What is the required frequency for testing the fire department connection (FDC) on a sprinkler system?

What is the required frequency for testing the fire department connection (FDC) on a sprinkler system?

• A. Monthly
• B. Quarterly
• C. Annually
• D. Every 5 years

Answer: (C)

The required frequency for testing the fire department connection (FDC) on a sprinkler system is annually. This is established to ensure that the connection remains functional and the fire department can effectively use it in the event of an emergency. Regular testing helps identify issues such as blockages, corrosion, or mechanical failures that could hinder access to the sprinkler system water supply when needed the most. Performing these tests annually aligns with standards set by fire safety codes, maintaining preparedness and safety for structures relying on sprinkler systems for fire suppression. Less frequent testing, like monthly or quarterly, is not generally required as it may not provide any additional benefit while only increasing maintenance costs. The option suggesting testing every five years would not be adequate, as such infrequent checks could allow significant wear or damage to go undetected, compromising the system's reliability. Therefore, annual testing strikes a balance between assurance and practicality.

The required frequency for testing the fire department connection (FDC) on a sprinkler system is annually. This is established to ensure that the connection remains functional and the fire department can effectively use it in the event of an emergency. Regular testing helps identify issues such as blockages, corrosion, or mechanical failures that could hinder access to the sprinkler system water supply when needed the most. Performing these tests annually aligns with standards set by fire safety codes, maintaining preparedness and safety for structures relying on sprinkler systems for fire suppression.

Less frequent testing, like monthly or quarterly, is not generally required as it may not provide any additional benefit while only increasing maintenance costs. The option suggesting testing every five years would not be adequate, as such infrequent checks could allow significant wear or damage to go undetected, compromising the system's reliability. Therefore, annual testing strikes a balance between assurance and practicality.