Provided that the AHJ will accept it, the 2008 Edition of NFPA 25 would allow you to use a performance based approach to reduce the frequency identified in NFPA 25. See 4.6.1.1.1 below. Note that there is a lot of information in the Annex that may be helpful.
There seems to be historical information that could assist your argument for moving to a monthly churn test. 4.6.1.1 The frequency of tests shall be in accordance with this standard. 4.6.1.1.1* As an alternative means of compliance, subject to the authority having jurisdiction, components and systems shall be permitted to be inspected, tested and maintained under a performance-based program. A.4.6.1.1.1 Paragraph 4.6.1.1.1 provides the option to adopt a performance-based test and inspection method as an alternative means of compliance with 4.6.1.1. The prescriptive test and requirements contained in this standard are essentially qualitative........ (lots more information in annex) Pete Larrimer VA -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 8:10 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Fire Pump Testing NFPA 25 requirements Wouldn't the insurance carrier also have some interest in this procedure?Seems you wouild be giving his lawyers a chance for a "Field Day" in court if a failure occured and it was learned that proper maintenance as directed by the standard had not been conducted.Just a thought. ---- David de Vries <[email protected]> wrote: > Seems I recall that this type issue has come up in the past -- perhaps it was > smoke alarms or heat detectors, or some such. In any event the owner was VA > or other large, multi-building owner and they developed a program that was > statistically sound in reducing the frequency of testing without > substantially altering the reliability of the system. The concept went thru > an NFPA committee (wish I could remember which) and was accepted. Closest > thing I can find in 25 is Section 1.3 and A.1.3. > > My suggestions (as long as the full 10 minute run time is not showing signs > of overheating or unusual noise/vibration): > > - talk to the owner about budgeting for a pump replacement in next few years, > - continue doing weekly starts, but cut the run time to a few minutes, just > long enough so that pressure is built up and the seals are wetted (determine > the length of run time based on those criteria and anything else suggested by > forum members - Tom D., George C., Thom M. etc. thoughts??), > - do the full 10 minute run test once a month, > - document, document, document, > - promptly repair any anamoly that shows up. > > If the weekly test run time gets down to 1 to 2 minutes 3 times per month, > the total time for the month has been reduced by more than half and may > extend the life of the pump. Problems with starting on pressure drop, not > running at all, not building up pressure, etc. will be apparent even with the > reduced run time. > > BTW I cannot tell you how many owners I have come across who rely solely on > the annual pump test. It does not run the rest of the year. When I ask them > for records of their weekly tests, I get "huhhh???" in response. > > 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)
