We’ve seen our first pieces of Sch. 10 fail from MIC recently, but that’s a different ballgame and NONE of the parent steel alloys factor that in their CRR ratings. I’d like offer another angle if I may, because this thread has been in the context of contractor and product practices only so far. Please keep in mind that for the owner of a building, there’s more to issues like this than just means and methods.
We are the EOR and specifier for a LOT of publicly bid work, and for our institutional clients have been specifying 10 and 40 only for 25 year. I’m sure that Sch. 7 advocates won’t necessarily like or agree with that approach, but unlike most consulting engineering firms, we have NEVER been the target of a claim or lawsuit. In fact, we’ve only had to put our insurance company on notice of a potential claim one time in 27 years. Needless to say, I’m proud of that of record and from our current perspective if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. I want to emphasize that there is NOTHING wrong with Sch. 7 and I’m not suggesting that it’s inferior. When I was in contracting, we used a lot of Sch. 7. In fact, I still remember the day that a rep from American Tube & Conduit brought in a piece of DynaFlow for the first time – we were amazed. But the fact is that this material is more subject to oxygen cell corrosion and MIC. As a consultant, corrosion control service provider and also as an expert witness, I’ve managed and observed the removal of a lot of leaky pipes over the years and have only seen Sch. 7 being subject to the various types of irreparable damage that necessitates R&R. If maintained at a high level from the time it’s commissioned into service, there’s no reason not to use it but… that’s the wildcard. Developers and owners of the built environment seem to only hate one thing more than fire sprinklers, and that’s having to ITM their fire sprinklers. Until such time as we can say that our universal sprinklered environment is aggressively maintained in good condition, this issue will not go away and it’s fair for owners to acknowledge the realities of the situation and specify 10 and 40 only, IMHO. Steve Leyton, President Protection Design and Consulting T | 619.255.8964 x 102 | www.protectiondesign.com<http://www.protectiondesign.com/> 2851 Camino Del Rio South | Suite 210 | San Diego, CA 92108 Fire Protection System Design | Consulting | Planning | Training From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 10:14 AM To: 'Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers' <[email protected]> Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Re: Steel pipe failure rates Only that the owner is worried about pipe failures using schedule 10. I don’t know where is information is coming from. In my 34 years in this industry I have never heard or seen Schedule 10 pipe failures on water filled sprinkler systems unless they freeze. The only other scenario is the use of Schedule 10 on dry pipe systems which we all are learning is for the short term unless you are charging that pipe with Nitrogen. Regards, G. Tim Stone G. Tim Stone Consulting, LLC NICET Level III Engineering Technician Fire Protection Sprinkler Design and Consulting Services 117 Old Stage Rd. - Essex Jct., VT. 05452 CELL: (802) 373-0638 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> From: Fpdcdesign <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 1:01 PM To: Discussion list on issues relating to automatic fire sprinklers <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [Sprinklerforum] Re: Steel pipe failure rates Did the specifying engineer state why he/she wants only Sch 40? On Nov 22, 2022 at 12:14 PM, <Skyler Bilbo<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I always use the Corrosion Resistance Ratio (CRR) argument. Basically, the thickness of schedule 10 piping is greater than or equal to the thickness of the first exposed thread of threaded schedule 40. Using this argument, schedule 10 should theoretically last at least as long as threaded schedule 40. You can't use this argument if they call for grooved schedule 40. Thanks, Skyler Bilbo [https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fci3.googleusercontent.com%2fmail-sig%2fAIorK4y8Hq3kJpcrMKcZPAe4JT4xB7a2Rf10HH9h91m15sYft0q0IkyUaWivqrU3_iQPJ9vznaW8t_4&c=E,1,yEA4GFaGWfku4hxN2FHeDjcyE0Od8owVOIzks_AMeV9rVyhPTFQOWdVEDdwi05pAHS9NWpUL6_jMN7nFO6-2y3Kt7gZq0-Q2Huryuqg-g0z5rt1RiQzQGtlWd2Eg&typo=1] 1700 S. Raney Street Effingham, IL 62401 217-819-6404 Direct 217-347-7315 Fax [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> www.wenteplumbing.com<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fwww.wenteplumbing.com&c=E,1,tqcCTUvTsVZ3GxrxQwwnJS5PiAdOLl2-h5687N6OeKBS_QefaDkU9H_TjiNVFd77lsU4n1Dj4JHMXQ1ydiJQnvIABPNXx85WkDcEvzxXO8NC5bWFobILpDM6x02K&typo=1> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 10:14 AM <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Are there any studies comparing the failure rates of Schedule 10 steel pipe versus schedule 40 steel pipe used on wet water filled sprinkler systems? I have a client who is not allowing the use of schedule 10 Main piping 2 ½” and larger on their projects. All piping used has to be schedule 40. Thank you in advance. Regards, G. Tim Stone G. Tim Stone Consulting, LLC NICET Level III Engineering Technician Fire Protection Sprinkler Design and Consulting Services 117 Old Stage Rd. - Essex Jct., VT. 05452 CELL: (802) 373-0638 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> _________________________________________________________ SprinklerForum mailing list: https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.firesprinkler.org%2flist%2fsprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org&c=E,1,-cZa30wgEkO0P4nNy4MvQmtJ5Kvt2m3NH76I1XXz1F3O49Qy6BdnzcMA2n2BdHPHeR5PN3fZiKrgAp1koErvohrDAfW2SnBn-lJoa-3e-VESVpegmmQK&typo=1> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> _________________________________________________________ SprinklerForum mailing list: https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2flists.firesprinkler.org%2flist%2fsprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org&c=E,1,xoOClOg0q-fIYBWwurjfS4bjkgLSDROGVvdFzz6h6VUxTWkoQKC-AnK4spRU89pMADppifeIAKTpepLp1gSREOhNkpb4N_oYtHtrqKKsXxoUNJm7&typo=1> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
_________________________________________________________ SprinklerForum mailing list: https://lists.firesprinkler.org/list/sprinklerforum.lists.firesprinkler.org To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
