4483
763-658-4921 fax
 
Email: chr...@sentryfiremn.com
 
Mail: P.O. Box 69
Waverly, MN 55390
 
Location: 4439 Hwy 12 SW
  Waverly, MN 55390

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Rod
DiBona
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 4:23 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Large vertical antifreeze system

I Am wondering if anyone has an opinion on a large ( 8" pipe) vertical
antifreeze system. The  piping would go straight up a silo almost 300'.
Do
you think that there would be an expediated 'separation' problem? I know
it
is not the preferrable option but we are wondering if it is an option at
all. This is in cold country. We have 7 deluge systems in a valve house
at
the bottom of the silo. We are currently looking at running seven
parallel
runs of galv sch 40 up the silo and the down the conveyors. If we could
run
one antifreeze filled line up the silo and put the valves in the heated
head
house that would save a lot of money. My gut tells me No but thought I
would
run it up the flagpole. Appreciate your thoughts.

Rod DiBona
Rapid Fire 
Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
h

RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

[Scott A. Futrell]

Just don't want someone suggesting a heat tracing system 300 feet high
and not realizing that it won't last as long as we expect the other
components to; 'cuz the owner will eventually find out...
You know me, Chris, I'm never happy.
You mean the picture of the drum drain with the heat tracing operating
and drain broken with >$200K of water damage to the contents of the
warehouse?

Scott 

(612) 759-5556 Cell

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Chris
Cahill
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2010 8:21 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

I won't argue the life expectancy in detail 'cuz it will fail some time.
A
simple solution and cheap is to run a second or even 3rd set of wires
that
are not connected until the 1st fails.  There is monitoring that tells
you
if it's working so you don't find out after it freezes. Couple screws
and
you are back in business. They are also thermostatically controlled so
you
don't run it in the warmer times perhaps extending the average life?  

So with that are you happier with 30+ years? 

And now I expect some failure examples, lol.  

Chris Cahill, P.E.
Fire Protection Engineer
Sentry Fire Protection, Inc.
 
763-658-4483
763-658-4921 fax
 
Email: chr...@sentryfiremn.com
 
Mail: P.O. Box 69
Waverly, MN 55390
 
Location: 4439 Hwy 12 SW
  Waverly, MN 55390

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Scott A.
Futrell
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 5:31 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

Chris and Dave two things.  Life expectancy of the heat tracing is
approximately 10 years, right?  Have to be aware of that.

And because both propylene glycol and glycerin are water miscible they
will form solutions at any combination of proportions.  Because both
form solutions with water they would not be expected to separate.

Scott Futrell
 



(763) 425-1001 Office
(612) 759-5556 Cell
 

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Chris
Cahill
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 4:42 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org; 'Rod DiBona'
Subject: RE: Large vertical antifreeze system

Premixed stuff comes guaranteed not to separate.  

But also consider near freezing point or so it becomes the consistency
of a
milk shake.  This is usually the temp specified you prep it at.  The
actual
temp it becomes solid and breaks things is usually a lot lower.  Now in
a
horizontal system I'm not too worried.  But will the pump be able to
push it
out at that consistency?  How long of a delay?  Maybe I'm over thinking
because pressure is pressure vertical or horizontal.   

Anyway just explore the viscosity at the cold temps you expect 'cuz I
believe you aren't that dissimilar to me which is cold.  And put it on
the
south face of the building so it doesn't get as cold for as long.  

If I did my math right that's about 12,000 lbs of pipe and liquid.
Whether
AF or not you have that covered right?

And 130 psi just in static.  Interesting on the pump and pressure
limits. 

Heat tape and insulation might be an option.  We've been successful on
several unique situations with it.   

Chris Cahill, P.E.
Fire Protection Engineer
Sentry Fire Protection, Inc.
 
763-658-4483
763-658-4921 fax
 
Email: chr...@sentryfiremn.com
 
Mail: P.O. Box 69
Waverly, MN 55390
 
Location: 4439 Hwy 12 SW
  Waverly, MN 55390

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Rod
DiBona
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 4:23 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Large vertical antifreeze system

I Am wondering if anyone has an opinion on a large ( 8" pipe) vertical
antifreeze system. The  piping would go straight up a silo almost 300'.
Do
you think that there would be an expediated 'separation' problem? I know
it
is not the preferrable option but we are wondering if it is an option at
all. This is in cold country. We have 7 deluge systems in a valve house
at
the bottom of the silo. We are currently looking at running seven
parallel
runs of galv sch 40 up the silo and the down the conveyors. If we could
run
one antifreeze filled line up the silo and put the valves in the heated
head
house that would save a lot of money. My gut tells me No but thought I
would
run it up the flagpole. Appreciate your thoughts.

Rod DiBona
Rapid Fire 
Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailm

Check valve for antifreeze system

[Bobby Gillett]

The check valve in an antifreeze loop is to have a 1/32” hole in the clapper
per NFPA 13-2007 7.6.3. We need an 1¼ for replacement, is there somewhere
that these are available or do you normally drill a hole in the clapper? If
you drill a hole is there a “preferred” style/brand for this?

 

Thank you,

 

Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax 

(731) 267-4853 cell

 
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com

 

 

 

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

antifreeze system with 2 connection points

[Ed Kramer]

I vaguely recall this being discussed previously, but can't find it.

 

Is there anything in NFPA 13 that prohibits an antifreeze system from having
multiple connection points to a wet sprinkler system?  This configuration
wouldn't be used a lot, but in the right circumstances could significantly
decrease antifreeze volume and improve hydraulics.

 

I don't think so, so I'm going to run with this. Let's assume the wet
sprinkler system has an RPZ backflow preventer at the system riser and the
'primary' antifreeze connection utilizes the standard antifreeze loop
(control valve, 5' drop, test valves, check valve w/ 1/32 hole, drain
valve).  Can the 'secondary' connection simply be a control valve and check
valve (without hole), or does it need to be the full-blown standard
antifreeze loop?

 

The standard antifreeze loop at the  'primary' connection would serve the
purpose of providing test and drain valves and providing a means to prevent
over-pressurization.  The control valve and check valve at the 'secondary'
connection would be used to isolate the system for maintenance and to
prevent antifreeze solution from flowing back into the wet system.

 

Signs should be posted at both connections indicating the existence and
location of the other connection.

 

Comments or thoughts?

 

Ed Kramer

Littleton, CO

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Backflow protection on antifreeze system

[Art Tiroly]

It is up to the water company regarding backflow requirements.

Art Tiroly
ATCO Fire Protec 

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 11:23 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Backflow protection on antifreeze system

Anybody have a 2006 International Plumbing Code handy?

 

I have a client who wants to use glycerine in a small antifreeze system.
Nothing unusual about that.   But he claims that by using food-grade
glycerine he doesn't need an RP BFP and the associated expansion tank.  I
disagree,  but don't have code references to back it up.   The 2006 IPC is
applicable.

 

Thanks in advance!

 

Ed Kramer

Kramer Design, LLC

Littleton, CO

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Backflow protection on antifreeze system

[Reed Roisum]

Ed,

2006 IPC  608.16.4.1 Additives or nonpotable source.

Where systems under continuous pressure contain chemical additives or 
antifreeze, or where systems are connected to a nonpotable secondary water 
supply, the potable water supply shall be protected against backflow by a 
reduced pressure principle backflow preventer. Where chemical additives or 
antifreeze are added to only a portion of an automatic fire sprinkler or 
standpipe system, the reduced pressure principle backflow preventer shall be 
permitted to be located so as to isolate that portion of the system. Where 
systems are not under continuous pressure, the potable water supply shall be 
protected against backflow by an air gap or a pipe applied atmospheric vacuum 
breaker conforming to ASSE 1001 or CSA B64.1.1.


I don't see any exceptions??  Hope this helps.


Reed A. Roisum, CET
Fire Protection

Ulteig Engineers, Inc.
3350 38th Avenue S.
Fargo, ND 58104
701.280.8580 direct
701.212.8810 cell
www.ulteig.com

Energy | Water | Built-Environment

CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION:Emails from this company normally contain 
confidential and privileged material, and are for the sole use of the intended 
recipient.  Use or distribution by an unintended recipient is prohibited, and 
may be a violation of law.  If you believe that you received this in error, 
please do not read the body of this e-mail and please inform the sender that 
you have deleted the e-mail and any copies.  Thank you.


-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org 
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 10:23 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Backflow protection on antifreeze system

Anybody have a 2006 International Plumbing Code handy?



I have a client who wants to use glycerine in a small antifreeze system.
Nothing unusual about that.   But he claims that by using food-grade
glycerine he doesn't need an RP BFP and the associated expansion tank.  I
disagree,  but don't have code references to back it up.   The 2006 IPC is
applicable.



Thanks in advance!



Ed Kramer

Kramer Design, LLC

Littleton, CO

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Backflow protection on antifreeze system

[Ed Kramer]

Perfect! Thanks Reed.

Ed

> -Original Message-
> From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-
> boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Reed Roisum
> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 9:37 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> Subject: RE: Backflow protection on antifreeze system
> 
> Ed,
> 
> 2006 IPC  608.16.4.1 Additives or nonpotable source.
> 
> Where systems under continuous pressure contain chemical additives or
> antifreeze, or where systems are connected to a nonpotable secondary
> water supply, the potable water supply shall be protected against
> backflow by a reduced pressure principle backflow preventer. Where
> chemical additives or antifreeze are added to only a portion of an
> automatic fire sprinkler or standpipe system, the reduced pressure
> principle backflow preventer shall be permitted to be located so as to
> isolate that portion of the system. Where systems are not under
> continuous pressure, the potable water supply shall be protected against
> backflow by an air gap or a pipe applied atmospheric vacuum breaker
> conforming to ASSE 1001 or CSA B64.1.1.
> 
> 
> I don't see any exceptions??  Hope this helps.
> 
> 
> Reed A. Roisum, CET
> Fire Protection
> 
> Ulteig Engineers, Inc.
> 3350 38th Avenue S.
> Fargo, ND 58104
> 701.280.8580 direct
> 701.212.8810 cell
> www.ulteig.com
> 
> Energy | Water | Built-Environment
> 
> CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION:Emails from this company normally contain
> confidential and privileged material, and are for the sole use of the
> intended recipient.  Use or distribution by an unintended recipient is
> prohibited, and may be a violation of law.  If you believe that you
> received this in error, please do not read the body of this e-mail and
> please inform the sender that you have deleted the e-mail and any
> copies.  Thank you.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org [mailto:sprinklerforum-
> boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 10:23 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> Subject: Backflow protection on antifreeze system
> 
> Anybody have a 2006 International Plumbing Code handy?
> 
> 
> 
> I have a client who wants to use glycerine in a small antifreeze system.
> Nothing unusual about that.   But he claims that by using food-grade
> glycerine he doesn't need an RP BFP and the associated expansion tank.
> I
> disagree,  but don't have code references to back it up.   The 2006 IPC
> is
> applicable.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> 
> 
> 
> Ed Kramer
> 
> Kramer Design, LLC
> 
> Littleton, CO
> 
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
> 
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
> 
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:Sprinklerforum-
> requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
> 
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
> 
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:Sprinklerforum-
> requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Backflow protection on antifreeze system

[Thom McMahon]

Ed:

Per the Colorado cross connection Control Manual, any additive to potable
water supply for fire protection requires a RPZ. The M references the
1997 UPC Specifically 603.4.18.3 "Where anti-freeze, Corrosion inhibitors or
other chemicals are added to a fire protection system supplied from a
potable water supply, the potable water supply shall be protected by one of
the following: 1) RPZ assembly 2) RPZ/DC assembly"

Additionally from Appendix "D" of the M 1999, "Drain Flow Chart" It
notes that drains which are required for all RPZ devices can discharge based
upon operating pressure XX GPM and that drain sizes X" are able to accept
XXX GPM.

EXAMPLE: A 1" RPZ operating at a static pressure of 50PSI can discharge
approx. 65GPM. A 2" floor drain can only flow 55 GPM, and a 3" 112GPM, so
for a RPZ operating at 50PSI requires a 3" floor Drain.

Example 2:A2.5" RPZ operating at 100PSI requires a 6" floor drain capable of
450GPM, because at that pressure the RPZ could discharge up to 400 GPM and a
5" floor drain can only take 350GPM.

Please not specific discharge flows are available from some RPZ MFG.'s If
they are less you can use them.

Here's what the IPC 2006 says:
608.16.4 Connections to automatic fire sprinkler systems
and standpipe systems. The potable water supply to
automatic fire sprinkler and standpipe systems shall be protected
against backflow by a double check-valve assembly
or a reduced pressure principle backflow preventer.

608.16.4.1 Additives or non-potable source. Where
systems under continuous pressure contain chemical
additives or antifreeze, or where systems are connected
to a non-potable secondary water supply, the potable
water supply shall be protected against backflow by a
reduced pressure principle backflow preventer. Where
chemical additives or antifreeze are added to only a portion
of an automatic fire sprinkler or standpipe system,
the reduced pressure principle backflow preventer shall
be permitted to be located so as to isolate that portion of
the system.

 

Thom McMahon, SET
Firetech, Inc.
2560 Copper Ridge Dr
P.O. Box 882136
Steamboat Springs, CO 80488
Tel:  970-879-7952
Fax: 970-879-7926


-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 9:23 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Backflow protection on antifreeze system

Anybody have a 2006 International Plumbing Code handy?

 

I have a client who wants to use glycerine in a small antifreeze system.
Nothing unusual about that.   But he claims that by using food-grade
glycerine he doesn't need an RP BFP and the associated expansion tank.  I
disagree,  but don't have code references to back it up.   The 2006 IPC is
applicable.

 

Thanks in advance!

 

Ed Kramer

Kramer Design, LLC

Littleton, CO

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Backflow protection on antifreeze system

[Ron Greenman]

Just as an example the Coffee Carts in Seattle need a backflow. You'd
think in the land of lattes the folks would want coffee in their
water. Back flow folks (the cross-connection guys) are charged with
keeping the water healthy and pleasing. Now you and I can debate
which, whether food grade glycerin or chlorination, is the most
pleasing but the waster department adds the chlorine and your client
adds the glycerine. Who has the end responsibility?

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Thom McMahon  wrote:
> Ed:
>
> Per the Colorado cross connection Control Manual, any additive to potable
> water supply for fire protection requires a RPZ. The M references the
> 1997 UPC Specifically 603.4.18.3 "Where anti-freeze, Corrosion inhibitors or
> other chemicals are added to a fire protection system supplied from a
> potable water supply, the potable water supply shall be protected by one of
> the following: 1) RPZ assembly 2) RPZ/DC assembly"
>
> Additionally from Appendix "D" of the M 1999, "Drain Flow Chart" It
> notes that drains which are required for all RPZ devices can discharge based
> upon operating pressure XX GPM and that drain sizes X" are able to accept
> XXX GPM.
>
> EXAMPLE: A 1" RPZ operating at a static pressure of 50PSI can discharge
> approx. 65GPM. A 2" floor drain can only flow 55 GPM, and a 3" 112GPM, so
> for a RPZ operating at 50PSI requires a 3" floor Drain.
>
> Example 2:A2.5" RPZ operating at 100PSI requires a 6" floor drain capable of
> 450GPM, because at that pressure the RPZ could discharge up to 400 GPM and a
> 5" floor drain can only take 350GPM.
>
> Please not specific discharge flows are available from some RPZ MFG.'s If
> they are less you can use them.
>
> Here's what the IPC 2006 says:
> 608.16.4 Connections to automatic fire sprinkler systems
> and standpipe systems. The potable water supply to
> automatic fire sprinkler and standpipe systems shall be protected
> against backflow by a double check-valve assembly
> or a reduced pressure principle backflow preventer.
>
> 608.16.4.1 Additives or non-potable source. Where
> systems under continuous pressure contain chemical
> additives or antifreeze, or where systems are connected
> to a non-potable secondary water supply, the potable
> water supply shall be protected against backflow by a
> reduced pressure principle backflow preventer. Where
> chemical additives or antifreeze are added to only a portion
> of an automatic fire sprinkler or standpipe system,
> the reduced pressure principle backflow preventer shall
> be permitted to be located so as to isolate that portion of
> the system.
>
>
>
> Thom McMahon, SET
> Firetech, Inc.
> 2560 Copper Ridge Dr
> P.O. Box 882136
> Steamboat Springs, CO 80488
> Tel:  970-879-7952
> Fax: 970-879-7926
>
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
> [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 9:23 AM
> To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> Subject: Backflow protection on antifreeze system
>
> Anybody have a 2006 International Plumbing Code handy?
>
>
>
> I have a client who wants to use glycerine in a small antifreeze system.
> Nothing unusual about that.   But he claims that by using food-grade
> glycerine he doesn't need an RP BFP and the associated expansion tank.  I
> disagree,  but don't have code references to back it up.   The 2006 IPC is
> applicable.
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
>
>
> Ed Kramer
>
> Kramer Design, LLC
>
> Littleton, CO
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>



-- 
Ron Greenman
Instructor
Fire Protection Engineering
Bates Technical College
Tacoma, WA

Member:
SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system

[Craig Leadbetter]

Is there any specific requirement in the Code for the use of dry pendent heads 
in an antifreeze system? 

If a regular head with a drop is used would the antifreeze in the drop degrade 
over time? 

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system

[å . . . . . . .]

In light of this post, which suggests use of anti-freeze system with a
residential application -- when within the last 6 weeks there was mention
of an explosion regarding the operation of one sprinkler that had
glycerin from an antifreeze system...

and with all due regard to the author of that post (who has forgotten
more than i shall ever hope to know or explore about fire), could it be
that something other than the glycerin explosion (resulting
from mist-like droplet dispersion via sprinkler operation) is an
equally valid explanation?

could it be the explosion was a result of a meth lab operation?  There
are good reasons to not think in this direction.  Although the
man was claimed to be holding a skillet of burning onions he was frying,
could he have been lying?  I know the man had his family with him
in the apartment of origin, and one rational man would not expose
his wife and children to meth lab operations.  I know meth lab operations
stink, and neighbors would think something was afoul, as this
apartment-of-origin
was part of a continuum of attached residences.

I am just finding it difficult to grasp the probabilities that we have
not seen more explosions from glycerin / combustible-liquid antifreeze
system operations.   surely, with the decades of experience we have
with anti-freeze systems, and with the dozens of operations, there would
have been some similar "deflagrations" and behaviors.

I read about the similar anti-freeze system that ignited at a outdoor
restaurant in NJ.  But I am struggling to believe that incident created
the same energy to knock a door and its frame 3-inches off it keep in the
wall.  Just thinking out loud on this one...


and the reason I know meth lab operations stink, is because smell is one
of the last memories to fade.  I read that somewhere...about the meth lab
smell...

scot deal
excelsior fire engineering
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

[George Church]

I like the Dunkin Donut Holes..seriously, just drill a hole in the
clapper, nothing more complex tan that.
Assuming you don't have a BFP stopping the expansion in the system???
Otherwise you'd need an expansion tank, not a hole.

glc 

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bobby Gillett
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:38 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Check valve for antifreeze system

The check valve in an antifreeze loop is to have a 1/32” hole in the clapper
per NFPA 13-2007 7.6.3. We need an 1¼ for replacement, is there somewhere
that these are available or do you normally drill a hole in the clapper? If
you drill a hole is there a “preferred” style/brand for this?

 

Thank you,

 

Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax 

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com

 

 

 

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

[Bobby Gillett]

Correct, no BFP on this one. It is a state inspected nursing home, so if I
can buy one I will. That way if it is listed with the hole in it I can
supply the cut sheet and they can’t come back and say we altered it and the
listing went away. 

 

Thanks all.

 

Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax 

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com

 

 

  _  

From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Church
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:09 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

 

I like the Dunkin Donut Holes..seriously, just drill a hole in the
clapper, nothing more complex tan that.
Assuming you don't have a BFP stopping the expansion in the system???
Otherwise you'd need an expansion tank, not a hole.

glc

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bobby Gillett
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:38 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Check valve for antifreeze system

The check valve in an antifreeze loop is to have a 1/32” hole in the clapper
per NFPA 13-2007 7.6.3. We need an 1¼ for replacement, is there somewhere
that these are available or do you normally drill a hole in the clapper? If
you drill a hole is there a “preferred” style/brand for this?



Thank you,



Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com







___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

  _  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1136 / Virus Database: 422/3190 - Release Date: 10/11/10

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

[George Church]

I've never heard of anyone selling these pre-drilled. You're doing exactly
what the red book says to do.

There are risks associated with using AF solutions in a nursing home, as I'm
sure you're aware- the listing on a check in an AF loop isn't one I'd lose
any sleep over. But I'd be darn sure you can use the AF solutions that
DIDN'T go BOOM in the recently released testing. That way you aren't
installing a time bomb that would give the plaintiffs the keys to your shop,
and with the recent brouhaha on AF, could make you negligent. If it is a low
pressure system, that would help you have a foot on the ground upon which to
further protect yourself, I believe higher pressure is smaller droplets is
more surface area is more chance for boom.

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bobby Gillett
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 4:05 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

Correct, no BFP on this one. It is a state inspected nursing home, so if I
can buy one I will. That way if it is listed with the hole in it I can
supply the cut sheet and they can’t come back and say we altered it and the
listing went away. 

 

Thanks all.

 

Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax 

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com

 

 

  _  

From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Church
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:09 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

 

I like the Dunkin Donut Holes..seriously, just drill a hole in the
clapper, nothing more complex tan that.
Assuming you don't have a BFP stopping the expansion in the system???
Otherwise you'd need an expansion tank, not a hole.

glc

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bobby Gillett
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:38 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Check valve for antifreeze system

The check valve in an antifreeze loop is to have a 1/32” hole in the clapper
per NFPA 13-2007 7.6.3. We need an 1¼ for replacement, is there somewhere
that these are available or do you normally drill a hole in the clapper? If
you drill a hole is there a “preferred” style/brand for this?



Thank you,



Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com







___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

  _  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1136 / Virus Database: 422/3190 - Release Date: 10/11/10

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

[Bobby Gillett]

United Brass has one that Pete just sent the link to me on. This is for
repair, it is supplying two sprinklers on a front porch and has been using
Propylene Glycol. Do you have a link/source to the solutions that DIDN’T go
BOOM in the recently released testing?

 

Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax 

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com

 

 

  _  

From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Church
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:20 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

 

I've never heard of anyone selling these pre-drilled. You're doing exactly
what the red book says to do.

There are risks associated with using AF solutions in a nursing home, as I'm
sure you're aware- the listing on a check in an AF loop isn't one I'd lose
any sleep over. But I'd be darn sure you can use the AF solutions that
DIDN'T go BOOM in the recently released testing. That way you aren't
installing a time bomb that would give the plaintiffs the keys to your shop,
and with the recent brouhaha on AF, could make you negligent. If it is a low
pressure system, that would help you have a foot on the ground upon which to
further protect yourself, I believe higher pressure is smaller droplets is
more surface area is more chance for boom.

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bobby Gillett
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 4:05 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

Correct, no BFP on this one. It is a state inspected nursing home, so if I
can buy one I will. That way if it is listed with the hole in it I can
supply the cut sheet and they can’t come back and say we altered it and the
listing went away.



Thanks all.



Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com





  _ 

From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Church
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:09 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system



I like the Dunkin Donut Holes..seriously, just drill a hole in the
clapper, nothing more complex tan that.
Assuming you don't have a BFP stopping the expansion in the system???
Otherwise you'd need an expansion tank, not a hole.

glc

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bobby Gillett
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:38 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Check valve for antifreeze system

The check valve in an antifreeze loop is to have a 1/32” hole in the clapper
per NFPA 13-2007 7.6.3. We need an 1¼ for replacement, is there somewhere
that these are available or do you normally drill a hole in the clapper? If
you drill a hole is there a “preferred” style/brand for this?



Thank you,



Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com







___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

  _ 

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1136 / Virus Database: 422/3190 - Release Date: 10/11/10

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkl

RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

[George Church]

http://www.nfpa.org/itemDetail.asp?categoryID=2064&itemID=48038
http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files//PDF/Research/RFAntifreezeSprinklers.pdf
http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files//PDF/Research/RFAntifreezeSprinklerSystemPh
2.pdf

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bobby Gillett
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 4:22 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

United Brass has one that Pete just sent the link to me on. This is for
repair, it is supplying two sprinklers on a front porch and has been using
Propylene Glycol. Do you have a link/source to the solutions that DIDN’T go
BOOM in the recently released testing?

 

Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax 

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com

 

 

  _  

From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Church
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:20 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

 

I've never heard of anyone selling these pre-drilled. You're doing exactly
what the red book says to do.

There are risks associated with using AF solutions in a nursing home, as I'm
sure you're aware- the listing on a check in an AF loop isn't one I'd lose
any sleep over. But I'd be darn sure you can use the AF solutions that
DIDN'T go BOOM in the recently released testing. That way you aren't
installing a time bomb that would give the plaintiffs the keys to your shop,
and with the recent brouhaha on AF, could make you negligent. If it is a low
pressure system, that would help you have a foot on the ground upon which to
further protect yourself, I believe higher pressure is smaller droplets is
more surface area is more chance for boom.

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bobby Gillett
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 4:05 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

Correct, no BFP on this one. It is a state inspected nursing home, so if I
can buy one I will. That way if it is listed with the hole in it I can
supply the cut sheet and they can’t come back and say we altered it and the
listing went away.



Thanks all.



Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com





  _ 

From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Church
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:09 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system



I like the Dunkin Donut Holes..seriously, just drill a hole in the
clapper, nothing more complex tan that.
Assuming you don't have a BFP stopping the expansion in the system???
Otherwise you'd need an expansion tank, not a hole.

glc

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bobby Gillett
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:38 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Check valve for antifreeze system

The check valve in an antifreeze loop is to have a 1/32” hole in the clapper
per NFPA 13-2007 7.6.3. We need an 1¼ for replacement, is there somewhere
that these are available or do you normally drill a hole in the clapper? If
you drill a hole is there a “preferred” style/brand for this?



Thank you,



Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com







___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

  _ 

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1136 / Virus Database: 422/3190 - Release Date: 10/11/10

RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

[Bobby Gillett]

Thank you, George.

 

Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax 

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com

 

 

  _  

From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Church
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:46 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

 

http://www.nfpa.org/itemDetail.asp?categoryID=2064
<http://www.nfpa.org/itemDetail.asp?categoryID=2064&itemID=48038>
&itemID=48038
http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files//PDF/Research/RFAntifreezeSprinklers.pdf
<http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF/Research/RFAntifreezeSprinklers.pdf> 
http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files//PDF/Research/RFAntifreezeSprinklerSystemPh
<http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/PDF/Research/RFAntifreezeSprinklerSystemPh
> 
2.pdf

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bobby Gillett
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 4:22 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

United Brass has one that Pete just sent the link to me on. This is for
repair, it is supplying two sprinklers on a front porch and has been using
Propylene Glycol. Do you have a link/source to the solutions that DIDN’T go
BOOM in the recently released testing?



Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com





  _ 

From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Church
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:20 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system



I've never heard of anyone selling these pre-drilled. You're doing exactly
what the red book says to do.

There are risks associated with using AF solutions in a nursing home, as I'm
sure you're aware- the listing on a check in an AF loop isn't one I'd lose
any sleep over. But I'd be darn sure you can use the AF solutions that
DIDN'T go BOOM in the recently released testing. That way you aren't
installing a time bomb that would give the plaintiffs the keys to your shop,
and with the recent brouhaha on AF, could make you negligent. If it is a low
pressure system, that would help you have a foot on the ground upon which to
further protect yourself, I believe higher pressure is smaller droplets is
more surface area is more chance for boom.

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bobby Gillett
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 4:05 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system

Correct, no BFP on this one. It is a state inspected nursing home, so if I
can buy one I will. That way if it is listed with the hole in it I can
supply the cut sheet and they can’t come back and say we altered it and the
listing went away.



Thanks all.



Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com





  _

From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of George Church
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:09 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: Check valve for antifreeze system



I like the Dunkin Donut Holes..seriously, just drill a hole in the
clapper, nothing more complex tan that.
Assuming you don't have a BFP stopping the expansion in the system???
Otherwise you'd need an expansion tank, not a hole.

glc

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Bobby Gillett
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:38 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Check valve for antifreeze system

The check valve in an antifreeze loop is to have a 1/32” hole in the clapper
per NFPA 13-2007 7.6.3. We need an 1¼ for replacement, is there somewhere
that these are available or do you normally drill a hole in the clapper? If
you drill a hole is there a “preferred” style/brand for this?



Thank you,



Bobby Gillett

Sr. Project Manager

Key Fire Protection, Inc.

(731) 424-0130 office  (731) 424-9285 fax

(731) 267-4853 cell

 <mailto:bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com>
bobby.gill...@keyfireprotection.com







___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/m

RE: antifreeze system with 2 connection points

[Art Tiroly]

If I understand this correctly, are you creating a loop feed for the
hydraulics? You need check valves and control valves at both ends.

I don't think you need a standard AF loop beyond the RPZBFP. You do need to
control pressure but in a different way.


Arthur Tiroly
ATCO Fire Protection Design


-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 3:12 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: antifreeze system with 2 connection points

I vaguely recall this being discussed previously, but can't find it.

 

Is there anything in NFPA 13 that prohibits an antifreeze system from having
multiple connection points to a wet sprinkler system?  This configuration
wouldn't be used a lot, but in the right circumstances could significantly
decrease antifreeze volume and improve hydraulics.

 

I don't think so, so I'm going to run with this. Let's assume the wet
sprinkler system has an RPZ backflow preventer at the system riser and the
'primary' antifreeze connection utilizes the standard antifreeze loop
(control valve, 5' drop, test valves, check valve w/ 1/32 hole, drain
valve).  Can the 'secondary' connection simply be a control valve and check
valve (without hole), or does it need to be the full-blown standard
antifreeze loop?

 

The standard antifreeze loop at the  'primary' connection would serve the
purpose of providing test and drain valves and providing a means to prevent
over-pressurization.  The control valve and check valve at the 'secondary'
connection would be used to isolate the system for maintenance and to
prevent antifreeze solution from flowing back into the wet system.

 

Signs should be posted at both connections indicating the existence and
location of the other connection.

 

Comments or thoughts?

 

Ed Kramer

Littleton, CO

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: antifreeze system with 2 connection points

[Mark Sornsin]

I would think you may still need the loop on the secondary connection if 
conditions are right... what would keep the antifreeze from 'drifting' past the 
secondary check valve when the pressures are equal on both sides of that check 
(and thereby allowing dilution of the mixture)? 

Mark A. Sornsin, PE | Fire Protection Engineer
Ulteig Engineers, Inc. |Fargo, ND 
Direct:    701. 280.8591 | www.ulteig.com


-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org 
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Art Tiroly
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 3:24 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: antifreeze system with 2 connection points

If I understand this correctly, are you creating a loop feed for the
hydraulics? You need check valves and control valves at both ends.

I don't think you need a standard AF loop beyond the RPZBFP. You do need to
control pressure but in a different way.


Arthur Tiroly
ATCO Fire Protection Design


-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 3:12 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: antifreeze system with 2 connection points

I vaguely recall this being discussed previously, but can't find it.

 

Is there anything in NFPA 13 that prohibits an antifreeze system from having
multiple connection points to a wet sprinkler system?  This configuration
wouldn't be used a lot, but in the right circumstances could significantly
decrease antifreeze volume and improve hydraulics.

 

I don't think so, so I'm going to run with this. Let's assume the wet
sprinkler system has an RPZ backflow preventer at the system riser and the
'primary' antifreeze connection utilizes the standard antifreeze loop
(control valve, 5' drop, test valves, check valve w/ 1/32 hole, drain
valve).  Can the 'secondary' connection simply be a control valve and check
valve (without hole), or does it need to be the full-blown standard
antifreeze loop?

 

The standard antifreeze loop at the  'primary' connection would serve the
purpose of providing test and drain valves and providing a means to prevent
over-pressurization.  The control valve and check valve at the 'secondary'
connection would be used to isolate the system for maintenance and to
prevent antifreeze solution from flowing back into the wet system.

 

Signs should be posted at both connections indicating the existence and
location of the other connection.

 

Comments or thoughts?

 

Ed Kramer

Littleton, CO

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: antifreeze system with 2 connection points

[Thom]

AS a continuation of what Mark said, what are the relative elevations of the
two points of connection? Sufficient elevation difference could make any
loop less effective.

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Mark Sornsin
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 3:19 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: antifreeze system with 2 connection points

I would think you may still need the loop on the secondary connection if
conditions are right... what would keep the antifreeze from 'drifting' past
the secondary check valve when the pressures are equal on both sides of that
check (and thereby allowing dilution of the mixture)? 

Mark A. Sornsin, PE | Fire Protection Engineer
Ulteig Engineers, Inc. |Fargo, ND 
Direct:    701. 280.8591 | www.ulteig.com


-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Art Tiroly
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 3:24 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: RE: antifreeze system with 2 connection points

If I understand this correctly, are you creating a loop feed for the
hydraulics? You need check valves and control valves at both ends.

I don't think you need a standard AF loop beyond the RPZBFP. You do need to
control pressure but in a different way.


Arthur Tiroly
ATCO Fire Protection Design


-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 3:12 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: antifreeze system with 2 connection points

I vaguely recall this being discussed previously, but can't find it.

 

Is there anything in NFPA 13 that prohibits an antifreeze system from having
multiple connection points to a wet sprinkler system?  This configuration
wouldn't be used a lot, but in the right circumstances could significantly
decrease antifreeze volume and improve hydraulics.

 

I don't think so, so I'm going to run with this. Let's assume the wet
sprinkler system has an RPZ backflow preventer at the system riser and the
'primary' antifreeze connection utilizes the standard antifreeze loop
(control valve, 5' drop, test valves, check valve w/ 1/32 hole, drain
valve).  Can the 'secondary' connection simply be a control valve and check
valve (without hole), or does it need to be the full-blown standard
antifreeze loop?

 

The standard antifreeze loop at the  'primary' connection would serve the
purpose of providing test and drain valves and providing a means to prevent
over-pressurization.  The control valve and check valve at the 'secondary'
connection would be used to isolate the system for maintenance and to
prevent antifreeze solution from flowing back into the wet system.

 

Signs should be posted at both connections indicating the existence and
location of the other connection.

 

Comments or thoughts?

 

Ed Kramer

Littleton, CO

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: antifreeze system with 2 connection points

[Ron Greenman]

The RPBA(s in this case) has "weighted" springs, the first typically
at six pounds, and the second two. Pressures can't be equal on both
sides unless there's a leak which is why two checks (unlikely that
both would fail), On the RPBA there's also a one pound spring trying
to open the dump port. So at worst you have a six pound spring keeping
the check closed and a one pound spring trying to dump the RP chamber
(RPZ). If the upstream pressure falls five pounds then the RP dump
will open and won't close until the the chamber is six pounds less
than the upstream pressure.

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Thom  wrote:
> AS a continuation of what Mark said, what are the relative elevations of the
> two points of connection? Sufficient elevation difference could make any
> loop less effective.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
> [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Mark Sornsin
> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 3:19 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> Subject: RE: antifreeze system with 2 connection points
>
> I would think you may still need the loop on the secondary connection if
> conditions are right... what would keep the antifreeze from 'drifting' past
> the secondary check valve when the pressures are equal on both sides of that
> check (and thereby allowing dilution of the mixture)?
>
> Mark A. Sornsin, PE | Fire Protection Engineer
> Ulteig Engineers, Inc. |Fargo, ND
> Direct:    701. 280.8591 | www.ulteig.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
> [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Art Tiroly
> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 3:24 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> Subject: RE: antifreeze system with 2 connection points
>
> If I understand this correctly, are you creating a loop feed for the
> hydraulics? You need check valves and control valves at both ends.
>
> I don't think you need a standard AF loop beyond the RPZBFP. You do need to
> control pressure but in a different way.
>
>
> Arthur Tiroly
> ATCO Fire Protection Design
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
> [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 3:12 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> Subject: antifreeze system with 2 connection points
>
> I vaguely recall this being discussed previously, but can't find it.
>
>
>
> Is there anything in NFPA 13 that prohibits an antifreeze system from having
> multiple connection points to a wet sprinkler system?  This configuration
> wouldn't be used a lot, but in the right circumstances could significantly
> decrease antifreeze volume and improve hydraulics.
>
>
>
> I don't think so, so I'm going to run with this. Let's assume the wet
> sprinkler system has an RPZ backflow preventer at the system riser and the
> 'primary' antifreeze connection utilizes the standard antifreeze loop
> (control valve, 5' drop, test valves, check valve w/ 1/32 hole, drain
> valve).  Can the 'secondary' connection simply be a control valve and check
> valve (without hole), or does it need to be the full-blown standard
> antifreeze loop?
>
>
>
> The standard antifreeze loop at the  'primary' connection would serve the
> purpose of providing test and drain valves and providing a means to prevent
> over-pressurization.  The control valve and check valve at the 'secondary'
> connection would be used to isolate the system for maintenance and to
> prevent antifreeze solution from flowing back into the wet system.
>
>
>
> Signs should be posted at both connections indicating the existence and
> location of the other connection.
>
>
>
> Comments or thoughts?
>
>
>
> Ed Kramer
>
> Littleton, CO
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org

Re: antifreeze system with 2 connection points

[Ron Greenman]

Of course the operation of these things does not keep the solution
from being diluted since the purpose is to keep the solution from back
siphoning and that operation will dump solution and allow fresh water
in. It's a delicate balance that takes lots of testing to maintain.

On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Thom  wrote:
> AS a continuation of what Mark said, what are the relative elevations of the
> two points of connection? Sufficient elevation difference could make any
> loop less effective.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
> [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Mark Sornsin
> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 3:19 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> Subject: RE: antifreeze system with 2 connection points
>
> I would think you may still need the loop on the secondary connection if
> conditions are right... what would keep the antifreeze from 'drifting' past
> the secondary check valve when the pressures are equal on both sides of that
> check (and thereby allowing dilution of the mixture)?
>
> Mark A. Sornsin, PE | Fire Protection Engineer
> Ulteig Engineers, Inc. |Fargo, ND
> Direct:    701. 280.8591 | www.ulteig.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
> [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Art Tiroly
> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 3:24 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> Subject: RE: antifreeze system with 2 connection points
>
> If I understand this correctly, are you creating a loop feed for the
> hydraulics? You need check valves and control valves at both ends.
>
> I don't think you need a standard AF loop beyond the RPZBFP. You do need to
> control pressure but in a different way.
>
>
> Arthur Tiroly
> ATCO Fire Protection Design
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
> [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Ed Kramer
> Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 3:12 PM
> To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> Subject: antifreeze system with 2 connection points
>
> I vaguely recall this being discussed previously, but can't find it.
>
>
>
> Is there anything in NFPA 13 that prohibits an antifreeze system from having
> multiple connection points to a wet sprinkler system?  This configuration
> wouldn't be used a lot, but in the right circumstances could significantly
> decrease antifreeze volume and improve hydraulics.
>
>
>
> I don't think so, so I'm going to run with this. Let's assume the wet
> sprinkler system has an RPZ backflow preventer at the system riser and the
> 'primary' antifreeze connection utilizes the standard antifreeze loop
> (control valve, 5' drop, test valves, check valve w/ 1/32 hole, drain
> valve).  Can the 'secondary' connection simply be a control valve and check
> valve (without hole), or does it need to be the full-blown standard
> antifreeze loop?
>
>
>
> The standard antifreeze loop at the  'primary' connection would serve the
> purpose of providing test and drain valves and providing a means to prevent
> over-pressurization.  The control valve and check valve at the 'secondary'
> connection would be used to isolate the system for maintenance and to
> prevent antifreeze solution from flowing back into the wet system.
>
>
>
> Signs should be posted at both connections indicating the existence and
> location of the other connection.
>
>
>
> Comments or thoughts?
>
>
>
> Ed Kramer
>
> Littleton, CO
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To U

RE: antifreeze system with 2 connection points

[Ed Kramer]

Thanks to all who replied.  Your thoughts lead me to believe that under the
right (wrong?) circumstances, antifreeze solution could slowly migrate out
of the system (and water migrate in) if there are multiple connection points
- even if all connection points utilize the standard loop with a drilled
check valve.  Probably the only way to insure this doesn't happen is to use
a standard loop with check valve (no hole) on all connection points along
with an expansion tank.  That takes away a lot of cost savings incentive.

Ed Kramer
Littleton, CO



> 
> Is there anything in NFPA 13 that prohibits an antifreeze system from
> having
> multiple connection points to a wet sprinkler system?  This
> configuration
> wouldn't be used a lot, but in the right circumstances could
> significantly
> decrease antifreeze volume and improve hydraulics.
> 
> I don't think so, so I'm going to run with this. Let's assume the wet
> sprinkler system has an RPZ backflow preventer at the system riser and
> the
> 'primary' antifreeze connection utilizes the standard antifreeze loop
> (control valve, 5' drop, test valves, check valve w/ 1/32 hole, drain
> valve).  Can the 'secondary' connection simply be a control valve and
> check
> valve (without hole), or does it need to be the full-blown standard
> antifreeze loop?
> 
> The standard antifreeze loop at the  'primary' connection would serve
> the
> purpose of providing test and drain valves and providing a means to
> prevent
> over-pressurization.  The control valve and check valve at the
> 'secondary'
> connection would be used to isolate the system for maintenance and to
> prevent antifreeze solution from flowing back into the wet system.
> 
> Signs should be posted at both connections indicating the existence and
> location of the other connection.
> 
> Comments or thoughts?
> 
> Ed Kramer
> Littleton, CO

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system

[tom poisal]

to answer your first question, there is no code requirement to use a
dry pend., as to the second, the solution must be checked, verified,
see nfpa 13, 25 and since this is a labourious (messy) action, I
believe required once a year, if at all possible I would install dry
pendentsis the pipe subject to freezing..; what r u doing?

On 4/24/10, Craig Leadbetter  wrote:
> Is there any specific requirement in the Code for the use of dry pendent
> heads in an antifreeze system?
>
> If a regular head with a drop is used would the antifreeze in the drop
> degrade over time?
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>


-- 
Tom Poisal, CET
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system

[Craig Leadbetter]

It is a condo project. We are protecting unheated garages. We will probably go 
with exposed pipe and upright heads. 



At 01:19 PM 4/24/2010, you wrote:
>to answer your first question, there is no code requirement to use a
>dry pend., as to the second, the solution must be checked, verified,
>see nfpa 13, 25 and since this is a labourious (messy) action, I
>believe required once a year, if at all possible I would install dry
>pendentsis the pipe subject to freezing..; what r u doing?
>
>On 4/24/10, Craig Leadbetter  wrote:
>> Is there any specific requirement in the Code for the use of dry pendent
>> heads in an antifreeze system?
>>
>> If a regular head with a drop is used would the antifreeze in the drop
>> degrade over time?
>>
>> ___
>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>>
>> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>>
>> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Tom Poisal, CET
>___
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
>For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
>To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system

[tom poisal]

I have done this on numerious occasions , run the piping in the attic
space from ajoining house, TENT with R-30 insulation, require a space
heater to be in the garage; hard wired set at 40' OR option the
antifreeze plus maint options...by the way..dry sidewalls from the
house an option ??
On 4/24/10, Craig Leadbetter  wrote:
> It is a condo project. We are protecting unheated garages. We will probably
> go with exposed pipe and upright heads.
>
>
>
> At 01:19 PM 4/24/2010, you wrote:
>>to answer your first question, there is no code requirement to use a
>>dry pend., as to the second, the solution must be checked, verified,
>>see nfpa 13, 25 and since this is a labourious (messy) action, I
>>believe required once a year, if at all possible I would install dry
>>pendentsis the pipe subject to freezing..; what r u doing?
>>
>>On 4/24/10, Craig Leadbetter  wrote:
>>> Is there any specific requirement in the Code for the use of dry pendent
>>> heads in an antifreeze system?
>>>
>>> If a regular head with a drop is used would the antifreeze in the drop
>>> degrade over time?
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list
>>> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>>> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>>>
>>> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>>>
>>> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>>> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Tom Poisal, CET
>>___
>>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>>Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>>
>>For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>>
>>To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>>(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>


-- 
Tom Poisal, CET
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system

[Todd Williams]

A meth lab would fall under "Design Criteria - Outside Dwelling 
Unit". Which reminds me of the question that someone asked me a while 
back: "Would a brothel, four stories or less, be a 13R occupancy?" My 
answer was to contact the State Fire Marshal and get a ruling. Of 
course, maybe some of our Nevada participants have more knowledge than I.


At 09:14 PM 4/25/2010, you wrote:
>In light of this post, which suggests use of anti-freeze system with a
>residential application -- when within the last 6 weeks there was mention
>of an explosion regarding the operation of one sprinkler that had
>glycerin from an antifreeze system...
>
>and with all due regard to the author of that post (who has forgotten
>more than i shall ever hope to know or explore about fire), could it be
>that something other than the glycerin explosion (resulting
>from mist-like droplet dispersion via sprinkler operation) is an
>equally valid explanation?
>
>could it be the explosion was a result of a meth lab operation?  There
>are good reasons to not think in this direction.  Although the
>man was claimed to be holding a skillet of burning onions he was frying,
>could he have been lying?  I know the man had his family with him
>in the apartment of origin, and one rational man would not expose
>his wife and children to meth lab operations.  I know meth lab operations
>stink, and neighbors would think something was afoul, as this
>apartment-of-origin
>was part of a continuum of attached residences.
>
>I am just finding it difficult to grasp the probabilities that we have
>not seen more explosions from glycerin / combustible-liquid antifreeze
>system operations.   surely, with the decades of experience we have
>with anti-freeze systems, and with the dozens of operations, there would
>have been some similar "deflagrations" and behaviors.
>
>I read about the similar anti-freeze system that ignited at a outdoor
>restaurant in NJ.  But I am struggling to believe that incident created
>the same energy to knock a door and its frame 3-inches off it keep in the
>wall.  Just thinking out loud on this one...
>
>
>and the reason I know meth lab operations stink, is because smell is one
>of the last memories to fade.  I read that somewhere...about the meth lab
>smell...
>
>scot deal
>excelsior fire engineering
>___
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
>For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
>To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Todd G. Williams, PE
Fire Protection Design/Consulting
Stonington, CT
860.535.2080
www.fpdc.com

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system

[George Church]

That'd be commercial, not residential, TW ;)

Scott, AF remains a viable alternative for freeze protection- like ANYTHING
in our trade or others, when you screw up massively, the result can be
catastrophic. 

glc

-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Todd Williams
Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 9:25 PM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system

A meth lab would fall under "Design Criteria - Outside Dwelling 
Unit". Which reminds me of the question that someone asked me a while 
back: "Would a brothel, four stories or less, be a 13R occupancy?" My 
answer was to contact the State Fire Marshal and get a ruling. Of 
course, maybe some of our Nevada participants have more knowledge than I.


At 09:14 PM 4/25/2010, you wrote:
>In light of this post, which suggests use of anti-freeze system with a
>residential application -- when within the last 6 weeks there was mention
>of an explosion regarding the operation of one sprinkler that had
>glycerin from an antifreeze system...
>
>and with all due regard to the author of that post (who has forgotten
>more than i shall ever hope to know or explore about fire), could it be
>that something other than the glycerin explosion (resulting
>from mist-like droplet dispersion via sprinkler operation) is an
>equally valid explanation?
>
>could it be the explosion was a result of a meth lab operation?  There
>are good reasons to not think in this direction.  Although the
>man was claimed to be holding a skillet of burning onions he was frying,
>could he have been lying?  I know the man had his family with him
>in the apartment of origin, and one rational man would not expose
>his wife and children to meth lab operations.  I know meth lab operations
>stink, and neighbors would think something was afoul, as this
>apartment-of-origin
>was part of a continuum of attached residences.
>
>I am just finding it difficult to grasp the probabilities that we have
>not seen more explosions from glycerin / combustible-liquid antifreeze
>system operations.   surely, with the decades of experience we have
>with anti-freeze systems, and with the dozens of operations, there would
>have been some similar "deflagrations" and behaviors.
>
>I read about the similar anti-freeze system that ignited at a outdoor
>restaurant in NJ.  But I am struggling to believe that incident created
>the same energy to knock a door and its frame 3-inches off it keep in the
>wall.  Just thinking out loud on this one...
>
>
>and the reason I know meth lab operations stink, is because smell is one
>of the last memories to fade.  I read that somewhere...about the meth lab
>smell...
>
>scot deal
>excelsior fire engineering
>___
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
>For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
>To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Todd G. Williams, PE
Fire Protection Design/Consulting
Stonington, CT
860.535.2080
www.fpdc.com

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system

[Matthew J. Willis (on the road)]

Todd, your question is not so simple. Initially your example seems to meet 
the definition of NFPA 101 (03 edit) 6.1.9.1, in particular, see example (6) 
in the annex. This can be protected with 13R provided all items are met. 
There can be no "transient" nature assigned due to the permanent residence. 
However; if there is a bar or gift shop, then you will be looking at a 
commercial occupancy with residential areas. as you know, this will greatly 
affect your calculation, protecting the attic.., etc. I would look at 
occupant load, use, configuration ..,, etc., on an individual basis, rather 
than a blanket statement of 13R. Hope this helps...

R/
Matt

- Original Message - 
 From: "Todd Williams" 
To: 
Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 8:25 PM
Subject: Re: Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system


A meth lab would fall under "Design Criteria - Outside Dwelling
Unit". Which reminds me of the question that someone asked me a while
back: "Would a brothel, four stories or less, be a 13R occupancy?" My
answer was to contact the State Fire Marshal and get a ruling. Of
course, maybe some of our Nevada participants have more knowledge than I.


At 09:14 PM 4/25/2010, you wrote:
>In light of this post, which suggests use of anti-freeze system with a
>residential application -- when within the last 6 weeks there was mention
>of an explosion regarding the operation of one sprinkler that had
>glycerin from an antifreeze system...
>
>and with all due regard to the author of that post (who has forgotten
>more than i shall ever hope to know or explore about fire), could it be
>that something other than the glycerin explosion (resulting
>from mist-like droplet dispersion via sprinkler operation) is an
>equally valid explanation?
>
>could it be the explosion was a result of a meth lab operation?  There
>are good reasons to not think in this direction.  Although the
>man was claimed to be holding a skillet of burning onions he was frying,
>could he have been lying?  I know the man had his family with him
>in the apartment of origin, and one rational man would not expose
>his wife and children to meth lab operations.  I know meth lab operations
>stink, and neighbors would think something was afoul, as this
>apartment-of-origin
>was part of a continuum of attached residences.
>
>I am just finding it difficult to grasp the probabilities that we have
>not seen more explosions from glycerin / combustible-liquid antifreeze
>system operations.   surely, with the decades of experience we have
>with anti-freeze systems, and with the dozens of operations, there would
>have been some similar "deflagrations" and behaviors.
>
>I read about the similar anti-freeze system that ignited at a outdoor
>restaurant in NJ.  But I am struggling to believe that incident created
>the same energy to knock a door and its frame 3-inches off it keep in the
>wall.  Just thinking out loud on this one...
>
>
>and the reason I know meth lab operations stink, is because smell is one
>of the last memories to fade.  I read that somewhere...about the meth lab
>smell...
>
>scot deal
>excelsior fire engineering
>___
>Sprinklerforum mailing list
>Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
>http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
>For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
>To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
>(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Todd G. Williams, PE
Fire Protection Design/Consulting
Stonington, CT
860.535.2080
www.fpdc.com

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) 

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

Re: Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system

[Roland Huggins]

the manufacturers of antifreeze tell us that PREMIXED solutions do not  
separate.

Roland


On Apr 24, 2010, at 10:05 AM, Craig Leadbetter wrote:

> Is there any specific requirement in the Code for the use of dry  
> pendent heads in an antifreeze system?
>
> If a regular head with a drop is used would the antifreeze in the  
> drop degrade over time?
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)

RE: Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system

[John Denhardt]

Just make sure the premix meets your minimum temperature requirement.
Verify the temperature that the premix will start forming crystals, not
the burst temperature.  We have been surprised what the premix solutions
are actually mixed at.  Do not assume 50%.

John

John August Denhardt, P.E.
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 


-Original Message-
From: sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org
[mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Roland
Huggins
Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 11:16 AM
To: sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
Subject: Re: Dry pendent heads for antifreeze system

the manufacturers of antifreeze tell us that PREMIXED solutions do not  
separate.

Roland


On Apr 24, 2010, at 10:05 AM, Craig Leadbetter wrote:

> Is there any specific requirement in the Code for the use of dry  
> pendent heads in an antifreeze system?
>
> If a regular head with a drop is used would the antifreeze in the  
> drop degrade over time?
>
> ___
> Sprinklerforum mailing list
> Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
> http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
>
> For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org
>
> To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
> (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
>

___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email
to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
___
Sprinklerforum mailing list
Sprinklerforum@firesprinkler.org
http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum

For Technical Assistance, send an email to: supp...@firesprinkler.org

To Unsubscribe, send an email to:sprinklerforum-requ...@firesprinkler.org
(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)