Existing C.I. DWV leak and cleanouts

[ribber]

I need to replace a cast iron 4x2 wye horizontal in my basement ceiling (leaking from hairline crack in the body of the fitting) It is the third part of three hub/spigot leaded fittings that are no-hubbed to lines of newer vintage above and below. Basically I have from top to bottom (left to right in picture): a no-hub connection to stubby length of pipe leaded into 1/4 bend from vertical riser, 1/4 bend horizontal, 4x2 wye horizontal - one right into another. After the 4x2 wye, it is no-hubbed to PVC with an immediate test tee. The 4x2 picks up a horizontal PVC sink line(on other side of pipe in picture).

Ideally I would replace the three fittings with no-hubs of the proper radius and with cleanouts, starting farthest upstream with a combi-wye on its back and the cleanout on the straight. However the reason for the original (60 year old and no problem) 1/4 bends is because the riser is against the chimney and comes down directly over the boiler flue. A long sweep will fit, but a combi-wye won't because of the straight leg. My question is that the requirement that cleanouts be provided at bends greater than 45 - if I replace the 1/4 bends with long sweeps, is that existing test tee 30" downstream from the sweeps sufficient cleanout? If I use a combi-wye or a wye as the second fitting to provide a downstream-pointing cleanout, then the first bend would be unreachable by snake - running it upstream from the test tee, the snake wouldn't make the turn because the straight run to the cleanout is easier. So do I skip trying to provide a downstream-pointing cleanout because it will actually make it harder to snake than the existing test tee?

 

[ribber]

Maybe I should simplify the question: when plumbing code says a cleanout needs to installed "at each change of direction of horizontal waste or soil lines and branch lines, that are greater then 45°" does a test tee 24" horizontally downstream satisfy the requirement of "at" the change of direction?

 

[Sponsor]

 

[Tuttles Revenge]

Could you LS Elbow at a 45 to the PVC and connect with a 45 or Wye and move that CO to the run of the WYE?

 

[ribber]

Thank you for responding. I *can* do that, it's what I was considering (plus I have to put another wye in for the 2") but the issue I have with it is that the long sweep can't be snaked then. The end line cleanout only cleans itself downward, not the branch with the sweep. If the two turns are made with sweeps, running a snake up from the test tee cleans out the sweeps. If the turn is made with a wye, running a snake from the CO misses the sweep, and running a snake up from the test tee will likely also miss the turn.

 

[ribber]

(If I went with a 4" wye, I'd put the 4x2 wye upstream of it like this)

 

[ribber]

...or is the possibility of the vertical long sweep clogging just something that won't happen because it's got about a 10' drop above it anyway? This riser serves only a 2nd floor bathroom. When I say the two 1/4 bends in a row haven't been a problem even though they're tight 5" radius 1/4 bends, it's been no problem for at least 16 years.

 

[Jeff H Young]

Tuttles revenge has a solution good enough. I didn't mention or explain it but he shows it well cleanout within 5 ft of end of line. plus in practical terms I doubt you'll ever have a problem. Don't know if this is being inspected but I wouldn't stress it I wouldn't expect a fail unless you know inspector really has it out for you. I don't know Mass Code but This passes all day long in my area