• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

PEX

Re: PEX

conarb said:
Thanks Jasper, it looks like California AHJ's should exclude the product if their water is Chlorinated. If it isn't chlorinated (which all municipal water in California is), then the AHJs should disallow it in recirculating hot water systems, Inspectors then have to make a field determination as to whether it's been exposed to UV light prior to installation.
There is a difference between what Authorities Having Jurisdiction should do, and what the law allows. Now that the State of California has approved PEX, California AHJs have fewer options. Unfortunately, I am under the impression that California's approval did not discriminate between types of PEX, nor did it consider the length of the manufacturer's warranty against exposure to sunlight.

Different kinds of PEX tubing have different properties. For example:

1) Silane PEX (PEX-B) can have far more anti-oxidants than PEX-A and PEX-C.

2) PEX tubing can be lined to reduce the amount of oxygen that diffuses into the tube from the surrounding air.

Also, it is possible to change the amount of chlorine in a recirculating hot water system.
 
Re: PEX

RJJ said:
Jasper: Interesting! is this a guess? where the info come from?
Yes, most of my conclusions are guesses, based on:

* The information in Lubrizol's letter

* Other websites I looked at when I wanted to improve wikipedia's article on PEX. I put some notes at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cross-linked_polyethylene#Comparison_of_types

* Basic "chemical kinetics". "Chemical kinetics" is the theory of how fast a chemical reaction uses up its reactant(s) to produce its product(s).

Each chemical reaction has a different rate. Most chemical reactions have the following properties:

* The rate depends on the chemicals involved, and what intermediate products are created along the way.

* The rate increases (roughly exponentially) with temperature. A 10 Celsius degree increase in temperature can double or triple the reaction rate.

* The rate increases (possibly non-linearly) with the concentration of each reactant.

* The rate depends on whether there is a catalyst.

* The rate depends on the solvent. In this case, the reaction happens in the tube material.

The degradation of PEX has the following reactants:

* Something that causes the damage, such as chlorine or ultra-violet light.

* The cross-linked polyethylene. (This has a fairly constant concentration, because it is most of the material.) Different kinds of PEX have different kinds of cross-links, so some kinds might be slower to be damaged.

* The anti-oxidants in the material. I assume the anti-oxidants are used up as they "try" to repair the damage. I assume that the tube will fail when it no longer has enough anti-oxidant in a spot to prevent a leak. Different kinds of PEX start out with very different amounts of anti-oxidants.

Basically, I am assuming that the amount of anti-oxidants used up is the sum of:

* The number of days exposure to sunlight * the amount of UV in the sunlight * a fudge factor, adjusted for the length of each day and the temperature of the PEX and whether the PEX contains any "sunblock". Many black plastic pipes use graphite as a "sunblock".

* The number of years exposure to chlorinated water * the concentration of the chlorine in the water * another fudge factor, adjusted for the temperature of the water and whether any linings prevent the chlorine from diffusing into the PEX.

I am also assuming that each PEX tube has a potential life, if it were never exposed to chlorine or UV. In effect, I assume that exposure to sunlight uses up some of the tube's life, and exposure to chlorinated water uses up more of the tube's life. Of course, you can only find out how long any particular tube will last when it fails. I hope that PEX tubes that are warranted against 180 days of exposure to sunlight have long potential lives (if they are kept out of sunlight).

A similar theory is used to estimate lung-cancer risk -- a smoker's risk of dying of lung cancer is roughly proportional to the number of cigarettes they have smoked, times the average time they kept the smoke inhaled. In the lung cancer analysis, body temperature is fairly constant, so it does not factor into the results. And yes, I knew a woman who never smoked who died of lung cancer.
 
Re: PEX

Jasper said:
And yes, I knew a woman who never smoked who died of lung cancer.
This just goes to show that there is a difference between theory and practice.

Thus, code inspectors are wise to ask for tests to show how long products are likely to last. Unfortunately, I do not know of any test that can prove that a product invented in the last 100 years will last as long as I want my house to last.

On the other hand, PEX is not the only plumbing product "invented in the last 100 years", and it is not the only product that can fail if exposed to "harsh" conditions. The best kinds of copper (for various applications) were also "invented in the last 100 years". Copper pipes, galvanized steel pipes, and other kinds of plastic pipes also have known failure modes.
 
Re: PEX

Jasper:

The Cal Pipes article says:



PolybutyIene (PB) is still being used in a many parts of the world for hot and cold potable water applications because those parts of the world don't rely on chlorine for the purification of their water. Countries that don't chlorinate their potable water use ozone, reverse osmosis, carbon or ground well systems. There is a direct scientific connection between chlorinated water and Polyolefin based materials decreased performance and longevity
Since the claim is made that PEX has been proven by many years of use in Europe, do you know if the European countries chlorinate their water?
 
Re: PEX

conarb said:
Since the claim is made that PEX has been proven by many years of use in Europe, do you know if the European countries chlorinate their water?
I am afraid I do not know much about water chlorination. For purposes of analyzing customers' pipe durability, the concentration of chlorine compounds "at the tap" is more important than whether the water is chlorinated at all.
 
Re: PEX

Jasper said:
For purposes of analyzing customers' pipe durability, the concentration of chlorine compounds "at the tap" is more important than whether the water is chlorinated at all.
A quick Googling shows that there are two common measures of chlorine concentrations:

* "Free chlorine" (HOCl/OCl-) in acidic water damages copper pipes, according to http://www.springerlink.com/content/kh872002rt2547p8/

* "Total chlorine", especially in acidic water, kills fish and other aquatic life, according to http://www.h2ou.com/h2wtrqual.htm#Chlorine

I do not know which measure is better for estimating the life of a PEX tubing system.
 
Re: PEX

Animal Lab News (ALN) Magazine has an article on what the "free chlorine" measurement means. As pH increases, the "free chlorine" changes from Cl2 to HOCl to OCl-. The article is "Animal Drinking Water Chlorination and Monitoring", by Susan McDaniel and Stacey Smart, in the September 2008 issue: http://www.alnmag.com/Article_Print.asp?pid=367

The article further explains that:

Combined chlorine is defined as the amount of chlorine existing in water in chemical combination with ammonia or organic amines. The disinfection capability of combined chlorine is much more limited than free chlorine. Ammonia is sometimes deliberately added to chlorinated public water supplies however, as combined chlorine is more stable than free chlorine and provides a residual chlorine concentration for a longer period of time. Total chlorine is simply the sum of free and combined chlorine. Free chlorine is the strongest disinfectant of the chlorine family, and the measure of its concentration is the number that is of concern when determining the chlorine residual in water.
 
Re: PEX

Jasper:

I don't really understand this, they say that France doesn't chlorinate then the chart seems to show that they do, apparently the European countries use a combination of Chlorine, Ozone, UV and reverse osmosis, while we us strictly chlorine?

I stumbled upon something else that I wonder about in researching this.



Wikipedia said:
Household reverse osmosis units use a lot of water because they have low back pressure. As a result, they recover only 5 to 15 percent of the water entering the system. The remainder is discharged as waste water.¹
I installed a fancy reverse osmosis system under the kitchen sink when my mother was alive, we never use it now, but I have a $300 a month water bill which I've always attributed to watering landscaping and too many showers. Now I wonder if that thing is sitting there wasting water all day long? Do they use water when not used? If so I better turn it off.

¹ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_osmosis
 
Re: PEX

conarb said:
Wikipedia said:
Household reverse osmosis units use a lot of water because they have low back pressure. As a result, they recover only 5 to 15 percent of the water entering the system. The remainder is discharged as waste water.¹
I installed a fancy reverse osmosis system under the kitchen sink when my mother was alive, we never use it now, but I have a $300 a month water bill which I've always attributed to watering landscaping and too many showers. Now I wonder if that thing is sitting there wasting water all day long? Do they use water when not used? If so I better turn it off.

If the schematic you linked to is accurate, it probably does use a lot of water all the time. It does not seem to require any electrical power, so it probably does not have any electronics, and it probably is powered by water pressure. Reverse osmosis is similar to pumping water uphill. Using water pressure to pump part of the water uphill results in a lot of "waste" water. If it does not have any electronics, and if it does not have any feedback loops from the output tank, then it might not shut off when the output tank is full. At 45 gallons per day (of output), this system is slower than typical 2 gallon per minute tap usage, so it probably runs continuously to try to feed the output tank.

If you "never use it now," turning it off seems like a very good idea. Please let us know whether you notice the difference in your water bill.
 
Re: PEX

My pappy never had these problems when he was a young-un. Just went to the well, bucket in hand, and came back with water. No Chlorine, flourine or BS. Just plain old water. Ah, the good old days! :D
 
Top