Jump to content

Featured Posts

Hi, our boat has just failed its BSS because of the gas fridge, which we never use and was in the boat when we bought it. Does anyone know how to remove a gas fridge? Thank you!

 

 

Why has it failed?

 

its presence isnt enough to fail it, if there is a leak in the pipework fix it and use it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, our boat has just failed its BSS because of the gas fridge, which we never use and was in the boat when we bought it. Does anyone know how to remove a gas fridge? Thank you!

 

 

First class case for an appeal to BSS against the fail in my opinion.

 

Which BSS regulation did it 'fail' on? Exactly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A potential problem you can run in to if removing any gas device from a boat is as follows.

 

Any appliance is either likely to be on a "tee" off of the main pipe, feeding other devices, or the last thing on that pipe. You can of course get a competant person to simply remove the appliance, and put a proper cap on the end of the pipe.

However the BSS specificies that the pipework should not have unnecessary joints, and doing this will typically leave a situation where there is one "tee" fitting and oine end cap no longer required, (I have assumed any individual isolater tap is removed with the appliance).

That is 4 joints more than you now need, (three on the tee, and one on the end cap).

 

However there is ambiguity, because I believe the BSS also used to refer to disabled equipment being properly capped off, (not sure if it still does), so it may be an individual examiner decision whether a disconnected, but "live" spur constitutes too many joints or not.

 

The best solution would be to replace the entire feed pipe between the two nearest appliance tees in each direction, thereby avoiding joints that do not need to be there.

 

This requires a "competent person", but if the boat is your main residence there are additional rules about who can make changes to the gas system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also appeal the decision unless there is something you have not told us.

 

As I recall the BSS refers to "unnecessary joints", as Alan says. The BSS examiner has demanded that the gas fridge gets removed before issuing a certificate so removal IS (on the face of it a BSS demand). So if the spur pipe is properly capped or the T is replaced with a straight connector the pipework does NOT have any unnecessary joints. The joints are necessary in pursuance of obtaining a BSS certificate.

 

As long a such joints are easily accessible for inspection I would argue the case for them.

 

I would urge you to appeal and also identify the examiner who issued this failure notice so others are protected from him - does he happen to have an electric fridges for sale or a mate who fits them?

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I would also appeal the decision unless there is something you have not told us.

 

As I recall the BSS refers to "unnecessary joints", as Alan says. The BSS examiner has demanded that the gas fridge gets removed before issuing a certificate so removal IS (on the face of it a BSS demand). So if the spur pipe is properly capped or the T is replaced with a straight connector the pipework does NOT have any unnecessary joints. The joints are necessary in pursuance of obtaining a BSS certificate.

 

As long a such joints are easily accessible for inspection I would argue the case for them.

 

I would urge you to appeal and also identify the examiner who issued this failure notice so others are protected from him - does he happen to have an electric fridges for sale or a mate who fits them?

 

 

Quite. Because I've read the BSS rules many many times and never noticed anything banning gas fridges, so I think the BSS examiner needs calling to account on this.

 

I could be wrong though, and there is something in the BSS he is relying on. I doubt it though, and I think the OP should mount an appeal. Its a straightforward and well defined process IIRC.

 

Perhaps Rob@BSSOffice might join this thread and explain the process? (Or confirm gas fridges actually are banned!)

Or a simpler, informal route would be for the OP to phone the BSS office and ask them to clarify the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may be wrong, but I didn't take it that the BSS fail was because there was a gas fridge, but that it was causing a detectable loss of pressure or was otherwise malfunctioning (flame failure device not working, yellow flame at pilot?)

 

Of course the mere presence of a gas fridge is not a BSS fail

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may be wrong, but I didn't take it that the BSS fail was because there was a gas fridge, but that it was causing a detectable loss of pressure or was otherwise malfunctioning (flame failure device not working, yellow flame at pilot?)

 

 

You're reading a lot into what the OP didn't say! But you could well be right.

 

We need to hear back from the OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

You're reading a lot into what the OP didn't say! But you could well be right.

 

We need to hear back from the OP.

Yes, I agree.

 

It would be an awful shame to hoof a perfectly serviceable fridge on a BSS testers whim.

 

Equally, if the OP has left out relevant facts relating to the fridges condition the BSS bod could be coming under unfounded scrutiny!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I agree.

 

It would be an awful shame to hoof a perfectly serviceable fridge on a BSS testers whim.

 

Equally, if the OP has left out relevant facts relating to the fridges condition the BSS bod could be coming under unfounded scrutiny!

 

I think we all accept that which is why I said the bit about "if you have not told us something".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think we all accept that which is why I said the bit about "if you have not told us something".

Quite!

 

It's a shame threads like this develop in this manor, a cry for help then bugger all leaving us guessing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all,

Thanks very much for the advice.

It failed because the flue from the back of the fridge is not going out of the back of the boat properly apparently.

It is a bit of a mystery because it didn't fail last time and I haven't changed anything. But I wasn't there when the guy came to do it so couldn't ask him myself.

I never use the fridge - indeed have never used it - so thought it might just be easier to get rid.

But maybe I should appeal instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all,

Thanks very much for the advice.

It failed because the flue from the back of the fridge is not going out of the back of the boat properly apparently.

It is a bit of a mystery because it didn't fail last time and I haven't changed anything. But I wasn't there when the guy came to do it so couldn't ask him myself.

I never use the fridge - indeed have never used it - so thought it might just be easier to get rid.

But maybe I should appeal instead.

I would, ours passed with an advisory about the flue. I extended it many years ago to reach the original hull fitting - a waeco fridge has the flue on the opposite side to the original Electrolux fridge.

 

The wording was 'flue has been extended and may effect performance' it doesn't make a jot of difference in my installation.

 

not a reason to fail it at all.

 

You can always ditch the flue completely. MtB advocates running without one, I'm not keen but there appears to be no technical reason why you shouldn't.

Edited by gazza
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, I will definitely look into appealing. Thanks gazza and everyone else.

A rather keen bss bod failed our friends Fairline Carrera because the anchor chain locker doubled as the gas bottle locker. It was correctly vented, the bottle secure and free from leaks. His reason for failure was the winch motor could cause a spark.

Had he known what he was on about it wouldn't even have been an advisory - a lofrans winch motor is IP66 rated - no chance of water getting in our a spark getting out!

The solution? Use a different bss bod who knows what he's on about!

 

:cheers:

Edited by gazza
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just passed ours, although I was most amused by the examiner's 'amps an hour' blah! I think he had 'done the course' and remembered some numbers, but he didn't really know what he was talking about. I didn't attempt to put him right!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all,

Thanks very much for the advice.

It failed because the flue from the back of the fridge is not going out of the back of the boat properly apparently.

It is a bit of a mystery because it didn't fail last time and I haven't changed anything. But I wasn't there when the guy came to do it so couldn't ask him myself.

I never use the fridge - indeed have never used it - so thought it might just be easier to get rid.

But maybe I should appeal instead.

 

 

Ok thanks for the update.

 

I would say (very) strictly speaking he is right. If a gas fridge has the optional flue kit fitted, it needs to be fitted correctly. Not bodged, half fitted or fitted improperly.

 

What he appears to have failed to point out are the two other options of 1) removing the improperly fitted flue kit completely and running without it, or 2) fitting it properly.

 

The baot passing last time beautifully illustrates how so much of gas is less a matter of fact as a more a matter of opinion. The previous BSS bod thought it was fitted adequately, this more recent bod didn't. Or are you saying it was the same examiner passed it last time and failed it this?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes the BSS is clear that any flue should not be modified, although our last boat had a somewhat lengthened flue, and passed each time without question.

 

However as MTB and others have said, it is perfectly acceptable that an unmodified flue vents into the cabin, so that would be an easy work around. Our "new" boat is like this, with no external flue.

 

I think that the BSS examiner can expect to see the fridge lit and running though, and check it burns with a clean flame. I would suggest if yours is never used, then it will not have received any attention, and you may not actually know if it will burn cleanly or not. Indeed, if is as temperamental as our old one, you may not even easily light it at all.

 

I don't think "because I don't use it it doesn't matter if it is safe" is acceptable in BSS terms (!) The BSS man needs to satisfy himself if you sold the boat to someone else, and trhey DID use it that it is unlikely to kill them with CO poisoning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes the BSS is clear that any flue should not be modified, although our last boat had a somewhat lengthened flue, and passed each time without question.

 

However as MTB and others have said, it is perfectly acceptable that an unmodified flue vents into the cabin, so that would be an easy work around. Our "new" boat is like this, with no external flue.

 

I think that the BSS examiner can expect to see the fridge lit and running though, and check it burns with a clean flame. I would suggest if yours is never used, then it will not have received any attention, and you may not actually know if it will burn cleanly or not. Indeed, if is as temperamental as our old one, you may not even easily light it at all.

 

I don't think "because I don't use it it doesn't matter if it is safe" is acceptable in BSS terms (!) The BSS man needs to satisfy himself if you sold the boat to someone else, and trhey DID use it that it is unlikely to kill them with CO poisoning.

 

 

Or as is argued by gas bods, 'although you may know not use it Sir, a visitor or guest might turn it ON and use it without your knowledge, so it must be made safe or disconnected'.

 

So yes I think you've put your finger on the problem, I suspect the BSS bod was unable to light it and see it running safely, therefore it has to either be fixed, or it has to go. Maybe he didn't communicate the first option properly or more likely the OP discounted it, not being willing to spend money fixing a gas appliance that is never used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A rather keen bss bod failed our friends Fairline Carrera because the anchor chain locker doubled as the gas bottle locker. It was correctly vented, the bottle secure and free from leaks. His reason for failure was the winch motor could cause a spark.

Had he known what he was on about it wouldn't even have been an advisory - a lofrans winch motor is IP66 rated - no chance of water getting in our a spark getting out!

The solution? Use a different bss bod who knows what he's on about!

:cheers:

I'm not sure you are quite right there. Ip66 means it's dust tight and can stand a jet of water. It's not the same as intrinsically safe so I think potentially the winch could ignite an explosive gas mixture If it sparked and the gas/air mix in the locker was right...

 

So maybe the Bss bod was correct actually.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure you are quite right there. Ip66 means it's dust tight and can stand a jet of water. It's not the same as intrinsically safe so I think potentially the winch could ignite an explosive gas mixture If it sparked and the gas/air mix in the locker was right...

 

So maybe the Bss bod was correct actually.....

Yes, I would fail that on the same grounds. It's not so much a question of a spark getting out but of gas getting in. IP66 does not guarantee it to be gas tight. I would need to see certification/evidence of intrinsic safety.

Depending on the layout/size of the gas/chain locker I could have serious doubts about the suitability of anchor chain being stowed alongside gas bottles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Depending on the layout/size of the gas/chain locker I could have serious doubts about the suitability of anchor chain being stowed alongside gas bottles.

That would concern me more that the motor. That requires a fault to cause a spark and a gas leak to cause an explosion where as a chain rattling around on a routine basis unless properly controlled could cause more damage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would concern me more that the motor. That requires a fault to cause a spark and a gas leak to cause an explosion where as a chain rattling around on a routine basis unless properly controlled could cause more damage.

 

 

And so we are led deep into the realms of the vanishingly unlikely. It's this ridiculous protecting against minuscule risks that brings the BSS into disrepute.

 

How many deaths or serious injuries, (or even just substantial explosions) have been caused in the last ten years by chain being stored in gas lockers? None is the answer, I suspect.

 

 

 

 

(Speeling ejit.)

Edited by Mike the Boilerman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.