几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » 三维空间:产品设计或CAX软件使用 » CAD设计 » 产品功能分析
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


回复
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-15, 03:28 PM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 pump station occupancy category

pump station occupancy category
i have a potable water pump station that pumps water to a reservoir. water in the reservoir goes to the distribution system which is also used for fire protection. per ibc table 1604.5 is this occupancy category iii (water treatment for potable water) or occupancy category iv (water treatment facilities required to maintain water pressure for fire suppression)? of course i could use iv to be on the safe side but am looking to see if iii is justifiable.
thanks for your help.
-jason
i would think that iii could be justifiable if the pump station is not required to maintain fire protection supply and pressure for a "reasonable" length of time following an emergency.
for instance, if the reservoir and downstream facilities can provide adequate supply and pressure for the length of time that the emergency back up system is required to run, the station would not be emergency-essential and could be designed cat iii.
another thing to consider is the effect on the potable water if the pump stops running.
are there upstream issues which could introduce contaminants or untreated water into the pipeline/pump if the pump goes off-line, causing possible detrimental effects if not decontaminated after an emergency?
i'm in land development, so i do a lot with water supply/pressure codes but not much with ibc, so take it with a grain of salt.
we run into this all the time. i would take a conservative approach and use category iv. plus since most loads are defined in asce 7, table 1-1 in that document hints strongly that water utility structures be category iv.
no one can argue that using iv is not the most conservative, but you could get an argument about using iii. and when the design is complete, you don't want to lose that argument.
i feel that using occ cat iv is the only way that one can interpret the code as it is written. i too have recently been in some extensive discussions about this with the project managers in my office. i have been told also that a variance may be granted for a particular facility if the facility is more of a secondary facility for the fire suppression system, and the owner requests it.
__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言:前进吧,你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
回复


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭

相似的主题
主题 主题发起者 论坛 回复 最后发表
pump foundation huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-15 03:28 PM
occupancy category iii per ibc 2006, table 1604.5 huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-10 04:52 PM
nonstructural component design in seismic design category b huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-10 04:41 PM
category ii loads huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 11:07 PM
category 4 hurricane huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 11:07 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 06:11 AM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多