Responsible or not

[batty]

[quote name='Andy

 

[Andy™]

i have done in the past.

 

[batty]

[quote name='Andy

 

[Andy™]

I don't remember ever putting any cables outside zones but as you get older you may forget. I personally would try to avoid doing it.

safe zones only apply to cables without mechanical protection.

like of SWA, steel conduit, pyro etc can go anywhere in the wall

but even so, i would still try and stick to a safe zone

 

[batty]

[quote name='Andy

 

[Apache]

105 posts - who'd have thought it

 

[Andy™]

I am afraid I do not agree with that. Pyro down the centre of a wall someone nails it how the hell is that going to be repaired.

great difficulty!

it will be one expensive (failed) picture hook!

 

[niceguy]

pyro would be an easy repair compared to an SWA repair:^O

I also have to say that i also cannot believe that it has taken this long to get a fairly simple point across.

BUT, having said that, the regs can and are open to all sorts of interpretations and its easy to mis read and maybe even misunderstand what they are trying to state.

Peace.

:Y

 

[Andy™]

pyro would be an easy repair compared to an SWA repair:^OI also have to say that i also cannot believe that it has taken this long to get a fairly simple point across.

BUT, having said that, the regs can and are open to all sorts of interpretations and its easy to mis read and maybe even misunderstand what they are trying to state.

:Y

i would have thought pyro would be harder to repair

 

[The Godfather]

pyro would be an easy repair compared to an SWA repair:^O
I also have to say that i also cannot believe that it has taken this long to get a fairly simple point across.

BUT, having said that, the regs can and are open to all sorts of interpretations and its easy to mis read and maybe even misunderstand what they are trying to state.

Peace.

:Y

But not everyone my friend.

The Godfather

 

[spinlondon]

[quote name='Andy

 

[spinlondon]

I think my one & only post on this topic is going to have to be:
Forgive me if my command of the english language has gone defective here - I simply cannot manage to get my head to process these two comments.

It is akin to eating an orange without eating an orange, isn`t it?

As to the actual "discussion", Who says that "putting an RCD on the circuit" is equivalent, or better, than following 7671? Just you? Or have you been given this idea from somewhere else, i.e. scam provider or IET etc...

Just curious...

KME

Have you actually read the chapter on departures from BS7671?

Have you read the advice given by the NICEIC relating to lighting circuits that have no CPC?

It is the NICEIC that advises how to comply with BS7671, whilst not complying with BS7671.

If you think that this is paradoxical, why are you a member of the NICEIC?

 

[Apache]

Have you actually read the chapter on departures from BS7671?Have you read the advice given by the NICEIC relating to lighting circuits that have no CPC?

It is the NICEIC that advises how to comply with BS7671, whilst not complying with BS7671.

If you think that this is paradoxical, why are you a member of the NICEIC?

You mean this one?

http://www.niceic.com/inc/file-get.asp?FILE=BPG1_aug07.pdf&RURL=/EN/contractor/section.asp%7C%7C13

that states an RCD is not suitable as a sole means of preventing an electric shock. I have read the entire document and notice not one mention of safe zones

:|

 

[Apache]

It is the NICEIC that advises how to comply with BS7671, whilst not complying with BS7671.

Mate, you clearly have a lot to add to the forum, but quoting that makes you sound like a madman.

What you suggest isn't possible. (Physically or grammatically).

We all accept that BS7671 isn't a legal document and you don't have to comply with it, but by not complying you can't comply with it!

Really!

 

[spinlondon]

It appears that there are a number of people that think they understand the Regulations but don't.

522.6.6 A cable concealed in a wall or partition at a depth of less than 50mm from the surface of the wall or partition shall :

(i) incorparate an earthed metallic covering which complies with the requirements of these regulations for a protective conductor of the circuit concerned, the cable complying with BS 5467, 6346, 6724, 7846, BS EN 60702-1 or BS 8436 OR

(ii) be enclosed in earthed conduit complying with BS EN 61386 and satisfying and satisfying the requirements of these regulations for a protective conductor OR

(iii) be enclosed in earthed trunking or ducting complying with BS EN 50085 and satisfying the requirements of these regulations for a protective conductor OR

(iv) be mechanically protected against damage sufficient to prevent penetration of the cable by nails, screws and the like.

(v) be installed in a zone within 150mm from the top of the wall or partition or within 150mm of an angle formed by two adjoining walls or partitions. Where the cable is connected to a point, accessory or switchgear on any surface of the wall or partition, the cable may be installed in a zone either horizontally or vertically, to the point, accessory or switchgear. Where the location of the accessory, point or switchgear can be determined from the reverse side, a zone formed on one side of a wall of 100mm thickness or less or partition of 100mm thickness or less extends to the reverse side.

522.6.7 Where Regulation 522.6.6 applies and the installation is not intended to be under the supervision of a skilled or instructed person, a cable installed in accordance with Regulation 522.6.6 (v), and not complying with Regulation 522.6.6 (i), (ii), (iii) or (iv), shall be provided with additional protection by means of an RCD having the characteristics specified inRegulation 415.1.1.

Now, what I am stating, is this:

1. That these two Regulations only apply to cables concealed in a wall at a depth that is less than 50mm.

2. That 522.6.7 only applies to cables that are in safe zones.

3. That protecting cables that are not in safe zones with an RCD will offer the same level of protection as cables that meet the requirements of 552.6.6(i) and 552.6.7.

Here is a link to the ESC best practice guide for replacing Consumer Units where lighting circuits do not have CPCs. http://www.esc.org.uk/pdfs/business-and-community/electrical-industry/BPG1_08.pdf

As you can see from the guide, the advice given is that you do not have to comply with the requirements of BS7671 to provide a CPC for the existing lighting circuits.

That you can install RCDs, ensure that the fittings are class II, fix a warning notice to the Consumer Unit and detail the non-compliances (Departures) on the Certificate.

I have suggested that accessories could be removed, the cables joined and the joints concealed, that an RCD be installed and the departure be noted on the Certificate.

How does my suggestion differ from the advice given by the ESC?

 

[spinlondon]

You mean this one?http://www.niceic.com/inc/file-get.asp?FILE=BPG1_aug07.pdf&RURL=/EN/contractor/section.asp%7C%7C13

that states an RCD is not suitable as a sole means of preventing an electric shock. I have read the entire document and notice not one mention of safe zones

:|

Right, have I suggested that an RCD should be used as a sole means of preventing electric shock?

I don't think so.

The circuit we have been discussing already has a means of preventing electric shock, it has a CPC. I have suggested installing an RCD as additional protection.

I never said that it mentioned safe zones.

It is a requirement of BS7671 that all circuits have a CPC.

The advice is that you do not have to comply with the requirement to provide a CPC, if you install an RCD etc.

 

[spinlondon]

Mate, you clearly have a lot to add to the forum, but quoting that makes you sound like a madman. What you suggest isn't possible. (Physically or grammatically).

We all accept that BS7671 isn't a legal document and you don't have to comply with it, but by not complying you can't comply with it!

Really!

I am trying to point out that the NICEIC, which owns the ESC offers advice on how to change a CU, I&T the installation to BS7671 whilst not complying with BS7671.

It's paradoxical, it's not my paradox, it's the NICEIC/ESCs paradox.

 

[SPECIAL LOCATION]

I have suggested that accessories could be removed, the cables joined and the joints concealed, that an RCD be installed and the departure be noted on the Certificate.How does my suggestion differ from the advice given by the ESC?

It is two different unrelated risks being compared.

No CPC in lighting circuits pivots around the problem of complying with

411.3.1.1 electric shock.

All exposed conductive parts Must be connected to a protective earth.

The ESC guidance note you refer to gives the RCD solution as a LAST RESORT to a situation where the customer is unable/unwilling to pay the additional cost of installation of CPCs to all LIGHTING circuits.. (NOTE this exception only applies to LIGHTING circuits)

It is not used as a get-out-clause for non compliance with regulations on other types of circuit. And the bottom of page 4 also states

A disclaimer does not absolve the installer from responsibility!

The buried in walls bit..

relates to protecting cables from IMPACT damage!

nothing to do with exposed conductive parts

As a general rule 80%+ of a lighting circuit is in a ceiling void NOT up and down walls.

Most people don't go hammering or drilling the ceiling to put up shelves and pictures... so Impact damage is less of a risk in ceilings..

it is purely the risk of metal light fittings switches becoming live under fault conditions, so they suggest go for class II and RCD such that if a metal fixing screw did become live the RCD should trip and reduce the risk of electric shock.

Where all circuit cables down walls MUST be protected from Impact,

An RCD is NOT a recognised means of cable protection from impact penetration!

By using safe zones, the Logic of not putting a nail in the wall above a switch or socket provides natural logic impact protection.

and IF the homeowner forgets the RCD is a back up!

cables outside the safe zones have physical protection and/or earthed sheathing such than any item penetrating the cable will go to earth potential first before it encounters any live potential conductors. at which point the fuse and or RCD trips!

 

[SPECIAL LOCATION]

:^OBlushing

Phew I have read it all!!!!ROTFWLROTFWL

it is clear that ALL the key points have been discussed about 27.5 times in every direction, up/down/left/right!!!!

and I didn't get many chances to have a go on the swings:_| :_| :_|

So I will just summaries the facts....

(and include the one bit that I think everyone missed?????????)

Cables buried in walls MUST BE PROTECTED FROM IMPACT

(thats what section 522.6 of the regs is on about.)

522.6.6, 522.6.7, 522.6.8 pages 100,101 give all the technical guff..

Or page 60 of the One Site Guide.

cables buried less than 50mm must EITHER;

(i) incorporate earth metallic covering

OR

(ii) enclosed in earthed conduit

OR

(iii) enclosed in earthed trunking

OR

(iv) sufficiently mechanically protected to avoid penetration by nails etc..

OR

(v) be run in a safe zone.

If the installation is domestic (non supervised) cables in safe zones must ALSO have RCD protection.

One quick little side thought, A cable run less than 50mm deep in a wall NOT in a safe zone and only RCD protected...

could be said to not comply with regulation 522.6.1 (bottom of page 99)

Wiring systems shall be selected and erected so as to minimise the damage arising from mechanical stress, e.g. by impact, penetration, tension or compression during installation, use or maintenance.

to me that includes the risk of homeowner nailing through the wall in 3 years time after you have done you work.

Right...

back to the business of taking an accessory off and leaving a cable down the Wall with only RCD protection ......

There IS an occasion where this is permissible...

.....................?

have you guessed it yet?

do you want a clue?O)

shall I tell you???Blushing;\

oh gew on then... you did ask nice! :x

Look again at the picture on page 60 of the On site guide..

or for those who have the NIC pocket gudes....

Look at guide 6 (permitted cable route zones).

SO...

If the cable is coming down a wall to an accessory and the wall is no more than 100mm thick, and there is a suitable reference measure point e.g. a doorway..

The zone on one side of the wall is mirrored onto the reverse side of the wall...

So IF there was an accessory on the opposite side of the wall to where you took one accessory off

the cables can be left going down / across the wall to NO accessory on that side!

an apparent virtual safe zone form t'other side -a- wall!!!BlushingGuinnessGuinness:x

:coat :coat:coat

 

[spinlondon]

Cables concealed in walls are protected against impact.

Regulations 522.6.6/7/8 are to protect against penetration.

As for the 100mm thick wall business.

This has been around for some time.

It allows you to run a concealed cable down one side of a wall, and then place the accessory on the other. Not something that I have ever been particuarly in favour of, as I've always considered it to be a dangerous practice.