Dometic Refer Recall - Possible Fire Hazard -Update 2/13/07

[MELM]

Click here to go directly to Updates.
Update Number 1 Nov 23, 2006
Update Number 2 Dec 5, 2006
Update Number 3 Jan 10, 2007
Update Number 4 Jan 19, 2007 - Recall Instructions - click here: Dometic Recall You need your model and serial numbers.
Update Number 5 Feb 13, 2007 - Added links to new info on the NHTSA website including the info/form for claiming reimbursement for a failure. These are at the end of the post below where all the updates are posted.

Also, edited the below Recall to include the change made prior to the Dec 5 update showing the proposed remedy.

Below is information from the NHTSA website on a recall of certain Dometic refrigerators. This recall is in its very early stages, and there is no resolution in place as of Nov 1, 2006.

From the NHTSA website:

Dometic Recall NHTSA Campaign ID 06E076000

Make / Models : Model/Build Years:
DOMETIC / NDR1062 9999
DOMETIC / RM2652 9999
DOMETIC / RM2662 9999
DOMETIC / RM2663 9999
DOMETIC / RM2852 9999
DOMETIC / RM2862 9999
DOMETIC / RM3662 9999
DOMETIC / RM3663 9999
DOMETIC / RM3862 9999
DOMETIC / RM3863 9999

Manufacturer : DOMETIC CORPORATION

NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID Number : 06E076000 Mfg's Report Date : AUG 28, 2006

Component: EQUIPMENT: RECREATIONAL VEHICLE

Potential Number Of Units Affected : 926877

Summary:
CERTAIN DOMETIC TWO-DOOR REFRIGERATORS MANUFACTURED BETWEEN APRIL 1997 AND MAY 2003: SERIAL NOS.
713XXXXX THROUGH 752XXXXX;
801XXXXX THROUGH 852XXXXX;
901XXXXX THROUGH 952XXXXX;
001XXXXX THROUGH 052XXXXX;
101XXXXX THROUGH 152XXXXX;
201XXXXX THROUGH 252XXXXX;
301XXXXX THROUGH 319XXXXX,
INSTALLED IN CERTAIN RECREATIONAL VEHICLES AS ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT AND SOLD AS AFTERMARKET EQUIPMENT. A FATIGUE CRACK MAY DEVELOP IN THE BOILER TUBE WHICH MAY RELEASE A SUFFICIENT AMOUNT OF PRESSURIZED COOLANT SOLUTION INTO AN AREA WHERE AN IGNITION SOURCE (GAS FLAME) IS PRESENT.

Consequence:
THE RELEASE OF COOLANT UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS COULD IGNITE AND RESULT IN A FIRE.

Remedy:
THE VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS WILL NOTIFY OWNERS OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES THAT HAD THE REFRIGERATORS INSTALLED AS ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT AND DOMETIC WILL NOTIFY OWNERS OF THE AFTERMARKET REFRIGERATORS. DOMETIC WILL INSTALL A SECONDARY BURNER HOUSING FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN BETWEEN APRIL AND JUNE 2007. OWNERS MAY CONTACT DOMETIC AT 888-446-5157.

Notes:
CUSTOMERS MAY CONTACT THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION'S VEHICLE SAFETY HOTLINE AT 1-888-327-4236 (TTY: 1-800-424-9153); OR GO TO HTTP://WWW.SAFERCAR.GOV.

The following is extracted from the notice provided by Dometic to the NHTSA dated 8/26/06:

The potential defect is associated with cooling unit at the back of the refrigeration cabinet.

A fractional percentage of the potentially affected refrigerators have experienced a fatigue crack that may develop in the boiler tube in the area of the weld between the boiler tube and the heater pocket. A fatigue crack may release a sufficient amount of pressurized coolant solution into an area where an ignition source (gas flame) is present. Dometic's investigation has shown that a simulated release of cooling solution (refrigerant) in the area of the boiler, under certain conditions, could be ignited by the presence of an open flame. A boiler fatigue crack with the loss of cooling solution without ignition would result in a non-operational refrigerator that is not a safety issue. Under certain conditions, the released coolant could ignite and result in a fire. In order to have a fire, at a minimum, all of the following conditions must exist:

1. The refrigerator must be on and normally operating and gas burner must be lit;
2. 'There must be an oversized heating element in the refrigerator;
3. The boiler tube must develop a throughway fatigue crack of a
specific size;
4. There must be a release of the cooling solution at a rate which will
allow the accumulation of the cooling solution at a concentration within its range of flammability; and
5. There must be ignition source (gas flame) present.

If any of these conditions are not present, a release of the cooling solution will not result in a fire.

In April of 1997 Dometic modified the design of the affected refrigerators by increasing the wattage of the heating element from 325 watts to 354 watts. All production of the affected units from April 1997 through May of 2003 utilized the 354 watt heating element. In May of 2003, in order to improve the operating life of the refrigerators, Dometic returned to the use of the 325 watt heating element which it continues to use today. It is now believed that the use of the higher wattage heater contributed to abnormal fatigue in the boiler tube.

The products in question are all refrigerators used in the original manufacture of recreation vehicles or as replacement equipment for recreation vehicles. The total population of refrigerators potentially containing the defect is 926,877. Dometic estimates a potential maximum incident rate of 0.01% related to boiler fatigue cracks that leak and may result in a fire. There have been no incidents of injury or death related to the affected population of Dometic refrigerators.

Dometic became aware of the occurrence of fires which may have involved their products and retained an independent engineering testing laboratory to fully evaluate and investigate any potential defect in their refrigerators which might result in a fire. A number of returned units were analyzed and microscopic fatigue cracks which could release coolant into the area of the burner were identified in the boiler tube metal in the area of the weld between the heater pocket and boiler tube. Tests simulating the cracks were conducted the week of August 18, 2006 and confirmed a possible cause of fire in the refrigerators under certain conditions. These test results prompted the preparation of this notice.

Dometic continues to gather information on the potential defect and will forward additional relevant information as it becomes available.

Dometic has not yet identified a proposed remedy for the potential defect. Dometic will continue a testing program designed to identify and evaluate possible remedies. This evaluation will take place both in the United States and in Sweden. Once a remedy has been identified, Dometic will initiate or participate in a remedy campaign initiated by the original equipment manufacturers and aftermarket suppliers who have purchased, sold, and distributed these products. A list of original equipment manufacturers and aftermarket suppliers to whom Dometic has sold the potentially defective refrigerators is being prepared and will be provided to the NHTSA upon its
completion.

The following is extracted from the NHTSA response on 9/18/06:

Please provide the following additional information and be reminded of the following requirements:

Dometic must provide an estimated dealer notification date as well as an owner notification date including the day, month, and year. You are required to submit a draft owner notification letter to this office no less than five days prior to mailing it to the customers. Also, copies of all notices, bulletins, dealer notifications, and other communications that relate to this recall, including a copy of the final owner notification letter and any subsequent owner follow-up notification letter(s), are required to be submitted to this office no later than 5 days after they are originally sent (if they are sent to more than one manufacturer, distributor, dealer, or purchaser/owner).

Dometic must file a sample of the envelope which you intend to use to mail the recall notice to owners. The words "SAFETY", "RECALL", "NOTICE" in any order must be printed on the envelope in larger font than the customers name and address.

[Desperado359]

Would this also be call a climate control switch? Thanks for the reply.

[timsrv]

If your refer is equipped with an L.A.T. (Low Ambient Temperature) switch, make sure that's turned off. There is nothing associated with the recall that would change current draw. Tim

[Desperado359]

I had my recall done about a month ago, the frig. still work as good as it did before, I have only one problem and that is afteer I shut everything down, now the new batteries are dead in about 3 days (from full charge)I can pull the fuse and they stay up, so my question is what did they do to make it draw juice all of the time, when I shut everything down.

[timsrv]

Here is the difference in my view: Like you said, Norcold ponied up and took care of the problem way back when. Dometic is only offering us a band-aid, then leaving the rest for us to figure out........years after the fact. Will changing an element help extend the life of your refer? I think that's the question we are all asking now. I don't have a definite answer, but before spending the money, it's nice to have as much info as possible. Anyhow, that's what I was trying to help with.

If Dometic were replacing all affected cooling cores & elements like Norcold did (way back when), then I would have to agree that there wouldn't be much left to talk about. Tim

[Dusty_R]

It seems to me that Norcold took care of their problem sooner quicker, and there wasn't all this discussion about.
How are Norcold's heating elements in comparison.

Dusty R

[timsrv]

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:h. 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:W.





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

[timsrv]

Well out of 25 new elements, the best tested at 346W and the worst tested at 363W:E, but most tested at around 355W:h. Seems a little high considering the problem they are having with these recalls. I would sure feel better if the new ones were on the low end of the new acceptable range (292W - 357W). I guess they are better than before though because I tested an element in a recalled unit the other day and it tested at 390W, then another one today tested at 397W. The thing that keeps bugging me is the statement made by Dometic in the notice they provided to the NHTSA dated 8/26/06:

In April of 1997 Dometic modified the design of the affected refrigerators by increasing the wattage of the heating element from 325 watts to 354 watts. All production of the affected units from April 1997 through May of 2003 utilized the 354 watt heating element. In May of 2003, in order to improve the operating life of the refrigerators, Dometic returned to the use of the 325 watt heating element which it continues to use today. It is now believed that the use of the higher wattage heater contributed to abnormal fatigue in the boiler tube.

If this is true, then why are these new elements still testing an average of 355W? I know that most are still within the accepted limits (barely), but then so were the 354W elements that started all of this. Unless of course they were using the 354W as a target with an acceptable range of ± 10% (318W - 389W) and most were testing at the top end or slightly above that. Something here still doesn't add up & it continues bugging me. I hate to be the turd and 2nd guessing Dometic's engineers, but I'd really like all the pieces to fit before I sell and install anymore of these.

For anybody interested, I checked my inventory and found Dometic part# 3108702.386 295W 120VAC element is dimensionally the same. I'd be willing to bet the refer would work just fine with one of these. Maybe I'll try it in an RM2862 I've got and let you know what happens. I can't see how it could possibly hurt the refer. Tim

[JBarca]

Tim

Thanks for the data. The find is a very good thing that you did find it, the bad part is, gee wiz do they have old stock laying around??? Or is it new stock?

Once would think that by now after all this Dometic could enforce from the sub supplier to meet a certain ohms spec range, not by % or they do not buy them. Or at least QC them them selves before shipping out to the field and cull out the low end ones.

If it is not practical to make element tighter in range, then they could add a voltage compensation device so the field techs could tweak it out at the point of use.

Thanks for the info.

John

[Community Alumni]

Our local rv repair shop ordered a new 325W element for Claude B about 5-6 weeks ago and it tested in the 350's. Dometic claim there is only one part number now and you get what you get. :E

[timsrv]

Something of interest for you all. Recently I went to my wholesale supplier and asked them if I could check ohms on all the replacement elements they had in stock before purchasing any. They had a quantity of 25 Dometic Part # 3850644422 elements in stock and handed me the entire box to inspect. Out of the 25 I checked, 2 were in the high 39 ohm range, 18 were in the 40 ohm range, and 5 were in the 41 ohm range. I ended up purchasing all 5 elements that tested above 41 ohms. The actual readings of these were 41.1 ohms, 41.2, 41.5, & (2) @ 41.6 ohms.

Imprinted on all of these elements is: 325W 120VAC. If you do the math, this works out to 44.3 ohms. If you take into acct that + or - 10% is acceptable, this leaves an acceptable range of 39.9 - 48.7 ohms. This means all but 1 or 2 were within specified limits, yet all were still slightly on the hot side.

Something else of interest, the statement I'm about to make can only be classified as rumor, but this is what I overheard one of the guys saying:

This whole thing started in the late 90's as an informal competition between Norcold and Dometic. Each were trying to claim bragging rights that their refers cooled faster then the other's

.

Like I said, this is only a loose statement made by one of the guys, & ultimately means nothing, but it did get me thinking. It could explain why both companies experienced the same problem on directly competing models during the same time frame. Food for thought I guess. Tim

[timsrv]

They quit putting in the mislabled hot elements in back in 2003. I'd be willing to bet they're checking every one since then. Still, I'd want to check myself just to be sure. Tim

[Skeet25]

Do the new units coming from Dometic have heating elements that are less than 40 ohms? It would probably be best to find an ohm meter and check the resistance myself.

[timsrv]

Yeah, at 1st I thought it was to keep the leaking stuff from coming in contact with the flame. Turns out, the intent is actually to contain the fire should one occur. In addition to containment, the melting type fusible link inside the boiler area will cut power to the PC board and shut down all modes of operation. If there is a leak and no fire, the thermal fuse on the outside of the sheet metal will open the circuit and do the same thing. This one is meant to prevent an on-going overtemp hazard. Tim

[MitchF150]

That's how I interpreted the issue... It's caused by the ELECTRIC element being too hot or something and causing the premature failure of the boiler welds. Then the stuff in the system can leak out and IF the LP is on at the same time it leaks out, that's what becomes flammable.

From what I understand now, the 'fix' only adds additional shielding to prevent the leaking stuff from coming in direct contact with the LP flame?? They do nothing with the element itself, so if it's the "hot" one, it'll still be "hot" and cause the failure anyway...

I'm just gonna run on LP until I get the fix AND get a lower watt element..;)

Mitch

[WilleyB]

bigdodgeram wrote:
I was wondering, I do not use propane to run my refer, electric only (most of the time)

Hi, if you read and understand the posts in this thread you'll realize that propane is not the reason for the failure. Running on propane exclusively it would be doubtful if you'd experience this failure. It would seem now from a previous post, that older units came complete with the shielding that is now offered as a fix
( in reality not a fix but a means to prevent a fire should the piping rupture from metal fatigue)
The real reason for the failure of the cooling system is the underrated 120 volt electrical heating elements. IF the measured resistance of the 120 volt element in your unit is below 40 ohms, I would replace it OR use a voltage corrective device (light dimmer rheostat) as suggested in previous posts to compensate for the overpowering of the element. In any case I'd definitely have the modification done and be thankful you haven't had a failure yet.

Willis