Thread: Thermal expansion tank and pressure

Bradford White

If this water heater is installed in a closed water supply system, such as the
one having a back-flow preventer in the cold water supply, provisions shall be
made to control thermal expansion. DO NOT operate this water heater in a
closed system without provisions for controlling thermal expansion. Your
water supplier or local plumbing inspector should be contacted on how to
control this situation

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jerry - Where is this in the IRC ?

Jim,

I have posted it many times previously, maybe even in this thread.

When I get back I will post it again ... unless someone else posts it before then.

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Jim,

I have posted it many times previously, maybe even in this thread.

When I get back I will post it again ... unless someone else posts it before then.

Yes, you have posted it many times. Several times just for Jim's benefit. Is there really any benefit in posting it again? Will this be the last time he needs to be shown? Is that not just feeding?
If you think that just one more time will do it, then .....

Added in edit

I think there are 3 types of questioners
The first type are people that do not know and are looking for an answer. Not fully understanding, they often have follow up questions. This type of questioner is the basis of education and understanding, therefore discussion is welcome.

Then there is the type of questioner that think they know, but unknown to them, they are misinformed or do not fully understand. To overcome there misconception, there will be much discussion and debate before they have a better understanding. This is still productive discussion.

Then there is the type that just refuses to accept. This type often has follow up questions that are irrelevant, repetitious, or just out of order. Questions are answered, evidence submitted, but still they refuse to accept.
At first, the questions appear to be genuine, so an answer is given. Many times the same question (or statement) is made, and answered several times. Much time is wasted responding to; false, misleading, and irrelevant statements.
This hardly ever results in a constructive discussion.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

You keep wanting to find a way out.
You say it's in the manual, show me.

Not sure what your point is...

Originally Posted by Ian Page

Not sure what your point is...

I don't mean to be short with you, but;
I think that every "What if", "But", and "exception" was thoroughly explained, along with providing supporting codes and requirements, to answer any/ all questions you had.
Therefore, I'm not going down that road again.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

I don't mean to be short with you, but;
I think that every "What if", "But", and "exception" was thoroughly explained, along with providing supporting codes and requirements, to answer any/ all questions you had.
Therefore, I'm not going down that road again.

Oh....
But it still doesn't change my mind about the sales pitch method of the plumber, which called into question the actual need for the expansion tank in the first place. And...being that they are rarely installed here, even by plumbing companies installing replacement water heaters, irrespective of code or supportive recommendation.

Originally Posted by Ian Page

Oh....
But it still doesn't change my mind about the sales pitch method of the plumber, which called into question the actual need for the expansion tank in the first place. And...being that they are rarely installed here, even by plumbing companies installing replacement water heaters, irrespective of code or supportive recommendation.

Sadly, I feel as though I have failed.

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

Sadly, I feel as though I have failed.

No...quite the opposite. You, and others have brought to my attention a piece of equipment I was not altogether familiar with. In reading the comments, looking on line and other research I feel I am better equipped to evaluate the need and provide appropriate advise to clients.

Originally Posted by Ian Page

Oh....
But it still doesn't change my mind about the sales pitch method of the plumber, which called into question the actual need for the expansion tank in the first place. And...being that they are rarely installed here, even by plumbing companies installing replacement water heaters, irrespective of code or supportive recommendation.

Ian,

I've addressed the above many times - when HIs bring items up with code officials in a non combative manner and seek input from code officials, it is surprising how often items which were previously not addressed by code inspectors or code officials begin to be addressed.

That has happened in many localities across the country and could very well happen in your area if you so choose.

Sitting back and saying 'well, it's not done that way here' does nothing to help change what is done there.

Get to know the code officials and inspectors in your area, learn from them while at the same time educating them on what you keep finding.

It works.

Rick, if you re-read my original post, I did not dispute the relevancy of the tank (nor have I since) just the plumber's 'suspicious' method, in my mind, in obtaining a result to justify the installation.

Originally Posted by Ian Page

No...quite the opposite. You, and others have brought to my attention a piece of equipment I was not altogether familiar with. In reading the comments, looking on line and other research I feel I am better equipped to evaluate the need and provide appropriate advise to clients.

Thanks
I feel better

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

The codes require the installation to meet code AND manufacturer's installation instructions - and the most restrictive of each takes precedence over the less restrictive.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jerry - Where is this in the IRC ?

Jim,

Using the thinking that you may remember things better if you have to expend effort in finding the information:
- for the "most restrictive" shall apply part, go here: R102.1 General.
- for the "code AND manufacturer's installation instructions" part, go here: P2801.2 Installation AND M2001.1 Installation AND G2408.1 (305.1) General.

Let me know if you need help reading and understanding what those sections are stating - either I or another of the participants here will TRY to explain to you what you are not getting as long as you TRY to understand what is being explained ... otherwise ... don't bother asking the questions if you are not actually looking for the answers.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jerry - The references you posted are not applicable.

First - Looking at the term " most restrictive " which is not defined in the Code the common definition of restrictive is to limit or to prohibit.
Requiring additional equipment to be installed by a manufacturer is clearly not limiting or prohibiting.

Second - Does the Code provide for a manufacturer to require additional equipment be installed in a building? I cannot find that requirement in the Code.

Jim,

You confirmed what I suspected ... that you do not, and are not interested in, wanting to understand codes (which has been obvious from your past code references and what you try to apply them to).

Last chance: Post those code sections here ... word for word (i.e.., that means copy and paste them here) ... and then tell me (tell us all) which word(s) you do not understand.

I, with the help of others here, will try to explain (using terms my second grade granddaughter would understand) what the code is saying. If you are still incapable of grasping what the codes are saying, then ... Rick was spot on with this: (and you are the third type, which I have made bold for highlighting purposes)

Originally Posted by Rick Cantrell

I think there are 3 types of questioners
The first type are people that do not know and are looking for an answer. Not fully understanding, they often have follow up questions. This type of questioner is the basis of education and understanding, therefore discussion is welcome.

Then there is the type of questioner that think they know, but unknown to them, they are misinformed or do not fully understand. To overcome there misconception, there will be much discussion and debate before they have a better understanding. This is still productive discussion.

Then there is the type that just refuses to accept. This type often has follow up questions that are irrelevant, repetitious, or just out of order. Questions are answered, evidence submitted, but still they refuse to accept.
At first, the questions appear to be genuine, so an answer is given. Many times the same question (or statement) is made, and answered several times. Much time is wasted responding to; false, misleading, and irrelevant statements.
This hardly ever results in a constructive discussion.

This is from a States manual....

DSCN3055.JPG

Originally Posted by Scott Patterson

This is from a States manual....

When you post the instructions of every WH manufacturer, and the codes of every state and muni, maybe then we can start to have a discussion.

Face it Scott (& Jerry), this has gone in so many circles it feels like I'm on a ride at 6 Flags
But if you think, "Just one more post" will be the post to end all doubt, then continue on.

Read my post below about 3 types of questioners

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

The easy answer to this Issue is to install a HBRV . For $10 any potential expansion issues,( If any exist),are solved.

I do not know what an HBRV is, but yes, there are other options available. The expansion is just one option.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Hose Bibb Relief Valve - Zurn and a couple of other Companies make them.
We had one building where the water pressure would build up and installed them for relief .

Let me get this straight - thermal expansion is not a problem ... but ... if it is ... then .... ????

From a link to the Zurn HBRV (which is just an adapter to replace a hose bibb with a pressure relief valve (or, with another adapter, attach to a hose bibb and end up with hose bibb threads for a hose):

Product Details - Zurn

http://content.zurn.com/web_document...ts/TP-HBRV.pdf

Detector Assemblies: RPDA vs. DCDA - YouTube

'Nuff said for the person posting the HBRV yet who insists that thermal expansion is not required, even when shown his own states code requiring thermal expansion control on 'closed' systems.

Jim, looking forward to the end of the month, huh?

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

JERRY !!! -As usual you shoot before you aim .I did not say anything thermal expansion. The water pressure increase was due to using the water main to pump water to the water tower.

JIM !!! The ... LINK ... TO ... THE ... HBPR ... YOU ... REFERENCED ... DID address thermal expansion - are you admitting that you do not even review the information that you reference?

Holy Cow!

[quote]Again, if you read MA CMR carefully you will find that the installation of expansion tanks is optional.[/qjuote]

Again, if you read MA CMR carefully you will find that the installation of expansion tanks is optional UNLESS ... yes, UNLESS ... go back and read that again.

As provided by Rick: (red and larger text size is mine for highlighting)
248 CMR 10.00: Uniform State Plumbing Code - (continued)
Where water meters or metering devices with check valves are installed, which can create a potential hazard or nuisance due to thermal expansion, a thermal expansion tank shall be installed as close as possible to the water meter or metering devices.

I had hoped that I could educate you somewhat but, I am getting discouraged as every day you are getting worse.

You must first and foremost learn to read what is written and educate yourself before attempting to educate others. Your posts, including the one I am replying to, indicate that you have not yet learned to comprehend what you read.

BTW - I am still waiting on the answer on how to reverse the feed to the water heater to correct problems in a house.

As has been proven time and time again, and as you are proving yet again - you have no intention of trying to learn anything ... you refuse to even learn to comprehend what "SHALL BE INSTALLED" means. And the MA code above even states "where" it shall be installed ... but I'm guessing that you do not even grasp the "where" it shall be installed as you do not seem to be able to grasp "shall be installed".

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

JERRY !!! -As usual you shoot before you aim .I did not say anything thermal expansion. The water pressure increase was due to using the water main to pump water to the water tower.

JIM !!! The ... LINK ... TO ... THE ... HBPR ... YOU ... REFERENCED ... DID address thermal expansion - are you admitting that you do not even review the information that you reference?

Holy Cow!

[quote]Again, if you read MA CMR carefully you will find that the installation of expansion tanks is optional.[/qjuote]

Again, if you read MA CMR carefully you will find that the installation of expansion tanks is optional UNLESS ... yes, UNLESS ... go back and read that again.

As provided by Rick: (red and larger text size is mine for highlighting)
248 CMR 10.00: Uniform State Plumbing Code - (continued)
Where water meters or metering devices with check valves are installed, which can create a potential hazard or nuisance due to thermal expansion, a thermal expansion tank shall be installed as close as possible to the water meter or metering devices.

I had hoped that I could educate you somewhat but, I am getting discouraged as every day you are getting worse.

You must first and foremost learn to read what is written and educate yourself before attempting to educate others. Your posts, including the one I am replying to, indicate that you have not yet learned to comprehend what you read.

BTW - I am still waiting on the answer on how to reverse the feed to the water heater to correct problems in a house.

As has been proven time and time again, and as you are proving yet again - you have no intention of trying to learn anything ... you refuse to even learn to comprehend what "SHALL BE INSTALLED" means. And the MA code above even states "where" it shall be installed ... but I'm guessing that you do not even grasp the "where" it shall be installed as you do not seem to be able to grasp "shall be installed".

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

JERRY - Until you can admit that you have a problem ,I nor anyone else cannot help you.

My apologies to all for continuing this one more post, but ...

The above quoted post of Jim's shows the problem.

For the benefit of all ... mum's the word.

(I thunk de Nile were a river in Egypt ... )

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Ormond Beach Counseling Center
200 E Granada Blvd
Suite 206
Ormond Beach, Florida32176
(386) 530-6338

That's a rather long drive for you to make, Jim, but in an effort to try to always be of help, you can stay at our house while you are undergoing your counseling ...

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Jerry - The references you posted are not applicable.

First - Looking at the term " most restrictive " which is not defined in the Code the common definition of restrictive is to limit or to prohibit.
Requiring additional equipment to be installed by a manufacturer is clearly not limiting or prohibiting.

Second - Does the Code provide for a manufacturer to require additional equipment be installed in a building? I cannot find that requirement in the Code.

See the reference below regarding manufacturer's requirements being part of the code.

IRC Codes - www.WaterHeaterExplosions.com - Another great official website from Michael Leavitt & Co Inspections, Inc.

Also, IRC 2012, Section R102. In part says: "Where, in any specific case different sections of this code specify different materials, methods of construction or other requirements, the most restrictive shall govern."

Unfortunately, some selectively choose to ignore code he does not like:
- R102.7 Existing structures. - - The legal occupancy of any structure existing on the date of adoption of this code shall be permitted to continue without change, except as is specifically covered in this code, the International Property Maintenance Code or the International Fire Code, or as is deemed necessary by the building official for the general safety and welfare of the occupants and the public.
- - R102.7.1 Additions, alterations or repairs.
- - - Additions, alterations or repairs to any structure shall conform to the requirements for a new structure without requiring the existing structure to comply with all of the requirements of this code, unless otherwise stated. Additions, alterations or repairs shall not cause an existing structure to become unsafe or adversely affect the performance of the building.

The first part ONLY applies to buildings and components which are:
- not replaced
- permitted and inspected
- unchanged
- has not been altered
- etc.

Once a building has had ANY unpermitted work - of any kind and to any extent - the building no longer has legal occupancy and that section no longer applies. That section does not apply to any of the conditions addressed in the second part as permits are required for that work.

How many buildings have permits pulled for EVERYTHING for which permits are required (as required by the code)? Probably none.

So, Rick, Scott, all others, how are you doing?

(Trying to find a way to end this thread and ignore the endless dribble from JA.)

Signing off on this thread, hopefully the JA will recognize the benefit to the community in doing so too.

(bold is mine)

Originally Posted by Jerry Peck

Unfortunately, some selectively choose to ignore code he does not like:
- R102.7 Existing structures. - - The legal occupancy of any structure existing on the date of adoption of this code shall be permitted to continue without change, except as is specifically covered in this code, the International Property Maintenance Code or the International Fire Code, or as is deemed necessary by the building official for the general safety and welfare of the occupants and the public.
- - R102.7.1 Additions, alterations or repairs.
- - - Additions, alterations or repairs to any structure shall conform to the requirements for a new structure without requiring the existing structure to comply with all of the requirements of this code, unless otherwise stated. Additions, alterations or repairs shall not cause an existing structure to become unsafe or adversely affect the performance of the building.

The first part ONLY applies to buildings and components which are:
- not replaced
- permitted and inspected
- unchanged
- has not been altered
- etc.

Once a building has had ANY unpermitted work - of any kind and to any extent - the building no longer has legal occupancy and that section no longer applies. That section does not apply to any of the conditions addressed in the second part as permits are required for that work.

How many buildings have permits pulled for EVERYTHING for which permits are required (as required by the code)? Probably none.

Follow the requirements of the code and the other parts of the structure is permitted to remain "without requiring the existing structure to comply with all of the requirements of this code" - don't follow the code and the building loses that option as it no longer has "legal occupancy".

Sounds like someone (possibly others too according to JA) needs to read the code and what is requires permits (everything not exempt) and what is exempt from permits (almost nothing).

Maybe JA would care to post the IRC exemptions from permits ... after reading them, of course?

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

There are those on this site that think you know what you are talking about and might believe what you write .

Jim,

I doubt there are many here who think you know what you are talking about, I know you have at least a few believers but I trust that the majority here are able to see through your smoke screen.

I have respect for the majority here and am convinced that their knowledge far greater than your smoke and mirrors act. Not unlike watching a magician go through his act and, while knowing it is all fake, one still watches to decipher the act.

Having said the above, there is no need to continue to correct your incorrect information because I've already acknowledged that I know that virtually all the others have the knowledge to see through your information and act.

Sometimes I am slow to recognize a "known known" as being such - my apologies to the others for my being slow to recognize that.

Originally Posted by Jim Abram

Mark - Thanks for exploding water heaters.
I do not know of any explosions due to thermal expansion.

This section of the Code comes into play with this type of issue.

R102.7 Existing structures.
The legal occupancy of any structure existing on the date of adoption of this code shall be permitted to continue without change, except as is specifically covered in this code, the International Property Maintenance Code or the International Fire Code, or as is deemed necessary by the building official for the general safety and welfare of the occupants and the public.

Just because you do not know of any exploding water heaters due to thermal expansion does not mean that it does not happen. If you do a Google search you will see that it does happen.

Quoting a reference to existing structures is not relevant. If the code or manufacturer requires an expansion tank than one should be installed when a water heater is installed. Does it have to be installed if the water heater is already present? No, not if it was not required when the water heater was installed. Yes, if it was required and was done.

The point of this thread was not about quoting code. It is about why expansion tanks are often needed or required. You do not seem to want to learn anything. You seem to only want to argue about issues. I'm not sure why myself or others waste our time trying to get through to you. It is apparently not possible.