Brad, I know I prattle and I suspect there are many Forum correspondents that see my name and immediately hit discard message. In, I believe a private post, I suggested that for you to avoid a similar fate that you back off from this number masturbation. I'm afraid you've hit my "too obtuse to take the time to decipher relative to the gain." Scot Deal is quite arcane with his couplets, et.al., but the payoff for the comment is usually worth the work. Your conclusions may very well be valuable but I'll never know because this damned blog already is far too time consuming. That is why I expect others do to my posts what I'll be doing to yours. Sorry for what you may consider a brutal attack.
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 9:35 AM, George Church <[email protected]> wrote: > So, we can't just stick a Potter auto air release at the top, or a couple > 1/2" ball valves to get air out? My fitters don't know a lot about molecules, > but they can open a valve until the air stops and water starts. > Benefits: > Material on the shelf or in the truck. > Little additional cost. > Little or no training required. > No need to find listed transparent tube material. > No need to worry about molecular lineage of bastards produced- we just get > some water in a bucket we can throw down a slop sink. > AFSA membership can devote its resources to its mission, not buying hard > drive space to archive 100 further posts of this discussion. > Drawbacks: > Can't see the air water mixture in the transparent sprig that we'll spend > $100k getting listed once its engineered. > Can't spend 2 hard drives full of pixels on discussing appropriate formulas > and potential materials. > We keep a dozen contributors/readers who don't unsubscribe in disgust. > > So is there a formula to weigh the various metrics so we can definitively > determine which of the two options is best? I can implement mine today for > $25. > > So for AFSA storage space and for those recvg emails on mobile phones, a > reminder to trim replies! > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brad Casterline > Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 8:47 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Code reference for replacing remote end inspectors test > withalisted Test N' Drain Valve.... > > 2H2+O2<->2H2O > I imagine a 1x2-0 transparent sprig- the water looks more bubbly at the top. > I remove the water, now I just have air, right? Half the time. From the > chemistry law of mass action, half the time the bubble is 'full of air', and > the other half it is 'full of water'. The right side of the above reaction > is water in the vapor state. Low pressure favors dissociation (right to > left), high pressure goes left to right. As the temperature and pressure go > up and down, the reaction goes more one way than the other, to maintain > 'dynamic equilibria'. The same thing happens when some air or some water is > removed. Instead of thinking each bubble is air half the time and water the > other half, it might be equivalent to think half the bubbles are air and the > other half water- if so, I am shocked by the practical implication: say > after the hydro, or drain down and recharge, a fitter spends an hour going > around to the high points getting the air out of the water--- 30 minutes of > that time was spent getting the water out of the water! :) And what does the > 4/5 nitrogen do during the reaction? Maybe it elopes with the carbon in the > steel, and they name every one of their kids Mic Foreman. The only > explanation I have been able to come up with for myself as to why, given > systems across the street from each other, one has mic and false alarm > problems but the other one does not, is simply one has continuous high > pressure maintenance, i.e., jockey pump, and the other does not. It has to > be deeper than this, but it might be a start-- some stats would be nice. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bobby McCullough [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2011 2:13 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Code reference for replacing remote end inspectors test > withalisted Test N' Drain Valve.... > > Venting the air has been around a long time but I don't believe it is an > everyday practice nor is it required by code (yet). A listed, automatic > (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) > -- Ron Greenman Instructor Fire Protection Engineering Technology Bates Technical College 1101 So. Yakima Ave. Tacoma, WA 98405 [email protected] http://www.bates.ctc.edu/fireprotection/ 253.680.7346 253.576.9700 (cell) Member: AFSA, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, NFSA, AFAA, ASEE, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) _______________________________________________ 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)
