Bad news Chowderheads. On the parquet, no less ...
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: <[email protected]> Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 19:02:11 To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: CPVC w/o water between riser and FDC Green. Go Celtics ------Original Message------ From: Thomas Watt Sender: [email protected] To: [email protected] ReplyTo: [email protected] Sent: May 17, 2009 9:47 PM Subject: Re: CPVC w/o water between riser and FDC What colored bear said this was a 13D system? :) Go Magic!!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Greenman" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 6:35 PM Subject: Re: CPVC w/o water between riser and FDC That was 2007 but it's in 2002 also and also in 4.3.2. Also, in A.4.3 there are recommendations on hydro testing DRY systems. Remember that dry systems are not prohibited by 13D. They are just not acceptable at the moment due to listing restrictions. And now I'm considering reversing my opinion. Since BlazemMaster specifically states it is NOT to be used in dry systems does that also mean the dry section of FDCs? BlazeMaster is silent on the subject so must you take the dry system prohibition and apply it to any dry part of a BlazeMaster installation? The silence seems to suggest just that. I haven't completely changed camps so quickly but I'm sitting on the fence. I love public discussion. It allows you to think out loud and show the entire world how big a fool you can be. I have a photo (Photoshopped for sure) of a fox's head amid a sea of beagles. The caption reads, "When you are in deep trouble, say nothing and try to look inconspicuous." I think I'll take my own advice. On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Thomas Watt <[email protected]> wrote: > assume, practical...are those definitions in the 2007 edition? I can't > find > them in 2002. > > I included the reference only to show the importance the manufacturer > places > on removal of air from the system. I assume it is not only the water > hammer > issue but the real possibility of distortion or failure(burn-through). > (A.6.3.6 NFPA 13 2002 ed.) > > I have found nothing quite as disconcerting as walking through a jobsite > on > a monday morning to find heads, escutcheons and burned off head adaptors > littering the floor. > Lightning struck roof, system 2 weeks from hydro. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ron Greenman" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2009 8:26 PM > Subject: Re: CPVC w/o water between riser and FDC > > > Thomas, > > When applying water to the FDC we can assume we are doing so to a pipe > that has already been tested for integrity and not worrying about dry > fits, unconnected pieces, etc. as we would in a new system (property > damage), nor full of air as we experience in a new system (potential > explosive decompression and the resultant bodily injury). We can also > assume that we are adding water to supplement a flow that is already > occurring and therefore there are "holes" (discharging heads) already > in the pipe. Unless we unleash the damned hellish hounds of hundreds > of pounds of over-pressurization upon the system I doubt that we will > even have the mildest of water hammer. And as a side note we have > hooked this FDC up to the truck because the building is on fire and > already experiencing property damage. Now should the pipe run from the > FDC be as short as possible? Certainly the dry portion, and we can > limit an FDC dry run of 100 feet (or more, or less) by placing the FDC > check valve as close as practical to the FDC itself. But if placing it > at the riser is the most practical location (my ridiculous 100 foot > run excepted) then so be it. I wonder how much pressure I would have > to apply to a CPVC system with only one head flowing before I've > created a situation that would rupture piping and connections already > tested to 200 psi in a static state? I'd bet more than my fire engine > could generate. > > On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Thomas Watt <[email protected]> wrote: >> IMHO, no. >> >> The FDC check should be installed as close as possible to the FDC to >> eliminate the dry run. >> >> >From the Harvel install guide: >> "When pressure testing, the sprinkler system shall be slowly filled >> >> with water and the air bled from the highest and farthest sprinkler >> >> heads before pressure testing i Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum <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) __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4081 (20090517)__________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com <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)
