Bathroom Wiring - D Skelton - Other Interpretations.

[Doc Hudson]

Probably RCD FCU the bathroom lighting circuit. But I haven't seen the job, so can't say for sure.

I very much doubt that any of our members have seen the job, nor can they say for sure, but this is the very nature of the way on-line forums work. Excluding occasional photo attachments to a question, none of us can see the installation in question. But from the information provided some reasonable and sound practical advice was given directly answering the OP's question. (That was the first 5 posts). Perhaps if you are not confident enough to commit to answering the actual question, it may have been better not to hijack someone else's thread for your debate on how you interpret BS7671 compared to other members interpretations. I agree with Batty that posts 6 onward now at 50+ have little or no practical use or help to 'dsnd_medic's question.

We aim to encourage constructive and helpful input from any member who feels they have a relevant comment to make on a topic and you are more than welcome to start your own topic to debate an issue that concerns you. However, it is also a fact the on-line forums are vulnerable to lonely people who just want to talk, Trolls who just want to disrupt, Advertisers who just want to spam, Insecure people trying to build their ego to justify their existence and other such odd-balls. As such, irrelevant posts preventing a member from getting their question answered are of no help, especially those that contradict themselves, nor do they give the impression of someone with useful knowledge to assist a question.

So if you are unable to answer the relevant question, rather than cluttering the topic, please just read and follow the subject as you may then learn some useful solutions to a problem.  

Doc H.  

 

[D Skelton]

I very much doubt that any of our members have seen the job, nor can they say for sure, but this is the very nature of the way on-line forums work. Excluding occasional photo attachments to a question, none of us can see the installation in question. But from the information provided some reasonable and sound practical advice was given directly answering the OP's question. (That was the first 5 posts). Perhaps if you are not confident enough to commit to answering the actual question, it may have been better not to hijack someone else's thread for your debate on how you interpret BS7671 compared to other members interpretations. I agree with Batty that posts 6 onward now at 50+ have little or no practical use or help to 'dsnd_medic's question.

We aim to encourage constructive and helpful input from any member who feels they have a relevant comment to make on a topic and you are more than welcome to start your own topic to debate an issue that concerns you. However, it is also a fact the on-line forums are vulnerable to lonely people who just want to talk, Trolls who just want to disrupt, Advertisers who just want to spam, Insecure people trying to build their ego to justify their existence and other such odd-balls. As such, irrelevant posts preventing a member from getting their question answered are of no help, especially those that contradict themselves, nor do they give the impression of someone with useful knowledge to assist a question.

So if you are unable to answer the relevant question, rather than cluttering the topic, please just read and follow the subject as you may then learn some useful solutions to a problem.  

Doc H.  

My OP was originally made to slightly correct wrong advice given, and that was that manufacturers instructions require a 3A fuse and that the OP would need to provide three pole isolation. In itself this also advises the OP that he is not bound to only one solution. This is not my interpretation of the regs, it is the regs, and I sure as hell don't consider it to be hijacking a thread to correct someones wrong advice.

I view this to be helpful and constructive, I even went back and edited my OP in order to show it as being informative and not a dig. My posts have nowhere contradicted themselves, nor do I believe they give an impression that I have no useful knowledge to contribute to a question and answer thread on bathroom fan wiring.

From your post it would seem you just want to add yourself to the list of people who have nothing better to do than put down someone who isn't part of your gang with sly and poorly disguised insults. It was not me who chose to start the witch hunt that made this thread as long as it is now, I have just continued to contribute in an effort to justify myself (not that I have any obligation to) to people who don't know me from Adam but wish to try and pick apart what I have said is written in black and white for no other reason than because I am not a regular member here.

I get it, I really do. If you want to stick your head above the parapet and challenge not only popular opinion but also the views of someone who is an established member, regardless of whether or not they are wrong or right, you've got to expect to take some slack. But don't for a minute confuse someone who is openly outspoken about popular misconceptions and who freely presents alternative views as someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.

I think you'll find if you read back through the thread you'll find it isn't me who is keen on cluttering the topic as I have stuck to the point the whole way through, it is in fact many of the 'elite' club on here that have cluttered it with insults and poorly constructed challenges of my knowledge.

The question was answered as best as it could be one or two posts in, but three or four posts in some technically incorrect advise was given. I corrected this, and I did my best to ensure my advice was informative and non-offencive, unlike the mud slinging that ensued afterwards! If you're looking for insecurity, odd-balls or people who want to satisfy nothing but their own egos, you need to look a bit closer to home fella.

 

[Doc Hudson]

Fortunately it looks as though dsnd-medic has not logged back in since a lot of your "input" from post 6 onward. To save him/her wasting time reading though nonconstructive comments I have split this section of posts off onto a new thread. My previous post was in reply to Battys observation that it was not helpful to the OP and your comment that you were unsure how to answer the original question as you haven't seen the job. My further comments related to some of the common problems with forums and an observation that off topic arguments do not help the forum or the members asking questions and that your posts do not appear very helpful or constructive. Yes I have read though them and I do know what I am talking about thank you. So now you are implying that I am protecting some little elite club and don't know what I am talking about? As BlueDuck puts if, the OP read most of post 6 onward I'm sure he's scratching his head thinking wtf? Maybe you can't see this for some reason or another. Whatever the reason is, you will be wise to follow the guidance given by forum moderators if you wish to stay a member. All of our members are part of our "elite" club or "gang" if you want to call the forum by that name, whether they have 1 post or 10,000+ posts.

Doc H.   

 

[D Skelton]

Yes I have read though them and I do know what I am talking about thank you. So now you are implying that I am protecting some little elite club and don't know what I am talking about? 

I never even incinuated that you don't know what you're talking about, just that you were jumping on the bandwagon with regards to your comments about me contradicting myself and having no useful knowledge. And yes, I am implying that you are protecting some little elite club. I can only reach this conclusion because I have never been met with the sort of hostility I have encountered here on any other forum I am a regular contributor of, in fact quite the opposite. My views here are treated like a fart in the wind, elsewhere, they are appreciated as knowledgable and helpful, you only have to ask around to know this. The only reason I can see for this is because I'm not known here. All I can say is that I see this on every forum I visit, this one is not alone. New members that are outspoken are often quickly jumped on by the majority and is something I have never been party to, if anything, I reslish the opportunity to debate with someone who can put a different perspective on something. My point is, I get it, it's fine, and if I stick around I'm sure you'll realise that I'm not just some annoying little troll, but until that time, as the newbie round here, I expect to have to put up with a little mud being slung my way.

As BlueDuck puts if, the OP read most of post 6 onward I'm sure he's scratching his head thinking wtf? Maybe you can't see this for some reason or another.

Of course I can see this, and I agree, but I wasn't the one who let this thread descend to the depths of sly digs, insults and wild assumptions that it has. I offered an opinion and an alternative way of looking at things and was met with almost vehement hatred. You have to ask yourself, who really is to blame for that, because from where I'm sitting, it isn't me.

Whatever the reason is, you will be wise to follow the guidance given by forum moderators if you wish to stay a member.

I will be wise to be me. I'll follow guidance A. when it is given, and B. when it is due. Until that point, I'll meet unfounded assumptions about me and my level of knowledge with a giggle. So far, no guidance has been given because I have done nothing wrong.

 All of our members are part of our "elite" club or "gang" if you want to call the forum by that name, whether they have 1 post or 10,000+ posts.

You can try and pull the wool over my eyes all you want, I've been around forums long enough to know how it works. Like I said, it's fine, I accept that I have to take a bashing from the clique here before I stand any sort of chance of being accepted. It's totally cool, I have a thick skin so please do let whoever wants to sling mud in my direction do so without hinderance. You have to at least allow them to get it out of their system

 

[NozSpark]

I have not contributed to this thread up until now, but now I will.

You said (3 posts ago) that it is not you interpretation of the regs, and that you are only stating what the regs say... this is an incorrect statement (IMHO)... most people interpret the regs in different ways, it is what is called their perception. People perceive things in different ways due to their own previous experiences and as these are many and varied then it is rare that anyone will look at something in exactly the same way as anyone else.

We also need to remember that the regs are only guidance and that we are not required to blindly follow them

 

[D Skelton]

I have not contributed to this thread up until now, but now I will.

You said (3 posts ago) that it is not you interpretation of the regs, and that you are only stating what the regs say... this is an incorrect statement (IMHO)... most people interpret the regs in different ways, it is what is called their perception. People perceive things in different ways due to their own previous experiences and as these are many and varied then it is rare that anyone will look at something in exactly the same way as anyone else.

We also need to remember that the regs are only guidance and that we are not required to blindly follow them

You are quite right, there are many regs that are open to interpretation. What I was referring to when I mentioned what the regs actually say, as opposed to how we can interpret them, is terms like 'local isolation', which is a term that doesn't exist. What does exist however is the term 'readily accessible means of switching off', which is completely different to isolation. Another term commonly misused is 'isolation for mechanical maintenace'. Some take this to mean that the fan itself has to be isolatable as a single item of equipment, when what the regs actually call for is that current using equipment must have a means of isolation.

With regards to the issue originally under discussion, someone said that the fan must be fused down and a three pole isolator must be fitted. This is simply not the case, there are many ways you can instal a bathroom fan, all of which are dependant on individual circumstances leaving no room for hard and fast rules.

Thank you for your input though, I appreciate the useful contribution to the thread

 

[Sidewinder]

Damien,

You do however need to carefully consider BS7671 reg. Group 537.3.2, along with as the designer, your statute law duties under CDM.

Whilst the term "isolation for mechanical maintenance" may not be an explicit term in BS7671, it is a well understood, tried and tested term which is legitimately used to describe the situation here.

Everyone would do well to remember and understand that CDM regulations overrule BS7671 as they are statutory, and HSE, certainly in Wales for the next 3 years are clamping down on the competence of designers under CDM, whilst many people think that CDM on.y applies if the work is notifiable, that is totally incorrect.

CDM applies to ALL construction works of any kind in any premises, and, sad as it may seem, designing and installing a bathroom fan in a private dwelling comes under CDM.

 

[D Skelton]

Damien,

You do however need to carefully consider BS7671 reg. Group 537.3.2, along with as the designer, your statute law duties under CDM.

Whilst the term "isolation for mechanical maintenance" may not be an explicit term in BS7671, it is a well understood, tried and tested term which is legitimately used to describe the situation here.

Everyone would do well to remember and understand that CDM regulations overrule BS7671 as they are statutory, and HSE, certainly in Wales for the next 3 years are clamping down on the competence of designers under CDM, whilst many people think that CDM on.y applies if the work is notifiable, that is totally incorrect.

CDM applies to ALL construction works of any kind in any premises, and, sad as it may seem, designing and installing a bathroom fan in a private dwelling comes under CDM.

One of the items listed in section 537.3.2 as being suitable for the purpose of switching off for mechanical maintenance is a circuit breaker I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, although yes, you're right, this section, along with others would need to be considered. With regards to the CDM regulations and part two within, yes, it does place the responsibility on the designer to make sure that whatever they are designing is safe. But, could you provide any information as to how a designer could demonstrate doing this? I can't, although I would bet that A. being competent, and B. following the requirements of BS7671 would go a long way in proving that you have met some of the requirements of the CDM regs as a designer of an electrical installation. As long as you can competently justify a decision made it can reasonably be demonstrated that you have complied with the requirments contained within.

There are many careful considerations we as electricians have to make on a daily basis. Often though, we are presented with a smorgas board of information with which to base our decisions on. There isn't many cases in our trade where there is onle one single way of achieving compliance with something.

One other thing. Bearing in mind everything mentioned above and the responsibilities we as electricians are faced with on a daily basis. Why is it that plumbers earn more than us?!

 

[Sidewinder]

The DRA's would be a good start to prove how the designer could demonstrate this, plus they would need access to the relevant documents for the work that they are undertaking, relevant standards etc., plus competence in undertaking DRA's.

 

[D Skelton]

Why would a seperate risk assessment need to be carried out in this circumstance though? Means of reducing hazards, danger and risks would be integrated into the design process by ensuring compliance with BS7671 surely?

 

[Sidewinder]

It would, because BS7671 is only part of what you have to comply with.

 

[D Skelton]

Yes, but following BS7671 in the design of the bathroom extractor fan circuit would demonstrate compliance with other relevant regulations. You gonna draw up a seperate set of DRAs for every single minor electrical alteration?

 

[Sidewinder]

That is up to you as the designer, the law is clear, how you comply with it is your decision.

As I have stated, there are other overarching requirements that put BS7671 in the shade, even for domestic, the decision is yours as the designer how you tackle this.

 

[D Skelton]

That is up to you as the designer, the law is clear, how you comply with it is your decision.

As I have stated, there are other overarching requirements that put BS7671 in the shade, even for domestic, the decision is yours as the designer how you tackle this.

Can't disagree with that.

 

[Sidewinder]

You just need to be sure that you are insured and competent, and can demonstrate your competence in a Court of Law & justify your decisions, etc. etc.

Also, you should have Professional Indemnity insurance for design works, to pay for your defence team in the event of an issue, especially if you are self-employed.

Tends to stop the hounds coming after your house and car etc.

Not aimed at anyone, just general info btw.

 

[D Skelton]

Yes I've always advocated the use of PI insurance for anyone carrying out any form of design or T&I work. Common sense really!

 

[SPECIAL LOCATION]

One of the items listed in section 537.3.2 as being suitable for the purpose of switching off for mechanical maintenance is a circuit breaker I believe, correct me if I'm wrong,

Indeed it is... and we all knew that a long time ago...

it is not a gem of wisdom that you brought to the discussion...

However...  step back into the real world...

example #1 I gave earlier

Consider a typical timer fan installation...

The run on timer circuit goes faulty so it keeps the fan permanently energised...

Customer rings up lat on Friday with a fault ..

"hello my extractor fan just keeps on running where can I turn it off?"

Skelton Electrical solution...

"oh yes just go and turn off the whole circuit... or just leave it running till we can get their on Monday fix the fault"

Or additionally....

most domestic fuse boxes have very little space to write what the MCB's actually protect....

So absolutely no hope of also writing Bathroom extractor fan on there as well..

To let the poor user find this "non-local" isolator.

Loads of CU's are installed in inaccessible locations. 

High up next to the garage roof...

Behind the kitchen cupboard...

Outside in the meter box...

Again making it hard for the poor user to figure out where to turn their fan off!!

When I asked earlier about my example #1 scenario.. 

you said your weren't saying how to do it..

just offering other suggestions..

But your suggestion of using the MCB as a sensible practical solution for the customer is about as much use as a chocolate teapot!.

Take a look at the instructions for a common domestic fan: Vent-Axia DX range...

http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Technical/DataSheets/Xpelair/DX100.pdf

as per good old common sense they suggest a double pole isolator with 3mm contact gap..

Note they like loads of other fan manufactures also recommend that the fan is cleaned on a regular basis...

Very helpful having a local isolator to allow the customer to do this safely without having to turn a whole lighting circuit off!!

We can all spend time arguing petty interpretations of BS7671 and why we don't have to do something one way...

BUT the reality is in the case of the original question about a bathroom fan..

A local isolator.. be it 2pole or 3pole if required is a far better solution than even thinking of using the MCB!

 

[D Skelton]

I answered this back at #43, I'm not going over it again.

Let me ask you this one question though; you get a call from a customer who's bathroom fan is kaput and they want you to replace it, you go round and have a look at the job and they live in a flat, the ceiling space above their bathroom is inaccessible from above. Crucially however, whoever fitted the fan in the first place didn't fit an isolator of any kind for it. Are you going to stand there and say "Sorry love, can't put a new one in until I've fitted a three pole isolator outside yer bathroom door and fused down your bathroom lighting circuit to 1A coz that's what the regs says innit which involves quite a bit of work tearing bits of your ceiling down in order to run all the cables I need to"?

Or.... Are you going to say "Yes, I can replace that no problem" and then go on to explain the potential benefit of having a local point of switching it off, but leaving it in the customers hands to work out whether the benefit is worth the cost?

Oh, and before you answer, the benefit of a local point of switching off has never been in dispute, just the requirement or non-requirement for it.

Me, I'm going with the latter. Like I've said all along, many different types of situation call for many ways to skin this cat.

I think this thread is pretty much done now isn't it, don't you?

 

[kme]

How the heck did I miss all this, FCOL???

OK - my tuppenceworth - for what good it`ll do.

There seems to be a lot of debate, both on the forum, and out in the real world, about correct interpretations of things (including regulations, electrical & non ).

My belief was that our goal in this forum was help & enlightenment; not incubation of misinformation!!

Damien: Yes, there are many ways to do works; some of which may involve "grey areas" of regulatory interpretation.

MY personal take on this is that there are TWO distinct parts of any design / install process:

1. Compliance with regulations.

2. Personal beliefs and common sense.

For instance: Last year, the "connections" magazine advocated the use of 3 core flex for final connections to timer fans. 

MY personal belief is that this is:

a) contravening regulations, and

b) poor practice, and something I will not do.

However, that article was written by people with much more experience than me; and they obviously believe that it IS an acceptable practice. I won`t do it ( or advocate it), but I won`t start a diatribe about it!

Similarly: let us suppose that your suggestions of using the final circuit OCPD as a means of isolating the fan is acceptable ( I`m not saying it IS - but lets suppose). It is certainly not sensible, or good practice.

Surely we must, as part of the " necessary experience" department of competence, be able & willing to look at, and know, what is sensible & in the clients` best interest - in conjunction with knowing the regs necessary for technical compliance? 

What this suggests to me is that the 5 day course hasn`t taught any common sense; and some survivors candidates of these courses have suspended their own sense of what is acceptable & rational, because they "have to follow the rules".

To be fair, you are stating that blindly following the "only one way to do xxxx" is incorrect - however, many of these time-tested; "unwritten rules", are there because they work. Its as simple as that. We don`t need to re-invent the wheel - its already here & working well. 

 

[SPECIAL LOCATION]

I answered this back at #43, I'm not going over it again.

{erm actually you just have!!! }  me red

Let me ask you this one question though; you get a call from a customer who's bathroom fan is kaput and they want you to replace it, you go round and have a look at the job and they live in a flat, the ceiling space above their bathroom is inaccessible from above. Crucially however, whoever fitted the fan in the first place didn't fit an isolator of any kind for it. Are you going to stand there and say "Sorry love, can't put a new one in until I've fitted a three pole isolator outside yer bathroom door and fused down your bathroom lighting circuit to 1A coz that's what the regs says innit which involves quite a bit of work tearing bits of your ceiling down in order to run all the cables I need to"?

Or.... Are you going to say "Yes, I can replace that no problem" and then go on to explain the potential benefit of having a local point of switching it off, but leaving it in the customers hands to work out whether the benefit is worth the cost?

Oh, and before you answer, the benefit of a local point of switching off has never been in dispute, just the requirement or non-requirement for it.

Me, I'm going with the latter. Like I've said all along, many different types of situation call for many ways to skin this cat.

I think this thread is pretty much done now isn't it, don't you?

Replacing an existing faulty accessory is different from designing a new installed accessory...

(same principal as like for like replacement work not necessarily requiring bring up to full compliance with current regs)..

However...   I don't think the original question was about faulty replacement work..  was it??

it was designing new work..!!

This was the question we were all answering..

and why I guess Deke suggested an isolator as a requirement of good guidance for the original bloke asking the questioin..

You said that was wrong!!

implying that others were just mindlessly following regs without applying them sensibly and practically 

and then then you went off with your daft idea of suggesting designing to use the OCPD...

As I pointed.. any idiot knows it is functional and possible..

But It is just a plain daft design idea showing lack of common sence..

Even tying to bring it up as a point of debate gives little or no merit to the discussion..

So I am glad to see you finally admit your suggestion was poor to say the least... :Applaud

and ultimately we have come back to the place where the actual original guidance given was all quite logical and sound without any blindly following of any regs...

so your input actually brought nothing new to the discussion of the question in hand.....!

  :C