# Some backflows I installed this week



## Plumber patt (Jan 26, 2011)

Just a few back flows I installed this week


----------



## BROOKLYN\PLUMB (May 21, 2010)

Pic #2 shows relief piping in the sink below rim even though the basket has an airbreak here you still need indirect drainage


----------



## SewerRatz (Apr 25, 2009)

I noticed there is no strainer installed, are these on a fire protection system? Here in Illinois it is code to have strainers on all the backflow devices except fire sprinkler systems.


----------



## easttexasplumb (Oct 13, 2010)

BROOKLYN\PLUMB said:


> Pic #2 shows relief piping in the sink below rim even though the basket has an airbreak here you still need indirect drainage


 
Like cars now have seat belts and airbags. I dont see the need for an air gap between the pipe and sink, the basket is an airgap.


----------



## hroark2112 (Apr 16, 2011)

The only issue I see is the valves are on the wall side, harder to operate them that way.


----------



## BROOKLYN\PLUMB (May 21, 2010)

easttexasplumb said:


> Like cars now have seat belts and airbags. I dont see the need for an air gap between the pipe and sink, the basket is an airgap.


On boilers we need a check valve between the boiler and the backflow I just try to follow the rules the way they make them and if I tried to apply logic the way you just did I would never pass inspections


----------



## Tommy plumber (Feb 19, 2010)

The bottom pic with the sticker 'non-potable water' is that a double-check?


----------



## ZL700 (Dec 8, 2009)

SewerRatz said:


> I noticed there is no strainer installed, are these on a fire protection system? Here in Illinois it is code to have strainers on all the backflow devices except fire sprinkler systems.


1/2" and 3/4" RPZ's in a commercial building on a fire protection system? highly unlikely right? Not to mention the missing locked bypass if it was


----------



## SewerRatz (Apr 25, 2009)

ZL700 said:


> 1/2" and 3/4" RPZ's in a commercial building on a fire protection system? highly unlikely right? Not to mention the missing locked bypass if it was


I was just making a point Mr Z, that fire protection systems are the only backflow preventers allowed by Illinois code not to have a strainer installed.

BTW ZL700 I noticed you never did posted an intro http://www.plumbingzone.com/f3/


----------



## ZL700 (Dec 8, 2009)

SewerRatz said:


> I was just making a point Mr Z, that fire protection systems are the only backflow preventers allowed by Illinois code not to have a strainer installed.
> 
> BTW ZL700 I noticed you never did posted an intro http://www.plumbingzone.com/f3/


 
With the question: 
"I noticed there is no strainer installed, are these on a fire protection system?" 
It appeared you were questioning these pictures. 

After 359 posts, did they erase it?


----------



## SewerRatz (Apr 25, 2009)

ZL700 said:


> With the question:
> "I noticed there is no strainer installed, are these on a fire protection system?"
> It appeared you were questioning these pictures.
> 
> After 359 posts, did they erase it?


 No my Intro still up. 

And yes I questioned the pictures cause they are missing strainers. Then I explained how in Illinois they are required on all installs except fire sprinkler system installs.

You might of gotten that I made the question to bring up the point, if you read the whole post I made.


----------



## ZL700 (Dec 8, 2009)

SewerRatz said:


> No my Intro still up.
> 
> And yes I questioned the pictures cause they are missing strainers. Then I explained how in Illinois they are required on all installs except fire sprinkler system installs.
> 
> You might of gotten that I made the question to bring up the point, if you read the whole post I made.


On that note, shouldnt all RPZ's have strainers anyways to prevent debris entering and disrupting seats wasting water and requiring premature service?

Why take shortcuts of no strainer, anyone?


----------



## SewerRatz (Apr 25, 2009)

ZL700 said:


> On that note, shouldnt all RPZ's have strainers anyways to prevent debris entering and disrupting seats wasting water and requiring premature service?
> 
> Why take shortcuts of no strainer, anyone?


 Strainers can clog and prevent the flow that is needed on a fire sprinkler system. They also do not see much flow except during the annual testing of the backflow device, and flow testing of the system.

Any other application of a backflow device is required by my code to have a strainer.


----------



## BROOKLYN\PLUMB (May 21, 2010)

easttexasplumb said:


> Like cars now have seat belts and airbags. I dont see the need for an air gap between the pipe and sink, the basket is an airgap.


Nope not an airgap its airbreak, an airgap is fixture outlet and an airbreak is waste


----------



## RealLivePlumber (Jun 22, 2008)

BROOKLYN\PLUMB said:


> Nope not an airgap its airbreak, an airgap is fixture outlet and an airbreak is waste


:no:


*Air Break (drainage system): *A piping arrangement in which a drain from a fixture, appliance, or device discharges into a receptor at a point below the flood level rim and above the trap seal of the receptor.


*Air Gap (drainage system): *The unobstructed vertical distance through the free atmosphere between the outlet
of the waste pipe and the flood level rim of the receptor into which it is discharging.​ 

*Air Gap (water distribution system): *The unobstructed vertical distance through the free atmosphere between the lowest opening from any pipe or faucet supplying water to a tank, plumbing xture or other device and the flood level rim of the receptor.​


----------



## sikxsevn (Jun 23, 2009)

ZL700 said:


> On that note, shouldnt all RPZ's have strainers anyways to prevent debris entering and disrupting seats wasting water and requiring premature service?
> 
> Why take shortcuts of no strainer, anyone?


Yes, all backflow preventers should have a wye strainer. A few dollars or a few hundred dollars, take your pick.


----------



## BROOKLYN\PLUMB (May 21, 2010)

RealLivePlumber said:


> :no:
> 
> Air Break (drainage system): A piping arrangement in which a drain from a fixture, appliance, or device discharges into a receptor at a point below the flood level rim and above the trap seal of the receptor.
> 
> ...


I stand corrected but I'm still right


----------



## Widdershins (Feb 5, 2011)

BROOKLYN\PLUMB said:


> I stand corrected but I'm still right


 Regional code requirements aside -- Exactly how are you still right?


----------



## BROOKLYN\PLUMB (May 21, 2010)

Widdershins said:


> Regional code requirements aside -- Exactly how are you still right?


While I figure that out can you get me a drink 

Thanks Widder


----------



## Widdershins (Feb 5, 2011)

BROOKLYN\PLUMB said:


> While I figure that out can you get me a drink
> 
> Thanks Widder


 Mixing it up right now.

I'm assuming you want it Neat.


----------



## BROOKLYN\PLUMB (May 21, 2010)

Widdershins said:


> Mixing it up right now.
> 
> I'm assuming you want it Neat.


I don't care what they say about you


----------



## Widdershins (Feb 5, 2011)

BROOKLYN\PLUMB said:


> I don't care what they say about you


 Neither do I.

Life is too short to dwell on the things you can't change.

Cheers.:thumbup:


----------



## Plumber patt (Jan 26, 2011)

Tommy plumber said:


> The bottom pic with the sticker 'non-potable water' is that a double-check?


Yes


----------



## Plumber patt (Jan 26, 2011)

ZL700 said:


> 1/2" and 3/4" RPZ's in a commercial building on a fire protection system? highly unlikely right? Not to mention the missing locked bypass if it was


All on potable water, no need fir strainers here


----------



## Plumber patt (Jan 26, 2011)

BROOKLYN\PLUMB said:


> Pic #2 shows relief piping in the sink below rim even though the basket has an airbreak here you still need indirect drainage


The basket is sufficient here


----------



## Plumber patt (Jan 26, 2011)

hroark2112 said:


> The only issue I see is the valves are on the wall side, harder to operate them that way.


Valves are piped minimum 3 inches off wall, valves are very easy to operate


----------



## c-note (Aug 12, 2011)

BROOKLYN\PLUMB said:


> On boilers we need a check valve between the boiler and the backflow I just try to follow the rules the way they make them and if I tried to apply logic the way you just did I would never pass inspections


true dat


----------



## Plumber patt (Jan 26, 2011)

c-note said:


> true dat


Makes no sense to have a check valve between back flow and the boiler, the bckflow is your check valve. With a Check valve downstream of the back flow it makes your back flow redundant.


----------



## Plumberman (Jul 7, 2008)

I like the pipe supports in the last picture. Looks good

As I've said before. There will ALWAYS be haters!

Kudos to you for posting your work 


----------



## BROOKLYN\PLUMB (May 21, 2010)

For the record I wasn't hating and they are nice clean installs


----------



## Plumber patt (Jan 26, 2011)

Plumberman said:


> I like the pipe supports in the last picture. Looks good
> 
> As I've said before. There will ALWAYS be haters!
> 
> Kudos to you for posting your work 


If I have time, I always try and make my hangers look nice, the cleaner and nicer your work looks, the more the inspector may over look anything that u missed


----------



## Greenguy (Jan 22, 2011)

Plumber patt said:


> Makes no sense to have a check valve between back flow and the boiler, the bckflow is your check valve. With a Check valve downstream of the back flow it makes your back flow redundant.


When you Better to have that redundancy in case something fails like the back flow assembly. Were required to use duel checks as well on our boiler feeds.


----------



## Tommy plumber (Feb 19, 2010)

Plumber patt said:


> If I have time, I always try and make my hangers look nice, the cleaner and nicer your work looks, the more the inspector may over look anything that u missed









What?....:blink:




I've been hearing that for years. Don't believe that BS for one minute. 
So, according to that logic, if my jobsite is tidy, an inspector should look the other way if he sees something that violates the code?


----------



## DesertOkie (Jul 15, 2011)

Tommy plumber said:


> [/COLOR]
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, but only on fridays before 3 day weekends.


----------



## Plumberman (Jul 7, 2008)

Plumber patt said:


> If I have time, I always try and make my hangers look nice, the cleaner and nicer your work looks, the more the inspector may over look anything that u missed


Well, I wouldn't go that far

A code violation is a code violation, no matter if it's the cleanest install ever installed. 

Inspectors here want to see workmanship and be within the minimum of code compliance, in compliance being the most important.


----------



## d78coots (Mar 30, 2009)

good work. 

although its a little more money, unions on them things make for a smoother ride down the road.


----------



## 422 plumber (Jul 31, 2008)

Plumber patt said:


> Makes no sense to have a check valve between back flow and the boiler, the bckflow is your check valve. With a Check valve downstream of the back flow it makes your back flow redundant.


Sometimes you have to install a checkvalve after the RPZ to prevent water hammer slamming back into the 2nd check and causing it to dump. Usually in an industrial setting with long pipe runs, and high pressure, where the water can pick up good velocity and then bounce back at the RPZ when a valve closes.


----------

