Browse Forums Building Standards; Getting It Right! Re: Damp proof course 81Mar 01, 2014 1:57 pm The 90 mm uPVC (u indicates unplasticised) storm water pipe is 90 mm OD. The 100 mm pipe is 110.2 mm OD. The builder would have noticed what pipes they were IF he saw them being laid because DWV, as well as being noticeably bigger, is also a different colour. He probably just referred to the plans IF he didn't see the pipes but I can only guess. His correspondence however indicates that he was expecting the plumbers to lay 100 mm pipe. It then follows that the plumbers would have been paid accordingly IF what the builder has indicated in the correspondence is a truthful account. I would love to know what you paid for and what the plumbers were paid for. At the end of the day, the plumbers should have used 100 mm for compliance but didn't, they used the el cheapo and not compliant as per AS2200 flimsy 90 mm uPVC storm water pipe instead. As far as the slab goes, the plumbers have no excuse to have not noticed the heights when plumbing the pipes. 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. Re: Damp proof course 83Mar 01, 2014 2:46 pm In that case, there exists a terminological inexactitude in the correspondence received advising that the pipes were 100 mm. That more than likely also indicates that he knew the pipes laid were not compliant with AS2200. Still doesn't excuse the plumbers. The rainwater tank install was incompetent. You were probably also charged for the more expensive Davey RainBank and pump that you didn't get. It is a disgrace that things like this cannot be investigated and action taken. 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. Re: Damp proof course 84Mar 01, 2014 2:57 pm terminological inexactitude - I like that. I must remember it. It is hard to take action over things that are not clearly specified ie. the pump. As for other things, it is a long story but related to the fact that instead of using euphemisms, I called a spade a spade and got myself into trouble. Re: Damp proof course 85Mar 01, 2014 3:04 pm Liliana terminological inexactitude - I like that. I must remember it. I wrote a 4 letter word starting with li but my post was blocked. The industry protects its own. Other countries must look on our consumer protection laws with disbelief. 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. Re: Damp proof course 86Mar 01, 2014 5:59 pm In defence of the plumbing side of the new VBA, I have to say they have been a big help. It did take time to prove our case because the plumbers were arguing that the land levels had been changed by us but once I was able to produce a photo of the house at frame stage showing the plinth under the fence (thank you neighbours!) we were in business. They issued a rectification order immediately and have told me to contact them when the plumbers come out so they can inspect the work before it is filled in. I think this is part of their new powers. Note to everybody - take a photo showing land levels with a reference point during the build! Re: Damp proof course 87Mar 01, 2014 7:45 pm That has also been my recent experience with the VBA Plumbing Technical Services division when discussing regulatory deficiencies. They inherited a mess in some areas. 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. Re: Damp proof course 88Mar 04, 2014 8:32 pm this doesn't warrant a new thread, but it might be of some interest to those already following it. Maybe about to open my mouth, just to change feet again, but in relation to specifications for storm water, it might just come from the top down. Example Quote: PVC Pipes to be sewer grade solvent cement joints but the plan shows and states Quote: 90 dia. PVC @ 1:100 I tried many searches for Sewer grade PVC but the only sewer type I can find is DWV, Drain Waste Vent, non pressure. No 90mm though, 80 dia or 100dia I'm ready to be clarified, but this came from an Engineer. No AS code specified. Maybe those further along the design to dig part have a slight justification. Re: Damp proof course 89Mar 05, 2014 10:23 am tezzab Example Quote: PVC Pipes to be sewer grade solvent cement joints but the plan shows and states Quote: 90 dia. PVC @ 1:100 I tried many searches for Sewer grade PVC but the only sewer type I can find is DWV, Drain Waste Vent, non pressure. No 90mm though, 80 dia or 100dia Sewer grade is DWV. It is not made in 90 mm but it is available in 80 mm, 100 mm and many other sizes. Stormwater pipe and DWV pipe are both available in 150 mm. He has confused his pipe references. Just to elaborate on the above posts... The 100 mm uPVC SN6 DWV pipe has an internal volume (8.53 litres per metre) that is about 46% greater than the common use 90 mm uPVC stormwater pipe with 1.8 or 1.9 mm walls and an internal volume of 5.84 litres per metre. This is because the 90 mm stormwater pipe has an internal diameter (ID) of 86.2 mm whereas the much stronger (3 mm thick walls) 100 mm SN6 DWV pipe has an ID of 104.2 mm. AS2200 requires the nominal diameter 100 mm uPVC DWV pipe to have a maximum flow rate of 450 lpm (which is 0.88 metres per second) whereas the flimsy nominal 90 mm uPVC stormwater pipe is mandated as 360 lpm (which is 1.03 metres per second). A bit strange one might say! http://www.dsdip.qld.gov.au/resources/n ... er/136.pdf When you do the calculations for pipes with a true 90 mm ID and a 100 mm ID, the respective internal volumes are 6.36 and 7.86 litres per metre.This in turn equates to respective flow rates of .94 and .95 metres per second when flowing at 360 and 450 litres per minute. Taking this further... If the 90 mm (86.2 ID) uPVC stormwater pipe was mandated for a maximum flow rate of .94 metres per second, the litres per minute flow rate would be 5.89 x .94 x 60 = 332 litres per minute, not 360! If the 100 mm (104.2 ID) uPVC SN6 DWV pipe was mandated for a maximum flow rate of .95 metres per second, the litres per minute flow rate would be 8.53 x .95 x 60 = 486 litres per minute, not 450! It is my opinion that the calculations for 90 mm ID and 100 mm ID uPVC pipe should not be transposed to nominal sized 90 mm uPVC stormwater pipe and 100 mm uPVC SN6 DWV pipe. The standards should, in my opinion, apply to the pipe's true ID and not their nominal ID, indicated as DN. The pipe's strength should also be taken into account. Farcical situations such as highlighted here where thin walled DN90 (actual ID is 86.2 mm) PVC stormwater pipe is understood to have a 17% higher velocity rating (1.03 metres per second) than the considerably stronger DN100 (actual ID is 104.2 mm) PVC DWV pipe (.88 metres per second) should never happen. 3in1 Supadiverta. Rainwater Harvesting Best Practice using syphonic drainage. Cleaner Neater Smarter Cheaper Supa Gutter Pumper. A low cost syphonic eaves gutter overflow solution. Re: Damp proof course 90Mar 15, 2014 8:53 pm Liliana Note to everybody - take a photo showing land levels with a reference point during the build! I'm with you there! Our builder didn't want to fix something because "we must of changed the ground level" but if the ground level was where he reckoned it was then there was something else he should of done. He couldn't argue it, if the ground level was this he should of done A and if the ground level was that he should of done B, he was wrong either way. (But we didn't change the ground level.) Re: Damp proof course 91Sep 14, 2014 1:15 am Hi Liliana, Hope this topic is still going I think that good construction practice for a weatherboard house on a slab is as Ausdesign said to provide an underlay to the slab, best turned up the edge of the slab and a Rencourse or similar dampcourse or similar laid under the bottom plates of the timber walls and turned up behind the wall plus down over the upturned underlay to form a continuous damp-course flashing because there are these things called external doors and full height windows. However not long ago it seems that the Building Code of Australia (in its wisdom?) decided not to draw the situation of a weatherboard house on a slab. The same goes for wall tiles junction joints with fixtures and floor tiles and hobs which is why wall tile installations are almost always not in compliance with plasterboard and particleboard manufacturer requirements. Leonardo_23 Re: Damp proof course 92Sep 20, 2014 12:19 am Hi Liliana, Instead of upturned underlay I meant over the particleboard edge and further down past the bottom of the particleboard to avoid any capillary action. The underlay under the slab could be turned up to the ground level but is normally not required nowadays and stops at the inside of the edge beam. Re: Damp proof course 93Sep 20, 2014 11:23 am Hi Leonardo_23, I'm not sure what you mean by particleboard. Where would the particleboard be? The underlay is, I assume, the black plastic but that certainly wasn't upturned and covered by any Rencourse. Do you have any images of what Rencourse is? Re: Damp proof course 94Nov 21, 2014 11:14 am Thanks for this threat, Liliana, I just discover my drainage is another non compliant, 90mm instead of 100mm. stormwater pit in wrong location, also less than 1 metre from our slab. our plan said, min 1 metre distance. Lucky I still have one last bill to be paid.........Thanks guys...... Re: Damp proof course 95Nov 21, 2014 11:31 am Hi fzxbeetle, I'm glad the thread has been of some use to you. It always pays to read the boring technical details yourself and see if they have indeed been followed. And best to do it now before you have paid. Good on you. Re: Damp proof course 97Dec 29, 2021 7:42 pm Hi building-expert, I have been searching posts for a few days regarding ground levels, thankfully I have found this post! I’m having a similar issue. Is there a specific requirement regarding the ground level around the perimeter of the house at handover? What are your thoughts on the attached photo? Thanks in advance, Jemma building-expert I have lost the count on the number of times this appeared on my pre final inspection report. " Builder must reduce ground levels around dwelling to comply with BCA. Levels must be 150mm below DPC and slope a minimum of 50mm away from dwelling(for ground surfaces that are not landscaped)" Of course what happens is that excess soil from slab excavation is spread around dwelling raising levels too high to save on removal from site costs. Nice bonus for the builder if he gets away with it (not if I am around) and a major headache for the owner. If concrete contractor is on the ball he will tell owner that excavation is required to reduce levels before preparing for paving. Then owner pays again for what builder should have done. However reality is that many builders don't have BCA and next to none concretors have one . So you end up with a problem that Liliana described. In saying that I exclude many competent concrete contractors that are professional and know their job. You just have to be lucky to pick one. Like ⋅ Add a comment ⋅ Pin to Ideaboard ⋅ Have look at your house plans and you will probably find that brick articulation joint has been missed. Maximum allowable spacing is 6M or 5.5M for a wall with window… 17 20562 Hi all Am new to this forum. I want to get some ideas/info about how to manage an 80 year old factory restoration to convert to a residence. The factory floor is concrete… 0 6338 Hi We have a road close to our place and only an old flimsy wooden fence between us and the Neighbour closest to the road. Any ideas on a sound proof modular fence. Like… 0 7458 |