Boiler not to current regulations !!
- Thread starter kenturner
- Start date
Sponsored Links
If it points into the wall it will splash back out at approx 3bar and splash anybody walking past with boiling water, but if you point it straight down it will not be as dangerous, BG are talking cr@p in my opinon.
as a lay man i can only advise on the paperwork supplied by the makers,most makers instructions state british standards also need to be adhered to.
1.so the safety valve needs to be in a safe area for it to operate.
2.ceiling plate for vertical flue,these are advertised for plastic soil/vent pipes,to stop spread of fire.
3.flue needs to be supported,no matter how much it will cost.
so it looks that the above have not been done due to cost,unregistered installer,project not finished or householder mucking around etc,etc.
maybe there should be an adhesive tape to apply to flues in lofts stating.
this is a gas appliance,do not adapt it,do not damage it,do not push items against it,do not hang anything from it,have it checked when boiler serviced/repaired.
quick edit/addition any water pipes connected, do not come into any gas regulations although water bye laws need to be adhered to.
so for safety valve termination is NCS.
so for sealing/ceiling plate is NCS.
so for flue not supported AT RISK.
1.so the safety valve needs to be in a safe area for it to operate.
2.ceiling plate for vertical flue,these are advertised for plastic soil/vent pipes,to stop spread of fire.
3.flue needs to be supported,no matter how much it will cost.
so it looks that the above have not been done due to cost,unregistered installer,project not finished or householder mucking around etc,etc.
maybe there should be an adhesive tape to apply to flues in lofts stating.
this is a gas appliance,do not adapt it,do not damage it,do not push items against it,do not hang anything from it,have it checked when boiler serviced/repaired.
quick edit/addition any water pipes connected, do not come into any gas regulations although water bye laws need to be adhered to.
so for safety valve termination is NCS.
so for sealing/ceiling plate is NCS.
so for flue not supported AT RISK.
Sponsored Links
Your wrong on all counts, the appliance was installed by a CORGI registered installer, he quoted a price on the job & he did it, the fact that it obviously has not been done to regs had nothing to do with me, he's the one with the corgi reg. so it's his job to see it's safe & conforms to regs. does it not ? thanks for your post but not exactly helpful
corgi is history.
2005 was a long time ago in the world of gas,just fix it yourself or get an expert in.
anyway save up for a decent boiler.
2005 was a long time ago in the world of gas,just fix it yourself or get an expert in.
anyway save up for a decent boiler.
Dont do what I did, tested that prv was working, but had not yet sealed around prv pipe.
Am yet to see a prv pipe turned towards the wall that would spray over anyone.
Am yet to see a prv pipe turned towards the wall that would spray over anyone.
OK then if you have about 5mm gap (as you see) from end of pipe to wall where else is the water going at 3bar, it aint going straight down i WILL guarantee that.
get an expert in to bring the installation up to standards.
expanding foam and an un supported flue is dangerous.flue will move and could come apart.
expanding foam and an un supported flue is dangerous.flue will move and could come apart.
N
namsag
Powermaxer tell me how how2 one metre lengths of flue pipe with a 3 inch joint is gong to seperate and leak. when supported by boiler and a clip that is just inches above wht the regs say
also, just because its not to current regs does not mean you have to change it all to be compliant to current regs. BG always moan about something. if a 25 year old system was working fine and it was gravity hot water, it would not be to current regs, but you dont have to change the system until it no longer works or is ACTUALLY dangerous to use.
they are just trying to make more money hoping you would use them to change it
they are just trying to make more money hoping you would use them to change it
- Joined
- 30 Oct 2006
- Messages
- 6,743
- Reaction score
- 367
- Country
as usual an awful lot of bullshit flying around on this thread.
as you are well aware BG do not make up any of the "rules" (contrary to the belief of some of their customers ) as i understand it they were merely reacting to an HSE recommendation, this is probably going to be a reg in the near future.
the advice given to BG engineers was that a termination not pointed to a wall (they did not say at what distance or angle) was deemed to be at risk only if the engineer himself judges the termination to be a risk if it did blow off at full flow. that generally means anything above a childs waist is likely to be labled AR. there was no specific mention of whether a straight down termination at low level was unsuitable for all those who prefer that. the concern was entirely for a termination pointing straight out of a wall over a patio for example. as a result of this grey area and leaving it up to the engineers own feelings for it there will be a great variation in outcomes.
the HSE probably had a case that they investigated and that was their recommendation, not BG'S.
the majority that i have left AR have been left that way because i couldnt get high enough on my ladder to add a couple of elbows. a few customers chose not to do anything about it, either FOC or chargeable. thats fair enough.
my presonal feeling is there is probably no safe way to terminate a potentially high flow of 100+degree water at heights above the waist. any of the current methods obviously involve gravity showering people underneath with water. terminating it against a wall or using the proper termination pieces should hopefully give a spray of water that is more likely to cool quicker and maybe give you time to escape with only a minor hot shower.
a solid stream of scalding water on your bald head whilst you sip a cocktail on your patio is entirely undesirable IMO.
as you are well aware BG do not make up any of the "rules" (contrary to the belief of some of their customers
) as i understand it they were merely reacting to an HSE recommendation, this is probably going to be a reg in the near future.the advice given to BG engineers was that a termination not pointed to a wall (they did not say at what distance or angle) was deemed to be at risk only if the engineer himself judges the termination to be a risk if it did blow off at full flow. that generally means anything above a childs waist is likely to be labled AR. there was no specific mention of whether a straight down termination at low level was unsuitable for all those who prefer that. the concern was entirely for a termination pointing straight out of a wall over a patio for example. as a result of this grey area and leaving it up to the engineers own feelings for it there will be a great variation in outcomes.
the HSE probably had a case that they investigated and that was their recommendation, not BG'S.
the majority that i have left AR have been left that way because i couldnt get high enough on my ladder to add a couple of elbows. a few customers chose not to do anything about it, either FOC or chargeable. thats fair enough.
my presonal feeling is there is probably no safe way to terminate a potentially high flow of 100+degree water at heights above the waist. any of the current methods obviously involve gravity showering people underneath with water. terminating it against a wall or using the proper termination pieces should hopefully give a spray of water that is more likely to cool quicker and maybe give you time to escape with only a minor hot shower.
a solid stream of scalding water on your bald head whilst you sip a cocktail on your patio is entirely undesirable IMO.
You did not specify the height of your ladder.
Your fairly comprehensive posting did not seem to differentiate between straight out horizontal discharge ( the worst ) and straight down discharge.
I would take the view that ANY horizontal discharge is potentially dangerous if within say 6 m of the ground level.
A downward discharge possibly becomes more dangerous with an increase in height.
Tony
Your fairly comprehensive posting did not seem to differentiate between straight out horizontal discharge ( the worst ) and straight down discharge.
I would take the view that ANY horizontal discharge is potentially dangerous if within say 6 m of the ground level.
A downward discharge possibly becomes more dangerous with an increase in height.
Tony
DIYnot Local
Staff member
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
Sponsored Links
