Gas hose on Alde bubble tester

[Spoonman]

Hi all

 

I have a few questions in regard to use of a 10mm Alde bubble tester, and it's compliance with BSS regulations

 

The copper piping in my boat is 3/8 imperial. The current gas bottle set up is the regulator connected by 8mm gas hose to a Fulham nozzle bulkhead compression fitting located in the gas locker.

 

This creates the issue of having to swap out the Fulham nozzle to a reducing coupler compression fitting 10mm to 3/8 , if I was to use all copper pipe from the bubble tester.

 

The 8mm version of this bubble tester comes with 2 barbed inserts, which are designed to connect to hose on both the inlet and outlet, presumably for use in motorhomes/vans ect .However I'm unsure why the 10mm version does not come with such? I probably should have bought the 8mm version! 

 

If you refer to the picture , my solution has been to use a small section of 10mm pipe connected directly to the bubble tester , with a 10mm Fulham nozzle attached to hose(class 2) with a jubilee clip, that then goes to the regulator.

 

The same will then be done to the outlet side and then it can be easily connected to the existing Fulham nozzle to the 3/8' gas work. 

 

Total length of flexible hose around 50cm on both sides ,so with in the 1metre limit stipulated in the BSS. I am unsure whether jubilee clips are sufficient, or are some other sort of clips needed?

 

I have seen various examples of gas hose being used with these 10mm bubble testers but only on the inlet side between the gas bottle and the bubble tester.

Can any one see any issues with this set up, and whether it would go against BSS requirements. These testers are designed for use with gas hose , so I feel as though this still  fits with in conditions set out in Appendix d of the bss regarding post 2008 bubble testers

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 23 by Spoonman

[MtB]

1 hour ago, Spoonman said:

Can any one see any issues with this set up, and whether it would go against BSS requirements. These testers are designed for use with gas hose , so I feel as though this still  fits with in conditions set out in Appendix d of the bss regarding post 2008 bubble testers

 

 

When you go slightly off-piste like this, the person who needs convincing it complies is your BSS examiner. Marshalling arguments that it complies will be no help at all if your BSS bod takes against it. Even appeals to the BSS office when you know you're right don't help (or so we learn on here).

 

Being pragmatic, you're probably best off asking this question of your BSS bod first rather than afterwards, rather than trying to persuade him or her later that it complies.

 

 

[jonathanA]

As far as I can tell that is OK for bss providing the hoses* are less than 1 metre. I just looked up the bss tests for this (see below)

 

A friends boat has just failed for having that set up but the numpty who Installed it just forced the hose onto the 10mm copper pipe and stuck 2 jubilee clips on it. 4 yrs ago a bss examiner passed it, last Saturday a different one failed it. (Although his advice was to fit compression to Fulham nozzles and he would pass it).

 

* obviously proper gas hose marked appropriately and in good condition. 

[blackrose]

I didn't realise hoses and jubilee clips were permitted at all, apart from factory crimped pigtails between the bottle and regulator. I suppose if it's in the gas locker it's ok, but I don't understand why a connection to a bubble tester needs to be in flexible hose at all?

 

I thought bubble testers came in 2 pipe sizes 8mm and 10mm. I put mine in a vice, cracked the 10mm fittings off and installed 1/2" compression fittings as that was my pipe size. Surely you can do the same and install 3/8" fittings in your bubble tester?

Edited April 24 by blackrose

[jonathanA]

1 hour ago, blackrose said:

I didn't realise hoses and jubilee clips were permitted at all, apart from factory crimped pigtails between the bottle and regulator. I suppose if it's in the gas locker it's ok, but I don't understand why a connection to a bubble tester needs to be in flexible hose at all?

yep - in fact you can have an 'all hose' system to a single appliance,  although if IIRC then you have to use crimped/swaged connections.  I can't remember and i'm not sufficently interested to look it up in the 195 pages of BSS document whether you have to use premade hoses on the high pressure (bottle to regulator) side.  (where regulator isn't direct on the bottle type) 

 

I guess the reason hoses are used for bubble testers (apart from caravan/motorhome use) is that the installer can't manage proper copper pipework /joints.

 

actually still had the BSS page open heres what it says

 

Applicability – where a bubble leak detector of suitable proprietary manufacturer is located within a
cylinder locker or cylinder housing, up to 1m of hose may be installed between the cylinder mounted
regulator and the detector, and up to 1m of hose may be installed between the detector and the supply
pipework. The hose between the detector and the supply pipework must be located within the locker
or housing.
Applicability – where there is a single appliance located very close to the cylinder installation it is
permissible for hose to run from the cylinder installation to the appliance without pipework provided
the hose length does not exceed 1m.
Applicability – for ‘all-hose’ systems apply Check 7.9.6

 

and 7.9.6 says (amongst other things)  :

 

hoses must have permanently attached end fittings, such as swaged
sleeve or sleeve and threaded insert (worm-drive clamps are not
permitted);

 

you live and learn... 

22 hours ago, MtB said:

 

When you go slightly off-piste like this, the person who needs convincing it complies is your BSS examiner. Marshalling arguments that it complies will be no help at all if your BSS bod takes against it. Even appeals to the BSS office when you know you're right don't help (or so we learn on here).

 

Being pragmatic, you're probably best off asking this question of your BSS bod first rather than afterwards, rather than trying to persuade him or her later that it complies.

 

 

I slighlty disagree Mike, the BSS documents are (to my mind) crystal clear around this and i don't see how any decent BSS examiner could quibble over this. Personally i wouldn't pay the Fecker if he failed it. I'd  raise a dispute/complaint with BSS, then argue the toss with CRT if they wouldn't then renew my licence etc. As we know it would take them years to take any effective action, depends whether you can stand the aggro or not - I probably couldn't to be honest and would probably cave in for an easy life.... 

[Alan de Enfield]

37 minutes ago, jonathanA said:

yep - in fact you can have an 'all hose' system

 

Yes- that is allowed in the RCD so the BSS could hardly 'ban it'.

 

As it happens our Catamaran is fitted with a flexible rubber hose gas system to ISO 10239

 

The BSS states :

 

Applicability – ‘all-hose’ systems will generally be found on imported boats, CE marked to the
Recreational Craft Directive or UKCA marked according to the Recreational Craft Regulations, where
the builder has chosen to apply ISO 10239.
Applicability – for multi-appliance systems to ISO 10239, anticipate a manifold arrangement within the
cylinder locker or housing.

 

The "1 metre" requirement is for a different application where the appliance is used directly attached to the regulator, and is not part of the BSS checking.

 

Applicability – single cooking appliances connected by hose of no more than 1m in length directly to a
regulator are acceptable and need not be assessed against this Check.

 

For example -  a rail mounted BBQ such as the one we have fitted 

 

 

Edited April 24 by Alan de Enfield

[Spoonman]

22 hours ago, jonathanA said:

 

I guess the reason hoses are used for bubble testers (apart from caravan/motorhome use) is that the installer can't manage proper copper pipework /joints.

 

actually still had the BSS page open heres what it says

 

Applicability – where a bubble leak detector of suitable proprietary manufacturer is located within a
cylinder locker or cylinder housing, up to 1m of hose may be installed between the cylinder mounted
regulator and the detector, and up to 1m of hose may be installed between the detector and the supply
pipework. The hose between the detector and the supply pipework must be located within the locker
or housing.
 

 

 

Thanks for bringing this section to my attention 👍 So technically you can have up to 2 metres of gas hose! Wild

 

I looked in to this a bit more and apparently it's an addition to the 2023 BSS. There is a document , where they give reasons why changes were made and for 7.9.4 

 

Explanation of change: This new Applicability formalises the longstanding BSS Office position.

 

So I feel more confident that with the Fulham nozzles this should be compliant and the use of jubilee clips ( aka worm driven clips) should be fine as it's not part of an "all hose" system.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 25 by Spoonman

[MtB]

On 24/04/2026 at 11:12, jonathanA said:

I slighlty disagree Mike, the BSS documents are (to my mind) crystal clear around this and i don't see how any decent BSS examiner could quibble over this. Personally i wouldn't pay the Fecker if he failed it. I'd  raise a dispute/complaint with BSS, then argue the toss with CRT if they wouldn't then renew my licence etc. As we know it would take them years to take any effective action, depends whether you can stand the aggro or not - I probably couldn't to be honest and would probably cave in for an easy life.... 

 

You rather miss the point I was making, which is that an incorrect BSS fail still lumbers you with no BSS, no Licence and instead, a laborious  and time-consuming uphill struggle to prove your point even though you are right all along.

 

I was suggesting heading off this scenario in advance by running it past the BSS bod who will be doing the next inspection. 

 

 

 

Edited April 25 by MtB
Missing word!

[Ex Brummie]

Purely a personal view, but why introduce a component into a gas line that has another number of joints/potential leak points, and after a year or two has a failure record. A test nipple and manometer is cheaper and more reliable. 

[Alan de Enfield]

21 minutes ago, Ex Brummie said:

Purely a personal view, but why introduce a component into a gas line that has another number of joints/potential leak points, and after a year or two has a failure record. A test nipple and manometer is cheaper and more reliable. 

 

Then you either have to pay for your non gas approved BSS inspector AND and an approved gas  engineer (to do the actual gas test), or, pay whatever a Gas qualified BSS examiner wants to charge you.

[cuthound]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Then you either have to pay for your non gas approved BSS inspector AND and an approved gas  engineer (to do the actual gas test), or, pay whatever a Gas qualified BSS examiner wants to charge you.

 

 

I use a gas qualified BSS inspector and I've found no difference in cost. (The first time I needed one the inspector asked if the boat was fitted with a bubble tester and when I said no he declined the job).

[MtB]

6 minutes ago, cuthound said:

 

 

I use a gas qualified BSS inspector and I've found no difference in cost. (The first time I needed one the inspector asked if the boat was fitted with a bubble tester and when I said no he declined the job).

 

That's interesting. 

 

A bubble tester is a FAR less severe test of gas tightness than the proper tightness test specified in BS 5482 Pt 3 or whatever it is called this week. Apart from the need for a bubble tester on a liveaboard when the BSS examiner is not GSR too, perhaps a quicker test and higher pass rate makes a bubble tester-equiped boat more attractive to all BSS bods.

[jonathanA]

2 hours ago, MtB said:

 

You rather miss the point I was making, which is that an incorrect BSS fail still lumbers you with no BSS, no Licence and instead, a laborious  and time-consuming uphill struggle to prove your point even though you are right all along.

 

I was suggesting heading off this scenario in advance by running it past the BSS bod who will be doing the next inspection. 

 

 

 

No I got your point which is why i was only slightly disagreeing. I would say that the bss test is perfectly clear in this area so shouldn't be any need to soft soap an inspector. I accept your point though as some inspectors won't accept, advisories or make up their own rules, such as Steve Williams insisting (to me) that an electrical RCD was compulsory for a BSS pass. 

 

1 hour ago, Ex Brummie said:

Purely a personal view, but why introduce a component into a gas line that has another number of joints/potential leak points, and after a year or two has a failure record. A test nipple and manometer is cheaper and more reliable. 

You can't be serious. Press the bubble tester button look for bubbles versus getting a bag of spanners out setting up manometer, opening test nipple, do tests, disconnect close up, test for leaks from test point with leak detector fluid. So that's spanners, screwdriver manometer and leak detector fluid. I can see how that's so much easier than a bubble tester.... NOT.

 

Not withstanding issues around GSIUR and the accuracy of bubble testers vs manometer that MTB refers to. But as a quick and easy test that anyone can  do that's probably worth the extra couple of joints and expense wouldn't you agree ? 

[cuthound]

3 hours ago, MtB said:

 

That's interesting. 

 

A bubble tester is a FAR less severe test of gas tightness than the proper tightness test specified in BS 5482 Pt 3 or whatever it is called this week. Apart from the need for a bubble tester on a liveaboard when the BSS examiner is not GSR too, perhaps a quicker test and higher pass rate makes a bubble tester-equiped boat more attractive to all BSS bods.

 

I know, that's why I prefer to stick with a manometer. 

[LadyG]

Ok, just an opinion required. I had the four burners cleaned, on my fitted cooker,  some sort of professional aparatus, the proper thing, everything looks great, but . 

Unfortunately only three burners now work. The fitter, a competant guy was mystified and has not yet returned. Should i ask him to come back and test the system. Im pretty sure there is no gas leak, ive got a good sense of smell. 

Why is it not working?

[MtB]

12 minutes ago, LadyG said:

Unfortunately only three burners now work. The fitter, a competant guy was mystified and has not yet returned.

 

Obviously a total goon, whatever he has told you.

 

Diagnosing a gas ring that doesn't light is child's play to anyone who understands how they work.

 

I'll fix it for you when I pick up that fridge! 

 

 

[Tony Brooks]

22 minutes ago, LadyG said:

Ok, just an opinion required. I had the four burners cleaned, on my fitted cooker,  some sort of professional aparatus, the proper thing, everything looks great, but . 

Unfortunately only three burners now work. The fitter, a competant guy was mystified and has not yet returned. Should i ask him to come back and test the system. Im pretty sure there is no gas leak, ive got a good sense of smell. 

Why is it not working?

 

If it is a fairly modern cooker then I suspect that the cavity under the burner cap is full of liquid, or the jet that is also under there is blocked. You may have to undo two screws to lift the cap off, or it just lifts off.

 

If it is a Dometic cooker then the caps tend to be held on by screws that seize up. Mine snapped so I had to drill, tap and fit new screws (with Copperslip).

 

Once the cap is off make sure the burner slots that the flames sit on are clean.

 

Edited to add, this does not involve opening any gas joints, but once reassembled, if the flame tries to lift off the burner or has yellow tips it is vital you consult a professional.

Edited April 25 by Tony Brooks

[LadyG]

19 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Obviously a total goon, whatever he has told you.

 

Diagnosing a gas ring that doesn't light is child's play to anyone who understands how they work.

 

I'll fix it for you when I pick up that fridge! 

 

 

Hes got about twenty five gas cookers to service, so i m surprised he doesnt know, if you tell me the secret, ill pass it on!

I think the marina are fed up with me being here, but insist  they must finish all the jobs before they get paid, which is a bit weird, lol

[Tony Brooks]

FWIW, I have no idea what servicing a gas cooker involves apart from ensuring the burners have even flames, the flames do not lift off the burner and have no yellow tips, plus the flame supervision is working. 10 minutes or less per cooker for the check, but more for rectification. Cleaning any voids in the burner, even if the burner caps need unscrewing, rather than just lifting off is, in my view, well within the competence of most DIY boaters.

 

Please explain exactly what this cooker servicing consists of because it sounds a bit weird to me.

[LadyG]

45 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

FWIW, I have no idea what servicing a gas cooker involves apart from ensuring the burners have even flames, the flames do not lift off the burner and have no yellow tips, plus the flame supervision is working. 10 minutes or less per cooker for the check, but more for rectification. Cleaning any voids in the burner, even if the burner caps need unscrewing, rather than just lifting off is, in my view, well within the competence of most DIY boaters.

 

Please explain exactly what this cooker servicing consists of because it sounds a bit weird to me.

I am assuming.ing that every one of the boats he sends out have fully functioning gas cookers, this must be due to both instalation and maintenance.

Previously I asked my Gas Safe, Boat Safe lpg qualified Examiner to service my cooker,  uneven flames and yellow tips, he said nothing about my terminology. He did not remove the burners, which I had been unable to do myself.  He also lit the grill, very smoky,  dirty, but functional

I am at the marina which has a guy who looks after the hire boat fleet,  he removed all four stove top burners, ( a lot of rusty crud underneath), took them away and returned them pristine. Some or all of the cross head screws have been replaced.

I find that it is better not to detail what should be done when dealing with fitters, they can then say something like " you told me to replace regulator, did not mention hose".

Edited April 26 by LadyG

[Tony Brooks]

1 minute ago, LadyG said:

I am assuming.ing that every one of the boats he sends out have fully functioning gas cookers, this must be due to both instalation and maintenance.

Previously I asked my Gas Safe, Boat Safe lpg qualified Examiner to service my cooker, he said nothing about my terminology. He did not remove the burners, which I had been unable to to myself. 

I am at the marina which has a guy who looks after the hire boat fleet,  he removed all four stove top burners, ( a lot of rust), took them away and returned them pristine. 

 

There is a difference between servicing and checking, probably less than two minutes to CHECK the stove operation during the turn round domestic equipment check. 

 

Now we are getting more information, so the burners were not cleaned in place on the stove which could have filled the void under the caps with liquid. I trust he hoovered the muck from those voids. This now points to a blocked jet/injector. On modern hobs there are usually vertically mounted in the centre of the burner void. I expect that you can now get the burner caps off (as he has recently taken them off). if it were mine I would take the jet out (unscrews), ensuring I did not damage or lose the soft washer, and ensure the tiny hole in it is clear. If it needs poking out try using one of your hairs, a fine. soft brush bristle or at a push a single copper strand from an electrical cable. On no account push something like a steel needle through it. Older cookers are very different.

[LadyG]

33 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

There is a difference between servicing and checking, probably less than two minutes to CHECK the stove operation during the turn round domestic equipment check. 

 

Now we are getting more information, so the burners were not cleaned in place on the stove which could have filled the void under the Older cookers are very different.

Its an older cooker. I think he had a dirtbuster 

Im not touching it, he started the job so he'll need to finish it!  I'll ask him to do a gas test if they feel it might be a good idea, there is test point  installed at the cooker end.

Its unfortunate that I now have another little problem, i just know the feeling, when you turn up to do a job then several more are added on!

I used to have a customer who added extra work  every time I cut her lawn and went to get paid. I stopped her  by telling her it would cost another fiver, suddenly the extra work was not required.

19 hours ago, jonathanA said:

No I got your point which is why i was only slightly disagreeing. I would say that the bss test is perfectly clear in this area so shouldn't be any need to soft soap an inspector. I accept your point though as some inspectors won't accept, advisories or make up their own rules, such as Steve Williams insisting (to me) that an 

 

Not withstanding issues around GSIUR and the accuracy of bubble testers vs manometer that MTB refers to. But as a quick and easy test that anyone can  do that's probably worth the extra couple of joints and expense wouldn't you agree ? 

Absolutely I would never have a  bubble tester in my gas locker which is subject to knocks from exchanging bottles. What is the point, if there is a leak then it may not be detected between testing, are you going to test every day, or twice a day, or once a year?

Believe me, it things can go wrong, they will..

Salty water days:  I once asked a new crew to look in my anchor locker so he knew how to get it out if needed  he managed to break the electrics cable which had been installed for twenty years. Never mentioned it, so I was a bit flummoxed when the nav lights did not work. They had worked the previous day.

New boater days: the  boater who offered to change over to my new gas bottle managed to empty it overnight. 

 

 

Edited April 26 by LadyG

[Tony Brooks]

1 hour ago, LadyG said:

Its an older cooker. 

 Usual, if you want answers, which you do not, the photos for identification or make & model. AS you say built in, so not freestanding, it is not likely to be an older cooker where all the burners and their supporting pipes lift out - especially as you say you could not get the tops off. If it were an older style cooker he would probably have taken the top off and lifted out all the burners, and what they fix to, away to work on.

 

More info just for education. If you mean the burner simply refuses to ignite and there is no gas hiss, then blocked jet. If it lights but then goes out as soon as you release the knob/flame failure button, then probably flame probe damage local to that burner. If you have gas hiss, but it won't ignite then, if your cooker is so equipped, there is a problem with the igniter on that burner. This could be a damaged/bent electrode or a misplaced and shorting igniter cable as the most likely.

Edited April 26 by Tony Brooks

[LadyG]

1 minute ago, Tony Brooks said:

 Usual, if you want answers, which you do not, the photos for identification or make & model. AS you say built in, so not freestanding, it is not likely to be an older cooker where all the burners and their supporting pipes lift out - especially as you say you could not get the tops off. If it were an older style cooker he would probably have taken the top off and lifted out all the burners, and what they fix to, away to work on.

Its a Caprice 2000,  installed 1999.

The fitter removed all the burners, drills, strength and experience involved. I am a weak and feeble woman. I pay strong and confide t men to do the work. I pay them, this is good for the economy  

[Tony Brooks]

3 minutes ago, LadyG said:

Its a Caprice 2000,  installed 1999.

The fitter removed all the burners, drills, strength and experience involved. I am a weak and feeble woman. I pay strong and confide t men to do the work. I pay them, this is good for the economy  

 

So a modern cooker, exactly like the one we had, and it did have a 12V igniter.