You think we have cross-connection problems now, wait until we try to convince someone to let us flow water out of a hydrant and back in to the public supply. It would be nice to have some kind of a flow meter set up, but how would you pump it back in. It would probably have to be a permanent connection with check valves and be chlorinated. I do like the return-flow test connection that has come out. It would be nice to have a portable set-up for 25 inspections.
We are at the mercy of water purveyors when it come to the timing of flow tests. Especially those that insist on doing their own. I did have one fire chef who refused to accept plans unless the flow test was done in the middle of the day on 4th of July weekend. The private water company refused to allow a test at that time because it would have required 2 guys at double time and 3/4 for a minimum of 4 hours, if they could find someone to work. It ended up a mess, but the chief accepted a 10 psi cushion on a 50 psi supply. We can't control everything. FWIW, I probably fall into the TH category as much as Ron. At 09:28 PM 9/7/2009, you wrote: >Yes and no and maybe. >If you are doing your flow test between 10 PM and 6 AM during the week or >during the weekend (actually only window allowed in some areas) you will >be getting a wonderful water supply. >If you are doing it when the pumping system kicks to balance the grid, >following someone using a little more water then they normally do, you >also get very good results. >Then on a hot day at 9 AM or 7 PM, you probably will not. Or first Monday >after school holidays. >Besides, as previously mentioned, a large number of authorities do not >allow us any more to do it, you pay for a modelling/estimate of water >available at 90-95% of the times, >In Asia we are bit more lucky, as we can test public supply when we find >it, but usually it's not good and a pump and tank is required. > >But from my years in this business, I have seen a lot of water >thoughtlessly wasted for this purpose (particularly in jurisdictions where >public water is not chargeable), and I believe we should be a bit more >environmentally sensible, and at the least we can return test water back >to the tank (if there is a tank) or consider frequency of testing, as is >stipulated in the new Australian standard. > >I think we are becoming greenies, but will we become tree-huggers as Ron? >Or enviro-nazis, or greenie show-offs, who claim to scavenge a drop here >but throw away a bucketful on the other side? > >Jack C Kilavuz >Mob: +65 9277 5741 >Direct: +65 6423 0552 > >Save Paper ? Save Power ? Save the Environment - Think before printing >this e-mail! > > > >"Ed Cyr" <[email protected]> >Sent by: [email protected] >07/09/2009 11:20 PM >Please respond to >[email protected] > > >To ><[email protected]>, <[email protected]> >cc > >Subject >Re: NFPA 25 Proposed Routine Water Supply Testing > > > > > > >Actual flow tests are the only way to get reliable data. >We are faced with water rationing, polluting of streams by storm drain >runoff, etc. >Modeling is becoming more prevalent. >I agree it is crap and cannot be deemed reliable. > >Ed >Alpha Fire > >----- Original Message ----- >From: <[email protected]> >To: <[email protected]> >Sent: Sunday, September 06, 2009 8:24 PM >Subject: Re: NFPA 25 Proposed Routine Water Supply Testing > > > > Never deal woth modeling. Actual flow tests only. Most of thje modeling >I > > see is crap. > > > > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > > > Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 02:52:13 > > To: <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: NFPA 25 Proposed Routine Water Supply Testing > > > > > > > > Once a test like a flow test is commenced I'm used to the requirement to > > > continue flowing water until water is material free. On the typical >casual > > basis this is water into a styrofoam cup, until a couple grabbed samples > > > in a row show no material. Have your reading glasses on. Otherwise >another > > water system user may be negatively impacted, ie. have product ruined. > > > > A flow test uses an amazing amount of water. 50K gallons would not be > > exceptional. > > > > Has anyone asked who is going to pay for the water? It's not free. > > > > I'm used to seeing modeling results for design. Is anyone still doing >the > > pitot routine? > > > > Yours, > > > > Bruce Verhei > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "David de Vries" <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2009 9:06:48 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada >Pacific > > Subject: NFPA 25 Proposed Routine Water Supply Testing > > > > There is a proposal in NFPA 25 to require water supply testing for > > sprinkler systems every 5 years. No trigger, like new, high-demand > > construction in the area or deterioration in the main drain test > > results -- just every 5 years run the test. This passed the committee on >a > > vote of 24 to 5. > > > > Anybody out there doing water supply testing for existing systems when > > there is no indication of a deteriorated supply? Any owners asking for >it? > > > > Sorry for the late heads-up. Comments on this, and all the rest of the >205 > > proposals, are due to NFPA by 5:00 p.m. EDT Friday. I will be up early >to > > prep some comments myself. > > > > Dave > > > > David A. de Vries, P.E., CSP > > Firetech Engineering Incorporated > > > > > > > > --- > > _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://fireball.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 > > [email protected] > > http://fireball.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 > > [email protected] > > http://fireball.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 >[email protected] >http://fireball.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) > > >______________________________________________________________ >Notice of Confidentiality > >This transmission contains information that may be confidential and >that may also be privileged. Unless you are the intended recipient >of the message (or authorised to receive it for the intended >recipient) you may not copy, forward, or otherwise use it, or >disclose it or its contents to anyone else. If you have received >this transmission in error please notify us immediately and delete >it from your system. > >RSA Group >============================================================== >_______________________________________________ >Sprinklerforum mailing list >[email protected] >http://fireball.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) Todd G. Williams, PE Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, Connecticut www.fpdc.com 860.535.2080 _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.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)
