BSEE


price of raw materials such as copper continues to rise and specifiers look for ways to increase efficiency on site, push-fit and press-fit fittings, along with MLCP, are experiencing growth, not least because of the considerable savings that can be made on installation times.


W


With the use of MLCP and press fing pipework on the rise, what are their benefits and is it worth making the switch? John Giens, business development director of piping systems specialist Maincor, takes a look


In fact, use of multi-layer barrier pipes, which include a metal layer to protect against degradation, has grown most significantly in the water supply sector, while the market for copper piping has remained relatively static. This is due in some part to the increasing health and safety legislation and the lack of ‘traditional’ skills of soldering and welding pipework, resulting in a huge shift towards flame free jointing. Known for their clean, secure and safe installations, as well as performance, MLCP pipes and press-fittings offer a genuine alternative to copper or plastic products, and are therefore fast gaining a significant percentage of the UK plumbing and heating pipework market.


Take advantage


Cost, while an important consideration, is only one of the many factors driving this rise in use of MLCP and press-fitting, with ease of installation and safety also being chief among them. One the major advantages of MLCP when compared to alternatives such as copper is the need for fewer connections, as pipes are available in a range of straight lengths and various flexible coil lengths. Of course this saves time when fitting and therefore helps keep installation costs down, but it also reduces the potential for leaks, particularly when compared to copper which needs many connections just to navigate bends and obstacles. In fact, a key advantage of MLCP is the ability to form around corners and obstructions without having to add fittings or connections, which is ideal in situations where pipework needs to be installed within a wall, ceiling or under a floor and for all types of retrofitting.


Hygiene is another important consideration for specifiers, particularly in regard to water supply systems. MLCP pipes are capped during manufacture, so they are hygienically clean on arrival on site and are resistant to lime scale build- up. Overall, this makes MLCP the ideal material for carrying drinking water. Copper pipes, on the other hand, are most often open-ended and left unprotected so can harbour dirt and bacteria even prior to installation and can be very difficult to remove once present.


Environmental issues are also taken into consideration with MLCP, adding to the rise in use of this material due to its sustainability credentials. When considering transportation, manufacturing and disposal, MLCP is a lighter product than copper, which significantly reduces the environmental impact of the product, something that will have a bearing on its suitability for projects where sustainability is high on the agenda.


Fail safe


uMLCP pipes and pressfings oer a genuine alternave to copper or plasc products


While time and cost will always be of the essence, safety should never be compromised and with press-fitting, this is certainly the case. The absence of a naked flame makes the fitting process a whole lot safer, less of a risk and very suitable for retro-fit projects, where existing fixtures and fittings need to be kept clear of the soldering flame. Depending on which system is used, press-fitting can more than halve the


hile traditional fitting methods still have their place, press-fitting systems and multi-layer composite pipes (MLCP) are making their presence felt, with an increasing number of installers making the switch. As the


HEATING & PLUMBING Pressing on with traditional fittings


uNot only does pressfing eradicate the need for hot works permits and a skilled installer, it also means far fewer tools are needed on site too


installation time and make the entire install a lot more efficient. After all, the site assessments and permits usually required when working with flame-based fittings are simply not necessary, so installers can simply get on with the job. Not only does press-fitting eradicate the need for hot works permits and a skilled installer, which all adds time and extra cost to an installation, it also means far fewer tools are needed on site too. In fact, with most press-fitting systems all that is required to achieve a secure, safe connection of MLCP pipework are pipe cutters, a bevelling tool and an allen key. The pipe is cut to length and bevelled at the end, the fitting is inserted into the pipe, before the allen key is used to screw the thread into place.


Size matters


The size of the O-ring has a part to play in the simplicity of press-fitting too; one large O-ring, for example, will be much more substantial than an ordinary O-ring as it is much harder to dislodge or damage as the pipe goes into the fitting, smoothly and quickly.


When it comes to press-fitting versus conventional connection methods such as soldered, far and away the biggest selling point of press-fitting is the peace of mind it offers installers that the end result is safe, correctly sealed and free of leaks. Offering less chance of errors, a viewing window enables the installer to check if the pipe is inserted into the connection fully and the fitting will leak if not pressed which, put simply, means that there is less chance of work being covered over before the leak is discovered, reducing warranty costs for the installer.


Flexible, fast, safe, sustainable and durable, with such advantages stacking up, there is little wonder why installers are increasingly making the switch.


www.maincor.co.uk 14 BUILDING SERVICES & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER AUGUST 2019 Read the latest at: www.bsee.co.uk


‘


One the major


advantages of MLCP when compared to alternaves such as copper is the need for fewer connecons


’


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58