George, My mistake, I apologize completely. I'm dumb and dyslexic and besides that I still jump when I should be looking more carefully. Sorry about that, it's amazing how one little word changers the meaning entirely.
Bob Knight -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Church Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 10:32 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Missing Didn't, not Don't. I didn't look at #13-07. If indeed the only requirement for galv in your adopted standard requires galv in large-drop systems, then despite the (obvious) conflicts Craig is sorting thru, then yes, only large drop systems are affected in a manner which the TC believes needed a requirement for galv, others don't. So from what I see before me, and I didn't open the referenced standard, unless you have LDs you don't need galvanized. Naturally it may be less to use galv than a pump if the dif in C factors helps you across the line between gravity and boost.... but in meeting the minimum consensus standard's requirements, go black and don't look back. We use galv simply because we think it is the right thing to do, and only refrain upon specific direction from whom we're contracted with- nothing to do with compliance with minimum consensus standards. Most people don't hydro at 225-265 PSI either. Naturally there's that great blurb in the specs that requires meeting requirements of the Owner's insurance carrier who remains anonymous, so you have no clue as to what those requirements might be! glc _______________________________________________ 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)
