I used to carry 1 1/4 and 2 inch 45's, 6-inch nipples and 2 foot piece of pipe threaded on one end, along with my pitot, just so I could take such measurements of the main drains.
Dwight ________________________________ From: Ron Greenman <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 5:18 PM Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test This is kind of like the story where a guy in a bar asks the shapely young thing on the next barstool if she'd sleep with him for $100,000.00. She answers with an enthusiastic yes. He then asks if she'd sleep with him for $10.00. Her response is an indignant, "what do you take me for, a whore?" His reply is, "we've already established that. Now we're just negotiating price." This was an illustrative metaphor Steve, not a dirty joke. We've established that a forward flow is required. And surprisingly we've actually got a fairly definitive description of what we're testing for by the committee in the next edition. To me it's in two parts though. First we're not testing so much as "exercising" a component, which to me is a maintenance issue. In the process though we're also testing as we're determining if said component is working. But when you do a "test" you need a standard of performance. That brings us to part 2 and that standard appears to be "at system demand." That requires a measurement for verification and the comparative baseline standard. So, and to me only, this new language is as convoluted as the old and doesn't give me a clear directive. Am I exercising or comparing results, or both? Can I say that a 15 head design, using nominal 1/2 inch orifices has a total surface area of 2.94 square inches and a nominal 2 inch main drain has a surface area of 3.14 square inches so I'll easily flow as much through my 2 inch main drain as system demand? Or do I have to calculate BOR flow demand, test and measure (pitot or buckey) for flow there at acceptance for verification, and then do that same procedure each year for confirmation? Or can I just see a good stream from the main drain, note the pressure are consistent with the acceptance test and say,"That there no backlow thingie is workin' just fine."? On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. < [email protected]> wrote: > Depends on the edition of the standard a local jurisdiction has adopted, > as well as any local amendments - but yes, forward flow tests of the > backflow assembly are required by NFPA 13 and 25. > > Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. | Karges-Faulconbridge, Inc. | Fire Protection > Engineer | Fargo, ND | direct: 701.552.9905 | mobile: 701.371.5759 | > http://www.kfiengineers.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of > [email protected] > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 3:49 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test > > Is this "forward flow test" now part of the required code? I was just on a > job the other day. New Construction. I noticed that all the systems had a > setup with (2) 2 1/2" hose valves after the backflow and alarm valve, in > addition to the 2" main drain. I take it that these 2 1/2's are for this > test? > > > In a message dated 7/29/2013 3:57:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > [email protected] writes: > > That isn't what the intent of the code is as stated.....just flow at > system demand. I can only speak for us, but we do a LOT of risers with only > a 250 gpm or so demand...sometimes even less. > > A 4" drain is well over what we need to open it up enough for system > demand. I would bet a 2" drain gets really close. > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 2:52 PM, David Autry <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Wouldn't it be easier, if you have a 4" backflow preventer you run 4" > > out the wall, 3" BFP, 3" out the wall, etc... > > That should open her up all the way. > > > > > > David Autry > > > > Meininger Fire Protection Inc. > > 2521 W L St. Suite No.4 > > Lincoln, Ne 68522 > > Voice (402) 466-2616 > > Fax (402) 466-2617 > > [email protected] > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Greg > > McGahan > > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 2:35 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow Test > > > > What would be simple and helpful would be a table similar to the one > > used for sizing fire pump Suction/Discharge/Relief Valve Piping etc. > > > > Since you are not measuring pressure, you could say 2" up to X > > gallons, 2.5" for Y etc.... > > > > A 2-1/2" Main drain is much easier and cheaper than some of the > > arrangments left / required on backflow preventers. > > > > Greg > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Ron Greenman > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > Better but it is still interpretable as requiring a measured flow > > > be established (if using the main drain location then the BOR > > > design > data). > > > Then you'd need a port that flowed that much, main drain or > > > otherwise, and then measure your annual test against anticipated > > > flow to make > > > sure you are meeting or exceeding the required flow. Or am I > > missing > > > something? I'm pretty certain that newer fire service rated > > > backflows don't fail any more often than normal FS checks, and that > > > that type of failure is either catastrophic (doesn't open or barely > > > opens) wouldn't a simple main drain test with decent flow > > > demonstrate that the valve is working? just a Forum question as > > > this is a done deal and I wasn't invited to join the exclusive > > > 25 club. > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Roland Huggins > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > the next edition has been cleaned-up on this issue. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > > > 25-271 > > > Log > > > > #CP15 Final Action: Accept > > > > (13.6.2.1, 13.6.2.2 (New)) > > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > > Submitter: > > > > Technical Committee on Inspection, Testing, and Maintenance of > > > Water-Based > > > > Systems, > > > > > > > > Recommendation: Revise 13.6.2.1 to read as follows: > > > > 13.6.2.1 All backflow preventers installed in fire protection > > > > system piping shall be exercised annually by conducting a forward > > > > flow test at a minimum flow rate of the system design. > > > > Add new 13.6.2.2 and renumber subsequent sections accordingly: > > > > 13.6.2.2 Where hydrants or inside hose stations are located > > > > downstream of the backflow preventer, the forward flow test shall > > > > include hose stream demand. Substantiation: This change was > > > > needed to better reflect that the backflow preventer is not a > > > > precise test whereby the flow through it must be measured but > > > > effort to exercise the device at flows as near as > > > possible > > > > to the system demand. > > > > Committee Meeting Action: Accept > > > > Number Eligible to Vote: 33 > > > > Ballot Results: Affirmative: 32 Negative: 1 Explanation of Negative: > > > > > > > > RAY, R.: This proposal should have been accepted in principle: > > the > > > wording > > > > "at a minimum flow rate" is confusing and should be reworded. > > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > > > 25-272 > > > Log > > > > #121 Final Action: Accept > > > > > > > > (13.6.2.1.1) > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________________________ > > > Submitter: > > > > Roland J. Huggins, American Fire Sprinkler Association, Inc. > > > > Recommendation: Delete the following text: > > > > > > > > 13.6.2.1.1 For backflow preventers sized 2 in. (50 mm) and under, > > > > the forward flow test shall be acceptable to conduct without > > > > measuring flow, where the test outlet is of a size to flow the > > > > system > > demand. > > > > Substantiation: This section implies that a measured flow is > > > > required for Backflow preventers (BFP) larger than 2 in when > > > > nothing > > > > in 13.6.2.1 > > > states > > > > such a requirement. There are other means to identify that the > > > > system demand is flowing through the BFP as discussed in > > > > A.13.6.2.1 > > > > It also > > > needs > > > > to be kept in mind that we are simply exercising the BFP to > > > > ensure it > > > will > > > > fully open at approximately the system demand. A high degree of > > > > accuracy regarding the volume of water is not warranted. > > > > Additionally, BFP's are subjected to an annual internal > > > > inspection as part of the cross > > > connection > > > > protection program. Committee Meeting Action: Accept Number > > > > Eligible to Vote: 33 Ballot Results: Affirmative: 33 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Roland Huggins, PE - VP Engineering > > > > > > > > American Fire Sprinkler Assn. --- Fire Sprinklers Saves > > Lives > > > > Dallas, TX > > > > http://www.firesprinkler.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 26, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Dwight Havens > > > <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Then they ought to say that in the code language. > > > > > > > > > > Dwight > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > From: John Denhardt <[email protected]> > > > > > To: "[email protected]" < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 3:07 PM > > > > > Subject: RE: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow > > > > > Test > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > While I do disagree to some extent of what the NFPA 25 > > > > > committee has > > > > done, Roland statement is correct. I have had numerous > > > > discussions with NFPA 25 committee members where they have stated > > > > the intent was to > > > exercise > > > > the device at near system demand. The key word to me was > "Exercise". > > > > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > John August Denhardt, P.E., FSFPE Strickland Fire Protection > > > > > Incorporated > > > > > 5113 Berwyn Road > > > > > College Park, Maryland 20740 > > > > > Office Telephone Number: 301-474-1136 Mobile Telephone Number: > > > > > 301-343-1457 FIRE SPRINKLERS SAVE LIVES - Can you live without > > > > > them? > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto: > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of > > Forest > > > Wilson > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 2:42 PM > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly Forward Flow > > > > > Test > > > > > > > > > > Here is an email on this topic that Roland addressed in the past: > > > > > > > > > > Im not going to say it was one of those casual assumptions > > > that > > > > > all systems are calculated nor that all risers have placards. > > > > > The main thing to keep in mind that the intent is simply to > > > > > fully EXERCISE the BFP at what os expected to be the system > > > > > demand. If no data available, a discussion with the AHJ is > > > > > warranted. As for > > > > > benchmarks, only the flow is pertinent and pressure is > irrelevant. > > > > > > > > > > Roland > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:44 PM, Matthew J. Willis wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On a more important matter: If a system was retrofitted with > > a > > > > >>> backflow, > > > > >> and > > > > >>> there is no hydraulic calc plaque attached to the riser, and > > > > >>> NFPA requires forward flow testing of backflows, how can you > > > > >>> conduct the test without a benchmark to test against? > > > > >>> > > > > >>> What is the recommended practice in this scenario? > > > > >>> Forest Wilson > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 25, 2013, at 12:16 PM, Ron Greenman > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Then subjective good flow demonstrates a working valve? If so > > > > >> all the numbers bantered around are pretty meaningless. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Forest Wilson > > > > >> <[email protected] > > > > >wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>> No. > > > > >>> The intent is not to pitot the output but to exercise the valve. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Sent from my iPhone > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On Jul 25, 2013, at 10:56 AM, Ron Greenman >>> > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> Forest. What were you flowing to discover these failures? > > > > >>>> Main > > > > >>>> drain > > > > or > > > > >>>> some special test header? Would a sign with the data > > > > >>>> requested > > > > >>>> by > > > the > > > > >>>> customer that started this thread have had any utility in > > > > >>>> helping > > > you > > > > >>>> discover the problem? > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Then back to that perennial question of what's a "full flow " > > > > >>>> test > > > and > > > > >>> how > > > > >>>> do you do one? I think Roland said the intent was to flow an > > > > equivalent > > > > >>> to > > > > >>>> the design discharge criteria. How do you do this? Do we run > > > > >>>> a > > > > >>>> pitot somewhere on the system? Do we catch and measure > > > > >>>> discharge? If so, > > > > from > > > > >>>> where? How do we arrange the test port(s)? Do we flow the > > > > >>>> design > > > area > > > > or > > > > >>>> simulate it elsewhere? Do we need results of at least or > > > > >>>> better > > > > >>>> flow > > > > or > > > > >>>> right on the money flow? If not either of those how do we > judge? > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Doesn't the hydraulic data plate note the required psi per > > > > >>>> the calcs > > > > at > > > > >>> the > > > > >>>> BOR and the static? Isn't the difference the residual drop > > > at > > > > >>>> that > > > > point > > > > >>>> relative to the design area? Wouldn't a main drain with good > > > > >>>> flow > > > at a > > > > >>> psi > > > > >>>> around the BOR rating, and returning to close to the noted > > > > >>>> static > > > when > > > > >>>> terminated suggest a fully open valve, or an adequately open > > > > >>>> valve > > > if > > > > the > > > > >>>> UG is oversized? In the latter case the partially open valve > > > > is > > > > >>> equivalent > > > > >>>> to fully open for the system I just described. Am I missing > > > something > > > > >>> here? > > > > >>>> An erroneous a priori? My understanding of hydraulics wrong? > > > > >>>> Main > > > > drains > > > > >>>> are too small to simulate the result of all design area > > > > >>>> heads > > > flowing > > > > as > > > > >>>> the water passes through the BOR? > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:34 AM, Forest Wilson < > > > [email protected] > > > > >>>> wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> I still have the check valve from a Ames that failed to open. > > > > >>>>> It was jammed shut, discovered when I was called out > > > > because > > > > >>>>> they > > > > >>> couldn't > > > > >>>>> do the fire pump test. > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> In another case, I tested a backflow and it failed (on a > > > > Best > > > > >>>>> Buy > > > > >>> store). > > > > >>>>> I opened the valve up and the check was damaged, would only > > > > >>>>> open a > > > > >>> third. > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> Sent from my iPhone > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> On Jul 24, 2013, at 8:53 PM, Ron Greenman > > > > >>>>> <[email protected]> > > > > >>> wrote: > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>>> Worked well for plumbing and process piping applications > > > > as > > > > >>>>>> they > > > are > > > > >>>>>> constantly being exercised. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Dwight Havens < > > > > [email protected] > > > > >>>>>> wrote: > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> I do remember the ones with the rods in the center of > > > > the > > > > >>>>>>> valve > > > > being > > > > >>>>>>> particularly poor. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> Dwight > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> ________________________________ > > > > >>>>>>> From: Ron Greenman <[email protected]> > > > > >>>>>>> To: [email protected] > > > > >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 11:25 PM > > > > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly > > Forward > > > > >>>>>>> Flow > > > > Test > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> By the mid-nineties you have the early Ames models > > > > >>>>>>> purpose > > > > >>>>>>> built > > > > for > > > > >>>>>>> sprinklers readily available, but many units being > > > > installed > > > > >>>>>>> are > > > > still > > > > >>>>> not > > > > >>>>>>> listed for fire service as many jurisdictions don't > > > > consider > > > > >>>>>>> the > > > > fire > > > > >>>>> line > > > > >>>>>>> a fire line until after the backflow, and a n on-listed > > > > >>>>>>> device is > > > > >>>>> cheaper > > > > >>>>>>> than a listed one. Plus many go back to the seventies > > > > and > > > > >>>>>>> many > > > used > > > > >>>>> weights > > > > >>>>>>> instead of springs and complicated lever systems for > > > > joining > > > > >>>>>>> the > > > > >>>>> clappers > > > > >>>>>>> and weights. Wish I could post a picture. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Dwight Havens < > > > > [email protected] > > > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> Give me a time frame. My best recollection is the mid > '90's. > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> Dwight > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> ________________________________ > > > > >>>>>>>> From: Ron Greenman <[email protected]> > > > > >>>>>>>> To: [email protected] > > > > >>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 9:12 PM > > > > >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly > > Forward > > > > >>>>>>>> Flow > > > > Test > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> Were these the plumbing type before fire service listed > > > > >>>>>>>> devices > > > > >>>>> existed. > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Dwight Havens < > > > > >>> [email protected] > > > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Yes, yes, and yes. The original proposal was based on > > > > >>>>>>>>> observed > > > > >>>>>>> failures > > > > >>>>>>>>> of BFPAs to operate properly during main drain testing. > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Glendale, AZ public library specifically comes to mind. > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Dwight > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ________________________________ > > > > >>>>>>>>> From: Todd Williams <[email protected]> > > > > >>>>>>>>> To: "[email protected]" < > > > > >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 9:32 PM > > > > >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: SIGN for Backflow Prevention Assembly > > > > >>>>>>>>> Forward > > > > >>>>>>>>> Flow > > > > Test > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Has there ever been an instance of system failure due > > > > to > > > > >>>>>>>>> the > > > > >>> backflow > > > > >>>>>>> not > > > > >>>>>>>>> properly opening? How about detection of a BFP problem > > > > >>>>>>>>> during a > > > > full > > > > >>>>>>> flow > > > > >>>>>>>>> test. How about something subsequent to the initial > > acceptance? > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Todd G Williams, PE > > > > >>>>>>>>> Fire Protection Design/Consulting Stonington, CT > > > > >>>>>>>>> 860-535-2080 > > > > >>>>>>>>> www.fpdc.com > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > >>>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > >>>>>>>>> [email protected] > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > >>>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > >>>>>>>>> [email protected] > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> -- > > > > >>>>>>>> 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: > > > > >>>>>>>> ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, > > > > >>>>>>>> WFC, > > > WFSC > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> They are happy men whose natures sort with their > vocations. > > > > -Francis > > > > >>>>>>> Bacon, > > > > >>>>>>>> essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > > > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > >>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>>>> > > > > [email protected] > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > >>>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>>>> > > > > [email protected] > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > >>>>>>> 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: > > > > >>>>>>> ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, > > > > WFC, > > > > >>>>>>> WFSC > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. > > > > -Francis > > > > >>>>> Bacon, > > > > >>>>>>> essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > > > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > >>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>>> > > > > [email protected] > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > >>>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>>> > > > > [email protected] > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> -- > > > > >>>>>> 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: > > > > >>>>>> ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, > > > > >>>>>> WFC, > > > > >>>>>> WFSC > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. > > > -Francis > > > > >>>>> Bacon, > > > > >>>>>> essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > > > > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > >>>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>>> > > > > [email protected] > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > >>>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list >>>>> > > > > [email protected] > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> -- > > > > >>>> 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: > > > > >>>> ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, > > > > WFC, > > > > >>>> WFSC > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. > > > > >>>> -Francis > > > > >>> Bacon, > > > > >>>> essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > > > > >>>> _______________________________________________ > > > > >>>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > >>>> [email protected] > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > > > >>> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > >>> [email protected] > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> -- > > > > >> 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: > > > > >> ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC, > > WFSC > > > > >> > > > > >> They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. > > > > >> -Francis > > > > Bacon, > > > > >> essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > > >> Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > >> [email protected] > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > 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: > > > ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC, WFSC > > > > > > They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. > > > -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprin > > > kl > > > er.org > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Greg McGahan > > Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com> > > 1160 McKenzie Road > > Cantonment, FL 32533 > > 850-937-1850 > > fax 850-937-1852 > > _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.o > > rg > > _______________________________________________ > > Sprinklerforum mailing list > > [email protected] > > > > > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > > > > > -- > Greg McGahan > Living Water Fire Protection, LLC <http://www.livingwaterfp.com> > 1160 McKenzie Road > Cantonment, FL 32533 > 850-937-1850 > fax 850-937-1852 > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > > ______________________________________________________________________ > This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. > For more information please visit > http://www.symanteccloud.com______________________________________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org > -- 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: ASEE, SFPE, ASCET, NFPA, AFSA, NFSA, AFAA, NIBS, WSAFM, WFC, WFSC They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. -Francis Bacon, essayist, philosopher, and statesman (1561-1626) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
