B
Burger
I would say it would be AR above 0.008 and AR for your others. It just states unsatisfactory ratio’s is AR for flued appliance, doesn’t quote any ratio.
Welcome to the forum. Although you can post in any forum, the USA forum is here in case of local regs or laws
Discuss Boiler I. D. For high reading on analysers in the Boilers area at Plumbers Forums
I would say it would be AR above 0.008 and AR for your others. It just states unsatisfactory ratio’s is AR for flued appliance, doesn’t quote any ratio.
If technically not ID it's a seriously poorly boiler and I'd want to cap it.
Remember the regs are just guidelines really and you cant get in too much trouble for being careful, categorise it as you like. ID for me, for a fault I haven't found - but is definitely there.
Remember the regs are just guidelines really and you cant get in too much trouble for being careful, categorise it as you like. ID for me, for a fault I haven't found - but is definitely there.
You cant just categorise as you like. An AR is an AR you cant ID it just because because you haven't found the fault, you find the fault and categorise accordingly.
When I reset my acs there was a section about unsafe procedures and you would of failed it.
Bad advice in my view.
I dont know you,Knapper, so I mean no direct disrespect. Too many reach for the cap kit, just to CYA. We are, generally, reasonaby apid professionals - and should take the job seriously. That includes having the confidence to follow the rules, but to be able to work out the problem. You should not ID a boiler if it is "poorly" - only if there IS an "immediate danger".
And you are wrong - if you wrongly, say, deprive a tenant of heat and HW you could end up being sued, although I cannot say that has ever happened. But if I was the said tenants were my kids or elderly parents in law, I can promise you that you would know about it.
I'm not a cap it and leave kinda guy.
In retrospect my advice was bad and was probably thinking of the badly corroded boiler with holes all over it as detailed above.
As a self employed engineer I have much more control over my jobs and asses them all on their own merit.
If just poor combustion on an otherwise healthy looking boiler then I'd work until the issue was resolved and failing that I'd decide how to categorise it based on it's own merit.
If the boiler was in poor condition and not a lifeline to an elderly or infirm customer then I'd easily find good reason to ID it for compounding issues (like corrosion). The poor combustion is just an alarm to prompt further investigation.
In practice on an AR boiler that I've arranged to replace I'd give the customer the warning notice and then tell them it's ok to use - but then id fail my ACS for that too!
I do get a bee in my bonnet about applying the regs to the letter and like to use my own judgement in the grey areas, I was a commercial engineer and perhaps making judgement calls is more necessary in that sector?
In retrospect my advice was bad and was probably thinking of the badly corroded boiler with holes all over it as detailed above.
As a self employed engineer I have much more control over my jobs and asses them all on their own merit.
If just poor combustion on an otherwise healthy looking boiler then I'd work until the issue was resolved and failing that I'd decide how to categorise it based on it's own merit.
If the boiler was in poor condition and not a lifeline to an elderly or infirm customer then I'd easily find good reason to ID it for compounding issues (like corrosion). The poor combustion is just an alarm to prompt further investigation.
In practice on an AR boiler that I've arranged to replace I'd give the customer the warning notice and then tell them it's ok to use - but then id fail my ACS for that too!
I do get a bee in my bonnet about applying the regs to the letter and like to use my own judgement in the grey areas, I was a commercial engineer and perhaps making judgement calls is more necessary in that sector?
I think the AR/ID classification is too similar in practice, AR wording should make it more acceptable to use the appliance as youd struggle to find a responsible user that would discern any difference between the two, the main difference being that the irresponsible user is unable to use a capped ID appliance?.....
"At risk" is a strange term, at risk of what, who, when?
In my opinion it should be something like
"potentially dangerous, use at your own risk"
Then a disclaimer something like
"The engineer who attended to this boiler has found potentially hazardous elements. This gas appliance should be repaired as soon as possible as it may develop into a more serious problem"
Immediately dangerous is self explanatory and could even be labelled
"This is a dangerous gas appliance and has been isolated from the gas supply for your safety"
I'm lucky in that I generally work for regulars but if your working on large contracts, for the council for example, I bet you get some very awkward situations.
Its bad enough just trying to explain how a filling loop works!
In my opinion it should be something like
"potentially dangerous, use at your own risk"
Then a disclaimer something like
"The engineer who attended to this boiler has found potentially hazardous elements. This gas appliance should be repaired as soon as possible as it may develop into a more serious problem"
Immediately dangerous is self explanatory and could even be labelled
"This is a dangerous gas appliance and has been isolated from the gas supply for your safety"
I'm lucky in that I generally work for regulars but if your working on large contracts, for the council for example, I bet you get some very awkward situations.
Its bad enough just trying to explain how a filling loop works!
Scott_1979
Gas Engineer
- Messages
- 107
Not flueless, open flued such as a back boiler.
B
Burger
The change was brought about because the Coroner said that AR should be treated as more serious than was the case. If you read his statement, I think he meant that EVERYTHING we consider AR or ID should be ID. His proposals were watered down somewhat
What they should of done was put it like an mot fail or advisory but as usual gas safe messed it up.
TBF, gasSafe do not make up the rules. They are simply the masters of the roll.
B
Burger
Was it condemned or just turned off? AR usually gets turned off unless turning off doesn’t remove the risk. Did you investigate the cause?
No. Flueless in this context IS flueless. Flued will cover RS & OF
I Have another one to look at with a high reading but the flue isn't totally corroded. So will be investigating the cause on this.
Too many think it means "At Risk of something in the far future when there could be a yellow moon, but basically I don't like the look of it, and don't have the confidence to decide I can leave it running, rather than risk hypothermia".
bacon_sandwich
Gas Engineer
- Messages
- 254
eeek, i would be yanking my probe out with those readings... lol
B
Burger
Not necessarily, I don’t get too many with high readings and they usually just want adjusting. In your instance though they may need a thorough investigation or new boiler?
Why would a proper clean not have a chance?
Sorry to add to this thread again. I spoke to an older gas engineer about these boilers being condemned for high analayser readings. Alpha he 25s. He stated on a boiler of this age you don't need to analyse them when doing a landlord check. Anyone agree with this?
B
Burger
Matt,
You need to be reading the Mi’s on these boilers, this will, then tell you whether to analyse or not.
You need to be reading the Mi’s on these boilers, this will, then tell you whether to analyse or not.
Similar plumbing topics
Looking at those working gas pressures and the...
- Locked
It’s probably not mate,as long as your doing...
- Locked
Spot on.
- Locked
No. Surely not. That would be... deceitful!
- Locked
Well done subby. It will be the first of many...
- Subby
- Plumbing Jobs | The Job-board
- 12
- 268
- Latest:
- kris
