Plumbing Rough in - Opinions sought

Thanks Godzilla for your prompt response. I'm just not sure if we've achieved what we were hoping for ie: trouble free pipework. The 2 joins close together were in the pipe leading up to the shower outlet as we needed to lift the height. I would've preferred the whole pipe to be replaced. This is the exact pipe that leaked and caused all the damage to the framework.
Any thoughts on running through the ceiling cavity as opposed to under floor?

Thanks again.

So your considering halting work, thank god I'm not working for you!!!!!

Originally Posted by plum

So your considering halting work, thank god I'm not working for you!!!!!

Thanks for your thoughts. The total job is close to 10k, this is just part of it, so I figure I've got a right to halt the work if I'm not happy with it. Plus approval was not sought to go into the ceiling.

Thanks

Originally Posted by barney118

I can only think the plumber has a preference to go through the roof as it is more convenient for them, if you asked to go through the floor then I am sure the price would have reflected that and that is what they should have done unless they got authorization from you first. The soldering job looks ok, I have seen better reduction soldering, I am one to ask why not choose PEX these days?

Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk

Hi Barney,

I tend to agree going through the ceiling was more for their convenience. They did not get authorization prior to doing this. The job was quoted based on the existing pipework which runs under the floor so any difficulties with access I would assume were factored into the original quote. By going through the ceiling I'm sure a lot of time has been saved.

We did consider PEX and had it quoted, but our thoughts were copper has been around for a while and the difference in price wasn't a lot in the scheme of things. A few hundred dollars in a full reno is not huge difference.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Cheers
JF

Originally Posted by woodchip

Going through the ceiling space is normal practice, did you make it 100% clear you wanted the pipework under the house, you really have to keep an eye on some tradies.
No doubt those massive check out's of the studs will be the hilarious butt of the jokes for the carpenters on-site for many lunch breaks!, probably still structurally sound though.
cheers

Hi Woodchip,

The current pipes are currently running under the house and improving access by removing floorboards was discussed with the plumber before any rough in commenced. To be fair we did not stipulate we didn't want the pipework in the ceiling, however following the path of the current pipework would make more sense to me and all previous discussion was around replacing existing pipework. By the time we arrived on site yesterday morning pipework was roughed in all the way up to the wet areas at the back of the house! I'm a little annoyed with myself to be honest because I had intended to be on site first thing before any work began, having said that I wasn't planning on hanging around all day to keep an eye on things. It's certainly been a learning experience, for the future "clearly scope things out and any major change requires approval first".

As a woodworker the "large" check outs for me are little frustrating as it doesn't take any more time to do them a bit more neatly. At most I would think 100mm wide would be enough, some of them are close to 300mm, I do get they'll never be seen but.... I didn't post all the photos but there are some rather large chunks out of top plates in a few places as well. The structural integrity did cross my mind.

Anyway I'm meeting him on site this morning to discuss things so we'll see what happens from there.

Thanks everyone for your feedback so far, much appreciated.

Cheers
JF

Originally Posted by wonderplumb

#1 is fine
#2 is actually illegal
#3 Can't see anything wrong aside for the sloppy checking out
#4 Nothing really wrong here either, again aside from the checking out, could have neatened up the pipework a bit
#5 Nothing technically wrong, just looks like a f##k up. I would have cut that out and started again back at the last joint and used that pipe elsewhere, if it was practical to do so

Hi Wonderplumb,

I appreciate your feedback. I've been a member here for quite a while having started originally on the Woodwork forum. I've read many of your replies to posts and you always offer good sound advice.

I too thought #2 was illegal when I saw it, and the cost of 3/4 to 1/2 reducer is all of $2.00.

I arrived on site this morning to find work had already started even though I'd asked for a chat prior to work starting . The jobs really too far along to change things now. Assurances were given that running pipe through the ceiling poses no concerns and work is warranted etc etc.. I might request the crimped joint be replaced with a reducer though, especially as it's illegal, that will be an interesting discussion.

I'm getting the feeling he feels he's either under quoted on the job and has to make up some time, or has too much on at the moment and is trying rush this job through. Either way I think communication has been the main issue here. A phone call to discuss a change of plans goes a long way in my book. I feel we're fairly easy to work for and certainly haven't been pushing to get things done quickly. We're not on site looking over his shoulder (perhaps this is the issue) and he can come and go as he pleases with a set of keys. I feel site access is fairly good as well with no wall linings in place...anywhere.

I've attached a few more photos if anyone is interested.

Again thanks for all the feedback.

For a bloke like me that has been known to be a bit rough, sometimes, when it does not matter, on my own work, the checkouts seem to bear no resemblance to the job in hand. Surely he could get it closer than that?
Also, I've never joined copper pipe but have had quite a bit done and I have never seen joints like those...look a bit amateur?

Originally Posted by David.Elliott

For a bloke like me that has been known to be a bit rough, sometimes, when it does not matter, on my own work, the checkouts seem to bear no resemblance to the job in hand. Surely he could get it closer than that?
Also, I've never joined copper pipe but have had quite a bit done and I have never seen joints like those...look a bit amateur?

Hi David,

Yes, that's I feel too. The checkouts seem to have been done with as much "clearance" as possible to make it easier running the pipework ie; less care needs to be taken putting bends in, lining things up etc..and then the pipe has been fastened wherever it's sits in the checkout. The house is over forty years old and the checkouts from any previous pipework are no more than 50mm wide, anywhere. I'm pretty sure cordless reciprocating saws weren't around in those days either, they would've all been hand cut. As for the soldering, I think "amateur" nails it. I would expect my joins to look like that not a trained professional.

I'm really dissapointed with the quality of work to be honest. We've pretty much done everything ourselves on this house up until now other than removing the asbestos, shifting around some structural walls and repairing the floor in the wet areas, which we got a builder in to do. It's annoying to see a wall stud I put in the day before that's directly under a roof strut cut 3/4 through to run a pipe in!

The most annoying thing is if he'd run the pipes under the house where the others already are the massive checkouts in the studs wouldn't even be there! All there would be is a hole in the bottom plate and maybe a not so large checkout in the stud either side if needed.

Anyway about to head to site soon. I'm looking forward to viewing whatever quality craftsmanship took place yesterday afternoon.

I am no expert but I thought there was a section in the framing code about crippling a stud and that it could not exceed a certain percentage, maybe 25% ?
I do not think a stud crippled by 50-75% directly under a prop would pass code, maybe some one with access to the code could check.
Regards Dave

Looking at table 6.1 in AS1684 the section title is "Notching, trenching and holes in studs and plates".
As I said I am not an expert so happy to be corrected by some-one with better knowledge of the building code, but as I read it the above situation would not be allowed.

Wanted (Vic) Wanted: AS1684
is where I found the link to AS1684.

Hi All,

Wow, I've been out all day and a lot of feedback has come through today!

Some of the information that's come through today regarding the potential structural issues is a little concerning. I will be addressing these issues soon though. ie: making required repairs.

Just to update everybody, we made the decision this morning to settle up the account with the current plumber. It was not an easy decision, or conversation, as he is a nice young bloke trying to make a go of it. Ultimately however we aren't happy with the pipework being put in the ceiling without consultation, or with the quality of some of the work. Our intention is to be in this house for a long time and we would not be happy leaving things as they are, so yes, it will all be coming out and going under the house. We're meeting with another plumber tomorrow (referred by a friend at work) who seems to be talking our language.

I would like to thank everyone in this thread that provided feedback, opinions, thoughts and information relating to Standards etc. After a couple of sleepless nights it certainly helped us to make a difficult (and expensive) decision. More importantly however, it has reinforced that fact that we have made the right decision. I've already learnt a lot doing this renovation and this current episode has taught me a lot as well, this lesson is unfortunately the most costly though...

Thanks again.

Cheers JF

Just thought I'd clear something up from my earlier post, before I had seen the follow up pictures, I didn't think the work was a sackable offence. The welding, not great, but certainly not sackable, but the notching leaves me speechless, and if that's an indication of his workmanship, I reckon the right decision has been made terminating his services.
If he is a young bloke, I would hope he learns from this, otherwise his future will be limited in the trade, he'll get found out by the NSW plumbing authorities and be put on notice, so to speak.

I like the OP's opening post when he called himself a pedantic PITA, however in this case I would have probably done exactly the same thing. He may well have done the young plumber a favour, he needs to communicate with his customers and the roughing out is dreadful, he will not last long if he can't either follow the clients wishes or explain to the client why they can't have what they want or the reason why he would like to do it differently. Most succesful tradies or others that deal with the public soon learn we need to make it clear at the start what the likely outcome and cost will be so issues are resolved beforehand, failure to do that usually leaves an unhappy customer and unpaid bills.

The pictures you posted have to be one of the worst butcher jobs I have ever seen on a timber frame, there was no excuse to cut so much timber from the studs, it not only looks bad it has weakened the entire row of studs hacked to bits, I think the plumber was intending on running 20 pipes through the walls going by the size of the notches he has take out, if one of our plumbers did a job like that, they would never work for us again.

Are you sure this guy was licensed ? I cannot believe he has made it through his apprenticeship performing work like this.

About the picture below, there is a critical stud missing from the frame between the pipes, who took this out ?.
This stud is transferring some roof load to the ground, and really should be replaced, I hope you have put a new stud in there

The 2nd picture below is totally unacceptable, and has reduced the carrying capacity of this stud to about 20%, again I hope this has been rectified ?

This is a classic example of why plumbers cannot become a builder by doing additional tertiary studies, like a bricklayer or carpenter can, because if this guy knew anything about structural principals he would understand why what he has done is so wrong.

Quote from Metrix......This is a classic example of why plumbers cannot become a builder by doing additional tertiary studies, like a bricklayer or carpenter can, because if this guy knew anything about structural principals he would understand why what he has done is so wrong.



Thanks for that Metrix, I needed a laugh.

Who'd want to be a builder anyway......

Originally Posted by plum

Who'd want to be a builder anyway......

Some days, I find myself saying the same thing,

It will be fine to leave the original stud out, as you have put the new ones in either side, The photos did not show the entire stud and I was not sure if these had been attacked by the butcher, if they are still intact then you can leave the original stud out.

Also there is no need to strengthen the top plate, it is only a few holes which won't make any difference to its strength.

Hope you have found a better plumber.