• 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

Pipe Sleeves

Great discussion and replys!

Now, what about fire sprinkler piping underneath a footing? Do you, or would

require a pipe sleeve for these type of " pipes "?

.
 
I see no difference with fire sprinkler piping. The physics is the same.
 
Does a sprinkler pipe know it needs to behave differently than a storm, sanitary or domestic water line? I think not... It's an underground pipe with all the pressures (hydraulic from the soil, whatever pressure is left in the pipe (maybe nothing if it's a drain line.. maybe 200 if it's a fire line).. I could make an argument out of many codes that the line needs to have a relieving arch to protect it.
 
On the OP,

1 - Yes, it's required by code. Unless given an Engineered design based on sound engineering priciples.

2 - The quoted code provision does not address sleeves under footings. It adresses relieving arches under footings and sleeves through foundation walls. The depth at which a relieving arch is no longer required is a design consideration for the DPR, not the Code Official.

On the sprinkler pipe, 'any pipe' is any pipe.
 
Big John,

Thanks for the input and clarification on the "pipes sleeves" underneath the

foundation. I should have stated "relieving arch" instead!

My purpose for this topic was to identify another gray area in the IPC, and

to see what others are doing regarding this type of installation. BTW, on

the project in mind, there were no dimensions provided for the piping

underneath the footings. When I asked the project mechanical contractor

about it ( on the telephone ), I got that "short silence thing", similar to

the "deer in the head lights" look. It's atypical here for the RDP's to provide

this information, and when I request it, I'm the %#^&$# inspector who

is holding the project up!

FWIW, the fire sprinkler piping protection underneath footings is also

listed in NFPA 13, Ch. 10, Section 10.6.

Thanks ya'll for your input! Time to go spread some more sunshine... :D

John,

How are things going in Albany?

.
 
Reviving & expanding this topic;

Ran into this, re-issued permit for new home, previous permit expired and worked stopped few years back when housing crashed, rough plumb and lateral inspection. House trap required by ordinance in this municipality on exterior, interior is a drop then wye thru foundation - no sleeve. I always call this out, I get told often I am the only one and same with the csst nailplates but anyhow the fitting arrangement is tight so a sleeve at this point will require removal of a significant portion of piping. Does anyone know of a code approved product that can be inserted into the foundation without removing the pipe assembly?
 
$ - $



Keystone,

I do not know of a code approved project off-hand.......From your

description, it sounds as though this will be one of those custom

made applications.

I'm thinking along the lines of something similar to a large diameter

steel pipe; similar to a casing used when drilling underneath interstate

highways, ...saaaaaaaay an 18" diameter, or larger steel pipe that can

be inserted around your drainage piping thru the existing foundation

wall, and then fill in the voids around the pipe casing.

To me, it's either remove the existing piping and re-pipe thru a smaller

sleeve, or use a much larger sleeve and insert around the existing

piping.

Guess they should have used an approved sleeve originally huh ?



$ - $

 
I recommend slicing a pipe in half lengthwise and placed around the pipe. The pipe is first wrapped with styrofoam at both ends of the sleeve so that the pipe will be centered in the sleeve. Then the two halves of the sleeve are taped together.

I have seen this many times. They always ask how big the sleeve must be and I recommend a 2" gap around the pipe.

I have been criticized for that. The complaint is that the styrofoam will impart force on the pipe and it is a poor seal between the pipe and the sleeve. I reply,"Give me a better solution". Remember that this is done after the formwork is in.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ice, no suprise this is has 16K hits, when I used google to seek solutions the forum link for the original posting is the 4th item that comes up..

I see both sides of the coin on the split sleeve, personally I am not a big fan but.....

I have been struggling with these situations now for some time but atleast I know I am far from the only one.
 
Keystone....."Linkseal" is what I see used commercially if I understand what you are looking for....http://www.linkseal.com/

I had a school project where I asked them for a detail for pipes passing under the footing, DP in charge said they weren't going to have any, I said it looked like they were....Gave my plan review to the super when he got on site, next thing I knew they had a change for stepping the footing 8' to get the pipe in the wall and above the footing....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
* & *

IMO, ...in this "neck of the woods", there would be far less problems with

this type of application if [ some ] DP's would actually read the applicable

codes sections and state this on their plans.......I have run in to this

problem numerous times, both in reviewing plans and out in the field.

Once you get out in to the field, and the requirement has not been

stated on the Approved Set of Plans, then realistically one could not

expect the plumbing contractor to retro-fit without being reimbursed

for his costs.........The Approved Set of Plans should have the

governing language AND, this particular issue should be addressed

at the initial foundation forming stage.

* & *
 
north star said:
* & *

Once you get out in to the field, and the requirement has not been

stated on the Approved Set of Plans, then realistically one could not

expect the plumbing contractor to retro-fit without being reimbursed

for his costs.........The Approved Set of Plans should have the

governing language AND, this particular issue should be addressed

at the initial foundation forming stage.

* & *
Click to expand...
I don't agree. This is a mundane requirement to protect the pipe. If the plumber doesn't know that, he'll learn a lesson.
 
Linkseal looks like a reasonable option..

This project was started by a Third Party Inspection Agengy that is no longer in the picture, I do not fault them cause the project was left weather tight at frame inspection but thats not to say this shouldn't have been addressed during foundation inspection. Who knows if there was an understanding between the contractor and inspector at that time.

As far as plan review, I can say it is rarity to see foundation sleeve notes. Is anyone else seeing or requiring this for residential projects
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top