Archive 07

Gas News Forum: OLD GAS FORUM: Consumers: Archive 07
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Gradwell (Editor) on Friday, July 20, 2007 - 07:25 pm: Edit Post

Following first qualification ACS is useless. I donít think it is, I know it is. I am now 100% certain. Those that can, sail through on auto-pilot. Others, the same others, struggle every five years on the basics or avoidable mathematics. Clearly ACS is not addressing the real needs. It has served a purpose and now something needs to take its place as a matter of urgency.

The changes since last ACS (on update training) could easily have been contained on one or two A4 sheets.

I am meeting a company next week with a senior engineer (not admin). Their job to update RGI employees, bearing in mind that most in the UK are denied access to the CORGI magazine (where they might see other jobs). My interest is to see if that is happening. Thatís where more focus is needed. We need to prevent problems rather than spend time and money repairing the same problems.

RGIís need brainstorming sessions at their place of work, like admin constantly do in offices where we usually observe they are either, off sick, on leave or in a meeting. How many RGI have the luxury of additional training. Proper training I mean. Relevant training. Yes I have met some at the excellent facilities offered by product manufacturers but more is required.

Plenty of interesting physics and chemistry in CCN1 but once done thatís enough. I still use science, chemistry and maths learnt at secondary school without having to repeat it every five years. It is a huge confidence trick.

Mr or Mrs HSE, it is not working. How much proof do you need. As I keep saying we need a wholly new approach based on sound management principles, not vested interests. We need someone new and untainted by the sickening squalor of cronyism.

My best guess is that ACS will disappear and there will be far more emphasis on auditing and accountability in the field, starting from the top down, following a well defined audit trail. And a loose-leaf gas safety handbook by CORGI or preferably some new body.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mike Bryant (Mike) on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 04:21 pm: Edit Post

Chris Hutt,

Mike Bryant wrote "The correct answer is now 15mbar."

Who says? There's enough confusing misinformation around without any of us posting stuff without identifying the source.


As I said in my post, the source was a question in my ACS CCN1 reassessment exam yesterday. It was one of my ACS questions. I answered 19mbar first attempt, got it wrong, answered 15mbar second attempt and that was right. I'll name the assessment centre if you wish.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By chris hutt (Chrishutt) on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 07:44 pm: Edit Post

Which body set the assessment - CITB? Whoever they are, they are the ones putting this nonsense about. If you could confirm who it was then I will write to them and ask them on what this "correct" answer is based. My guess is that it's just another example of incompetent question drafting.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Gradwell (Editor) on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 07:57 pm: Edit Post

I can confirm that we also were treated to similar Ďnoisesí about pressure losses in peak periods / jack frost etc during our conditioning (BPEC), which urged us to perhaps let-it-go rather than dial the numbers. All very loose and of course onus 100% on us. Come away from the College and what evidence are you clutching to back you up.

Forget it.

Keep it simple. 21 plus or minus 2 or dial the numbers. No one, I repeat no one, can take exception to that. What they do then is their business, you are no longer in the frame.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mike Bryant (Mike) on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 10:25 pm: Edit Post

Chris and Les, I can't remember which body set the assessment, but I think it was BPEC. I CAN remember the 'revision' course tutor saying the latest BS for gas meters says up to 4mBar drop across a meter is 'acceptable'. I noted the comment but not the BS number as my objective was to get through reassessment, not have arguments about stuff.

I'd like to reverse the question. Which normative document would you cite to support 19mbar, not 15mbar, as the minimum acceptable pressure at the meter outlet?

If you have a reference, I'll contact my assessment centre on Monday, ask them for THEIR reference then quote yours in response and see what they have to say. I'm certain they'll have a reference, it's just that I didn't write it down when I was there.

'Battle of the BSs' coming up, I suspect!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Gradwell (Editor) on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 10:37 pm: Edit Post

BS6400-1:2006

6.1 Pressure absorption

The pressure absorption across the primary meter installation shall not exceed 4 mbar at a flow rate equivalent to the maximum capacity of the meter, with a DMP of 19 mbar at the outlet of the ECV.

Snip, snip

It is a requirement of BS 6891 that the maximum pressure absorption across the installation pipework is 1 mbar.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mike Bryant (Mike) on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 10:50 pm: Edit Post

So with 19mbar at the ECV as per the BS, and 4 bmar across the meter, this gives 15mbar at the outlet of the meter. Yes?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Gradwell (Editor) on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 11:03 pm: Edit Post

The 4mb is compensated for by (TRANSCO) tweaking the regulator to deliver 21mb + or - at the meter outlet.

Image for fun:

meter


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Gradwell (Editor) on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 11:09 pm: Edit Post

I got TRANSCO out to one at 18 and he changed the regulator. Said they do not do the meters. Proper TRANSCO van. Tested it with U gauge and Ok.

So he said.

I tested it after he'd gone and still 18 so on the phone again. Subby comes out with a meter. Hired van as the firm he worked for when he arrived for work had gone belly up and by the time he arrived he was working for someone else.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By chris hutt (Chrishutt) on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 11:25 pm: Edit Post

"Which normative document would you cite to support 19mbar, not 15mbar, as the minimum acceptable pressure at the meter outlet?"

Gas Safety (installation & Use) Regulations 1998, Reg 33 (1) "Where a person installs a gas appliance... he shall ....examine the appliance and the gas fittings and other works for the supply of gas ....for the purposes of ascertaining whether - ...(b) the operating pressure is as recommended by the manufacturer."

Since most manufacturers are recommending 20 mbar +/- 2 mbar operating pressure, complying with this would effectively require the meter outlet pressure to be at least as high. If not the commissioning of the appliance must be aborted and the gas supply disconnected (see Reg 33,2).


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mike Bryant (Mike) on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 11:37 pm: Edit Post

The 4mb is compensated for by (TRANSCO) tweaking the regulator to deliver 21mb + or - at the meter outlet.

I know they usually do that, but is there a BS that says they HAVE to do that...?

I called TRANSCO out to a 14mbar at the meter outlet once. They attended and said there was nothing they could do. Street pressure was 14bar too. Like it or lump it, he said.... What's a responsible RGI supposed to do then?

I lumped it as the boiler worked and the punter was happy. I'd done my bit by telling them all.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mike Bryant (Mike) on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 11:43 pm: Edit Post

So getting back to my question....

So with 19mbar at the ECV as per the BS, and 4 bmar across the meter, this gives 15mbar at the outlet of the meter. Yes?

I take it you all agree then, 15mbar is within BS limits.

And as Chris points out, many appliances may not be connected to such a supply.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Gradwell (Editor) on Saturday, July 21, 2007 - 11:43 pm: Edit Post

That's the essence. You did all you could and as long as the appliance is safe you record everything and are covered (CYA).

The industry standard is 21 + or - 2 which I assume will be in IGE/UP/1B which I don't have here (but Alan has in Belfast if he's around).

Same applies on next and all jobs. If pressure is down it may not be the street pressure but regulator or meter. Only they can say.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Alan Begley (Atbegley) on Monday, July 23, 2007 - 10:30 am: Edit Post

Hi Les
I do not appear have IGE/UP/1B or can't find it at the moment, but I have had a look at my Domestic Natural Gas Viper Book(for which you can get the up dated pages FOC.) and on page I-4 second paragraph it states.

"Natural gas governors are set and sealed by the gas supplier . They are adjusted to give a working pressure at the meter outlet between 19-23mbars"

I give credence to anything written by the Viper people and assume thay have got this information from the correct source and I would assume the pressure should not drop below this is up to the point of full capicity of the meter.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Gradwell (Editor) on Monday, July 23, 2007 - 10:34 am: Edit Post

Yup and as Mike correctly says it can drop below. Not our problem.

Delegate upwards and dial the numbers. I did loads once at 18mb on one block of neglected flats with long standing tenants.

Thanks.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Steven Gazeley (Sgazeley) on Thursday, July 26, 2007 - 09:25 pm: Edit Post

I have an old Worcester Boiler that needs to be replaced. It is in the old coal cupboard on the side of the house under the stairs. The gas meter is directly above the boiler. The distance from the floor to the underside of the meter is 1150mm. We have been told we need to move the meter. The man from United Utilities who came to look at moving the meter said the current installation was safe (there is a metal plate under the meter), although the current flue comes out the side of the boiler rather than the top. There is nowhere else in the cupboard to move the boiler without major buidling works. We were told we had to move the meter because it was not safe to have the flue just under the meter. Is this correct? According to the installtion guide, a Worcester Bosch 27CDi needs 1112mm height for installation, so it should fit.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By chris hutt (Chrishutt) on Thursday, July 26, 2007 - 09:31 pm: Edit Post

Who told you the existing situation was unsafe? Ask them to indicate the regulations that say that! If they can't, ignore them. It is the responsibility of the installer of the new boiler to ensure that it and it's flue have the necessary clearances.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Steve Hall (Roberts) on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 10:47 pm: Edit Post

I thought I'd post a brief message for the interest of anyone who read my novice ramblings in Archive 5 (March).

I was having trouble finding a solution for a back boiler replacement in a small mid-terrace with upstairs bathroom.

An installation has just been completed with a condensing system boiler (Vaillant Ecotec) in the loft and regular cylinder in the airing cupboard in the living room.

It's early days but I am very pleased. The first floor bathroom was not disrupted at all. Had I gone for a combi in the living room, I would have had to run a 125mm flue through the bathroom.

The gas supply and electrics were extended to the loft with no trouble.

Thames Water wanted £1500 to upgrade the mains so a mains pressure cylinder was ruled out for now.

I've also got a scale remover gadget installed!

Thanks for everyone who posted advice for me in March. I am pretty sure I made a good choice - with the help of an excellent plumber (the only one who believed in my plan). I would recommend a similar set up to others.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Les Gradwell (Editor) on Wednesday, August 08, 2007 - 10:51 pm: Edit Post

Well done I remember that marathon.

Let's have some feedback on your bills when you've enjoyed a few months of energy saving.