MeyerFire
  • Blog
  • Forum
  • TOOLKIT
    • ALL TOOLS
    • BUY THE TOOLKIT
  • UNIVERSITY
    • ALL COURSES
    • JOIN THE UNIVERSITY
  • PE Exam
    • PE Forum & Errata
    • PE Store
    • PE Tools
    • PE PREP SERIES
    • PE 100-Day Marathon
  • LOGIN
    • TOOLKIT-ONLY LOGIN
    • UNIVERSITY LOGIN
  • PRICING
    • SOFTWARE & TRAINING
    • STORE
  • OUR CAUSE
    • ABOUT MEYERFIRE
    • JOB OPENINGS
    • BECOME AN INSTRUCTOR
    • HELP/SUPPORT
Picture

Benefits/Reasons for Flow Tests vs. Modeling?

9/14/2022

16 Comments

 
Most cities require fire flow tests before design and calculation of a sprinkler system, but I have dealt with a few cities that instead use a water modeling system to calculate the pressure and flow at certain locations.

What is the reason for this?

Are there benefits or downsides to one or the other?

Is one more accurate?

Thanks in advance - appreciate the input.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
16 Comments
Ray Jackson
9/14/2022 08:07:17 am

I have not heard of this, but... I am old school, give me a flow test everytime. It's worked very well years. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Reply
Connor
9/14/2022 08:19:31 am

I would say the models are useful, and they can give importand data such as seasonal fluctuations. A flow test is necessary during the shop drawings phase to see the current condition of the piping and if there are any issues. The model doesn't know if a valve was closed since its last regular inspection, for instance.

Reply
Dan Wilder
9/14/2022 08:21:58 am

To prevent the loss of water from the system along with any potential secondary effects like water hammer and/or property damage is my guess.

The water models I have been provided by AHJ's have been pretty spot on because they have their entire system (mains, pumps, elevations, valves, pressure reducing/restricting valves) generally near 100% accurate. Water models provided by engineers have been less reliable as they typically encompass a much smaller section of the water supply.

As to overall accuracy, I haven't seen anything pro or con however identifying issues early with the water supply like closed valves or debris in the system early on.

Reply
Dwight H Havens
9/14/2022 08:32:25 am

Either method works. Both depend on the accuracy of the assumptions used to develop the data and results. My personal bias is to flow tests, but you must recognize that a flow test only represents a single point in time, and without broad knowledge of the operating characteristics of a water supply source may only be of limited value. A good model will allow one to evaluate water supply availability 24/7/365 and allow you project potential changes to the available water supply over time. Given the expected life of a fire suppression system, there are many factors that need to be watched to ensure viability of the fire suppression throughout its useful life. Water supply is only one of them.

Reply
Casey Milhorn
9/14/2022 09:05:05 am

Everyone pretty much covered it, but I will say it's probably going to be the way things are going so get used to it. I personally like the liability being on the water purveyor and I also like the fact that they are modeling (hopefully) daily, weekly, monthly, seasonal fluctuations that may be occurring. As someone else said, I just hope that the water purveyor is doing annual flows on their hydrants to verify what the models show.

Reply
Franck
9/14/2022 11:00:14 am

As indicated by Casey, if you go to modeling, check anyway if an actual flow test confirm the expectations.
Models might not discover potential issues such as pipe ageing, settlement, MIC corrosion...

I personnaly prefer actual testing (I trust what I see) as I don't know what is behind the models.
But as indicated by other peers, a true test is only a check at a point of time and characteristics may vary during the day, with possible huge difference depending on the hour (especially close to industrial facilities operating during the daytime), and during the season (especially at touristical resorts).

Reply
Aviv
9/14/2022 11:02:59 am

Sometimes it's required due to draught conditions. For example, it is highly encouraged in California:

https://www.dgs.ca.gov/-/media/Divisions/DSA/Publications/bulletins/BU_15-02.pdf?la=en&hash=7907B865C5C99EE7DCB24AC27304F0F74F83A652

As for pros and cons, I agree with the above.

Reply
Chris
9/14/2022 11:16:24 am

How new are the models they give you? The only locality I deal with that does water modeling will sometimes provide a model that is 3-4 years old so I am not a fan of that, so we will go do an actual flow test when possible.

Reply
Kelsey
9/14/2022 11:16:49 am

In my area, we almost exclusively use municipal models. Very rarely do we have to go out and do a flow test ourselves.
We are in a very environmentally conscious area, which is a big part of it.
I love it - it is quick, and reliable for a year-round idea of what the water will be. We don't have to wait for warm weather to have a single point in time flow test.

Reply
Glenn Berger
9/14/2022 11:52:38 am

Modelling is not accurate. Modelling may or may not be validated by a flow tests. Hydraulic models are only as good as the input assumptions that cannot be verified.

Always, always use a fire hydrant flow test.

Reply
Jesse
9/14/2022 12:21:15 pm

Flow characteristics are the foundational basis of AS design. I don't like using exclusively modeled data as the basis of design. I will always opt to physically flow water.

In one AHJ in my metro area, they combine the 2. The physical flow test is done with all city pumps off, using only gravity tanks. We then submit the flow data to the FD and they use that to model the worst-case scenario. I.E. low water level in gravity tanks, etc. in order to prove system efficacy in a worst case scenario. Its a pain, but it really provides a clear and accurate design picture.

Besides, modeled data isn't going to find a closed water valve in the system somewhere.

Reply
Bill
9/14/2022 12:46:33 pm

I’d plan on getting used to models, if for no other reason than water conservation alone. Consider all the water discharge from a fire sprinkler system in one year, then multiply that by how many systems, and you have a lot of discharge! Then throw on flow tests… it’s a lot of water that we can use for fire fighting, etc.

Reply
Jim Buchanan
9/14/2022 02:23:57 pm

All are solid points. However, Bill’s thoughts regarding water conservation address our future, which is reality, or soon will be…

Reply
Travis Mack
9/14/2022 01:00:35 pm

Model is the way to go. If you are only accepting physical flow tests, why are you accepting fire sprinkler systems without flowing the design area fully?

The models are good if there are good data to support it. Flow tests are a single spot point in time. Are you adjusting flow test values for season and peak demand times. That 10% or 10 psi may not cover it.

You do need accurate data to input in the models. Many water companies today have that data and can model it properly.

As far as finding closed water valves via flow testing, that is the responsibility of the water purveyor. Sprinkler contractors don't need to take on more liability than they already have.

Reply
Jay
9/16/2022 10:39:16 am

Chicago flow tests their water supply system. If your requesting flow info in an area they haven't tested in a while, they run the test and send you the results.
However, last June I requested flow data near a hotel on the Magnificent Mile. I was told they don't conduct flow tests there because they're worried about business interruption and possible property damage. They gave me a computer model instead.

Reply
schulman
9/20/2022 01:38:19 pm

i've never seen water leave the atmosphere ... and Flow Tests are real

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    SUBMIT A QUESTION
    Picture
    Why Sponsor?

    ALL-ACCESS

    Picture
    GET ALL OUR TOOLS

    SUBSCRIBE

    Subscribe and learn something new each day:
    I'm Interested In:

    COMMUNITY

    Top June '25 Contributors
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    SEE LEADERBOARD

    YOUR POST

    SUBMIT A QUESTION

    PE EXAM

    Get 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
    SIGN ME UP!

    FILTERS

    All
    A1171
    ABA
    ADA
    ASCE 7
    ASME A17.1
    ASTM E1354
    Blog Thread
    Daily Discussion
    Design-documents
    EN 12845
    Explosion Protection
    Explosion-protection-prevention
    Fire Detection And Alarm Systems
    Fire Dynamics
    Flammable And Combustible Liquids
    Flammable-combustible-liquids
    FM Global
    Human-behavior
    IBC
    ICC 500
    IEBC
    IFC
    IMC
    IPC
    IRC
    ISO
    Means Of Egress
    NBC
    NFPA 1
    NFPA 10
    NFPA 101
    NFPA 11
    NFPA 110
    NFPA 1142
    NFPA 1221
    NFPA 13
    NFPA 13D
    NFPA 13R
    NFPA 14
    NFPA 15
    NFPA 16
    NFPA 17A
    NFPA 20
    NFPA 2001
    NFPA 214
    NFPA 22
    NFPA 220
    NFPA 24
    NFPA 241
    NFPA 25
    NFPA 291
    NFPA 30
    NFPA 307
    NFPA 30B
    NFPA 31
    NFPA 33
    NFPA 37
    NFPA 400
    NFPA 409
    NFPA 415
    NFPA 45
    NFPA 495
    NFPA 497
    NFPA 5000
    NFPA 502
    NFPA 54
    NFPA 55
    NFPA 654
    NFPA 68
    NFPA 70
    NFPA 701
    NFPA 72
    NFPA 75
    NFPA 770
    NFPA 82
    NFPA 850
    NFPA 855
    NFPA 90A
    NFPA 92
    NFPA 96
    NICET
    OBC
    OSHA
    Passive Building Systems
    PE Prep Guide
    PE Prep Series
    PE Sample Problems
    Poll
    Smoke Management
    Special Hazard Systems
    UFC 3-600-01
    UFC 4-021-01
    UFC 4-211-01
    UPC
    Updates
    Water Based Fire Suppression
    Weekly Exams


    ARCHIVES

    July 2025
    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016


    PE PREP SERIES

    SEE LEADERBOARD

    RSS Feed

Picture
​Home
Our Cause
The Blog
The Forum
PE Exam Prep
The Toolkit

MeyerFire University
​Pricing
Login
​Support
Contact Us
Picture

MeyerFire.com is a startup community built to help fire protection professionals shine.
Our goal is to improve fire protection practices worldwide. We promote the industry by creating helpful tools and resources, and by bringing together industry professionals to share their expertise.

​MeyerFire, LLC is a NICET Recognized Training Provider and International Code Council Preferred Education Provider.

All text, images, and media ​Copyright © 2016-2025 MeyerFire, LLC

We respect your privacy and personal data. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. 
The views, opinions, and information found on this site represent solely the author and do not represent the opinions of any other party, nor does the presented material assume responsibility for its use. Fire protection and life safety systems constitute a critical component for public health and safety and you should consult with a licensed professional for proper design and code adherence.

Discussions are solely for the purpose of peer review and the exchange of ideas. All comments are reviewed. Comments which do not contribute, are not relevant, are spam, or are disrespectful in nature may be removed. Information presented and opinions expressed should not be relied upon as a replacement for consulting services. Some (not all) outbound links on this website, such as Amazon links, are affiliate-based where we receive a small commission for orders placed elsewhere.

  • Blog
  • Forum
  • TOOLKIT
    • ALL TOOLS
    • BUY THE TOOLKIT
  • UNIVERSITY
    • ALL COURSES
    • JOIN THE UNIVERSITY
  • PE Exam
    • PE Forum & Errata
    • PE Store
    • PE Tools
    • PE PREP SERIES
    • PE 100-Day Marathon
  • LOGIN
    • TOOLKIT-ONLY LOGIN
    • UNIVERSITY LOGIN
  • PRICING
    • SOFTWARE & TRAINING
    • STORE
  • OUR CAUSE
    • ABOUT MEYERFIRE
    • JOB OPENINGS
    • BECOME AN INSTRUCTOR
    • HELP/SUPPORT