Stormwater pipes and primer

The builder would not have done the plumbing.

Where is the crack, at the coupling? The soil depth appears to be ok at the coupling.

The builder did this plumbing not the drainer. I saw them doing it because they argued the downpipe wasn't on the plans. The next day I saw their maintenance guy digging the trench.

Yes when I moved the pipe the joint cracked. I dug it out to investigate why it was wet.

Here are more photos I unearthed while digging it out.
You can't tell me a plumber would put his licences on the line for this.

Their motto is "if you can't see it we'll hide it"

I can now seriously understand why they were always so defensive when I found problems I "could see" !

Am I correct in assuming that the pipe in the photo above is also the pipe in the photo below?



If so, then only one surface was coated with solvent cement! Laxness breeds laxness.

Well, the builder/ss or whoever he is certainly isn't a competent plumber...not that the overall standard of plumbing in the plumbing industry is particularly high. That bar was lowered a long time ago.



Unfortunately, you are leaving yourself exposed by doing this. Don't you have your own building consultant? Who is acting in your interests during this build?



Down pipes shown on plans are often drawn at "nominal positions" and left up to others further down the food chain to design during the build...which rarely happens.

The reasons for nominal positions vary but if there is a display home, the street view will often not have downpipes for aesthetic reasons, the reason why so many display homes have non compliant roof drainage. There was a report presented to the NSW parliament about 4 years ago now and part of the report stated that Department of Fair Trade inspectors were instructed to randomly inspect 35 display homes and only one was found to have compliant roof drainage. See page 17 in the link below.

http://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/pdfs/ ... report.pdf

Your State Victoria has more stringent roof drainage regulations (not governance) than NSW and in Victoria, non compliant new house stormwater drainage is rife.

Yes you are correct. Those two photos are of the same pipe.

I don't hold my breath with these guys

Here is another pic of the lovely workmanship of my builder.

My concreters unearthed my aggi drain that is supposed to discharge to a silt pit as per engineering.

Why is the agi drain so close to your foundations?

It runs along the back wall of my garage that backs onto my neighbour.

Primer is essential to prepare pipe walls for joining. It will remove any pipe manufacturing residue that may interfere with fusion of surfaces of spiggot and socket. Over the years I have seen few joints fail and have in some cases been able to recover fittings for re joining.
However where solvent cleaner is used reclamation is impossible because of fused surfaces.

It must also discharge to a silt pit as per the regulations found in:
AS/NZS 3500.3
AS/NZS 3500.5

Just a very important note here about AS/NZS 3500.3 and AS/NZS 3500.5

The National Construction Code (NCC) comprises the Building Code of Australia (BCA) Parts 1 and 2 and the Plumbing Code of Australia (PCA) Part 3.

The BCA has hierarchy over the Australian Standards that are called up in the BCA as Deemed To Satisfy (DTS) solutions. See hierarchy pyramid below.



The BCA sits at level 3, the Australian Standards sit at level 4a as DTS provisions.

The Plumbing Regulations 2008 adopted the PCA in 2008. The PCA at the time of adoption (2004 edition) made no reference to the BCA under the DTS provision for roof drainage systems.

On May 1 2011, the PCA was introduced into the NCC as volume 3.At the time of adoption, Victoria introduced a variation into the DTS provisions of Part D1 to exclude the BCA as a DTS provision for roof drainage systems.

Victoria has made no changes to the variation in Part D1 of the PCA since it was introduced in 2011.

Because you are building in Victoria, if you or someone else representing you argues any case regarding stormwater drainage (which includes roof drainage), you only need to refer to:
AS/NZS 3500.3
AS/NZS 3500.5

To put it politely, the BCA was excluded because the BCA roof drainage regulations are crapola! However, having said that, the AS stormwater regulations also promote sub standard installations (pipework that is insufficiently sized in many instances to facilitate the roof area drained) because plumbers are judged as qualified to install to their own 'design' which they are then able to sign off as being compliant. Lol.

Even if your builder is also a plumber who is qualified to do stormwater drainage, diverting Ag pipe directly to the stormwater system is a big NO. If he is not a suitably qualified plumber, then he should not have done the installation and if the work has been signed off by a plumber, then he should also be hauled over the coals.

Exactly!

Yes my builder pulled that one on me. They under designed my stormwater discharge system and claimed they complied to AS. When questioning how they pulled the section which says they can use their experience and knowledge of the are to design the system.

I'm planning on making a complaint to the plumbing board of they do not fix it.

I did find a reference in the Standards where AS2200 is needed to be consulted when calculating the pipe sizes...I haven't been to bed yet but when I get a chance this weekend, I will find the reference and post the details for you.

The Victorian Plumbing Commission was abolished several years ago, plumbing now comes under the VBA.

The BCA sits at level 3, the Australian Standards sit at level 4a as DTS provisions.


Forgive the stupidity of this question but if the BCA sits at level 3, what sits at level 1?

Maybe Engineering specifications??

Fair question.

1 Building Act
2 Building Regulations
3 BCA

Thanks for that BE. Of course!