SlideShare uma empresa Scribd logo
1 de 44
Baixar para ler offline
Presentation to the 2016 ASPE
Convention & Expo
Let the Civil Designer Deal with the
Containment Backflow Preventers
The water engineering community has been
struggling with new professional liability risk
involving the location of premise isolation
backflow preventer systems; Not because of new
design practices, but because of new information
about the old practices. There has been a slow
trickle of warnings for years, but in the past 3
years important organizations and industry
leaders have added new warnings with much
stronger language that not only change
recognized best practices, but actually challenge
the fitness and safety of older placement
methods altogether.
• Water Districts NEED
Containment in order to
fulfill their EPA
mandate; and
Bottom Line:
“…. 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.…”
• Containment design details and specifications need to be provided to civil
engineers because of their general familiarity with standard details and
their comparable lack of familiarity with backflow systems.
AWWA’s preamble to the Cross Connection Control Manual,
published by EPA
Introduction
1. Design differences DC vs. RPZ; Why it matters
2. Current placement practices
3. The real flood risks of indoor RPZs
4. The real cost of indoor containment
5. The explosive growth of the RPZ and how it impacts M/P Engineers
6. How do we encourage transitioning this task to the civil engineering discipline?
Today We’ll Cover…
Let the Civil Designer Deal with the Backflow
System
2 types of backflow Preventers:
DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ
Double-Check Valve
Assemble, DC or DCDA
Reduced Pressure Zone
Valve Assembly, RP RPDA
A designer may specify one of two types of BFPs for premise isolation. Up until
recently, the decision for which assembly to specify was based solely on the
perceived hazard to the waste water system created by the processes of the end
user. High hazard (better named, high waste-hazard) uses were required to utilize an
RPZ. Uses that did not pose a risk to the waste water were allowed to use a DC.
For example, a medical facility or a chemical plant triggered the requirement for an
RPZ while an office or simple retail user would be allowed to use a DC or, depending
on the municipality, no premise isolation system at all.
1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
DC: Low hazard?
Public
(Supply)
side
Property
(Private)
side
Flow
DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ
The Double-check assembly was developed in the 1950s for the fire industry. And for
many years it was regarded as a satisfactory solution. The design is simple. Any time
system-water pressure on the property (private) side exceeds the system pressure on the
city (public) side, two redundant check valves close and water stops flowing backwards.
But no remedy exists in the event of a malfunction of the valve closures or if debris in the
water line causes the valves to not close completely. Additionally, The DC is a closed, or
blind system making detection of any failure impossible without a field test performed by
a licensed tester. Today, millions of DCs are in service that may have failed. When a Florida
city began its annual testing program in 2010, it found 52% of the valves in service had
failed with no way to determine how long they had been inoperable.
1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ
RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water
Flow
Property
(Private)
side
Public
(Supply)
side
The RPZ emerged in the 1970s as a remedy to the double-check limitations. Like the DC, it
incorporates 2 redundant check valves. But unlike the DC, the RPZ incorporates a
hydraulically operated differential relief valve directly beneath the # 1 check valve. It is
this relief valve’s placement (along with the universal laws of hydraulics) that make this a
fail-safe solution for water purveyors. As elegant as the design is, it comes at a cost. And
that cost is the surrounding area.
1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
As the DC reveals, valves fail. But when they fail in an
RPZ, the assembly is designed to create a deluge
event directly under the assembly so that no
contaminated water returns to the public water
supply. Because of the danger of contamination, no
water from the relief valve may be piped directly
from the assembly. It must release into the
atmosphere away from any piping. Watch this short
video revealing an actual discharge.
Flow Stop
DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ
RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water
In a flow-stop situation the water
between the check valves will often
drain out the relief valve. Some think
that that event defines the limit of
what water can ever flow into a drain.
Not so.
1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
Loss of pressure
#2 valve
blocked
#2 valve
blocked
DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ
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!
RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water
1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
#2 Valve
blocked
#1 valve
Failure
#1 valve
Failure
Normal
delivery
pressure
DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ
Now consider a failure of the #1 check
valve. Under normal operating conditions,
this failure would go unnoticed. After all,
water is being called for by the user
through the opening of taps. The water
flows in undeterred.
But with this imbalance in the system,
changes in demand tend to rock the
remaining valves open and closed
sporadically.
RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water
Demand
1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
#1 Valve
failure
#1 valve
Failure
#1 valve
Failure
Blockage
relief
valve
Blockage
relief
valve
DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ
RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water
Demand
Normal
delivery
pressure
This creates the conditions for the “perfect
storm” scenario. The imbalance created by
the # 1 failure makes the relief valve more
prone to opening momentarily, allowing
debris to block the closure of that valve.
Under such conditions, a constant flow of
delivered water will begin to flow directly
out the relief valve. This reduces water
pressure for the user, but delivery will
continue.
1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
Blockage
Relief
Valve
#1 Valve
failure
DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ
No
demand
Normal
delivery
pressure
RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water
The real damage begins when the user
stops using water such as at the end of a
work day.
With the relief valve blocked open and the
# 1 valve inoperative, all the water that the
purveyor can provide will flow unabated
out the relief valve wherever it might be,
and continue until the water source is
interrupted.
This is the scenario that must be avoided:
the perfect storm.
1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ
RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water
This picture was tweeted last summer by a
Nashville backflow tester. He was called to
a multi-story office building on a Sunday to
inspect a “malfunctioning backflow
preventer”. By the time he completed his
service of the assembly, a small pebble was
all he recovered from the 8” RPZ in the
background.
1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ
RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water
This was the scene
when he arrived.
By the way, the RPZ
was working perfectly
before and after the
call, behaving precisely
as it was designed to.
1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
 Above ground in an enclosure
 Inside a building
 Inside a vault – Click here for more
3 options for backflow preventer placement
2. Placement Practices
 Inside a building
 Above ground in an enclosure – Click here for more
 Inside a vault
3 options for backflow preventer placement
2. Placement Practices
 Inside a building
 Above ground in an enclosure
 Inside a vault
3 options for backflow preventer placement
2. Placement Practices
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
1. Professional liability: indoor flooding
Here’s what the American Society of
Plumbing Engineers advise about indoor RPZs.
“Before an RPZ is located, consideration should be
given to both how much water will be discharged,
and where it will drain. Consideration must be given
to the drain system to assure the drainage system
can handle the load. If a drain is not capable of
accepting the flow, other choices as to the location
of the valve, such as outside in a heated enclosure,
should be made.”
-2006 ASPE Plumbing
Engineering Design Handbook, vol 2, p 70
3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
 Inside a building
3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
3 options for backflow preventer placement
This flood occurred in a hospital mechanical room causing over $1M in damage. You are
looking at two sides of one wall.
1. Professional liability: indoor flooding
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
On the left, we see that the sudden water flow and volume moved the wall into the next
room (right photo), which happened to be a telephone and low-voltage wiring room.
1. Professional liability: indoor flooding
3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
The insurer sought recovery from all the risk holders including the engineer, architect,
contractor, subcontractor, and even the most recent recorded tester; 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.
1. Professional liability: indoor flooding
3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
In times past, this event would have been seen as an unforeseeable casualty, a pipe
burst. But insurers have been listening to the next part of the discussion. This
commentary from experts changed everything.
1. Professional liability: indoor flooding
3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
So if an RPZ is designed to dump water, then drain
capacity is the issue. The chart on the right is from
the manufacturer of the BPA seen in the previous
flood photos. It illustrates the anticipated flow rate
from the relief valve at various pipe sizes and at
various pressures. Note that the assembly shown will
flow 375 GPM at 85 PSI. A 4” drain pipe with a 1%
fall rate evacuates clean water at a maximum 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.
1. Professional liability: indoor flooding
3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
An article published June 2013 in the
Chicago chapter of the American
Society of Plumbing Engineers written
by David DeBord, a former president of
that organization, and current
Education chair of the national ASPE,
states all these facts better than I can.
He uses the Manufacturer’s data
supplied by a different manufacturer,
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.
1. Professional liability: indoor flooding
3 .The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
He concludes that regarding
indoor RPZs…
1. Professional liability: indoor flooding
3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
2. Space allocation/Accessibility
The space provided for an indoor BPA is
routinely inadequate as provided by the
architect. That’s because giving up space that
would otherwise add value is being allocated
as non-revenue space. Non-revenue space is
the enemy of every development project.
The BPA pictured cost tens of thousands in
property value. Even a mere 3” indoor BPA will
cost a developer $6,000 to $9,000 more than
an outdoor installation in a heated enclosure.
4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs
Charlotte: 32.000 SF
Columbus: 36.000 SF
Suffolk Cty: 33.333 SF
Arlington: 32.000 SF
Average: 33.325 SF
Consider the average square footage required
for just a 3-inch indoor in-line backflow
preventer. To the right, four representative
cities are represented. The average required
space is 33.325 SF.
Assuming a discount rate of 9%, rent value of
$30 per foot annually, and a 25 year life, the
net present value of that space to the property
owner is $12, 156.48.
Arlington, TX: 32 SF
4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
2. Space allocation/Accessibility
Average: 33.325 SF
Annual Rent Value
(based on Class A Office
@ $30/sf)
$999.75
25-year Cash Flows
(based on 2.5% inflation)
$34,149.22
Net Present Value
(based on 9% discount
rate)
$12,156.48
Assuming a discount rate of 9%, rent value of
$30 per foot annually, and a 25 year life, the
net present value of that space to the property
owner is $12, 156.48.
4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
2. Space allocation/Accessibility
NPV:
Landlord has lost this amount of value
by placing CBPA inside.
$12,156.48
CONSIDER:
1.If space is recaptured for rental value, what will my alternative cost be?
2.Will placing the system outside cost more or less than $12,156.48?
3.If it’s less, then how much less? (I don’t like the look of a box outside.)
4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
2. Space allocation/Accessibility
Aboveground heated enclosure
for 3” BPA with heat.
Option A:
Use conventional model
e.i., Watts 957 NRS
Safe-T-Cover 300-AL-H
$3,266.00
72 X 38 X 22 = 60K CI
Option B:
Use new ”n-type” model
e.i., Watts 957N NRS
Safe-T-Cover 200SN-AL-H
$1,120.00
46 X 38 X 19 = 33K CI
4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
2. Space allocation/Accessibility
$1,000
$1,120
$1,800
$3,920
$3,266
$1,200
$1,800
$6,266
4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
2. Space allocation/Accessibility
Indoor
CBPA
$3,920.00
plus assembly
$6,266.00
plus assembly
$12,156.48
plus assembly
Owner’s Cost: 3” Domestic line
4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
2. Space allocation/Accessibility
“How much more value does my building have with the additional
rent?”
ANSWER:
Year Annual Rent*
1 $999.75
PropertyValue*
$10,289.09
5 $1,103.54 $11,357.23
10 $1,248.55 $12,849.67
15 $1,412.62 $14,538.22
20 $1,598.25 $16,448.66
25 $1,808.27 $18,610.15
* - Today’s dollars: Assumptions: Annual rent growth of 2.5%; 5% vacancy; 35% operating expenses;
capitalization rate of 6%.
Owner’s Property Value
4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs
 Inside a building
3 options for backflow preventer placement
2. Space allocation/Accessibility
No more DCs on
commercial or industrial
properties.
Chicagoland, IL
TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ
Elgin, October 2012
5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
Naperville, April 2013
Naperville already required RPZs on their commercial irrigation systems, but after
Elgin’s action, they too outlawed DCs, and in fact, extended mandatory RPZ use on
fire line systems as well.
TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ
Atlanta Area, GA
Roswell, August, 2014
Roswell detailed two methods of RPZ
placement, one indoors for small sizes,
and one outdoors for larger sizes.
The drawings for the indoor method
explicitly address drain system
requirements and force designers to
reconcile the flood rate risks with
specific drainage system capacities
5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ
Atlanta Area, GA
Roswell, August, 2014
The chart shows that unless the
designer is willing to install an 8”
drain system all the way to the
sewer inlet, he cannot utilize an
indoor solution for any pipe size
larger than 2 inches.
5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
And the outdoor method mandates an
enclosure that is ASSE-1060 compliant.
TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ
Delaware, June 2013
Columbus Area, OH
5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
North central Texas
Alpine
Bedford
Boerne
Carrollton
Cleburne
College Station
Denison
Farmington
Farris
Franklin
Grand Prairie
Haltom
Texarkana
Waco
Waskom
White Settlement
Addison
Arlington
Buda
Cedar Hill
Colleyville
Crowley
Denton
Duncanville
Fort Worth
Franklin
Gainesville
Highland Village
Midlothian
Roanoke
Round Rock
Saginaw
Same language added to muni code
TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ
5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
Fort Worth added this in 2010, since then many cities have added it as well.
TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ
Central VA
Lynchburg, 2008
Lynchburg has
required RPZs on all
non residential
connections for almost
a decade. This includes
domestic, irrigation,
and fire lines.
5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ
Mountain West
Denver, February, 2013
In 2013 Denver Water
added new standard
details for 3” and larger
RPZs to be installed
outdoors.
They also call for double
checks for public park
drinking fountains to be
installed above ground in
a heated enclosure.
5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
Seattle, WA
Raleigh, NC
Charlotte, VA
Austin, TX
Nashville, TN
Albuquerque, NM
Long Island, NY
Denver, CO
Las Vegas, NV
Lynchburg, VA
Columbus, OH
Chicago. IL
Forth Worth, TX Roswell, GA
Longview, WA
Arlington, TX
Gwinnett Cty, GA
Chesapeake, VA
Olympia, WA
Kent, WA
Franklin, TN
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. (These are the
cities we know of….)
TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ
5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
Consider the ‘worst case scenario’ of a
water volume discharge of a
containment backflow prevention,
namely, an uncontrolled discharge
caused by a failure of the #1 check
valve contemporaneous with the relief
valve being stuck or propped open by
debris. If there is no faucet demand
within the commercial premise, such
as over night, then this perfect storm
produces an unmitigated flow of all
available water through the relief valve
continuously. The management of this
sudden water deluge is a significant
hazard. As severe as the most severe
storm water runoff event.
Special Insert
This hazard is clearly work found within
the civil engineering discipline rather than
the plumbing engineering discipline.
Designing and specifying any outdoor
containment BPA – even if it is placed
within the jurisdictional boundaries of the
plumbing engineer, is asking for trouble.
Watch a video of an RPZ doing what it’s designed to do here.
A survey of 1869 civil and mechanical
engineers was conducted by Safe-T-
Cover and EnviroDesign Management
over a 22-month period ending in
Spring, 2016. The survey followed a
professional learning module
delivered by EnviroDesign and was
managed and tabulated by Benchmark
Email Services. Excluding delivery
failures, 1220 were delivered and
opened. The following 2 slides show
the questions in the short survey and
the responses.
6. How do we Encourage transition to Civil
Engineers
6. How do we Encourage transition to Civil
Engineers
1. Define your discipline. 2. The presentation added to my
knowledge
6. How do we Encourage transition to Civil
Engineers
3. The information causes me to
rethink my perspective on
containment backflow preventer
placement
4. The local water guidelines for
commercial and industrial
construction lack needed standard
details for above-ground backflow
preventer installation.

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

ACEA 2015 meter sizing and site backflow prevention
ACEA 2015 meter sizing and site backflow preventionACEA 2015 meter sizing and site backflow prevention
ACEA 2015 meter sizing and site backflow preventionBritt Jones
 
25 ways to screw up a lift station design - v.16
25 ways to screw up a lift station design - v.1625 ways to screw up a lift station design - v.16
25 ways to screw up a lift station design - v.16Brian Gongol
 
Product developement
Product developementProduct developement
Product developementHiran Gabriel
 
Edrvi webinar 021611
Edrvi webinar 021611Edrvi webinar 021611
Edrvi webinar 021611EDR
 
When is it time for recess? - v.04
When is it time for recess? - v.04When is it time for recess? - v.04
When is it time for recess? - v.04Brian Gongol
 
Improving the Availability of Lift Stations through Optimized Redundant / Bac...
Improving the Availability of Lift Stations through Optimized Redundant / Bac...Improving the Availability of Lift Stations through Optimized Redundant / Bac...
Improving the Availability of Lift Stations through Optimized Redundant / Bac...Vecoin
 
Final risk workshop Dec 2019
Final risk workshop Dec 2019Final risk workshop Dec 2019
Final risk workshop Dec 2019Sarah Younes
 

Mais procurados (10)

ACEA 2015 meter sizing and site backflow prevention
ACEA 2015 meter sizing and site backflow preventionACEA 2015 meter sizing and site backflow prevention
ACEA 2015 meter sizing and site backflow prevention
 
25 ways to screw up a lift station design - v.16
25 ways to screw up a lift station design - v.1625 ways to screw up a lift station design - v.16
25 ways to screw up a lift station design - v.16
 
Product developement
Product developementProduct developement
Product developement
 
Edrvi webinar 021611
Edrvi webinar 021611Edrvi webinar 021611
Edrvi webinar 021611
 
StormCon 2014
StormCon 2014StormCon 2014
StormCon 2014
 
When is it time for recess? - v.04
When is it time for recess? - v.04When is it time for recess? - v.04
When is it time for recess? - v.04
 
Hc3113741382
Hc3113741382Hc3113741382
Hc3113741382
 
Improving the Availability of Lift Stations through Optimized Redundant / Bac...
Improving the Availability of Lift Stations through Optimized Redundant / Bac...Improving the Availability of Lift Stations through Optimized Redundant / Bac...
Improving the Availability of Lift Stations through Optimized Redundant / Bac...
 
2009-02-17 Seminar - Hurricane Ike Houston Perspective
2009-02-17 Seminar - Hurricane Ike   Houston Perspective2009-02-17 Seminar - Hurricane Ike   Houston Perspective
2009-02-17 Seminar - Hurricane Ike Houston Perspective
 
Final risk workshop Dec 2019
Final risk workshop Dec 2019Final risk workshop Dec 2019
Final risk workshop Dec 2019
 

Semelhante a Backflow Prevention: Let the Civil Engineer Deal With It

Dual Plumbed Systems and Cross Connection Control (California Department of P...
Dual Plumbed Systems and Cross Connection Control (California Department of P...Dual Plumbed Systems and Cross Connection Control (California Department of P...
Dual Plumbed Systems and Cross Connection Control (California Department of P...San Diego County Water Authority
 
Drainage designmanual chapter11_energydissipators
Drainage designmanual chapter11_energydissipatorsDrainage designmanual chapter11_energydissipators
Drainage designmanual chapter11_energydissipatorsbamlaku mamo
 
Top 10 Cross-Connection Hazards Threatening Your Drinking Water
Top 10 Cross-Connection Hazards Threatening Your Drinking WaterTop 10 Cross-Connection Hazards Threatening Your Drinking Water
Top 10 Cross-Connection Hazards Threatening Your Drinking WaterHydroCorp
 
doc - Interdisciplinary Capstone Design
doc - Interdisciplinary Capstone Designdoc - Interdisciplinary Capstone Design
doc - Interdisciplinary Capstone Designbutest
 
Rainwater 201: The Next Level of Rainwater Harvesting
Rainwater 201: The Next Level of Rainwater HarvestingRainwater 201: The Next Level of Rainwater Harvesting
Rainwater 201: The Next Level of Rainwater HarvestingBrian Gregson
 
BUILDING SERVICES- water supply, plumbing.ppt
BUILDING SERVICES- water supply, plumbing.pptBUILDING SERVICES- water supply, plumbing.ppt
BUILDING SERVICES- water supply, plumbing.pptDr. Akshay Wayal
 
Lead Free Regulations Impact on Selection of Potable Water Valves
Lead Free Regulations Impact on Selection of Potable Water ValvesLead Free Regulations Impact on Selection of Potable Water Valves
Lead Free Regulations Impact on Selection of Potable Water ValvesIves Equipment
 
Pipefitter Research Paper
Pipefitter Research PaperPipefitter Research Paper
Pipefitter Research PaperMandy Hebert
 
Electronic device & circuit
Electronic device & circuitElectronic device & circuit
Electronic device & circuitriyadh8
 
Construction Observation Tips
Construction Observation TipsConstruction Observation Tips
Construction Observation Tipsncengineer
 
Wastewater Generation and Management in Underground Utility Vaults and Manholes
Wastewater Generation and Management in Underground Utility Vaults and ManholesWastewater Generation and Management in Underground Utility Vaults and Manholes
Wastewater Generation and Management in Underground Utility Vaults and ManholesC.I.Agent Solutions
 
Rain and Greywater
Rain and GreywaterRain and Greywater
Rain and Greywaterwirethehouse
 
BW-WhentoCleanAirCondensers-WhitePaper
BW-WhentoCleanAirCondensers-WhitePaperBW-WhentoCleanAirCondensers-WhitePaper
BW-WhentoCleanAirCondensers-WhitePaperDennis Miller
 
http://www.RaincycleSystems.com
http://www.RaincycleSystems.comhttp://www.RaincycleSystems.com
http://www.RaincycleSystems.comclaytoncolleran
 
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT UET LAHORE by envian
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT UET LAHORE by envianWATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT UET LAHORE by envian
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT UET LAHORE by envianMuhammad Usman
 
Presentation_ATECO_RES_New-ATECO
Presentation_ATECO_RES_New-ATECOPresentation_ATECO_RES_New-ATECO
Presentation_ATECO_RES_New-ATECOJGNW
 
PIPING DESIGN.pdf
PIPING DESIGN.pdfPIPING DESIGN.pdf
PIPING DESIGN.pdfeldoctol
 

Semelhante a Backflow Prevention: Let the Civil Engineer Deal With It (20)

Rainwater Harvesting Answer Book
Rainwater Harvesting Answer BookRainwater Harvesting Answer Book
Rainwater Harvesting Answer Book
 
Dual Plumbed Systems and Cross Connection Control (California Department of P...
Dual Plumbed Systems and Cross Connection Control (California Department of P...Dual Plumbed Systems and Cross Connection Control (California Department of P...
Dual Plumbed Systems and Cross Connection Control (California Department of P...
 
Drainage designmanual chapter11_energydissipators
Drainage designmanual chapter11_energydissipatorsDrainage designmanual chapter11_energydissipators
Drainage designmanual chapter11_energydissipators
 
Top 10 Cross-Connection Hazards Threatening Your Drinking Water
Top 10 Cross-Connection Hazards Threatening Your Drinking WaterTop 10 Cross-Connection Hazards Threatening Your Drinking Water
Top 10 Cross-Connection Hazards Threatening Your Drinking Water
 
Plumbing
PlumbingPlumbing
Plumbing
 
doc - Interdisciplinary Capstone Design
doc - Interdisciplinary Capstone Designdoc - Interdisciplinary Capstone Design
doc - Interdisciplinary Capstone Design
 
Rainwater 201: The Next Level of Rainwater Harvesting
Rainwater 201: The Next Level of Rainwater HarvestingRainwater 201: The Next Level of Rainwater Harvesting
Rainwater 201: The Next Level of Rainwater Harvesting
 
BUILDING SERVICES- water supply, plumbing.ppt
BUILDING SERVICES- water supply, plumbing.pptBUILDING SERVICES- water supply, plumbing.ppt
BUILDING SERVICES- water supply, plumbing.ppt
 
Lead Free Regulations Impact on Selection of Potable Water Valves
Lead Free Regulations Impact on Selection of Potable Water ValvesLead Free Regulations Impact on Selection of Potable Water Valves
Lead Free Regulations Impact on Selection of Potable Water Valves
 
Pipefitter Research Paper
Pipefitter Research PaperPipefitter Research Paper
Pipefitter Research Paper
 
Electronic device & circuit
Electronic device & circuitElectronic device & circuit
Electronic device & circuit
 
Construction Observation Tips
Construction Observation TipsConstruction Observation Tips
Construction Observation Tips
 
Wastewater Generation and Management in Underground Utility Vaults and Manholes
Wastewater Generation and Management in Underground Utility Vaults and ManholesWastewater Generation and Management in Underground Utility Vaults and Manholes
Wastewater Generation and Management in Underground Utility Vaults and Manholes
 
Rain and Greywater
Rain and GreywaterRain and Greywater
Rain and Greywater
 
BW-WhentoCleanAirCondensers-WhitePaper
BW-WhentoCleanAirCondensers-WhitePaperBW-WhentoCleanAirCondensers-WhitePaper
BW-WhentoCleanAirCondensers-WhitePaper
 
http://www.RaincycleSystems.com
http://www.RaincycleSystems.comhttp://www.RaincycleSystems.com
http://www.RaincycleSystems.com
 
Presentation - energy lose
Presentation - energy losePresentation - energy lose
Presentation - energy lose
 
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT UET LAHORE by envian
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT UET LAHORE by envianWATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT UET LAHORE by envian
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DESIGN REPORT UET LAHORE by envian
 
Presentation_ATECO_RES_New-ATECO
Presentation_ATECO_RES_New-ATECOPresentation_ATECO_RES_New-ATECO
Presentation_ATECO_RES_New-ATECO
 
PIPING DESIGN.pdf
PIPING DESIGN.pdfPIPING DESIGN.pdf
PIPING DESIGN.pdf
 

Último

ChatGPT-and-Generative-AI-Landscape Working of generative ai search
ChatGPT-and-Generative-AI-Landscape Working of generative ai searchChatGPT-and-Generative-AI-Landscape Working of generative ai search
ChatGPT-and-Generative-AI-Landscape Working of generative ai searchrohitcse52
 
Modelling Guide for Timber Structures - FPInnovations
Modelling Guide for Timber Structures - FPInnovationsModelling Guide for Timber Structures - FPInnovations
Modelling Guide for Timber Structures - FPInnovationsYusuf Yıldız
 
SATELITE COMMUNICATION UNIT 1 CEC352 REGULATION 2021 PPT BASICS OF SATELITE ....
SATELITE COMMUNICATION UNIT 1 CEC352 REGULATION 2021 PPT BASICS OF SATELITE ....SATELITE COMMUNICATION UNIT 1 CEC352 REGULATION 2021 PPT BASICS OF SATELITE ....
SATELITE COMMUNICATION UNIT 1 CEC352 REGULATION 2021 PPT BASICS OF SATELITE ....santhyamuthu1
 
Design of Clutches and Brakes in Design of Machine Elements.pptx
Design of Clutches and Brakes in Design of Machine Elements.pptxDesign of Clutches and Brakes in Design of Machine Elements.pptx
Design of Clutches and Brakes in Design of Machine Elements.pptxYogeshKumarKJMIT
 
Phase noise transfer functions.pptx
Phase noise transfer      functions.pptxPhase noise transfer      functions.pptx
Phase noise transfer functions.pptxSaiGouthamSunkara
 
دليل تجارب الاسفلت المختبرية - Asphalt Experiments Guide Laboratory
دليل تجارب الاسفلت المختبرية - Asphalt Experiments Guide Laboratoryدليل تجارب الاسفلت المختبرية - Asphalt Experiments Guide Laboratory
دليل تجارب الاسفلت المختبرية - Asphalt Experiments Guide LaboratoryBahzad5
 
Guardians and Glitches: Navigating the Duality of Gen AI in AppSec
Guardians and Glitches: Navigating the Duality of Gen AI in AppSecGuardians and Glitches: Navigating the Duality of Gen AI in AppSec
Guardians and Glitches: Navigating the Duality of Gen AI in AppSecTrupti Shiralkar, CISSP
 
How to Write a Good Scientific Paper.pdf
How to Write a Good Scientific Paper.pdfHow to Write a Good Scientific Paper.pdf
How to Write a Good Scientific Paper.pdfRedhwan Qasem Shaddad
 
Best-NO1 Best Rohani Amil In Lahore Kala Ilam In Lahore Kala Jadu Amil In Lah...
Best-NO1 Best Rohani Amil In Lahore Kala Ilam In Lahore Kala Jadu Amil In Lah...Best-NO1 Best Rohani Amil In Lahore Kala Ilam In Lahore Kala Jadu Amil In Lah...
Best-NO1 Best Rohani Amil In Lahore Kala Ilam In Lahore Kala Jadu Amil In Lah...Amil baba
 
Basic Principle of Electrochemical Sensor
Basic Principle of  Electrochemical SensorBasic Principle of  Electrochemical Sensor
Basic Principle of Electrochemical SensorTanvir Moin
 
Gender Bias in Engineer, Honors 203 Project
Gender Bias in Engineer, Honors 203 ProjectGender Bias in Engineer, Honors 203 Project
Gender Bias in Engineer, Honors 203 Projectreemakb03
 
Strategies of Urban Morphologyfor Improving Outdoor Thermal Comfort and Susta...
Strategies of Urban Morphologyfor Improving Outdoor Thermal Comfort and Susta...Strategies of Urban Morphologyfor Improving Outdoor Thermal Comfort and Susta...
Strategies of Urban Morphologyfor Improving Outdoor Thermal Comfort and Susta...amrabdallah9
 
Clutches and brkesSelect any 3 position random motion out of real world and d...
Clutches and brkesSelect any 3 position random motion out of real world and d...Clutches and brkesSelect any 3 position random motion out of real world and d...
Clutches and brkesSelect any 3 position random motion out of real world and d...sahb78428
 
SUMMER TRAINING REPORT ON BUILDING CONSTRUCTION.docx
SUMMER TRAINING REPORT ON BUILDING CONSTRUCTION.docxSUMMER TRAINING REPORT ON BUILDING CONSTRUCTION.docx
SUMMER TRAINING REPORT ON BUILDING CONSTRUCTION.docxNaveenVerma126
 
EPE3163_Hydro power stations_Unit2_Lect2.pptx
EPE3163_Hydro power stations_Unit2_Lect2.pptxEPE3163_Hydro power stations_Unit2_Lect2.pptx
EPE3163_Hydro power stations_Unit2_Lect2.pptxJoseeMusabyimana
 
sdfsadopkjpiosufoiasdoifjasldkjfl a asldkjflaskdjflkjsdsdf
sdfsadopkjpiosufoiasdoifjasldkjfl a asldkjflaskdjflkjsdsdfsdfsadopkjpiosufoiasdoifjasldkjfl a asldkjflaskdjflkjsdsdf
sdfsadopkjpiosufoiasdoifjasldkjfl a asldkjflaskdjflkjsdsdfJulia Kaye
 
Landsman converter for power factor improvement
Landsman converter for power factor improvementLandsman converter for power factor improvement
Landsman converter for power factor improvementVijayMuni2
 
ASME BPVC 2023 Section I para leer y entender
ASME BPVC 2023 Section I para leer y entenderASME BPVC 2023 Section I para leer y entender
ASME BPVC 2023 Section I para leer y entenderjuancarlos286641
 

Último (20)

ChatGPT-and-Generative-AI-Landscape Working of generative ai search
ChatGPT-and-Generative-AI-Landscape Working of generative ai searchChatGPT-and-Generative-AI-Landscape Working of generative ai search
ChatGPT-and-Generative-AI-Landscape Working of generative ai search
 
Modelling Guide for Timber Structures - FPInnovations
Modelling Guide for Timber Structures - FPInnovationsModelling Guide for Timber Structures - FPInnovations
Modelling Guide for Timber Structures - FPInnovations
 
SATELITE COMMUNICATION UNIT 1 CEC352 REGULATION 2021 PPT BASICS OF SATELITE ....
SATELITE COMMUNICATION UNIT 1 CEC352 REGULATION 2021 PPT BASICS OF SATELITE ....SATELITE COMMUNICATION UNIT 1 CEC352 REGULATION 2021 PPT BASICS OF SATELITE ....
SATELITE COMMUNICATION UNIT 1 CEC352 REGULATION 2021 PPT BASICS OF SATELITE ....
 
Design of Clutches and Brakes in Design of Machine Elements.pptx
Design of Clutches and Brakes in Design of Machine Elements.pptxDesign of Clutches and Brakes in Design of Machine Elements.pptx
Design of Clutches and Brakes in Design of Machine Elements.pptx
 
Lecture 2 .pdf
Lecture 2                           .pdfLecture 2                           .pdf
Lecture 2 .pdf
 
Phase noise transfer functions.pptx
Phase noise transfer      functions.pptxPhase noise transfer      functions.pptx
Phase noise transfer functions.pptx
 
دليل تجارب الاسفلت المختبرية - Asphalt Experiments Guide Laboratory
دليل تجارب الاسفلت المختبرية - Asphalt Experiments Guide Laboratoryدليل تجارب الاسفلت المختبرية - Asphalt Experiments Guide Laboratory
دليل تجارب الاسفلت المختبرية - Asphalt Experiments Guide Laboratory
 
Guardians and Glitches: Navigating the Duality of Gen AI in AppSec
Guardians and Glitches: Navigating the Duality of Gen AI in AppSecGuardians and Glitches: Navigating the Duality of Gen AI in AppSec
Guardians and Glitches: Navigating the Duality of Gen AI in AppSec
 
How to Write a Good Scientific Paper.pdf
How to Write a Good Scientific Paper.pdfHow to Write a Good Scientific Paper.pdf
How to Write a Good Scientific Paper.pdf
 
Best-NO1 Best Rohani Amil In Lahore Kala Ilam In Lahore Kala Jadu Amil In Lah...
Best-NO1 Best Rohani Amil In Lahore Kala Ilam In Lahore Kala Jadu Amil In Lah...Best-NO1 Best Rohani Amil In Lahore Kala Ilam In Lahore Kala Jadu Amil In Lah...
Best-NO1 Best Rohani Amil In Lahore Kala Ilam In Lahore Kala Jadu Amil In Lah...
 
Basic Principle of Electrochemical Sensor
Basic Principle of  Electrochemical SensorBasic Principle of  Electrochemical Sensor
Basic Principle of Electrochemical Sensor
 
Gender Bias in Engineer, Honors 203 Project
Gender Bias in Engineer, Honors 203 ProjectGender Bias in Engineer, Honors 203 Project
Gender Bias in Engineer, Honors 203 Project
 
Strategies of Urban Morphologyfor Improving Outdoor Thermal Comfort and Susta...
Strategies of Urban Morphologyfor Improving Outdoor Thermal Comfort and Susta...Strategies of Urban Morphologyfor Improving Outdoor Thermal Comfort and Susta...
Strategies of Urban Morphologyfor Improving Outdoor Thermal Comfort and Susta...
 
Lecture 4 .pdf
Lecture 4                              .pdfLecture 4                              .pdf
Lecture 4 .pdf
 
Clutches and brkesSelect any 3 position random motion out of real world and d...
Clutches and brkesSelect any 3 position random motion out of real world and d...Clutches and brkesSelect any 3 position random motion out of real world and d...
Clutches and brkesSelect any 3 position random motion out of real world and d...
 
SUMMER TRAINING REPORT ON BUILDING CONSTRUCTION.docx
SUMMER TRAINING REPORT ON BUILDING CONSTRUCTION.docxSUMMER TRAINING REPORT ON BUILDING CONSTRUCTION.docx
SUMMER TRAINING REPORT ON BUILDING CONSTRUCTION.docx
 
EPE3163_Hydro power stations_Unit2_Lect2.pptx
EPE3163_Hydro power stations_Unit2_Lect2.pptxEPE3163_Hydro power stations_Unit2_Lect2.pptx
EPE3163_Hydro power stations_Unit2_Lect2.pptx
 
sdfsadopkjpiosufoiasdoifjasldkjfl a asldkjflaskdjflkjsdsdf
sdfsadopkjpiosufoiasdoifjasldkjfl a asldkjflaskdjflkjsdsdfsdfsadopkjpiosufoiasdoifjasldkjfl a asldkjflaskdjflkjsdsdf
sdfsadopkjpiosufoiasdoifjasldkjfl a asldkjflaskdjflkjsdsdf
 
Landsman converter for power factor improvement
Landsman converter for power factor improvementLandsman converter for power factor improvement
Landsman converter for power factor improvement
 
ASME BPVC 2023 Section I para leer y entender
ASME BPVC 2023 Section I para leer y entenderASME BPVC 2023 Section I para leer y entender
ASME BPVC 2023 Section I para leer y entender
 

Backflow Prevention: Let the Civil Engineer Deal With It

  • 1. Presentation to the 2016 ASPE Convention & Expo Let the Civil Designer Deal with the Containment Backflow Preventers The water engineering community has been struggling with new professional liability risk involving the location of premise isolation backflow preventer systems; Not because of new design practices, but because of new information about the old practices. There has been a slow trickle of warnings for years, but in the past 3 years important organizations and industry leaders have added new warnings with much stronger language that not only change recognized best practices, but actually challenge the fitness and safety of older placement methods altogether.
  • 2. • Water Districts NEED Containment in order to fulfill their EPA mandate; and Bottom Line: “…. 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.…” • Containment design details and specifications need to be provided to civil engineers because of their general familiarity with standard details and their comparable lack of familiarity with backflow systems. AWWA’s preamble to the Cross Connection Control Manual, published by EPA Introduction
  • 3. 1. Design differences DC vs. RPZ; Why it matters 2. Current placement practices 3. The real flood risks of indoor RPZs 4. The real cost of indoor containment 5. The explosive growth of the RPZ and how it impacts M/P Engineers 6. How do we encourage transitioning this task to the civil engineering discipline? Today We’ll Cover… Let the Civil Designer Deal with the Backflow System
  • 4. 2 types of backflow Preventers: DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ Double-Check Valve Assemble, DC or DCDA Reduced Pressure Zone Valve Assembly, RP RPDA A designer may specify one of two types of BFPs for premise isolation. Up until recently, the decision for which assembly to specify was based solely on the perceived hazard to the waste water system created by the processes of the end user. High hazard (better named, high waste-hazard) uses were required to utilize an RPZ. Uses that did not pose a risk to the waste water were allowed to use a DC. For example, a medical facility or a chemical plant triggered the requirement for an RPZ while an office or simple retail user would be allowed to use a DC or, depending on the municipality, no premise isolation system at all. 1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
  • 5. DC: Low hazard? Public (Supply) side Property (Private) side Flow DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ The Double-check assembly was developed in the 1950s for the fire industry. And for many years it was regarded as a satisfactory solution. The design is simple. Any time system-water pressure on the property (private) side exceeds the system pressure on the city (public) side, two redundant check valves close and water stops flowing backwards. But no remedy exists in the event of a malfunction of the valve closures or if debris in the water line causes the valves to not close completely. Additionally, The DC is a closed, or blind system making detection of any failure impossible without a field test performed by a licensed tester. Today, millions of DCs are in service that may have failed. When a Florida city began its annual testing program in 2010, it found 52% of the valves in service had failed with no way to determine how long they had been inoperable. 1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
  • 6. DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water Flow Property (Private) side Public (Supply) side The RPZ emerged in the 1970s as a remedy to the double-check limitations. Like the DC, it incorporates 2 redundant check valves. But unlike the DC, the RPZ incorporates a hydraulically operated differential relief valve directly beneath the # 1 check valve. It is this relief valve’s placement (along with the universal laws of hydraulics) that make this a fail-safe solution for water purveyors. As elegant as the design is, it comes at a cost. And that cost is the surrounding area. 1. Design Differences (and why it matters) As the DC reveals, valves fail. But when they fail in an RPZ, the assembly is designed to create a deluge event directly under the assembly so that no contaminated water returns to the public water supply. Because of the danger of contamination, no water from the relief valve may be piped directly from the assembly. It must release into the atmosphere away from any piping. Watch this short video revealing an actual discharge.
  • 7. Flow Stop DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water In a flow-stop situation the water between the check valves will often drain out the relief valve. Some think that that event defines the limit of what water can ever flow into a drain. Not so. 1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
  • 8. Loss of pressure #2 valve blocked #2 valve blocked DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ 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! RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water 1. Design Differences (and why it matters) #2 Valve blocked
  • 9. #1 valve Failure #1 valve Failure Normal delivery pressure DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ Now consider a failure of the #1 check valve. Under normal operating conditions, this failure would go unnoticed. After all, water is being called for by the user through the opening of taps. The water flows in undeterred. But with this imbalance in the system, changes in demand tend to rock the remaining valves open and closed sporadically. RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water Demand 1. Design Differences (and why it matters) #1 Valve failure
  • 10. #1 valve Failure #1 valve Failure Blockage relief valve Blockage relief valve DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water Demand Normal delivery pressure This creates the conditions for the “perfect storm” scenario. The imbalance created by the # 1 failure makes the relief valve more prone to opening momentarily, allowing debris to block the closure of that valve. Under such conditions, a constant flow of delivered water will begin to flow directly out the relief valve. This reduces water pressure for the user, but delivery will continue. 1. Design Differences (and why it matters) Blockage Relief Valve #1 Valve failure
  • 11. DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ No demand Normal delivery pressure RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water The real damage begins when the user stops using water such as at the end of a work day. With the relief valve blocked open and the # 1 valve inoperative, all the water that the purveyor can provide will flow unabated out the relief valve wherever it might be, and continue until the water source is interrupted. This is the scenario that must be avoided: the perfect storm. 1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
  • 12. DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water This picture was tweeted last summer by a Nashville backflow tester. He was called to a multi-story office building on a Sunday to inspect a “malfunctioning backflow preventer”. By the time he completed his service of the assembly, a small pebble was all he recovered from the 8” RPZ in the background. 1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
  • 13. DesigndifferencesDCvs.RPZ RPZ: Fail-safe against returning water This was the scene when he arrived. By the way, the RPZ was working perfectly before and after the call, behaving precisely as it was designed to. 1. Design Differences (and why it matters)
  • 14.  Above ground in an enclosure  Inside a building  Inside a vault – Click here for more 3 options for backflow preventer placement 2. Placement Practices
  • 15.  Inside a building  Above ground in an enclosure – Click here for more  Inside a vault 3 options for backflow preventer placement 2. Placement Practices
  • 16.  Inside a building  Above ground in an enclosure  Inside a vault 3 options for backflow preventer placement 2. Placement Practices
  • 17.  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement 1. Professional liability: indoor flooding Here’s what the American Society of Plumbing Engineers advise about indoor RPZs. “Before an RPZ is located, consideration should be given to both how much water will be discharged, and where it will drain. Consideration must be given to the drain system to assure the drainage system can handle the load. If a drain is not capable of accepting the flow, other choices as to the location of the valve, such as outside in a heated enclosure, should be made.” -2006 ASPE Plumbing Engineering Design Handbook, vol 2, p 70 3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
  • 18.  Inside a building 3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs 3 options for backflow preventer placement This flood occurred in a hospital mechanical room causing over $1M in damage. You are looking at two sides of one wall. 1. Professional liability: indoor flooding
  • 19.  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement On the left, we see that the sudden water flow and volume moved the wall into the next room (right photo), which happened to be a telephone and low-voltage wiring room. 1. Professional liability: indoor flooding 3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
  • 20.  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement The insurer sought recovery from all the risk holders including the engineer, architect, contractor, subcontractor, and even the most recent recorded tester; 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. 1. Professional liability: indoor flooding 3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
  • 21.  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement In times past, this event would have been seen as an unforeseeable casualty, a pipe burst. But insurers have been listening to the next part of the discussion. This commentary from experts changed everything. 1. Professional liability: indoor flooding 3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
  • 22.  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement So if an RPZ is designed to dump water, then drain capacity is the issue. The chart on the right is from the manufacturer of the BPA seen in the previous flood photos. It illustrates the anticipated flow rate from the relief valve at various pipe sizes and at various pressures. Note that the assembly shown will flow 375 GPM at 85 PSI. A 4” drain pipe with a 1% fall rate evacuates clean water at a maximum 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. 1. Professional liability: indoor flooding 3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
  • 23.  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement An article published June 2013 in the Chicago chapter of the American Society of Plumbing Engineers written by David DeBord, a former president of that organization, and current Education chair of the national ASPE, states all these facts better than I can. He uses the Manufacturer’s data supplied by a different manufacturer, 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. 1. Professional liability: indoor flooding 3 .The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
  • 24.  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement He concludes that regarding indoor RPZs… 1. Professional liability: indoor flooding 3. The Real Flood Risks of indoor RPZs
  • 25.  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement 2. Space allocation/Accessibility The space provided for an indoor BPA is routinely inadequate as provided by the architect. That’s because giving up space that would otherwise add value is being allocated as non-revenue space. Non-revenue space is the enemy of every development project. The BPA pictured cost tens of thousands in property value. Even a mere 3” indoor BPA will cost a developer $6,000 to $9,000 more than an outdoor installation in a heated enclosure. 4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs
  • 26. Charlotte: 32.000 SF Columbus: 36.000 SF Suffolk Cty: 33.333 SF Arlington: 32.000 SF Average: 33.325 SF Consider the average square footage required for just a 3-inch indoor in-line backflow preventer. To the right, four representative cities are represented. The average required space is 33.325 SF. Assuming a discount rate of 9%, rent value of $30 per foot annually, and a 25 year life, the net present value of that space to the property owner is $12, 156.48. Arlington, TX: 32 SF 4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement 2. Space allocation/Accessibility
  • 27. Average: 33.325 SF Annual Rent Value (based on Class A Office @ $30/sf) $999.75 25-year Cash Flows (based on 2.5% inflation) $34,149.22 Net Present Value (based on 9% discount rate) $12,156.48 Assuming a discount rate of 9%, rent value of $30 per foot annually, and a 25 year life, the net present value of that space to the property owner is $12, 156.48. 4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement 2. Space allocation/Accessibility
  • 28. NPV: Landlord has lost this amount of value by placing CBPA inside. $12,156.48 CONSIDER: 1.If space is recaptured for rental value, what will my alternative cost be? 2.Will placing the system outside cost more or less than $12,156.48? 3.If it’s less, then how much less? (I don’t like the look of a box outside.) 4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement 2. Space allocation/Accessibility
  • 29. Aboveground heated enclosure for 3” BPA with heat. Option A: Use conventional model e.i., Watts 957 NRS Safe-T-Cover 300-AL-H $3,266.00 72 X 38 X 22 = 60K CI Option B: Use new ”n-type” model e.i., Watts 957N NRS Safe-T-Cover 200SN-AL-H $1,120.00 46 X 38 X 19 = 33K CI 4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement 2. Space allocation/Accessibility
  • 30. $1,000 $1,120 $1,800 $3,920 $3,266 $1,200 $1,800 $6,266 4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement 2. Space allocation/Accessibility
  • 31. Indoor CBPA $3,920.00 plus assembly $6,266.00 plus assembly $12,156.48 plus assembly Owner’s Cost: 3” Domestic line 4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement 2. Space allocation/Accessibility
  • 32. “How much more value does my building have with the additional rent?” ANSWER: Year Annual Rent* 1 $999.75 PropertyValue* $10,289.09 5 $1,103.54 $11,357.23 10 $1,248.55 $12,849.67 15 $1,412.62 $14,538.22 20 $1,598.25 $16,448.66 25 $1,808.27 $18,610.15 * - Today’s dollars: Assumptions: Annual rent growth of 2.5%; 5% vacancy; 35% operating expenses; capitalization rate of 6%. Owner’s Property Value 4. The Real Cost of Indoor BPAs  Inside a building 3 options for backflow preventer placement 2. Space allocation/Accessibility
  • 33. No more DCs on commercial or industrial properties. Chicagoland, IL TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ Elgin, October 2012 5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ Naperville, April 2013 Naperville already required RPZs on their commercial irrigation systems, but after Elgin’s action, they too outlawed DCs, and in fact, extended mandatory RPZ use on fire line systems as well.
  • 34. TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ Atlanta Area, GA Roswell, August, 2014 Roswell detailed two methods of RPZ placement, one indoors for small sizes, and one outdoors for larger sizes. The drawings for the indoor method explicitly address drain system requirements and force designers to reconcile the flood rate risks with specific drainage system capacities 5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
  • 35. TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ Atlanta Area, GA Roswell, August, 2014 The chart shows that unless the designer is willing to install an 8” drain system all the way to the sewer inlet, he cannot utilize an indoor solution for any pipe size larger than 2 inches. 5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ And the outdoor method mandates an enclosure that is ASSE-1060 compliant.
  • 36. TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ Delaware, June 2013 Columbus Area, OH 5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
  • 37. North central Texas Alpine Bedford Boerne Carrollton Cleburne College Station Denison Farmington Farris Franklin Grand Prairie Haltom Texarkana Waco Waskom White Settlement Addison Arlington Buda Cedar Hill Colleyville Crowley Denton Duncanville Fort Worth Franklin Gainesville Highland Village Midlothian Roanoke Round Rock Saginaw Same language added to muni code TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ 5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ Fort Worth added this in 2010, since then many cities have added it as well.
  • 38. TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ Central VA Lynchburg, 2008 Lynchburg has required RPZs on all non residential connections for almost a decade. This includes domestic, irrigation, and fire lines. 5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
  • 39. TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ Mountain West Denver, February, 2013 In 2013 Denver Water added new standard details for 3” and larger RPZs to be installed outdoors. They also call for double checks for public park drinking fountains to be installed above ground in a heated enclosure. 5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
  • 40. Seattle, WA Raleigh, NC Charlotte, VA Austin, TX Nashville, TN Albuquerque, NM Long Island, NY Denver, CO Las Vegas, NV Lynchburg, VA Columbus, OH Chicago. IL Forth Worth, TX Roswell, GA Longview, WA Arlington, TX Gwinnett Cty, GA Chesapeake, VA Olympia, WA Kent, WA Franklin, TN 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. (These are the cities we know of….) TheexplosivegrowthoftheRPZ 5. The Explosive Growth of the RPZ
  • 41. Consider the ‘worst case scenario’ of a water volume discharge of a containment backflow prevention, namely, an uncontrolled discharge caused by a failure of the #1 check valve contemporaneous with the relief valve being stuck or propped open by debris. If there is no faucet demand within the commercial premise, such as over night, then this perfect storm produces an unmitigated flow of all available water through the relief valve continuously. The management of this sudden water deluge is a significant hazard. As severe as the most severe storm water runoff event. Special Insert This hazard is clearly work found within the civil engineering discipline rather than the plumbing engineering discipline. Designing and specifying any outdoor containment BPA – even if it is placed within the jurisdictional boundaries of the plumbing engineer, is asking for trouble. Watch a video of an RPZ doing what it’s designed to do here.
  • 42. A survey of 1869 civil and mechanical engineers was conducted by Safe-T- Cover and EnviroDesign Management over a 22-month period ending in Spring, 2016. The survey followed a professional learning module delivered by EnviroDesign and was managed and tabulated by Benchmark Email Services. Excluding delivery failures, 1220 were delivered and opened. The following 2 slides show the questions in the short survey and the responses. 6. How do we Encourage transition to Civil Engineers
  • 43. 6. How do we Encourage transition to Civil Engineers 1. Define your discipline. 2. The presentation added to my knowledge
  • 44. 6. How do we Encourage transition to Civil Engineers 3. The information causes me to rethink my perspective on containment backflow preventer placement 4. The local water guidelines for commercial and industrial construction lack needed standard details for above-ground backflow preventer installation.
  • 45.  Develop a firm-level policy  ASPE local chapter dialog with local water purveyor  Encourage best practices learning  Publish standard details and drawings consistent with best practices 6. How do we Encourage transition to Civil Engineers
  • 46.  Plumbing engineers are facing new liability risks from insurance carriers, revealed by new warnings and commentary from industry leadership regarding indoor containment RPZs.  Because of the need for pure water in the public water supply and the undetectable nature of the DCs, purveyors are demanding more RPZs and ignoring the legacy hazard guidance.  RPZs are designed to engulf the immediate surrounding area.  Indoor placement of 3” & larger RPZs adds irrational risk for PO & designer.  Placing the CBPA inside costs PO $000s more than outside.  The need to address sudden flood water flows disqualifies MEP from CBPA Design.  Your local water district must be encouraged to adopt new details and guidelines that promote best practices and adoption by CEs. Take-Aways

Notas do Editor

  1. Backflow prevention at the containment or premise isolation level is controversial in plumbing circles. The Isolation doctrine asserts that we can take care of any cross connection contamination risks by enforcing the plumbing code. Simple as that. The Containment advocates, namely, the AWWA, say, no, that’s not good enough because of unknown changes to individual plumbing systems after the C of O is issued. The Good news is I AM NOT HERE TO SETTLE THE ISSUE! Instead, knowing that these doctrines exist whether we like it or not, I am here to offer some guidance: because the only mistake you can make if you find yourself in a district that requires a containment system is to treat it as another indoor plumbing fixture.
  2. The bottom line: Water districts need premise isolation, and Premise isolation design specifications need to be provided for civil engineers.
  3. Today we’ll cover Design differences DC vs. RPZ; Why it matters Current placement practices and the problems with each The real flood risks of indoor RPZs? The real cost of indoor containment? The explosive growth of the RPZ and how it impacts M/P Es What are the “Best practice” examples around the U.S. for containment BPAs? How do we encourage transitioning this task to the civil engineering discipline?
  4. But now, many purveyors are requiring RPZs on all premise isolation systems. Moreover, as the system designer, a designer may choose to specify an RPZ regardless of the minimum requirement named in the local code. There is no penalty for providing the higher degree of protection.
  5. The Double-check assembly- developed 1950s, works well. Any time pressure on the property (downstream) side exceeds pressure on the city (public) side, - valves close and water stops flowing backwards. Keep in mind, no remedy exists in the event of malfunction of the valve closure or if debris in the water line causes the valves to not close completely.
  6. The Reduced Pressure Zone Assembly Consists of 2 independently operating check valves just like the Double check plus a hydraulically operated differential relief valve located below the first check valve. This hydraulic valve and it’s placement, makes the RPZ virtually fail-safe.
  7. Its really quite elegant, but it comes at a cost to area around the device. * When a Back-siphon event occurs, both check valves close. At that moment, THE RELIEF VALVE will open every time and evacuate the water between the valves. Some think that that event defines the limit of what water can ever flow into a drain. Not so.
  8. 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.
  9. Failure of # 1. undetected in normal conditions.
  10. Faulire of #1 PLUS Relief valve blockage:
  11. * This picture was tweeted this summer by a Nashville backflow tester. (READ)
  12. There are three options for backflow preventer placement. 3 possibilities, all three are widely practiced.
  13. There are three options for backflow preventer placement. 3 possibilities, all three are widely practiced.
  14. There are three options for backflow preventer placement. 3 possibilities, all three are widely practiced.
  15. There are three options for backflow preventer placement. 3 possibilities, all three are widely practiced.
  16. There are three options for backflow preventer placement. 3 possibilities, all three are widely practiced.
  17. There are three options for backflow preventer placement. 3 possibilities, all three are widely practiced.
  18. There are three options for backflow preventer placement. 3 possibilities, all three are widely practiced.
  19. There are three options for backflow preventer placement. 3 possibilities, all three are widely practiced.
  20. 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)
  21. 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)
  22. 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)
  23. There are three options for backflow preventer placement. 3 possibilities, all three are widely practiced.
  24. the average floor area required for a conventional 3” backflow preventer is 33.325 SF.
  25. Assuming a discount rate of 9%, rent value of $30 per foot annually, and a 25 year life, the net present value of that space to your client is $12, 156.48.
  26. Cost of an enclosure, 2 options: Option 1: conventional, “in-line” assembly= $3,266 Option 2: N-type assembly=$1,100.
  27. Costs are $3,920 and $6,266 respectively.
  28. So the answer to the question is absolutely not: The owner is extremely persuaded to move this thing outside and add additional rent revenue to the enterprise. Moreover, there are a few scenarios that compound this cost differential. It is the likelihood that either of two future events will require the assembly to be upgraded to an RPZ – an outcome that is becoming quite common, and will cost your client thousands of dollars in retrofit expense plus the continued lost opportunity cost from an oversized mechanical room because either, the tenancy will change from low hazard to high hazard through the normal leasing and re-leasing process; or the purveyor will change its definition of what constitutes ‘high hazard’ and your now low hazard user will be re-classified as a high hazard user at a later time.
  29. So what’s happening around the country that might help us understand where all this is going? * We’ve been watching Northern Illinois. More specifically, the 7 most populous cities around Chicago. * It all started in the fall of 2012 with Elgin. On October 24, 2012, they amended their domestic water service requirements as follows: (READ) *A few weeks later, the city of Chicago amended their fire line guidelines as follows: READ * Not to be left behind, in January of 2013 Naperville saw Elgin and raised them one, amending their guidelines to require RPZs on all commercial and and multi-residential new construction for each service, Fire, irrigation, and domestic.
  30. Within the Central Ohio area, Columbus has articulated a rational middle-ground position for getting Backflow preventers out of harm’s way. Recognizing that drain capacities for small sized RPZs CAN be accommodated with a typical 4” drain system, they detailed two methods of RPZ placement, one indoors for small RPZs, and one outdoors for larger sizes. * The drawings for the indoor method explicitly address drain system requirements and force designers to reconcile the flood rate risks with specific drainage system capacities * And the outdoor method mandates an enclosure that is ASSE-1060 compliant.
  31. Within the Central Ohio area, Columbus has articulated a rational middle-ground position for getting Backflow preventers out of harm’s way. Recognizing that drain capacities for small sized RPZs CAN be accommodated with a typical 4” drain system, they detailed two methods of RPZ placement, one indoors for small RPZs, and one outdoors for larger sizes. * The drawings for the indoor method explicitly address drain system requirements and force designers to reconcile the flood rate risks with specific drainage system capacities * And the outdoor method mandates an enclosure that is ASSE-1060 compliant.
  32. Delaware, Ohio. In the 2013 release of their Infrastructure design guide, they now mandate RPZs in outdoor enclosures on all commercial, industrial, and institutional water lines.
  33. Fort Worth, TX. Just a few months ago, Fort Worth updated their Design Standards Manual. Within it, they’ve defined what we’re calling the Tenant Provision. [READ]
  34. In Central Virginia, the city of Lynchburg was one of the earliest adopters of the current trend toward RPZs. In 2008, they amended their construction guidelines as follows: [READ]
  35. In the Mountain West, Denver, Colorado has long had the reputation of being a leader in infrastructure quality: In 2012 and 2013, Denver Water, one of the nation’s largest water purveyors, added specifications and drawings for above ground backflow preventer enclosures to their standard details. They make specific recommendations about 3” and larger RPZs and even small double check backflow preventers being deployed to aboveground enclosures.
  36. 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.
  37. Consider the ‘worst case scenario’ of a water volume discharge of a containment backflow prevention, namely, an uncontrolled discharge caused by a failure of the #1 check valve contemporaneous with the relief valve being stuck or propped open by debris. If there is no faucet demand within the commercial premise, such as over night, then this perfect storm produces an unmitigated flow of all available water through the relief valve continuously. The management of this sudden water deluge is a significant hazard. As severe as the most severe storm water runoff event. This hazard is clearly work found within the civil engineering discipline rather than the plumbing engineering discipline. Designing and specifying any outdoor containment BPA – even if it is placed within the jurisdictional boundaries of the plumbing engineer, is asking for trouble.