Yes the fire started in the kitchen. We had numerous engineers looking at the wreckage but since all of the valves were pretty much detroyed in the fire it was not possible to tell which part was defective. The oddest thing was that the propane detector never sounded. So if the fridge valve went and set off the gas attached to the fridge then it would make sense that the detector never sounded because there never was a build up of gas. Does that make sense to any of you?
I will be the first to admit that I know almost nothing about RVs but it just seems logical to me that a new travel trailer would not blow up unless something went wrong. Also I have been told that it is important to note that this trailer was not used for camping and had only been moved once since it was purchased.
When the refer starts to leak, what is leaking is ammonia and hydrogen gas. The hydrogen gas is explosive and the ammonia is toxic.
Sounds like a proplem to me.
George
George & Karen W
2004 Allegro 30DA
2000 Jimmy toad
FMCA F334632
IMO, it's not likely there is even enough hydrogen in the refer to do much more than blow the access door and roof vent off the coach. Even if there was, the area where the gas would collect is relatively small, well ventilated, and fairly well separated from the interior of the coach. An explosion like that would have vented outward toward the exterior anyhow. It's entirely possible a refer explosion could result in a fire, but I seriously doubt the explosion itself would hurt anybody inside the coach. I agree with the other guy that said it was most likely an LP leak. And it would have had to be a MAJOR LP leak to blow the place up. Fire investigators should have been able to determine the source of such an explosion. Tim
Our Dometic cooling tower failed. 4 months out of warranty. Not included in the recall. I did call and ask if they would make an exception and take care of ours. Nope. Your own your own, I was told.
Nolan and JoAnn
2000 Kenworth T600. (The Little Blue Truck)
2004 NuWa Hitchhiker Champagne 33LKTG
2003 Kawasaki Nomad. The Cow. (mine)
2004 Harley Road King. The Hog. (hers) http://community.webshots.com/user/2ontheroad
as always keep all your paperwork........on this recall things have changed and people have gotten money back after the fact...so keep those receipts.......
good luck
Don
Yeah, I keep wondering if they're going to expand the recall to cover a wider range of manufacture dates. I see these things with cracked boilers all the time. I saw 2 of them just last week (RM 2852 & RM 2662) both had the green dripping down around the burner, but both were outside the recall dates (one before and one after). Not sure how they determined the dates of affected units. I still don't believe it was caused by a 29 watt hotter element. Maybe someone at Dometic rolled the dice while choosing the manufacture date cut-offs?
After reading all of the post on the "Dometic Recall" I decided to try installing a transformer (per the post below) to lower the voltage going to the heating element. I wanted to replace the element but the local RV dealer only stocked the new part# from Dometic and I didn't trust it considering the stock element was stamped 325watts and had 38.9 ohms resistance. I called RV Mobile this morning and ordered a new element and asked the salesman to check the resistance before completing the order. I got a call 30 minutes later from RV Mobile to let me know that they had just received a new shipment of elements and the wire color had been changed and the resistance on all were 39-41 ohms so I cancelled the order. I feel that the metal used in the cooling system is at fault but I also think that the heating element that is over powered only aggravates the defect in the welds. I installed the transformer (got it @ radio shack) today and it worked great. I also switched the position of the heating element to the 12 volt side of the tube. My element has 38.9 ohms resistance and the refrigerator runs on LP or 115-120 volts & 2.9 amps. After installing the transformer the voltage applied to the heating element was 113 volts almost a 7 volt drop! Volts squared divided by resistance = watts so I was running @370 watts and after the transformer install I am @ 328 watts. The transformer cost $10.00 and was easy to install. The new elements can run you 30.00-70.00 dollars + shipping. The refrigerator still cools great. Thanks to all of the people that took time post on this very important issue.
Mark W.
WilleyB wrote: Hi trouble1263, and thank you for your kind thought.
For those members who would like to do the transformer fix I'll try to clean up my drawing and terminology. As LScamper has suggested an autotransformer is an expensive item indeed. What is proposed here is a method to compensate for, by lowering the wattage of an underrated 120 volt element. Namely those heating elements with a resistance below 40 ohms.
What is proposed is a Radio Shack #: 273-1511 or Circuit City #: 2731511 Transformer Transformer: primary is 120 VAC, HD type. Volts: 12.6V CT. 3.0A. in either case the price is about $10. The 120 volt PRIMARY winding has two black wires that are smaller in diameter than the three wires of the 12.6 volt SECONDARY winding. The CT in the "12,6 CT" stands for "Center Tap" meaning that the 12.6 volt winding is equally divided. There are two yellow wires which are the 12.6 volt leads with a black lead from the Center Tap and from the black lead to either yellow lead we would measure 6.3 volts while in operation. Click-->
The connections:
Connect one wire of the fridge 120v element to a transformer Primary wire as shown (like Red wire shown) and to one side of the 120 volt line (AC black wire). The other element wire will be connect to the other transformer Primary wire. Then connect the white 120v AC supply (from the control board where the element is connected to now) wire to the black Center Tap wire of the Secondary winding. Then connect one of the 12.6 volt secondary wires (yellow A or B) to the point marked "C" as shown on the diagram. These connections make the transformer operate like a step down transformer in that now there are many more windings across the 120 volts, by using only the primary leads as an output the voltage will be reduced to about 113.7 volts. (120 - 6.3= 113.7) If you have less you can connect point "C" to the opposite side of the secondary.
Unused leads should be taped (insulated as voltage will be present) In operation the Transformer will be warm to the touch, but it should not real hot. I anyone wishes to do this instead of replacing the heating element and wishes to ask questions " go for it " if can help I'll be glad to. Willis
My thanks to LScamper for pointing out my omission that the 120V for the circuit comes from the circuit board and not directly from the line voltage
Pilot---Mark
Co Pilot (boss)Nancy
Children:
Alyssa
Corey
Matthew
Kaylyn
Dogs: Shih-Tzu's(other children)
Max
Shelby
Twiggles
Travel Trailer 2001 Sunnybrook 2708 SLE
Tow Vehicle 2004 Ford Super Duty F-250 Diesel 6.0
Keep in mind calculating heating element watts in the manner you did (using resistance only) is not the most accurate method (your estimated watts will always be on the high side). It's totally understandable as I initially made this same mistake myself before giving it some more thought. Anyhow, here is a better and more thorough explanation I posted earlier in this thread. Read on. Tim
timsrv wrote: Okay, Okay, I'm making some major headway here and had to share it with you all. Please understand It's been a while since my college electrical / electronics training, so this took some thought to get back into the swing of things. I started remembering there are more ways to check watts. Although testing resistance is the easiest way, it's not the most accurate way.......especially on something that gets hot. Once you energize an element, the heat changes resistance, therefore changing the calculated watts. Checking in this manner is only going to be approximate and always on the high side (more heat = more resistance).
As I just said, there is more than one way to calculate the watts of a load (3 to be exact). Method 1.= Volts squared divided by Resistance = Watts. Method 2.= Amps squared X Resistance = Watts. Method 3. (and the most accurate in this case) Volts X Amps = Watts
Due to the fluctuation in resistance caused by heat, the best way to determine Watts in an element is to eliminate resistance from the equation.
Okay, now for the good stuff. I energized an element and measured Amps by routing current through my Fluke. When cold the current was slightly higher so I waited for element to heat and stabilize. Once there I measured 2.63 Amps. Using method 3 to calculate (Volts X Amps) this works out to 315 Watts.
On a side note, remember the old style element I tested? Remember the hot spot at the bottom (right adjacent to the cracked weld)? Well, looks like they did something about that too. Check out the nice even heat of this new element!
Okay, so I'll have to take back some of my bad thoughts of Dometic (but not all). This makes me feel a whole lot better and should go a long way to solving the problem with these refers. I still think they should be replacing elements as part of the recall, but that's another subject. Would also be nice if they put a little more effort into explaining things, but I think we do a pretty good job figuring them out here. Just takes a bit longer to get to the bottom of things. Tim
I did read this post before making the decision to install the transformer. My line voltage was 120 volts before installing the transformer which (Volts X Amps = Watts) would give me 348 Watts. Now that the voltage applied to the heater is 113volts I have 327 watts. Since the performance of the refrigerator hasn't changed I feel it was worth ten dollars to lower the heat applied to the poorly manufactured cooling unit.
Do you recommend the replacement of the heating element because of the hot spots you found on the older element? Thanks again for the info.
Mark W.
timsrv wrote: Keep in mind calculating heating element watts in the manner you did (using resistance only) is not the most accurate method (your estimated watts will always be on the high side). It's totally understandable as I initially made this same mistake myself before giving it some more thought. Anyhow, here is a better and more thorough explanation I posted earlier in this thread. Read on. Tim
timsrv wrote: Okay, Okay, I'm making some major headway here and had to share it with you all. Please understand It's been a while since my college electrical / electronics training, so this took some thought to get back into the swing of things. I started remembering there are more ways to check watts. Although testing resistance is the easiest way, it's not the most accurate way.......especially on something that gets hot. Once you energize an element, the heat changes resistance, therefore changing the calculated watts. Checking in this manner is only going to be approximate and always on the high side (more heat = more resistance).
As I just said, there is more than one way to calculate the watts of a load (3 to be exact). Method 1.= Volts squared divided by Resistance = Watts. Method 2.= Amps squared X Resistance = Watts. Method 3. (and the most accurate in this case) Volts X Amps = Watts
Due to the fluctuation in resistance caused by heat, the best way to determine Watts in an element is to eliminate resistance from the equation.
Okay, now for the good stuff. I energized an element and measured Amps by routing current through my Fluke. When cold the current was slightly higher so I waited for element to heat and stabilize. Once there I measured 2.63 Amps. Using method 3 to calculate (Volts X Amps) this works out to 315 Watts.
On a side note, remember the old style element I tested? Remember the hot spot at the bottom (right adjacent to the cracked weld)? Well, looks like they did something about that too. Check out the nice even heat of this new element!
Okay, so I'll have to take back some of my bad thoughts of Dometic (but not all). This makes me feel a whole lot better and should go a long way to solving the problem with these refers. I still think they should be replacing elements as part of the recall, but that's another subject. Would also be nice if they put a little more effort into explaining things, but I think we do a pretty good job figuring them out here. Just takes a bit longer to get to the bottom of things. Tim
Offline
watts and after the transformer install I am @ 328 watts. The transformer cost $10.00 and was easy to install. The new elements can run you 30.00-70.00 dollars + shipping. The refrigerator still cools great. Thanks to all of the people that took time post on this very important issue. 
I'll try to clean up my drawing and terminology. As LScamper has suggested an autotransformer is an expensive item indeed. What is proposed here is a method to compensate for, by lowering the wattage of an underrated 120 volt element. Namely those heating elements with a resistance below 40 ohms.
Willis
). This makes me feel a whole lot better and should go a long way to solving the problem with these refers. I still think they should be replacing elements as part of the recall, but that's another subject. Would also be nice if they put a little more effort into explaining things, but I think we do a pretty good job figuring them out here. Just takes a bit longer to get to the bottom of things. Tim
