Thanks Chris, Ron, and Mike- Ron, I think between "From the MSDS:" and "on the other hand" is for CaCl before it is in solution- right? Maybe after the upcoming webinar with Mr. Johnson, Mr. Bilbo, and Mr. Myers, et.al., we can start seeing some re-'solution' to the Antifreeze problem.
*********thanks Mike Cabral: As I recall this stuff works it's way out of everything. Threaded connections, packing glands etc. Can't keep it confined. **********thanks Ron Greenman: >From the MSDS: In the event of a fire, wear full protective clothing and NIOSH-approved self-contained breathing apparatus with full facepiece operated in the pressure demand or other positive pressure mode. At high temperatures or when moistened under fire conditions, calcium chloride may produce toxic or irritating fumes. Hazardous Decomposition Products: Emits toxic chlorine fumes when heated to decomposition. May form hydrogen chloride in presence of sulfuric or phosphoric acids or with water at elevated temperatures. Incompatibilities: Methyl vinyl ether, water, zinc, bromine trifluoride, mixtures of lime and boric acid, barium chloride, and 2-furan percarboxylic acid. Metals will slowly corrode in aqueous calcium chloride solutions. Aluminum (and alloys) and yellow brass will be attacked by calcium chloride. Conditions to Avoid: Incompatibles. On the other hand: Accession Number : AD0284026 Title : DEVELOPMENT AND ENGINEERING TEST REPORT, CHARGES, ANTIFREEZE, FIRE EXTINGUISHER, LITHIUM/CALCIUM CHLORIDE BASE Descriptive Note : Technical rept. Corporate Author : ARMY ENGINEER RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT LABS FORT BELVOIR VA Personal Author(s) : Malcolm, James E. Handle / proxy Url : http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/AD284026 Check NTIS Availability... Report Date : 20 JUL 1961 Pagination or Media Count : 109 Abstract : This report covers development and engineeringtest phases for water additive charges, antifreeze, fire extinguisher, lithium/calcium chloride base. The report summarizes literature surveys and laboratory tests made. It is concluded that: (a) A solution having 20.0% CaCl2, 8.8% LiCl, and 71.2% H2O composition on a weight basis and having a density of 1.2265 at 68 F is satisfactory as a candidate antifreeze salt for winterizing water to -65 F; (b) Sodium chromate at a concentration of 1,050 mg/l of solution effectively inhibits the corrosive effect of the above salt solution on Al, steel, brass, Zn, Mg, and Cu; (c) Lithium-chloride solutions (approximately 23% LiCl by weight in water) are effectively nonfreezing to below minus 65 F and except for higher cost are as applicable for application in antifreeze charges as the CaCl2 LiCl mixture in solution with water; and (d) Dry packaging of salt charges including the inhibitor is feasible. Descriptors : *CHLORIDES, *CALCIUM COMPOUNDS, *FIRE EXTINGUISHING AGENTS, *LITHIUM COMPOUNDS, MAGNESIUM, CHROMATES, SODIUM COMPOUNDS, CORROSIVE LIQUIDS, BRASS, FIRE EXTINGUISHERS, STEEL, ZINC, COPPER, ALUMINUM Subject Categories : MISCELLANEOUS MATERIALS Distribution Statement : APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Search DTIC's Public STINET for similiar documents. Members of the public may purchase hardcopy documents from the National Technical Information Service. http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=AD 0284026 *****thanks Chris Mak: I know of one CaCl system that was installed in one of our far South (Southern Hemisphere = coldest) cities here in New Zealand. The service manager looking after the black steel system loved it - guaranteed income replacing pipework every year. I was Engineering Manager for Wormald New Zealand (Tyco - i.e Simplex Grinnell equivalent.) The system was a very old system in, from memory, a timbermill. The subject came up when we were looking at alternatives to glycols (I had fears about flammability around 165 years ago - which now seem founded.) The Invercargill branch service manager recommended we did not look at CaCl for the reasons I stated earlier - "guaranteed service work." Apparently the pipe just rotted away. -----Original Message----- From: Brad [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 7:35 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Calcium Chloride Loops? >From page 17-3, 16th edition Fire Protection Handbook, under 'Freezing Temperature and Antifreeze Additives', second paragraph: "The water soluble freezing point depressant in fire equipment most widely used is calcium chloride with a corrosion inhibitor additive. Calcium chloride solutions are not used when fire protection systems are supplied by public water connections. Table 17-1A gives data on the amounts needed for various low temperatures". (60-40 should be good to -50). Talk about 'best solutions'! A pressure tank is an acceptable water supply AND could be the most economical. Wouldn't a Calcium Chloride Loop work similar to an Antifreeze Loop? Would it need an expansion tank? How much does a pound of 80% flake fire protection grade calcium chloride cost (on the street)? Would you need the corrosion inhibitor if you used other than black steel? Is the corrosion inhibitor the big factor in ".not used.public water."? I know it is non-toxic, doesn't that mean no alcohol, hence likely non-combustible in solution? If RPZs keep bad stuff out of city water, wouldn't they keep calcium chloride out too? I hear CALCIUM does a body good, and I have a sodium CHLORIDE shaker I use now and then, but I guess when things get crossed, some weeds die. _______________________________________________ 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)
