Hey Jerry this is Brad, I hope you don't mind me chiming in again while you wait for experts. If you believe your clients will never have 6 big dry Christmas trees fully engulfed in their living room say when the head activates, then it really doesn't matter what psi or k you use.
> On Jan 28, 2014, at 5:29 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > Cecil and Forum: > > Sorry to read of your diappointment, Cecil - I feel, however, you are > putting a few words in my mouth. What I was actually saying is: Based on Mr. > Fleming's presentation in Seattle a few years ago, I continue to feel > confident > the systems I design for new homes do NOT pose a risk and/or hazard for > owner/occupants. My memory may be a little "hazy", but I seem to recall Russ > saying his presentation was based on two (or three) separate independent > laboratory tests. I remember his - or my - comparison with the traditional > 'fire > triangle' (remove one component and no combustion/explosion). > > I would prefer to put your statement like this: My confidence level is very > high that my Client(s) will not experience an anti-freeze "event" so long > as my designs are based on low pressure levels (Northern NM wells at 40 to 45 > psi), 'k' factors at 4.9+ and glycerin concentrations at NTE/pre-mix 48% > (all combined, not "either/or"). Using (FP) engineering judgement, AHJ > "approval", historical data, New Mexico sprinkler success stories w/glycerin > enets > - I feel confident enough that I designed my own house using this approach. > If my house blows up tommorrow, you will have been correct. But don't hold > your breath. > > I am not suicidal, nor am I stupid (my words). If you think I had the > slightest doubt and went ahead with an anti-freeze design for a billionaire's > 28,000 sq. ft. house - glycerin THROUGHOUT/not just the attic - then I, too, > am > disappointed. When I see factual data that supports the contention that I > should not be designing glycerin systems in any homes, I will stop said > design and drain down the system in my own house. My position remains based > on my > (current) understanding of laboratory test results. > > If someone will correct me here: Am I to understand that (roughly) > half-a-dozen 'events' over some 70+ years of anti-freeze installations is > justification for eliminating all anti-freeze systems? Am I totally "out of > the loop" > in New Mexico? Or, do I recall a few of those (more recent) explosions were > actually attributed to extremely high concentrations of glycol/glycerin?? > > Where are the "experts" that I expected to hear from - other than Cecil??? > The life you save might be mine??? > > Regards to All- > > Jerry > [email protected] > Santa Fe, New Mexico > _______________________________________________ > 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
