Your original question was:
"So for those AE's out there specifying the heavier weight pipe, I'd like to know if
there is a real reason "
That is the one I addressed.
You are correct that the building occupancy occupancy will change in 20 years,
but the sprinkler system doesn't. How many buildings out there built in the
1980's have had their sprinkler systems replaced due to occupancy changes? The
vast majority of 20 year old buildings have the original sprinkler system. The
same can be said for 30 or 40 year old buildings. Rightly or wrongly the
expectation is that the sprinkler system will last as long as the building. It
is uncommon for a sprinkler system to be ripped out and replaced every time the
occupancy or ownership of a building changes. I think your customers would be
very surprised to hear you say that you designed the sprinklers in their
building to last no more than 20 years!
Joe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joe I think you missed my intention. (Oh and BTW, I started this topic,
so I know what the original question was) If a client wanted or required
sch 40, I make sure I knew that before bidding and I would make sure
they closely examined all bids to assure that everyone bid apples to
apples.
I've asked many times why is sch 40 required vs. sch 10 and most times
the specifier doesn't know why it's written that way.
Other than longevity which would make sense, as stated by others, in
today's market, the vast majority of facilities rarely stay in their
original state for more than 10 let alone 20 years.
Craig L. Prahl, CET
Fire Protection Group
Mechanical Department
CH2MHILL
Lockwood Greene
1500 International Drive
PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491
Direct - 864.599.4102
Fax - 864.599.8439
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.lg.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joe
Hankins
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 11:49 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Piping installed vs. Piping Spec'd
You're totally missing the point here. This thread started with with a
question about why an AE would specify schedule 40 pipe. The general
response seemed to be that the only possible reason is that he is stupid
and doesn't know that schedule 10 is cheaper. I fully understand that
you unfortunately (for some customers) have to go with schedule 10 in a
competitive situation, I can't for the life of me figure out why you
would try to talk someone who specified schedule 40 out of it.
Joe
Unfortunately in the industrial realm, sprinkler systems are often
reluctantly looked upon as a necessary evil. They don't produce any
revenue and as far as most clients are concerned they aren't really
needed because they've never experienced a fire in any of their other
facilities. But they must be present because codes dictate such. So
cost of installation becomes a MAJOR issue. They don't often think
about or care about longevity of the system, just about what it will
cost right now. They will worry about repair or replacement 10 or 20
years down the road. Plus as competitive bidders, you've got to bid
what will get you the job then offer an alternative later for their
consideration.
Craig L. Prahl, CET
Fire Protection Group
Mechanical Department
CH2MHILL
Lockwood Greene
1500 International Drive
PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax -
864.599.8439 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lg.com
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joe
Hankins
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 11:09 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Piping installed vs. Piping Spec'd
Rob is the only one who got the answer right, and seems to bee the only
one able to see beyond the "when I finish the system and get paid,
it's
somebody else's problem" school of thought. Building owners expect
their buildings to last. The savings in installation cost from using
schedule 10 can (and many, many times has) turn into a significant
loss
due to reduction in useful life. Regardless of the rate of corrosion,
schedule 10 will last roughly half as long as schedule 40. Large
companies who have engineering departments are well aware of this, and
specify schedule 40.
Don't make decisions for your customers if you don't know what the
expect and want. Contrary to popular opinion, they don't all want the
least effective sprinkler system the code allows. They have to live
with
it when you are long gone.
Joe
Robert Terry wrote:
I have always been told it has to do with wall thickness and the
longevity of the systems. Sch 10 pipe 2" and smaller has a wall
thickness of 0.109 which is much less than the old sch 40. Sch 10
pipe
2.5" and up has a wall
thickness of 0.120 and thicker. That is much closer to the minimum
wall
thickness of sch 40 which is 1" pipe at 0.133.
That just what I have been told in the past.
-Rob Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 9:52 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Piping installed vs. Piping Spec'd
As a contractor I've usually seen sch. 10 grooved piping for anything
above 1". But it seems most AE firms are specing sch 40 threaded for
anything below 2.5". Now this is for the average project with no
special requirements.
When I've asked why, there is no real answer other "than that's what
we've always done". Installers prefer the grooved pipe, and the sch.
10 is usually cheaper than sch. 40. So for those AE's out there
specifying the heavier weight pipe, I'd like to know if there is a
real
reason or it it's just because that's what is in the Guide Spec.
Craig L. Prahl, CET
Fire Protection Group
Mechanical Department
CH2MHILL
Lockwood Greene
1500 International Drive
PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax -
864.599.8439 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lg.com
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
_______________________________________________
Sprinklerforum mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
