Quantcast

Does this setup look ok?

Help Support Plumbing Forums:

AlP

New Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Location
Florida
I'm replacing some old rotten CI and have dry fit the attached drain and sanitary run. This shows the toilet on a 4" long sweep, a cleanout heading towards the main, a 3" vent (to be extended thru the roof), and two 2" drain lines. One 2" to service a tub and lav, and the other to service a washer and utility sink. The questions I have are 1) any glaring errors?, 2) can I use the 3" sanitary T for the vent vs a wye?, 3) is the 2" dbl wye used correctly?. I will of course be watching the 1/4" per foot slope. I'm in Fort Myers, FL and realize most will not know local codes but if there's anything that might be in question for "normal" practice I'd appreciate any comments.
 

Attachments

breplum

Professional
Professional
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
649
Reaction score
234
Location
Lafayette, CA
YES. Glaring errors.
-The double wye is INCORRECT. A "Figure 5" will be the correct fitting IF the distance from trap to vent is five ft. or less for 2" trap arms. AND, the elbow would be a long sweep not short like you have.
But the thing is wrong because any horizontal run greater than 5' needs to have a full sized cleanout that is accessible if this is a first floor.
If there are other vents in the dwelling, then you may be able to have a 2" vent.
- The toilet: NO tees on their back, ever but the entire WC concept is not correct for basic plumbing code.
Start over.
Get books on plumbing or have a licensed plumber help you.
Code Check Plumbing and Mechanical and the Dewalt Plumbing spiral bound "books" found on Amazon are a start. Read it all six times until you understand everything about drainage and venting and traps.
 

AlP

New Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Location
Florida
Wow, and thanks. I was concerned especially with the dbl wye, and someone suggested the dbl sanitary tee, which I wasn't comfortable with, so off on the search for a fig. 5 dbl fixture tee. A vent was planned for each of the two 2" runs. Appreciate the long sweep correction on the 2" elbow, makes sense of course. On the WC was looking at a sanitary T with an eighth bend but local code said that for transition from vertical to horiz. that a long sweep or the other are acceptable, but maybe not in context of a WC? - so off to do some more research.
 

breplum

Professional
Professional
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
649
Reaction score
234
Location
Lafayette, CA
If your double fixture idea is utilizing vents farther out, then you do not need a Fig.5. You would only need a tee and a elbow on top of that. The Fig. 5 creates a double fixture and vent in one, but only for 5' arms max.

On the WC, or any transition from vert. to horiz. a sweep fitting is the fitting, a "combo' (wye and eight bend) or long sweep. But your vent concept was in the wrong place and doesn't work. You will also be learning about horizontal wet venting, which is complex.
 

AlP

New Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Location
Florida
Thanks again. Books expected tomorrow. Was trying to get this as close to right as possible before I call the inspector! Fun learning this and want to do it right, and never good to look like an idiot. Appreciate the feedback.
 
Joined
Sep 22, 2019
Messages
12
Reaction score
2
Location
Patterson
I know a savvy GCs who introduces easy to fix glaring idiot errors for the inspector to find. Because otherwise, certain inspectors will invent some issue to fix that will cost more time and money - either through (needlessly) correcting it, or fighting the report.
 
Last edited:
Top