Jump to content

Gas bottle size


MHS

Featured Posts

3 minutes ago, Tacet said:

But my father told me that 2cwt sacks were previously in use- and wikipedia offer some support for a unit known as the large sack  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_(unit)

But seems to suggest it only as a naval thing, and that they were moved around on, and discharged from sack trucks.

 

I can't see it as practical for sacks that needed to be manually loaded on to a cart or lorry, then carried often considerable distances on a man's back, and discharged into a bunker, "coal hole" or similar, (or in some areas of the country presumably the bath!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, alan_fincher said:

But seems to suggest it only as a naval thing, and that they were moved around on, and discharged from sack trucks.

 

I can't see it as practical for sacks that needed to be manually loaded on to a cart or lorry, then carried often considerable distances on a man's back, and discharged into a bunker, "coal hole" or similar, (or in some areas of the country presumably the bath!).

Off topic perhaps but up to WW11 agriculture handled (manually) bags of over 1cwt.   Weight depending on what was in them e.g. Wheat (from memory 3 bushels) 1.6cwt and fertiliser (superphosphate I think) 1.7 cwt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jerra said:

Off topic perhaps but up to WW11 agriculture handled (manually) bags of over 1cwt.   Weight depending on what was in them e.g. Wheat (from memory 3 bushels) 1.6cwt and fertiliser (superphosphate I think) 1.7 cwt.

In 1968 (we had just bought the farm) we harvested Barley. The combine was an old model that a couple of people rode on the side and filled sacks directly from the Auger. The full sacks weighed in at between 1cwt and 1.5cwt depending on how quickly you could turn the divert flap over to the other persons sack.

 

When the loading platform was full. these sacks were then manually loaded onto a tractor and trailer, manually unloaded and carried into the barn for storage. We all carried our share of sacks - no 'elfin safety those days.

 

A recent study showed that soldiers carried between 97 and 135 lbs into battle.

A 'minimum' weight for a short patrol would be 60 lbs which was usually doubled if the patrol was for an extended period.

Special Ops regularly carry 160lbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/09/2018 at 20:54, Alan de Enfield said:

Surely you have to at BSS time - under the 'new' regs the examiner has to see the locker empty, and, he is not allowed to disconnect / lift / re-connect the cylinders.

The BBS examinations i have  arranged to  date have been completed without a need for me to be present.

That seems to be the end of that arrangement........unless the examiner agrees in advance that he can lift my 6.4kg cylinder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chewbacka said:

Reading bollocks

I can't help you with that. I find being selective in what one chooses to read on the internet works well.

 

 

Edited by MJG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MartynG said:

The BBS examinations i have  arranged to  date have been completed without a need for me to be present.

That seems to be the end of that arrangement........unless the examiner agrees in advance that he can lift my 6.4kg cylinder.

The examiners 'bend the rules' in many mysterious ways - sometimes even 'passing' things which should be automatic fail, and failing things that are 'advisory' only.

Its the luck of the draw as to which type you get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Jerra said:

Off topic perhaps but up to WW11 agriculture handled (manually) bags of over 1cwt.   Weight depending on what was in them e.g. Wheat (from memory 3 bushels) 1.6cwt and fertiliser (superphosphate I think) 1.7 cwt.

Corn was over a hundred weight well into 60s in Norfolk, but I can't remember what it was.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The examiners 'bend the rules' in many mysterious ways - sometimes even 'passing' things which should be automatic fail, and failing things that are 'advisory' only.

Its the luck of the draw as to which type you get.

 My present boat had more than a year of the BSS certificate  to run when I bought it.  Faults discovered at the pre purchase survey prevented a fresh BSS being issued . That was  something I could not dispute. 

Other than that I have, with a little advance preparation,  had no any issues getting a boat through a BSS  exam. 

Presumably some defective  gas lockers have been observed and this is why the examination has been extended. 

 

As far as manual  lifting is concerned , and as an example , 20kg is regarded as a maximum weight for one man repeatedly manual handling building blocks   in the construction industry .

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, MartynG said:

As far as manual  lifting is concerned , and as an example , 20kg is regarded as a maximum weight for one man repeatedly manual handling building blocks   in the construction industry .

Doesn't the maximum weight depend on 'what you are doing with it'.

I know when in business our 'packers' all had different weight limits depending on if they were sitting, standing, lifting straight, or lifting and twisting, the height of lift and frequency of lifting.

 

Found one of the charts …………………

 

Image result for manual handling maximum weights

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Doesn't the maximum weight depend on 'what you are doing with it'.

I know when in business our 'packers' all had different weight limits depending on if they were sitting, standing, lifting straight, or lifting and twisting, the height of lift and frequency of lifting.

 

Found one of the charts …………………

 

 

Yes it does 

In construction 20kg is considered a max weight for blockwork and that tends to be applied to other  items  which may need o be picked up off the ground  an placed somewhere else . This action may of course be repeated many times and that needs to be taken into account. The 20kg limit is commonly applied to other construction items . 

On a boat the gas locker arrangements no doubt vary considerably .   

 

I think they should say the examiner is expected to lift small gas cylinders up to a certain weight  , say, 20kg ..........or say 10kg ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, MartynG said:

Yes it does 

In construction 20kg is considered a max weight for blockwork and that tends to be applied to other  items  which may need o be picked up off the ground  an placed somewhere else . This action may of course be repeated many times and that needs to be taken into account. The 20kg limit is commonly applied to other construction items . 

On a boat the gas locker arrangements no doubt vary considerably .   

 

I think they should say the examiner is expected to lift small gas cylinders up to a certain weight  , say, 20kg ..........or say 10kg ?

A 13kg propane cylinder when full weighs close on 30kg and often it’s not an easy lift from a gas locker, so I can’t see many examiners agreeing to lift those.  Normally it’s a controlled ‘drop’ into the locker and an empty one out so not a problem, but I can see some boaters will struggle to safely lift a full cylinder out of a locker.  Back injuries will be the consequence of this.............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The total weight of a 13kg gas cylinder is around 30kg for the more modern type, with the older style ones that have a bolt on handle at nearer 40kg - the exact weight is stamped onto the aluminium disc below the valve.

 The OP could consider using one of the alternative suppliers as most use a 12kg cylinder that are much slimmer, and often slightly lighter construction. The main attraction of Calor is the ability to exchange them anywhere but if only using the occasional one this isn't so important. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MartynG said:

Yes it does 

In construction 20kg is considered a max weight for blockwork and that tends to be applied to other  items  which may need o be picked up off the ground  an placed somewhere else . This action may of course be repeated many times and that needs to be taken into account. The 20kg limit is commonly applied to other construction items . 

On a boat the gas locker arrangements no doubt vary considerably .   

 

I think they should say the examiner is expected to lift small gas cylinders up to a certain weight  , say, 20kg ..........or say 10kg ?

Agreed - but 'weight aside' It could be that the instruction to not disconnect / connect the cylinders is down to the examiners often not being 'qualified' to make gas connections ?

 

Just thinking about the reasoning behind the instruction - I don't know if connecting a cylinder up is 'making a gas connection' ?

 

How many cylinders can actually be lifted out and placed on the deck without disconnecting - mine cannot and it may be 'too late' once he has struggled to lift it out (26kg+) rotated it and found it won't stand on the floor and have to put it back in the locker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Agreed - but 'weight aside' It could be that the instruction to not disconnect / connect the cylinders is down to the examiners often not being 'qualified' to make gas connections 

If they can test the gas system surely they can change a gas cylinder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, MartynG said:

If they can test the gas system surely they can change a gas cylinder.

But can they ?

Are they allowed ?

 

Why do the BSS say :

 

LPG cylinder lockers - boat owners must ensure the BSS Examiner can carry out careful checking of the LPG cylinder locker for condition, including the removal of all loose portable items, base protection mats, removable false floors and the temporary removal of connected LPG cylinders.

Discuss your LPG cylinder locker arrangements with your examiner in advance of the examination as this may require your attendance or you to make prior arrangements involving service agents.

LPG lockers not accessible enough to allow an assessment of condition will involve the BSS Examiner having to return to carry out the check with the obstruction removed.

 

How many BSS examiners are Gas safe registered & Boat LPG competent ? Is the one you have chosen ?

 

How many BSS examiners are only authorised to 'press' a 'bubble tester' ?

 

Carrying out 'work on the gas system of boats used primarily for residential or domestic purposes fall within scope of a piece of  UK legislation known as the Gas Safety [Installation and Use] Regulations (GSIUR).

As such, the law demands that anyone contracted to 'work' on the LPG system of a boat in scope must be (LPG boats-competent) Gas Safe registered.

As the definition of 'work' covers the removal and replacement of a screw nipple on a gas test point, the scope of the GSIUR includes carrying out BSS LPG tightness test.

Therefore, on a boat in scope of GSIUR, examiners who are not Gas Safe registered can only complete check 7.12.2 (confirming gas tightness) by either:

  • undertaking a gas tightness test using a bubble tester where fitted and correctly located; or,
  • observing the tightness test conducted by a (LPG boats-competent) Gas Safe registered installer
Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

But can they ?

Are they allowed ?

 

Why do the BSS say :

 

LPG cylinder lockers - boat owners must ensure the BSS Examiner can carry out careful checking of the LPG cylinder locker for condition, including the removal of all loose portable items, base protection mats, removable false floors and the temporary removal of connected LPG cylinders.

Discuss your LPG cylinder locker arrangements with your examiner in advance of the examination as this may require your attendance or you to make prior arrangements involving service agents.

LPG lockers not accessible enough to allow an assessment of condition will involve the BSS Examiner having to return to carry out the check with the obstruction removed.

 

How many BSS examiners are Gas safe registered & Boat LPG competent ? Is the one you have chosen ?

 

How many BSS examiners are only authorised to 'press' a 'bubble tester' ?

 

Carrying out 'work on the gas system of boats used primarily for residential or domestic purposes fall within scope of a piece of  UK legislation known as the Gas Safety [Installation and Use] Regulations (GSIUR).

As such, the law demands that anyone contracted to 'work' on the LPG system of a boat in scope must be (LPG boats-competent) Gas Safe registered.

As the definition of 'work' covers the removal and replacement of a screw nipple on a gas test point, the scope of the GSIUR includes carrying out BSS LPG tightness test.

Therefore, on a boat in scope of GSIUR, examiners who are not Gas Safe registered can only complete check 7.12.2 (confirming gas tightness) by either:

  • undertaking a gas tightness test using a bubble tester where fitted and correctly located; or,
  • observing the tightness test conducted by a (LPG boats-competent) Gas Safe registered installer

 

Indeed, given that bubble testers can give a false sense of security,  because the leak needs to be relatively large before it shows up compared to a manometer,  surely there is a case for all BSS examiners to be trained to use a manometer anew registered with GasSafe? 

 

 

(I will now walk slowly away having lit the blue touchpaper ?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Tacet said:

 

But my father told me that 2cwt sacks were previously in use- and wikipedia offer some support for a unit known as the large sack  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_(unit)

 

20 hours ago, alan_fincher said:

But seems to suggest it only as a naval thing, and that they were moved around on, and discharged from sack trucks.

 

I can't see it as practical for sacks that needed to be manually loaded on to a cart or lorry, then carried often considerable distances on a man's back, and discharged into a bunker, "coal hole" or similar, (or in some areas of the country presumably the bath!).

The link doesn't say it was an exclusively navy thing - nor that sack trolleys were invariably used.  I don't claim any direct experience - but my Dad wasn't in the Navy.   It does seem remarkable (or unbelievable) these days - which is why I made the post.  The kids today...

 

Returning to the one CWT sacks of recent years, the technique of the coal man was well considered.  The sacks were taken off the truck at shoulder height and rolled around he shoulder into the bunker - which meant that he didn't have to raise the sack manually.  If the bunker was too high for easy discharge, a sack or two were put down on the ground to form a step.

 

The coal man wore a leather wimple (or is there another name) of hat and shoulder. It must have eased chafing and reduced the quantity of coal dust passing between neck and collar.  Even then, the annual delivery was something of interest to me.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, cuthound said:

 

Indeed, given that bubble testers can give a false sense of security,  because the leak needs to be relatively large before it shows up compared to a manometer,  surely there is a case for all BSS examiners to be trained to use a manometer anew registered with GasSafe? 

 

 

(I will now walk slowly away having lit the blue touchpaper ?)

Snag is cost. Our local gas guy (now retired, leaving nobody between us and Glasgow) revealed that before doing the caravan and boat LPG courses, he had to be qualified in normal, house, installations. IIRC, it cost him about a grand and a half, and he only really intended to work on caravans, but the "boat" course was only another day ... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Iain_S said:

Snag is cost. Our local gas guy (now retired, leaving nobody between us and Glasgow) revealed that before doing the caravan and boat LPG courses, he had to be qualified in normal, house, installations. IIRC, it cost him about a grand and a half, and he only really intended to work on caravans, but the "boat" course was only another day ... 

Our local boat LPG chap actually lives on a boat, but it got to the point a couple of years ago he wasn't doing enough boat work to justify the ~£400 fee for the boaty bit.

 

We now carry a pile of his business cards on the boat and hand them out to anyone who mentions gas to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, cuthound said:

 

Indeed, given that bubble testers can give a false sense of security,  because the leak needs to be relatively large before it shows up compared to a manometer,  surely there is a case for all BSS examiners to be trained to use a manometer anew registered with GasSafe? 

 

 

(I will now walk slowly away having lit the blue touchpaper ?)

 

9 hours ago, Iain_S said:

Snag is cost. Our local gas guy (now retired, leaving nobody between us and Glasgow) revealed that before doing the caravan and boat LPG courses, he had to be qualified in normal, house, installations. IIRC, it cost him about a grand and a half, and he only really intended to work on caravans, but the "boat" course was only another day ... 

The BSS test element seems like an easy issue to resolve. There's no requirement for the guy using a manometer to test the integrity of a boat system be qualified in home gas installation, or any gas installation at all, is there?  A short course and practical exam in how to do the test properly would seem to suffice.  It doesn't resolve the wider issue of the cost of training for those who wish to work only on boat or caravan gas, but that's a separate subject I guess.  I wonder what MtB thinks?

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Sea Dog said:

 

The BSS test element seems like an easy issue to resolve. There's no requirement for the guy using a manometer to test the integrity of a boat system be qualified in home gas installation, or any gas installation at all, is there?  A short course and practical exam in how to do the test properly would seem to suffice.  It doesn't resolve the wider issue of the cost of training for those who wish to work only on boat or caravan gas, but that's a separate subject I guess.  I wonder what MtB thinks?

The law is clear, if a live aboard boat any paid work on the gas system (which your bss manometer check is) must be by a registered person.  There is no option for a ‘manometer only’ registration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chewbacka said:

The law is clear, if a live aboard boat any paid work on the gas system (which your bss manometer check is) must be by a registered person.  There is no option for a ‘manometer only’ registration.

Absolutely.  I don't live aboard permanently but my last BSS still involved a registered person and I'd much prefer to have a proper manometer test.  I'm merely musing that there could be a place for such a limited qualification so that we could all have the benefit of the manometer test. 

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.