Plumbing forum - Stainless Repair Clamps

Author

Stainless Repair Clamps

Eric G.

2005-11-11, 6:21 pm

So yesterday the friggin low-bid excavation contrator where I work decided
to smash one of our pump station force mains. We had to cut out a section
of pipe and install a new piece with stainless repair clamps. It was 6" ID
cast iron if that makes a difference.

The plumbing inspector, while not saying it was against code, was basically
telling us that the repair clamps have a rated life-expectancy, and he was
against approving this repair to be buried again.

We pulled the cut-sheets from the clamps, and called the manufacturer
today, and they have no life-expectancy rating. They will last "for life"
according to them.

We then forwarded the cut-sheets and an email from the manufacturer stating
such. He still refuses to approve them for permanent use.

Has anyone here ever heard of one of these clamps failing when installed
right? Can anyone point me to another reference that might have a life-
expectancy, or specifically states there is none?

I don't have the cut-sheet in front of me, but the clamps were made by
Mueller. They have rubber against the pipe, then stainless steel sheathing
with 4 7/8" stainless bolts to clamp.

Thanks.

Oh, and if I can't find anything else, can someone suggest a way to fight
the inspector on this? I really don't want to fight him if he is right,
but I can't seem to prove that just yet.

Bob Wheatley

2005-11-11, 7:21 pm

"Eric G." <NgOrSePeAnM99@Zoptonline.Znet> wrote in message
news:Xns970BABAD7DA83NgOrSePeAnM99Zoptonl@140.99.99.130...
> So yesterday the friggin low-bid excavation contrator where I work decided
> to smash one of our pump station force mains. We had to cut out a section
> of pipe and install a new piece with stainless repair clamps. It was 6"
> ID
> cast iron if that makes a difference.
>
> The plumbing inspector, while not saying it was against code, was
> basically
> telling us that the repair clamps have a rated life-expectancy, and he was
> against approving this repair to be buried again.
>
> We pulled the cut-sheets from the clamps, and called the manufacturer
> today, and they have no life-expectancy rating. They will last "for life"
> according to them.
>
> We then forwarded the cut-sheets and an email from the manufacturer
> stating
> such. He still refuses to approve them for permanent use.
>
> Has anyone here ever heard of one of these clamps failing when installed
> right? Can anyone point me to another reference that might have a life-
> expectancy, or specifically states there is none?
>
> I don't have the cut-sheet in front of me, but the clamps were made by
> Mueller. They have rubber against the pipe, then stainless steel
> sheathing
> with 4 7/8" stainless bolts to clamp.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Oh, and if I can't find anything else, can someone suggest a way to fight
> the inspector on this? I really don't want to fight him if he is right,
> but I can't seem to prove that just yet.

While I think your inspector is being a dick, there are some contextual
precedents for this particular circumstance. The problem at it's core is
whether your local code perceives a force main as a DWV system, or a high
pressure system. There was a time here locally that all force mains or pump
induced systems were under the codes as pressure systems. IOW, only pressure
rated fittings could be used. About 10 or 15 years ago there was a flip-flop
of John Kerry proportions. Everything then switched to gravity codes per
UPC. We had to use appropriate long or short DWV fittings, including
cleanouts every 135 degrees of turn.
The point here is that if your code mandates that force main connections are
ruled by DWV codes, you are fine assuming the "no-hub" type bands you used
are acceptable under your code and it's amendments.
However, if your code states that force mains are governed by the pressure
portions of your code, you have a problem.
The easiest fix under the circumstances would be to buy two 6" short M.J.
couplings and four M.J. transition gland packs. You shouldn't need any rods
or thrust blocks since it's a break in a straight line.
If this needs farther explanation let me know.

Bob Wheatley

Eric G.

2005-11-11, 8:21 pm

"Bob Wheatley" <xmaster.dancer@directway.com> wrote in
news:11na6bkrq1ko9a8@corp.supernews.com:

> "Eric G." <NgOrSePeAnM99@Zoptonline.Znet> wrote in message
> news:Xns970BABAD7DA83NgOrSePeAnM99Zoptonl@140.99.99.130...
>
>
>
> While I think your inspector is being a dick, there are some
> contextual precedents for this particular circumstance. The problem at
> it's core is whether your local code perceives a force main as a DWV
> system, or a high pressure system. There was a time here locally that
> all force mains or pump induced systems were under the codes as
> pressure systems. IOW, only pressure rated fittings could be used.
> About 10 or 15 years ago there was a flip-flop of John Kerry
> proportions. Everything then switched to gravity codes per UPC. We had
> to use appropriate long or short DWV fittings, including cleanouts
> every 135 degrees of turn. The point here is that if your code
> mandates that force main connections are ruled by DWV codes, you are
> fine assuming the "no-hub" type bands you used are acceptable under
> your code and it's amendments. However, if your code states that force
> mains are governed by the pressure portions of your code, you have a
> problem. The easiest fix under the circumstances would be to buy two
> 6" short M.J. couplings and four M.J. transition gland packs. You
> shouldn't need any rods or thrust blocks since it's a break in a
> straight line. If this needs farther explanation let me know.
>
>
> Bob Wheatley

Thanks, Bob. No further explanation required. I wasn't personally able
to speak to the inspector, but since we do conform to the UPC, I will at
least have that to stand on. In thinking about it further though, the
excavation contractor is liable for this, and has agreed to pay for the
repairs that we made, and will pay for any changes required to meet the
inspectors approval. So we will probably go the "safer" route and do it
right. I am really not all that comfortable with the repair clamps
considering that this pipe is/was buried on a big piece of shale with no
back-fill.

Anyway, I appreciate the time and the response.

Eric

Red Jacket The Laughing Indian !

2005-11-12, 2:21 pm

We had a Plummer in my city go that way.
He put PVC underground, no joints in a church.
The city refused to pass it, his lawyer went after our
city.
He won. Now we all can put proper PVC in DWV underground.
( PVC manufactures helped in the lawsuit $.)

Look the main thing is proper depth, 12" of screening, slope
and NO joints.

Ax permission for any joints. He should pass it.

"Eric G." <NgOrSePeAnM99@Zoptonline.Znet> wrote in message
news:Xns970BABAD7DA83NgOrSePeAnM99Zoptonl@140.99.99.130...
> So yesterday the friggin low-bid excavation contrator where I work decided
> to smash one of our pump station force mains. We had to cut out a section
> of pipe and install a new piece with stainless repair clamps. It was 6"
ID
> cast iron if that makes a difference.
>
> The plumbing inspector, while not saying it was against code, was
basically
> telling us that the repair clamps have a rated life-expectancy, and he was
> against approving this repair to be buried again.
>
> We pulled the cut-sheets from the clamps, and called the manufacturer
> today, and they have no life-expectancy rating. They will last "for life"
> according to them.
>
> We then forwarded the cut-sheets and an email from the manufacturer
stating
> such. He still refuses to approve them for permanent use.
>
> Has anyone here ever heard of one of these clamps failing when installed
> right? Can anyone point me to another reference that might have a life-
> expectancy, or specifically states there is none?
>
> I don't have the cut-sheet in front of me, but the clamps were made by
> Mueller. They have rubber against the pipe, then stainless steel
sheathing
> with 4 7/8" stainless bolts to clamp.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Oh, and if I can't find anything else, can someone suggest a way to fight
> the inspector on this? I really don't want to fight him if he is right,
> but I can't seem to prove that just yet.

Ned Flanders

2005-11-12, 3:21 pm

we burry sch35 outside and it is in 12' lengths I think. The connection is
a hub with rubber o-rings at the end of each section. you just pound the
sections together. When making repairs I will try to dig up enough to bend
it just enough to use a coupling with pvc glue to make joint. If cant dig up
enough I use pvc slip coupling. The sch 35 is more elastic and can
withstand more movement. I don't like to burry the no-hub connectors out of
fear with movement they might work loose. I would never burry a fernco
under any condition. this is of course just reg gravity fed drains not
under force from pumping. The pump mains here I think are butt welded
together like the water lines. (not sure have not worked on it just looked
at it)

"Red Jacket The Laughing Indian !" <RedJacketTheaughingindian!@yahoo.com>
wrote in message news:B7idnRjepN_AsOvenZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@adelphia.com...
> We had a Plummer in my city go that way.
> He put PVC underground, no joints in a church.
> The city refused to pass it, his lawyer went after our
> city.
> He won. Now we all can put proper PVC in DWV underground.
> ( PVC manufactures helped in the lawsuit $.)
>
> Look the main thing is proper depth, 12" of screening, slope
> and NO joints.
>
> Ax permission for any joints. He should pass it.
>
>
> "Eric G." <NgOrSePeAnM99@Zoptonline.Znet> wrote in message
> news:Xns970BABAD7DA83NgOrSePeAnM99Zoptonl@140.99.99.130...
> ID
> basically
> stating
> sheathing
>

Red Jacket The Laughing Indian !

2005-11-13, 10:21 pm

Sched 40 comes in rolls, too bad no other line sched is
offered.
I don't know for sure if it is, but it would work out nice
if we had that.

"Ned Flanders" <mrstinky@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:TTqdf.2807$C62.1563@trndny04...
> we burry sch35 outside and it is in 12' lengths I think. The connection
is
> a hub with rubber o-rings at the end of each section. you just pound the
> sections together. When making repairs I will try to dig up enough to
bend
> it just enough to use a coupling with pvc glue to make joint. If cant dig
up
> enough I use pvc slip coupling. The sch 35 is more elastic and can
> withstand more movement. I don't like to burry the no-hub connectors out
of
> fear with movement they might work loose. I would never burry a fernco
> under any condition. this is of course just reg gravity fed drains not
> under force from pumping. The pump mains here I think are butt welded
> together like the water lines. (not sure have not worked on it just looked
> at it)
>
>
>
> "Red Jacket The Laughing Indian !" <RedJacketTheaughingindian!@yahoo.com>
> wrote in message news:B7idnRjepN_AsOvenZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@adelphia.com...
6"[color=darkred]
installed[color=darkred]
life-[color=darkred]
fight[color=darkred]
right,[color=darkred]
>
>

Eric G.

2005-11-14, 9:21 pm

Well, just to follow up on this a bit: The Mueller repair clamps are rated
for a continuous 500 PSI pressure, and are certified for buriel with proper
backfill and bedding. So the inspector has accepted the repair and
approved it.

The problem that I really have now is that my excavation contractor needs
to dig down another 5 feet in this trench to complete installation of a new
water main. He is asking permission to blast becuase of all of the shale
(in the Princeton, NJ area we call it "Princeton Select" soil). We have
obviously denied permission for this, but the township went ahead and
issued a blasting permit anyway.

So, we currently have a 6" sewage force main, with two repair clamps, and a
6" water line (fire main) both suspended by 6"x6" pressure treated lumber
in a trench that is already 4' deep, and they want to blast down another
5' to complete the job.

This is really what happens when my company decides to put out an RFP
without asking anyone with any knowledge to work on the specifications.
AND THEN they go ahead and accept the low bid contractor even when the bid
was SO low that it looks a bit suspicious.

Sorry for venting here, but I really hate dumb fucking engineers that never
had to work in the field (or even SEE the field) before they got their
degree or certification or whatever. And on top of that working for a
company that sometimes wants to be so fucking cheap that they'll wind up
payinf three times to get the job done right.

Eric

Bob Wheatley

2005-11-14, 9:21 pm

"Eric G." <NgOrSePeAnM99@Zoptonline.Znet> wrote in message
news:Xns970EC48CB1A1ANgOrSePeAnM99Zoptonl@140.99.99.130...
> Well, just to follow up on this a bit: The Mueller repair clamps are
> rated
> for a continuous 500 PSI pressure, and are certified for buriel with
> proper
> backfill and bedding. So the inspector has accepted the repair and
> approved it.
>
> The problem that I really have now is that my excavation contractor needs
> to dig down another 5 feet in this trench to complete installation of a
> new
> water main. He is asking permission to blast becuase of all of the shale
> (in the Princeton, NJ area we call it "Princeton Select" soil). We have
> obviously denied permission for this, but the township went ahead and
> issued a blasting permit anyway.
>
> So, we currently have a 6" sewage force main, with two repair clamps, and
> a
> 6" water line (fire main) both suspended by 6"x6" pressure treated lumber
> in a trench that is already 4' deep, and they want to blast down another
> 5' to complete the job.
>
> This is really what happens when my company decides to put out an RFP
> without asking anyone with any knowledge to work on the specifications.
> AND THEN they go ahead and accept the low bid contractor even when the bid
> was SO low that it looks a bit suspicious.
>
> Sorry for venting here, but I really hate dumb fucking engineers that
> never
> had to work in the field (or even SEE the field) before they got their
> degree or certification or whatever. And on top of that working for a
> company that sometimes wants to be so fucking cheap that they'll wind up
> payinf three times to get the job done right.
>
> Eric
>

The only thing you ever see in an ivory tower is....

Ivory.

Bob Wheatley

LinkBot