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

Very good point, pass1. It absolutely is something to think about.

I actually had to consider this during house construction and came up with a few belt-and-suspenders ways of preventing leaks where lines pass through the basement wall. I have a couple of other underground penetrations of the wall, and after 23 years, they have never leaked. I really think I can keep the penetrations from leaking.

Boots--

I'm still not getting concrete reasons why you think it is a bad idea other than it's not the way a pro would do it. Pros have economic and time pressures to consider. Those things are less important to me.

I believe that the approach I described would give longer valve life, and the system would be easier to drain, purge, and generally maintain. And I certainly would include backflow prevention.

So what specifically, aside from standard parctice or professional convention issues, are the gotchas in this approach? I wouldn't pursue this with you if I didn't think you knew what you were talking about.

I tried my best, Boots, to get you to be specific about exactly why this approach is a bad idea. I really wanted to know. Instead of offering any concrete reasoning, you repeatedly fell back to just saying it's not professional standard practice. Obviously I knew that in the first place, hence my question.

Also, the unprovoked personal attacks are the mark of someone who maybe doesn't know as much as he implies he does.

Is there anyone else out there who could weigh in on the original question?

Boots--

Your picture of a poorly executed idea reflects on the workmanship, not necessarily the idea.

Having said that, I think I see a germ of reason among your insults. It's true that a service peraon would need access to the house to work on the system. I didn't really consider this since I do virtually all work myself, and I almost always have access to the house. The inconvenience to some future owner doesn't concern me much, but now I'm thinking forward to my dotage when I can't or don't want to do that kind of work any more.

This is a valid consideration, though it really just puts the sprinkler system in the same category as most of the rest of the plumbing in the house.

Thank you. Got anything else besides the "not how a pro would do it" stuff?

Believe me, Boots, when I say that I condone and respect professional best practices. I use them every day in my own line of work.

However, consider where these best practices come from. They evolve, pretty much by consensus, from professionals doing the work every day and finding what works best for them. Since the pros make their living at it, their criteria for succcess includes time and cost efficiency right near the top. They develop practices that yield safe, reliable, and effective systems that are easy to service. But the practices also have to optimize time and cost requirements.

An amateur or DIYer doing his own install and his own service has a different persperctive and different drivers. He also wants a safe, reliable and effective system, but time and cost pressures may not be at the top of the list. If he sees ways to make the system work better for him, why begrudge that, even if it bends some professional practices?

I have almost 80 electrical circuits in my house, with a LOT of home runs and half-filled conduits to the breaker panels. It meets or exceeds code, and I'd put the workmanship up against a professional job any time, but I know there are professional electricians who would roll their eyes. For me though, my frequent changes and adds are a breeze, so should I care?