Jeff: As a 3rd party consultant, we've been offering remediation and claims management services as well as technical consulting to the legal, property ownership and property management communities on MIC-related issues for about 15 years. 2 years ago, we spun off a subsidiary business to diagnose and treat MIC exclusively. In all that time, which includes comprehensive diagnostic work (water sampling, internal video recording, metallurgy, etc.) we have never found piping that was damaged beyond repair that wasn't Schedule 7. To be clear, we have never replaced, nor programmed for replacement, any Sch. 10 or Sch. 40 due to its being damaged beyond the point where it can be treated in place. And we've overseen the removal of Schedule 7 that began pinhole leaking as early as 5 years after installation...
Steve L. -----Original Message----- From: Sprinklerforum [mailto:sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Normand via Sprinklerforum Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2021 11:08 AM To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org Cc: Jeff Normand <jeff.norm...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: schedule 7 pipe? I have been designing with sch 7 pipe for over 25 years. Not sure about longevity. But you mentioned A53 unlisted pipe. Possibly getting listed? I would really like to see comparisons of sch 7, 10 and 40 for corrosion and MIC. Specially treated pipe some manufacturers claim. Always heard that sch 40 threads are just as bad as sch 10 grooved. Jeff On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 12:45 PM Scott Futrell via Sprinklerforum < sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org> wrote: > Considering how much corrosion I've observed and documented in wet and > dry systems in schedule 10 in 8-15 years - not MIC - we only specify > schedule 40. > > Scott > > Office: (763) 425-1001 x 2 > Cell: (612) 759-5556 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum <sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org> > On Behalf Of Steve Leyton via Sprinklerforum > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2021 11:07 AM > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org > Cc: Steve Leyton <st...@protectiondesign.com>; Matt Grise < > m...@afpsprink.com> > Subject: RE: schedule 7 pipe? > > Considering how much "Sch. 7" we've seen perforated by MIC, and also > that our firm is heavily invested in the institutional and educations > sectors where clients want 50+ year buildings, we only spec' Sch. 10 and 40. > > Steve L. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sprinklerforum [mailto: > sprinklerforum-boun...@lists.firesprinkler.org] On Behalf Of Matt > Grise via Sprinklerforum > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2021 7:58 AM > To: sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org > Cc: Matt Grise <m...@afpsprink.com> > Subject: schedule 7 pipe? > > Has there been any push/interest in allowing unlisted (standard ASTM > A53) schedule 7 steel pipe to be allowed by code in place of the listed "flow" > piping options? > > Matt > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er.org _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er.org _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org > > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkl > er.org > _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list Sprinklerforum@lists.firesprinkler.org http://lists.firesprinkler.org/listinfo.cgi/sprinklerforum-firesprinkler.org
