Thread: CSST

Just wondering what everyone thought about CSST?

CSST Settlement - Home Page

I will sit back before I comment.

Similar Threads:

• csst and lightning
• csst
• CSST bonding
• Check those CSST connections
• CSST Class Action Settlements???

Just recently had a client call the manuf. (Tracpipe) and ask about this.

I had been recommending the pipes be bonded to the GEC but Tracpipe says they only recommend it in high lightning zones, my area is a low to medium zone.

Only one builder grounds theirs around here, all others never heard of it.

No AHJ's around here are requiring it either, until permits pulled after 9/2007 then they (Meck. County)require the additional bonding to the GEC instead of just the bonding achieved through the furnace valve/cabinet.


The new CSST called counterstrike has a black sheathing and does not need the additional bonding according to the manuf.

This has also been discussed a few times in the archives - try a search there.

WARDFLEX STEPSAVER

Code REQUIRES all metal gas piping be bonded to ground.

Re: CSST
WARDFLEX STEPSAVER

Mike - thanks for the link. Click on their applications link and look at "furnaces and water heaters" - they're using black pipe!

It dosen't matter what we think. What matters is what happens if we do not report what we see and know to be an item of concern. How much concern is left up to Laywers. Thats what they are for. We just see the ball and throw it at them.

Well, as CSST is metal pipe, it needs to be grounded. What harm can come from grounding it even if the manufacturer does not require it.

I started reporting ungrounded CSST about a year ago. I seldom get any arguments over it being grounded and when I do I just send a snip of the code to the folks.

The problem is that the CSST pipe is so thin that lighting will punch a hole in it unlike black pipe. With the ground wire this gives the lighting a path to the ground. Kind of a simple explanation but I think it covers it fairly well.

If the CSST is connected to hard-pipe which is bonded, you're ok, according to Gastite.

Originally Posted by Mike Parks

Just wondering what everyone thought about CSST?

CSST Settlement - Home Page

I will sit back before I comment.

Settlement regarding CSST closed last fall (2007). That website has been about for some time.

As for CSST I don't have any particular problems with it as long as it is installed correctly.

Frisco, TX (where I get a lot of HIs) is one of the highest hit rates for lightning strikes in the U.S.. They also have some of the strongest additional grounding requirements for residential construction. It is not just CSST that Frisco has written 'additional' grounding requirments for.

Why wait ... GA and comment.

Nolan and others, I see the additional bonding in the Frisco new construction, but I have not found any specific information on their website. Do you have anything from them on that? I am guessing it is not just CSST bonding but whole house lightening protection.

Also, I found something about a automatic flow shutoff valve on the gas entrance and branch piping. Any information on that?

Jim,

I've got a copy of the schematic for the gas pipe bonding from Frisco that also mentions an excessive gas flow shut-off valve.

Let me know if you want me to send it to you. Since it's a scanned document and the lettering is small, I don't think it will post here on the forum very well.

Originally Posted by Jim Luttrall

Nolan and others, I see the additional bonding in the Frisco new construction, but I have not found any specific information on their website. Do you have anything from them on that? I am guessing it is not just CSST bonding but whole house lightening protection.

Also, I found something about a automatic flow shutoff valve on the gas entrance and branch piping. Any information on that?

Jim,

Attached are a few scanned pages from a bunch of information I got from one of the Frisco City Code Officials. I went over to the "city hall" on Main West of Preston last summer to chat about some radiant barrier requirements I had heard about.

Anyway ... I left with a bunch of hardcopy information from the official. The attached pages are from a 38-page document that is a supplement guideline to help residential house builders ... verbiage taken from the cover page.

I think this may also answer your automatic flow shutoff valve question.

Thanks Nolan, thats what I was looking for!
I guess the Frisco fire marshal had a big hand in drafting those standards.
I have not see anything else as strict as theirs.
I was at the TAREI meeting where one of the P.E. that does windstorm certifications said that the new standards for CSST required bonding at each section, but there is nothing like that on any of the manufacturer's sites except the single bonding location.
Thanks, Jim

Jake shared this diagram with me. This is from Frisco, TX (the place where the CSST litigation started).
I found it very interesting. Basically, they have amended to require bonding everything in the attic which is where most equipment is located here. I guess the idea is to try and afford some lightening protection.
Also notice the gas flow shut off requirement.
Thanks Jake.
Jim

jake

could you fax that schematic over to me---i'm in colorado and we have alot of lightning--i can't make out anything from the thread

thanks charlie

303-465-1811

Charlie,

Send me your email address and I'll attach and send it to you...easier for me.

Jake

jake thanks--cvanfleet56@aol.com

Last few pages of this doc. have clear diagrams

http://www.ciatx.org/downloadables/C...e_Brochure.pdf

Charlie, I guess the hyperlink didn't attach correctly

hey barry

what doc. and what diagrams

charlie

Originally Posted by CHARLIE VAN FLEET

hey barry

what doc. and what diagrams

charlie

Its an Adobe PDF file.

NOLAN
DON'T WANT TO SOUND STUPID BUT WHERE DO I GO TO VIEW--YOUR WEB SITE--SORRY
CHARLIE

Originally Posted by CHARLIE VAN FLEET

NOLAN
DON'T WANT TO SOUND STUPID BUT WHERE DO I GO TO VIEW--YOUR WEB SITE--SORRY CHARLIE

Charlie,

Just click on my website URL at the bottom of this post. It will take you to the front page of the site.

now i got it thanks nolan

Funny thing is, even if something is NOT code (minimum building standard), if it poses a safety issue to my client, I write it up - period. We are NOT code (minimalist) inspectors. We are supposed to provide "value-add" to our clients (and protect ourselves along the way). We should definitely have code knowledge, but not all r/r write-ups I do are purely based on meeting or not meeting code requirements.

I get tired of contractors citing code to me and I started using "professional workmanlike manner" or safety reasons to back up my recommendations for repair or replacement. I also try to be very specific about WHAT I am calling out and WHY.

So many inspectors use the catch all phrase of "consult with licensed XYZ professional for repair recommendations..." blah, blah. Where is the value in that?

O.K., what was it we were talking about anyway?... (-: