Plumbing Connection Summer 2016

11 / 116

PLUMBING CONNECTION SUMMER 2016 11
NUDGE NUDGE, WINKWINK − STORY UPDATE
In the 2015 Summer edition of Plumbing Connection we
published an article under the headline Nudge Nudge, Wink
Wink which questioned whether certain brass fittings
available in the Australian market, via a big box retailer,
complied with DR brass requirements.
The test records for the product in the article were
supplied to us as a market example in confidence by a
laboratory. The composite image we used to highlight
the issue was not the actual product tested, which
remained with the laboratory. For photographic purposes
we purchased similar product off the shelf locally and
changed the colour of the non-brass parts of the fitting
(to McGrath Foundation pink) to disguise the product.
Unfortunately the WaterMark licence number (WM
71225) of the substitute product purchased for
photography remained in view, which may have implied
that products certified under WM 71225 are non-
compliant. That was our oversight and we apologise to
those parties involved. Subsequently, ApprovalMark
International has demonstrated with independent reports
from a NATA registered laboratory that the products
certified under WM 71225 are in fact compliant.
In our judgement we failed to clearly detail that and
have subsequently made a donation to the McGrath
Foundation for our
misdemeanour - Plumbing Connection Magazine.
44 PLUMBING CONNECTION SUMMER 2015 PLUMBING CONNECTION SUMMER 2015 45
NUDGE NUDGE, WINKWINK…
Chat tomostplumbersaround
Australiaand they’llhavea
storyor twoaboutcheap/
non-conforming–generally imported
–products thatdon’tcomplywith
regulations;however, it’sgenerally
anecdotal,withoutany technical
backup.
So,we thought itwouldbe
interesting toconducta realworld test.
Somesay youcanwalk intoany retail
storearoundAustraliaandbuynon-
conformingplumbingproduct that is
dressedupas the real thing (evenwith
WaterMark identification).
As PlumbingConnectionmagazine
hasdoneonacoupleofoccasions
over the years,weboughtproduct
andhad it laboratory tested tosee
if itheldupagainst theWaterMark
approval, indicatedon theproduct’s
identification.
In thiscasewewanted toknow if
thepush-fitball valveandsocketwe
boughtwereactuallymade fromde-
zincifiedbrass (DRbrass)whichwas
stampedon theproductand forms
partsof theapproval requirement.Due
to theharshwaterconditionsaround
Australia,DRbrass isaspecified
requirement–no if’sorbuts–and
it isamoreexpensiveproduct to
manufacture thannon-DRbrass
fittings.
Suchproductscanbehidden
sleepersonprojects; theycan leak
over timeandcausesignificantand
costlydamage tobuildings internally.
So,wepurchased these twoproducts
froma largewell-knownbig-box
retailerandhad them run through the
de-zincification testingata laboratory.
We’renotsureany regulatorseverdo
thisaspartof their ‘policing’?
For legal reasonswe’renot identifying
thebrandor retailer (andwechanged
thecolouron theproduct toprotect
the innocent). It’snotabout thisone
supplier; it’smoreabout thedifficulty in
thepolicingofcurrent requirements.
The lab reports (nextpage) reveal
thesad fact thatboth theseproducts
failed tomeet theDR requirements
andcouldmore than likely failbefore
theirexpectedusable life isover.
Do these retailersknowingly
circumvent the laworare theymisled
bymanufacturerswhogoback to their
oldhabitsonce theproductcertifier
leaves theirbuilding?
Ourguess is they take thingsat face
valueanddon’thave thequalifiedstaff
inplace toaskenoughquestions,or
theyprefer to tick theboxesand take
theeasywayout.
It’sabigchallenge for this industry
todelivera ‘levelplayingfield’,a term
thatseems tohavedisappeared from
Government-speak.
Ofcourse the realitywith thisnon-
conformingproductcheating is that
it’snot illegal for thepoor innocent
plumber (orhiscustomer) tobuysuch
product–but (unknown tomost) it is
illegal to install–astrangeanomaly.
ThesadnewsMrPlumber is thatyou
are theonewhowillcop the full force
of the law/insurancecompany, in the
eventofa failure.
NON-CONFORMINGPRODUCTANDTHECONSEQUENCESOFPURCHASINGAND INSTALLINGTHEMAREAHOT-TOPIC
INTHE INDUSTRYATTHEMOMENTANDFORGOODREASONTOO.ASPLUMBINGCONNECTIONDISCOVERED, IT’S
EASYTOWALK INTOASTOREANDPURCHASEONE,EVEN IF IT’SSPORTINGWATERMARK IDENTIFICATION.JEFF
PATCHELLEXPLAINS.
IMAGE1: Bothproducts failed tomeetDR requirementsandcouldmore than
likely failbefore theirexpectedusable life isover. IMAGE2&3: Dezinfication test
results indicatebothproductsdonotcomplywithproductstandards.
PRODUCTREGULATION
If youhavehadanybadexperiences in
thisareaofdiscussionwe’dbehappy
tohear from you.
ContactPlumbingConnection’seditor:
1
2
3
DEZINCIFICATIONTESTRECORD
PartDescription:¾”BallValve
Direction rod,drawn tubeandcomponents
machined from theseproducts Forgingsandcastings
Con.cast rodand
componentsmachined
from theseproducts
Directionofgrainflow Perpendicular tograin
flow ThickestSection ThickestSection
Magnification 50x 50x 50x 50x
Areaofexposedsurface 50mm2
No.ofMeasurements 25 25 25 25
AverageDepthof
Dezincification 640µm
MaximumDepthof
Dezincification 690µm
Requirement forAverage
Depth 300micronsmaximum 100micronsmaximum 100micronsmaximum 100micronsmaximum
TypeofDezincification a&ß’Attack
Compliance toProduct
Standard
*Testcompleted inaccordancewith theAustralianStandardAS2345 (2006)-Seemethod inAppendixC (75ºC±3 foradurationof24
hours±0.5h)
DEZINCIFICATIONTESTRECORD
PartDescription:ThreadedSocketHexagon-15mm
Extruded rod,drawn tubeandcomponents
machined from theseproducts Forgingsandcastings
Con.cast rodand
componentsmachined
from theseproducts
Directionofgrainflow Perpendicular tograin
flow ThickestSection ThickestSection
Magnification 50x 50x 50x 50x
Areaofexposedsurface 140mm2
No.ofMeasurements 25 25 25 25
AverageDepthof
Dezincification 367µm
MaximumDepthof
Dezincification 656µm
Requirement forAverage
Depth 300micronsmaximum 100micronsmaximum 100micronsmaximum 100micronsmaximum
TypeofDezincification a&ß’Attack
Compliance toProduct
Standard
*Testcompleted inaccordancewith theAustralianStandardAS2345 (2006)-Seemethod inAppendixC (75ºC±3 foradurationof24
hours±0.5h)
Quality without compromise
t