New drainage laterals, bad water main pipe discovered

Page 2 of 3  

Unless it is a really smal house with no yard, then 1" is your friend.
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It's unanimous. 1" it will be. Thanks!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dan_Musicant wrote:

Dan-
I had a main line repipe done about 25 years ago in a very similar situation.... 3/4" galv from 1930
I had it replaced with 1" copper, I've got a 3/4" meter & about 50' from street to house
water flow & pressure is great..can run the lawn sprinklers AND take a shower (or use a single fixture in the house) since the house is only partially re-piped I still have flow problems internal to the house.
Go with 1", you'll be happier & you'll never reason have to question your choice
btw I had to talk my neighbor out of using 1.25" for his main line
cheers Bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Why? 3" would be ok if cost was no object. While it will still only flow to the limit of the smallest restriction, the volume of water "stored" in the big pipe would still help.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Eric in North TX wrote:

Well cost is nearly always a factor. Plus my neighbor & I help each other out on projects & although we tend towards overkill we balance each other out. & hopefully minimize our desire for "wasted" overkill.
For a 75' x 150' lot & a 1" meter ....a 1" line is right size.....1.25" is unnecessary as is 3".
IMHO a bigger line won't buy very much (almost none) improvement in performance.......water is not very compressible & the concept of water "stored" requires some sort of accumulator (LARGE flexible lines, or a piston or bladder style accumulator) just adding large metal lin won't do much.
Incompressibles (water, hydraulic fluid, etc) need to be delivered on a real time basis;
instantaneous supply must equal instantaneous
or a system accumulator must be present. to supply instantaneous peak (short term) demands & buffer instantaneous peak supply (the cause of water hammer)
So a large line isn't going to "store" much if any extra water but it will have less head loss that a smaller line.
another mis-conception about water flow / hydraulics is
"....... it will still only flow to the limit of the smallest restriction......"
that is not entirely true....hydraulic supplies suffer head loss through the lines, fittings, valves, & other restrictions...the cool thing about analyzing the system is that the "head loss" (pressure loss) due to each item can be expressed in equivalent length of straight pipe
so a valve (depending on style) might add a between 1' & 10' of "extra" pipe length....an elbow maybe 4'.
Yeah putting a 1" valve in a 3" line is REALLY gonna add some large loss (a rather unrealistic example) but the system will still preform better than a completely plumbed 3/4" system
Well......we might get enough losses in the transition from 1" up to 3" & back to 1" overwhelm the postive effect of the 3" . Plus analyzing a mixed size system (by hand) gets to be a real PITA.
In any case the way a complete hydraulic system performs is a function of layout, pipe sizes & fittings...combined with the demand...ie flow velocities, since head loss is a dependent on flow velocity.
Sorry about the long winded post...I guess I got overcome by Nick's evil influence......... :)
cheers Bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
OI missed the first part of this thread, but if this is just an average home, 3/4" in the norm, from the meter into the house. One inch is common from the water main (in the street) into the home and up tp the meter.
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 06 Jan 2007 03:17:41 -0600, snipped-for-privacy@UNLISTED.com wrote:
:OI missed the first part of this thread, but if this is just an :average home, 3/4" in the norm, from the meter into the house. One :inch is common from the water main (in the street) into the home and :up tp the meter.
Average house = ? Maybe min'e pretty average (I'm the OP). The house is 1925 square feet, with 2 baths, a laundry room and average sized yard. I'm sure 3/4" is fine for me, but whoever moves in after me, who knows? Maybe 3/4" from meter to house plumbing is perfectly adequate. In terms of flow, I suppose it is. I figure the interior cross section is 2.25 times that of 1/2" pipe, and on top of that the previous 1/2" pipe is undoubtely quite corroded on the interior. Yes, some of that will have sloughed off but I'm guessing that the resistance to flow is greater than for new galvanized 1/2" pipe.
I figure probably the best argument for 1" would be that the water flow would be slower and thus the noise of the water flow would be reduced over 3/4". So I'm told. To me, it's theoretical at this point, but I'm still in a position to ask for 1" over 3/4". The work isn't to begin until at least tomorrow.
Dan
:wrote: : :>> btw I had to talk my neighbor out of using 1.25" for his main line:>> :>> cheers :>> Bob:> :>Why? 3" would be ok if cost was no object. While it will still only :>flow to the limit of the smallest restriction, the volume of water :>"stored" in the big pipe would still help.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dan_Musicant wrote:

Bigger is always better, on round stuff the actual flow area goes up dramatically with even a small diameter increase.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I always demonstrate the difference between 1/2 inch and 3/4 inch by holding up a dime and a quarter.
CWM
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dan_Musicant wrote:

Dan-
Choose 1", you'll be be happy & never have an issue with it.
Type L minimum, (Type K is better but probably un-necessary overkill)
My 1" Type L main line has been in the ground in Orange county CA since 1980; great flow, no issues.
Cheers Bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I haven't looked at prices, but the difference in cost between 1" and 3/4" is probably minimal. Who knows if some day someone will want the higher flow? It's far cheaper to install the larger line now that it will be to dig it up and increase the size.
BTW: Is PVC a desired/allowed alternative?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 8 Jan 2007 08:13:49 PST, snipped-for-privacy@mojaveg.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com (Everett M. Greene) wrote:
:> Dan_Musicant wrote:
:> > :>> btw I had to talk my neighbor out of using 1.25" for his main line :> > :>> :> > :>> cheers :> > :>> Bob :> > :> :> > :>Why? 3" would be ok if cost was no object. While it will still only :> > :>flow to the limit of the smallest restriction, the volume of water :> > :>"stored" in the big pipe would still help. :> > :> > :OI missed the first part of this thread, but if this is just an :> > :average home, 3/4" in the norm, from the meter into the house. One :> > :inch is common from the water main (in the street) into the home and :> > :up tp the meter. :> > :> > Average house = ? Maybe min'e pretty average (I'm the OP). The house is :> > 1925 square feet, with 2 baths, a laundry room and average sized yard. :> > I'm sure 3/4" is fine for me, but whoever moves in after me, who knows? :> > Maybe 3/4" from meter to house plumbing is perfectly adequate. In terms :> > of flow, I suppose it is. I figure the interior cross section is 2.25 :> > times that of 1/2" pipe, and on top of that the previous 1/2" pipe is :> > undoubtely quite corroded on the interior. Yes, some of that will have :> > sloughed off but I'm guessing that the resistance to flow is greater :> > than for new galvanized 1/2" pipe. :> > :> > I figure probably the best argument for 1" would be that the water flow :> > would be slower and thus the noise of the water flow would be reduced :> > over 3/4". So I'm told. To me, it's theoretical at this point, but I'm :> > still in a position to ask for 1" over 3/4". The work isn't to begin :> > until at least tomorrow. :> :> Choose 1", you'll be be happy & never have an issue with it. :> :> Type L minimum, (Type K is better but probably un-necessary overkill) :> :> My 1" Type L main line has been in the ground in Orange county CA since :> 1980; great flow, no issues. :> :> Cheers :> Bob: :I haven't looked at prices, but the difference in cost :between 1" and 3/4" is probably minimal. Who knows if :some day someone will want the higher flow? It's far :cheaper to install the larger line now that it will be :to dig it up and increase the size. : :BTW: Is PVC a desired/allowed alternative?
The supervisor, when I asked him how much more 1" would cost than 3/4" today said over $600! Hardly minimal. Maybe after they'd started the job they figured they had me if I wanted to upgrade materials. At that point, they could have gone 1" without losing any work:
They did the job today. I tried to get ahold of the supervisor before they did any installation, but he didn't return my call. I had an explicit understanding with him that they were to install 3/4" L both underground and under the house. I talked with the foreman of the crew and he wasn't aware of that, but I told him I had a clear understanding with the supervisor. I also asked him about a bonding jumper at the meter and he seemed to whiff on that one - didn't know what it was or something. He talked about water heater! The supervisor didn't call me back and after a while I go under the house and see that they installed 3/4" M under the house, counter to my agreement. I tell the foreman and he says he's aware that he has to "rip it out." Why this has happened is beyond me.
I hear him talking to the supervisor on his cell phone and ask to talk to him. This is the same guy who the office was to have call me earlier. I try to ask him how much more it will cost to install 1" than 3/4", both would be L thickness. At this point, they were going to have to rip out the hard copper under the house and hadn't installed any soft copper outside, so there was no reason they couldn't do 1" instead. In either case, they were going to have to wait for a truck to deliver the copper they'd install. The supervisor said it would be over $600 extra! I asked him why and he said the materials cost that much more. I said screw that, basically. I call the office again (I'm not privy to the supervisor's cell number), and he calls me right back and affirms that 1" costs that much more for materials and I say I don't want that and they finish the installation this evening in the dark.
I have an idea that they never installed the bonding jumper, which I'm going to try to check out tomorrow when it's light. I don't know what it would look like. Would that be a strap between the copper pipe coming into the meter and the pipe leaving it and going to the house?
Dan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dan_Musicant wrote:

I beg to differ....that supervisor (or his company) is either a thief or stupid (in either case he is wrong) .... the increase in material would be less than $100 closer to $50
cheers Bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
: :Dan_Musicant wrote:
:> (Everett M. Greene) wrote::>
:> :> Dan_Musicant wrote:
:> :> > :>> btw I had to talk my neighbor out of using 1.25" for his main line :> :> > :>> :> :> > :>> cheers :> :> > :>> Bob :> :> > :> :> :> > :>Why? 3" would be ok if cost was no object. While it will still only :> :> > :>flow to the limit of the smallest restriction, the volume of water :> :> > :>"stored" in the big pipe would still help. :> :> > :> :> > :OI missed the first part of this thread, but if this is just an :> :> > :average home, 3/4" in the norm, from the meter into the house. One :> :> > :inch is common from the water main (in the street) into the home and :> :> > :up tp the meter. :> :> > :> :> > Average house = ? Maybe min'e pretty average (I'm the OP). The house is :> :> > 1925 square feet, with 2 baths, a laundry room and average sized yard. :> :> > I'm sure 3/4" is fine for me, but whoever moves in after me, who knows? :> :> > Maybe 3/4" from meter to house plumbing is perfectly adequate. In terms :> :> > of flow, I suppose it is. I figure the interior cross section is 2.25 :> :> > times that of 1/2" pipe, and on top of that the previous 1/2" pipe is :> :> > undoubtely quite corroded on the interior. Yes, some of that will have :> :> > sloughed off but I'm guessing that the resistance to flow is greater :> :> > than for new galvanized 1/2" pipe. :> :> > :> :> > I figure probably the best argument for 1" would be that the water flow :> :> > would be slower and thus the noise of the water flow would be reduced :> :> > over 3/4". So I'm told. To me, it's theoretical at this point, but I'm :> :> > still in a position to ask for 1" over 3/4". The work isn't to begin :> :> > until at least tomorrow. :> :> :> :> Choose 1", you'll be be happy & never have an issue with it. :> :> :> :> Type L minimum, (Type K is better but probably un-necessary overkill) :> :> :> :> My 1" Type L main line has been in the ground in Orange county CA since :> :> 1980; great flow, no issues. :> :> :> :> Cheers :> :> Bob :> : :> :I haven't looked at prices, but the difference in cost :> :between 1" and 3/4" is probably minimal. Who knows if :> :some day someone will want the higher flow? It's far :> :cheaper to install the larger line now that it will be :> :to dig it up and increase the size. :> : :> :BTW: Is PVC a desired/allowed alternative?:> :> The supervisor, when I asked him how much more 1" would cost than 3/4" :> today said over $600! Hardly minimal. Maybe after they'd started the job :> they figured they had me if I wanted to upgrade materials. At that :> point, they could have gone 1" without losing any work::> :> They did the job today. I tried to get ahold of the supervisor before :> they did any installation, but he didn't return my call. I had an :> explicit understanding with him that they were to install 3/4" L both :> underground and under the house. I talked with the foreman of the crew :> and he wasn't aware of that, but I told him I had a clear understanding :> with the supervisor. I also asked him about a bonding jumper at the :> meter and he seemed to whiff on that one - didn't know what it was or :> something. He talked about water heater! The supervisor didn't call me :> back and after a while I go under the house and see that they installed :> 3/4" M under the house, counter to my agreement. I tell the foreman and :> he says he's aware that he has to "rip it out." Why this has happened is :> beyond me.:> :> I hear him talking to the supervisor on his cell phone and ask to talk :> to him. This is the same guy who the office was to have call me earlier. :> I try to ask him how much more it will cost to install 1" than 3/4", :> both would be L thickness. At this point, they were going to have to rip :> out the hard copper under the house and hadn't installed any soft copper :> outside, so there was no reason they couldn't do 1" instead. In either :> case, they were going to have to wait for a truck to deliver the copper :> they'd install. The supervisor said it would be over $600 extra! I asked :> him why and he said the materials cost that much more. I said screw :> that, basically. I call the office again (I'm not privy to the :> supervisor's cell number), and he calls me right back and affirms that :> 1" costs that much more for materials and I say I don't want that and :> they finish the installation this evening in the dark.:> :> I have an idea that they never installed the bonding jumper, which I'm :> going to try to check out tomorrow when it's light. I don't know what it :> would look like. Would that be a strap between the copper pipe coming :> into the meter and the pipe leaving it and going to the house?:> :> Dan: :I beg to differ....that supervisor (or his company) is either a thief :or stupid (in either case he is wrong) .... the increase in material :would be less than $100 closer to $50 : :cheers :Bob
Yeah, I told him on the phone the exact same thing except I didn't mention the $50. I gotta think they were just trying to see if they could squeeze a bunch out of me with that line. I don't think I'll use them again. Not unless I can see something to justify that $600 charge (which I declined, of course). I honestly think he might be stupid. Just don't know. How could he be THAT stupid?
Dan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dan_Musicant wrote:

You might go down to Lowes and check the difference in price between 3/4" and 1" price. don't think it would take much of a length to exceed a difference of $50.
OTOH. Was using the black plastic pipe a no go for the supply? Don't remember the schedule number but the 105 PSI or 120 PSI plastic pipe is what should be used. That's relatively cheap and and it is a standard replacement around here in areas where the soil eats hole in copper.
I use a piece as a supply pipe from the pressure irrigation supply (about 60 psi) that goes in an L about 50 one way and 25 feet another way and just lies on top of the ground. It is under pressure about 6 months of the year and has shown no adverse effects over the past 15 years. Should last forever underground.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
George E. Cawthon wrote:

DoIt Center in Mammoth Lakes, CA (not exactly the cheapest place)
Type L 3/4" $36 / 10ft Type L 1" $46 / 10 ft
I assume Dan had about a 50ft run last night when I SWAG'd the cost delta
I didn't look back in the thread to determine the run length
Looks like the delta from 3/4" to 1" should be in th $1/ft range not $10/ft
cheers Bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
:DoIt Center in Mammoth Lakes, CA (not exactly the cheapest place) : :Type L 3/4" $36 / 10ft :Type L 1" $46 / 10 ft : :I assume Dan had about a 50ft run last night when I SWAG'd the cost :delta : :I didn't look back in the thread to determine the run length : :Looks like the delta from 3/4" to 1" should be in th $1/ft range not :$10/ft : :cheers :Bob Yes, I had the impression that the price difference was about that - ~$1/foot. That was for hard copper piping. Soft, I don't know about, but I don't think it's way different.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I just checked one source and the difference is $2.00 a foot at that place. I don't know if that is good or bad in the scheme of things and your local plumbing supply, but I do know that copper is very expensive these days. $600 seems high, but $50 seems very low. How long of a run is it?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:
:
:> : :> :I beg to differ....that supervisor (or his company) is either a thief :> :or stupid (in either case he is wrong) .... the increase in material :> :would be less than $100 closer to $50 :> : :> :cheers :> :Bob:> :> Yeah, I told him on the phone the exact same thing except I didn't :> mention the $50. I gotta think they were just trying to see if they :> could squeeze a bunch out of me with that line. I don't think I'll use :> them again. Not unless I can see something to justify that $600 charge :> (which I declined, of course). I honestly think he might be stupid. Just :> don't know. How could he be THAT stupid?: :I just checked one source and the difference is $2.00 a foot at that place. :I don't know if that is good or bad in the scheme of things and your local :plumbing supply, but I do know that copper is very expensive these days. :$600 seems high, but $50 seems very low. How long of a run is it? : The run is approximately this:
30' or less of soft copper (i.e. underground from meter to the house). That's not counting a piece that's about 7' or so that they sledge hammered under the sidewalk. That was, of course, hard straight copper.
About 35' of hard copper under the house. I did check Home Depot's prices for 10' lengths of hard copper a couple of weeks ago or so:
10' of 1" L copper tubing at Home Depot is $36 10' of 3/4" L copper tubing at Home Depot is $25
So, the under the house run price increase should be something like under $50 at those rates. I don't know what the difference would be for soft copper. It's hard for me to imagine that it would be several hundred dollars on 30'.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
After the 3/4" water main was installed I am finding that my water pressure is very much improved. I don't notice it so much when using a tap or whatever. What I'm noticing is when I use more than one thing. For instance, I can flush the toilet and not have my shower lose 2/3 of its flow! It's a major improvement. The interior piping is still very old 1/2" galvanized almost entirely, but it appears that the old 1/2" galvanized water main was severely corroded, both on the interior and exterior. Well, whether it was interior or exterior, combined they were enough to make the pipe so fragile as to break in the first place, leading to the necessary replacement.
Dan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.