Thread: Sink trap

Odd trap -- is this trap acceptable

Similar Threads:

• Loud gurlging noises - sink/tub drainage
• p-trap
• trap
• Acceptable under kitchen sink???
• Plumbing under kitchen sink....

Originally Posted by Barry Thirtle

Odd trap -- is this trap acceptable

Yes..

I disagree, no it is not.

The piping has been increased a trade size (1-1/2") - the Sch. 40, from the tail piece (1-1/4" the PB), then is reduced again to 1-1/4 for the cheap flimsy Sch. 10 or 20 trap.

The intermediate increase followed by the size reduction at the trap is not permitted and for good reason. The mix of materials and other issues present further contribute to the deficient and defective installation which are problematic and have the potential to compromise heath in addition to the obvious deterioration and damage to property by the contamination.

The configuration is completely wrong for the tail to arm, and the PB nut is completely "unscrewed" the gasket is not engaged, nothing is securing the drain bsket tail piece.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

I disagree, no it is not.

The piping has been increased a trade size (1-1/2") - the Sch. 40, from the tail piece (1-1/4" the PB), then is reduced again to 1-1/4 for the cheap flimsy Sch. 10 or 20 trap.

The intermediate increase followed by the size reduction at the trap is not permitted and for good reason. The mix of materials and other issues present further contribute to the deficient and defective installation which are problematic and have the potential to compromise heath.

Mr Watson is correct in saying that reducing pipe diameter from 1.5" to 1.25" is not allowed.
However I'm not sure the pipe diameter has been reduced.
To me it looks like 1.5" sch 40 trap going to 1.5" thin wall trap arm.
With the tail piece being 1.25"

sanitary bends are required for drainage not vent elbows. Street fittings. Change in direction prior to trap wrong. Unservicable running trap. It is completely DIY hack work and not correct.

Slip within trap assembly for servicing and trap arm, not as tail piece extensions and not for drainage/waste. Plumbers putty, caulk, and quik-stop are not acceptable methods for chemically welding PVC, same requires use of the correct primer and chemical weld.

Plumbing codes are public health and safety not just occupant or individual safety issues. This is most wrong and unacceptable.

The camera perspective distorts sizes. The tail piece is 1 1/4". The drain pipe appears to be 1 1/2" all the way. That is normal.

The trap has a slip joint under the sink and a screw connection at the downstream end, also normal.

There is a nut directly under the sink drain which compresses the rubber ring and it is not visibly leaking there. Then a compression fitting on the tailpiece, not visibly leaking. A third nut seals the tailpiece to the PVC.

Agreed, the brown gunk looks wrong.
The original sink has likely been replaced by a new cabinet, and the installer used elbows to match the new drain up to the old pipe. I would warn of the possibility of clogging because of the elbows.

Originally Posted by John Kogel

... I would warn of the possibility of clogging because of the elbows.

I don't see that they are any more likely to be a problem than the setup on a double kitchen sink. The ells look to have the same radius.

The primary issue to me is that the p-trap should be directly below the tailpiece. What is shown is what is called a running trap where the trap arm should be. I am not sure what plumbing code this falls under, but I know the International Code(s) don't allow this.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Yes..

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

I disagree, no it is not.

I agree with Watson - that trap is not acceptable.

That is a shallow running trap, and running traps are not allowed.

The proper configuration for a trap is to have the inlet to the trap come in above the outlet to the trap and meet required water seal depth.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

I agree with Watson - that trap is not acceptable.

That is a shallow running trap, and running traps are not allowed.

The proper configuration for a trap is to have the inlet to the trap come in above the outlet to the trap and meet required water seal depth.

I concede, evidently I am mistaken.
However I can not find anything in the IRC on running traps.
Could you provide some information?
I do not have the UPC

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

I agree with Watson - that trap is not acceptable.

What!?! Jerry and Watson agree on something? Someone please help me off the floor and back into my chair.

Originally Posted by Bruce Ramsey

What!?! Jerry and Watson agree on something? .

Just another Sign of the Impending Doom !
End of the world December 21, 2012?

Good one Bruce!!!

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

I concede, evidently I am mistaken.
However I can not find anything in the IRC on running traps.
Could you provide some information?
I do not have the UPC

The unammended IRC plumbing chapters are IPC not UPC based. TX uses IPC and IRC, the editions used vary on the area as large cities, their extra-area jurisdictions, the counties, or if default to state-wide adoptions.

The information regarding the HOST of defects between drain basket and supposed trap arm in both the IRC and its references and deferences to the IPC and the IPC. The IPC is available to review for free on line.

I've already indulged you repeatedly and you've argued the obvious, If plumbing and fluid dynamics are a weak point for you, there are a host of resources available to you to help you understand both the codes, and general plumbing, Rick. Since you are not the OP, I CHOOSE to not indulge you further, esp. your failure to recognize the incorrect changes in direction prior to the incorrect trap & trap arm.

The entirety from the fixture discharge to the incorrect transition to what is visable prior to the wall finish is wrong for a host of reasons of which I have pointed out at least half a dozen.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

The unammended IRC plumbing chapters are IPC not UPC based. TX uses IPC and IRC, the editions used vary on the area as large cities, their extra-area jurisdictions, the counties, or if default to state-wide adoptions.

The information regarding the HOST of defects between drain basket and supposed trap arm in both the IRC and its references and deferences to the IPC and the IPC. The IPC is available to review for free on line.

I've already indulged you repeatedly and you've argued the obvious, If plumbing and fluid dynamics are a weak point for you, there are a host of resources available to you to help you understand both the codes, and general plumbing, Rick. Since you are not the OP, I CHOOSE to not indulge you further, esp. your failure to recognize the incorrect changes in direction prior to the incorrect trap & trap arm.

The entirety from the fixture discharge to the incorrect transition to what is visable prior to the wall finish is wrong for a host of reasons of which I have pointed out at least half a dozen.

Thank you
I'll keep that in mind.

Rick, I commend you for your respsonse to Watson's tirade and for holding your tongue, I would not have. I think you add much more to this forum than Watson. I, and am sure many others, am fed up with Watson's know it all attitude and his complete lack of manners and general civility. I usually just skip his responses as I know they are going to be long winded and off point. Watson, the definition of manners is "the unenforced standards of conduct which demonstrate that a person is proper, caring, non-grouchy, polite, and refined", if manners are a problem for you I recommend buying a book or taking a class. Sorry but the grouchy *#!*&^ just got to me.

Originally Posted by Tom Rees

Rick, I commend you for your respsonse to Watson's tirade and for holding your tongue, I would not have. I think you add much more to this forum than Watson. I, and am sure many others, am fed up with Watson's know it all attitude and his complete lack of manners and general civility. I usually just skip his responses as I know they are going to be long winded and off point. Watson, the definition of manners is "the unenforced standards of conduct which demonstrate that a person is proper, caring, non-grouchy, polite, and refined", if manners are a problem for you I recommend buying a book or taking a class. Sorry but the grouchy *#!*&^ just got to me.

Thank you Tom

But I was in error

BTW
My tongue is still bleeding
Urban Dictionary: bite your tongue

Originally Posted by Tom Rees

Rick, I commend you for your respsonse to Watson's tirade and for holding your tongue, I would not have. I think you add much more to this forum than Watson. I, and am sure many others, am fed up with Watson's know it all attitude and his complete lack of manners and general civility. I usually just skip his responses as I know they are going to be long winded and off point. Watson, the definition of manners is "the unenforced standards of conduct which demonstrate that a person is proper, caring, non-grouchy, polite, and refined", if manners are a problem for you I recommend buying a book or taking a class. Sorry but the grouchy *#!*&^ just got to me.

Tom, the ignore feature is a wonderful tool on this website. Click on their name, select their profile and then select to put them on your ignore list! You will see their name in the thread but that is all!

Originally Posted by Bruce Ramsey

What!?! Jerry and Watson agree on something? Someone please help me off the floor and back into my chair.

I know how you feel

Originally Posted by Bruce Ramsey

What!?! Jerry and Watson agree on something? Someone please help me off the floor and back into my chair.

I guess in some sort of way, I brought them together.
What have I done!

I agree only that the elbows ahead of the trap is wrong. The tailpiece installation and the pipe sizing is correct in my book.

Jerry agrees that the running trap is not acceptable. That is not an endorsement for the rest of that blather, or is it?

Originally Posted by John Kogel

I agree only that the elbows ahead of the trap is wrong. The tailpiece installation and the pipe sizing is correct in my book.

Jerry agrees that the running trap is not acceptable. That is not an endorsement for the rest of that blather, or is it?

I wondered if someone would catch that ... ... no, it is not an endorsement of the rest of Watson's blather; but it is wrong for several reasons, Watson included some, embellished on things not wrong, and missed other things which are wrong.

Suffice it to say that "It's wrong - have plumber install a proper trap."

Does the IRC not recognize offset traps? In WI you can offset a trap 15” horizontally (or vertically) from a drain, not sure why they did it in this case. This would be acceptable as long as it is within 15” and the trap seal is within the 2” to 4” limitation. If there is a change in pipe size here, as long as the trap can be removed you comply with the cleanout requirements for the different pipe sizes.

I agree it is an odd set up and should be changed, but it would pass here. WI does not specifically address running traps in our code, but the 15” max offset deals with it indirectly.

Originally Posted by Mike Kleisch

Does the IRC not recognize offset traps? In WI you can offset a trap 15” horizontally (or vertically) from a drain, not sure why they did it in this case. This would be acceptable as long as it is within 15” and the trap seal is within the 2” to 4” limitation.

Mike,

It is not the offset of the trap which is wrong, it is the style of the trap which is wrong. A trap with the inlet and the outlet at the same height are susceptible to self-siphoning during use. The trap inlet should be higher than the trap outlet.

The IRC allows a trap to be offset, as you call it, by up to 30" from the center line of the fixture outlet to the center line of the trap inlet. The vertical distance from the fixture outlet to the trap weir shall not exceed 24".

The Wisconsin Residential Code - Plumbing section ( https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/cod...387/382/III/32 ) only allows 15" (vertical and horizontal distance from the fixture outlet) as you stated, which means the IRC is more lenient than the Wisconsin code in both horizontal distance and in vertical distance.

The IRC states that the trap shall be of "standard design", then does not address what the "standard design" is. Other than that, both the IRC and the Wisconsin Residential codes require the traps to be self-scouring, but give no actual design information.

An offset is significantly less than a bend. Elbows don't belong in drainage waste systems.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

Elbows don't belong in drainage waste systems.

Sure Sign of Amateur Installation.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Yes..

Rick, how would you remove it to get something that fell in without removing the sink?
There is only one slip nut on the trap.

Originally Posted by Bruce Ramsey

What!?! Jerry and Watson agree on something? Someone please help me off the floor and back into my chair.

Me too!!!!

Originally Posted by Rich Goeken

Rick, how would you remove it to get something that fell in without removing the sink?
There is only one slip nut on the trap.

I see two slip joints
Below the tail piece and the trap arm.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Yes..

Geeze R.C. do you have to write a book ? Just stick to the intent, be brief and move on.

There is nothing in our code about requiring the trap inlet to be higher than the outlet, WI still allows drum traps, with department approval. The 15" offset limit is to prevent the water flow from gaining enough speed to siphon the trap, that's how it handles the running trap issue. I assume there is a vent on the inside of the wall, well within our distance from trap requirement, to provide air.

Our code addresses the minimum radius of 90's after the trap. In this case, the first 90 is before the trap and is a similar setup to that of a bathtub drain, or the photo Rick posted, so I can't say that is wrong. It is simple enough to remove this trap and clean it out, or clean the drain downstream, so you meet the cleanout requirements.

It might be ugly and amateurish looking, but is legal in WI.

Originally Posted by Mike Kleisch

There is nothing in our code about requiring the trap inlet to be higher than the outlet, WI still allows drum traps, with department approval. The 15" offset limit is to prevent the water flow from gaining enough speed to siphon the trap, that's how it handles the running trap issue. I assume there is a vent on the inside of the wall, well within our distance from trap requirement, to provide air.

Our code addresses the minimum radius of 90's after the trap. In this case, the first 90 is before the trap and is a similar setup to that of a bathtub drain, or the photo Rick posted, so I can't say that is wrong. It is simple enough to remove this trap and clean it out, or clean the drain downstream, so you meet the cleanout requirements.

It might be ugly and amateurish looking, but is legal in WI.

Would you show that photo to your local Chief Plumbing Inspector and get their stamp of approval on it and post that here? Thank.

No problem Jerry, I did one better, and sent an email to Ken at the State, hope to hear something on Monday, he's pretty good about responding to emails, will post back when I hear something.

Probably won't get an official stamp on it as it's not a submittal for approval on an actual install here, but will get his opinion if it complies or not.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

I see two slip joints
Below the tail piece and the trap arm.

Right... Looked at that before I commented. And why do they have two on traps? So you can easily take it off to remove objects and junk and not to have to take apart the whole sink. Some even have a small screw cap (forget what it's called, help me here) on the bottom of the trap for rings, etc. removal.

Originally Posted by Mike Kleisch

No problem Jerry, I did one better, and sent an email to Ken at the State, hope to hear something on Monday, he's pretty good about responding to emails, will post back when I hear something.

Probably won't get an official stamp on it as it's not a submittal for approval on an actual install here, but will get his opinion if it complies or not.

Mike,

Not sure who Ken at the state is, but I presume he is somebody with the plumbing code department.

Thank you for sending it to him, I look forward to finding out what he says of it.

Thank you.

Originally Posted by Rich Goeken

Some even have a small screw cap (forget what it's called, help me here) on the bottom of the trap for rings, etc. removal.

Trap clean out

BTW
Traps are not required to be removable when installed with a trap clean out.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Trap clean out

BTW
Traps are not required to be removable when installed with a trap clean out.

"Trap clean out" Thanks. Maybe should have had 2nd cup of coffee..

I got a response from Ken, he is a Plumbing Consultant with the State of WI, and based on the photo and assuming a proper vent inside the wall this trap would comply with code.

Originally Posted by Mike Kleisch

I got a response from Ken, he is a Plumbing Consultant with the State of WI, and based on the photo and assuming a proper vent inside the wall this trap would comply with code.

I did expect that answer, but, in your area, 'he's the man'.

"Ken" who!

I'm following up with this supposed endorsement from an unnammed "consultant" for Wisc.

Originally Posted by H.G. Watson, Sr.

"Ken" who!

???? Maybe this Ken?

S&B Plumbing Plan Reviewers

Green Bay - 2331 San Luis Pl, 54304 - Fax 920-492-5604
Wes Grube - 920-492-5613 - wesley.grube@wi.gov
Hayward - 10541N Ranch Road, 54843 - Fax: 715-634-5150
Tom Devereaux - 715-634-3026 - tom.devereaux@wi.gov

Madison - PO Box 7162, 53707 (mailing address), 201 W Washington Ave - Fax: 608-267-9566
Tim Lamb - 608-266-9647 - tim.lamb@wi.gov
Ken Pertzborn - 608-267-2242 - ken.pertzborn@wi.gov

Wow… I really didn’t expect all the hate and interrogation that goes on here.

You guys say it’s wrong, but based on what code sections? I would really like to see them, as stated in other posts offsets are allowed and running traps are not addressed in the IRC. No one commented on the double sink photo Rick showed, despite the fact it is the same setup???

I have no problem admitting I’m wrong, and am not out to always be right… I just could not prove in the WI code this install is wrong. I have no familiarity with the IRC, as I have no need to know it, but like to see what other codes say, that's why I view this site... maybe not so much anymore after all this...

I was hoping to avoid the waste of Ken’s time, with everyone contacting him, as this is not a project in WI, I was just getting an opinion from him if I was interrupting the code correctly, since I’m an inspector as well.

Anyway, if it pleases you, and it appears you will not accept any answer until you find the one you want, but here is all his info if helps to prove anything:

Ken Pertzborn
Plumbing Plan Reviewer
PO 7162 Madison 53707
608-267-2242
608-267-9566
pertzborn

Originally Posted by Mike Kleisch

Wow… I really didn’t expect all the hate and interrogation that goes on here.

You guys say it’s wrong, but based on what code sections? I would really like to see them, as stated in other posts offsets are allowed and running traps are not addressed in the IRC. No one commented on the double sink photo Rick showed, despite the fact it is the same setup???

I have no problem admitting I’m wrong, and am not out to always be right… I just could not prove in the WI code this install is wrong. I have no familiarity with the IRC, as I have no need to know it, but like to see what other codes say, that's why I view this site... maybe not so much anymore after all this...

I was hoping to avoid the waste of Ken’s time, with everyone contacting him, as this is not a project in WI, I was just getting an opinion from him if I was interrupting the code correctly, since I’m an inspector as well.

Anyway, if it pleases you, and it appears you will not accept any answer until you find the one you want, but here is all his info if helps to prove anything:

Ken Pertzborn
Plumbing Plan Reviewer
PO 7162 Madison 53707
608-267-2242
608-267-9566
pertzborn

Offsets are allowed in drain, vent, and wet vent systems, true.

Running traps are addressed (prohibition) in the IRC. The IRC defers to the IPC. Most jurisdictions which have adopted the IRC, do not adopt the plumbing chapters of same, FYI.

Yes it was (Rick's post of illustration - not a photo) WAS commented upon, on more than one occasion, by more than one poster. Post 25, "offsets" are NOT the same as a full BEND (offsets are LESS than a full bend) an ELbow is NOT a bend. Vent fittings do not belong in drainage.

Ricks illustration is NOT the "same thing", and as illustrated and without key, is not FULLY correct, even for Wisconsin.

Despite your inability to see the defects, even to Wisconsin "rules" that is NOT what you said. In fact you, on several topic discussions, have stated something was correct or compliant with wisconsin code/rules. You have overlooked obvious contradictions even by wisconsin codes in other topic posts as well. You have also made statements misquoting or summarizing a portion with no regard to the remainder.

The tail piece has been glued into the "behind the wall" and protruding therefrom requires cleanout access at no less than perpidicular spect from the direction of flow, centerline. It is abundantly clear as to the size and schedule differance in two places throughout this "configuration". Fitting Bells are standard at trade size and schedule for material configurations to receive equal size, schedule, material "spigot" 'ends'.

A vent ELbow or 90 from a truely vertical (plumb, true) to horizontal does NOT provide a slope. A bend is a sanitary fitting, an elbow is a vent fitting.

Mr Watson
We can always depend on you for "Friendly and Helpful" advice.
Have you considered working at ACE Hardware?

Not sure why I'm going to bother, but what the...

Odd, the IPC or the IRC does not mention running traps, or list them as prohibited. So, others have their share of misquotes...

Working from wall to sink. I see the IRC and IPC are about the same, SPS is WI.

Drain pipe from wall to 1/4 bend slip joint fitting:
SPS 382.32(8)(a) and IPC table 706.3

Trap installed to slip joint (for removal) and trap seal 2-4 inches:
SPS 382.32(3)(b) and IPC 1002.4

Trap connected to 1/4 bend to horizontal:
SPS 382.32(8)(a) and IPC table 706.3

1/4 bend to vertical:
SPS 382.32(8)(a) and IPC table 706.3

Slip joint to sink tailpipe for removal of trap:
SPS 382.35(3)(j) and IPC 708.7

Trap removable for clean out purposes, even if the pipes are a different size, it complies.
SPS 382.35(3)(j) and IPC 708.7

Horizontal Offset trap allowed, and is not one of the ones listed as prohibited:
SPS 382.32(4)(b) 15" and IPC 1002.1 30"
SPS 382.32(3)(f) and IPC 1002.3

The trap is self scouring:
SPS 382.32(3)(d) and IPC 1002.2

Neither code mentions the requirement for the inlet to be higher than the outlet on the trap.

The thickness of the markings and protrusions look like sch 40 piping/fitting and all looks 1-1/2"

Those do not appear to be vent ells, the hubs don't look close enough unlike this one, plus I've never seen a vent ell fitting for a slip joint, giving more cause for 1/4 bend fittings as they all appear to match up:






I'm sure you are referring to my post about the boiler where I said it was half right, more polite than saying half-ass while being positive. But, that also means it's not right either, and I don't like to deal with absolutes... it would be 100% wrong if no venting was installed. Venting was installed, but it was done wrong, thus half right...

Thanks everyone for the lively discussion.

May everyone have a great New Year