Is a hydrostatic test required for adding two new sprinklers to an existing system?
For this, assume it can be isolated, and the local jurisdiction refers to NFPA 13 - 2016 Edition. This is the most referenced code outside of the obstruction rule, and is the most common I've seen interpreted differently amongst professionals. Reference Chapter 25, Section 25.2. What is your "threshold" for triggering a hydrostatic test? Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
14 Comments
Dan Wilder
12/2/2024 07:25:50 am
Technically, yes on all systems per 25.2.1.4 (working pressure) and again 25.2.1.4.1 (200 PSI for modifications >20 sprinklers) or when isolation is not possible, test to working pressure per 25.2.1.4.2. So, no matter what, there is a test. I think the issue is everyone jumps to 200# (up to 225#) when they hear "Hydrostatic", not just a given pressure for a set amount of time as defined in 3.8.1.14.3.
Reply
OP
12/2/2024 07:10:22 pm
Thanks for the response. I take a very similar stance as you. Also, thank you for pointing to a seemingly simple but very helpful reference to the definition.
Reply
Anthony
12/2/2024 07:37:28 am
Yo can always get the base of riser pressures and flow, At least the start of a curve. You'll have a static pressure at the riser and a residual pressure when you flow through the test port on the system. Use the test port and K factor and calculate the flow given the pressure on the riser. Note this should only be done where the test port is on the riser not a remote test port.
Reply
Glenn Berger
12/2/2024 08:13:11 am
I have never had a project that a hydro test was not mandated. Normally just at system pressure for any type of system modifications regardless of the number of sprinklers added or subtracted.
Reply
OP
12/2/2024 07:13:10 pm
Thanks for your response. I believe, like Dan noted really well above, is that people tend to jump to a definition of hydrostatic testing automatically triggering a 200 lb. test and not other methods i.e. system pressure, 50 psi above operating pressure, etc.
Reply
Anthony P
12/2/2024 08:17:36 am
As Dan said, confirm with the AHJ. New York has a few different scenarios for this. Whether its Port Authority or DOB. I have seen it where the AHJ just wanted an Air Test and for it to not lose pressure.
Reply
12/2/2024 09:50:10 am
And to back up what Dan said at the beginning of the thread, the 2016 commentary recognizes that systems may not require a full hydrostatic test for minor modifications:
Reply
Anonymous
12/2/2024 07:21:04 pm
would you consider two new sprinkler heads to an existing system, a "modification"?
Reply
Jack G
12/2/2024 10:17:09 am
I agree with Jerry.
Reply
Ryan
12/2/2024 11:55:24 am
Where are you getting the additional 50psi over system pressure?
Reply
OP
12/2/2024 07:16:54 pm
NFPA 13 - 2016
Ryan
12/3/2024 12:07:07 pm
The 50 psi is only when the system pressure is always at or higher than 150. So if static on system is 160, it has to be tested at 210. No other time do you have to add 50 pounds.
Reply
sean
12/2/2024 10:18:48 pm
all new heads need it. modifications can can be at system pressure.
Reply
Mark Harris
12/8/2024 11:43:21 am
Agree that sometimes the requirements seem excessive. I always thought the 20 sprinklers was reasonable compromise. If there is a workmanship or defective fitting most times system pressure will show it. As far as two isolated heads what about the connection when you are done with the hydro test on two heads? Or hydrotest done at rough in and then cutting drops after ceiling install. Just saying think the test requirement could easily be abused and additional cost may be excessive. We are a code driven industry but still want our end users to consider they are getting value. First step of that value is providing quality workmanship and materials. Sprinkler systems have an enviable track record so we never want to compromise system integrity. If those two sprinklers are over a multi-million dollar clean room tool verses two sprinklers for a couple bathrooms in a Great Clips lease space I may look at it differently. Glad NFPA 13 has tried to clarify but ultimately it is up to the AHJ.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
ALL-ACCESSSUBSCRIBESubscribe and learn something new each day:
COMMUNITYTop January '25 Contributors
YOUR POSTPE EXAMGet 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
FILTERS
All
ARCHIVES
February 2025
PE PREP SERIES |