Hall of hacks & pikers Photo's please.

[Mike Leary]

Originally Posted by Wet_Boots

can you explain why it would fail to provide effective backflow protection?

It may or may not have provided protection, only a very skilled tester could have known. The point I make is NO assembly shall be modified in any way, which makes that hack lash-up with the ball valve downstream, illegal, and is not approved.

[Wet_Boots]

Originally Posted by Mike Leary

It may or may not have provided protection, only a very skilled tester could have known. The point I make is NO assembly shall be modified in any way, which makes that hack lash-up with the ball valve downstream, illegal, and is not approved.

The ASSE approval is for the central casting, and not for the assembly with isolation valves. If ASSE is happy, my regional authorities are happy.

[mitchgo]

Originally Posted by Wet_Boots

The ASSE approval is for the central casting, and not for the assembly with isolation valves. If ASSE is happy, my regional authorities are happy.

I actually agree, I think. The shut off handles are supposed to be the same

Up here every single bypass assembly that I've seen off a RPDA or DCDA is modified. Maybe that's the exception and not for residential assemblies?

[Wet_Boots]

I wouldn't doubt that California rules could be different, and we all know these things are made so they can sell in California.

[Mike Leary]

Originally Posted by Wet_Boots

The ASSE approval is for the central casting, and not for the assembly with isolation valves. If ASSE is happy, my regional authorities are happy.

Nope, you don't move the ball valves, hence the term, "assembly". Mitch should know better. You, not being a tester, obviously, would not have a clue.

[mitchgo]

The alteration I see is on bypass assemblies. I see it every time I test a large DCDA or RPDA

[Wet_Boots]

Originally Posted by Mike Leary

Nope, you don't move the ball valves, hence the term, "assembly". Mitch should know better. You, not being a tester, obviously, would not have a clue.

ASSE cert is for the assembly of checks and air gaps - it is an assembly, even without the isolation valves.

It may not please, according to California, or WASP (WAshington State Pinheads ), but away from their domain, the powers that be do not care.

[Fireguy97]

Originally Posted by Wet_Boots

ASSE cert is for the assembly of checks and air gaps - it is an assembly, even without the isolation valves.

It may not please, according to California, or WASP (WAshington State Pinheads ), but away from their domain, the powers that be do not care.

That RP doesn't have an air gap. The Relief Port is below the flood plain. That wouldn't pass up here either.

The powers that be, won't care as long as nothing happens. If and when it does happen and lawyers get involved, there will be a crap storm dragging everyone that touched that 'assembly' in with it.

Mick

[Wet_Boots]

Originally Posted by Fireguy97

That RP doesn't have an air gap. The Relief Port is below the flood plain. That wouldn't pass up here either.

The powers that be, won't care as long as nothing happens. If and when it does happen and lawyers get involved, there will be a crap storm dragging everyone that touched that 'assembly' in with it.

Mick

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to observe that the photo showed an RPZ in a meter pit.

That install is very much a matter of presiding local standards. It happens that there is a clause in the regional code that provides for such installs, with the requirement that the actual flood plain in the region is below the device. They do not highlight that clause, but it is there.

[mitchgo]

As far as my knowledge goes- here you can have a below ground RP
IF

A drain is installed and the drain releases elsewhere physically lower then the rp box. So basically it has to be on a hill in order to have a below ground rp.