# Condensate switch



## ICE (Sep 4, 2011)

We do not allow an electromechanical device on the secondary condensate if a gravity method is possible.  I see it done this way so often that I suspect that it is accepted in other jurisdictions.  How about the rest of you?


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Sep 4, 2011)

Majority have the sensor in the overflow pan. In early summer mud daubers plug the secondary drain openings; may explain why there's a sensor in the pan with the aux. drain. So the one that's shown would work.

UL listed to comply with UL 508 and most applicable building codes.

M1411.3.1 4. A water level detection device conforming to UL 508shall be provided that will shut off the equipment served in the event that the primary drain is blocked. The device shall be installed in the primary drain line, the overflow drain line or the equipment-supplied drain pan, located at a point higher than the primary drain line connection and below the overflow rim of such pan.


----------



## Daddy-0- (Sep 4, 2011)

We see float switches here all the time. Sometimes you have to have them in a crawl space if you cannot get the secondary to a conspicuous location by gravity. Do you have a local amendment that prohibits  them?


----------



## ICE (Sep 4, 2011)

Francis Vineyard said:
			
		

> Majority have the sensor in the overflow pan. In early summer mud daubers plug the secondary drain openings; may explain why there's a sensor in the pan with the aux. drain. So the one that's shown would work.UL listed to comply with UL 508 and most applicable building codes.
> 
> M1411.3.1 4. A water level detection device conforming to UL 508shall be provided that will shut off the equipment served in the event that the primary drain is blocked. The device shall be installed in the primary drain line, the overflow drain line or the equipment-supplied drain pan, located at a point higher than the primary drain line connection and below the overflow rim of such pan.


The section # looks like it came from the IRC.  California didn't adopt the mechanical portion of the IRC.  Should the word primary be "secondary" instead?


----------



## ICE (Sep 4, 2011)

Daddy-0- said:
			
		

> We see float switches here all the time. Sometimes you have to have them in a crawl space if you cannot get the secondary to a conspicuous location by gravity. Do you have a local amendment that prohibits  them?


No, we have a Chief Mechanical Engineer that prohibits them unless there is is no way to get to the exterior.  It is the same with condensate pumps.


----------



## Daddy-0- (Sep 5, 2011)

Prohibits them on what basis? Is it in whatever mechanical code you have in cali? Seems fishy to me. I love float switches because a $7 part can fix so many logistical nightmares. What problem does your mech. eng. have with them? Curious now.


----------



## klarenbeek (Sep 6, 2011)

Nothing in the code prohibits this setup. We see it all the time here.  the code does allow it to be in either the primary or overflow (secondary) drain. If I ever told a contractor they couldn't do something and they thought they could, I'd be getting asked pretty quick "show me where it says I can't"


----------



## ICE (Sep 6, 2011)

Daddy-0- said:
			
		

> Prohibits them on what basis? Is it in whatever mechanical code you have in cali? Seems fishy to me. I love float switches because a $7 part can fix so many logistical nightmares. What problem does your mech. eng. have with them? Curious now.


Gravity has never failed whereas an electromechanical device has.

Klarenbeek asked for code.  It has been a while since I last talked with the Chief and I don't recall asking for a code purist's answer, i.e., how do I get there with the code?  Knowing the Chief, he has it down.

Contractors love the switch and for good reason.  It is less expensive and no labor compared to a gravity drain.  I'd like them too if the Chief would say OK.

Francis mentioned bugs.  I've heard that before and have never heard of a failure of a gravity secondary drain.  That means squat, but just saying.....

This is a common set-up that passes. The bases are covered.


----------



## north star (Sep 7, 2011)

*& & & &*

Where's the purple primer on the pvc joints?.....From Section P2904.9.1.3

in the `06 IRC.



*& & & &*


----------



## mtlogcabin (Sep 7, 2011)

> Knowing the Chief, he has it down


I believe the Chief is correct if you are still using the "UMC" 2006 version, However if the manufactures installation instructions includes a float switch he could allow it in lieu of Section 310 under Section 105 Alternate Materials and Methods.


----------



## texasbo (Sep 7, 2011)

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> I believe the Chief is correct if you are still using the "UMC" 2006 version, However if the manufactures installation instructions includes a float switch he could allow it in lieu of Section 310 under Section 105 Alternate Materials and Methods.


'06 allowed it too. Short of a local amendment, chief is making up his own codes. Someone should call him on it, and if in fact he is enforcing "I want", instead of "the code requires", disciplinary action should be taken. This is exactly the kind of thing that gives our profession a bad name.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Sep 7, 2011)

texasbo do you have a code section. I read UMC 310 and there was no mention of float switches just secondary drains so I can see how someone would prohibit them.


----------



## texasbo (Sep 7, 2011)

Mt - 307.2.3


----------



## ICE (Sep 7, 2011)

texasbo said:
			
		

> '06 allowed it too. Short of a local amendment, chief is making up his own codes. Someone should call him on it, and if in fact he is enforcing "I want", instead of "the code requires", disciplinary action should be taken. This is exactly the kind of thing that gives our profession a bad name.


Should I form a tribunal?


----------



## texasbo (Sep 7, 2011)

ICE said:
			
		

> Should I form a tribunal?


Why would you? Apparently, if Chief says it, it's ok, even though you say it's not allowed, but yet you can't tell us why:

"Klarenbeek asked for code. It has been a while since I last talked with the Chief and I don't recall asking for a code purist's answer, i.e., how do I get there with the code? Knowing the Chief, he has it down.".

Maybe you guys have an amendment or something that you aren't aware of, and Chief is spot on. You tell us.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Sep 7, 2011)

texasbo said:
			
		

> Mt - 307.2.3


That's the IMC I was refering to The Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC) which I thought the California Mechanical code is based upon


----------



## peach (Sep 7, 2011)

the float switch is instead of the secondary drain... when the unit isn't working, the resident usually calls someone for service. I like them, actually... assuming they are installed to actually work.  (And I've never seen one for $7 - a good one is considerably more)


----------



## Daddy-0- (Sep 7, 2011)

Peach

They are still less than running a bunch of PVC around the house in most cases.

ICE

My chief said they are ok in Virginia so I will continue to approve them.


----------



## ICE (Sep 7, 2011)

Secondary condensate drains have two purposes.  One is to convey condensate and the other is to warn the occupant that the primary has ceased to function.  In order of importance, the secondary trumps the primary in that the secondary is the last chance to prevent an inadvertent release of condensate, where it will cause damage.

Gravity if available, is trustworthy.  A switch or pump is not trustworthy.  Gravity doesn't wear out or get stuck but switches and pumps do.  A switch or pump that has never operated, located in a dusty hot attic for 14 years might not work.  That has been borne out in my jurisdiction.  Rats and/or failed components played a role.  Therefor if gravity is available, it shall be gravity.

When we build on the Moon, switches and pumps will be approved.  The Code will come from the Intergalactic Code Council.  The ICC won't even need new stationary.

Code states that condensate shall drain to an "Approved" location.  Approved by whom?  Here, it is a mechanical engineer.  Where you are, it might be you.  Make up your own mind and do as you see fit.


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Sep 7, 2011)

Will someone explain since the primary trap is supposed to be sealed (per manufacturers design); but will allow the secondary to be opened to outside air and if the secondary is sealed with the switch (as shown in the OP) would there be enough negative pressure to draw the condensation back out of the trap?

Would not be surprised if this outlet is to be the next item the IECC will eliminate in the Mech/Gas as it was done with the combustion air through the return.


----------



## texasbo (Sep 7, 2011)

ICE said:
			
		

> Secondary condensate drains have two purposes.  One is to convey condensate and the other is to warn the occupant that the primary has ceased to function.  In order of importance, the secondary trumps the primary in that the secondary is the last chance to prevent an inadvertent release of condensate, where it will cause damage. Gravity if available, is trustworthy.  A switch or pump is not trustworthy.  Gravity doesn't wear out or get stuck but switches and pumps do.  A switch or pump that has never operated, located in a dusty hot attic for 14 years might not work.  That has been borne out in my jurisdiction.  Rats and/or failed components played a role.  Therefor if gravity is available, it shall be gravity.
> 
> When we build on the Moon, switches and pumps will be approved.  The Code will come from the Intergalactic Code Council.  The ICC won't even need new stationary.
> 
> Code states that condensate shall drain to an "Approved" location.  Approved by whom?  Here, it is a mechanical engineer.  Where you are, it might be you.  Make up your own mind and do as you see fit.


We don't know what the code says, because you still haven't told us which code you're using, and if you have amendments regarding these devices. So we are left to guess, because you gave us a photograph, a statement that you don't allow it, but you can't tell us why.

So the fact remains, that if your code DOES allow it, and your "Chief" doesn't allow it, just because he has made up some reason that makes him warm and fuzzy, you guys should have a new "Chief'.

You said:

"and I don't recall asking for a code purist's answer, i.e., how do I get there with the code?"

And I don't think it's too much of a stretch, nor a "purist's" issue to question how to get there with the code, since we're kinda on, you know, a code forum...


----------



## texasbo (Sep 7, 2011)

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> That's the IMC I was refering to The Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC) which I thought the California Mechanical code is based upon


Yep, you're right. As I said before, without any real information, other than "we'll allow it on the moon", or some other such nonsense, we're left to guess.

I'm going to tell myself they have an amendment, just because I can't believe a building official (or the other employees) would stand for such reckless behavior.


----------



## ICE (Sep 7, 2011)

texasbo said:
			
		

> '06 allowed it too. Short of a local amendment, chief is making up his own codes. Someone should call him on it, and if in fact he is enforcing "I want", instead of "the code requires", disciplinary action should be taken. This is exactly the kind of thing that gives our profession a bad name.


If only you had a clue as to the man you are speaking about.  He has earned his position, he deserves his position.  His stature dwarfs all but a few and here you are ready to give him a spanking.  Now that's funny!

An amendment for every code decision is what you recommend.  We amend the code plenty.  There is no need for an amendment for such a code decision and if there were, well that's just stupid.

Without an amendment, the CME is making his own code.  Look at what I said about your amendment requirement.

Someone should call him on it!  How about a respectful discussion.  One does not approach authority announcing that they are being "called out."  I would lose respect in a flash.

I want as opposed to code requires?  I explained that in a post above.

Disciplinary action should be taken  ....... Who in the Hell are you.?

This is exactly the kind of thing that gives our profession a bad name.

Print a copy of your post, put that sentence under it and get it framed.


----------



## ICE (Sep 7, 2011)

texasbo said:
			
		

> We don't know what the code says, because you still haven't told us which code you're using, and if you have amendments regarding these devices. So we are left to guess, because you gave us a photograph, a statement that you don't allow it, but you can't tell us why.So the fact remains, that if your code DOES allow it, and your "Chief" doesn't allow it, just because he has made up some reason that makes him warm and fuzzy, you guys should have a new "Chief'.
> 
> You said:
> 
> ...


Sophomoric remarks make me wonder if you are worth a reply.  The remarks you've made in a previous post clinch it for me.  I'll stay out of your way, you stay out of mine.


----------



## texasbo (Sep 7, 2011)

ICE said:
			
		

> If only you had a clue as to the man you are speaking about.  He has earned his position, he deserves his position.  His stature dwarfs all but a few and here you are ready to give him a spanking.  Now that's funny!An amendment for every code decision is what you recommend.  We amend the code plenty.  There is no need for an amendment for such a code decision and if it were, well that's just stupid.
> 
> Without an amendment, the CME is making his own code.  Look at what I said about your amendment requirement.
> 
> ...


Wow. That just about sums it up. Because "the man" has "earned respect", he gets carte blanche to make decisions to prohibit something specifically allowed by your code? Now there's a joke...

There's no reason to amend the code if you're going to prohibit something that is SPECIFICALLY allowed by it? The joke just keeps getting funnier!

"How about a respectful discussion?" Well, that's what we've been trying to get, but instead, all we get are pictures and vague comments about you not allowing it, with no reason why you can legally prohibit it. Give us something tangible, as we've asked for, like what code you're under, or an amendment, and we're cool.

Otherwise, if you guys are prohibiting items that the code permits, just because you don't like them, then you're just another heavy handed, corrupt, out of control department like we often read about in the papers.


----------



## texasbo (Sep 7, 2011)

ICE said:
			
		

> CA 2011 Mechanical Code


Well looky there. I guess that's a start. You going to just let us do the work, or show us where it says the devices are prohibited?

Edit: well, from what I could find, Cali adopted the full set of 2009 I-Codes effective January 1, 2011. So until we get better information from someone who actually enforces these codes, that's all I have to go on.

So, we're left with a man who "earned his position", and whose "stature dwarfs all but a few", apparently making unilateral decisions to prohibit something that the code specifically allows.

Come on, man, if you're going to post something, and tell us you don't allow it, at least be able to speak intelligently about it when you are questioned.


----------



## texasbo (Sep 7, 2011)

ICE said:
			
		

> Sophomoric remarks make me wonder if you are worth a reply.  The remarks you've made in a previous post clinch it for me.  I'll stay out of your way, you stay out of mine.


Let me make something very clear: I most certainly will not "stay out of your way", when you decide to throw something out on this forum, and then can't even intelligently answer questions about it when asked.

I most certainly will not "stay out of your way", when you offer up "earned position" and "stature that dwarfs" as  sound reasons for excusing someone from complying with the law.

It's not asking too much to expect you to be able to actually answer questions about stuff you throw out here. If you can't even do that, then you might as well just permanently inhabit the "off topic" sub-forum and play patty cake.


----------



## texasbo (Sep 9, 2011)

ICE, where are you buddy? You told us that your "chief" doesn't allow secondary condensate float shut-off devices, and several of us wanted to know if your code prohibited them, or if you did it by ordinance. Well, which is it? You followed up with a cryptic post that you're under the 2011 California mechanical code, and from what I can tell, that's the 2009 IMC, so I assume you have a local amendment that overrides your state code, no?

If you don't know, how about putting your "chief" on the line? You know, the guy who's "earned his position", and who's "stature dwarfs all but a few"?

Inquiring minds want to know, ICE, or Tigerloose, whichever you prefer, how you have legally been prohibiting these devices; some of us might like to adopt a similar ordinance to the one you've adopted prohibiting these IMC approved devices.

I checked your website, and couldn't find anything under "dirt daubers", "rats" , "intergallactic" or "stature", so I need some direction. Should I call some of your local HVAC contractors? I'm sure they could point me in the right direction.

Or, you could just cite the Cali Mechanical Code, and/or your local amendments, and put this whole thing to bed. And my response will be: "was that so hard?" By the way, is your "Chief", you know, the guy with all the "stature", a registered engineer in the state of California?

Edit: Of course, you know that I know the answers to all of the rhetorical questions above. I will say, in the interest of full disclosure, that I truly enjoy your photos, and for the most part, I think your narrative adds to this forum. I mean that sincerely.  However, I don't enjoy bullsh!t, and I refuse to tolerate building departments who make up their own rules; that gives our entire profession a bad name.


----------



## Codegeek (Sep 9, 2011)

texasbo said:
			
		

> you're under the 2011 California mechanical code, and from what I can tell, that's the 2009 IMC


Actually the 2010 California Mechanical Code is the latest and greatest and it's based on the UMC, not the IMC.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Sep 9, 2011)

It is the same lanquage as the 2009 UMC. Gravity drains that discharge to the exterior do fail in cold climates (they freeze) They fail in warm climates due to algee and insect nests so we have allowed the float switches for years. As I said ealier I see how one could reach the conclusion that a float switch in not allowed because it is not specifically mentioned but they can be approved under alternate means and methods. 

309.0 Condensate Wastes and Control.309.1 Condensate Disposal. 
​



Condensate from air washers,air-cooling coils, fuel-burning condensing appliances, and theoverflow from evaporative coolers and similar water-suppliedequipment or similar air-conditioning equipment shall becollected and discharged to an approved plumbing fixture ordisposal area. If discharged into the drainage system, equipmentshall drain by means of an indirect waste pipe. Thewaste pipe shall have a slope of not less than VB inch per foot(10.5 mm/m) or 1 percent slope and shall be of approvedcorrosion-resistant material not smaller than the outlet size asrequired in either Section 309.3 or 309.4 for air-cooling coilsor condensing fuel-burning appliances, respectively. Condensateor wastewater shall not drain over a public way.
​309~2 
​



Condensate Control. When a cooling coil or coolingunit is located in an attic or furred space where damage mayresult from condensate overflow, an additional watertight panof corrosion-resistant metal shall be installed beneath thecooling coil or unit top to catch the overflow condensate dueto a clogged primary condensate drain, or one pan with astanding overflow and a separate secondary drain may beprovided in lieu of the secondary drain pan. The additionalpan or the standing overflow shall be provided with a drainpipe, minimum % inch (19.1 mm) nominal pipe size,discharging at a point that can be readily observed.This requirement is in addition to the requirements inSections 309.3 and 309.4.
​309.3 Condensate Waste Sizing. 
​



Condensate waste pipesfrom air-cooling coils shall be sized in accordance with equipmentcapacity as follows:
​TABLE 3-1MINIMUM CONDENSATE PIPE SIZE
​

EQUIPMENT CAPACITY MINIMUM CONDENSATEIN PIPE DIAMETERTons of
​

(kW) 
​

Inches (mm)Refrigeration
​Up to 20 (Up to 70.34) 
​

% (20)21-40 (73.85 - 140.67) 1 (25)41- 90 (144.19 - 316.6) I1f4 (32)91 - 125 (320.03 - 439.6) _lYz _(40)126 - 250 (443.12 - 879.2) 2 (50)
​The size of condensate waste pipes may be for one unitor a combination of units, or as recommended by the manufacturer.The capacity of waste pipes assumes a one-eights
​

44
​

_(\Is) _
​

inch per foot (10.5 _mmlm) _or 1 percent slope, with the piperunning three-quarters (%) full at the following conditions:Outside Air - 20% Room Air - 80%DB75°F(24°C)Condensate drain sizing for other slopes or other conditionsshall be approved by the Authority Having Jurisdiction.
​309.4 Fuel-Burning Appliance Condensate Drains. 
​

Condensatedrain lines from individual fuel-burning condensing appliancesshall be sized according to the manufacturer'srecommendations. Condensate drain lines serving more thanone appliance shall be approved by the Authority Having Jurisdictionprior to installation.
​309.5 Plastic Fittings. 
​

Female PVC screwed fittings shall beused with plastic male fittings and plastic male threads only.
​310.0 Personnel Protection.
​

A suitable and substantial metal guard shall be providedaround exposed flywheels, fans, pulleys, belts, and movingmachinery that are portions of a heating, ventilating, or refrigeratingsystem.
​

311.0 Heating or Cooling Air System.311.1 Source. 
​

A heating or cooling air system shall beprovided with return air, outside air, or both. A heating orcooling air system regulated by this code and designed toreplace required ventilation shall be arranged to dischargeinto a conditioned space not less than the amount of outsideair specified in Chapter 4.
​311.2 Air Filters. 
​

Air filters shall be installed in a heating,cooling, or makeup air system. Such filters shall comply withthe standard, Air Filter Units, Test Performance of, that isreferenced in Chapter 17, as Class I or II filters.
​Exception: 
​

Systems serving single guest rooms or dwellingunits shall not require a listed filter.
​311.3 Prohibited Source. 
​

Outside or return air for a heatingor cooling air system shall not be taken from the followinglocations1) Closer than ten (10) feet (3,048 mm) from an appliancevent outlet, a vent opening of a plumbing drainage system,or the discharge outlet of an exhaust fan, unless the outletis three (3) feet (914 mm) above the outside-air inlet.(2) Where it is less than ten (10) feet above the surface ofany abutting public way, driveway, sidewalk, street, alleyor driveway.(3) A hazardous or insanitary location or a refrigerationmachinery room as defined in this code.(4) From an area, the volume of which is less than 25 percentof the entire volume served by such system, unless thereis a permanent opening to an area the volume of which isequal to 25 percent of the entire volume served.
​2010 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL COD


----------



## texasbo (Sep 9, 2011)

Thanks codegeek and MT; I also found it here: http://www.iapmo.org/Pages/2010CaliforniaPlumbingCode.aspx

Would have been nice to get that info from the OP when the question was first asked, instead of "we have a chief mechanical engineer that prohibits them"...


----------



## ICE (Sep 9, 2011)

texasbo said:
			
		

> ICE, where are you buddy? You told us that your "chief" doesn't allow secondary condensate float shut-off devices, and several of us wanted to know if your code prohibited them, or if you did it by ordinance. Well, which is it? You followed up with a cryptic post that you're under the 2011 California mechanical code, and from what I can tell, that's the 2009 IMC, so I assume you have a local amendment that overrides your state code, no?If you don't know, how about putting your "chief" on the line? You know, the guy who's "earned his position", and who's "stature dwarfs all but a few"?
> 
> Inquiring minds want to know, ICE, or Tigerloose, whichever you prefer, how you have legally been prohibiting these devices; some of us might like to adopt a similar ordinance to the one you've adopted prohibiting these IMC approved devices.
> 
> ...


Allow me to concede on all points.  Since you know where I work your comments take on a new meaning for me.

I am sorry that I posted this thread.  You have my word that I won't do it again.  In parting I would ask that you let me off the hook and not follow through with your suggestion about contacting contractors in my area.  That's a punishment that doesn't fit the crime.


----------



## texasbo (Sep 9, 2011)

ICE said:
			
		

> Allow me to concede on all points.  Since you know where I work your comments take on a new meaning for me.I am sorry that I posted this thread.  You have my word that I won't do it again.  In parting I would ask that you let me off the hook and not follow through with your suggestion about contacting contractors in my area.  That's a punishment that doesn't fit the crime.


Whoa - I hope your comments are facetious, as mine were. If you're serious, then chill out; that would be way below the belt, and I would never, ever do something like that. Besides, it looks as if, whether you're fully aware of it or not, that the mechanical code that you are under does not outright recognize these switches. Come on, you of all people can appreciate some sparring. Peace, ICE.


----------



## Paul Sweet (Sep 12, 2011)

This thread was very helpful to me.  My A/C stopped running a week or so ago.  The technician thought a clogged filter choked the airflow and caused it to stop.  A couple days later it stopped running again.  The technician had just come back when I was reading this post.  I called home and asked my wife to have him check the condensate pump.  He found the line was plugged, cleaned it out, and the A/C has worked fine since.


----------



## ICE (Sep 13, 2011)

I got the point across and now I am done with it.


----------



## texasbo (Sep 14, 2011)

Wow. Thanks for the sanctimonious wall of words; spare us the drama. All I can say is that you've got problems, buddy.

Well, no, of course that's not all I can say. I can also say this: is it unreasonable to ask for a code reference on a code forum? Maybe it's ok for you and/or your department to say that "you can't do it because the chief says you can't do it". That doesn't cut it with most folks, and it doesn't cut it with me.

And all of the comments I made were done so with the qualification that you had no amendments and/or your code allowed the float switches.

Because you gave us nothing else to go on - nothing rational, that is.

But it's so much more dramatic to play the mistreated martyr, and it's so much more fun to leave out the "ifs" when you're quoting someone's posts, isn't it.

Question mark omitted intentionally.


----------



## Builder Bob (Sep 14, 2011)

Time out !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 24 hours time out charged to the general population of the BB that doesn't need the non-code related correspondence between two parties.......

Gentlemen, there is a place and a time to discuss differences of opinion. Please keep the differences of opinion to code language and interpretation of code as it relates to the original question.

This BB is not the place or the time to air dirty laudry.

May I offer the private conversation or e-mail features of the board if ya'll wish to persue the diffeences of opinion amonst yourselves.

PS - Speaking from experience from a different bullitien board from cash cow........


----------



## Codegeek (Sep 14, 2011)

I'm with Builder Bob, this is not the forum for getting into personal attacks.  If ICE and texasbo want to have a discussion between the two of them, take it elsewhere; I don't care where, but not here.

I've had what has felt like a personal attack on myself and as hard as it was to ignore it, I did.  Let's move on gentlemen.  Agree to disagree and let it drop.


----------

