By Bill Adams
When purchasing a pump-equipped fire truck, there’s a reasonable expectation that a quality and professional piping installation will be supplied.
What is expected may not be what’s delivered. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1901, Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus, Chapter 16, Fire Pumps and Associated Equipment, only specifies performance and minimum sizes for some of a rig’s piping. The design, degree of engineering, level of workmanship, and materials to be used are left to the apparatus purchasing committee (APC) to specify. To the best of my knowledge, there is not a documented “right way” or “wrong way” to plumb a fire pump. Purchasers commonly rely on apparatus manufacturers (OEMs) to provide piping installation verbiage to incorporate into their purchasing specifications. Be advised that some OEM specifications are more detailed than others. Regardless of the specificity of the verbiage, when a purchaser publishes an OEM’s suggested specification, the purchaser owns it.
 |
| 1 A unique, one-of-a-kind, and obviously field-engineered tank-to-pump line on a rig. It appears the booster tank was either ordered incorrectly or was one that was in stock. Regardless of the numerous parts and pieces to make the connection, the rig did pass a tank-to-pump flow test. Not pretty-but it works. (Photo courtesy of the author.) |
Does Terminology Matter?
In a competitive bidding environment, whatever is written in the purchasing specifications becomes the precedent-the minimum requirements that all bidders must meet. A fire chief stating, “Brand A’s plumbing is third rate; my kid could have done a better job,” or “Brand B’s piping job is unprofessional; it is unacceptable,” may not be legal grounds to disqualify a bid. One way to get the best value for monies expended is to fairly evaluate product and proposals by comparing apples to apples.
Some APC members don’t care about or can’t be bothered with piping particulars, blindly accepting whatever a preferred vendor is selling. They should care because they might have to describe what a particular piping component is and why it was, or was not, specified. Visualize explaining to the mayor-in a public forum-that you don’t know what model 3203 widgets are but you really need them on your new fire truck. Your preferred vendor might not be there to bail you out. Good luck. An alternative is to leave piping particulars out of the specifications and hope for the best. Purchasers should be aware of what could be provided inside their new pump house.
 |
<
Read more
- 356
- Article rating: No rating
Posted: Feb 10, 2017
By Bill Adams
When purchasing a pump-equipped fire truck, there’s a reasonable expectation that a quality and professional piping installation will be supplied.
What is expected may not be what’s delivered. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1901, Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus, Chapter 16, Fire Pumps and Associated Equipment, only specifies performance and minimum sizes for some of a rig’s piping. The design, degree of engineering, level of workmanship, and materials to be used are left to the apparatus purchasing committee (APC) to specify. To the best of my knowledge, there is not a documented “right way” or “wrong way” to plumb a fire pump. Purchasers commonly rely on apparatus manufacturers (OEMs) to provide piping installation verbiage to incorporate into their purchasing specifications. Be advised that some OEM specifications are more detailed than others. Regardless of the specificity of the verbiage, when a purchaser publishes an OEM’s suggested specification, the purchaser owns it.
|
| 1 A unique, one-of-a-kind, and obviously field-engineered tank-to-pump line on a rig. It appears the booster tank was either ordered incorrectly or was one that was in stock. Regardless of the numerous parts and pieces to make the connection, the rig did pass a tank-to-pump flow test. Not pretty-but it works. (Photo courtesy of the author.) |
Does Terminology Matter?
In a competitive bidding environment, whatever is written in the purchasing specifications becomes the precedent-the minimum requirements that all bidders must meet. A fire chief stating, “Brand A’s plumbing is third rate; my kid could have done a better job,” or “Brand B’s piping job is unprofessional; it is unacceptable,” may not be legal grounds to disqualify a bid. One way to get the best value for monies expended is to fairly evaluate product and proposals by comparing apples to apples.
Some APC members don’t care about or can’t be bothered with piping particulars, blindly accepting whatever a preferred vendor is selling. They should care because they might have to describe what a particular piping component is and why it was, or was not, specified. Visualize explaining to the mayor-in a public forum-that you don’t know what model 3203 widgets are but you really need them on your new fire truck. Your preferred vendor might not be there to bail you out. Good luck. An alternative is to leave piping particulars out of the specifications and hope for the best. Purchasers should be aware of what could be provided inside their new pump house.
|
<
Read more
- 372
- Article rating: No rating
Posted: Feb 10, 2017
By Bill Adams
When purchasing a pump-equipped fire truck, there’s a reasonable expectation that a quality and professional piping installation will be supplied.
What is expected may not be what’s delivered. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1901, Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus, Chapter 16, Fire Pumps and Associated Equipment, only specifies performance and minimum sizes for some of a rig’s piping. The design, degree of engineering, level of workmanship, and materials to be used are left to the apparatus purchasing committee (APC) to specify. To the best of my knowledge, there is not a documented “right way” or “wrong way” to plumb a fire pump. Purchasers commonly rely on apparatus manufacturers (OEMs) to provide piping installation verbiage to incorporate into their purchasing specifications. Be advised that some OEM specifications are more detailed than others. Regardless of the specificity of the verbiage, when a purchaser publishes an OEM’s suggested specification, the purchaser owns it.
|
| 1 A unique, one-of-a-kind, and obviously field-engineered tank-to-pump line on a rig. It appears the booster tank was either ordered incorrectly or was one that was in stock. Regardless of the numerous parts and pieces to make the connection, the rig did pass a tank-to-pump flow test. Not pretty-but it works. (Photo courtesy of the author.) |
Does Terminology Matter?
In a competitive bidding environment, whatever is written in the purchasing specifications becomes the precedent-the minimum requirements that all bidders must meet. A fire chief stating, “Brand A’s plumbing is third rate; my kid could have done a better job,” or “Brand B’s piping job is unprofessional; it is unacceptable,” may not be legal grounds to disqualify a bid. One way to get the best value for monies expended is to fairly evaluate product and proposals by comparing apples to apples.
Some APC members don’t care about or can’t be bothered with piping particulars, blindly accepting whatever a preferred vendor is selling. They should care because they might have to describe what a particular piping component is and why it was, or was not, specified. Visualize explaining to the mayor-in a public forum-that you don’t know what model 3203 widgets are but you really need them on your new fire truck. Your preferred vendor might not be there to bail you out. Good luck. An alternative is to leave piping particulars out of the specifications and hope for the best. Purchasers should be aware of what could be provided inside their new pump house.