MeyerFire
  • Blog
  • Forum
  • THE TOOLKIT
    • SUBMIT AN IDEA
    • BACKFLOW DATABASE*
    • CLEAN AGENT ESTIMATOR*
    • CLOUD CEILING CALCULATOR
    • DOMESTIC DEMAND*
    • FIRE FLOW CALCULATOR*
    • FIRE PUMP ANALYZER*
    • FIRE PUMP DATABASE*
    • FRICTION LOSS CALCULATOR
    • HANGER SPACER*
    • IBC TRANSLATOR*
    • K-FACTOR SELECTOR*
    • NFPA 13 EDITION TRANSLATOR ('19 ONLY)
    • NFPA 13 EDITION TRANSLATOR ('99-'22)*
    • LIQUIDS ANALYZER*
    • OBSTRUCTION CALCULATOR
    • OBSTRUCTIONS AGAINST WALL*
    • PLUMBING FIXTURE COUNTS
    • QUICK RESPONSE AREA REDUCTION
    • REMOTE AREA ANALYZER*
    • SPRINKLER DATABASE*
    • SPRINKLER FLOW*
    • SYSTEM ESTIMATOR*
    • TEST & DRAIN CALCULATOR
    • THRUST BLOCK CALCULATOR
    • TRAPEZE CALCULATOR
    • UNIT CONVERTER
    • VOLUME & COMPRESSOR CALCULATOR
    • WATER STORAGE*
    • WATER SUPPLY (US)
    • WATER SUPPLY (METRIC)
  • UNIVERSITY
    • ABOUT
    • CATALOG
    • CONTENT LIBRARY
  • PE Exam
    • PE Forum & Errata
    • PE Store
    • PE Tools
    • PE Prep Series
    • PE 100-Day Marathon
  • LOGIN
  • PRICING
    • SOFTWARE & TRAINING
    • STORE
  • THE CAUSE
    • ABOUT US
    • BECOME AN INSTRUCTOR
    • HELP/SUPPORT
Picture

Two Hose Valves at Top of Remote Standpipe?

3/25/2022

17 Comments

 
In Class I standpipes, I commonly see a pair of hose valves installed at the top landing (or intermediate landing) - One immediately below the other.

Is this an incorrect derivative of the requirement to calculate the two most remote outlets (at 500 gpm), or something that was required in a previous edition of NFPA #14, or is this merely a regional practice that is a result of the shared DNA of my regional contractors?

I thought I had seen an informal interpretation regarding this, but I cannot find it again. NFPA Figures do not appear to support this double-valve arrangement.

​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
17 Comments
Alex Riley
3/25/2022 07:55:32 am

Hi,

Personally, I have never seen that installed. NFPA 14 (2016 Edition) 7.10.1.1.1 states that for the Class I standpipe, you need a minimum flow for the hydraulically most remote standpipe shall be 500 gpm through the two most remote 2 1/2 inch outlets. I suppose in your case, if your top most floor has two valves, they would be considered the most remote.

Although, section 7.3.2.1 states that hose connections shall be provided at each flow landing and does not state that multiple hose valves are required on the top floor.

Thank you,
Alex

Reply
NK
3/25/2022 08:06:37 am

2 hose valves at the top level is easier for ITM testing so you don't have to run hoses up through the stairwells and worry about leaking water in an occupied building. NFPA 14 does not require this and your interpretation that the calculations are based on 500gpm at the two most remote fire hose valves (one on each of the top two levels) is correct.

Reply
Wes
3/25/2022 08:13:56 am

I've seen this done a handful of times, and it was to help facilitate testing.

If we're looking at the topmost landing (main level or intermediate) of a stairwell, then there's some benefit to it, albeit perhaps a relatively small benefit.

If the most remote standpipe has a roof outlet and no roof access, then testing the second-from-the-top outlet would be very difficult. You would need multiple long hose runs and careful coordination between testing personnel to flow both the roof outlet and the topmost outlet below the roof. Adding the extra outlet on the roof means you could just hook up and run that standpipe all from the roof. Significantly easier in that setup, in my opinion.

Reply
Anthony
3/25/2022 08:10:19 am

Alex got the code spot on and I too have never seen that arrangement.

Are you in a city with a many high rises? I understand that in larger cities it is the plan to fight fires on nearby high-rises from the roofs of adjacent buildings this may be an effort to supply that effort?

Also may be easier to test a stand pipes flow with a hose monster on the roof with the two hoses valves up there? You don't need the extra 50' of hose to come up from a lower landing?

Reply
Jack G
3/25/2022 08:10:45 am

I ve only done that when the stairs had access to the roof, and roof manifolds were required. Sometimes the AHJ will allow it inside the roof access door, with a sign, because of freezing winter conditions,

Reply
DS
3/25/2022 08:12:55 am

This also could be for ease of testing for the flow test and not having to use a hose valve inside the stairs as one of the two most remote valves. It is a common practice in both existing and new installations in the area I work in.

Reply
Jesse
3/25/2022 08:16:35 am

Our largest AHJ also requires this. and yeah its kinda weird to me too

Reply
Matt
3/25/2022 08:27:24 am

I agree that it is for ease of testing. It can be messy and time consuming to run a hose from the second most remote standpipe connection to a safe discharge location.

I have see 2 connection manifolds requested by owners, but not fire departments.

Reply
Max link
3/25/2022 08:27:50 am

In certain jurisdictions that's exactly what we do to facilitate 5-year test of the standpipe.

Reply
Dan Wilder
3/25/2022 09:05:23 am

The wording and interpretation of NFPA 14 over the cycles has created this issue in both the hydraulics and design/install that carried over from editions and reviewers.

For instance, NFPA 14-16 Ed Figure A.11.5.2(a) clearly shows to hose valves at the same level for standpipe testing while (b) shows 2 on different levels....the only difference is where the hoses run.

NFPA 14-07 Ed Section 7.3.2.2 shows the requirement for an additional hose connection at the hydraulically most remote portion of the system to facilitate testing. The 2010 edition has this section removed.

Make sure to review the editions that were active when the building was constructed. You shouldn't apply current editions to existing construction (the building age was not discussed but as a general approach).





Reply
Wes
3/25/2022 09:08:46 am

Thanks Dan, this makes much more sense. I didn't know the historical context for this, but around the time we saw this method used was very much when the 2007 Edition of NFPA 14 would have been adopted.

Reply
Anonymous
3/25/2022 11:49:04 am

Thanks Dan and everyone. I think testing and incosistencies in the figures in the standard going way back is why it has become a common practice locally.

Reply
Danny
3/25/2022 09:44:57 am

I have a hospital that has two of these at most remote standpipes that are two different roofs. Per NFPA 25 to perform a 5 year flow inspection for a fully sprinklered building I need to flow 500gpm then 250gpm out of each additional standpipe until I reach 1000 gpm. Would flowing 500gpm out of both “Siamese/double hose valves” be ok?

Thanks

Reply
Wes
3/25/2022 09:49:29 am

No, not in my opinion. The test would need to be conducted as described - 500 gpm at the top of the most remote standpipe, then 250 gpm at each additional standpipe (top or bottom).

Just flowing 500 gpm out of the most remote standpipe would not meet the intent of the test, and would potentially differ substantially from what the original standpipe calculations anticipated (ie: you could fail the test despite the system performing to its original intent).

Reply
Danny
3/25/2022 09:53:15 am

Ok, thank you!

sean
3/25/2022 12:40:04 pm

this actually changed from the different versions of nfpa 14. it used to sawy you should have two valves at the most remote location (2 valves at the highest landing). Now it specifically says you can use the two hose valves in the locations they are required i.e. the top floor and the floor below.

Reply
Danny
3/25/2022 01:58:15 pm

So you think I would be ok to flow my 1000gpm out of the two standpipes/double hose valves?

It would be great if I could do this. It would allow me to have less manpower and less of a chance for water damage as long as the roof drains can handle it!
That being said I’m prepared to do 500,250,250.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Picture
    Why Sponsor?

    ALL-ACCESS

    Picture
    GET ALL OUR TOOLS

    SUBSCRIBE

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

    COMMUNITY

    Top ​Feb 2023 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
    A117.1
    ABA
    ADA
    ASCE 7
    ASME A17.1
    ASTM E1354
    Daily Discussion
    Design Documents
    EN 12845
    Explosion Protection & Prevention
    Fire Detection And Alarm Systems
    Fire Dynamics
    Flammable & Combustible LIquids
    FM Global
    Human Behavior
    IBC
    ICC-500
    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 30B
    NFPA 33
    NFPA 400
    NFPA 409
    NFPA 415
    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
    Passive Building Systems
    PE Prep Guide
    PE Prep Series
    PE Sample Problems
    Poll
    Smoke Management
    Special Hazard Systems
    UFC 3 600 01
    UFC 3-600-01
    UFC 4-021-01
    Updates
    Water Based Fire Suppression
    Weekly Exams


    ARCHIVES

    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

    Fire Protection PE Exam Prep
    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 an International Code Council Preferred Education Provider.

All text, images, and media ​Copyright © 2023 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
  • THE TOOLKIT
    • SUBMIT AN IDEA
    • BACKFLOW DATABASE*
    • CLEAN AGENT ESTIMATOR*
    • CLOUD CEILING CALCULATOR
    • DOMESTIC DEMAND*
    • FIRE FLOW CALCULATOR*
    • FIRE PUMP ANALYZER*
    • FIRE PUMP DATABASE*
    • FRICTION LOSS CALCULATOR
    • HANGER SPACER*
    • IBC TRANSLATOR*
    • K-FACTOR SELECTOR*
    • NFPA 13 EDITION TRANSLATOR ('19 ONLY)
    • NFPA 13 EDITION TRANSLATOR ('99-'22)*
    • LIQUIDS ANALYZER*
    • OBSTRUCTION CALCULATOR
    • OBSTRUCTIONS AGAINST WALL*
    • PLUMBING FIXTURE COUNTS
    • QUICK RESPONSE AREA REDUCTION
    • REMOTE AREA ANALYZER*
    • SPRINKLER DATABASE*
    • SPRINKLER FLOW*
    • SYSTEM ESTIMATOR*
    • TEST & DRAIN CALCULATOR
    • THRUST BLOCK CALCULATOR
    • TRAPEZE CALCULATOR
    • UNIT CONVERTER
    • VOLUME & COMPRESSOR CALCULATOR
    • WATER STORAGE*
    • WATER SUPPLY (US)
    • WATER SUPPLY (METRIC)
  • UNIVERSITY
    • ABOUT
    • CATALOG
    • CONTENT LIBRARY
  • PE Exam
    • PE Forum & Errata
    • PE Store
    • PE Tools
    • PE Prep Series
    • PE 100-Day Marathon
  • LOGIN
  • PRICING
    • SOFTWARE & TRAINING
    • STORE
  • THE CAUSE
    • ABOUT US
    • BECOME AN INSTRUCTOR
    • HELP/SUPPORT