Containment Backflow Installation and Design

Safe-T-Cover
Feb. 13, 2017
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
Containment Backflow Installation and Design
1 of 39

More Related Content

Recently uploaded

Unit 1-Data Science Process Overview.pptxUnit 1-Data Science Process Overview.pptx
Unit 1-Data Science Process Overview.pptxAnusuya123
Hacktoberfest with GDSC NIET.pdfHacktoberfest with GDSC NIET.pdf
Hacktoberfest with GDSC NIET.pdfYashiGupta410690
UNIT IV	REFRIGERATION PRINCIPLES                                             ...UNIT IV	REFRIGERATION PRINCIPLES                                             ...
UNIT IV REFRIGERATION PRINCIPLES ...karthi keyan
Gate 2007 Q & Ans key.pdfGate 2007 Q & Ans key.pdf
Gate 2007 Q & Ans key.pdfmining novel
Mohammad Mahdi Farshadian CV - Prospective PhD Student 2024Mohammad Mahdi Farshadian CV - Prospective PhD Student 2024
Mohammad Mahdi Farshadian CV - Prospective PhD Student 2024Educational Group Mohammad Farshadian
UNII II		ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS IN BUILDINGS	UNII II		ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS IN BUILDINGS
UNII II ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS IN BUILDINGS karthi keyan

Featured

Beginners Guide to TikTok for Search - Rachel Pearson - We are Tilt __ Bright...Beginners Guide to TikTok for Search - Rachel Pearson - We are Tilt __ Bright...
Beginners Guide to TikTok for Search - Rachel Pearson - We are Tilt __ Bright...RachelPearson36
Unlocking the Power of ChatGPT and AI in Testing - A Real-World Look, present...Unlocking the Power of ChatGPT and AI in Testing - A Real-World Look, present...
Unlocking the Power of ChatGPT and AI in Testing - A Real-World Look, present...Applitools
12 Ways to Increase Your Influence at Work12 Ways to Increase Your Influence at Work
12 Ways to Increase Your Influence at WorkGetSmarter
ChatGPT webinar slidesChatGPT webinar slides
ChatGPT webinar slidesAlireza Esmikhani
More than Just Lines on a Map: Best Practices for U.S Bike RoutesMore than Just Lines on a Map: Best Practices for U.S Bike Routes
More than Just Lines on a Map: Best Practices for U.S Bike RoutesProject for Public Spaces & National Center for Biking and Walking
Ride the Storm: Navigating Through Unstable Periods / Katerina Rudko (Belka G...Ride the Storm: Navigating Through Unstable Periods / Katerina Rudko (Belka G...
Ride the Storm: Navigating Through Unstable Periods / Katerina Rudko (Belka G...DevGAMM Conference

Featured(20)

Containment Backflow Installation and Design

Editor's Notes

  1. The fact is, the entire Eng commty, at least those that engage in the design of water systems, are struggling w/ new professional liability risk involving the location of CNTMT Backflow preventer systems. not because of a new design practice, but because of new information about the old practices. There has been a slow trickle of warnings for years, * past two years: imp orgs and ind’ry leaders have added new warnings, much stronger language: not only change recognized best practices, but actually challenge the fitness and safety of older placement methods altogether.
  2. I told you I wouldn’t attempt to settle the Doctrine Question today. But I will say we are not going to get rid of the problem by dumping the system itself. More backflow is occurring at the meter than was previously believed
  3. And with this new risk realization comes a new Interested Party. The insurance company. Because of this very public commentary from experts, they now have new weapons for damage recovery.
  4. Consider these facts. [READ] Water utilities are seeking more containment backflow protection To answer the “why” question, one must first look to AWWAs statement in the preamble of the CCCM published by EPA: [READ] . The return of any water to the public water system after the water has been used for any purpose on the customer’s premises or within the customer’s piping system is unacceptable and opposed by AWWA *But new technologies like SCADA and AMI are revealing that there are far more BF events happening than we ever imagined. (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) back-siphon events that were not detected prior to these technologies; back pressure events sometimes caused by the SCADA systems themselves (pressure regulation, internal distribution pumps, etc. 40-year-old buildings with lead in every plumbing joint are no longer low hazards to the public water supply. The Bootleg Contingency: bad/ignorant actors Terrorism
  5. Consider these facts. [READ] Water utilities are seeking more containment backflow protection To answer the “why” question, one must first look to AWWAs statement in the preamble of the CCCM published by EPA: [READ] . The return of any water to the public water system after the water has been used for any purpose on the customer’s premises or within the customer’s piping system is unacceptable and opposed by AWWA *But new technologies like SCADA and AMI are revealing that there are far more BF events happening than we ever imagined. (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) back-siphon events that were not detected prior to these technologies; back pressure events sometimes caused by the SCADA systems themselves (pressure regulation, internal distribution pumps, etc. 40-year-old buildings with lead in every plumbing joint are no longer low hazards to the public water supply. The Bootleg Contingency: bad/ignorant actors Terrorism
  6. Number 3 For containment, AWWA, ASPE, & the legal community recognize “outside aboveground” as ‘best practice’.
  7. Today we’ll take a look at the questions designers and plans-review personnel are asking to determine proper application of containment backflow prevention Why outside? (OR asked another way, Why not inside?) I’ll show you the 2 critically important reasons why these systems are best placed outside. 2. Once that’s laid out, I’ll take you through the 5 reasons more and more water authorities are deciding that subterranean vault installation is too dangerous, too expensive, and too much of a risk burden to be allowed to continue. 3. Where is the momentum (and what does it tell us about the future) for containment BP systems? 4. Survey
  8. The first question is Why Outside? What’s wrong with inside? The number one reason has to do with RPZs because RPZs are an ever-present flood hazard. * Here’s what the American Society of Plumbing Engineers published in their Plumbing Engineering Design Handbook: [READ]
  9. The most important thing a designer must understand is the worst case scenario. What CAN happen. What describes The Perfect STORM? We all know that with an RPZ, when water demand stops, the water between the valves often evacuates into the relief valve. Some (many) think that that event defines the limit of what water can ever flow into a drain. Not so.
  10. Consider a flow-stop situation, one that might naturally occur at the end of the day. If you look closely, you can see that a small pebble has lodged in the #2 check valve. Now let’s say there’s a fire around the corner that causes back siphon at this point in the system. Because the # 2 check valve is not closing, all the water that has been delivered to the building will continue to flow out the relief valve until the private lines are cleared. If this is a four story building, that’s a lot of water.
  11. Failure of # 1. undetected in normal conditions.
  12. Faulire of #1 PLUS Relief valve blockage:
  13. * This picture was tweeted this summer by a Nashville backflow tester. (READ)
  14. Let’s look at a flood of a medical facility. You are looking at 2 sides of one wall. On the left, we see that the water volume from the release moved the wall into the next room, which happened to be a telephone and low-voltage wiring room. The insurer sought recovery from all the risk holders including the engineer, architect, contractor, subcontractor, and even the most recent recorded tester; and while the details of who paid what were not made public, we do know that the property insurer was made whole by one or more of the listed defendants.
  15. Let’s look at a flood of a medical facility. You are looking at 2 sides of one wall. On the left, we see that the water volume from the release moved the wall into the next room, which happened to be a telephone and low-voltage wiring room. The insurer sought recovery from all the risk holders including the engineer, architect, contractor, subcontractor, and even the most recent recorded tester; and while the details of who paid what were not made public, we do know that the property insurer was made whole by one or more of the listed defendants.
  16. So if these things are designed to dump water, then drain capacity is the issue. The chart on the left is from Wilkins. It’s the Relief Valve Discharge Rate chart of its top of the line, 375 RPZ. It illustrates the flow rate of that device in various sizes and at various pressures. Note that a 2 1/2 inch device will flow 375 GPM at 85 PSI. If you remember your fluid volume tables, you’ll recall that a 4” drain pipe with a 6 inch fall per 100 horizontal feet evacuates clean water at a rate of 93 GPM. If that device is flowing at 375 GPM and your clearing 93, then you are flooding at a rate of 282 GPM. The chart on the right is a Drain Requirements chart created by the city of Columbus, OH. It’s importance cannot be overstated. It reveals that unless you intend to utilize 8” drain pipes at a 6” per 100 horizontal feet fall-rate all the way to the sewer, you cannot justify anything larger inside than a 2” RPZ inside. * An article published this summer in the Chicago chapter of the American Society of Plumbing Engineers written by David DeBord, a former president of that organization, states all these facts better than I can. He uses the Manufacturer’s data supplied by the Watts Corporation and he uses a 65 PSI instead of my 85, but he actually does the math in the article and offers FLOOD rates or 219 GPM for 2 1/2 and 3”; and flood rate of 482 GPM for 4” and above. * He concludes that regarding indoor RPZs, : (READ)
  17. So if these things are designed to dump water, then drain capacity is the issue. The chart on the left is from Wilkins. It’s the Relief Valve Discharge Rate chart of its top of the line, 375 RPZ. It illustrates the flow rate of that device in various sizes and at various pressures. Note that a 2 1/2 inch device will flow 375 GPM at 85 PSI. If you remember your fluid volume tables, you’ll recall that a 4” drain pipe with a 6 inch fall per 100 horizontal feet evacuates clean water at a rate of 93 GPM. If that device is flowing at 375 GPM and your clearing 93, then you are flooding at a rate of 282 GPM. The chart on the right is a Drain Requirements chart created by the city of Columbus, OH. It’s importance cannot be overstated. It reveals that unless you intend to utilize 8” drain pipes at a 6” per 100 horizontal feet fall-rate all the way to the sewer, you cannot justify anything larger inside than a 2” RPZ inside. * An article published this summer in the Chicago chapter of the American Society of Plumbing Engineers written by David DeBord, a former president of that organization, states all these facts better than I can. He uses the Manufacturer’s data supplied by the Watts Corporation and he uses a 65 PSI instead of my 85, but he actually does the math in the article and offers FLOOD rates or 219 GPM for 2 1/2 and 3”; and flood rate of 482 GPM for 4” and above. * He concludes that regarding indoor RPZs, : (READ)
  18. Video showing a #1 check valve failure and debris in the relief valve holding it open. See this video now at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7MjJuZQoYo
  19. the average floor area required for a conventional 3” backflow preventer is 33.325 SF.
  20. Cost of an enclosure, 2 options: Option 1: conventional, “in-line” assembly= $3,266 Option 2: N-type assembly=$1,100.
  21. Costs are $3,920 and $6,266 respectively.
  22. Today we’ll take a look at the questions designers and plans-review personnel are asking to determine proper application of containment backflow prevention Why outside? (OR asked another way, Why not inside?) I’ll show you the 2 critically important reasons why these systems are best placed outside. 2. Once that’s laid out, I’ll take you through the 5 reasons more and more water authorities are deciding that subterranean vault installation is too dangerous, too expensive, and too much of a risk burden to be allowed to continue. 3. Where is the momentum (and what does it tell us about the future) for containment BP systems? 4. Survey
  23. Why an aboveground enclosure? Why not a subterranean vault? Well, the first reason has to do with the RPZ. 41 states have written code that prohibits the installation of RPZs below grade. And as far as I know, where it remains unwritten, it is invariably enforced as an unacceptable practice.
  24. So let’s look at the considerations. Safety, Liability, and changing demands * We’ve all seen the extraordinary measures OSHA imposes to legally access vaults for maintenance tasks. fresh air exchange hoses, tents, extra men. The costs are more and more prohibitive but frankly, the risk of serious injury is real as well. * But beyond the cost of safety for onsite workers, liability issues persist. * When a vault floods like this one, the mandatory test cocks are submerged, and in that event, a violation of the International Plumbing has likely already occurred. The water may look clean, but consider what would typically make up the constituents of that water. Runoff of lawn chemicals alone make this a clear and present danger to the water supply. In fact, it led the USC Foundation of Cross Connection & Hydraulic Research in 2005 to change their recommendation of even double check BFP installation in vaults. * (READ) Finally, Changing demands. Engineers are obviously preoccupied with new construction. But buildings, through their normal life of changing tenants over time, change uses with respect to hazard levels, and hazard levels, or more precisely, the named high-hazard threshold, has become a moving target. Around the corner from our office in Nashville, I snapped this picture. It sits in front of a warehouse owned by an automotive dealer. When they bought the property and erected the building, they put a double-check BFP down in that vault with the meter. A few years later, the city changed an ordinance that redefined their particular use to high-hazard. When they sought a permit to upgrade the HVAC system, the city forced them to change to an RPZ. After constructing this huge vault, they now leave it almost empty with an RPZ in an enclosure perched on top of it. They paid three times for a single solution. Now this enclosure – This is what happens all too often when tenants or hazard thresholds change in areas where no guidelines or Standard Details exist.
  25. So let’s look at the considerations. Safety, Liability, and changing demands * We’ve all seen the extraordinary measures OSHA imposes to legally access vaults for maintenance tasks. fresh air exchange hoses, tents, extra men. The costs are more and more prohibitive but frankly, the risk of serious injury is real as well. * But beyond the cost of safety for onsite workers, liability issues persist. * When a vault floods like this one, the mandatory test cocks are submerged, and in that event, a violation of the International Plumbing has likely already occurred. The water may look clean, but consider what would typically make up the constituents of that water. Runoff of lawn chemicals alone make this a clear and present danger to the water supply. In fact, it led the USC Foundation of Cross Connection & Hydraulic Research in 2005 to change their recommendation of even double check BFP installation in vaults. * (READ) Finally, Changing demands. Engineers are obviously preoccupied with new construction. But buildings, through their normal life of changing tenants over time, change uses with respect to hazard levels, and hazard levels, or more precisely, the named high-hazard threshold, has become a moving target. Around the corner from our office in Nashville, I snapped this picture. It sits in front of a warehouse owned by an automotive dealer. When they bought the property and erected the building, they put a double-check BFP down in that vault with the meter. A few years later, the city changed an ordinance that redefined their particular use to high-hazard. When they sought a permit to upgrade the HVAC system, the city forced them to change to an RPZ. After constructing this huge vault, they now leave it almost empty with an RPZ in an enclosure perched on top of it. They paid three times for a single solution. Now this enclosure – This is what happens all too often when tenants or hazard thresholds change in areas where no guidelines or Standard Details exist.
  26. So let’s look at the considerations. Safety, Liability, and changing demands * We’ve all seen the extraordinary measures OSHA imposes to legally access vaults for maintenance tasks. fresh air exchange hoses, tents, extra men. The costs are more and more prohibitive but frankly, the risk of serious injury is real as well. * But beyond the cost of safety for onsite workers, liability issues persist. * When a vault floods like this one, the mandatory test cocks are submerged, and in that event, a violation of the International Plumbing has likely already occurred. The water may look clean, but consider what would typically make up the constituents of that water. Runoff of lawn chemicals alone make this a clear and present danger to the water supply. In fact, it led the USC Foundation of Cross Connection & Hydraulic Research in 2005 to change their recommendation of even double check BFP installation in vaults. * (READ) Finally, Changing demands. Engineers are obviously preoccupied with new construction. But buildings, through their normal life of changing tenants over time, change uses with respect to hazard levels, and hazard levels, or more precisely, the named high-hazard threshold, has become a moving target. Around the corner from our office in Nashville, I snapped this picture. It sits in front of a warehouse owned by an automotive dealer. When they bought the property and erected the building, they put a double-check BFP down in that vault with the meter. A few years later, the city changed an ordinance that redefined their particular use to high-hazard. When they sought a permit to upgrade the HVAC system, the city forced them to change to an RPZ. After constructing this huge vault, they now leave it almost empty with an RPZ in an enclosure perched on top of it. They paid three times for a single solution. Now this enclosure – This is what happens all too often when tenants or hazard thresholds change in areas where no guidelines or Standard Details exist.
  27. So let’s look at the considerations. Safety, Liability, and changing demands * We’ve all seen the extraordinary measures OSHA imposes to legally access vaults for maintenance tasks. fresh air exchange hoses, tents, extra men. The costs are more and more prohibitive but frankly, the risk of serious injury is real as well. * But beyond the cost of safety for onsite workers, liability issues persist. * When a vault floods like this one, the mandatory test cocks are submerged, and in that event, a violation of the International Plumbing has likely already occurred. The water may look clean, but consider what would typically make up the constituents of that water. Runoff of lawn chemicals alone make this a clear and present danger to the water supply. In fact, it led the USC Foundation of Cross Connection & Hydraulic Research in 2005 to change their recommendation of even double check BFP installation in vaults. * (READ) Finally, Changing demands. Engineers are obviously preoccupied with new construction. But buildings, through their normal life of changing tenants over time, change uses with respect to hazard levels, and hazard levels, or more precisely, the named high-hazard threshold, has become a moving target. Around the corner from our office in Nashville, I snapped this picture. It sits in front of a warehouse owned by an automotive dealer. When they bought the property and erected the building, they put a double-check BFP down in that vault with the meter. A few years later, the city changed an ordinance that redefined their particular use to high-hazard. When they sought a permit to upgrade the HVAC system, the city forced them to change to an RPZ. After constructing this huge vault, they now leave it almost empty with an RPZ in an enclosure perched on top of it. They paid three times for a single solution. Now this enclosure – This is what happens all too often when tenants or hazard thresholds change in areas where no guidelines or Standard Details exist.
  28. So let’s look at the considerations. Safety, Liability, and changing demands * We’ve all seen the extraordinary measures OSHA imposes to legally access vaults for maintenance tasks. fresh air exchange hoses, tents, extra men. The costs are more and more prohibitive but frankly, the risk of serious injury is real as well. * But beyond the cost of safety for onsite workers, liability issues persist. * When a vault floods like this one, the mandatory test cocks are submerged, and in that event, a violation of the International Plumbing has likely already occurred. The water may look clean, but consider what would typically make up the constituents of that water. Runoff of lawn chemicals alone make this a clear and present danger to the water supply. In fact, it led the USC Foundation of Cross Connection & Hydraulic Research in 2005 to change their recommendation of even double check BFP installation in vaults. * (READ) Finally, Changing demands. Engineers are obviously preoccupied with new construction. But buildings, through their normal life of changing tenants over time, change uses with respect to hazard levels, and hazard levels, or more precisely, the named high-hazard threshold, has become a moving target. Around the corner from our office in Nashville, I snapped this picture. It sits in front of a warehouse owned by an automotive dealer. When they bought the property and erected the building, they put a double-check BFP down in that vault with the meter. A few years later, the city changed an ordinance that redefined their particular use to high-hazard. When they sought a permit to upgrade the HVAC system, the city forced them to change to an RPZ. After constructing this huge vault, they now leave it almost empty with an RPZ in an enclosure perched on top of it. They paid three times for a single solution. Now this enclosure – This is what happens all too often when tenants or hazard thresholds change in areas where no guidelines or Standard Details exist.
  29. So let’s look at the considerations. Safety, Liability, and changing demands * We’ve all seen the extraordinary measures OSHA imposes to legally access vaults for maintenance tasks. fresh air exchange hoses, tents, extra men. The costs are more and more prohibitive but frankly, the risk of serious injury is real as well. * But beyond the cost of safety for onsite workers, liability issues persist. * When a vault floods like this one, the mandatory test cocks are submerged, and in that event, a violation of the International Plumbing has likely already occurred. The water may look clean, but consider what would typically make up the constituents of that water. Runoff of lawn chemicals alone make this a clear and present danger to the water supply. In fact, it led the USC Foundation of Cross Connection & Hydraulic Research in 2005 to change their recommendation of even double check BFP installation in vaults. * (READ) Finally, Changing demands. Engineers are obviously preoccupied with new construction. But buildings, through their normal life of changing tenants over time, change uses with respect to hazard levels, and hazard levels, or more precisely, the named high-hazard threshold, has become a moving target. Around the corner from our office in Nashville, I snapped this picture. It sits in front of a warehouse owned by an automotive dealer. When they bought the property and erected the building, they put a double-check BFP down in that vault with the meter. A few years later, the city changed an ordinance that redefined their particular use to high-hazard. When they sought a permit to upgrade the HVAC system, the city forced them to change to an RPZ. After constructing this huge vault, they now leave it almost empty with an RPZ in an enclosure perched on top of it. They paid three times for a single solution. Now this enclosure – This is what happens all too often when tenants or hazard thresholds change in areas where no guidelines or Standard Details exist.
  30. Today we’ll take a look at the questions designers and plans-review personnel are asking to determine proper application of containment backflow prevention Why outside? (OR asked another way, Why not inside?) I’ll show you the 2 critically important reasons why these systems are best placed outside. 2. Once that’s laid out, I’ll take you through the 5 reasons more and more water authorities are deciding that subterranean vault installation is too dangerous, too expensive, and too much of a risk burden to be allowed to continue. 3. Where is the momentum (and what does it tell us about the future) for containment BP systems? 4. Survey
  31. What is going on in the engineering community and with water jurisdictions that is driving change to get these installations into a safer environment? This past fall at the Bi-Annual ASPE National conference, one of the learning workshops had this title. The Board President of the Central Texas ASPE, Chris Phillips, a plumbing engineer at Jacobs in SAT contacted me and asked me to deliver the message.
  32. All these cities have made changes whereby RPZ use has been expanded either by lowering or eliminating the hazard threshold for use on domestic water lines in the past 5 years.
  33. Let’s look briefly at the new solutions emerging to deal with the need for less visual impact on property fronts that owners so desperately desire. * This is the industry standard Watts 709 DCDA. It is housed by our Model 1000-AL. It’s 12 feet long and stands 6’8” tall. * This is the Wilkins 450DA. It is housed in our Model 1000TLU880M. It’s 5’4” square and stands just 5’2” tall. same plumbing solution and make a much smaller visual footprint.
  34. So if you are a water authority contemplating an expanded use of aboveground enclosures, you are not alone. In fact, you’ve zeroed in on the central component to the nation’s emerging best practices and the proper application of containment backflow preventer systems. 1 Because of the Strong migration toward RPZs nationwide, proper application means more enclosures. 2 Because the High hazard threshold is changing or being eliminated all over the country, you’ll see more enclosures; 3 Because the owners and designer’s risk is lower with outdoor RPZs, you’ll see more enclosures; 4 Because of a growing list of available standard details for aboveground installations, you’ll see more enclosures; 5 Because it’s considered the best insurance policy against professional liability claims, you’ll see more enclosures.
  35. If you have any questions or comments, please email me at randy@safe-t-cover.com or phone me at 800-245-6333.