One minor correction - NFSA proposal (which is supported by the water supply task group) has language that will be in the body and the annex of the standard. My task group (chapters 23 and 24) has discussed this proposal and will offer our input at the meeting next week. It will be interesting to see what direction the committee goes with this topic.
John -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 3:21 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: to Pitot or not to Pitot? I didn't write it; look for a definition of "qualified" as used in NFPA 25 and you won't find that either. NFPA standards currently reference Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 11th Edition, so the "official" definition of appropriate would be, " right or suited for some purpose or situation". So if there are known seasonal fluctuations and/or pressure curves that reflect highest demand windows during the day (in SoCal that's often mid-morning) then it would be appropriate to acquire and factor that information when considering the water supply. NFSA has made comments in the current cycle for NFPA 13 and 13R, to include new guiding language in the annexes regarding safety factors in water supplies. NFPA 14 in first draft adopted a proposal that addresses the seasonal and peak day demand issue, but not without resistance from contractor members of the TC who (correctly) noted that sometimes it's not possible to acquire that information because water purveyors can't or won't provide it. We're getting there, but I don't think it's incumbent on NFPA to instill conscience or high standards in every user of their standards. We have to take ownership of this ourselves at some point. SL -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brad Casterline Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 12:01 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: to Pitot or not to Pitot? "...shall be made as appropriate." Define 'appropriate'. -----Original Message----- From: Steve Leyton [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 1:55 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: to Pitot or not to Pitot? It may well be a requirement, but back to my rhetorical question: who's actually doing it? SL -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark A. Sornsin, P.E. Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 11:39 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: to Pitot or not to Pitot? Oh, and BTW, taking those seasonal/local/whatever fluctuations into account IS noted in NFPA 13 - so one could argue correctly that it is a requirement of "code" (assuming your code references NFPA 13). 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: Sprinklerforum [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve Leyton Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 12:57 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: to Pitot or not to Pitot? How many people, when requesting or performing a flow test or flow model, specify that the values be measured at peak seasonal and peak day demands? How much fluctuation does a given water system or zone experience in a day/week/month/year? How many of us review those fluctuations and factor them into a flow test once it's taken? ______________________________________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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
