distance flue to edge of brickwork

[namsag]

Chrishutt. Idon`t know how there can be different figures given no concern of mine, my only concern is boilers are fitted to what we are told they should be and that is MI`s.

 

[simond]

In the case of Vaillant, if their MIs are saying that a clearance of 150mm is required to a structural opening (as my recent Ecotec copy does) and the VTK instructions say minimum of 50mm to a window opening, then common sense suggests that the 150mm figure should have precedence unless it is clear that there are no structural issues (e.g. the opening is near the top of a wall and bears little load).

The instructions say 50mm. Common sense therefore means that the manufacturer has given the option of fitting it 50mm from an opening. Why argue Chris, it's written in the MIs in black and white (in a cute little grey box)?

Vaillant has arrogantly taken the assumption that having designed the boiler, sold it in 'n' continents and paid for the UK Advantica testing they can write the installation manual.

 

[nickso]

You don't have to go by the regs, as we all know they are overruled by the manufacturer instructions. The Regs haven't changed (although word has it they will to reflect plume management issues).

Therefore a Vaillant flue can go 50mm from a window opening, because they expressly say so.

At the moment there is no reg other than the regs saying MIs take preference, which is all we need to put a Vaillant flue 50mm from a window. CORGI therefore are happy, we comply with Building Regs, lovely day

its good practice to go by the regs, or advisories, if the mi's dont specifically state what a distance to an object should be.

in your vaillant case then yes you can go to 50mm if the mi's state that it can be done like that and there are no regs that have specifically overuled that statement.

if there is no specific measurement in the mi's then go to 150mm, simple.

i have to say i wouldnt personally think its acceptable to cut a hole within 50mm of an opening, it simply looks dodgy as shown in the op's pic. even 150mm is dodgy sometimes depending on the individual case.

 

[simond]

I agree that cutting a hole this close to an opening is in some circumstances dodgy.

However there are instances where it is more than acceptable, like the 3 storey block of flats in Clapham I was parked outside just before Christmas where the council had used Vaillant's minimum 50mm on every boiler.

Sometimes it is the only way, hats off to Vaillant for making it possible I say. Those of us in the field must determine when it is appropriate.

 

[nickso]

I agree that cutting a hole this close to an opening is in some circumstances dodgy.

However there are instances where it is more than acceptable, like the 3 storey block of flats in Clapham I was parked outside just before Christmas where the council had used Vaillant's minimum 50mm on every boiler.

Sometimes it is the only way, hats off to Vaillant for making it possible I say. Those of us in the field must determine when it is appropriate.

but why is it acceptable in that case? because it was going to be difficult to do any other way? hardly a good excuse for potentially harming the buildings structural safety.

i agree with you in principal, lord knows i love anything that makes my life easier, but i dont think vaillant or any other boiler manufacturer should be the people to decide on how close a flue hole should be to an opening.

 

[chrishutt]

The instructions say 50mm.

In addition, the terminal should not be nearer
than 150 mm to an opening in the building fabric
formed for the purpose of accommodating a
built-in element such as a window.

That's what they actually say, Simon. I wouldn't want to be putting my neck on the block by going against their instructions.

 

[bengasman]

Sorry mate but you have not read my post correctly, I am trying to find the distance to end of brickwork, NOT to ventilation openings; that is what the whole post is about.

this is why I gave measurements I did

in that case, where did you get them from?
think i have inadvertently opened can of worms

 

[bengasman]

I agree that cutting a hole this close to an opening is in some circumstances dodgy.

However there are instances where it is more than acceptable, like the 3 storey block of flats in Clapham I was parked outside just before Christmas where the council had used Vaillant's minimum 50mm on every boiler.

I would be hesitant, to say the least, to present a job done by the council as proof that this is how it should be done.
Was in a (ex)council flat the other day where they had “improved” the mains by sticking a shower pump on, in the bathroom, fed by an extension lead.

Other example.
Came in to sort out a underfloor heating problem and found a council sparky doing a bit on the side. When I asked him when he was going to bond the waterpipe, he told me: “no need for that, in 2008 you don’t have to do supplementary bonding”
At least I assume he was a council employee as he had a council van and got very nervous when I asked him for his nic card.

 

[namsag]

Bengas , he is probanly telling truth, bonding rules are all changing(if not already) and a lot of what was done in past is no longer req

 

[bengasman]

Bengas , he is probanly telling truth, bonding rules are all changing(if not already) and a lot of what was done in past is no longer req

I doubt it. He did not know the difference between main equipotential bonding and supplementary.
Connecting the water and gas to the meb is not to support the supplier's earth as some people think