SPRINKLER TALK FORUM - You Got Questions, We've Got Answers

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tehachapibackflow</i>
<br />You will begin to notice on the watts 009 series the internal parts are all plastic. Those check modules will begin to crack with high pressure or freezing temps. Bets of luck with the "failing febcos"
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
just remember all backflow devices are rated at temp rating of up to 120 degrees anything hotter will require a watts 909 MOD model which is rated for really hot water.

"failing" can be taken several ways ~ if device testing isn't performed on a regular basis, the effectiveness of the check valves can only be guessed at. For a PVB, that doesn't trouble me very much, since the spring-loaded vacuum breaker has not yet shown any tendency to stick.

I suspect the process of gaining agency approvals is ample demonstration of the relief valve performance of an RPZ. Our testing is all about check valves. For a DCVA, I consider it essential, since the device is sealed, and contains nothing else but check valves. The air openings on PVBs and RPZs make the check valves in those devices less critical to the task of protection.

There are many other factors that determine if a RPZ is failing. You cannot just rely on the relief valve dripping or dumping to determine if an assembly is failing. If what you mentioned was true there would be no need to ever test a RPZ assembly. You would just wait until it drips then repair it. Remember the ultimate goal for backflow is for protection of the drinking water supply. Not just ease of winterizing or cost. Think about it.

One aspect of RPZ selection that isn't obvious, is that there are parts of the country that haven't yet set up testing requirements for backflow preventers, so those areas don't get a chance to build up a profile of RPZ performance. They will be more concerned with relief valve leakage than just about anything else. Luckily for them, the basic design of an RPZ allows for the relief to dump water, so that untested check valves don't present the kind of potential danger that they would for a DCVA

Performance and no-disassembly features aside, one practical consideration for extending the RPZ selections, is that there would be RPZs with right-to-left flow direction available. It looks like the Febco 860 is left-to-right. The Wilkins 975xl is right-to-left.

I have to agree with the cracked seats due to freezing. But it is worth to be able to replace a seat instead of replacing a backflow due to a pit or crack in the seat of a febco 825y. If you ask any true backflow tester they will tell you there are many more advantages to the wilkins 975XL. See Ya.

I do make certain the RPZs are clear of water before winter arrives, so I can hold off learning about freeze damage. My basic response to a frozen backflow call is to advocate a replacement, so they start fresh, without any worries about warped brass. I hear tell that one freeze gripe that can affect the Wilkins 975XL is the plastic seats developing cracks.

Anyone have experience with the Conbraco RPZs? It does look much like a Wilkins, with both Y-checks oriented upward, and a testcock on the relief valve, which looks like it might eliminate disassembly requirements for winterizing.

You will begin to notice on the watts 009 series the internal parts are all plastic. Those check modules will begin to crack with high pressure or freezing temps. Bets of luck with the "failing febcos"

I always thought the Febco 825Y series was ruggedly built, and its larger relief diaphragm gave it a performance edge at lower supply pressures. At the same time, I noticed a tendency for the check valve poppets to jam. Since winterizing includes check valve dissasembly, an opportunity to clean the poppet stems and guides allows the 825Y to keep working reliably. Warmer climates will see different results.

Lately, I've been trying the Watts 009 series, which have no disassembly requirements while winterizing. No gripes so far, but time will tell.

To those who are in terested in backflow assembies. Here in california we see all differnet types of assemblies. We see every brand made. But as a certified tester, and Chief Distribution Operator of a large water system and Cross Connection Control Manager. I have no problem tooting the horn for wilkins priducts. They by far pass testing much more often than any other assembly. Wilkins is the easiest assembly to work on. The parts are inexpensive and easy to understand the products manuals. Just so everyone knows I am not in anyway paid or endorsed by wikins. I just truely believe in their products.

Hope this helps.

I live just outside of Anchorage, Alaska. Since Sprinkler systems aren't very prevelant here I don't think there are any regulations on backflow but I will check. I do need an RPZ model since all of my heads will be well above the preventer.