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

Maximum Velocity for Water in Hydraulic Calcs?

2/20/2019

13 Comments

 
Does NFPA 13 limit the friction loss per foot of pipe? What is good practice to follow in calculation process? 

​Posted anonymously by a member for discussion. Discuss this  | Subscribe
13 Comments
Naveen Kumar S link
2/20/2019 07:52:46 am

it's 15FPS.

Reply
John P Malescio
2/20/2019 10:08:32 am

NFPA-13 does not have any restrictions on piping velocities, but NFPA-20 does have restrictions.

If you look at the history of the Hazen-Williams Equation, you'll find the velocities higher than 25 FPS start to break down the equation due to the extra forces in the velocity pressures.

I always try to keep them sub 25 FPS optimally sub 20 FPS

Reply
Anon
2/20/2019 10:47:10 am

There are no velocity limits in NFPA 13.
I have long heard of the limitations of the H-W at higher velocities, and have read Ken Isman's NFSA article comparing the H-W to the D-W in terms of velocities. Can you elaborate on how/where the breakdown with H-W occurs? I have not been able to find this information, nor has anyone been able to walk me through it.

James
2/20/2019 10:30:17 am

While accurate, this is a baseless response. There is no maximum requirement in NFPA 13 or in building codes for hydraulic calculations. However, NFPA handbooks tell you to use velocities between 10-20 ft/s. The reason is that the values of the friction loss coefficients used are accurate only if the flow velocity is close to that at which the value of C was measured.

Reply
James
2/20/2019 10:32:46 am

To be specific, this is for the hazen-williams equation.

Anon
2/20/2019 10:51:06 am

John, that is consistent with what I have read.

PETE
2/20/2019 10:44:55 am

I set a warning threshold at 32 fps in hydracalc, and don't really even pay attention to that if it is only in the node segment supplying the most hydraulically remote sprinkler (nearest sprinkler on the furthest line). Velocity pressure only accounts for a small percentage of the total pressure, and any deviation from the Hazen-Williams formula can be correct for with all of the other safety factors in the NFPA 13 standard. Velocity pressures DO need to be accounted for in other types of systems, but if you're concerned about it, AutoSprink calculations automatically include the velocity pressure in the calcs.

Reply
Franck Orset
2/20/2019 11:02:37 am

No restriction from NFPA

When I was working for an Insurance company reviewing hydraulic calculations for our clients, we were using the Factory Mutual requirement (20 ft/s or 6 m/s in metric) for gridded systems.
At that time, the French standard had a limitation at 7 m/s (23 ft/s). Not sure if it is still the case...

It is anyway advisable trying to keep a velocity below 20 ft/s, especially in the area where the sprinkler heads are operating.
The reason is that if the velocity is high where water is flowing through a sprinkler head, the distribution pattern could be problematic. The high velocity in this area is an indication of a possible issue.
If the high velocity is on the feed main, away from the calculated remote area, this is less of a concern.

Reply
Franck Orset
2/20/2019 11:09:22 am

I suddenly realized, by reading again the question, that the answer is not to the question (as well as all the answer above).
The question is not regarding velocity limitation in pipes, but about maximum friction loss per foot of pipe.
It is true that high friction loss is also related to velocity.

Again, the answer is no. There is no limitation. Just common sense. If you have huge friction losses, you will need a higher pressure from your water supply and it is never advisable.
The art is to find the equilibrium between the efficiency (limited friction loss = larger pipe) and the cost (larger pipe = larger cost and possible obstruction issues)
But if your water supply is able to compensate your high friction loss in a small portion of pipe... no big deal. It just means that your system has not been optimized and you're a poor designer :)

Reply
Anon
2/20/2019 12:02:16 pm

[sheepishly] I also did not read the original post correctly, and went straight down the old velocity rabbit hole. I concur with Mr. Orset.

Patrick Drumm
2/21/2019 07:15:16 am

I agree that there is no requirement regarding limits of pressure loss per foot in NFPA #13. It can be important to keep in mind high pipe velocities and high pressure loss when designing systems, because if changes are needed to be made in the field in these areass due to any number of issues (coordination, lighting location changes), additional pipe and fittings in these areas can cause signifigant increases in pressure requirments due to the pressure loss per foot previously identified and the added equivalent lenght of pipe you would be adding.

Piero Piemonte
2/21/2019 01:45:02 am

European norm UN EN12845:2015 indicates maximum velocity and not the limit of friction losses.
Those limits are:
6 m/s (19,68 ft/s) through Control Valves and Flow Switches
10 m/s (32,80 ft/s) in any other net part

Reply
Ivonn link
2/20/2019 12:18:07 pm

In NFPA 13 Ed.2019 include a new statement in the section 27.2.1.4 says : the velocity of water flow shall not be limited when hydraulic calculations are performed using the Hazen - Williams.

Is not a ilimitation but you need to keep in mind friction loss and that are related to velocity, you need to take care of the friction loss but if you system have a good cushion you don't need to worry about the velocity.

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 April '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 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

    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