Joined
·
5,480 Posts
I'm sure this thread will go the distance in discussion.
As a plumber and drain cleaner, I find myself taking issue with building any piping system that I know I've encountered over time that proved to be horrible from the standpoint of cleaning the drain.
For example,
Double vanity utilizing a cross instead of a cross-wye. A cross wye will make the drain cleaning for that task when both drains foul a simple task.
If it is a cross tee, cable is always going to send across to the opposite dirty arm and now you've got the challenge of either
1. Bending your cable (if not already) and fishing the drain till it drops
2. Using a drop-head bulb auger
3. Other method
I run 1/4" open hook for all smaller drains, bend the cable back at 6" almost at a 45 to drag the inside of the pipe, catch the sweep down on a tee before up.
When it comes to a cross tee, whether it's catching at toilet or vanities, to tell me that there's enough velocity in the fixture it serves to create a siphoning effect I don't buy.
Especially on a vanity application. On a toilet, I've yet to see a documented case exists where a cross wye was used and a toilet was sucked dry, whereby the not one S trap existed but 2.
Prove the hard science that a cross wye is a known culprit in the plumbing system that follows residential, not commercial type settings that the volume of discharged water creates the ability to bring a siphon to a 1' 6" trap arm off a double vanity.
Code is implemented to minimum standard, not maximum, and just stating "well it's code, therefore it's wrong" doesn't cut it.
Another example where the code states and what is otherwise rubbish:
"Inlet side of the trap will be the only slip joint allowable in the DWV system."
^^^^
That was designed for testing reasons of the DWV system and that's it. That's why that code is implemented.
But what about tub drain overflows, Gerbers? Slip joint on overflow.
KY has a rule on new construction whereby you must glue the trap arms in. This makes it difficult for a drain cleaner from the start, damaging the ferruled edge instantly on the first turn into the piping. It also becomes a dangerous task when years have went by and you're cabling a drain with that length of trap arm being shook violently while drain cleaning, praying the brittle PVC doesn't snap off back at the tee from where all those years of hot water went down that sink from normal use, cooking water like hot water off the stove or the constant dishwasher cycles pushing 120 degree water through the drains.
As mentioned,
When you have to address the plumbing in a fouled mode, even though the system was designed to be nonfouling, I take issue to designs that make it very difficult to drain clean.
If that is the case, then maybe cleanout access should be incorporated in designs where this the case. I wouldn't expect to hold my breath on this notion, and just about every single cleanout would be covered up most times.
Like in California,
Constantly I hear about plumbers/drain cleaners accessing rooftops to clear drains due to no access to cleanouts, or they simply do not exist on the DWV systems.
That proves without a doubt that the people who run the show, enforce the codes do not partake in the care and maintenance of the plumbing system but only the initial building of the design.
A rant indeed, but many times I've seen where steps in the original design makes the maintenance of plumbing systems far easier for the down the road mentality. These people in the beginning stages of the design should put more thought into it, and not knock drain cleaners that redesign or remove these oversights to make maintenance a more accessible process.
As a plumber and drain cleaner, I find myself taking issue with building any piping system that I know I've encountered over time that proved to be horrible from the standpoint of cleaning the drain.
For example,
Double vanity utilizing a cross instead of a cross-wye. A cross wye will make the drain cleaning for that task when both drains foul a simple task.
If it is a cross tee, cable is always going to send across to the opposite dirty arm and now you've got the challenge of either
1. Bending your cable (if not already) and fishing the drain till it drops
2. Using a drop-head bulb auger
3. Other method
I run 1/4" open hook for all smaller drains, bend the cable back at 6" almost at a 45 to drag the inside of the pipe, catch the sweep down on a tee before up.
When it comes to a cross tee, whether it's catching at toilet or vanities, to tell me that there's enough velocity in the fixture it serves to create a siphoning effect I don't buy.
Especially on a vanity application. On a toilet, I've yet to see a documented case exists where a cross wye was used and a toilet was sucked dry, whereby the not one S trap existed but 2.
Prove the hard science that a cross wye is a known culprit in the plumbing system that follows residential, not commercial type settings that the volume of discharged water creates the ability to bring a siphon to a 1' 6" trap arm off a double vanity.
Code is implemented to minimum standard, not maximum, and just stating "well it's code, therefore it's wrong" doesn't cut it.
Another example where the code states and what is otherwise rubbish:
"Inlet side of the trap will be the only slip joint allowable in the DWV system."
^^^^
That was designed for testing reasons of the DWV system and that's it. That's why that code is implemented.
But what about tub drain overflows, Gerbers? Slip joint on overflow.
KY has a rule on new construction whereby you must glue the trap arms in. This makes it difficult for a drain cleaner from the start, damaging the ferruled edge instantly on the first turn into the piping. It also becomes a dangerous task when years have went by and you're cabling a drain with that length of trap arm being shook violently while drain cleaning, praying the brittle PVC doesn't snap off back at the tee from where all those years of hot water went down that sink from normal use, cooking water like hot water off the stove or the constant dishwasher cycles pushing 120 degree water through the drains.
As mentioned,
When you have to address the plumbing in a fouled mode, even though the system was designed to be nonfouling, I take issue to designs that make it very difficult to drain clean.
If that is the case, then maybe cleanout access should be incorporated in designs where this the case. I wouldn't expect to hold my breath on this notion, and just about every single cleanout would be covered up most times.
Like in California,
Constantly I hear about plumbers/drain cleaners accessing rooftops to clear drains due to no access to cleanouts, or they simply do not exist on the DWV systems.
That proves without a doubt that the people who run the show, enforce the codes do not partake in the care and maintenance of the plumbing system but only the initial building of the design.
A rant indeed, but many times I've seen where steps in the original design makes the maintenance of plumbing systems far easier for the down the road mentality. These people in the beginning stages of the design should put more thought into it, and not knock drain cleaners that redesign or remove these oversights to make maintenance a more accessible process.
