Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

(quoted)
I snapped a bunch of pictures but can't post them right
now as I have to run (maybe it will be a different thread
as this is getting a bit off topic from the "trucking"
aspect).
(end quote)

It's interesting that the law requires tanks
and cisterns.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

On 6/30/14, 11:03 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
(quoted)
I snapped a bunch of pictures but can't post them right
now as I have to run (maybe it will be a different thread
as this is getting a bit off topic from the "trucking"
aspect).
(end quote)

It's interesting that the law requires tanks
and cisterns.


Some areas of CA require residential properties to have fire sprinkler
systems, like an office building.

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

Retired wrote, on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:19:38 -0400:

Some areas of CA require residential properties to have fire sprinkler
systems, like an office building.

All residences out here in the mountains, AFAIK, are *required* to
have sprinkler systems.

In fact, here's a picture of the three 5,000 gallon tanks for one
relatively new residence I explored today.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3835/1...b1b7b947_b.jpg

The two tanks (10,000 gallons) to the right are for the sprinklers.
And only the overflow from them, is what feeds the left-most tank,
which is the 5,000 gallons for the residence.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3867/1...8618b9c4_b.jpg

Interestingly, the tank fill level was set too low:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2927/1...a6655fcc_b.jpg

Such that, when we lifted up the weights, water started gushing in:
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5480/1...0794c170_c.jpg

Our informal plan is to check everyone's well setup, to ensure
at least they have the maximum water available.

We'll also test each of the wharf hydrants, in order to figure
out if they're working or not.

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

Stormin Mormon wrote, on Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:03:25 -0400:

It's interesting that the law requires tanks
and cisterns.

I don't think the law *requires* the cistern, but, the tank farm
I just visited had five 5,000 gallon tanks, plus what I call a
~20,000 gallon "cistern" and another 500 gallon water tank.

Water is pumped from the well into the bottom of the 1st tank:
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3842/1...cc8e2fd8_b.jpg

That 1st tank is connected at the bottom of the 2nd tank:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2907/1...d0e81c48_b.jpg

It then overflows out the top of the 2nd tank to the 3rd tank:
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3897/1...80420713_b.jpg

It then flows out the top of the 3rd to the top of the 4th:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2898/1...dde9bcfa_b.jpg

From that 4th tank, it flows to the 5th 5,000 gallon tank:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2901/1...0375bc3d_b.jpg

There was also a tiny 500 gallon tank which we will make
use of when delivering water by truck from the hydrant:
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5571/1...13b6ae13_b.jpg

And, in our examination, we found the supply leaking out of
what I call the 20,000 gallon "cistern" (I don't know what
to call this mostly underground rectangular water reservoir):
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2940/1...631c81ec_b.jpg

The weights were hanging high and dry, but no water was the
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3911/1...987f1802_c.jpg

So, this house, at least, was minus 20,000 gallons of
potential fire-fighting water in this extreme fire hazard
zone.

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

On Tue, 1 Jul 2014 03:04:08 +0000 (UTC), "DannyD."
wrote in

In fact, here's a picture of the three 5,000 gallon tanks for one
relatively new residence I explored today.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3835/1...b1b7b947_b.jpg

Wow! Five 5k gal tanks at $3500 each plus shipping.
http://www.plastic-mart.com/product/...age-tank-40641

It's not cheap living up there.
--
Web based forums are like subscribing to 10 different newspapers
and having to visit 10 different news stands to pickup each one.
Email list-server groups and USENET are like having all of those
newspapers delivered to your door every morning.

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

DannyD. wrote, on Tue, 01 Jul 2014 03:29:41 +0000:

I don't think the law *requires* the cistern, but, the tank farm
I just visited had five 5,000 gallon tanks, plus what I call a
~20,000 gallon "cistern" and another 500 gallon water tank.

I think I got the *direction* of flow wrong in that
description. I'll have to re-annotate.

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

"DannyD." writes:

So, this house, at least, was minus 20,000 gallons of
potential fire-fighting water in this extreme fire hazard
zone.

I get the impression this is in the east hills, so you probably
missed the grass fire in santa teresa yesterday ...

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

DannyD. posted for all of us...

And I know how to SNIP


DannyD. wrote, on Tue, 01 Jul 2014 03:29:41 +0000:

I don't think the law *requires* the cistern, but, the tank farm
I just visited had five 5,000 gallon tanks, plus what I call a
~20,000 gallon "cistern" and another 500 gallon water tank.

I think I got the *direction* of flow wrong in that
description. I'll have to re-annotate.

I was going to question that because it is much easier to fill from the top
because the pump does not have to fight the water weight. Also, would the
pump then have to overcome the weight of the water in the other tanks?

Is this a setup for one dwelling or several? Interesting, thanks for the
post!

Around here they convert used gasoline fuel oil tankers to fill swimming
pools. Only problem is water weighs more and the cops stop them for
overweight.

--
Tekkie

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

On 7/4/2014 4:51 PM, Tekkie® wrote:

I was going to question that because it is much easier to fill from the top
because the pump does not have to fight the water weight. Also, would the
pump then have to overcome the weight of the water in the other tanks?


From my understanding, it's all based on the
height of the lift. Fill from the top means
15 feet (I'm guessing) lift, where filling a
nearly empty tank requires eight feet (again
guessing) lift.


--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

Tekkie® wrote, on Fri, 04 Jul 2014 16:51:43 -0400:

I was going to question that because it is much easier to fill from the top
because the pump does not have to fight the water weight. Also, would the
pump then have to overcome the weight of the water in the other tanks?

Yeah. Nobody noticed, so, I could have gotten away with the mistake, but,
I had to correct myself if for no other reason than my own netizen integrity.

Is this a setup for one dwelling or several?

It's a single residence with multiple buildings on it.

The water comes up from one well, into the top of the 5th 5K gallon tank,
which, IIRC, is the wharf hydrant tank, and then from that 5th tank, it
overflows into the 4th tank, which is the secondary building main water
supply.

From that 4th tank, it spills overhead into the 3rd tank, which is the
water supply for the main building, and then from that 3rd tank, it
spills over the top into the 2nd tank which is tied at the bottom to
the 1st tank, which has that 4 inch wharf hydrant pipe going into the
ground.

So, of the 5 x 5K gallons = 25,000 gallons, 15,000 gallons are reserved
for fire while only 10,000 gallons are for household water.

Interesting, thanks for the post!

I'm glad you appreciate the effort, as, by posting this information, we
can all learn, and, by way of contrast, we can compare to how you guys
do it where you live, where, presumably, most of you have far more rain
than we get (we get rain only in the winter and then literally ZERO rain
from about March to about November) although we do get good fog which
waters the taller trees.

Around here they convert used gasoline fuel oil tankers to fill swimming
pools. Only problem is water weighs more and the cops stop them for
overweight.

Interesting. 5 pounds per gallon versus 8 pounds per gallon is a pretty
big difference. I called recently to fill my swimming pool, and the cost
was $225 to $250 for every 3,800 gallons. The truck is a stainless steel
tanker, which, the company (Bay Area Water Trucking, 408-683-0500) says
is periodically inspected by the FDA (I was surprised at that) for
cleanliness. They get their water, like all the bulk water trucking firms,
out of the San Jose Water Company fire hydrants, which costs them
only about 1 cent a gallon.

Interestingly, with just a tank and a truck, we can get the same water
from the same fire hydrant for the same price; so all the cost is in
the transportation.

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

CRNG wrote, on Tue, 01 Jul 2014 03:42:45 -0500:

Wow! Five 5k gal tanks at $3500 each plus shipping.
http://www.plastic-mart.com/product/...age-tank-40641

It's not cheap living up there.

You're not kidding.

A while ago, when I was filling my pool, I had called this company
to ask how much it would cost to have water delivered, and they
quoted $225 to $250 for every 3,800 gallons.
Bay Area Water Trucking, 408-683-0500

These guys were even more, IIRC (I think it was $4,000):
Franks Water Service 408-353-1343

So, to fill my pool, for example, would be at about $2,500
to $4,000 at local prices. For that kind of money, I could
buy a 500 gallon tank, and rent a Hertz truck, and make
80 trips. OK, after calculating the number of trips, I just
decided I'd need at least 1,000 gallons to drop it down to
40 trips. Even that's a lot of trips. Maybe I'll just use
the garden hose. ....

https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3750/1...bd17ae83_b.jpg

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

Stormin Mormon wrote, on Fri, 04 Jul 2014 17:17:28 -0400:

From my understanding, it's all based on the
height of the lift. Fill from the top means
15 feet (I'm guessing) lift, where filling a
nearly empty tank requires eight feet (again
guessing) lift.

It was my mistake to show the flow backward.

The tanks all seem to fill from the top.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5480/1...0794c170_c.jpg

Then, they either overflow at the top, to the next tank:
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3897/1...80420713_b.jpg
Note: The flow is opposite the arrows drawn.

Or, they are connected at the bottom, in series:
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2907/1...d0e81c48_b.jpg
Note: The flow is the opposite as drawn.

For example, my (rather puny) tanks are both connected at
the bottom, and there is no separate tank for fire only:
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5526/1...30413bde_b.jpg

Mine seems to be the anomaly as every other tank I've seen
has been plastic, fatter, shorter, and they all had a separate
tank (or two) for fire only.

Unfortunately, one of mine is leaking at the bottom somehow:
https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5078/1...94bc1c4f_b.jpg

Which I don't know really how to fix.

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

On Fri, 4 Jul 2014 16:51:43 -0400, Tekkie® wrote
in

I was going to question that because it is much easier to fill from the top
because the pump does not have to fight the water weight. Also, would the
pump then have to overcome the weight of the water in the other tanks?

LOL! That's really funny. I guess you aren't a fluid dynamics
"tekkie".
--
Web based forums are like subscribing to 10 different newspapers
and having to visit 10 different news stands to pickup each one.
Email list-server groups and USENET are like having all of those
newspapers delivered to your door every morning.

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

On 7/5/2014 6:37 AM, DannyD. wrote:
Tekkie® wrote, on Fri, 04 Jul 2014 16:51:43 -0400:

I was going to question that because it is much easier to fill from the top
because the pump does not have to fight the water weight. Also, would the
pump then have to overcome the weight of the water in the other tanks?

Yeah. Nobody noticed, so, I could have gotten away with the mistake, but,
I had to correct myself if for no other reason than my own netizen integrity.


I noticed! If your tank is filled to 8 feet over the ground,
the pressure at the bottom is "about" 4 PSI. Makes no
difference if the tank is 100 gal, or 20,000 gal. Same PSI
to fight. Based on water height.

If your fill at the top is 16 feet up, you'll need "about"
8 PSI.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

On 7/5/2014 8:20 AM, CRNG wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jul 2014 16:51:43 -0400, Tekkie® wrote
in

I was going to question that because it is much easier to fill from the top
because the pump does not have to fight the water weight. Also, would the
pump then have to overcome the weight of the water in the other tanks?

LOL! That's really funny. I guess you aren't a fluid dynamics
"tekkie".


You also noticed?

Yeah, nothing like trying to pump backwards against a
20,000 gal tank that's two feet high. Compared to fill
at 12 feet.... ha, ha.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

Danny D's Cistern in Law
 

CRNG posted for all of us...

And I know how to SNIP


On Fri, 4 Jul 2014 16:51:43 -0400, Tekkie® wrote
in

I was going to question that because it is much easier to fill from the top
because the pump does not have to fight the water weight. Also, would the
pump then have to overcome the weight of the water in the other tanks?

LOL! That's really funny. I guess you aren't a fluid dynamics
"tekkie".

What is funny? Never professed to be...

--
Tekkie