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.

[jmaotto]

I went to Mclains RV in Rockwall without the trailer but with all the documentation, the recall noctice from Dometic and the date and names of the lady at Dometic as well as the name of the lady at Mclains RV. They still insist I have to bring the trailer for the tech to verify the model and serial number before thay will order the part

[bbissel1]

If you have a refer covered by this recall be sure and document all the contacts and actions you take. Our's blew up in Sebring Fl this winter. We had seen the recall notice on this thread earlier so we called Dometic to locate the nearest dealer. We found the dealer had heard nothing of the recall, he called Dometic and they told him they would not cover it. We told him to order the unit because we NEED a refer. He got the replacement unit and replaced it. 1300$ Two days later Dometic called us and told us to fill out the claim form,have the dealer sign it and they would reimburse us for the full amount. We went to the website and got the claim form,got it signed and sent it in. Dometic sent us a check for $1300. It's cashed and in our bank. This all before the official recall date. Central RV in Sebring brought a refer out to the campground to use over the weekend. That was outstanding service.

[Empty_Nest__Soo]

jmaotto wrote:
. . . . I was told that I need to bring the trailer in for my appointment on Monday the 2nd, to that their tech could verify that my refrigerator is on the recall. I have the recall letter from Dometic but he needs to see the refrigerator himself and then order the parts.
Have any of you heard of such a thing?

Yes. When I called the nearest Dometic authorized dealer, he asked me to bring in the TT so that he could inspect it and get the info he needed to order the recall kit.

I told him where I live. (It is about 75 miles on 2-lane roads across a mountain range to get from here to there.) I told him I wanted to make one trip (no more) to get this fixed.

He readily allowed me to give him the information he needed over the phone. I count him as one of the good guys. 😄

I wonder if this “inspection” is one of Dometic’s requirements.

Wayne

[CrossCountryNom]

timsrv wrote:


After further thought on this I am going to recant my earlier statements and suggestions. They were meant for discussion purpose only. I have come to the realization that I get absolutely no benefit for sharing my opinion here, yet I am potentially opening myself up for liability. How smart is that? So please let me repeat. Do not make any unauthorized mods or changes to your refer. If you do, you do at your own risk! I will go back and edit or delete my prior posts. Tim

I've been reading this threat since it started last year. You have brought a great deal of experience and information to all of us here.

I have read through your 'suggestions' and decide that they made sense to me. I have since installed a lower wattage element and installed it in the 12 volt slot.

I made the the decision to do this, NOT you. If anything goes wrong it is my responsibility, NOT yours. No one held a gun to my head while I made the 'suggested' changes.

But I understand your concerns. After all in today's society, NO ONE is responsible for their actions- it's always someone elses fault.

But one thing I do intend to do after the 'fix' is installed. I be going back to using our refer on propane almost 100% of the time. That's the way we have been using our refer for the last three years. Then there is no concern about how these welds hold up with different wattage elements.

[balvert]

stevenal wrote:
I haven't a clue how much engineering goes into these things, or what kind of safety factor might be used if they do. All I know is that Dometic got caught when elements that were about 9% high were used. Now folks are going to continuous 154% on a tube that normally sees very little use. It may work just fine, but I would get the word from Dometic, not just the techs.

Yup, I am sure Dometic will step right up to the plate and tell us what to do. Just park your 200K rig and wait for them to show us the light. Gee, where is that Easter Bunny, I just know he is hiding somewhere with the flying reindeer.

These are the same people that say you have to call them to tell them you have one of THEIR fridges and would they please fix it so your trailer doesn't go up in smoke. The same people that you registered your warranty with are saying it is your responsibility to contact them because everybody that has one of the effected fridges has seen posts on the internet. Sheesh guys, wake up.

Tim, MOST of us realize that your opinions are just that and not official directions regarding this. I for one appreciate your guidance and input.

Casey

[Grillmeister]

timsrv wrote:
I will go back and edit or delete my prior posts. Tim

Too bad, but I do understand why 😞

[timsrv]

stevenal wrote:
I haven't a clue how much engineering goes into these things, or what kind of safety factor might be used if they do. All I know is that Dometic got caught when elements that were about 9% high were used. Now folks are going to continuous 154% on a tube that normally sees very little use. It may work just fine, but I would get the word from Dometic, not just the techs.

After further thought on this I am going to recant my earlier statements and suggestions. They were meant for discussion purpose only. I have come to the realization that I get absolutely no benefit for sharing my opinion here, yet I am potentially opening myself up for liability. How smart is that? So please let me repeat. Do not make any unauthorized mods or changes to your refer. If you do, you do at your own risk! I will go back and edit or delete my prior posts. Tim

[jmaotto]

I have an appointment with the dealer to do the recall on my Dometic refrigerator on Monday. This was made by 3 way conversation with Dometic and the RV dealer. I just contacted the dealer to see if the parts came in. I was advised that no parts will be in before the 16th of April. I was told that I need to bring the trailer in for my appointment on Monday the 2nd, to that their tech could verify that my refrigerator is on the recall. I have the recall letter from Dometic but he needs to see the refrigerator himself and then order the parts.
Have any of you heard of such a thing?

[stevenal]

I haven't a clue how much engineering goes into these things, or what kind of safety factor might be used if they do. All I know is that Dometic got caught when elements that were about 9% high were used. Now folks are going to continuous 154% on a tube that normally sees very little use. It may work just fine, but I would get the word from Dometic, not just the techs.

[WilleyB]

Well I dropped in the dealers Monday (26th) had a chat with the service tech and the parts dept. people. They are ordering the kit and will give me a call as soon as it arrives. Guess I'm the first. Now I didn't mention that it was an idea from this thread, but I did tell him I was putting the new element in the 12V element well, he also thought that was a good idea.
He mentioned that while he was on a course Dometic had informed them that a recall was in the works and to expect one in the future. Darn, I forgot to ask the date he was on that course.

Willis

[Crabbypatty]

Timsrv,
As far as I am concerned you have no liability with the thread. But you should disclaim as there is always one...........However as you do this for a living, and we dont, you seem to have vast amounts of experience that you are sharing with us in a communal effort. I appreciate it and on balance though we are not part of your income stream, you have a source of knowledge in reverse that will help you in your business day. RV Net is like having an interactive popular mechanics, world book enclyclapedia, and a travel agency all wrapped up into one easy to use package.

PS, my new 42 ohm element in the 12 volt pocket has been chillin succesfully for 24 hours now. I did notice when I pulled apart the fiberglass to remove and insert the element, that there appeared to be corrosion on the tubes. Now 7 years old (2000 Wilderness) I hope that it lasts much longer given the replacement cost......

[JBarca]

stevenal wrote:

When placing my order, though, I saw something interesting. The same page shows the 210W 12V DC element. So the original problem was that Dometic put a 354W element in a tube designed for 325W, and now folks are advocating putting a 325 Watter in the 210W rated DC tube. Am I the only one seeing the problem with this idea?

Steve

What lead you to believe the tube to hold the 12 volt tube was rated for any type of wattage? What mechanically makes a 210 watt or 325 watt tube welded to a boiler tube rated?

Where did we get to that Dometic actually designed a tube for any size wattage?

The problem here is believed to be the "rates" of thermal expansion of different thickness parts working against each other creating high stresses and the weaker part breaks first. In this case the main boiler tube verses the actual weld attaching it to the electric element tube. The boiler tube shrinks at a different rate then the actual weld. Cold fluid is inside the boiler tube being heating actually cools the boiler tube yet the weld stays hotter longer. The rates at which the weld and boiler tube heat/shrink are different. This fits to why the boiler tube tear was at the end of the weld. It is the point getting the most stress where all this heating/cooling expansion is going on.

If the 12 volt DC tube had a much thicker cross section of weld than the 120 VAC tube, Or the actual element tube was thicker, then yes I could agree using a higher wattage element on the 12 volt pocket may make the matters worse.

But we do not have indication of the welds being larger or the 12 volt tube or the tube being thicker. Moving the element to a different zone that has not been stressed has merit behind it for 2 reasons, even if that element tube is identical to the 120 VAC tube.

If someone's unit has the thermal expansion problem, to prolong life until failure, they might try:

1. Reduce the heat to reduce the stresses. = A proper rated element.
2. Stop stressing the affected area. Move the element from the stresses pocket. = move from 120 VAC to 12 VDC.

Thermal cycle fatigue once you have it, is time cycle driven. It is predictable that it will fail. It will just take a number of thermal cycles in order for it to happen.

After thinking more on this,

It would fit the pattern of thermal cycle fatigue that Cooling units with heating tubes that have very thin welds would have less issues of fatigue than welds of thick cross section.

After seeing what has been presented so far, my take on this issue is the actual welding concept and or the size of the weld bead is the design/manufacturing problem that is agravating this. If the element tube was held against the main boiler tube with a thermal expansion design concept in mind, it would not matter much if we had a 354, a 325 or a 210 watt element.

It would not be surprising that fridges with very light welds with 354 watt elements would have fewer failures then 354 watt units on thick welded tubes. Providing the actual run time on electric was the same.

Now to the DC system,

I would think 12 volt systems are normally lower wattage to keep the DC amps from going real high and creating large current draw on a battery system. The 12 volt option is usually mentioned to be used only as a maintaining cooling mode, not to bring a hot fridge down cold.

Since Dometic missed the entire thermal expansion problem all together the first time, or lack of trying to control it, why would they put a whole lot of effort into making the 12 volt tube actually rated to only handle the lower wattage?

[timsrv]

Due to the sensitive nature of recalls, it's best to let Dometic call all the shots here. They are the ones with product liability. Any changes you make that are not sanctioned by Dometic could potentially release them from such liability and put it on you. Tim

[Crabbypatty]

Stevenal:
I used to have a three way fridge 12v/120v/lpg and on 12v it took a long time and lots of amps to cool. SO You observation from my perspective doesnt mean an overload, but rather a lower load due to the draw on your 12 volt batts/alternater. At first I missed the 12v, but I have used gas alot standing still and traveling and love it. Fridge stays cold and I dont worry about the batts.

Mine is now on 12 hours and all is nominal @ 42 ohms

[stevenal]

Okay, just made my order at rvmobile. I was the one advocating letting Dometic fix it properly, but from all accounts that is not what they are doing. Guess it's up to us to see that we get past the safety issue and look to longevity.

When placing my order, though, I saw something interesting. The same page shows the 210W 12V DC element. So the original problem was that Dometic put a 354W element in a tube designed for 325W, and now folks are advocating putting a 325 Watter in the 210W rated DC tube. Am I the only one seeing the problem with this idea?