Gas installation query

[the grinch]

Yes I'm aware of that, but my point was that it's easy to find metric stuff that is not suitable (and many people would be unaware that it's not suitable). If you stick to Imperial, and buy it from recognised chandleries, it'll be a fairly safe bet that it's suitable.

 

Tim

yes, good point!

[alan_fincher]

Yes I'm aware of that, but my point was that it's easy to find metric stuff that is not suitable (and many people would be unaware that it's not suitable). If you stick to Imperial, and buy it from recognised chandleries, it'll be a fairly safe bet that it's suitable.

 

Tim

The one bit that is not intuitive, (until you know!), is bubble testers.

 

A chandlery where everything else is fully imperial, in my experience still only sells metric bubble testers.

 

As MTB has indicated 5/16" imperial versus 8mm is probably so near as damn it to be interchangeable, although I doubt many will wish to restict any of their main pipe feed down to just 5/16", unless there are only modest appliances installed.

 

However I have always understood from previous conversations on here that it is not clever to mix 8mm and 3/8" imperial, (whether you swap olives or not, IIRC).

 

Of course as Mike says, you can take the metric fittings off, and do things in straight imperial, but this will be less than obvious to most people, I think, without being fed that.

 

As I said, SoCal is one of the few places that seems to supply the Alde testers with imperial fittings already fitted.

 

Here is the 3/8" imperial one.... SoCal Linky

 

I don't think I have ever seen one advertised with 1/2" fittings in place, (nor indeed 12mm, I think ??).

Edited July 29, 2012 by alan_fincher

[MtB]

The one bit that is not intuitive, (until you know!), is bubble testers.

 

As MTB has indicated 5/16" imperial versus 8mm is probably so near as damn it to be interchangeable, although I doubt many will wish to restict any of their main pipe feed down to just 5/16", unless there are only modest appliances installed.

 

Agreed. The metric pipe is 2½ thousandths of an inch bigger than the imperial, well within the manufacturing tolerances of fittings and tube so effectively 100% interchangeable.

 

 

However I have always understood from previous conversations on here that it is not clever to mix 8mm and 3/8" imperial, (whether you swap olives or not, IIRC).

 

Not only not clever, but not possible given that 3/8" is 1.5mm bigger than 8mm! Did you mean 5/16", or 10mm?

 

 

As I said, SoCal is one of the few places that seems to supply the Alde testers with imperial fittings already fitted.

 

Here is the 3/8" imperial one.... SoCal Linky

 

The part number for a 10mm Alde Bubble Tester is 4071 920 according to the box of the one I have here on my desk. The link you give claims a part number of 4071 with no suffix number to indicate the size. And I see from the Alde site, only 8mm and 10mm are available. No imperial options. But the plot thickens. The Alde site shows part number 4071 808 for a 10mm one, and in their photo the colour is now grey, looking like a plastic product!

 

 

I don't think I have ever seen one advertised with 1/2" fittings in place, (nor indeed 12mm, I think ??).

Nope, nor have I.

 

Mike

 

ETA I think it's 50/50 that if you ordered that 3/8" one from SoCal, a 10mm item would arrive in the post....

Edited July 29, 2012 by Mike the Boilerman

[Good Morning Bob]

Hi,

 

While everyone is talking about gas installations thought I would sneak in with another question.

 

I am considering fitting a bubble tester so that I could regularly check tightness but have heard that some inspectors don't like them as they prefer to test with a manometer which I believe is a better test?

 

Are there any issues with having both a bubble tester and a test point fitted to the system so that I can regularly test with the bubble tester but the system can still be fully tested with a manometer?

 

Cheers.

 

/jh

[Timleech]

Agreed. The metric pipe is 2½ thousandths of an inch bigger than the imperial, well within the manufacturing tolerances of fittings and tube so effectively 100% interchangeable.

 

 

 

 

Not only not clever, but not possible given that 3/8" is 1.5mm bigger than 8mm! Did you mean 5/16", or 10mm?

 

 

 

 

I seem to remember that A well-known chandlery will supply conversion parts on request (10mm to 3/8"), but it was a while ago so I may have that wrong.

 

Tim

[alan_fincher]

Are there any issues with having both a bubble tester and a test point fitted to the system so that I can regularly test with the bubble tester but the system can still be fully tested with a manometer?

No!

 

Some appliances actually have a test point incorporated in them, (e.g. a Morco water heater), so you can often end up with one in addition to a bubble tester, without even trying!

 

Although not mandatory, the BSS office strongly recommend inclusion of a bubble tester.

 

The use of suitable proprietary bubble testers is strongly recommended, as it allow boaters to easily, routinely and safely test for gas leaks.

[nicknorman]

because a 2 Mbar leak could be hidden by a 2 Mbar let by at the gas bottle valve, that is why we have let by tests in both LP and Natural Gas as let by should be visible by a rise in pressure on the "U" Guage.

OK I get that thanks. But surely it is just necessary to check for pressure change at 2 significantly different pressures - ie normal operating pressure, and nearly or even fully at atmospheric. RM seemed to be implying that some critical adjustment of the system pressure was needed during the tests.

Edited July 29, 2012 by nicknorman

[the grinch]

yes RM is correct the let by test is carried out at 5Mbar

[nicknorman]

yes RM is correct the let by test is carried out at 5Mbar

Any particular reason for that specific pressure?

[the grinch]

i'm sure there is but not sure why 5 was chosen for LPG (its 10 on NG)but i'm sure it is well thought out!

[bizzard]

I'm so gas safe i even fill my gas lighter over the sink, there is no U bend in the waste pipe.

[nicknorman]

i'm sure there is but not sure why 5 was chosen for LPG (its 10 on NG)but i'm sure it is well thought out!

Or maybe it's just "a lowish pressure", not zero to be sure an appliance has not been left on accidentally. Then someone wanted a specific figure because "lowish" was too vague, so someone said "let's make it roughly 1/2 pressure, a nice round 10mB will do", then someone said "but since LPG is more dangerous, the test should be more stringent with a higher differential pressure across the tap" so the answer was "well let's make it 5 mB for LPG then". I suspect that was the extent of the science behind it, or am I too cynical?

 

Bottom line is, would it make any difference if the test was done at 6 or 4?

Edited July 29, 2012 by nicknorman

[Iain_S]

I don't know about the current production, but early test points used a fibre washer which could easily be split by overtightening, but they could work loose if not tightened enough. I think that has a lot to do with the requirement to be gas qualified to do the tests.

 

BUT, although a non gas registered examiner can't isn't allowed to use the test point on commercial or liveaboard boats, it's OK on private leisure craft. That's the logic I struggle with!

 

Iain

[the grinch]

 

 

Bottom line is, would it make any difference if the test was done at 6 or 4?

no it wouldn't as a u guage is only accurate to 0.5 Mbar anyway and i doubt that it was that simple!

[MtB]

BUT, although a non gas registered examiner can't isn't allowed to use the test point on commercial or liveaboard boats, it's OK on private leisure craft. That's the logic I struggle with!

 

Iain

There's no logic, it's the law. We are offered no explanation, it is just handed down from on high.

 

Liveaboards fall within the scope of the Gas Safety (installation and Use) Regulations 1998 (the GSIUR). Private leisure craft which are not a residence, don't.

 

The GSIUR state that anyone carrying out 'work' on a gas system for payment or other reward on a residential boat must be registered with the body administering the Register... currently Gas Safe Register. Therefore anyone laying tools on a liveaboard gas system in return for money, e.g. BSS bods, must be Gas Safe Registered. BSS bods working on leisure-only craft do not, as leisure craft fall outside of the scope of the GSIUR..

 

Hope that helps. Mad isn't it?

 

Mike

[Timleech]

There's no logic, it's the law. We are offered no explanation, it is just handed down from on high.

 

Liveaboards fall within the scope of the Gas Safety (installation and Use) Regulations 1998 (the GSIUR). Private leisure craft which are not a residence, don't.

 

The GSIUR state that anyone carrying out 'work' on a gas system for payment or other reward on a residential boat must be registered with the body administering the Register... currently Gas Safe Register. Therefore anyone laying tools on a liveaboard gas system in return for money, e.g. BSS bods, must be Gas Safe Registered. BSS bods working on leisure-only craft do not, as leisure craft fall outside of the scope of the GSIUR..

 

Hope that helps. Mad isn't it?

 

Mike

 

Is it not the case that anyone doing gas work for money on any (inland) boat needs to be gas safe registered?

There used to be the 'competent person' requirement, I did my gas courses years ago so that I could be a 'competent person', but then CORGI got their fingers in the pie so I didn't keep it up, not worth the bother & expense of registering unless I waned to spend my life as a gas fitter.

 

Tim

[MtB]

Is it not the case that anyone doing gas work for money on any (inland) boat needs to be gas safe registered?

There used to be the 'competent person' requirement, I did my gas courses years ago so that I could be a 'competent person', but then CORGI got their fingers in the pie so I didn't keep it up, not worth the bother & expense of registering unless I waned to spend my life as a gas fitter.

 

Tim

 

Nope. No requirement. Anyone can work on a non-residential boat for money as I understand it, no matter how incompetent they may be*.

 

If anyone disagrees, could you come up with a citation please? Thanks.

 

Mike

 

 

*So much for the 'jobs for the boys' theory floated earlier in this thread!

 

(Edited to correct grammar.)

Edited July 29, 2012 by Mike the Boilerman

[nicknorman]

There's no logic, it's the law. We are offered no explanation, it is just handed down from on high.

 

Liveaboards fall within the scope of the Gas Safety (installation and Use) Regulations 1998 (the GSIUR). Private leisure craft which are not a residence, don't.

 

The GSIUR state that anyone carrying out 'work' on a gas system for payment or other reward on a residential boat must be registered with the body administering the Register... currently Gas Safe Register. Therefore anyone laying tools on a liveaboard gas system in return for money, e.g. BSS bods, must be Gas Safe Registered. BSS bods working on leisure-only craft do not, as leisure craft fall outside of the scope of the GSIUR..

 

Hope that helps. Mad isn't it?

 

Mike

But let's not forget that to comply with GSIUR one only has to be Gas Safe registered if one is an employees or self-employee (ie doing it for money). Private individuals can do it themselves provided they are competent. Therefor an owner could carry out the testing with the BSS bod as an observer. Funnily enough they might not want to comply with the law under those circumstances, preferring to gold-plate the law instead!

[MtB]

But let's not forget that to comply with GSIUR one only has to be Gas Safe registered if one is an employees or self-employee (ie doing it for money). Private individuals can do it themselves provided they are competent. Therefor an owner could carry out the testing with the BSS bod as an observer. Funnily enough they might not want to comply with the law under those circumstances, preferring to gold-plate the law instead!

 

Yep, perfectly right.

 

The vast majority of 'professionals' gold-plating the law as you put it, do so out of ignorance in my opinion. They wish to fully minimise the risk of being hauled over the coals by their professional body should anything later go wrong. Last man in is always the one the HSE go for. Being taken off the Register for GSR bods is one fear, as their livelihoods will be taken away at a stroke. Dunno about BSS bods. Worst case scenario is ending up in the dock on a manslaughter charge. Rare but many gas bods worry about this terribly.

 

I'm not sure how your 'jobs for the boys' theory stands up in your example. How does a BSS bod gain a financial advantage by refusing to refusing to observe a private individual carrying out a tightness test? Surely he could finish the inspection, get paid and be on his way... far more financially advantageous than being dog-in-the-manger about it.

 

Mike

[nicknorman]

Yep, perfectly right.

 

The vast majority of 'professionals' gold-plating the law as you put it, do so out of ignorance in my opinion. They wish to fully minimise the risk of being hauled over the coals by their professional body should anything later go wrong. Last man in is always the one the HSE go for. Being taken off the Register for GSR bods is one fear, as their livelihoods will be taken away at a stroke. Dunno about BSS bods. Worst case scenario is ending up in the dock on a manslaughter charge. Rare but many gas bods worry about this terribly.

 

I'm not sure how your 'jobs for the boys' theory stands up in your example. How does a BSS bod gain a financial advantage by refusing to refusing to observe a private individual carrying out a tightness test? Surely he could finish the inspection, get paid and be on his way... far more financially advantageous than being dog-in-the-manger about it.

 

Mike

It wasn't my "jobs for boys" theory. My beef is more along the lines of the lack of clear rules in one place gives rise to a lot of misinterpretation from professionals who don't in fact have a clear idea of the law. Not had a personal problem with a boat but have been at the trade counter as an obvious amateur getting a bit for our house gas boiler, and had a "professional" in the queue telling me and the sales bod that he shouldn't be selling me the part if i was not Corgi (at the time) registered. And that was a part that didn't even require gas path disruption (thermocouple IIRC). I suspect you may agree with me on that one.

Edited July 29, 2012 by nicknorman

[smileypete]

Thanks mike.

 

I fully intend to have the installation done by a qualified person as long as the morco issue won't prevent it.

 

Mainly checking the things that will affect the design of the gas lockers I will be getting built.

And the interior conduits etc I plan to build to conceal pipes from view in day to day use but allow easy inspection at a later date.

 

I am very grateful for the knowledge of others, and know my limitations as regard fit out and can't see anything but false economy in not getting the installation done by a professional.

If a gas bod won't install the Morco they might be prepared to run the pipe and finish in a matching stop end in the right place, and advise on location, ventilation etc. All that's then needed is to do is put the Morco in and make a decent joint to the pipe that's there.

 

Running pipe in conduit needs some careful thought, if a union leaks the gas can go along the conduit, behind panelling and into the bilge undetected. If the pipe is drilled into accidentally the same can happen. So ideally run the pipe on the surface somewhere less visible but sheltered from accidental damage, like under the gunnel. If it is hidden best run it in the corner where it's less likely to get drilled into, not across the middle of panelling.

 

With lockers, the fittings need protection from damage by gas bottles. There are small waterproof magnetic LED worklights that should help with seeing the valves and bubble tester. With compression fittings the best sort of olive to use on soft copper pipe are 'parallel' soft copper olives from the likes of BES. Worth getting half a dozen extras and practicing on offcuts of pipe, see how much force is needed to get the olive to bite into the pipe a little, but not tooo much.

 

It's worth looking back using the search facility for the discussions on gas fitting, bear in mind not all the posts are coming from qualified installers but it gives some idea of what areas to look into and ask questions about.

 

cheers, Pete.

~smpt~

[blackrose]

1) can you get bubble testers in larger than 3/8 size?

 

I haven't read the whole thread so someone else may have answered this. I don't think you can get bubble testers with larger fittings than 3/8", but if you want half inch fittings you can put the bubble tester in a vice, take off the 3/8" fittings and put in 1/2" compression fittings. That's what I did. Otherwise you can just come off your regulator in 3/8", go through the 3/8" bubble tester and then use a 3/8" - 1/2" fitting to take it up to 1/2". (All inside the gas locker).

Edited July 30, 2012 by blackrose

[the grinch]

I haven't read the whole thread so someone else may have answered this.

 

been mentioned a couple of times

[pmms]

BUT, although a non gas registered examiner can't isn't allowed to use the test point on commercial or liveaboard boats, it's OK on private leisure craft. That's the logic I struggle with!

 

Iain

Iain,

 

Back at the start of the BSS examiner training in 1996 CORGI were up in arms about examiners not CORGI registered "working" on the gas systems of boats. This work was using a manometer to test system soundness. The then chief exec. of BW was persuaded that, on private boats, the examiner training course and subsequent assessment was sufficient to ensure competence in this testing, and as private boats were outside the scope of the GSI&U regs. he stood behind the BSS and I am led to believe told CORGI and HSE that examiners were not required to be registered. HSE/CORGI disagreed and when a court case loomed the then deputy Prime Minister, in 1997, (so my "deep throat" says) intervened and came down on BW/BSS's side.

 

When did logic ever have anything to do with the drafting of regulations?

 

Paul M

[Iain_S]

I think we all agree on the legal position, and also recognise the illogic of it!

 

 

But let's not forget that to comply with GSIUR one only has to be Gas Safe registered if one is an employees or self-employee (ie doing it for money). Private individuals can do it themselves provided they are competent. Therefor an owner could carry out the testing with the BSS bod as an observer. (snip)

 

I hadn't thought of this approach, but would not the competent private individual be considered to be acting as the agent of the BSS bod, and therefore be in breach of GSIUR?

 

Iain