Dear visitor, welcome to SPRINKLER TALK FORUM - You Got Questions, We've Got Answers. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains how this page works. You must be registered before you can use all the page's features. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.
This post has been edited 3 times, last edit by "secutanudu" (Jul 6th 2010, 4:53pm)
Not sure why the link didn't work.Your link doesn't work on this website. Besides, when you want to cite a written requirement, you include chapter and verse, and not the entire volume. For all we know, this is yet another case of the code for fire sprinkler systems, which does require a DCVA, being read as a requirement for lawn sprinklers.
What about for my parents? Their house is in the middle of a hill....I guess an RPZ would be the way to go there.And trust me, a PVB is an upgrade from the DCVA, especially in a state that is lax about requiring annual device testing. You can always sell the old DCVA on eBay.
If no one is going to be testing the devices, a DCVA is the last thing you want to have. They can and will stick open. Especially the older Febco 805Y, the most popular model in the Long Island area. If you had one of those, I would replace it without hesitation. Whether an RPZ can substitute, is a matter of accepting its above-ground installation, and also accepting the additional pressure loss it creates.