Triple-whammy wood fuel warning

[Victor Vectis]

I finished working in the Technology Dept. of a large school academy a year or so ago. I miss the work like a hole in the head. What I do miss is access to large woodworking machinery, ditto a photocopier and a printer but what I miss the most is access to the scrap and offcuts the department produced.

 

The HoD did a lot of moderating work for one of the exam boards. He told me of a visit to a school somewhere north of Manchester. The GCSE coursework produced by the students there had as part of the specification 'Must not be larger than.....<can't remember the exact size>' . This wasn't on the exam boards spec. so my HoD queried it. He got the reply 'That's the largest size I can get through the door of my woodburner'!

[Sabcat]

 

I think this is right. When you read this instructions it is usually impossible or inappropriate to comply with the fitting requirements when installing in a boat, IIRC.

 

MtB

 

CO is pretty much the same weight as air, it's not like propane that sinks down into the bilges. I don't think it makes much odds where you have a CO alarm. If there's CO in the boat, it's going to be detected, unless the alarm is stashed at the back of a cupboard.

 

I mounted mine next to the Morco in galley, about 6ft from the cooker and 15ft from the stove.

[onionbargee]

Wet logs tar up your chimney you say ? I never would have guessed.

 

Is it a bit slack in the BSS office ?

[madcat]

LOL they've looked at cute cats on the Internet and finished the doughnuts so it's down to the serious stuff.

[floatsyourboat]

What if you dry the damp wood( been raining) on top of the stove?

Yes indeed and probably worse still burning scrap wood with paint or other residues on them that can also produce quite toxic fumes as well as any CO risks.

What about pallets?

[tree monkey]

What if you dry the damp wood( been raining) on top of the stove?

What about pallets?

There's a difference between wet wood and unseasoned wood, it's unseasoned that causes the problem.

Seasoned wood can get wet and be dried by the fire

Unseasoned wood can also get wet but it's pointless trying to season it by the fire

[floatsyourboat]

There's a difference between wet wood and unseasoned wood, it's unseasoned that causes the problem.

Seasoned wood can get wet and be dried by the fire

Unseasoned wood can also get wet but it's pointless trying to season it by the fire

I thought as much cheers.

[blackrose]

 

A healthy sense of self preservation of anyone living in what amounts to a metal box that contains gas appliances and another smaller metal box for keeping fire in insists on a CO alarm.

 

A person would have to be simple not to have one. Or a canary.

Yes, and there are plenty of simple, uninformed or uninterested people on boats, which is precisely why some argue for CO alarms being compulsory.

Edited January 24, 2015 by blackrose

[onionbargee]

The BSS office does lack common sense sometimes.

[bassplayer]

Are fire alarms compulsory according to the BSS yet? Maybe the BSS is more about prevention than detection...

[Sir Nibble]

The BSS office does lack common sense sometimes.

I am convinced that wherever there is a test to be passed there are people looking after their jobs. MOT for instance, if it wasn't dangerous last year why is it suddenly a risk? ie failing on the loss of vision caused by a chip in the screen you hadn't noticed. IEE, Regs currently on 17th edition and 18th being worked on. Again, if it wasn't dangerous then why is it now? 17 editions and still needing to be superseded suggests either the job needs to go to someone competent to sort out the mess or new regs are just there to keep the compilers in their jobs.

[Radiomariner]

I am convinced that wherever there is a test to be passed there are people looking after their jobs. MOT for instance, if it wasn't dangerous last year why is it suddenly a risk? ie failing on the loss of vision caused by a chip in the screen you hadn't noticed. IEE, Regs currently on 17th edition and 18th being worked on. Again, if it wasn't dangerous then why is it now? 17 editions and still needing to be superseded suggests either the job needs to go to someone competent to sort out the mess or new regs are just there to keep the compilers in their jobs.

Last year the MOT mechanic was a wee short ass of 5'1" and the windscreen chip was high above his line of vision, this year the mechanic was 6'6" and the windscreen chip was bang in the middle of his eye line?

 

Hey Sir Nib's, things do change over time. The MOT has to be the same for every car, that is the nature of the beast. New car models bring new possibilities of failure, also, as accidents are investigated and new causes identified, a need for extra examination items become necessary.

 

WRT CO monitors the BSS is very aware of the situation and publishes/promotes a great deal of information/recommendations on the subject. The subject is constantly under review.

 

Incidents of CO poisoning could increase if compulsory fitted monitors not exactly fit for purpose on a boat, or poorly installed resulted in more reliance upon them rather than on personal awareness, vigilance and care.

A comprehensive test regime might be needed, it may not be sufficient to know that the alarm will sound when it senses CO, air flow has to be considered, it might be that the CO gets into someone's lungs before the alarm

 

edited for typing error

Edited January 26, 2015 by Radiomariner

[cuthound]

I am convinced that wherever there is a test to be passed there are people looking after their jobs. MOT for instance, if it wasn't dangerous last year why is it suddenly a risk? ie failing on the loss of vision caused by a chip in the screen you hadn't noticed. IEE, Regs currently on 17th edition and 18th being worked on. Again, if it wasn't dangerous then why is it now? 17 editions and still needing to be superseded suggests either the job needs to go to someone competent to sort out the mess or new regs are just there to keep the compilers in their jobs.

As Radio mariner says, things change. For example until switched mode power supplies became common on 3 phase supplies it was usual to provide a half size neutral conductor. With the increased use of switched mode power supplies came vastly increased harmonics, which returned to earth via the neutral conductor. Unless full size neutral conductors were used, the cables would burn out, so the wiring regs changed to acknowledge this.

[b0atman]

I am convinced that wherever there is a test to be passed there are people looking after their jobs. MOT for instance, if it wasn't dangerous last year why is it suddenly a risk? ie failing on the loss of vision caused by a chip in the screen you hadn't noticed. IEE, Regs currently on 17th edition and 18th being worked on. Again, if it wasn't dangerous then why is it now? 17 editions and still needing to be superseded suggests either the job needs to go to someone competent to sort out the mess or new regs are just there to keep the compilers in their jobs.

I agree with you Sir Nibble the whole BSS is a money making enterprise.

The regulations should cover a new or rebuild this 4 year inspection is just another way to self propagate the BSS committee and make money.

People will always fiddle the system thus defeating any inspection certificate.

The job should be done right first off .

The electrical side of test says no solid conductors why. for e.g what is wrong with 2.5 mm solid cable for sockets Ships used solid core cable probably still do

what vibration does a narrowboat have to break a strand of properly installed wire.

Now we have RCD coming in on boat why if installation is protected by a bankside rcd ,Agree if inverter or generator fed but why are these peces of equipment not fitted with correct protection ? nuff said

[Radiomariner]

I agree with you Sir Nibble the whole BSS is a money making enterprise.

The regulations should cover a new or rebuild this 4 year inspection is just another way to self propagate the BSS committee and make money.

People will always fiddle the system thus defeating any inspection certificate.

The job should be done right first off .

The electrical side of test says no solid conductors why. for e.g what is wrong with 2.5 mm solid cable for sockets Ships used solid core cable probably still do

what vibration does a narrowboat have to break a strand of properly installed wire.

Now we have RCD coming in on boat why if installation is protected by a bankside rcd ,Agree if inverter or generator fed but why are these peces of equipment not fitted with correct protection ? nuff said

Couple of misconceptions.

The BSS is a non profit organisation.

 

Having worked most of my life on sea going ships I can assure that they do not permit solid core cables (Except for inside pre-constructed fittings and control cabinets) whereas the BSS dropped the requirement for this check some time ago although they consider multi strand wire as "best practice" (you must be looking at a very old version of the BSS Guide, 1992 perhaps,) I no longer have a copy) I do believe that stranded wire is a requirement of the Recreational Craft Directive and marine electricians will generally frown on solid core 'house' wiring.

 

Residual Current Devices are not mandatory, only "advisory" with the BSS. The 'B' in BSS is for boat not shoreside installations, Recent inclusion of marina's into electrical regulations does nothing to protect boats not in marina's. As boats move from location to location it is very good advice to have their own RCD.

 

Edited for punctuation.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Radiomariner

[b0atman]

Bss non profit making plenty of people now making money from it

Ships I have been on lots of pyrotenax cable used this has solid cores modern ships maybe not so.

Boats moving from location to location should only be plugging into a RCD protected socket

BSS as I have said should be an installation guide specification which older boats can be brought up to at owners disgression.

What is point of the 4 year checks when the next day idiots can and will alter things like ventilation.

The concept of doing something to stop deaths on board is admirable and with the gas and petrol has certainly made a big difference.

But it is now getting silly

People are killed by co and fire yet detectors are not compulsory on new boats and are only advisory ??

[Radiomariner]

Yes, Pyro or MI cable with solid cores is used on ships, but it, as I recall, is a specialised (fireproof) cable, used, in my experience, primarily for fire detection and alarm, and instrumentation systems. Not for current carrying electrical supply. The outer copper sheath makes it more robust., and comparatively expensive.

 

Yes, I earn a little money from BSS examinations. Not enough to make a living. I do not personally know any examiner that makes a living from BSS alone In my case after necessary expenses and fuel cost my best income to date has been £1400 per year. The office staff (five or six persons) of course draw a liveable salary. None of them drive luxury cars or live in mansions.

 

Some years ago I could always tell when the car belonging to my neighbours son was due for it's MOT Off would come the big fat alloy wheels, the suspension system stripped down and all original components put back for MOT day, such people are an extreme minority, and the same applies to boaters. Most will conform to BSS standard and leave it at that. However safety standards have to be met. Boats are always subject to modification, perhaps we should arrange for an inspection every year, or perhaps every six months! Perhaps 'spot' checks when you are out cruising may be more effective? No I do not think you would like that.

 

I have already made some points about CO detectors. Before these devices can be made mandatory, Manufacturers, boat builders, lawyers and a plethora of others including boat owner groups, have to be brought in and have to agree.

You may be surprised at the number of boat owners I meet who consider sensors as an unnecessary expense because, they, the owners "are aware and careful"