boiler ventilation

[nickso]

nickso
GIUSP states for AR with the gas user or the responsible person's permission turn off the appliance.
6, 6.4, d

i know that but thats of no interest to me. if it's AR it goes off. the customer has the decision then. i've made mine.

 

[nickso]

am i missing something or is the current vent of 50% of required free area not 50% of what the manufacturer recommended? if so the boiler has always been "unsafe" but its only recently that the regs were changed to raise the classification to a potentially more serious one. quite rightly IMO. the HSE will probably have raised it due to a death or serious injury. can anyone think why the HSE would have a direct reason to get rid of old boilers? nonsense i think.

off the top of my head the definition of At Risk is a situation that could cause danger to life or property. it's the engineers opinion based on a particular regulation. if you don't agree with that engineers opinion then get another.

IIRC the 90% of free area figure is acceptable because it takes into account the possibility of measuring errors.

The current regulation ( 1st June 2008 ) requires 90% of the ventilation stipulated by the manufacturer.It was previously 50%.

incorrect. if you currently have 50% and nothing has changed since installation then it has always been wrong. only after the HSE changed the classification has the real push by conscientious engineers to get the vent upgraded.

If an engineer decides that an installation is AR, in this case if ventilation is less than 90% of the boiler manufacturer's recommendation, he should ask permission to turn the boiler off. At risk surely refers to the possibility of a problem at some unstated future time such that corrective action must be taken before the boiler is turned on again. It can hardly be a matter of opinion because a precise measurement is given. A registered engineer should have no problem checking this. Otherwise how many opinions do we need ? AR is not a matter of opinion; it is a failure of an installation to meet a required standard,

again incorrect. i do not need to ask to turn off an AT Risk boiler. i turn it off and its the customers decision to turn it back on if they choose. the corrective action required should be noted on the paperwork given to the customer and also verbally advised.

in stating it was a matter of opinion i meant in the general context of an AR situation. in your case the ventilation is well below standard and is clearly AR. AR situations in general can often be grey areas and can quite often be a matter of opinion. ask ten men their opinion and like it or not you will get an argument about it as is often seen on this site. a regulation may be clear, its bearing on an actual installation may not. i'll admit its a difficult one to explain to a non RGI.



the 10% rule works in your favour by giving you the benefit of the doubt. if i were you i would complain about the level of service. there really is no excuse for not knowing how to measure a vent and it's subsequent classification. i doubt you will get far. upgrade your vent to the correct standard using another firm and bin the current firm.

You appear not to be aware of the regulations. The following is taken from information I received from HSE Infoline Admin two days ago.

May 2005. " Any existing gas installations with below 40 per cent ( 0%to 39%) ventilationshould be deemed At Risk and the appliance should be turned off with the gas users permission........"

1st June 2008. " all installations providing less than 90% ventilation will be regarded as putting consumers AT Risk"

It follows that you are wrong to say that my boiler has always been unsafe.If you still think you are right, I suggest you contact HSE rather than shoot the messenger

lets put it another way you may understand.

1) your boiler is installed in the early 1900's.
2) the correct ventilation is probably not installed with it. we believe it is only 50% of the required amount. it is NTCS- INCORRECTLY INSTALLED.
3) due to a reason presently only known to the HSE the requirements change in early 2005.
4) the HSE generously give owners a period of grace so they can get their heads round this new classification and allow anyone with 40-89% of the required free area very generous 3 year period to get ther "****" together.
5) most don't
6) mid 2008 everything below 90% is AR
7) life as we know it ceases to exist.
8 ) a new dawn arises whereby people actually start to get the proper ventilation for their OF boilers.
9) you finally get the message and come on to a random site plucked from google to ask ridiculous questions, argue with knowledgeable regulars, misunderstand most of the advice given and generally act like a complete arse.

your ventilation has been wrong since jesus last walked the earth. get it upgraded and do us all a favour.

 

[kevplumb]

well said that man

 

[allyq]

bonnanbuidhe
I object to your comments, if you had done minimal homework you could have easily identified who in previous posts were talking sense/fact.
my first post was short and factual, pointing out the exact wording in the giusp and its location in our handbook.
i have no problem with the fact that you ventilation may be an issue, but as i said a little homework before posting may have been a better course of action.
please refrain from posting personal comments accusing people of being arrogant.

 

[kirkgas]

i dont know whether you want the installation firm back doing more work for you, but if they installed it and subsequenly serviced it they have short changed you, i dont agree you get a refund for some services as they have actually carrie out the service but failed to notice the vent wasnt correct, then didnt notify you of the upgrade of classification, but as a compromise why not ask them to upgrade the vent FOC for you as you have paid them a few quid over the years (and originally paid them for work they havent done, ie supply proper ventilation) it is worth a phone call

 

[vulcancontinental]

than of course there are the fanned flue distances & checks that are a potential mine field waiting to catch someone out ??

?????

there are two reasons for my asking for a little more info but I might be misinterpreting your sentence.

 

[bonnanbuidhe]

am i missing something or is the current vent of 50% of required free area not 50% of what the manufacturer recommended? if so the boiler has always been "unsafe" but its only recently that the regs were changed to raise the classification to a potentially more serious one. quite rightly IMO. the HSE will probably have raised it due to a death or serious injury. can anyone think why the HSE would have a direct reason to get rid of old boilers? nonsense i think.

off the top of my head the definition of At Risk is a situation that could cause danger to life or property. it's the engineers opinion based on a particular regulation. if you don't agree with that engineers opinion then get another.

IIRC the 90% of free area figure is acceptable because it takes into account the possibility of measuring errors.

The current regulation ( 1st June 2008 ) requires 90% of the ventilation stipulated by the manufacturer.It was previously 50%.

incorrect. if you currently have 50% and nothing has changed since installation then it has always been wrong. only after the HSE changed the classification has the real push by conscientious engineers to get the vent upgraded.

If an engineer decides that an installation is AR, in this case if ventilation is less than 90% of the boiler manufacturer's recommendation, he should ask permission to turn the boiler off. At risk surely refers to the possibility of a problem at some unstated future time such that corrective action must be taken before the boiler is turned on again. It can hardly be a matter of opinion because a precise measurement is given. A registered engineer should have no problem checking this. Otherwise how many opinions do we need ? AR is not a matter of opinion; it is a failure of an installation to meet a required standard,

again incorrect. i do not need to ask to turn off an AT Risk boiler. i turn it off and its the customers decision to turn it back on if they choose. the corrective action required should be noted on the paperwork given to the customer and also verbally advised.

in stating it was a matter of opinion i meant in the general context of an AR situation. in your case the ventilation is well below standard and is clearly AR. AR situations in general can often be grey areas and can quite often be a matter of opinion. ask ten men their opinion and like it or not you will get an argument about it as is often seen on this site. a regulation may be clear, its bearing on an actual installation may not. i'll admit its a difficult one to explain to a non RGI.



the 10% rule works in your favour by giving you the benefit of the doubt. if i were you i would complain about the level of service. there really is no excuse for not knowing how to measure a vent and it's subsequent classification. i doubt you will get far. upgrade your vent to the correct standard using another firm and bin the current firm.

You appear not to be aware of the regulations. The following is taken from information I received from HSE Infoline Admin two days ago.

May 2005. " Any existing gas installations with below 40 per cent ( 0%to 39%) ventilationshould be deemed At Risk and the appliance should be turned off with the gas users permission........"

1st June 2008. " all installations providing less than 90% ventilation will be regarded as putting consumers AT Risk"

It follows that you are wrong to say that my boiler has always been unsafe.If you still think you are right, I suggest you contact HSE rather than shoot the messenger

lets put it another way you may understand.

1) your boiler is installed in the early 1900's.
2) the correct ventilation is probably not installed with it. we believe it is only 50% of the required amount. it is NTCS- INCORRECTLY INSTALLED.
3) due to a reason presently only known to the HSE the requirements change in early 2005.
4) the HSE generously give owners a period of grace so they can get their heads round this new classification and allow anyone with 40-89% of the required free area very generous 3 year period to get ther "s**t" together.
5) most don't
6) mid 2008 everything below 90% is AR
7) life as we know it ceases to exist.
8 ) a new dawn arises whereby people actually start to get the proper ventilation for their OF boilers.
9) you finally get the message and come on to a random site plucked from google to ask ridiculous questions, argue with knowledgeable regulars, misunderstand most of the advice given and generally act like a complete a**e.

your ventilation has been wrong since jesus last walked the earth. get it upgraded and do us all a favour.

Oh dear ! Temper, temper!

For a start let's get Jesus sorted; he walked on water. So much is common knowledge.

I fully understand what you say about the boiler but I have the supplier's installation and annual service records for the past 18 years; there is not a single reference to inadequate ventilation. The installation has always been signed off as ok in the remarks column of the service document. As the firm in question is not some cowboy outfit - they employ 15 engineers in the field - it surely does not make me an "A" for believing them.

If you are saying that what HSE now stipulate ( 90% ) should have been the standard all along, then you can hardly blame me for not knowing that. I rely on "experts" such as yourself

I suspect I rattled your cage when I pointed out that what you were saying was not in agreement with the HSE procedures I quoted. But I get the impression you probably think they know less than you do. Anyway, let's leave it at that! I'm sure we have better things to do with our time.

 

[bonnanbuidhe]

i dont know whether you want the installation firm back doing more work for you, but if they installed it and subsequenly serviced it they have short changed you, i dont agree you get a refund for some services as they have actually carrie out the service but failed to notice the vent wasnt correct, then didnt notify you of the upgrade of classification, but as a compromise why not ask them to upgrade the vent FOC for you as you have paid them a few quid over the years (and originally paid them for work they havent done, ie supply proper ventilation) it is worth a phone call

I have written a letter to that effect. Thank you for your suggestion

 

[transam]

than of course there are the fanned flue distances & checks that are a potential mine field waiting to catch someone out ??

?????

there are two reasons for my asking for a little more info but I might be misinterpreting your sentence.

All MI's give a minimumn distance for the flue outlet , from an opening into the building , window , door ect , they also state that it should be established that products of combustion should not be able to re-enter the building or neighbouring propertys ?or words to the effect, a sort of get out of jail statement ? maybe , how does one check this 52 weeks of the year ? how does one check neighbouring propertys ??
Ultimately if an incident occured , I doubt that an rgi waving the MI's about , or stating that they have complied with distances ect , would help ! or influence the judge ??

Best advice keep your passport handy I think the French foreign legion still have a no questions asked recruitment policy ??

 

[nickso]

Oh dear ! Temper, temper!

For a start let's get Jesus sorted; he walked on water. So much is common knowledge.

I fully understand what you say about the boiler but I have the supplier's installation and annual service records for the past 18 years; there is not a single reference to inadequate ventilation. The installation has always been signed off as ok in the remarks column of the service document. As the firm in question is not some cowboy outfit - they employ 15 engineers in the field - it surely does not make me an "A" for believing them.

If you are saying that what HSE now stipulate ( 90% ) should have been the standard all along, then you can hardly blame me for not knowing that. I rely on "experts" such as yourself

I suspect I rattled your cage when I pointed out that what you were saying was not in agreement with the HSE procedures I quoted. But I get the impression you probably think they know less than you do. Anyway, let's leave it at that! I'm sure we have better things to do with our time.

deary me.

we probably should leave it at that. if you can't understand the situation after i have written it down in easy to understand bullet points you are clearly incapable of ever understanding.

one last time. i know the requirements. ignore AR. ignore NTCS. ignore your belief your firm is not a "cowboy" outfit. even ignore the fact they have consistently failed to advise you of a very obvious defect on your system. ignore the amount of years they have failed to advise you. ignore the classification of that defect if you wish.

just understand that since the day your boiler was installed, if it did not have the ventilation as stipulated by the manufacturer then it was incorrectly installed. fact.

understand that and i may deem you suitable to move on to the next module: classification changes and their subsequent effect on existing systems.

 

[bonnanbuidhe]

Oh dear ! Temper, temper!

For a start let's get Jesus sorted; he walked on water. So much is common knowledge.

I fully understand what you say about the boiler but I have the supplier's installation and annual service records for the past 18 years; there is not a single reference to inadequate ventilation. The installation has always been signed off as ok in the remarks column of the service document. As the firm in question is not some cowboy outfit - they employ 15 engineers in the field - it surely does not make me an "A" for believing them.

If you are saying that what HSE now stipulate ( 90% ) should have been the standard all along, then you can hardly blame me for not knowing that. I rely on "experts" such as yourself

I suspect I rattled your cage when I pointed out that what you were saying was not in agreement with the HSE procedures I quoted. But I get the impression you probably think they know less than you do. Anyway, let's leave it at that! I'm sure we have better things to do with our time.

deary me.

we probably should leave it at that. if you can't understand the situation after i have written it down in easy to understand bullet points you are clearly incapable of ever understanding.

one last time. i know the requirements. ignore AR. ignore NTCS. ignore your belief your firm is not a "cowboy" outfit. even ignore the fact they have consistently failed to advise you of a very obvious defect on your system. ignore the amount of years they have failed to advise you. ignore the classification of that defect if you wish.

just understand that since the day your boiler was installed, if it did not have the ventilation as stipulated by the manufacturer then it was incorrectly installed. fact.

understand that and i may deem you suitable to move on to the next module: classification changes and their subsequent effect on existing systems.

First may I say that I feel I owe you an apology for the abrasive manner in which I answered your last post. Please accept it !

I believe my boiler was properly installed as stipulated by the manufacturer. I have no reason to think otherwise. In other words, the ventilation exceeded the manufacturer's minimum specification of 56 cm2 also quoted as 9 in2. I have the manual before me. I cannot understand , therefore, how you can say that it has always been below spec. How else can I make a judgement ?

I have never said that the ventilation was below what was specified. The fly in the ointment appears to be the spec. changes introduced by HSE in 2005 and 2008. These called for 50% and 90% of the stated area respectively. The only way in which I can interpret this is that my boiler was properly installed in 1998 in accordance with the then existing regulations. Since that time CORG/ HSE have tightened the regulations, thus putting my boiler in an AR classification. It follows that the 1998 values were invalid in the light of subsequent experience. If this is what you are saying, I agree.

I have already put the work in hand to have additional ventilation fitted.
So what if next year the HSE decides that the area should be 100% of the manufacturer's value, 120% and so on. This all appears a bit arbitrary to me because the additional ventilation I am having fitted next week may be regarded as AR in a year or two. In this sense no installation can ever be said to be safe because experience may dictate changes in standards. If that is what you mean I agree with you. But when I talk of safe I am saying that an installation meets existing standards; there is no other way of determining what safe means.

Does that make sense to you ?

 

[kevplumb]

if the ventilation in sq/ins free area is as the boiler mans spec

you dont need to have anything fitted

regardless of what reg you or the company quote

 

[nickso]

Oh dear ! Temper, temper!

For a start let's get Jesus sorted; he walked on water. So much is common knowledge.

I fully understand what you say about the boiler but I have the supplier's installation and annual service records for the past 18 years; there is not a single reference to inadequate ventilation. The installation has always been signed off as ok in the remarks column of the service document. As the firm in question is not some cowboy outfit - they employ 15 engineers in the field - it surely does not make me an "A" for believing them.

If you are saying that what HSE now stipulate ( 90% ) should have been the standard all along, then you can hardly blame me for not knowing that. I rely on "experts" such as yourself

I suspect I rattled your cage when I pointed out that what you were saying was not in agreement with the HSE procedures I quoted. But I get the impression you probably think they know less than you do. Anyway, let's leave it at that! I'm sure we have better things to do with our time.

deary me.

we probably should leave it at that. if you can't understand the situation after i have written it down in easy to understand bullet points you are clearly incapable of ever understanding.

one last time. i know the requirements. ignore AR. ignore NTCS. ignore your belief your firm is not a "cowboy" outfit. even ignore the fact they have consistently failed to advise you of a very obvious defect on your system. ignore the amount of years they have failed to advise you. ignore the classification of that defect if you wish.

just understand that since the day your boiler was installed, if it did not have the ventilation as stipulated by the manufacturer then it was incorrectly installed. fact.

understand that and i may deem you suitable to move on to the next module: classification changes and their subsequent effect on existing systems.

First may I say that I feel I owe you an apology for the abrasive manner in which I answered your last post. Please accept it !

I believe my boiler was properly installed as stipulated by the manufacturer. I have no reason to think otherwise. In other words, the ventilation exceeded the manufacturer's minimum specification of 56 cm2 also quoted as 9 in2. I have the manual before me. I cannot understand , therefore, how you can say that it has always been below spec. How else can I make a judgement ?

I have never said that the ventilation was below what was specified. The fly in the ointment appears to be the spec. changes introduced by HSE in 2005 and 2008. These called for 50% and 90% of the stated area respectively. The only way in which I can interpret this is that my boiler was properly installed in 1998 in accordance with the then existing regulations. Since that time CORG/ HSE have tightened the regulations, thus putting my boiler in an AR classification. It follows that the 1998 values were invalid in the light of subsequent experience. If this is what you are saying, I agree.

I have already put the work in hand to have additional ventilation fitted.
So what if next year the HSE decides that the area should be 100% of the manufacturer's value, 120% and so on. This all appears a bit arbitrary to me because the additional ventilation I am having fitted next week may be regarded as AR in a year or two. In this sense no installation can ever be said to be safe because experience may dictate changes in standards. If that is what you mean I agree with you. But when I talk of safe I am saying that an installation meets existing standards; there is no other way of determining what safe means.

Does that make sense to you ?

ok, apology accepted.

there is too much rambling nonsense on this thread.

if you don't know what the current size of the vent is its pointless speculating any further what needs to be done to bring it up to standard. it may already meet the standard as the only engineer to see it recently seems to have a thin grasp on the requirements.

please get someone reputable to have a look and alter it if necessary.

 

[Boilerman2]

I think the OP's problem is with changing regulations and in particullar the classification of the inadequate ventillation. BUT the OP should realise that the regulations and procedures of dealing with situations is constantly changing based on real-life experience for example and I quote from 1978..
"where an oil fired boiler has performed satisfactorily, then the ventillation for a Gas fired replacement can be deemed satisfactory".. this advice was at a time when many oil fired boilers were being replaced with gas fired counterparts and clearly the ventilation on these installations, although correct at the time of installation would no longer be acceptible.

We used to install Balanced flue boilers in "Ginnels" (Passage ways), but after a spate of Carbon Monoxide Deaths, these were outlawed and are now illegal.

So you do have to accept that goal posts WILL move, but it is largly based on real time experiences and tragically sometimes a death or two.

So please don't take it out on your service Co they are trying to keep you safe and has been said many times on this thread, the procedure for asseing ventilaation shortfall was significantly tightened up in 2008!

 

[kirkgas]

I think the OP's problem is with changing regulations and in particullar the classification of the inadequate ventillation. BUT the OP should realise that the regulations and procedures of dealing with situations is constantly changing based on real-life experience for example and I quote from 1978..
"where an oil fired boiler has performed satisfactorily, then the ventillation for a Gas fired replacement can be deemed satisfactory".. this advice was at a time when many oil fired boilers were being replaced with gas fired counterparts and clearly the ventilation on these installations, although correct at the time of installation would no longer be acceptible.

We used to install Balanced flue boilers in "Ginnels" (Passage ways), but after a spate of Carbon Monoxide Deaths, these were outlawed and are now illegal.

So you do have to accept that goal posts WILL move, but it is largly based on real time experiences and tragically sometimes a death or two.

So please don't take it out on your service Co they are trying to keep you safe and has been said many times on this thread, the procedure for asseing ventilaation shortfall was significantly tightened up in 2008!

i agree with everything you say apart from what i have highlighted, the service company installed the boiler then serviced 18 times, we still are to get clarification on whether the vent is adequate or not, but if not that fault lies solely with the installer as the reg hasnt changed on that (would have been HI - 7 x 4.5, now HI/1.1 -7 x 5 but close enough) so the company are either at fault for not fitting the right vent and subsequently not informing him the vent was AR as opposed to NCS, or they are at fault if the vent is correct as there latest engineer doesnt have a clue what he is talking about