Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I've set out the main part of my drainage, being old clay to new
inspection chamber to rest bend and soil pipe etc, with the gradient at 1 in 40. Two other connections on the chamber are to connect to two roddable bottle gullies (one under outside tap, other for rain water runoff - combined sewer). If these gullies are connected to the chamber mainly with straight pipe, the gradient will be a lot steeper than 1 in 40. Is this OK, or do I need to use some kind of rest bend from the gully so that the main run of pipe from gully to chamber is about 1 in 40 ? Of course, if the roddable feature is to be any use, then run needs to basically be straight. Thanks, Simon. |
#2
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "sm_jamieson" wrote in message ... I've set out the main part of my drainage, being old clay to new inspection chamber to rest bend and soil pipe etc, with the gradient at 1 in 40. Two other connections on the chamber are to connect to two roddable bottle gullies (one under outside tap, other for rain water runoff - combined sewer). Where do they still allow rain water to be connected into foul drains? You could be in serious trouble, you would be around here. |
#3
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
dennis@home wrote: "sm_jamieson" wrote in message ... I've set out the main part of my drainage, being old clay to new inspection chamber to rest bend and soil pipe etc, with the gradient at 1 in 40. Two other connections on the chamber are to connect to two roddable bottle gullies (one under outside tap, other for rain water runoff - combined sewer). Where do they still allow rain water to be connected into foul drains? Presumably everywhere where there is a combined sewer rather than separate sewers for foul and surface water. -- Cheers, Roger ______ Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks. PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP! |
#4
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Roger Mills" wrote in message ... In an earlier contribution to this discussion, dennis@home wrote: "sm_jamieson" wrote in message ... I've set out the main part of my drainage, being old clay to new inspection chamber to rest bend and soil pipe etc, with the gradient at 1 in 40. Two other connections on the chamber are to connect to two roddable bottle gullies (one under outside tap, other for rain water runoff - combined sewer). Where do they still allow rain water to be connected into foul drains? Presumably everywhere where there is a combined sewer rather than separate sewers for foul and surface water. Like I said where? AFAIK its been made illegal. They certainly should be as they overflow in storms and flood places with raw sewage. |
#5
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12 Apr, 23:14, "dennis@home" wrote:
"Roger Mills" wrote in message ... In an earlier contribution to this discussion, dennis@home wrote: "sm_jamieson" wrote in message ... I've set out the main part of my drainage, being old clay to new inspection chamber to rest bend and soil pipe etc, with the gradient at 1 in 40. Two other connections on the chamber are to connect to two roddable bottle gullies (one under outside tap, other for rain water runoff - combined sewer). Where do they still allow rain water to be connected into foul drains? Presumably everywhere where there is a combined sewer rather than separate sewers for foul and surface water. Like I said where? AFAIK its been made illegal. They certainly should be as they overflow in storms and flood places with raw sewage. I said its a combined sewer. Coventry. Never had any problems in storms. Most of the 1930s houses are like that. AFAIK, most houses with hoppers for bath water have combined sewers. Soakaways would be no good - there's a great thick layer of clay. There is no separate drain for us to use ! Connects straight to a public sewer running though the back gardens. Got me thinking though - the road drains going into the same sewer would seem a bit odd, but I guess they must do. Simon. |
#6
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
dennis@home wrote: "Roger Mills" wrote in message ... Presumably everywhere where there is a combined sewer rather than separate sewers for foul and surface water. Like I said where? AFAIK its been made illegal. They certainly should be as they overflow in storms and flood places with raw sewage. It may be illegal for new build - but the idea of having separate sewers is fairly recent (1960's?) and lots of places built prior to that have only a single, combined, sewer. Regulations like this are not usually retrospective. Do you honestly think that the powers that be are going to make you build an additional sewer in existing densely populated areas? The implications of doing this - *and* of separating the two types of output from *each* property are horrendous. -- Cheers, Roger ______ Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks. PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP! |
#7
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
"dennis@home" writes: Where do they still allow rain water to be connected into foul drains? Just about every older dense urban area, where there's no separate rainwater drainage system and nowhere to put soakaways. You can ask for permission anywhere. A friend of mine had no problem getting permission out in a rural setting, which did surpise me a bit. You could be in serious trouble, you would be around here. -- Andrew Gabriel [email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup] |
#8
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
sm_jamieson wrote:
I've set out the main part of my drainage, being old clay to new inspection chamber to rest bend and soil pipe etc, with the gradient at 1 in 40. Two other connections on the chamber are to connect to two roddable bottle gullies (one under outside tap, other for rain water runoff - combined sewer). If these gullies are connected to the chamber mainly with straight pipe, the gradient will be a lot steeper than 1 in 40. Is this OK, or do I need to use some kind of rest bend from the gully so that the main run of pipe from gully to chamber is about 1 in 40 ? snip The '1 in 40' rule only applied to soil - rainwater can go at any angle, but even soil drains are now no longer subject to the '1 in 40' rule.....the idea was that ****, travelling at velocity, would splatter up the sides of inspection chambers and the like, then when it set, it would build up into a blockage, they now don't insist on this as slow moving turds cause blockages themselves. |
#9
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Phil L wrote:
The '1 in 40' rule only applied to soil - rainwater can go at any angle, but even soil drains are now no longer subject to the '1 in 40' rule.....the idea was that ****, travelling at velocity, would splatter up the sides of inspection chambers and the like, then when it set, it would build up into a blockage, they now don't insist on this as slow moving turds cause blockages themselves. I thought the justification was that if the angle is too steep, the fluids drain too fast, leaving the solids stranded. A lower angle was thought to keep the solids afloat and moving. Chris -- Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK Have dancing shoes, will ceilidh. |
#10
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 14 Apr, 07:46, Chris J Dixon wrote:
Phil L wrote: The '1 in 40' rule only applied to soil - rainwater can go at any angle, but even soil drains are now no longer subject to the '1 in 40' rule.....the idea was that ****, travelling at velocity, would splatter up the sides of inspection chambers and the like, then when it set, it would build up into a blockage, they now don't insist on this as slow moving turds cause blockages themselves. I thought the justification was that if the angle is too steep, the fluids drain too fast, leaving the solids stranded. A lower angle was thought to keep the solids afloat and moving. Chris -- Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK Have dancing shoes, will ceilidh. 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 ! Cheers, Simon. |
#11
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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 |
#12
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#13
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Chris J Dixon" wrote in message ... I thought the justification was that if the angle is too steep, the fluids drain too fast, leaving the solids stranded. A lower angle was thought to keep the solids afloat and moving. Having solids move away too fast can drag the water out of a toilet, and other, water traps. Look at external stacks. The toilet goes outside, and an immediate near horizontal elbow and then tees into the drain stack. The toilet does no go directly into a tee on the stack. The elbow reduces flow. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Drain inspection chamber | UK diy | |||
Inspection chamber: what should water level be? | UK diy | |||
Small man-hole / inspection chamber | UK diy | |||
Storm water inspection chamber? | UK diy | |||
New inspection chamber... in the lounge?!! | UK diy |