Re: DWV and Fernco Part II
Posted by Chris on February 25, 2004 at 13:52:51:
In response to Re: DWV and Fernco Part II
: To recap, idiot contractor ran underslab 3" directly below toilet port, resulting in illegal vent behind the bend (bend formed with a wye and 45) and the flange a mere 8" from the wall.

: Top-down view:
: -----|wye+45 up|--->vent up

This is illegal but not unusual. It actually seems to work, but that's probably only because the pipe is big enough that the top half acts as a vent. I've seen this setup on several houses in counties around here that don't require inspection. That said, there is a reason for plumbing codes; I'd avoid anything non-code that I could, but that's just me.

The 8" rough-in, of course, is just stupid.

: 1st solution was to cut out the wye and put in a santee which corrects the rough-in dimension but doesn't correct the vent.

: -----|santee up|----|Fernco|-->vent up

You've also added a new violation: a sanitary tee can only be used in a vertical position.

: New solution is to put a wye in ahead of a toilet bend and jog the drain line around the bend to the vent with 45s.
: ------------------
: / \
: ---|wye |---|bend up| --->vent up

: All 3" PVC. I should be able to do this with no Ferncos, yes? And then I'm all legal, yes?

Yes, but why? Since you are now cutting the existing pipe in two places (ahead of the closet bend and behind it, at the bottom of the vent, why not just glue it all up? Make sure that you roll the wye fitting so that the branch is at 45 degrees from the horizontal (or more) if you want this to be legal.

You only need 2" for the toilet vent, btw, but if your existing vent is 3" you might as well stay with that.

One caveat: the orginal setup is often used when the pipe beyond the toilet is the *drain* for other fixtures, i.e. it's a wet vent. If that's the case, you've got a more complicated situation.

: BTW, the inspector will never see this. In this town, homeowners are not allowed to do their own plumbing/electrical/HVAC, only contractors who do crap like this and fast-talk their way out of inspections.

Well, then, I'm with Gary: you should sue the bastard. Unfortunately, it sounds like you've already destroyed the evidence with your first attempt.




Replies to this post
There are none.