On 14 Apr, 10:10, "Jim Alexander" wrote:
"sm_jamieson" wrote in message

...

Thats what I thought too. Anyway, this does not apply to water only,
so I guess I can put in any angle I like. But I'll be prepared for the
BCO to shout at me !

Coming in late but puzzled. You can only put in an angle accomodated by
the inspection chamber socket and or the gulley outlet. So why not create
the gradient to suit the inspection chamber socket by a short bend and pipe
extension at the gully. Or am I missing something?

Jim A

The roddable gully has a side-exit socket at I guess 87.5 degrees.
The inspection chamber has 20 degree adjustable angle inlets (flopast
from screwfix), and you are allowed slight bends near roddable points
(inspection chamber and roddable gully). You are correct, there will
almost certainly be some slight bends to allow the main length of pipe
between them to be straight. All this is a given.

The point was, if I use any more than a slight bend from the roddable
gully, the roddable feature will be useless, since any tight bend just
after the roddable gully would prevent rods entering the main pipe. In
this case a nomal trap and separate rodding eye would be required.

The question was, (1) between slight bends at each end and the main
run straight at a steeper angle, OR, (2) tighter bends at each end and
the main run straight at a shallower angle.

If I create the gradient to suit the sockets, I will end up using
scenario (2) above.
Of course this is mitigated on the chamber end by the adjustable
inlets !

Hope that clears things up !
Simon.