Back Boiler

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

You see, this is what I don't understand. If both the firefront and the boiler need to be fully operational, with gas being supplied to both parts, for either one to function then can someone please tell me how the boiler part can continue running safely when the gas supply to the fire part has been completely disconnected?

And yes, this was performed by a registered Corgi gasman! The reason being that it is apparently unsafe for a person to sleep in the same room where there is a gas fire so when my nan was too ill to get upstairs and had to sleep in the living room they cut off the gas supply to her firefront so she couldn't use it. The back boiler continued to run as normal

So surely, if the fire isn't needed for the boiler to continue working, it should be ok to remove the decorative front from the fire in order to fit a vented radiator cover, rather than have to look at an ugly firefront that is neither use nor ornament????

The fire can be isolated from the gas mains by closing a 3 way valve on the gas supply pipe. This means the gas still gets to the boiler but not the fire. The fire has to remain in place even though it is isolated because if it were removed it would leave an open ended gas pipe which is against regs.

Isolated and disconnected are two different things.

The 'decorative fire front' also contains the fire and can't be removed because the manufacturers designed the fire to work with all those parts in place. Removing bits and pieces from a fire surround may cause dangerous gases to spill back in to the room etc.

Basically, even though it may be damned ugly to look at it has been designed to do a job and shouldn't be played around with. Even painting the surrounds is against regs and would get it condemned.

J

Katieben wrote: »

is it possible to use radiator cover to put over the fire? so keep ugly front in place but hide with radiator cover?

As long as it is well perforated I cannot see a problem. Clearly the boiler burner must be able to get enough air for combustion but I think a radiator cover would provide enough free area for the air supply.

Of course there may well be some regulation that says you must not obstruct the air passage to the boiler in any way. So there may be some regulatory issue but I am sure from a technical point of view it would be OK.

My main concern, on reflection, is that someone might "cover the cover". That is put a decorative cloth or something similar over the radiator cover. This would certainly make the situation dangerous, so maybe a radiator cover is inadvisable. I have though actually seen this done with the gas fire in place, fire off but the boiler on, even then the family concerned survived, but definitely not a good idea.

We bought our hourse in 2002 with a back boiler system. It was a pain to begin with - constantly running out of hot water. Then we got an electric shower fitted last year - OK no more problems with the water. Around xmas last year, we started having "issues" with the back boiler. One night we thought there had been a series of earthquakes as the house was shaking (or so it seemed) and we discovered that the system had been overheating or something causing huge tremors in the tank (or something similar?) At the start of September, the system failed and we had to get an engineer to look at it as we had no hot water or heating. He had to replace the main unit and that cost around £200 with the labour. Anyway, that was sorted, and then 4 weeks or so ago, we got home from a dinner party and the living room stank of gas.....we quickly turned everything off and tested it again in the morning and sure enough gas started leaking so we thought it'd be simple...engineer came out and said....it's not repairable.......so unexpectedly, we end up with a bil for nearly £2k for a new boiler................combi this time.

Glad we got it done.....wouldn't be without hot water on deman now....

Going back to the question....I wouldn't now knowing waht I do, buy a house with a back boiler.

Woby_Tide wrote: »

You'd sacrifice a potentially perfectly adequate house that matched all your criteria on the basis it has a back boiler that could be replaced/rectified with (going on current prices) about 1% of the property 'value' spent? It's a bit like rejecting properties on the basis of not liking the curtains or wallpaper, bizarre behaviour IMO.

Good morning: Comparing the rejection of a property on the basis of its central heating system to disliking the 'curtains or wallpaper' is a flawed analogy. An amazing number of 'completely renovated' properties have appeared on the market down here with the original back boilers and rewireable fuse consumer units..potential buyers should be more concerned about what lies beneath:eek: ... rejecting a property with a BBU is the buyer's perogative. Caveat emptor.

HTH

Canucklehead