Jockey pump and fire pump

[Fred B]

Beyond just code applications, you need to understand the operations of a particular peice of equipment or mechanism, know it's intended purpose, justification for utilization of it. Then you can start to get down to what codes and safety considerations that come into play. Your bottom line in review is to ensure safe and compliant installation, you can't do that just from the NEC without other knowledge of the installation proposed.
Google the jockey pump and learn why it is used, it's function within the system as a whole, what implications are there if it is inadvertently disconnected (your other thread starts to explore that), answer some of these questions you might start to get to the answer of code compliance, and sections applicable. This is not just a simple 210.52 is a receptacle required here question that can be simply point to a particular subsection, if it were they wouldn't require a review.
Bottom line is for a safe and compliant installation (not just electrically).

We've used jockey pumps for both potable supply when public supply wasn't providing adequate supply pressure or short term volume, or for this type in fire prevention. Each has seperate reasons and requirements found from application of differing code sections.
My impression is this application (yours) being directly related to fire protection and safe operation of the primary fire protection system, the related codes to that system become applicable. Personally I can see justification for inclusion of the Jockey Pump (or other brand name) into the electrical system of the primary fire protection system (whatever you are doing to comply there do for the jockey).
Here, to get you started:

Jockey pump in fire system

Grundfos CR pumps are perfect as the jockey pump in fire systems for industrial and commercial fire protection.

www.grundfos.com

 

[hhsting]

Beyond just code applications, you need to understand the operations of a particular peice of equipment or mechanism, know it's intended purpose, justification for utilization of it. Then you can start to get down to what codes and safety considerations that come into play. Your bottom line in review is to ensure safe and compliant installation, you can't do that just from the NEC without other knowledge of the installation proposed.
Google the jockey pump and learn why it is used, it's function within the system as a whole, what implications are there if it is inadvertently disconnected (your other thread starts to explore that), answer some of these questions you might start to get to the answer of code compliance, and sections applicable. This is not just a simple 210.52 is a receptacle required here question that can be simply point to a particular subsection, if it were they wouldn't require a review.
Bottom line is for a safe and compliant installation (not just electrically).

We've used jockey pumps for both potable supply when public supply wasn't providing adequate supply pressure or short term volume, or for this type in fire prevention. Each has seperate reasons and requirements found from application of differing code sections.
My impression is this application (yours) being directly related to fire protection and safe operation of the primary fire protection system, the related codes to that system become applicable. Personally I can see justification for inclusion of the Jockey Pump (or other brand name) into the electrical system of the primary fire protection system (whatever you are doing to comply there do for the jockey).
Here, to get you started:

Jockey pump in fire system

Grundfos CR pumps are perfect as the jockey pump in fire systems for industrial and commercial fire protection.

www.grundfos.com

Ok but this thread has nothing what jockey pump is.

one of the problems I have is that from the sketch post#1 their is one service conductor to the main service switchboard which is tapped ahead of swbd main service disco in compartment swbd. The tap is still the same service conductor not separate one.

I see exception for Fire pump main service disconnect but didnt find where in NEC 2017 the jockey pump main service disconnect is allowed to be remote Not grouped from the Swbd main service disconnects?

 

[hhsting]

Problem I have is following and please if anyone can help or provide input or opinion greatly appreciated:

The post #1 sketch jockey pump is solely used for fire protection sprinkler system pressure maintenance. There are No local amendments that says to provide backup power to the jockey pump. The building where this install is new 4 story apartment complex and is Not a high rise so no backup generator is provided

NEC 2017 section 695.6(B)(1), 695.1(B)(2) info notes both indicate that jockey pump can supplied by fire pump circuit. So this maybe mean jockey pump service rated controller can be remote located with fire pump service controller.

However other sections of NEC 2017 such as 230 does not support 695. By this I mean the following and following 2 questions below:

1. Jockey pump service rated controller plus MLO Swb main service breakers total 7 disconnects:

In post #1 sketch fire pump circuit is tapped ahead of the main service swbd so I don’t see fire pump circuit as another service entrance conductor which can allow addition six service disconnects unless I am incorrect and so total swbd plus jockey service rated controller can only allow 6 disconnects however with jockey pump service rated controller total service disconnect would become 7th. This means one of the swbd service disco has to go. Can someone please provide their opinion regarding this?

2. Grouping of MLO swbd main service disconnects with jockey pump service rated controller:

Post #1 sketch MLO swbd is located remote from fire pump controller service rated and jockey pump service rated controller. I see exception for Fire pump main service disconnect to be remote 230.72(B) but didnt find where in NEC 2017 the jockey pump main service disconnect is allowed to be remote Not grouped from the Swbd main service disconnects. Can someone please provide their opinion about this?

 

[hhsting]

Problem I have is following and please if anyone can help or provide input or opinion greatly appreciated:

The post #1 sketch jockey pump is solely used for fire protection sprinkler system pressure maintenance. There are No local amendments that says to provide backup power to the jockey pump. The building where this install is new 4 story apartment complex and is Not a high rise so no backup generator is provided

NEC 2017 section 695.6(B)(1), 695.1(B)(2) info notes both indicate that jockey pump can supplied by fire pump circuit. So this maybe mean jockey pump service rated controller can be remote located with fire pump service controller.

However other sections of NEC 2017 such as 230 does not support 695. By this I mean the following and following 2 questions below:

1. Jockey pump service rated controller plus MLO Swb main service breakers total 7 disconnects:

In post #1 sketch fire pump circuit is tapped ahead of the main service swbd so I don’t see fire pump circuit as another service entrance conductor which can allow addition six service disconnects unless I am incorrect and so total swbd plus jockey service rated controller can only allow 6 disconnects however with jockey pump service rated controller total service disconnect would become 7th. This means one of the swbd service disco has to go. Can someone please provide their opinion regarding this?

2. Grouping of MLO swbd main service disconnects with jockey pump service rated controller:

Post #1 sketch MLO swbd is located remote from fire pump controller service rated and jockey pump service rated controller. I see exception for Fire pump main service disconnect to be remote 230.72(B) but didnt find where in NEC 2017 the jockey pump main service disconnect is allowed to be remote Not grouped from the Swbd main service disconnects. Can someone please provide their opinion about this?

Does anyone know the above?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tulsa Electrician]

Not your answer may help others.

 

[Tulsa Electrician]

Couple more

 

[hhsting]

Problem I have is following and please if anyone can help or provide input or opinion greatly appreciated:

The post #1 sketch jockey pump is solely used for fire protection sprinkler system pressure maintenance. There are No local amendments that says to provide backup power to the jockey pump. The building where this install is new 4 story apartment complex and is Not a high rise so no backup generator is provided

NEC 2017 section 695.6(B)(1), 695.1(B)(2) info notes both indicate that jockey pump can supplied by fire pump circuit. So this maybe mean jockey pump service rated controller can be remote located with fire pump service controller.

However other sections of NEC 2017 such as 230 does not support 695. By this I mean the following and following 2 questions below:

1. Jockey pump service rated controller plus MLO Swb main service breakers total 7 disconnects:

In post #1 sketch main service switchboard is fed from utility conductors and fire pump circuit is tapped ahead of the main service swbd so I don’t see fire pump circuit as another service entrance conductor which can allow addition six service disconnects unless I am incorrect and so total swbd plus jockey service rated controller can only allow 6 disconnects however with jockey pump service rated controller total service disconnect would become 7th. This means one of the swbd service disco has to go. Can someone please provide their opinion regarding this?

2. Grouping of MLO swbd main service disconnects with jockey pump service rated controller:

Post #1 sketch MLO swbd is located remote from fire pump controller service rated and jockey pump service rated controller. I see exception for Fire pump main service disconnect to be remote 230.72(B) but didnt find where in NEC 2017 the jockey pump main service disconnect is allowed to be remote Not grouped from the Swbd main service disconnects. Can someone please provide their opinion about this?

Can anyone that is knowledgeable and expert please provide their input or opinion regarding above?

I really appreciate it

 

[tom baker]

Perhaps you should get a PE who deals with fire pump systems to review the submittal. If a mistake is made on plan review there would be a significant liability.

 

[Tulsa Electrician]

Let's say based on pics.
There is a bus tie, twin source, single source etc.
Why do we have to include the what ever pump, not the fire pump need to be sized into this tap/source.
If we have to size it in and the connection to the what ever pump can not be in the fire pump controller. Since there is a what ever pump related to the fire pump and has to be in the separate controller and is associated equipment How can it not be allowed.

The single allowed disc has to use this fire pump and related equipment including the what ever pump for the sizing so tap after or use service rated (ats if needed) controllers.

I Think there is enough confusing issue with these installations let's not make it worse.

The rules covered what happens at and after that tie.

So use the allow seventh as long as it meet the requirements of what ever AHJ/ others involved mandate.
It's really that easy.

 

[hhsting]

Perhaps you should get a PE who deals with fire pump systems to review the submittal. If a mistake is made on plan review there would be a significant liability.

Because my question post #47 pertains to NEC code related matters. Plan reviewers deal with code NEC.

 

[roger]

Perhaps you should get a PE who deals with fire pump systems to review the submittal. If a mistake is made on plan review there would be a significant liability.

Best advice we can give and this thread needs to end somewhere.

Roger

 

[tom baker]

Since no one knows I will close this topic