Can Bathroom Door Vents Be Removed Temporarily for Chimney Sweep Inspection?

Hello
The situation as in the subject.
I bought a new bathroom door and of course the chimney sweep stuck to the openings that they were too small. I do not want to cut the door or replace the grille because it involves costs.
The purchase of a grille and its installation by a cooperative carries the risk that visually it will not be the best solution for a new door.
The door has vents, but the chimney sweep says too small.
Can I pull down the door for his visit and say I don't have it?
As I say, I think that the enlargement of the openings will not change much the actual air exchange situation, apart from the fulfillment of the exaggerated legal requirements.

And then someone will poison you and be on you.
This is why the chimney sweep comes in to make it his problem.

http://www.wentylacja.org.pl/pages-72.html

And he writes there:
In order for the air to circulate freely, it is necessary to make appropriate openings in the door or a grille with a total area of 200 cm2. The openings must be at the bottom of the door. You can also trim the entire door leaf by about 2.5 cm.

Sure you can download it to your house and nobody can stop you from doing it, but remember one thing, you only have one life. And what you want to do, other than what you can call stupid.

Okay, just tell me where the logic is.

After all, every bathroom is different, so the statement that cutting a 2.5 cm hole is to solve the problem of air exchange is, in my opinion, stupid. One will have a tight door, the other will not, one will have clogged ventilation, other not one gaps and gaps between the doors. And here it is said that the hole does everything.
After all, the chimney sweep comes, takes the meter, closes the door, tests the draft.
It turns out that everything is normal, but the hole in the door is to be and that's it. Isn't that pure stupidity.
I would not risk my life or anyone else's if the measurements showed that this hole should be cut.
But no. It is written that there is to be a hole it is supposed to be. I fully understand the chimney sweep and I am not surprised.
My point is whether cutting this hole will actually change anything.

It is not about cutting a hole, but about regulations that require a 200 cm square hole in the rooms where the boiler is installed. Do you think cars are sold without heating in Africa?

My colleague Andrefff, the regulations also oblige me to have a door with a width of 80 cm
What I have to remake a frame that I can't move anyway because the wall is structural. I have 70 because that's what it was done in the year 60 when the building was being built like most old buildings.
Everyone knows what the rules are, some better some worse. A large part of them is not covered in reality.
Rather, I was looking for confirmation that it will not change anything or will change a little.
But I understand that if anything happened, even for this reason, it would still be for me because I did not meet the requirements.
I am writing because you first wrote about the threat to life and now you write that it is not just about the rules that order me to do something.

Recipes, unlike you, take care of your life.

andrefff wrote:

Recipes, unlike you, take care of your life.

I am afraid that more and more people with an approach like yours can be plundered by people who provide regulations for completely different reasons than those mentioned by you.
Anyway, best regards and have a nice day .

To be sure, buy a carbon monoxide detector because that's probably what it's all about. You will be guaranteed security.

If you consider cutting a 20x10 hole as looting people, congratulations on your sense of humor.

Deceptive security.
You will still buy one with batteries and you will think that if something is wrong, it will lock up because you will not connect the power supply for aesthetic reasons.

grubs wrote:

Hello
The situation as in the subject.
I bought a new bathroom door and of course the chimney sweep stuck to the holes that they were too small. I do not want to cut the door or replace the grille because it involves costs.

These are not huge costs. The grille is 20 PLN, and the undercutting costs nothing. You need to have right and left hands for technical matters and you can do it yourself. It will take approx. 30 minutes.

Quote:

The door has vents, but the chimney sweep says too small.

Because these openings are for malcontents who do not want a grid, because they are spoiled by an eminently solemn place. Rather, I think that the chimney sweep is right, because if the holes were made "for aesthetics" (and such holes are almost always made for aesthetics, because they are not able to play a different role), they certainly do not have a technical role - for the holes to play the correct role, there must be a lot of them, which gives an even worse aesthetic level than the grille (see what the area of one hole is and compare it with the grille area (the grille is about 400cm2 (effectively from 300cm2) - 120x400mm, one hole 30mm - about 7cm2, i.e. the holes should be more than 40 to give a comparable effect to the grille.) So to replace the grille with holes you need to make 4 rows of 10 - admit, how many do you have now - 5, or maybe 7?

Quote:

Can I pull down the door for his visit and say I don't have it?

This is simply a stupid solution, and replacing the door is a dangerous solution if you have a boiler.

Quote:

As I say, I think that the enlargement of the openings will not change much the actual air exchange situation, apart from the fulfillment of the exaggerated legal requirements.

This is not exaggerated, it results from mathematics, and it changes a lot. To achieve the assumed boiler power - you need to burn a certain dose of gas per hour, to burn this dose of gas you need to provide the right dose of air, to provide the right dose of air, you need to maintain the appropriate cross-sections of the inlet holes, otherwise the air "does not keep up" and the negative pressure is created, the higher it is, the smaller the openings (from zero to a dozen or so pascals) - with a certain negative pressure, the exhaust gas draft stops or slows down, then not all the exhaust gases are released into the chimney, some of them remain in the room. Then there is an oxygen deficiency in the air, incomplete combustion takes place, a certain amount of carbon monoxide is formed, its concentration gradually increases up to a certain detection limit - and now it is important who or what and how to detect this situation.

But why explain all this to the author, as he will do anyway in his own way. And he founded the topic only to be sure of his arguments.

So that we can understand each other - you have a choice of a bathroom door grill:


in exchange for the holes you have:

Hello

Chris W, I struggle with these perforated doors on 90% of the construction sites I deal with.

The crowning argument for doors with holes is usually "and we always put them on and it was fine", and that there is a label "bathroom" on the door, or that they gave one in the warehouse, and they know it better there in the warehouse. The procedure of translating what is going on with these holes to the foreman, who installed it, or to the construction manager who endorses it, takes me about a week on average.

Congratulations on your patience.

To Grubs.

This grille in the upper photo is fine.
These holes in the bottom photo are wrong.

And the chimney sweep didn't stick, it just does its job well.

Thanks Chris W for the extensive explanation. This is what I ment.

As you wrote in the last post, I have a door with such holes and the only grille I found is the one in your photo. I already bought it once, but it turned out that it is too short and does not cover the holes (half one is left)
it would have to be to the side and one hole would have to be left which I would like to avoid.
I was looking for other wider and narrower grilles, but I found nothing.
I think I am left with undercutting the door only by myself, it will not be easy. The only thing I have is a panel cutter and I know that I will not cut it evenly.
What can I do it or where and then what is the cost of it.
Do you trim across the width?
I know that in castorama they trim but from what I remember it is at least 20 cm
Added to this is the door transport (probably not cheap) and the loss of the warranty.
If you have any ideas, please write.

Look for something like a furniture ventilation grille. Much more choice for the door and much nicer.

Hello.

grubs wrote:

Added to this is the door transport (probably not cheap) and the loss of the warranty.
If you have any ideas, please write.

The idea is the simplest in the world. Check what you bought according to the attached documents. Invoice, label on the door. If you have a record anywhere that it is a bathroom door, bathroom door or something like that, politely inform the seller in writing that the door he sold you does not have the functional feature for which you have made the purchase, because it does not meet the requirement

§ 79. 1. The doors to the bathroom, washroom and a separate section should open outside the room, subject to § 75 sec. 2, at least 0.8 m wide and 2 m high in the light of the frame, and in the lower part - openings with a total cross-section of not less than 0.022 m2 for air supply.
// I corrected. When quoting, please check the source code page for correctness in the future.
mod.Chris_W

This is an entry from the Journal of Laws no. 75, item. 690 from 2002.

You attach a xero of the proof of purchase and a receipt that reads "bathroom door." and the chimney opinion.
And you request an exchange for a compliant one, or you return the goods. Transport at their expense, because they were entirely to blame, and you were not at all.

This is an assertion of your warranty claim from the seller - the product does not have the functional feature for which you bought it.

Sending the claim to the seller by registered mail with return receipt requested.

If you don't have such a receipt, don't break it. You go to the store with a photo camera and check the description of the goods at the exhibition or in the price list. And you take a photo and attach a photo to the magazine as above.

However, you must have the proof of purchase.

If you do not have a proof of purchase, we will act differently.

However, it will take time, unfortunately. If this is Castorama, they should react in reins. Fear that if your claims are not recognized, you will go to court.

I can help in writing the receipts, because I am damned for the product "bathroom door with holes".
Man - if you hadn't called the chimney sweep, you would have been put in a life-threatening situation because of the seller's incompetence !!!!!! Because CO is no joke, this gas kills.

Wow
Until now, I was sure that this provision applies to bathroom doors in rooms with a gas heater.
And here's a surprise! applies to all bathrooms.
Doesn't this call into question the words of my colleague Chris_W "It is not exaggerated, it results from mathematics" since, regardless of whether we have a gas stove or not, the hole 220 should be provided.
What, then, was the legislator guided by in his calculations. Did he accept the worst option, i.e. the amount of air needed to completely burn the gas? If so, why did he order to install such a hole for everyone ???
It does not matter that I have a stove with a closed combustion chamber or open or maybe the opening CWO is to be 220.

Buddy andrefff, would you change the door in the bathroom without a gas heater (I wonder what you have) because, as you mentioned, the law cares about our life
I am a bit clingy, I know, but I am a bit annoyed with the inconsistency of these regulations.
I am looking for furniture grilles and I have not found a grill that meets the requirements for the opening, and they are usually one-sided and I need both sides.

Buddy Cat-huncwot, I will check what you write about, only as I wrote earlier, I have 70 doors and replacement for fully compliant with the regulations would involve the replacement of the jambs and the breach of the wall !!


What's more, the PN-83 / B-03430 standard said at least "The inflow of indoor air to kitchens, bathrooms, toilets and auxiliary windowless rooms should be provided through openings in the lower parts of the door or through the gaps between the lower edge of the door and the floor or the threshold. or the gaps should be 200 cm2 "
And in our situation, it is about a door that MUST have an opening, regardless of the gaps.
The standard also does not bind rooms with a gas heater. For such rooms there are requirements as to the ventilation air volume flow, which are greater than in the case of rooms without "Junkers"

Of course, the larger the opening, the better it is clear, but whether it is a safety calculation.

Well, I have this, door 80 cut by two cm, which gives 160 cm sq, plus a visible gap of 50 cm x 1 cm. Total 210 sq cm.

grubs wrote:

What, then, was the legislator guided by in his calculations.

Belaying is always belaying, so that someone 100cm2 was not enough and thus suffered a loss of health, or poor living conditions, and anything bad can get hurt.

Quote:

Of course, the larger the opening, the better it is clear, but whether it is really a safety calculation.

But it is beneficial even in the absence of a boiler - gravity ventilation works better - there are always ventilation grilles in the bathrooms, and not necessarily in the rooms, so this is how the air flow from the rooms (from their windows) to the bathroom is realized. And large grilles in the doors (and walls), even if they are exaggerated, improve air exchange quite a lot.
I don't understand what are you getting at? Do you want to repair the formal condition of your bathroom? Do you want to ignore everything just to skip over the momentary chimney sweep problem?

Nice theme with this slot.
I will calculate at home and since I have raised about 1.5 cm + 4 holes, maybe a thin furniture grille will be enough.

I want to have a door in accordance with the law so that the chimney sweep and the cooperative do not cling to and risk cutting off the gas, it is safe, but also to have comfort in the bathroom. Too large a gap with good ventilation of the apartment will cause the legs to wind up in the bathroom.
I do not want to change the legal status, but to adapt the door to it at the lowest possible cost, without deteriorating too much the comfort of use, which with the current door suits me.

Hello.

grubs wrote:

the PN-83 / B-03430 standard stated at least "The inflow of indoor air to kitchens, bathrooms, toilets and auxiliary windowless rooms should be provided through openings in the lower parts of the door or through the gaps between the lower edge of the door and the floor or the threshold. Cross-section of net openings or gaps. should be 200 cm2 "

For today, and even since 1993

Chapter 5
Application of standards
Art. 19.
1. The application of Polish Standards is voluntary, subject to paragraph 2 and 3.
2. Ministers in matters falling within the scope of their activity and after obtaining an opinion or at the request of the Committee, may, by regulation, introduce the obligation to apply the Polish Standard, when it concerns in particular:
1) protection of life, health, property, safety at work and use,
2) environmental protection,
3) products ordered by state authorities.

This is an Journal of Laws 55, item. 251, as amended - I use the uniform text.
I would like to point out that until 2004 the minister did not use the statutory delegation to make a standard binding. However, as he did it in 2004 - see Journal of Laws No. no. 109, item. 1156 of 2004, Annex to the regulation - he did it ineffectively, as the Standardization Act of 2002 provided for

Chapter 3
Polish Standards and other standardization documents
Art. 5.
1. ..
2. ..
3. The application of Polish Standards is voluntary.

Moreover, the minister lost his statutory delegation to introduce the obligation to apply standards under the regulation.

IMO, no contradiction It is voluntary in the application of the standard and the binding provision in the rank of a regulation. And the latter settles the matter.

grubs wrote:

And in our situation, it is about a door that MUST have an opening, regardless of the gaps.

And this record rules. And rightly so, because it is on the safe side. As there is a factory hole 220, it is for sure and regardless of other door mounting conditions, which may or may not provide the missing area of up to 220.

grubs wrote:

I am a bit clingy, I know, but I am a bit annoyed with the inconsistency of these regulations.

Let go, because by going this way, you can get a regular chick.

Well, we had a chat about a hole in the toilet door, relying on two acts and one regulation.

grubs wrote:

Buddy Cat-marauder, I will check what you write about

I heartily urge you.

And quick - cut the door at the bottom with a hand circular saw. It should come out flush.

The standard is not mandatory,
but the legal act on the basis of which the standards are developed is:
Regulation of the Minister of Infrastructure on technical conditions to be met by buildings and their location of April 12, 2002 (Journal of Laws No. 75, item 690)
even here:
http://www.architektura.info/index.php/prawo/warunki_techniczne_budynki
and this is valid and there is nothing to discuss,
The chimney sweep is right and the confirmation of this, apart from the above text, is the fact that the combustion of 1 m3 of gas requires about 10 m3 of air, and for this to be possible, this is possible and this is the purpose of this 200 cm2 air intake and 14x14 cm exhaust outlet led above the roof,
This is what the recipe says, but whether you are aware of what you are crushing the copies about is another matter,
And that was it

Hello
This is the wording of the Ordinance of the Minister of Infrastructure in the wording, Journal of Laws No. no. 75, item. 690 from 2002.

Kot-huncwot wrote:

and in the lower part - openings with a total cross-section of not less than 0.022 m2 for air supply.

In fact, the regulation does apply, with a small exception. Namely in the scope of Appendix No. 1, Journal of Laws No. 109, item. 1156 of 2004, in which a certain set of standards was quoted, is ineffective, because in relation to the Standardization Act, the regulation is a legal act of a lower order.

1950 wrote:

This is what this 200 cm2 supply air opening is for

This is a voluntary provision in the application of the Polish Standard.
Of course, 220 cm2 apply, as stated in the Journal of Laws. no. 75, item 690.

From the Standardization Act of 2002

Art. 5.
1. The Polish Standard is a national standard, adopted by consensus and approved
by a national standardization body, generally available, marked with
the principle of exclusivity - the symbol of PN.
2. A Polish Standard may be an introduction of a European or an international standard. This introduction may be in the original language.

Especially point 2 is difficult to reconcile with the concept that

Added after 4 [minutes]:

1950 wrote:

but the legal act on the basis of which the standards are developed is:
Regulation of the Minister of Infrastructure on technical conditions to be met by buildings and their location of April 12, 2002 (Journal of Laws No. 75, item 690)

because it is difficult to assume that someone outside Poland writes standards in accordance with and on the basis of the Regulation of the Minister of Infrastructure on technical conditions to be met by buildings and their location of April 12, 2002 (Journal of Laws No. 75, item 690), as amended or other provisions of Polish law.

The standards are non-binding, but in the event of a fatal accident, the prosecutor does not ask whether the standard does not apply, but whether it was in accordance with the standards.
It is the same with UDT, recently I was building a 214 kW gas boiler and the clerk did not care that the cascade was a company one, with all approvals and certificates.
He didn't like the placement of the safety valve and it didn't help, I had to convert to the standard.

The fact that the regulations are inconsistent is another matter.

Hello

1950 wrote:

but in the event of a fatal accident, the prosecutor does not ask whether the standard does not apply, but whether it was in accordance with the standards.

Unfortunately not. He will ask if it was in accordance with applicable law.

1950 wrote:

It is the same with UDT, I recently made a gas boiler room 214 kW and the clerk did not care that the cascade was a company one,

Unfortunately, the "firmness" of the cascade does not guarantee that it meets the requirements of Polish law.

At this power, the boiler room is subject to technical inspection, pursuant to the Act on the technical conditions of technical inspection, Journal of Laws No. 135, item. 1261 from 2003.

On the other hand, the Act on technical supervision, Journal of Laws No. 122, item. 1321 of 2002 provides that the technical supervision is performed by the Office of Technical Inspection.

So this nice gentleman from UDT was not an official, but it was Polish Law in His Own Person. And he decided that the safety valve was installed in the wrong place in the company mode and ordered that the valve be installed in a different place. He indicated another place using the written principle of technical knowledge, which is PN, and, probably, the regulations of technical supervision. And by subscribing to all of this, he took full responsibility for what he ordered.

A colleague did not work because it was the standard, but because it was the decision of the Office of Technical Inspection (UDT). And what the UDT supported when making the decision was his business. He could say that he wanted to do so, and then, having signed the paper, take full responsibility for it.

The provisions of Polish law should not be confused with the "firmness" of individual technical solutions, because they are not the same.

And from the bathroom door it started ..........

I wrote and in fact it was that the cascade had all approvals and certificates valid in the EU,
I did not know and the importer did not know that we are in the EU.
Therefore, I am writing about the inconsistency of the regulations.

Hello.

Nice off-topic is done. I am asking for a little more patience with grubs and mods, but I think the topic is interesting.

1950 wrote:

I wrote and in fact it was that the cascade had all approvals and certificates valid in the EU,

That's what you wrote, so it was.

The important thing in all this is that the technical requirements, regulations to be met, or EU directives they are not final, final and only just requirements, they are only minimal requirements.

The CE mark doesn't mean it's something technical (let's stick to this area) marked with this sign it is ultimately, in the end, objective, and only rightly good, only that it has met the EU minimum requirements.
On the other hand, specific detailed technical provisions of national law may provide otherwise and, if they do, are to be met.

Col. 1950 - if you want, we can follow the topic further.
I do not know what exactly the importer provided you, because the concept of a "company" cascade is very broad.

On the other hand, I am willing to accept a bet (I wanted a cake with cream, but I go to a cake, because it can be sent on the Bieruń - Wawka route) that in the goods you received from the importer, the Polish Office of Technical Inspection is empowered as an instance finally resolving any possible doubts.

Are you still playing?




Added after 3 [minutes]:

1950 wrote:

but in the event of a fatal accident, the prosecutor does not ask whether the standard does not apply, but whether it was in accordance with the standards.

Added after 1 [minutes]:

Kot-huncwot wrote:

Unfortunately not. He will ask if it was in accordance with applicable law.

I support what I wrote, while the so-called continued.
A standard is - by definition - a written principle of technical knowledge. My development is "the effectiveness of which in achieving the assumed goal is confirmed by many years of practice."

And in the case of an accident in a boiler room due to the non-application of voluntary PN, to the prosecutor's question why the relevant PN was not applied, if it exists and so far its use gives good results, IMO does not have a good answer to this question.

Nobody writes, so I close.
I'll open it back if necessary.