T & P valve Teed Off!

[randynavarro]

Take a look at the pic- sorry but its a bit fuzzy.

They tee'd off the T & P valve at the top of the water heater on the left to send water to the hot water circulating pump. Pump is in the background on the wall.

Seems a bit funny to me but, hey, I'm not a plumber!

Is this ok?

Download Attachment: CIMG6661.JPG

54.23 KB

[David C. Argabright]

Looks to me that BOTH of the PT valves are tapped. I can't see how this would allow any discharge from the valves or how any water would circulate. The levers are in the closed position.

You may not be a plumber but it appears that you might suspect more than this pipe putter togetherer did.

I hope those in the know can explain it better that I.

[hausdok]

It looks to me like that T & P in the foreground goes straight back makes a dogleg and then passes by where the other connects to the same discharge line.

The T & P (if it is a T & P and not a Watts 210) is supposed to be installed in the top six inches of the tank. Memory is fuzzy, but I seem to recall that if they both discharge through one line that it must be at least twice as large and that if it's a 3/4" line below that second valve it's a no-go.

OT - OF!!!

M.

[BlackJack]

What I can see looks dangeroous to me. The discharge line cannot be less than 3/4 inch. It's a hack job ... any more pics?

[kurt]

In addition to the restriction on the outlet(s), it's a dipsquat way to circulate hot water. They should tap into the sillcock; that way, cold water is returned to the bottom of the tank, efficiency is improved, & circulation cleans sediments off the tank bottom.

Tell 'em it's wrong on several counts.

[David C. Argabright]

Yeah....what those guys said. And

strongly recommend

that they get a licenced qualified plumbing contractor to do the work.

[randynavarro]

Originally posted by hausdok

It looks to me like that T & P in the foreground goes straight back makes a dogleg and then passes by where the other connects to the same discharge line.

Yes, that's correct. They are discharged to the same 3/4" pipe.

The T & P (if it is a T & P and not a Watts 210) is supposed to be installed in the top six inches of the tank.

Doesn't the fact that the valves are installed in the top of the tanks fall in the category of being in the top 6" of the tank?

Memory is fuzzy, but I seem to recall that if they both discharge through one line that it must be at least twice as large and that if it's a 3/4" line below that second valve it's a no-go.

I don't recall ever seeing the T & P valves on twin water heaters discharged through a pipe twice the size of the valve. Doesn't make it right or wrong but now you got me thinking. I'm gonna look it up and see if I can find what the 'rule' is here.

Thanks for the feedback.

[randynavarro]

Originally posted by BlackJack

What I can see looks dangeroous to me. The discharge line cannot be less than 3/4 inch.

Well, the discharge is at least 3/4" but see my post above. According to Mike, he thinks it should be twice that size if two valves are attached to the same line.

It's a hack job ... any more pics?

I've got more but this is the only one that shows the most detail

Thanks a bunch for lookin' and helpin'

[randynavarro]

Originally posted by kurt

In addition to the restriction on the outlet(s), it's a dipsquat way to circulate hot water.

I love that word dipsquat! I think I'll use it much more.

They should tap into the sillcock; that way, cold water is returned to the bottom of the tank, efficiency is improved, & circulation cleans sediments off the tank bottom.

I think I agree. I just think its flat dangerous the way it is configured. Maybe something to do with the fact that if the valve actually blew, whats stopping the steam and water from being pushed into the pipes inside the home and blowing faucets or valves downstream? Plumbing science[:-yuck]

Tell 'em it's wrong on several counts.

Already done

Gracias Kurt

[kurt]

Feel free to use it whenever; just give me an attribution line in your publications....[:-eyebrow

These things are important. Honestly, I've never seen a T&P do anything more than dribble, but we all know the results of ineffective or non-functional T&P's; water heaters blowing through 2 stories and a roof & ending up in someone's convenience market hundreds of meters distant.

It's gotta be right, period. No cavalier attitudes w/the T&P, thanks....

[Les]

I have been in the vicinity of t&p's discharging two times: Once while on the second floor with client and the "world" literally exploded! The homeowner had known the water heater was weak, so he turned up the temp for the inspection just before we got there. I had not been in the basement yet, so could not be blamed. The house immediately filled with steam and of course the basement flooded. I went by myself to the basement and discovered the problem and turned the water off at the main - like an idiot! After a few minutes I regained my senses and turned the gas off at exterior main.

Second time I was with my client in the basement and actually touched a leaky t&p that discharged immediately. Lucky for me we only got wet feet and clothes. That one I used coldwater valve and gas cock to disable. Homeowner took it all in stride and replaced whole unit and was glad we were not injured.

T&P's are not to be fooled with. Back to the original post - none of that setup makes any sense. They have created an effective HydroBomb.

[StevenT]

I am having a hard time from the picture, figuring out exactly what I see and what I think I see.

Not seeing the tank in the foreground being vented, I'm assuming that it being used as a storage tank only. I question the efficiency of this systems's hot water recovery.

Is that PVC being used as flue pipe on the active heater?

I would think that the circulating pump should be located between the two tanks, I can't tell that it is.

Was consideration given regarding the length of the TPR sensor going through the tee?

I agree that the TPR drain is not acceptable.

I not sure if it's necessary, but I wouldn't mind seeing an expansion tank.

If I was to put this together, I think I would have:

Cold water feed with expansion tank and back flow preventer into cold water inlet of tank "A" (active)

Hot water outlet of "A" into Cold water inlet of "B" (storage)

Hot water feed of "B" to house

Tee into draincock of "B" to circulator pump with temp sensor to tee into cold water feed of "A"

I would have tied the two TPR valves into 1-1/2", at no point would the two 3/4" drains met into less than 1-1/2".

Having said all of that, simply on the merit of the undersized TPR drain tube... and the questionable length of the TPR sensor I would definately call for a "qualified licensed plumber" to evaluate the system.

-Steven Turetsky S.I.,N.Y.

[hausdok]

Originally posted by StevenT

simply on the merit of the undersized TPR drain tube... and the questionable length of the TPR sensor I would definately call for a "qualified licensed plumber" to evaluate the system.

-Steven Turetsky S.I.,N.Y.

Why?

You've clearly identified a valid issue. Why call for a plumber to "evaluate" the system? It makes your report sound whimpy and unsure. You get paid to make the call, so make it.

I'd write something like:

The temperature and pressure (T & P) relief valve on the left-hand water heater is incorrectly installed because it's not in the top six inches of the tank where the manufacturer's instructions say it should be. Have a licensed plumber correct it.

If something is clearly wrong, we shouldn't be saying that it should be "evaluated" by someone else. We just evaluated it. We should say that a professional must correct it.

ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!

Mike

[StevenT]

Mike,

I agree with everything you're saying about not being afraid to call something that is wrong, wrong. And it should be corrected, not re-evaluated".

In this particular scenario, I saw what I knew was wrong, what I thought might be wrong, and what I didn't care for, but may not be wrong. It is for that reason I called for full evaluation by a licensed plumber. Had it just been something I was sure of, I would have no problem, and do not have a problem calling for "correction".

But your point is well taken. I assure you, if I see something that in my heart of hearts, I feel should be corrected, and I hesitate to call it that way, your advice will echo in my memory.

- Steven Turetsky, S.I., N.Y.

O.T - O.F.... HUAAH