Two-pipe to one-pipe conversion

seized123

I have an above ground oil tank in a plastic protective tub, with supply and return out the top of the tank and into the house. The burner's in the basement about 7ft. below the top of the outside tank. I would like to switch from one-pipe to two pipe. My question is, can I do this myself?

I already know the answer from many of you, and I take it very seriously when someone says “dream on Bozo, just hire a pro” and I am ready to hear it if I really should not do this myself. What I do have in my favor is: 1) I am retired, and can take all the time I need 2) It's summer, we can live without heat and h/w while I do this 3) I have this forum, which has been helpful beyond anything I expected 4) With this project, it seems to me I will know right away if I screwed up - like soldering, if I follow instructions and then when I'm done see no leaks after turning on the burner I'm probably okay, and if I do see a leak, I can redo the offending flare until it's good (or worst case call for DYI rescue) 5) I am motivated and very interested in this stuff.

I'll attach photos of the current system, some of you have seen them on another thread which started on another subject, but I figure now this should have its own thread. (https://forum.heatinghelp.com/discussion/192521/is-this-barometric-damper-installed-okay#latest)

The following is what I'm envisioning. Almost all of the details as to what to use are thanks to @STEVEusaPA on the other thread. Apologies to @STEVEusaPA if I get some of this wrong, any miscues are probably mine. Anyway, going from the tank to the burner:

First I clear both lines of oil using a handy bicycle pump setup suggested by @EdTheHeaterMan.

Next, there is a duplex bushing at the top of the tank for the supply and return lines. I figure I could leave the duplex in, remove the return tubing from it and plug that hole. Then I could just leave the first few inches of existing ½ inch supply line that comes out of it and attach the first valve (see below re: valves). I want jacketed copper all the way, but I figure a few inches or feet of non-jacketed inside the protective tub between the duplex and the first valve wouldn't matter much. I guess I could put some of that corrugated tubing over that part if it's a concern.

Next put in both an anti-siphon valve, which apparently is required by the New York Stated Mechanical Code, and also a ball valve, which I would like to have so I can manually turn off the supply at the tank. (Currently there are no valves at all anywhere on the supply line except the one Firomatic inside.) Both valves would be protected by the tub. I think anti-siphon valves can conceivably fail if water entrained in the oil freezes, but the way I read the code it wants an anti-siphon valve outside, plus I want one outside.

I would be flaring, which if I have ever done it it was decades ago, but before attempting any of this I would buy the tool and practice on ½ inch soft tubing for as long as it takes until I felt confident, days, weeks .... If I never feel confident practicing then I abandon the project.

So, two valves at the top of the tank in the tub. Currently there is a lot of excess tubing curled around right above the tank and I figure I do that with the new line, or make neat loops, Everything after will be ½ inch jacketed copper line. My number one primary concern is safety regarding possible oil spill/leakage, and I know there is also corrugated tubing you can put outside a line, I would be willing to do this in addition to the jacketed line if that would increase the safety factor, or maybe you'll laugh if that's really overkill. Suggestions welcome.

Anyway, then I'd snake the line out the side of the tub and down to the hole in the wall at ground level. There is a rough hole there, and I believe the old lines are electrical taped in the hole to protect from contact with concrete, and some of that orange foam fills in the hole. I would consider making the hole nicer and putting a small length of PVC in it to further protect the lines, unless that would be too much overkill. I guess I would spray more orange foam in to seal it. Next add insulation to the outside line, as I assume that even jacketed line needs that.

Now we're inside the basement. The line will go down 3 or 4 feet (to just above the floor, I guess) then into a Firomatic and my old General filter housing and then into a Garber spin-on filter. Can the filters just rest on the floor, or should there be some support holding them up?

Then install an oil safety valve. Just wondering, is that still necessary if there's an anti-siphon valve outside? Even if it's not necessary, though, if one would not interfere with the other I'd be happy to have both - I like redundancy.

@STEVEusaPA then suggested two options (I hope I understand them right):

1) Firomatic just before the pump, remove the bypass plug and plug the now-unused return port.

or

2) Install Firomatic followed by Tigerloop, copper lines from Tigerloop to pump, do not remove bypass plug, done.

Steve, the way I read it, it seemed like you preferred option 1. If so, why? I thought Tigerloops were good things in general.

The big alternative of course is to have someone do everything. I have a ballpark estimate from a local largish home services outfit with nice shiny vans, (no luck so far finding that old time 1-2 man operation like my recently retired plumber) and I think the whole thing would come to $1000-2000. Money is not the issue, that does not seem to me to be outrageous for this kind of work, but part of me really would like to tackle it myself, and I would love to hear all opinions. (If I do hire them should I get some form of written, more detailed contract or estimate? Things with my old plumber for decades were very informal.)

Please, let 'er rip.

seized123

Is the damper/flue configuration okay? I read that sometimes tees are not to be used. It’s a Weil-McLean WGO-3 oil furnace.

Steamhead

Nope. The instructions are here, and come in the box with the unit. All you have to do is read and follow them:

https://www.fieldcontrols.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/01575700_TypeRC_Rev_B_04-15.pdf

That is a good boiler, but it looks pretty rough. I think you need someone other than the oil company to look at it. It will also run well with a Carlin gas burner - where are you located?

seized123

Thanks, @Steamhead. I did look at the instructions. There’s no picture of a flue coming out the top and going back to the wall like I have, but in the old thread where I read that this might be a problem, someone suggested replacing the tee with an elbow, and then I guess putting the damper somewhere on that. Contacted Field Controls and am waiting to hear back.

I wonder why this configuration is bad?

I’m about an hour north of New York City. 

The boiler is pretty old, have to look up just how old.(10, 15 yrs? More…?) And what usually goes bad in an old boiler where it’s time to replace it?

seized123

Here’s a picture of the whole shebang. Two-pipe system although the tank is above the below-grade basement.

captainco

I believe Fields instructions are more based on they don't know versus actual performance. I see no problem with that location. It is okay on gas why not oil? i .
know of installations I have helped with that you won't find in their instructions. Obviously only those good at combustion should attempt to do these things.

seized123

So Field Controls got back to me with this reply:

"The way you are describing the installation of the barometric to the oil fired boiler sounds like that of a bullhead tee installation. The bullhead tee is not supposed to be used on an oil fired appliance. This type of installation is only permitted with a gas atmospheric appliance."

I'm figuring that bullhead tee in this context means the flow comes in at the branch and goes up to the two runs.

I'm going to go back and ask Field Controls why it's okay for gas but not for oil.

The boiler's about 21 years old, and has probably been running that long with this configuration, since I have no memory of my plumber changing the flue after the boiler was installed.

STEVEusaPA

I wouldn't call them again. The oil line with all the fittings and the return is garbage.
The flue pipe is the wrong gauge, and it's installed wrong for oil. It's probably ok for gas because you would (should) use a dual acting baro for gas.
From the boiler, straight piece, 90° elbow, straight piece into the base of the chimney. On that second straight piece you could cut in the baro with the correct collar.
I don't agree with spending the money to switch it to gas with a gas burner. I doubt you'd recover the money and the gas burner would give you less efficiency.
Just needs some TLC, and some upgrades from someone who knows what they are doing.

EBEBRATT-Ed

Field is right. It shouldn't be on a tee for oil. As far as the boiler goes you run it until it starts leaking. A good tune up by a professional oil heat tech would be a good idea

Bob Harper

The chimney connector pipes need to be replaced with 24 ga. You want the baro. close to the boiler but 1.5-2x the connector diameter from the boiler flue collar, ells or other fittings. You need a little space btw the baro. and the chimney to measure draft pressure and a test hole about 1.5x the diameter from the appliance collar to run combustion analysis. Did you use a mirror and light to look up the flue? It really should be relined.
To prove the point about the bullhead, look into the baro. damper collar above the gate. See all that soot? Why would it be there is there is a steady stream of room air being entrained causing an air wash? It shouldn't. That means you've got Black Particulate Matter into the home, which means its everywhere.
FYI, no foil tape or coverings over chimney connector pipe. Min. 3 screws/ joint equidistantly spaced. Best practice is no seams on horizontal runs btw 5-7 O'Clock to prevent condensation from puddling in the seams. '31 requires male end-up on connectors, which can lead to condensate dribbling down the outside of the pipe.
What Steve said.

EdTheHeaterMan

When I learned about oil heat, there were very few flame retention oil burners in service. I did learn that oil heat could burn clean. This was in the days when the natural gas utilities were advertising that gas is clean and oil was dirty, as a way to get consumers to switch to Natural Gas. Of course, fuel oil dealers had the marketing slogan "Go Modern, Go Gas, Go BOOM."

Back to clean burning oil. The important thing when it came to burning clean, was to get the air oil mixture to be just right. The constantly changing chimney draft was a problem. So getting the draft control to accurately regulate the draft at the burner was a critical part of the process. I remember some illustrations that illustrated "WRONG WAY" in several diagrams that the true oil heat expert would pay close attention to. The Field RC control installation instructions were pretty detailed (Figure 1) however, there were others that I also recall like Fig 2, 3, and 4 that I also remember.


If you look closely at Fig 2 illustrate the correct use of the collar furnished with the draft control. If you were to use a standard Tee fitting, the disk may extend into the flow of the flue gas, as in Fig 4. This would adversely affect the fuel air mixture. Also Fig 3 shows one problem with using a Tee in the configuration the OP has pictured. When the flow or flue gas hits the turn and continues on a 90° turn, different eddy currents may come into play that can cause enough difference in the air pressure (or negative pressure) in the combustion chamber to make the Air/Fuel mixture change under different chimney draft conditions

Since the goal of the Barometric Draft Control is to create a constant and steady pressure (or draft) in the combustion chamber in order to get the static pressure of the burner fan to add the same amount of air to the fuel in the combustion chamber, You don't want to place the control in a location where the balance of the swinging door may be compromised.

But that is just the way I learned it too many years ago.

Mad Dog_2

Like Ed said...RUN TO FAILURE (leaks from the sections).  That boiler just needs some TLC. Stay with oil.   I would redo the flue pipe, new Fields Control RC Damper, complete brush and vacuum, Garber Filter, new Firematic and nice copper tubing with Flare fittings.  New Relief valve, new relief piping (that looks like a black nipple) in copper.  If the Heating elements heat nicely and quietly, leave the near boiler piping, Expansion tank, feeder and circulator alone.
Finish off with a Smoke test and Combustion analysis.  This rehabbed boiler could go another 20 years!   Mad Dog  🐕 

RayWohlfarth

It used to be common to install it there but is not suggested for a couple of reasons. The first is that you will have rollout when the chimney is cool. The second is it will cause the boiler to overfire as the velocity will put the flue gases out like a venturi when the chimney is hot. You will have a difficult time maintaining the draft It should be between the boiler and the chimney Lastly, the barometric damper for an oil burner should have the red stops to stop it from spilling out. I believe New York code calls for a spill switch but they may be commercial.
Good Luck

seized123

This is so much helpful information I can't believe it!

Thanks for the posts, and since no good deed goes unpunished, I'd like to ask you guys some further specific follow-up questions. These questions are not to question the validity of what you're suggesting, but to clarify my understanding further when there's an idea or term I don't quite get. This is both because I am very interested in this stuff, but also because, let's face it, the reality is that whatever heat tech I end up finding to replace my newly retired plumber of 30 years (who I now realize was not an oil heating whiz) may not be as knowledgeable and dedicated as you guys, and I may have to be specific about what I need and why. (Any recommendations for Orange County, N.Y. would be welcome. My oil company is Carpenter and Smith, which so far I have not been using for service but might now, and I'm also looking at Jones Services, which is a local mid-size mechanical/electrical company with a fleet of nice shiny trucks - the opposite of my sole proprietor second generation retired plumber, who was a great guy but on the other hand never to my knowledge even did a combustion analysis, etc. etc. I notice Jones gets very good reviews, a lot of them for heat stuff.)

@Steamhead mentioned having someone other than the oil company come and look at it. The oil company did not install or maintain it (my old plumber did), so I was wondering, is there any reason in general maybe not to go with one's oil company for service and installation, maybe due to incentives or something (I can see, being cynical, how it could be against the oil co.'s interest to have your system be too efficient!) or did you say that just assuming they put the boiler in (with all its flaws) and therefore it would be best to have someone else look at it? I initially I thought the oil company would be best to try first because they're obviously specialists in oil heating, though I know in either case all depends on the quality of the techs.

@STEVEusaPA, you mentioned that "the oil line with all the fittings and the return is garbage." I know this is a subject that has been debated on this site, but please guys, feel free to pile on here: should I switch to a one pipe system? The oil tank is above ground on the other side of the wall, just behind and above the boiler which is below ground. The burner's probably, I don't know, 5-8 feet below the bottom of the tank. I would love to hear reasons why I should/shouldn't switch.

Also, exactly what about the oil line with all the fittings makes it garbage? (I'm not disagreeing, I ask not because I don't want to replace them, but because I'm just trying to absorb some expertise and/or be able to explain the reasons in case whoever does the work is not as expert, which is likely.) Actually, along these lines, @Mad Dog_2 provided an incredibly helpful and specific list of suggestions, among them: "Garber Filter, new Firomatic and nice copper tubing with Flare fittings." I'll assume that for some reason the Garber filter is better - they look easier, like replacing a car oil filter. Next, why get new Firomatic(s), are the newer ones better, or is it just good to replace them after a while? (Again, I like the idea of replacing old or subpar stuff, I'm just trying to learn and see some of what you guys see automatically.) I do notice there is a gunky, oily sheen on the supply line and fittings and on the return line on the boiler side of the return line Firomatic, which may or may not mean anything. Next, why new tubing and flare fittings? (Again, more than happy to do it.) I have to say I've always felt that the way the tubing feeds through and just rests on the near boiler pipes seems kind of cheesy, and makes it more difficult to, say, change the pump strainer because you can't just unbolt the pump and swing it out of the way a little, since the fittings going into the filter hit against the water inlet piping. Also, what do you see that says to get a "new Relief valve, new relief piping (that looks like a black nipple) in copper"? Just for my own understanding. This list of stuff to do is very helpful, as I've said, and if nothing is cracked or demented inside the boiler itself, it will get done.

As a final note on the supply/return stuff, I've seen pix of flexible braided oil supply lines, would it make sense to put those in going to the pump (and/or out of it if I keep the return line)? I really like the idea because it seems to me that would make it really easy to disconnect the line whenever I want to use my new Westwood t15 suction line analyzer that I haven't used yet but really want to, even though I've never used one.

One improvement I'm going to make right away, which I can do myself, is install a Carlin 70200 primary control, which I bought based on @EdTheHeaterMan's suggestion on another thread.

RE: the baro damper, thanks @STEVEusaPA and @EBEBRATT-Ed, and @Bob Harper VERY helpful and specific advice and tips I would never have known. Two things: First, what's the reason for 24 gauge, and second, how did you guys just look at it and know it was the wrong gauge? Also, is 24ga thinner or thicker than what's on there? In any case, as you suggest, 24 gauge is going on there. Once the elbow goes in, it looks like it would be a little cramped to place the damper 1.5-2X the diameter from both the elbow and the flue collar on the vertical part, maybe there's room on the horizontal part, but that's shortish too and might get too close to the chimney. I'm sure something will work out. @EdTheHeaterMan that was a great description which helps me see why this setup is bad, thanks for the diagrams.

@Bob Harper you mentioned the flue lining. Does that mean in the chimney? When you mentioned that it dawned on me that never in 30 years of living here have we ever thought about the chimney. I'm thinking of calling a chimney guy for an inspection. I know they have stainless steel chimney liners they drop down the whole thing, is that the kind of thing you're thinking of? No idea if there's one like that in there now, if they even had them back then.

Finally, a few of you mention that the idea is to run this thing to failure, which is exactly what I'd like to do. Nothing would be better than to keep this thing going with a rehab. It sounds from what you say that, for a boiler, "failure" mostly means the heat exchanger starting to leak? It does make sense to me that before I start doing these improvements, I should look more closely into the boiler's internal condition. If there were a crack or leak now, would I necessarily know it externally? What can I check myself inside the boiler (and then probably have a pro check if I didn't immediately find any definitive deadly defects) or what tests can be done to check that there's no existential problem? The boiler was cleaned very recently by another old time plumber I was trying out, and he didn't mention anything, but like my old plumber this guy didn't even do a combustion analysis on the tune-up, so who knows if he really looked. I should mention also that for some reason we think our well water is terrible for plumbing, we have gone through several indirect h/w heaters we think for that reason, and I'm happy this boiler has lasted this long.

Thanks again for all your help, all future replies appreciated.

seized123

Oh yes, and thanks @RayWohlfarth for the description of why this setup is bad, it always helps me to know the physical reasons, as far as I can understand them. And I wouldn't have known about the red stops, good tip.

STEVEusaPA

seized123 said:

...
@STEVEusaPA, you mentioned that "the oil line with all the fittings and the return is garbage." I know this is a subject that has been debated on this site, but please guys, feel free to pile on here: should I switch to a one pipe system? The oil tank is above ground on the other side of the wall, just behind and above the boiler which is below ground. The burner's probably, I don't know, 5-8 feet below the bottom of the tank. I would love to hear reasons why I should/shouldn't switch.

Also, exactly what about the oil line with all the fittings makes it garbage? (I'm not disagreeing, I ask not because I don't want to replace them, but because I'm just trying to absorb some expertise and/or be able to explain the reasons in case whoever does the work is not as expert, which is likely.)...

The 'garbage' is the mix of copper & steel, the steel unions, and the 2 pipe set up. Looks like a lot of it is slightly leaking.
Here's what I would do, although I don't know if your tank is bottom fed or top fed, but either way, it ends up as a gravity job.

Depending on the condition of your tank, and the style:
1.
a) If single wall steel, I would feed off the bottom of the tank (making sure tank pitched toward outlet), with a ball valve at the bottom of the tank. Then continuous piece of 3/8" copper line into the building...
------or------
b) If double wall or top fed, come out of the tank with one continuous piece of 3/8" copper line into the building.

2. After 3/8" copper enters the building, install a firomatic valve, then immediatel support and install a General filter and Garber spin-on filter connected together. If you don't want to do both, just do the spin-on.

3. Continue vertically down with the 3/8" copper line until you are no more that 3' above the center of the oil pump. Then install a oil safety valve.

4. Continue down, then over with continuous, jacketed 3/8" copper oil line to the burner.

--Now you can finish with either of these 2 different options--

Options 1. I prefer, single pipe into a firomatic valve attached to the inlet of the fuel pump. VERY IMPORTANT: YOU MUST REMOVE THE BYPASS PLUG IN THE RETURN PORT OF THE FUEL UNIT (don't mean to yell but if you don't you'll almost instantly ruin the fuel unit). Plug the return port with proper plug.
Power vacuum bleed the fuel system and done.

Option 2. At the burner, leave the fuel pump as is, and install an oil deaerator (Tiger Loop), with (my first choice) two 3/8" copper tubing lines, or second choice, flex lines. The oil deaertor will (should be supplied) have a firomatic valve in it's inlet.
Manually hold open the oil safety valve (OSV), turn on burner until you get oil, release manual hold open of OSV, let 'er rip.

Again, continuous oil lines to each component (no unions, no check valves), all joints flared. If you're not a flaring maestro, the Option 2 oil deaerator will hide your flaws and avoid nuisance lockouts.
I don't like 2 pipe in this situation (or almost never) because you are constantly running about 17gph thru the filter, pump and the pump strainer (just pump and strainer with oil deaerator). With single pipe you only put thru the filter(s), oil line, pump strainer and fuel pump, the gph of the burner's firing rate.

I have this set up at my house 1a & option 1 (slightly different as my tank is inside). With double filtration, I only change the oil filters when the vacuum gauge on the spin-on indicates it's starting to restrict. I think this fall will be 4 years. Same for cleaning, hook up analyzer every year. If nothing is different (CO2, smoke, draft, ohms-no sense opening it up for a cleaning). I also don't have a draft regulator because of a very high over fire draft that I can't knock down far enough with 2 draft regulators, so I use a neutral pressure point adjuster-but that's not going to work for you.
Your mileage may vary, especially with an older and outdoor tank.
Treat the tank, every delivery, try to fill it up and the end of the season.

seized123

Wow. Amazing.

Out of curiosity, how do you deal with the oil in the lines when you are changing fittings but not replacing the whole oil line, like if you are replacing a leaking Firomatic that has nothing between it and the tank? How do you handle oil wanting to siphon out? (There’s no equivalent of a whole house water cutoff, right, though I guess the Firomatics serve as cutoffs for any work done between them and the boiler.) I’ve always wondered about this.

Oh, and here are some more artistic photos, especially of the lines to outside.

seized123

The last photo is of the lines going up into the plastic cover for the oil tank, not up into the house (the cover is pretending it has siding).

Steamhead

seized123 said:

So Field Controls got back to me with this reply:

"The way you are describing the installation of the barometric to the oil fired boiler sounds like that of a bullhead tee installation. The bullhead tee is not supposed to be used on an oil fired appliance. This type of installation is only permitted with a gas atmospheric appliance."

The reason is- on an atmospheric (not power-driven) gas burner with a standing pilot, a bad enough downdraft can snuff out the flame. Standing-pilot safeties may take up to three minutes to shut off the gas flow, so this would let a lot of raw gas into the boiler. So they installed a double-swing barometric like that so the downdraft would not blow down to the boiler.

I think you'll get a good long life from that boiler if you maintain it well.

And, what @STEVEusaPA said about the oil lines.

@RayWohlfarth - that's an RC draft regulator, not an M+MG2. The pic makes it look bigger than it is. The RC has its own stop which is a tab that goes thru an opening on the right side of the swinging disc. It's not convertible to gas usage like the M+MG2, which is done by removing the red stop.

@STEVEusaPA - looking at the thermal efficiencies of the WGO-3 as opposed to W-M's own EG-40, the WGO has an advertised thermal efficiency (calculated by figuring what percentage the DOE Output is of the Input BTU) of 84.8%. The EG-40 has the same thermal efficiency (didn't used to, but W-M has made it better), but its AFUE is two points lower than the WGO-3's 86%. Since we typically remove the Kaowool rug from the firebox floor when converting one of these boilers, I suspect that would increase the WGO's thermal efficiency by exposing more heat-transfer surface to the gas flame. So there's really no loss in efficiency.

The rug is there to reflect some heat back into the oil flame, maintaining its temperature so it doesn't run cool enough to burn incompletely which would produce smoke and soot. Note to any non-pros reading this- DO NOT try this yourself.

RayWohlfarth

@Steamhead Thanks Missed that

Big Ed_4

The fire-O-matic valve on the return line is a No No . A ball valve would be the choice and take the handle off . With your tank set up , I would recommend a tiger loop .Being a top feed set up there would sludge on the bottom .Running it two pipe the flow of oil though the line would be 5 gallons of hour . Less crud , less resistance and less liability ..

We use to install draft regulators in that location because of easy service of the chimney base . I instal them now close to the breach of the chimney . Further away from the burner the less combustion noise ..

seized123

So the oil company tech came out today to see about putting in cutoff valves at the oil tank. (The tank is above ground outside, it is in a big plastic tub, and the burner is about 5-8 feet below it in the basement, so siphoning would be a danger in case of a leak.) I want these valves because before I tackle some of the changes you guys recommend, because I really want to be able to shut off the supply at the tank in case of a leak, or repairs on the line, or when I go away in warm weather and turn off the boiler, and not have to worry about siphoning. There are currently no valves anywhere on the lines except the Firomatics inside (one on the supply and one on the return, although the return one might be a no-no, see below).

He recommended Firomatics on the supply and return lines right near where they come out the top of the tank, which means they'd be outside, although protected by the cover of the tub. I said what about ball valves but he said Firomatics would be better because he could use flare fittings. (This seemed weird to me, that putting a ball valve on ½ inch copper tubing wouldn't be routine, but I'm pretty ignorant, and maybe Firomatics are the best option.)

So I'm fine with the Firomatics outside if it's considered okay (especially by you guys). I understand what @Big Ed_4 said about Firomatics on the return being a no-no, but at least I'd have something for now that I can manually shut, and can switch it out later if necessary, maybe when the inside Firomatic on the return line is changed.

So what do you think, two Firomatics outside, or insist on two ball valves if it can be done, or a Firomatic on the supply and a ball valve or some other kind on the return because Firomatics on returns are frowned upon?

(He also looked at the inside lines and thought the Firomatic on the return inside wasn't a problem and was better than a ball valve, and he thought the barometric damper configuration was fine - I didn't mention that the manufacturer and you guys said it was not correct - and when I mentioned anti-siphon valves he seemed not to be familiar with them, but then said “Oh, a check valve” - but they're different, aren't they? - so I'm not totally confident...)

seized123

…Not totally confident in the tech, I mean; I have a lot of confidence in what I learn on this site!

STEVEusaPA

No valves on return by code, especially a firomatic. If it fails closed, it will instantly blow out the pump seal, and if you’re lucky you’ll only have a mess. If you’re unlucky, you’ll have a catastrophe.
Do it like my second post. 1b, option 1

seized123

Thanks @STEVEusaPA, what I thought.

So for now it looks like Firomatic or ball valve on the supply line at the tank, and ball valve on the return at the tank and another to replace the Firomatic on the return inside. And then the other changes you suggested.

I was wondering what would be the advantages of switching to 3/8 tubing from 1/2, if any, since you mentioned it, just so I know? 

seized123

Oops, @STEVEusaPA, I missed that you said no valves at all on return line. So, not even a ball valve kept open all the time except for leaks downstream or repairs? If there were a leak in the return line, even with the system off what would prevent oil from siphoning out the return line? Just being paranoid here …

And thanks a ton for the specific information! From what you say it seems neither my old plumber nor this tech know the code. Speaking of which, what is a good source for the actual current code for oil heat where a civilian can look it up? Where the heck does The Code actually reside? I am in Orange County, NY. and so far an internet search turns up nothing. Is it the Fire Code maybe? Where do you guys go to look something up definitively about oil heat requirements?

seized123

Ah, there’s something called the New York State Mechanical Code! Is that what a NY oil guy would use? And check this out, 1305.4, no valves, as you already knew. I can show this to whoever I end up using when they insist they’ve always done it the other way. 

MikeAmann

I'm confused. Do these go together?



You have an above ground tank. Is your situation the exception or the rule?

seized123

Good catch! Looking at it again think the exception applies to the section before it, on supply piping. Here’s a screenshot that makes that clearer:

seized123

And there’s this (see screenshot below). So what I need is an anti-siphon valve on supply at the tank, and to remove the Firomatic on the return line, no valves on return at all, as @STEVEusaPA has been pointing out.

MikeAmann

OK, I agree.
But it looks like you need an anti-siphon valve.

seized123

Yup, looks like anti-siphon valve on supply at tank, remove Firomatic on return, (then when that’s done eventually go ahead with the other stuff).

seized123

So, I also asked these questions in another thread I started about safety valves, so now this discussion about anti-siphon valves etc. is going on in two threads in parallel - my fault, if this is frowned upon please let me know.

Meanwhile, obviously you’re right, @STEVEusaPA, but here’s what I still don’ get:

With no valve of any kind on the return line as the code appears to require, how could you possibly service anything involving that line between tank and burner? If you remove the pump cover to replace the strainer, or want to replace the pump, or if the return is leaking at the pump, whatever, wouldn’t oil siphon out the line if you disconnected it? There must be two-pipe systems out there with no valves as per code, what do pros do to deal with this?

pecmsg

seized123 said:

So, I also asked these questions in another thread I started about safety valves, so now this discussion about anti-siphon valves etc. is going on in two threads in parallel - my fault, if this is frowned upon please let me know.

 

@Erin Holohan Haskell

clean up on isle 9

seized123

I’ll limit these questions to this thread.

ChrisJ

If the return should go to the top of the tank why would it need a valve?

seized123

This plot keeps thickening. I see that NFPA 31 says no valves allowed in return EXCEPT for a hard-seat or ball valve with the handle removed, which is exactly what @MikeAmann suggested, but the NYS Mechanical Code (which would apply to me?) says no valves at all which is what @STEVEusaPA said.

The thing is, no valve at all on the return makes no sense to me because it seems to me a leak or disconnection for repair would start siphoning out oil, as @pecmsg agrees, but I can’t figure out how you guys deal with this. Is the reality that all 2-pipe systems you deal with really have shutoff valves? Is the NYS code a senseless requirement? (Or maybe there’s some exception somewhere in it hat I’m missing.)

seized123

… (Of course I mean it would siphon oil only for systems with the tank well above the burner like mine.)

pecmsg

That’s why the return only goes in to the top of the tank well above the oil level. 

Your guy wants to install valves that are not allowed how do we know he followed that rule as well?

seized123

@pecmsg you have read my mind! I obviously didn’t know enough about it but it did It occur to me that for exactly that reason maybe return lines are supposed to extend only a little bit below the top of the tank, and THEN it occurred to me that I have no idea whether the plumber actually did that! I will have to ask the oil company to check. (My old plumber did the installation, he’s retired and moved south, so I’m trying out the oil company for service.) Or I could just switch to one-pipe and not have to worry about these questions …?

@CTOilHeat had a very interesting technique on the other thread (which I am trying not to post on anymore) and I copy it here:

“With your set up, shut the supply line firomatic off, drop the oil filter, then run the burner until it reset a couple times. This will push the oil in the return line into the tank and also test the primary controls lockout function, which is pretty important.”

ChrisJ

If I hired someone in my area I'd expect him to know and understand code in that area.

If I have to explain code to him I think id want someone else.   I should be able to hire him and walk away.  It shouldn't be my problem, that's why I'm paying him. No?