Main bonding, following on from other threads

[ADS]

No-one else seems to want to have a go, Sidewinder, so are you going to tell us your plans?

 

[Sidewinder]

Not yet things are not exhausted...

Come on peeps there is more meat on this yet.

I'll drip feed things if people are prepared to have a go.

 

[Manator]

I was wrong, with my suggestions, so if anyone wants to beat up a mod, then have a go at replying to this thread.

 

[Sidewinder]

Not wrong M,

Just not my way of thinking.

BTW do you "agree" with my thoughts?...

 

[steptoe]

I cant answer,

I had to explain to him how to do it, his idea was waaaaay wrong,! :slap

 

[Manator]

Not wrong M,Just not my way of thinking.

BTW do you "agree" with my thoughts?...

Yes I do, and to be honest is the only way you could do it notwithstanding all regulations. One point though, remember those touch voltages, they are a pain to achieve with normal T&E cable.

 

[Sidewinder]

Polymer service feeds!

---------- Post Auto-Merged at 22:39 ---------- Previous post was made at 22:39 ----------

BTW thanks for the support I value that!

 

[ADS]

I was wrong, with my suggestions, so if anyone wants to beat up a mod, then have a go at replying to this thread.

Care to enlighten us with your suggestions?

 

[steptoe]

dont ask,

just give him a slap,

not often you get a chance to slap a mod without repercussions is it,?

 

[Sidewinder]

Nope he can't, not yet anyway or he will get a slap!

 

[Manator]

Care to enlighten us with your suggestions?

Of course I will, i thought that the clue in the description was the statement that the distance from the stop tap, hence the water intake was 6m away as the crow flies, now to me I would argue that the disruption and extra costs of getting a suitable bond to this either inside or outside of the property, would be equally served if the bonding was done local to the CU. My reasons being that the connections could be easily identified, located and tested. They would not suffer from fauna and other influences (external), and as long as the certificates noted the position of the bonds, it would still comply to the regulations.

However, Sidewinder does have a particular problem with this install, which does have some bearing on the outcome.

 

[Sidewinder]

:slap

^ nearest thing I could find to a slap for M

 

[wozz]

Assuming the job is not in Scotland,Approved Document P, Section 2, 2.1

Where any electrical installation work is classified as an extension, the addition & alteration work must include:

a) such works on the existing fixed electrical installation in the building as are necessary to enable.....

the addition/alteration (the extension) ;

the circuits which feed it;

the protective measures &

the relevant earthing and bonding systems..........

....to meet the requirements

AND....

B) Establishing that the mains supply equipment is suitable.

So all four items listed above have to meet the requirements of the current regs........the 100 mA up-front RCD doesn't, and neither will a RCD fused spur......what about RCD protection for the rest of the circuit?

The later half of 2.3 seems to say only what you install needs to comply?

 

[ADS]

The later half of 2.3 seems to say only what you install needs to comply?

2.3

In accordance with regulation 4(2), the whole of the existing installation does not need to be upgraded to current standards, but only to the extent necessary for the new work to meet current standards......

This actually ties in with 2.1 by saying that although you don't have to bring the whole of the existing installation up to current regs, you do have to bring any of the existing installation that has a bearing on your 'addition/alteration' up to current standards.

Breaking 2.1 down into single, (readable), sentences, it states:

........the addition and alteration work must include such works on the existing electrical installation as are necessary to enable the additions and alterations to meet the requirements.

........the addition and alteration work must include such works on the existing electrical installation as are necessary to enable the circuits which feed the additions and alterations to meet the requirements.

........the addition and alteration work must include such works on the existing electrical installation as are necessary to enable the protective measures and relative earthing and bonding systems to meet the requirements.

This seems pretty straight forward to me if you want to comply with the 'Building Regs'.

Regulation 4(2), regarding the building being no worse, (after work is completed), in respect of compliance, applies to all parts of the 'Building Regs' and not just part P - so you can't just say, 'well, it's better (electrically) than it was' - it has to comply with all the 'Building Regs'.

 

[wozz]

Ok so would you say this goes beyond the requirements of 7671?

What page is 4(2) on?

This is in the notes of application.

Regulation 4(2) also means that, when extending

or altering an installation, only the new work

must meet current requirements and there is no

obligation to upgrade the existing installation

unless the new work would adversely affect the

safety of the existing installation, or the state of

the existing installation was such that the new

work could not be operated safely, or where there

is a requirement to upgrade imposed by the

energy efficiency requirements of the Building

Regulations.

This to me is saying earthing and bonding is to meet meet 7671 and my additional part of circuit and not the existing?

 

[ADS]

Ok so would you say this goes beyond the requirements of 7671?

Not sure what you mean by 'beyond the requirements' - Building Regs are statutory, 7671 isn't.

What page is 4(2) on?

It's the actual 'building regulation' they're referring to, not the approved document.

This is in the notes of application.

Regulation 4(2) also means that, when extending

or altering an installation, only the new work

must meet current requirements and there is no

obligation to upgrade the existing installation

unless the new work would adversely affect the

safety of the existing installation, or the state of

the existing installation was such that the new

work could not be operated safely, or where there

is a requirement to upgrade imposed by the

energy efficiency requirements of the Building

Regulations.

This to me is saying earthing and bonding is to meet meet 7671 and my additional part of circuit and not the existing?

I'll give you this one - kind of contradicting itself really, isn't it.

Typical.......let's make things as unclear as possible.

 

[wozz]

Sorry I wasnt very clear there, iv always thought main bonding and earthing sound im ok to make a addition to a circuit as long as what i do complies, no need to upgrade whole circuit to the 17th edition, following guidance from ESC.

2.3 as a whole does seem to ask for the whole circuit to be upgraded, which is asking for more than 7671. Which is where my 'beyond' bit came from.

Typical.......let's make things as unclear as possible.

Couldnt agree more mate but keeps us on our toes.

IF we all argeed with each other we would be like plumbers

 

[ADS]

Sorry I wasnt very clear there, iv always thought main bonding and earthing sound im ok to make a addition to a circuit as long as what i do complies, no need to upgrade whole circuit to the 17th edition, following guidance from ESC.

Some think this way, where others tend to think - 'if you've worked on a circuit, you're responsible for it' - it's another 'grey' area that causes a lot of confusion.

There was a good article written a couple of years ago - I can't remember who by or what it appeared in - but it took you, in stages, from the new socket you installed all the way back to the board, explaining why you had to be responsible for the whole lot - and not just the new socket.

Maybe one of the others read it as well and can remember where it is

 

[gselectrical]

As far as the bonding goes, I would agree with ADS' post (no 15). But I assume this is not the route you have decided to take Side?

You said that the boiler is on the ground floor? What is above the boiler? as in on the 1st floor?

Cheers.

GS

 

[Sidewinder]

As far as the bonding goes, I would agree with ADS' post (no 15). But I assume this is not the route you have decided to take Side?You said that the boiler is on the ground floor? What is above the boiler? as in on the 1st floor?

Cheers.

GS

Job not done yet gs.

I will really have to install a bond to the main water incomer.

I am going to try to upgrade the gas incoming bond.

The gas should be easy, the water will be around the outside of the property under the drip.

These will be 16mm.

I am also toying with upgrading the gas cross bonding at the boiler.

ADS,

You suggest ditching the 100mA, I asked for what, i could not see a reply mate any suggestions?

---------- Post Auto-Merged at 20:29 ---------- Previous post was made at 20:28 ----------

So you mean a sparky goes to a house and adds a socket, does it properly and they are now responsible for the whole of the old installation ?

Well I don't read it that way, nor do I do it that way!

It is not always that clear cut.