Did you point out the results of the flow test and ask where the variance might come from?
Could be they're taking into account seasonal fluctuations? We ran into that recently, adjustment so severe a lousy but useable (for small #13R and #13D student housing) service and made it where the municipal supply couldn't flow a single head on the 3rd floor if we installed 2" or 4" UG. Yet somehow, various other buildings in the vicinity have systems dating back to the 1920's in service without pumps. Pretty severe fluctuations- we lost 30+ PSI from the little we had to start with! Somewhere there is a reasonable explanation for the difference. If the water co doesn't give YOU the time of day, present a COR for a pump, pump and tank, to the owner WITH a preface you do this simply to get action from him to contact and get explanation from water co. Sometimes Owners have more clout with water co or mayor/economic development org, local senators/reps, and other ears Owners can call upon. glc -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Mack, SET Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 10:47 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: A new winner? How would you address this situation?: Water flow test performed by the site utility contractor indicating 100 psi static, 73 residual and 1389 gpm. Water company says that computer model shows 100 psi static, 20 psi static at 1300 gpm. System works with the measured flow test, but not close at the computer model. The system is 20 psi K25 esfr system. The water company also states that based on computer model, there is only going to be 900 gpm @ 20 psi available by the year 2025 and we are required to design to that. This information came out after design completed. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Church Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 8:24 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: A new winner? Reminds me of the excessive loss during a flow test; could see the elevated tank several blocks away, and with 10" UG there shouldn't have been as much loss as we witnessed. Water co checked and found partially closed valve, did a fiberglass plant with the resultant dramatically improved supply. EH with (short) 1.5" lines :) However, a year earlier, a competitor put a tank and pump in across the street at another job, I can only guess that they took the waterflow test they got and told the owner there was insufficient supply, here's the COR for a tank and pump, thanks. Seriously, we need to do a better job for the Owners paying us for our talent. glc -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dyce Geoffrey H. Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 10:11 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: A new winner? Sounds like 1. Guy cant read the gauge 2. You have a hung valve on the system UG 3. Pipe is plugged Just my 2 cents -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Williams Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 9:30 AM To: [email protected] Subject: A new winner? Did a flow test this morning. Static 94, Residual 16, Flow 369 gpm. The head of the water department was reading the gauge. No plans to investigate (yet). Think they can design a dry system in a wood truss attic on that? Todd G. Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, Connecticut www.fpdc.com 860.535.2080 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) __________ NOD32 3653 (20081201) Information __________ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.com _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
