Replies

1. 
   Bill_Conner | Dec 14, 2000 04:11pm | #1

   *
   In most jurisdictions your are not suppose to make unions - dielectric or not - inaccessible. There are dielectric couplings that can be located like any coupling. The use of a 6 to 12 inch brass nipple seems to be an often accepted substite for a dielectric fitting.

1. 
   Francis_Voignier | Dec 14, 2000 06:07pm | #2

   *Keep in mind that dielectric unions will break your ground connections to the electrical panel.fv

1. 
   David_Thomas | Dec 14, 2000 07:58pm | #3

   *I agree with Bill and Francis. The slightly better installation inside a wall or celing would have been a brass nipple or non-union dielectric fitting. But since it is a ball valve and not a union, I would leave it there if it were my house. Bury the sucker. -David

1. 
   Francis_Voignier | Dec 14, 2000 08:56pm | #4

   *A brass nipple is an accepted standard as both a dielectric substitute and a non accessible connection. With a valve, you run into the remote possibility of failure of the packing or whatever seals the mechanical components of the valve. I would in your case, try to fit a nipple, but I see the picture quite clearly, and it might not be easy. Even though I might keep the valve just as it is if it were my house, I can in no way advise you to do so, for you may get back to me, a few years down the line, and ask me to bring my tools over! fv

1. 
   John_Sprung | Dec 15, 2000 12:28am | #5

   *It sounds like you've had mixed copper and galvanized in place for 25 years or so. In that case, the galvanized part could be close to the end of its useful life. Since you're tearing up the ceiling anyhow, the first class way to go would be to replace all the galvanized stuff now. If you don't do it now, you'll do it sometime later, perhaps when it's even less convenient. Remember the part of Murphy's Law that says "... and at the worst possible time."-- J.S.

2. 
   Joe_Hennessey | Dec 15, 2000 03:27am | #6

   *Is the local plumbing supply open on Christmas Eve? Murphy works overtime on holidays I think. Joe H

3. 
   Barry_Miller | Dec 15, 2000 04:17am | #7

   *John Sprung misread your message. You have brass between the iron and the copper, and no chemical reaction should occur as a result. The real dilemma is whether to close it up. I would expect an open ball valve to be as little likely to leak as would a brass union. Your call.

4. 
   CaseyR_ | Dec 15, 2000 05:39am | #8

   *It's my understanding that intermediary brass units and dielectric unions slow down but don't necessarily completely arrest the electrolytic corrosion that erodes the metal pipes. Fine Homebuilding has online an answer to a question where they suggest using two brass couplings and a brass nipple between steel and copper pipes at:http://www.taunton.com/fh/features/materials/41dielectric.htm There is also a discussion relating to this at:http://www.terrylove.com/wwwboard/messages/426.htmland the follow-on to the response at:http://www.terrylove.com/wwwboard/messages/429.htmlThere is undoubtedly merit to John Sprungs suggestion that galvanized piping has a finite lifespan, although around here we have a lot of houses with galvanized pipes that are well over 25 years of age. It should also be mentioned that copper can also have a finite life span, particularly with certain water conditions that have been discussed in some past discussions.

2. 
   Rich_Regan | Dec 15, 2000 05:43am | #9

   *
   I opened up a ceiling in my house and found the point where copper water lines were tagged onto the old galvanized lines when a bath was added about 25 years ago. They used a brass ball valve for the transition. It seems to be holding up pretty good. With my limited knowledge of plumbing, this seems like a good solution, because I understand that you're not suppossed to bury dielectric unions in walls. Since the valve is not needed as a shut off point, but only as a brass union, I guess it wouldn't hurt to bury it. Am I way off base on this, is there a better solution?