A long time ago when I was a young man I did a lot of work on old systems in industrial buildings in New England. . . old textile mills mostly. I wish I had a few $ for every piece of 3/4" pipe I changed to 1" on these old pipe schedule systems.
A high vent was almost always present with instructions on filling the system posted on the riser. The location of the vent or vents was stated and the order or the procedure for operating them was often posted. Some times the instructions would advise you to open the vent while filling other times the vent was opened after the system was under pressure. If you followed the instructions you went home for the day and that was that. If you didn't you could expect a call sometime through the night because water would move as the air migrated through the system and trip the alarm. These systems were old in the late 1960's and early 1970's. . . willing to bet most of them are still in service. Venting the air keeps trapped air out of the mains and cross mains which would eliminate the air water interface which if present invites corrosion. Sometimes there is something to learn from accent history Mike Cabral ---- George Church <[email protected]> wrote: > Minimize false trips and air for MIC. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Forest Wilson > Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 10:43 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: statistics > > What advantage is there to venting the air? Other than response time? > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry > > -----Original Message----- > From: "George Church" <[email protected]> > > Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 10:12:12 > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: statistics > > > Nothing fancy, a 1" ball valve; or an ITC-type set up if you want to get > fancy and run it out, we don't always. > > Potter has an auto air release you could also use. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ergo > Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 10:02 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: statistics > > George, > > You have a way to bleed the air off of the system at the high point? This > sounds like a good idea. Cold you explain some more on how to make this > happen? > > Thanks, > > > Ergo > > > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 8:38 AM, George Church <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Venus and Mars. I raise hypothetical questions, you hunter-gatherers > answer > > the question instead of pursuing the issue of statistics :) and how to > find > > them. Quite a change from the suggester of a group hug:) > > > > I agree on the BFP, MIC, and although we often have the ITC on a riser > > manifold, we generally have a way to bleed the air off the high point to > > avoid false signals. > > > > Good point on calculating the Expected Value, taking the frequency a step > > further and including impact. > > > > glc > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chris > > Cahill > > Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 11:02 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: RE: statistics > > > > But if you are doing a risk analysis you are forgetting the outcome side. > > For example, failure of a BFP to protect the public in theory could be > > catastrophic to many if not all on the water supply. Failure of a BFP in > a > > fire should only affect one building. On the theoretical side some may die > > from the fire and/or billions of $ lost but it ain't getting a whole city > > sick or contaminating an aquifer used by 10's of millions. So the rates > > alone are irrelevant. You need to take risk and multiply it by loss then > > you have the answer on which way to go. Don't get me wrong BFP's are a > > bunch of hooey. > > > > 1st question - about 0 for both, BFP's are a waste of money in the first > > place. > > > > 2nd - MIC is an issue we need to or will be dealing with more often. > > Remember ESF only seems at this point to be an Allied problem. I vote > treat > > the MIC. > > > > 3rd - off the end gets some/most air out reducing false alarms and > > eliminating some air/water interface rusting. MIC coatings help with the > > added oxygen in the water. I vote end. > > > > Chris Cahill, P.E. > > Fire Protection Engineer > > Sentry Fire Protection, Inc. > > > > 763-658-4483 > > 763-658-4921 fax > > > > Email: [email protected] > > > > Mail: P.O. Box 69 > > Waverly, MN 55390 > > > > Location: 4439 Hwy 12 SW > > Waverly, MN 55390 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of George > > Church > > Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 9:15 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: statistics > > > > Just as we recently discussed that we don't know how many heads a year are > > installed, or how many have been installed in the past 100+ years, when > > discussing unexpected activations, statistics of some order of magnitude > > would be helpful in numerous other things. > > > > Which occurs more frequently, failure of a backflow to protect the public > > supply, or failure of a backflow to allow full forward flow of water to a > > sprinkler system when needed? > > > > Is the possibility of MIC greater than the likelihood of ESF from MIC > > coatings? This would aid us in deciding, on systems comprised of combo > > steel > > and CPVC, if we want to use uncoated pipe (more susceptible to MIC) or > risk > > Environmental Stress Fractures? > > > > Is it better to run the ITC off the riser and limit the new oxygen into > the > > system, or run it off the tail end and check for blockage? > > > > There are countless other items we have no data upon which to base our > > decisions. Our best guesses may be completely wrong- guess our batting > > average would be no better than 50-50, and likely the answer may be based > > on > > something more important but not considered. > > > > glc > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: George Church [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 10:07 AM > > To: '[email protected]' > > Subject: RE: Fire marshall > > > > Just as a plumber would assume testing a sprinkler backflow is limited to > > the backflow portion of the test, not aware of the forward flush we're > more > > concerned about. > > > > glc > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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]<to%3asprinklerforum-requ...@fire > sprinkler.org> > > (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]<to%3asprinklerforum-requ...@fire > sprinkler.org> > > (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]<to%3asprinklerforum-requ...@fire > sprinkler.org> > > (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) > > _______________________________________________ > 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)
