magpie patrick Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 Not a question, not a rant, just slight puzzlement. Lutine has had her BSS and failed on three counts: the breather pipe for the diesel was not fireproof, the solid fuel stove not adequately fixed down, and the gas boiler leaked and could not be tested. The breather pipe is now fixed, the stove is being fixed (although the solution is slightly inelegant to avoid having to take the stove out to secure it) and the gas leak fixed. However the boiler won't fire up although pilot light will light. Now, the examiner tells me it needs to fire it up so he can smoke test it, so if it won't go he will fail it. However, if he can test it any fail is only advisory, I will be granted a BSS so long as the test can be carried out, regardless of the outcome of the test This strikes me as odd, very odd. Most of these rules are logical, I can't see the logic of this one... Any comments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoominPapa Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 This strikes me as odd, very odd. Most of these rules are logical, I can't see the logic of this one... Any comments? Seems logical to me. He can't stop you using a boat with a boiler that might kill you, but in order to be allowed to use the boat in that condition, you must be warned about it. He can't warn you unless he can test it. MP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnetman Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 Maybe it has to be shown to fire up and shut down correctly? Possibly? I didn't think a test of the unit itself was needed, just a gas system manometer test Unless the examiner has a reason to believe that the thing is unsafe and may fail to close off the gas after an attempted startup? Sorry just reread and you are talking about a smoke test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magpie patrick Posted August 14, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 Seems logical to me. He can't stop you using a boat with a boiler that might kill you, but in order to be allowed to use the boat in that condition, you must be warned about it. He can't warn you unless he can test it. MP. I can see where you are coming from, but that still doesn't make sense: the same advisory could be given "This boiler could not be tested and can not be regarded as safe to use, but does not damage the integrity of the gas system" OR "This boiler has been tested and does not meet the required standard, it can not be regarded as safe to use but does not damage the integrity of the gas system" OR the implicit warning which is also allowed "There was no boiler on this boat when the boat was tested, if there is one now it can not be regarded as safe to use and we don't even know if the gas system is safe as it has been modified or installed since the test was done" If failing the test mattered, I could see why it would need to be tested to grant a BSS, but if the boiler being lethal is an advisory fail, I can't see why it not working is a mandatory one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtB Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 I didn't think a test of the unit itself was needed, just a gas system manometer test It's a good thing you're not a BSS bod then isn't it?! A 'spillage test' is necessary to show the flue works. (A smoke test is something different, and it is impractical to do one on a Morco BTW.) MtB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magpie patrick Posted August 14, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 It's a good thing you're not a BSS bod then isn't it?! A 'spillage test' is necessary to show the flue works. (A smoke test is something different, and it is impractical to do one on a Morco BTW.) MtB Oh.... What's a spillage test, and why can't a smoke test be done on a Morco.... (I've never had one before, all this would be a lot easier if I knew how the damned thing was supposed to work...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtB Posted August 14, 2014 Report Share Posted August 14, 2014 (edited) A smoke test is where a smoke pellet is lit in the combustion chamber of a conventional-flue appliance with a hot flue. The pellet produces 5 cubic metres of dense smoke in one minute, all of which will flow vertically up the flue and out to atmosphere. The point of this test is to identify the flue terminal on a roof (there may be many close together), and to identify through smoke leakage any leaks in the flue duct where it rises vertically through the building. Hardly appropriate on a Morco with a flue 18" long! A spillage test is where a smoke match, smoke pen or incense stick is used to create a thin trail of smoke. This is used (with the appliance running) to demonstrate that air is being sucked into the flue diverter above the heat exchanger, instead of flue gasses escaping into the boat interior. I once told an elderly and somewhat deaf lady her boiler had failed a spillage test. She was one helluva battle-axe and she repeatedly demanded in a very loud voice to know what on earth a spinach test was, repeatedly mis-hearing me saying 'no, SPILLAGE test'... Her daughter was unable to intervene from laughing... You probably had to be there MtB Edited August 14, 2014 by Mike the Boilerman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magpie patrick Posted August 15, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2014 You probably had to be there MtB No, I didn't.... Was this boiler in the unStable bar? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratty's Retreat Posted August 16, 2014 Report Share Posted August 16, 2014 I have just had an advisory for failing spillage test, as my Morco does not have an external flue just vents through a mushroom. Is this likely to be a major problem? If I have to have an ally chimney I will but would prefer not to. Thanks in advance. John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan de Enfield Posted August 16, 2014 Report Share Posted August 16, 2014 Not from a 'gas-bod' point of view, just common sense. If there is an accident and (either you or) a guest should get carbon-monoxide poisoning you could be subject to a claim of manslaughter, you have not complied with a safety recomendation, and therefore your insurance will be invalid. Is it worth it for the sake of a correct flue ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now