The dry system may push to 13 because I don't think there are any residential sprinklers listed for dry systems.
Travis -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Greenman Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 8:04 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Unusual Situation Todd, A dry system would not be a reason to cause the system to become 13. See 13R, 2002, 5.3.2. A dry pipe system is acceptable. It's CPVC that is not listed for dry system use. 5.3.3 says to install dry pipe systems in accordance with 13 but not that a dry pipe system makes it a 13 system. I read this to mean that all rules, including coverage, are still dictated by 13R but because it is silent on low points, slope, compressor fill times, etc. that 13 applies in that regard. As for anti-freeze glcerin is required in the described suituation because it's the only acceptable type listed for CPVC. If the system was not plastic propylene glycol would be acceptable. If this is not a stand alone system then anti-freeze in the UG would be unacceptable. On the other hand if it is fire protection only then an RPBA/RPDA should be acceptable protection from the public/private point of attachment which is typically the property line. Another comment for Charles. If you put a "RPZ" device in this system in a vault the vault needs a drain that can handle the maximum discharge rate of the device and be able to drain run-off that gets into it. The discharge port of the device cannot be under water. On 7/4/07, Todd Williams - work <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Where did these 'requirements' come from? It sounds to me that the > owner needs to have an Engineer come in and work with him (or her) on > a system design. > > I believe that with the anti-freeze that it could still be a 13R > system. A dry system would push it to 13. The water company would > probably have something to say about glycerine (remember, no glycol in > CPVC) in underground mains. Since the existing system is dry and (I > assume) a 13, is there going to be an issue decreasing the protection > level to 13R? The AHJ or Insurance Comapny may weigh in on that. > > Without knowing the type and arrangement of the building, It's > difficult to make any comments about the impact of the soffits. I'm > not sure I follow Ron's train of thought. > > Since you spoke about outside walkways, is part of this system > outside? If so, then galvanized pipe and fittings plus wax coated > sprinklers on a dry system would be appropriate. > > > At 09:43 PM 7/3/2007, you wrote: > >Hello sprinklerforum, > > > > I am open to suggestions on this one. > > > > We have a customer in a 4 story residential building wanting > > to replace the entire system due to rusted/leaking pipes in the old > > system. > > > > They are requiring the system to be installed with CPVC piping. > > > > They are requiring the ENTIRE system to be filled with > > Anti-Freeze including the underground. > > > > They are wanting to put the DCDA Backflow, Then the Alarm > > Valve, Then the RPZ Backflow and Expansion Tank into a hotbox outside. > > > > To me it looks like the use of Anti-Freeze bumps it to a 13 > > system instead of 13R. The new piping is to be built into new > > soffits on the outside of the building walkways. They have a Dry > > Pipe system now and do not want the leaking problems they have now > > to recur in a few years like the existing 10 year old system. I am > > not even bring up the subject of Anti-Freeze recovery/reuse when the > > system is tested or when the Alarm company does a flow to test the > > WF switches quarterly. The Main Drain flow test is another subject... > > > >-- > >Best regards, > >Charles Thurston > >Coastal Fire Protection mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Sprinklerforum mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > > >To Unsubscribe, send an email > >to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >(Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > > Todd G. Williams, PE > Fire Protection Design/Consulting > Stonington, Connecticut > 860-535-2080 > www.fpdc.com > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > To Unsubscribe, send an email > to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > -- Ron Greenman at home.... _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) __________ NOD32 2378 (20070704) Information __________ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
