Does anyone know of any literature summarizing standpipe design changes history for the last 130 years or so?
Something to the effect of:
With more enforcement of 5-year standpipe flow testing in our area we find ourselves spending a lot of time trying to locate older versions of NFPA and NBFU to see the design basis at the time of construction to determine testing procedure. Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
13 Comments
Pete H
1/10/2024 07:48:17 am
Don't have anything well written on the reasoning, but I'm willing to BS a guess.
Reply
Dan Wilder
1/10/2024 07:54:05 am
That would be a good question to ask of NFPA direct. The online access only goes back to 1968 for NFPA members, LiNK goes back to 2007.
Reply
Anthony
1/10/2024 08:10:11 am
NFPA does summarize the changes from year to year.
Reply
Greg
1/10/2024 08:26:40 am
From my recollection, the physical library at Fire Protection Publications (FPP) within Oklahoma State University has a historical collection of many NFPA pamphlets and early standards
Reply
Thomas Duross
1/10/2024 08:39:16 am
Welcome to my world. About 20 years ago I began offering standpipe testing to clients. I wrote our State's DPS office and they responded with a lengthy and detailed response that I have kept updated. One important caveat, you need to determine what edition of your SBC adopted when the installation permit was obtained and also what edition of #14 was referenced by that edition of the SBC, plus, you need to review section 10, 9, 12, whatever of the SBC because it could trump #14, plus any local or state ordinances. Depending on your state's law structure, anyone of these could override #14. For instance, my state (MA) didn't adopt the '93 edition until '99 but it still said fully sprinklered non high-rises didn't have to meet the 100 psi threshold and could be manual wet. Under our currently adopted #25 ('14), I still have to test manual wet standpipes.
Reply
Russ Byrd, SFD Plan Review, Retired
1/10/2024 09:07:10 am
Seattle has higher standpipe pressure requirements for high rise buildings, delivered by dedicated fire pumps. For decades the minimum residual pressure was 125 psi @ 300 gpm at any hose connection. This was increased after 911.
Reply
Mark Harris
1/10/2024 05:15:50 pm
I asked this question to a Fire Marshal in the mid 1990's and was told it had to do with using fog nozzles verses straight stream. The fog nozzles required higher pressure. At the time it made sense.
Reply
Casey Milhorn
1/10/2024 06:32:23 pm
Be extremely careful here. It is the owner's responsibility to provide you with original design documents. As others have said, you alos have to know what edition was applicable for this project. Date alone might not tell you if a project was allowed a variance and you would even need to know the month and day. For example if you assume that a project should meet 100 psi, when really it was designed and approved at 65 psi, and you write that as a deficiency you might be asking the owner to make an unnecessary upgrade. Or vice versa, you might be approving an install that is deficient. I would ask the owner for the original design docs, then assuming you probably won't get those documents the majority of the time, perform the test to what is available, document it, provide to the owner and AHJ, and let them decide if it's enough. Add a note at the bottom that the original design psi was not provided and AHJ to verify if pressure meets with their approval.
Reply
Dwight Havens
1/11/2024 10:22:36 am
Historically, the NFPA library has been very helpful in identifying specific requirements of the standards based on their published dates. Do your homework first. As previously indicated, research the source code (typically building or fire) for the building when it was designed and constructed, then work your way to the edition of the standard (supposedly) used to design the system. Then contact the NFPA librarian and ask for help. Thomas, Russ, and Casey all bring up valid points. Local amendments also need to be checked for, and when were they adopted.
Reply
Ivan Humberson
3/6/2024 03:50:29 pm
I realize this is kind of late on this topic, but a quick check of the initial code change on NFPA's website, the Report on Proposals for the 1993 edtion of NFPA 14 had substantiation as the following: "The 150psi criteria is deemed necessary since the previously mentioned NFPA Standpipe Survey indicated that a majority of departments utilize adjustable (fog type) or automatic type nozzles many of which require a 100 psi operating pressure at the nozzle to provide for an effective stream. In addition, 1 1/2 in. and 1 3/4 in. diameter hose lines are used in many standpipe packs in 100 ft to 150 ft lengths. The friction loss in the 1 3/4 in. lines will range from approximately 0.25 psi/ft for a 125 pgm flow to nearly 1 psi/ft for a 250 gpm flow. The 150 psi value will be sufficient for flows of approximately 180 gpm along a single, 100 ft length of 1 3/4 in. line." So, yes, it appears the change to a higher residual pressure at the standpipe hose outlets was driven by the use of adjustable (fog) and/or automatic nozzles.
Reply
RUSSELL BYRD
3/6/2024 08:58:55 pm
Hi Ivan...thanks for your question...
Reply
Jack G
7/12/2024 12:24:35 pm
Check with you state and municipality as they have modified or changed sections of the IBC for ( in our forte) sprinklers, standpipe flows and pressures, and fire alarm.
Reply
Danny
10/28/2024 12:09:09 pm
Wouldn't you first have to determine if this was an Automatic, Semi-Automatic, or Manual standpipe? Those pressures are not required on every standpipe.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
ALL-ACCESSSUBSCRIBESubscribe and learn something new each day:
COMMUNITYTop September '24 Contributors
YOUR POSTPE EXAMGet 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
FILTERS
All
ARCHIVES
November 2024
PE PREP SERIES |