Author Topic: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two (Read 24699 times)

Badger · « **Reply #45 on:** October 27, 2012, 07:14:03 PM »

Quote........"be demonstrated to meet or exceed the performance criteria"

So let me get this right, the 65 million people of the UK, with a larger per capita usage of gas, in some places packed in very dense populations, in very similar western style design buildings with probably the same if not worse weather conditions and used since the year 2000 (and still in use)........ARE CONSIDERED WHAT??

Wouldn't that be considered to demonstrate a meeting or exceeding of the criteria?? Surely its a matter of physics and reality, not when you wrote it down, it is either safe or unsafe.

A powered flue in NZ would perform the exact same as a flue in UK, unless they go the other way.... like the water down a plug hole, LOL.

It appears that it comes down to bureaucracy, politics and connections..... not common sense and transparency....

Of interest...Mr Stannard just did a presentation at a certain plumbing group's AGM, along with Max Pederson.....hhhmmmm?

bowtieboy · « **Reply #46 on:** October 27, 2012, 08:28:38 PM »

badger, this is clearly nonsense!
(Clause 3.1.2 gives guidance on the application of Part 3. I consider my earlier advice to you that Energy Safety does not consider that applying a mixture of standards to establish compliance with Part 1 of NZS 5261 is best practice for domestic or similar gas installations and does not support such an approach is consistent with NZS 5261.)
since when did you say you where mixing standards?

?
as i understand it, (and correct me if i am wrong) you have used the British standard to comply with the ONLY mandatory part of the code...part one.
My question to you Badger is, do you believe that your installation complies with the British standard completely?.... then it ALSO complies with part 1 of nzs5261 and you are legally in the RIGHT.full stop. stannard is wrong, and clearly has had a guts full of talking to you.,which is wrong.
You have already proved that your installation is safe by stating that the customer has had no issues with products of combustion entering the house,as we as gas fitters using common sense and experience fully know, a power flue of this type mounted 250mm off the wall expelling products of combustion away from the house will dissipate with air and any air mix that would move back into a open window will be completely safe.FACT !....oh how do i know you ask?

its call experience!!!just 20 years with this one product !!and i have installed hundreds of Bosch, rinnai, rheems, palomas.
regards

Badger · « **Reply #47 on:** October 27, 2012, 09:13:31 PM »

I think he is saying that you can't mix 5261 with this British standard, but I am using it as an alternative TO 5261, but even so if you use one code to size the pipe(friction along length is a constant, unless on another planet) and you use another code to site the flue terminal and appliance, whats the problem......unless its because if he says its OK them I am 100% innocent....after loosing my house and business over some thing I tried to warn about for 6 years, asking an MP three years before the explosion, the explosion happened in April 2009, check out the date of this letter(attached) sent to the Board by Nick Smith MP and another subsequent letter asking Williamson for someone to look into it..but still waiting.....

Badger · « **Reply #48 on:** October 27, 2012, 09:20:18 PM »

AND PEOPLE WONDER WHY I GO ON AND ON.... AND USE NAUGHTY WORDS

Badger · « **Reply #49 on:** August 01, 2014, 05:57:21 PM »

So an MP can forget flying by helicopter to a mansion hosted by a really big German guy and he can't remember receiving $25 000, but he can adduce new evidence for his appeal..........

I did nothing wrong, got framed, but I can't adduce any new evidence for my appeal....and loose everything.

That sounds fair.

gordyplum · « **Reply #50 on:** August 01, 2014, 08:34:26 PM »

Badger, as soon as that idiot Banks opened his mouth I thought of what you had related regarding your case. Trouble is that he is very much part of the problem pervading all parts of this , very corrupt ,governance of the country

Subject / Started by	Replies / Views	Last post
Possible new standard for gas Audit Started by aboutgas	0 Replies 2375 Views	June 26, 2011, 09:42:43 PM by aboutgas
British tapware compatability Started by Sonnyboy	3 Replies 2228 Views	April 11, 2013, 09:33:07 AM by Enn
Alternative firefighting water supply SNZ PAS 4509:2008 Started by Enn	0 Replies 2038 Views	November 22, 2014, 03:49:59 PM by Enn
The apprentice days are over! Carrying licence cards legally mandatory Started by newguy	7 Replies 4582 Views	November 08, 2010, 06:34:09 PM by Thunderhead

In a forum (BBCode)	[url=https://www.plumbers.nz/codes-standards-health-and-safety/10/british-standard-as-an-alternative-to-non-mandatory-part-two/1236/]British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two[/url]
In a site/blog (HTML)	<a href="https://www.plumbers.nz/codes-standards-health-and-safety/10/british-standard-as-an-alternative-to-non-mandatory-part-two/1236/">British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two</a>

Author Topic: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two (Read 24699 times)

Badger

Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two

bowtieboy

Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two

Badger

Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two

Badger

Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two

Badger

Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two

gordyplum

Re: British Standard as an alternative to non mandatory part two

Share Topic

Similar Topics

Possible new standard for gas Audit

British tapware compatability

Alternative firefighting water supply SNZ PAS 4509:2008

The apprentice days are over! Carrying licence cards legally mandatory