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

Why Pressure Loss Between Street and Backflow?

1/8/2021

18 Comments

 
We are inspecting an existing fire sprinkler building for an upgrade to an Extra Large Orifice (ELO) system.

We performed a hydrant flow test and noticed a 14 psi static loss between the hydrant, 185-ft of 8-inch ductile, 2 elbows and 8 feet of elevation rise to the supply side of the RPZ backflow preventer.  We recorded 73 psi at hydrant and 59 psi at the number 1 test cock on the RPZ while static.

I spoke with the water authority and they confirmed no meter or check valve on the 8" fire line; it is straight into the valve room plus 2 elbows. The building is 20 years old and the pump test provided 120% of rated capacity.

Any idea how the static pressure inside the building is 14 psi less?

​​​​​​​​Sent in anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
18 Comments
Dan Wilder
1/8/2021 08:27:30 am

Check your gauges for calibration and try to use the same type for both. Using a glycerin filled 100# and an Air/Water 300# will not be equal when comparing them.

Do both gauges move equally with changes in the static pressure (up and down)?

I'm assuming the RPZ is doing it's job and there is an additional loss across the valve? Not that this makes a difference on the static, but just making sure the valve is doing its job.

Reply
Mike
1/8/2021 09:06:09 am

Check the gauges.

Reply
Andrew K
1/8/2021 09:14:46 am

I can only agree with previous responses. In general, we should consider the the pressure gauges as a possible source of psi discrepancy. I would offer that if you have the opportunity to use one certified pressure gauge for both locations, it may eliminate any discrepancies between different gauges.

Reply
Jesse
1/8/2021 09:30:58 am

First of all check the gauges. We've all seen way too many mis-calibrated gauges. If the gauges are good, it's likely the UG pipe is fouled. I ran a basic HW manual calc presuming a flow of 1000-gpm. Your friction loss is in the area 1.38 psi. Your 8-ft rise in elevation accounts for a loss of 3.46 psi for a total loss of 4.84 psi. You've lost 14 psi, so we're at the point where the culprit may be scale buildup on your UG pipe. If this is the case, you'll need to replace the UG.

Reply
Jesse
1/8/2021 09:37:41 am

Sorry - I just re-read the original post. Earlier my brain registered the pressure differences while flowing, not static.

This one's weird. Thinking its the gauges.

Reply
Casey Milhorn
1/8/2021 09:38:51 am

Completely agree with checking the gauges. Also make sure you are doing them at the same exact time. Sounds like you are in an industrial area and water usage can spike up and down dramatically affecting the static pressure available, especially if the city water main is a dead end line and/or undersized. Other than that, physics is physics.

Reply
Franck
1/8/2021 09:56:56 am

For the same elevation, static should be the same everywhere in your system.
If you have a difference, it may come from a pressure gauge reading (as indicated above), a possible change in elevation, or the provision somewhere of a pressure reducing system.
By elimination, you can guess where is the answer...

But first thought is of course to check the calibration of the pressure gauges.

If difference is coming while flowing the system, then it comes to friction losses, as indicated by Jesse. If more difference than expected, then it may come from a smaller pipe size than expected (smaller diameter installed, or smaller inside diameter because of scale build up, MIC, improperly opne valves...

Reply
Glenn Berger
1/8/2021 10:13:24 am

After checking the gauges (easy answer), you might have underground piping that has a problem (internal or external). Do you know if there are soil corrosive issues?

Reply
Shane
1/8/2021 10:29:52 am

my best guess there is a small leak, due to corrosion, in the underground piping or at a fitting connection after the backflow.

Reply
C.T. Carbonari
1/8/2021 10:34:50 am

I always check testing equipment & methodology (i.e. gauges, connections, locations,piping configuration) whenever unexpected hydraulic anomalies occur.

Assuming the hydrant is public and on a dead end line, there is typically a key valve near the property line at point of connection with the city water supply.
I would check to ensure it is fully stroked open.

Reply
C.T. Carbonari
1/8/2021 11:06:58 am

Also, this sounds like a Fire Service Main Flow Test (as opposed to a traditional hydrant test)

Knowing how much flow (gpm) you achieved during your test would help in assessing your pressure drops.

@ Q=1500 gpm for 8" DI ; c=100 (existing) w/205 ft equiv. pipe
your pressure drop should be in the 4.5 psi range.

A 14 psi residual drop is an indicator of a restricted orifice.
(Heavy Corrosion, Valve partial open)

Reply
Louie Lincoln link
1/8/2021 02:42:32 pm

I doubt that all of the gauges are that far off. With the pump only flowing at 120% if the original was 150%, there is a flow restriction.
The flow loss would account the 30% difference. It would be helpful if you could get your hands on the original pump start report.

Reply
Felipe Pedraza
1/8/2021 07:09:22 pm

If the guages have been checked.and are of the same make and kind, proceed to checking all roadway valves near the source and make sure that they are fully open and in working condition. I have found some of them close and even broken in the past. Also check with utilities for any watermain repair near the area, or waterline taps to the main and the cut out line donut went into the main and is either blocking a watermain roadway valve ir is blocking the water at the BF.

Reply
Tony Brown
1/9/2021 08:22:30 am

I have come across this situation three times. Once was due to a throttled down curb valve, the other two was because a neighbor had tapped into my clients incoming service.
My gages are always checked before leaving the shop and I have them checked and calibrated on a regular basis, even brand new ones so if you are confident that your gages are okay then check all valves between the hydrant and the backflow. 14 psi loss on 185 + of 8" ductile is a huge loss so I would check for a mechanical cause, i.e., valves, broken pipe,

Reply
FRED WALKER
1/11/2021 10:08:11 am

1. Check gauges, ensure calibration, easy first check swap gauges.
2. If gauges check and you have 0 flow through the backflow preventer; then you have a leak, an undocumented tap, or some other condition creating flow between the hydrant and the backflow preventer.

If the hydrant is located on a distribution main and there is a Tee-off to the backflow preventer you may need to take static at hydrants on either side of the Tee as well as the backflow preventer to account for flow in the distribution main.

Reply
C.T. Carbonari
1/14/2021 10:58:07 pm

I hope the OP responds with clarification when this issue is resolved.
Knowing the actual field solutions to these more empirical types of questions benefits all of us!

Reply
Jesse
1/15/2021 07:40:17 am

Agree with C.T. Would be beneficial to all of us if the OP circled back with the resolution. Differential diagnosis are great, and this created some great discourse. We're all better at what we do because of it.

Reply
Mike Millman
3/2/2021 01:40:58 pm

1) Is it possible there is more elevation change than you realize? The ground can gradually slope quite a bit without really "feeling" it. Double check elevations using something like Google Earth Pro.
2) As mentioned, check the gauges
3) Do the gauges have 3-way valves allowing to bleed out all of the air before taking an accurate static water pressure measurement?
4) Are you positive the hydrant gauge and the in-building gauge are truly on the same piping system with nothing between them?
5) What time were the tests conducted? Is it possible that nearby daytime water use could be affecting your readings? Any industrial water users nearby?

If none of the above can explain it, I would expect an underground leak somewhere between the two test points.

Please follow up with the solution. We're all interested haha!

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 May '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

    June 2025
    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