When sizing a water storage tank for exclusive fire protection use, and fed by a fire pump, should

the tank be sized on 150% of pumps rated capacity (at the req'd duration)or just the fire sprinkler
demand + inside hose?
Fire sprinkler demand + inside hose x duration= tank capacity. If u have any dry pipe or preaction
system then as per NFPA 13 u have to add the gpm required to fill the systems for your total gpm
for the tank.
If you have standpipes per NFPA 14, you have to consider the flow/duration for those - if it
exceeds what the sprinklers require.
It is my opinion that the water tank is to be sized for the greatest demand. If you have hydrants,
that is often your greatest demand. Second is usually standpipes, followed by sprinklers. If you
have a pump taking suction from the tank, you want to be sure you have enough water in the
tank to be able to complete the pump test.

Travis, so what do you think in this case - make the tank able to supply 30 minutes at 150%
capacity + 30 minutes at 100% capacity and compare that with the sprinkler + hose demand at
60 minutes and see which is greater?

1500 gpm pump @ 150% = 2250 gallons X 30 minutes = 67,500 gallons

+

1500 gpm pump @ 100% x 30 minutes = 45,000 gallons
---------------------------------
= 112,500 gallons

compared to sprinkler demand (+ hose stations inside) = 1,642 gpm X 60 minutes = 98,520
gallons

Of course the pump test durations were just arbitrary - not that anyone is going to need the
pump running at 150% for 30 minutes to test it... but it would be embarassing to run out of water
for the pump test and the above seems to dictate at least a 100,000 gallon tank.

I'm late to the party but I have a question: What is the fire flow? Travis stated this, but sprinkler
demand is not the same as firefighting water demand, and that's the question in my arena.

Travis answered it, and the original poster neglected to even raise the question.

Without all the facts this is not a simple question. We don't know if this a community fire pump, a
building fire pump, a campus fire pump or what the heck you are trying to protect. Tell me what is
"exclusive" as you originally asked.
Stookey, pump & tank are for fire sprinklers and inside hose stations- exclusively. No hydrants, no
domestic, no nothing - but fire sprinklers.
I don't see why you would need to run the fire pump for 30 minutes at 150% and 30 minutes at
100%. It looks like your sprinkler demand is going to be the driving force.

Does this tank have an automatic float for refill. You can even use that to reduce the size of the
tank if needed.
Oremus,

I stand corrected. I should have read the question more closely.
NFPA 851/850 (protection for power plants) states that the design water capacity of the system
should able to be refilled in 8hrs or less, is there a similar requirement for just sprinkler-internal
hose systems water tanks as per Oremus case?

use a flow meter into the tank and make it easy it is permitted by NFPA 25.1. a test shall be conducted every 3 years in accordance with 8. $6.000 gallon tank. In the case of a 500 gpm pump I prefer to size the tank at 750 gpm for 60 minutes and provide a 45.3. 8.3.3 Where the annual test is conducted periodically in accordance with 8.000 is very minimal.1. The performance of the pump when applied at capacities over 140 percent of rated capacity can be adversely affected by the suction conditions.3. What are we talking about. Pump suction and discharge pressures and the flowmeter measurements shall determine the total pump output.000 more on a project that might be sellign for $10 million? I've always been able to offer it to the owner as an alternate which they always accept when you explain the larger tank would take care of any additions or a density increase should something change down the road.1.When you run your pump test can't you run your hoses back to the tank so you don't have to refill the tank after your annual pump test? I've done this on a few projects and doing this combined with using a flow meter makes the pump test easy. 400 gpm sprinkler + 250 hose = 650 gpm which would call for a 39. My understanding the correct way is to calculate total sprinkler demand plus hose stream allowance for whatever time requirement there was. What the heck. 08 14.1. Seems a 500 gpm pump would handle anything up to OH2.3.1.1 or 8.3.4.2. 8.08 see below.2 Use of the Pump Discharge via the Bypass Flowmeter to Drain or Suction Reservoir. How about a solved example that everyone agrees with ? If fire flows are an issue I could calculate it for my own purposes but would want verification by a PE or FPE before proceeding. But the answer to the question (not addressing ISO fire flows) is sprinkler demand plus inside and outside hose stream allowance if any.2.3.3.3.2 The means to fill the tank shall be sized to fill the tank in a maximum time of 8 hours. Come on.3. Application of the pump at capacities less than 90 percent of the rated capacity is not recommended.3.000 gallon and 45.2.3. After reading everything about it I could find I concluded ISO fire flows are an area sprinkler layout technicians aren't qualified to navigate. Chevy Why bother with hoses.2.2. Personally I like to size the tank for the pump at 150% for whatever time is required. .3.2 in lieu of the method described in 8.1.3. a set of plans with $300 or so on a $10 million project could save me a lot of headache down the road so why take the risk? Why the 1500 gpm pump on a project that requires but a 30 minute supply? Sounds light hazard to me unless there are ISO fire flows involved.3. the cost difference between a 39.3. NFPA 22.000 gallon water storage regardless of the pump size. 8. From NFPA #20 appendix A-2-3 A stationary pump for fire protection should be selected in the range of operation from 90 percent to 150 percent of its rated capacity.3 Annual Tests.

It seems to me that sometime in the past I read that the hydraulic method was "preferred" by most modern designs. . but was just wondering if I couldn't do it more quickly by using the pipe schedule method (if the available water supply was sufficient). 7-2. I believe your statement is correct for the Extra Hazard Occupancy. Thank you for your response.2.2 & 7-2.2. This dedicated water supply costs money so the lower the flow rate. I'm having trouble definitively determining whether to use the pipe schedule method or the hydraulic method (7-2. Table 7-2. I've read and re-read NFPA 13 for clues as well as the Fire Protection Handbook from NFPA. The pipe schedule method shall be permitted only for new installations of 5000 ft2 (465 m2) or less or for additions or modifications to existing pipe schedule systems sized according to the pipe schedules of Section 8-5. Below is text from NFPA 13 . 7-2.4 bar) at the highest elevation of sprinkler.1 Table 7-2. My interpretation of this is that the Pipe Schedule method can still be used for new systems of the Ordinary (and Light) Hazard Occupancies.3 in NFPA 13) to determine water demand.1 are available at a minimum residual pressure of 50 psi (3. I've used the Hydraulic Method and have spreadsheets already set up to assist me. the lower the costs. but can't seem to find the reference. 1: The pipe schedule method shall be permitted for use in systems exceeding 5000 ft2 (465 m2) where the flows required in Table 7-2.I'm working my way through an automatic "wet" sprinkler design for an Ordinary Hazard Group 2 area. Pressure and flow requirements for extra hazard occupancies shall be based on the hydraulic calculation methods of 7-2. All new must be hydraulically designed/calc'd.e.3. as the areas I deal with don't typically have access to "public water" and therefore the water must be supplied and "dedicated" to the fire suppression system by the owner of the property. For previous designs.1 shall be used in determining the minimum water supply requirements for light and ordinary hazard occupancies protected by systems with pipe sized according to the pipe schedules of Section 8-5. Exception No. and the lower the total volume. only existing Pipe Schedule Systems may be replaced. But it seems that the pipe schedule design is a quicker. Exception No. lower flow rate).2. "cook book" design approach. I'm trying to develop a design guideline for myself (and my company) so that I don't have to wrestle through these comments every time I do a sprinkler design (every couple of years it seems).2 Water Demand Requirements — Pipe Schedule Method.1 shall be used in determining the minimum water supply requirements. Any comments? I believe if you read the latest editions of the Code. We always check over pipe schedule systems with a hydraulic calc to check. This can be a bit of a concern in most of my designs. but can't recall the source of that comment. One advantage of the Hydraulic method is that the water demand typically appears to be smaller (i.2. 2: The pipe schedule method shall be permitted for additions or modifications to existing extra hazard pipe schedule systems. It all depends on the situation which requires more water. I have based all of my designs on the hydraulic method.1999 Edition.

If you have any further questions.000 sq. A poorly designed system can have a higher demand than a pipe schedule system. While the pipe schedule approach had previously served as an acceptable design option for a wider range of buildings and spaces. 2002. I have not done a pipe schedule system in probably the last 10 years. ft. You can get between a 40 and 60% reduction in the design area. With the advent of hydraulic calculation programs for fire sprinkler systems. different pipe. I remember being required to calculate tree systems by hand when I first started. but the lead engineer wanted to make sure I understood what the computer was doing with the calculations.7.2. pipe schedules are mostly a thing of the past. That was one of the best lessons I was given in the fire sprinkler industry. They do not permit it unless replacing existing and even then only if you can show a redesign to hydraulic would be very difficult due to pipe locations. I think the NFPA 13 committee is saying you can do it but why? 50 psi flowing 500 gpm on top of a 30 foot building!! and if the sprinkler system is a local alarm only. We had the computer programs to do it.5 requires the residual pressure of 50 psi at the highest elevation if the system is larger then 5. Minutes to do what once took days. I just read it over and recalled that the local AHJ is the reason we don't use pipe schedule. You can play with a pipe sizes. You can try different sprinklers. and get instant feedback. the flow is increased to 750 gpm as per section 11. It's really fun with some of the programs available now. If you are concerned about water supply requirements. it's misuse has resulted in its restricted application. You are correct on that one. NFPA 13. and I do fire sprinkler systems every day. you can calculate the system using quick response sprinklers (light and ordinary hazard wet pipe systems)and reduce the design area as long as the ceiling or roof deck (if exposed) is less than 20'.1 for a light hazard requires 15 psi at 500-750 gpm.Just as a note the latest version of NFPA 13 is 2002 Edition. . please feel free to email me. Quote from the NFPA 13 Handbook: The use of pipe schedule design approaches is restricted to rather small systems. hit the button. Hydraulic calculations and systems designed with hydraulic calculations require an understanding of the effects the layout can have on the demand.2. I have run into many pipe schedule systems that don't always calculate out. different areas. table 11.10/1500 or about 150 gpm plus 100 gpm for FD hose for a total of 250 gpm about 50% less gpm then a pipe schedule system.2. I would think a hydraulic designed system would be much cheaper to install particularly if you have a marginal water supply.2. I hope this is helpful. my favorite tool. Don't like the results just undo it. Section 11. I've noticed with some of our newer designers that they don't necessarily understand the effect balance can have on their demand as the software is doing the work for them. A light hazard hydraulic system requires . unless high residual pressures are available. Technology.2. Once you understand how it works you start to lay your systems out so that they balance.2. Addtionally.