No not new pipe work. I had the whole system cleaned by a guy specialising in power flushing, that's all he did. He forward and reverse power flushed to remove the debris that had collected in the radiators and the pipe work. All rads where individually disconnected and power flushed. This was after the whole system had been flushed through. The process took five hours from start to finish.
Welcome to the forum. Although you can post in any forum, the USA forum is here in case of local regs or laws
- Thread starter windle poones
- Start date
-
- Tags
- boiler
In retrospect I probably should have gone for a new boiler, maybe a Valliant. I had checked spares availability for the Puma range before making my decision and was told the heat exchanger for the Puma 100 had been discontinued, but all parts were still available for the 80. However that was 2 years ago.
Don't blame you for keeping it. I'm keeping my Glow Worm Ultimate going for as long as I can.
We've taken condensing boilers out which have been 6/7 years old which were beyond repairing. Admittedly these were probably ones that haven't been well maintained or fitted well.
We've taken condensing boilers out which have been 6/7 years old which were beyond repairing. Admittedly these were probably ones that haven't been well maintained or fitted well.
They refused a Worcester.....that's a no brainer really.
Not doubting you but why??? It always made sense to me when there are two taps but in the instance where it’s tap hose nrv it makes sense because you’d never be able to remove the hose correctly
It was my understanding that you required two taps by regs anyway?
You can see why you have the NRV on the cold, as it's less of a dead leg.
But there’s no dead leg because the hose should be removed, alright maybe mm in it but seriously.
Should be. But how many customers actually remove it though.
Also if you're only fitting a tap on one side and just a NRV on the other I wouldn't be removing the link.
No but I’m arguing regs if you say there should be two taps then the hose should also be removed. Sorry I’m not being pedantic I’m genuinely querying. I cannot see what difference it makes what the reasoning is for the nrv on cold
I wasn't disputing the fact that the hose shouldn't be removed, I was just simply stating that hardly anyone actually removes the link.
I thought there was some reg about the NRV on the filling loop, but I can't find it to hand. Years ago, it was as you say NRV on the heating side. Then about 10 years ago I thought they changed it and required the NRV to be on the cold main. Incase someone left the filling loop open on the cold side and the dead leg within the loop.
Even if it isn't a reg about it, isn't it better practice for it to be on the Cold? You remove the dead leg (If one is created by the customer), plus you can drain the boiler easily when recharging the expansion vessel or maintenance 😛.
Two taps - at least if one is passing you have a fail safe on your second tap.
Oh I totally agree with two taps don’t get me wrong but to me it’s logical to stop the heat at the return end so there is no inadvertent heating of the cold side. I cannot see where a dead leg occurs if there is no hose though.
You're right, there isn't one when the hose has been removed. But my point kind of was, no one ever removes the hose.
Legally the original contractor is entitled to be given reasonable opportunity to put the situation right. You’re well within your rights to insist the work is undertaken by a competent person. Sounds very like you have the experience to decide for yourself if the guy is flanneling you.
Didn’t say to fit a zone valve did I. OP alluded to the rebuild of the boiler which I was questionning
As you say however you are well within your rights also to refuse access if you feel they have acted outside scope or unlawfully
Official Sponsors of Plumbers Talk
Similar plumbing topics
We recommend City Plumbing Supplies, BES, and Plumbing Superstore for all plumbing supplies.
