Triangle Venting Bulletin Dated 6/28/11

CMadatMe

Recevied this today thought I'd share. I don't see ASTM-1785 listed here...

tim smith

Aaaaaaaaaaaaargh!

I just finished twin 175s on a job where I had to run 4" stainless because of 50 ft of pipe and 3 elbows. Would have been nice to see this earlier??? Oh well.

tim smith

whoops double tap

HDE

ASTM

To reopen an argument, ASTM1785 is not about appliance venting so why bring it up?



This specification covers poly(vinyl chloride) (PVC) plastic pipe, schedules 40, 80, and 120 for use with the distribution of pressurized liquids only. This specification also includes classification criteria, nomenclature system, test methods, requirements, workmanship, dimensions, sustained pressure, burst pressure, flattening, extrusion quality, finish, appearance, and marking methods for PVC plastic pipe. PVC pipe covered are marked with one of six type/grade/design stress designation and defined by four hydrostatic design stresses. PVC plastics are categorized by short-term and long term-strength tests.

CMadatMe

Why

Because from reading this I'm taking it to mean they want ULC-S636 PVC that meets Canadian Requirements.

Paul Pollets

Nu??

Aside from adding the PPE piping, it seems the manufacturer will continue to allow PVC for venting.

Robert O'Brien

Thanks,Chris!

Good info!

CMadatMe

Hey Bob

Have you come across an inspector out on the island that won't allow PVC venting? I was prviey to an e-mail where a rep of a boiler mfg stated that inspectors out there were not allowing PVC. The inspector used the Charlotte Letter as its determining factor.



The rep thought that they were using the wrong interpertation as the letter refers its use back to the equip mfg.

Steamhead

A lot of this

may be quite different when the Lofgren case is decided.

Robert O'Brien

Chris

Never heard of an LI inspector failing PVC when the I&O manual allows it.

HDE

Like?

I hope there are changes, like required CO detectors.

Because if your talking about banning PVC, they would have to ban stove pipe, wood burning stoves, furnaces, boilers.... There is way more instances on record of those items attributing to CO deaths

cattledog

lofgren case

http://www.lofgrencoinitiative.org/Lofgren-Civil-Case.pdf



There were several factors which led to the tragic deaths of the family, but PVC itself, as a vent material, is not on the list. If a stainless steel vent system was not screwed together and it fell apart like the unglued PVC, the deaths and subsequent lawsuit would still have occurred.

Jean-David Beyer

That is really interesting.

I read that entire thing, and it is interesting, if the facts are as presented, just how much fault there is in that case. The failures of design, implementation, inspection, maintenance, etc., are mind boggling. If even one or two people involved had done their jobs correctly, this need not have happened. I was surprised that the boiler manufacturer was included in the list of defendants. I suppose a CO detector built into the boiler would have been a good idea, but when I consider that the boiler was not installed according to the manufacturer's specifications, they might have defeated the built-in CO detector as well.  I always remember an uncle of mine who did engineering work, among other things. He remarked that while you could design things to be fool-proof, you could not design things to be damn-fool-proof.



It is so frustrating reading that pleading. The difficulty of finding competent contractors, competent inspectors, competent maintainers, seems to be the norm. The contractor who installed my mod-con did not glue most of the fittings on my air supply or exhaust venting either, and the inspector did not find that problem. Luckily, the contractor did support the PVC piping so it did not fall apart. The inspector did not notice that the CSST was not bonded or grounded, even though it was in plain sight. So my inspectors seem no better than the ones in Colorado, and my former contractor was only a little better. My inspector asked if I had a CO detector, and I said I did, but he did not look to see if I was telling the truth or not.



Now I have two CO detectors of the Big Box Store type, and one high sensitivity one in my bedroom. I also gave a family I care about two CO detectors since they did not have any and had not gotten any even after a few years of my telling them to get them. Theirs plug into the wall and have 9volt batteries in them. I hope they change the batteries.

Tim McElwain

There is more

to the story in Long Island which I am sorry I can't divulge here. If you really need to know give me a phone call at 401-437-0557 on Tuesday.

Steamhead

Bottom line with PVC

is that the manufacturers of the pipe have not approved it as a venting material. Doesn't matter what the appliance manufacturer says, the pipe manufacturers have not approved it. This has been covered in some other threads so I won't rehash those discussions.



And given the current legal climate, I doubt they ever will. Why should they open themselves to the liability?



Perhaps the most significant issue in the Lofgren case is whether the building inspector should be held liable for approving the work when it clearly didn't meet Code. Those of you who have followed these issues will remember the Days Inn case in Ocean City, MD. The inspector (as well as a few other equally undeserving people) got a pass on that one, even though the job was installed completely wrong. I believe the contractor was the only one held liable.



It remains to be seen whether Colorado is as corrupt as Maryland in this regard.