|
|
When doing a flow test for a 5-year on an automatic wet standpipe system in a building which has had significant additions over the years, which design pressure applies?
The original 8-story building and pump are from the early 1980's and was required to have a minimum residual 65-psi at the roof, flowing 750 gpm. Fast forward to the most recent building attachment to the existing fire pump, and the code now requires a minimum of 100-psi at 750 gpm at the roof. Would these additions be considered separate zones and therefore be tested individually at their specific design requirement, or would they all be tested at the original design requirements? The building is a healthcare facility and is inspected to NFPA 25-2011 per the Joint Commission requirements. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
4 Comments
Does anyone know of a fire department connection manufacturer that produces a fire department connection rated for higher than 300 psi?
Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I have a building being renovated into a (A-2) restaurant for a total of three floors with a basement level. All levels are classified an A-2 occupancy. The building is going to be sprinklered and have a fire alarm system.
Now that the project is about 75% to completion, the owner has resubmitted plans to have the roof top used as a A-2 also with an occupant load of about 30 people. The ground floor to the roof is 29-ft. The building is not over 30-ft to require a standpipes, but can it be required now due to the rooftop being used as a occupied floor? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Can someone tell about how often are Fire Department Connections ever used in a real fire?
We all install FDCs but in the real world how much do Fire Departments use them? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe NFPA 20 5.6.2 requires a fully-independent and automatic back up pump for very tall buildings. This project is just under 50 stories with a pump and back up several levels below grade serving the lower zones and another pump and back up several levels above grade serving the remaining zones.
The project’s electrician cannot meet the power requirements for the worst case scenario, which would be all (4) pumps operating at once (if the primaries are running, but not at full capacity). The request is to interlock the primary and back up on the respective level, so only one pump is running on the level at a time (for a max total of two pumps running in the whole building). Would interlocking the pumps on their respective levels still satisfy the requirements of NFPA 20 5.6.2 (copied below)? NFPA 20 5.6.2 Fire Pump Backup. Fire pumps serving zones that are partially or wholly beyond the pumping capability of the fire department apparatus shall be provided with one of the following:
Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I always seem to miss listing a pressure gauge on a project. Are any required above what I have in my checklist below?
Sprinkler:
Standpipe
Pumps
Moderator note: thanks in advance for feedback, we're developing a cheatsheet on this topic in the near future Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Hi, all! I came across this forum by accident at the perfect time. I am having a dilemma with the building department.
I am conducting an annual flow test on a 500 gpm (at 100 psi) fire pump from the test header off the pump discharge with the valve closed as to not disturb the system. I achieved 100% and 150% with no issues and the curve was almost identical to the pump's design curve. The Department of Buildings is rejecting the test because the test was conducted from the discharge manifold. I was trying to avoid flowing from the roof because it's a very high end building and did not want to risk anything. Now, this system has been recently installed and the jockey pump panel is reading 100 psi on the system. When I tested my pump, it pushed out 168 psi on discharge and 48 psi on suction for a net of 120 psi (the pump is rated at 124 PSI for churn). I can conduct the test from the roof with no issue as long as the building feels comfortable with their storm drain's ability to handle the flow, but I am worried about over-pressurizing the system. Am I permitted by code to test off the header and not from the roof? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I'm looking at requirements for hose valves (FHV) at exit passageways and I'm a little confused.
The code states that a hose connection is required: "in every exit passageway at the entrance from the exit passageway to the other areas of a building. Exception: Where floor areas adjacent to an exit passageway are reachable from exit stairway hose connections by a 30-foot (9144 mm) hose stream from a nozzle attached to 100 feet (30 480 mm) of hose, a hose connection shall not be required at the entrance from the exit passageway to other areas of the building." What is the rationale behind locating a hose valve at the entry of the exit passageway? Is this for fighting fires outside? I have been told it is so that the fire department can quickly locate the hose valve, but I can't imagine they would want to run their hose 130-feet in the passageway just to then have another connection in the stairwell. My passageway is about 100-feet long and it connects to a stairwell that does have a fire hose valve located at the main landing. Why would I need a fire hose valve at the entry of the exit passageway also, which is 100-ft away? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I have a project that is under NFPA 13R (2019) and NFPA 14 (2019). In section 7.10.1.3.1.1 of NFPA 14, it states that in cases where NFPA 13R system demand is higher than the standpipe demand, the system demand applies.
Is it ever possible to have a residential sprinkler system with a higher demand than a standpipe? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We have a project where the contractor tied in a new 4-inch standpipe into the existing 6-inch sprinkler main riser. Now it becomes a combination standpipe/fire sprinkler riser.
My question is - does the contractor still need to install riser isolation valves on every floor? Per NFPA 13 8.17.5.2.2* the following restrictions shall apply: (3) Each combined sprinkler and standpipe riser shall be equipped with a riser control valve to permit isolating a riser without interrupting the supply to other risers from the same source of supply. (For fire department connections serving standpipe and sprinkler systems, refer to Section 6.8). As of now the sprinkler main riser is not a part of their scope. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Is a pumper truck from the fire department required to do standpipe flow testing?
Sent in anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We have a project where the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) is requiring zone control valves and dedicated pipe from the standpipe to any IT rooms and sprinklers in elevator shafts.
As a result, we have three zone controls for each floor: (1) the floor sprinkler system, (2) IT rooms, and (3) any sprinklers in elevator shafts. Is there a code or standard basis for this requirement, or would it be specific to the AHJ? We're doing the work either way for this project since the AHJ is requiring it, but I would like to know for future projects. Thanks in advance. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We are designing a residential building that will have a manual wet standpipe in a fully-sprinklered building. The building itself is less than 75-feet high.
I need to calculate the wet manual standpipe but would like to check my approach. Do I need to calculate the remote standpipe at the two most remote hose valves at 100 psi, 250 gpm each, plus one more hose valve closer to the source at 250 gpm all the way back from a supply at the fire truck? Thanks in advance for any feedback. Posted anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We have an existing building were the highest occupied floor is less than 30'-0 above fire vehicle access. This building is being renovated. Part of the renovation involves the construction of a new building to be connect to the existing building. The new building is higher than 30'-0 above fire vehicle access. The exit stairwells in the new building need a standpipe system.  Does the existing building need a standpipe system since it is connected even though the existing building stairways and floors are not higher than 30'-0 above fire vehicle access?
Posted anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We have a project where the general contractor is stating that the vertical penetration in the stairwell landing, where the standpipes are located, need to be sealed.
They are not asking for it to be a fire-rated seal, but they say some sort of seal will be required. I know on past projects this typically was never a requirement. I have searched NFPA and the IBC with no luck on finding something that would insinuate that no seal is required for the vertical standpipes openings within the rated stair. Is a seal required for these stair landing penetrations? Any input is much appreciated. Posted anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Adding a new Fire Department Connection to an existing building with a 4-inch combination standpipe and 2-1/2 inch mains feeding each level. The standpipe is significantly farther from the new FDC location; however, the 2-1/2 inch feed main is located closer to the new location.
Is it acceptable to connect the 4" FDC pipe to the 2-1/2" main, or do we need to route the pipe back to the standpipe location? Submitted anonymously and posted for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe In an existing building with no fire pump test header, is it permissible to use Standpipe 2-1/2" fire hose cabinet valves to conduct a flow test for smaller pumps?
I believe NFPA 20 (2019) 4.22.3.1.3 (2) indicates that this approach is acceptable, but I would like to confirm. Submitted anonymously and posted for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We are working on a new addition to an existing high school. Part of the addition is a new auditorium with a full stage. The stage will be the highest hazard and our calculation area, Ordinary 2. The stage will also have (2) 1-1/2" hose stations with fog nozzles, one on each end, north and south, to protect the stage. They will be supplied from the same fire sprinkler system protecting the stage.
Do we need to include the hose station(s) discharge in the hydraulic calculations? If so, what would be the flow criteria from those hose connections, and is that separate from the outside hose allowance or part of it? Thanks all for your input. Submitted anonymously and posted for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe We have a 5-story building with wet manual standpipes in three stairwells. A single FDC connects to the end of a manifold in the riser room that has a 4-inch dry system, a 4-inch wet sprinkler, and a 6-inch riser that supplies the three standpipes. Each standpipe has a separate isolation valve at its stair tower. One of the standpipes is a combination standpipe/riser with sprinkler floor control valves for levels 2-5.
Regarding the 6-inch standpipe riser off of the manifold: Is a control valve required, or allowed? Is a check valve required? Is a flow switch required, or recommended? This project is under NFPA 14-2013 Edition. Thanks. Submitted anonymously and posted for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I have a covered mall under 30' tall that requires hose valve connections in accordance with the International Building Code, Section 905.3.3.
Do these hose valve connections count as a standpipe that requires a monitored isolation valve as per NFPA 14 6.3.2? Submitted anonymously and posted for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe I’m a Fire Inspector/Design Reviewer and I have a problem that I’ve been trying to tackle. NFPA 14 systems are designed for high volume low pressure firefighting tactics, but the majority of fire departments in America use high pressure low volume equipment. Here are the key points:
NFPA 14 Type 1 standpipe systems provide 250 gpm at 100 psi with 200 ft to most remote location in a sprinkled building. In the firefighting world this equates to a fire attack with 250 ft of 2.5” hose and a 1-1/8” smooth bore nozzle. The 250 ft comes from, 50 ft to stretch to the hose connection on the floor below the fire floor and 200 ft to most remote location on the fire floor. Fire ground friction loss calculations for 250 gpm through 2.5” hose is 15 psi loss per 100 ft. A smooth bore nozzle requires 50 psi to operate properly. We are stretching from the floor below so we have roughly 6 psi head loss. So the required pressure at the hose valve is 93.5 psi. You can see that the NFPA 14 design requirements are in line with the use of this higher volume lower pressure equipment. The problem is that 2.5” hose is very heavy and requires a lot of man power. 2.5” attach lines are used by large city departments like Seattle, New York, and Chicago. Many smaller city and town departments don’t have the staffing to stretch such big lines. We may only have a couple firefighters stretching an attack line where as the big cities would have 6 or more. So we use smaller more maneuverable hose and more pressure demanding fog nozzles. A more typical firefighting set up in the majority of fire departments would be 1.75” or 2” hose and a 75 psi or 100 psi fog nozzle flowing between 150-200 gpm. I’ll use Bozeman as an example. We use 1.75” hose, a 75 psi fog nozzle, and a target flow of 175 gpm. In our experience the pressure loss per 100-ft of 1.75” hose with 175 gpm is 50 psi. So if we need to stretch 250 ft of hose, we would need 206 psi at the hose valve on the landing below the fire floor. Add in that the tallest building we have is 11 stories, and a 25 psi pressure loss adjustment for pumping the FDC, and we are up to 285 psi required at the FDC. There seems to be a disconnect between the design world and the firefighting world. This poses all sorts of problems such as compromising sprinkler systems and old standpipe systems since they may have components that are not rated for such high pressures. Even worse are systems with pressure reducing hose valves that wouldn’t even allow us to pump the FDC to get anywhere near the pressures we need with our equipment (see One Meridian Plaza fire in Philadelphia). I think that Fire Departments need to communicate their design needs to designers, and Fire Departments also need to look at the equipment they use, and see how they can make changes to operate more closely to what NFPA 14 systems are designed for. If you have any knowledge on this topic I would love to hear it, thanks in advance. Submitted anonymously and posted for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe Are isolation valves allowed to be installed after dry valve for a standpipe system?
Posted anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe NFPA 1 Section 13.2.2.2, a Class I standpipe is not required in buildings less than three stories or less than 50-ft high above grade.
If we have a huge industrial complex or storage occupancy of 60,000 square meters (645,000 sqft), should we not require a standpipe system if it is only one floor above grade with a total height of 40-feet? Looks strange to me. Posted anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe How do you see standpipes and hose valves protected from physical damage in parking garages where the area is large enough to require standpipes outside of the exit stairs? Bollards? Pipe guards? No protection?
Posted anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe |
ALL-ACCESS
SUBSCRIBESubscribe and learn something new each day:
COMMUNITYTop Nov. '21 Contributors
YOUR POSTPE EXAMGet 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
FILTERS
All
ARCHIVES
December 2021
PE PREP SERIES
|
RSS Feed
