Sockets with no RCD protection

[binky]

Binky , it looks like a blanket coverage now  .   

This is what bothers me now,  it is assumed an electrical system can't be safe with out 30mA protection, so why don't surgical theatres have RCDs, how have we all survived so long considering we were born in the age of rewirable fuses. Every factory I have worked in didn't have an RCD anywhere, and if you really want to RCD everything, there seems little understanding of  the application of 100mA and 300mA RCDs. perhaps we need to start installing more fused spurs to hardwire equipment instead of sockets???

 

[Sidney]

The problem now is more about litigation than protection of life. People get electrocuted, it happens, but now people want someone to blame for their own stupidity in a lot of cases.

 

[binky]

Nothing new there, no body should be working in a Telecoms tower unless suitably 'trained'. As I said earlier, this is commercial premises, and the Telecoms company will both be controlling access to the tower, and is responsible for their H&S training of thier staff, and any contrctors. Dealing with Joe Public in their houses is a different kettle of fish. IMHO RCDing every socket is unneccessary under these conditions.

 

[SPECIAL LOCATION]

The bottom line is you need someone with big enough Balls to write and sign a risk assessment saying we don't need RCDs here because of 'X' 'Y' and 'Z'...  

But very few people will be willing to put their Balls in front of the guiloteen or the lump hammer.....

So it ends up just RCD the lot 

 

[Evans Electric]

Dealing with Joe Public in their houses is a different kettle of fish. IMHO RCDing every socket is unneccessary under these conditions.

I tend to agree Binky ,    I feel the same about the  "cables buried less than 50mm deep in walls"  lettuced ..which  , at a stroke  ensures  100%  RCD  in certain circumstances . 

And the 18th takes us further down the line of appeasing  some manufacturers lobby to make a killing  supplying new devices ...Oooops , shouldn't a said that .  :facepalm:

 

[Evans Electric]

But very few people will be willing to put their Balls in front of the guiloteen or the lump hammer.....

So it ends up just RCD the lot 

Difficult to come up with something to justify , specially as a mere sparks . 

What happened to the criteria from the 16th  that was attached to  a socket serving  a freezer and the fear of losing an expensive load of food .   

Someone said earlier that a notice attached  didn't comply anymore. 

 

[Sidney]

The bottom line is you need someone with big enough Balls to write and sign a risk assessment saying we don't need RCDs here because of 'X' 'Y' and 'Z'...  

But very few people will be willing to put their Balls in front of the guiloteen or the lump hammer.....

So it ends up just RCD the lot 

All I want is the designer to either give me a risk assessment or agree to fit RCD socket-outlets.

I know he won't want to stick his name down to anything as he will take full liability in the unlikely event of someone getting a fatal shock. Due to the varied layouts and nature of telephone exchanges you cannot guarantee that some will just use a socket for maintenance and anything could be plugged in for general use, potentially some for outdoor use.

This leaves us with having to use RCD protection, but this will cost money, who will pay for this? As the installers we're haven't signed a contract to provide additional parts at cost and neither has our customer. BT will say this is for ourselves and our customer to sort out, the just want the racks put in as per their original contract.

Catch 22 for our customer.

I'm just covering my arse.

 

[Sharpend]

I would take this above this guy and ask for a statement from those above to say that they are taking sole responsibility for the design of the cabinets and the associated electrical equipement installed as being compliant with BS7671. 

On a similar note I found out this week that a certain large manufacturer of electric vehicle charge points have convinced the IET that it is not necessary to install a separate earth rod assembly on the smaller charging units due to their ingenuity of their electronic devices within their enclosures which ensures there is no risk in the event of a fault, however the rapid chargers still require a separate earth rod assembly. ? 

So I guess they are saying that their electronic components don’t fail. :C  

 

[Evans Electric]

I think you are right in doing so .

design of the cabinets and the associated electrical equipement installed as being compliant with BS7671. 

Sharpie ,  do these things actually come under BS7671      or  do they come under  the BS,s  Sidewinder deals with ? 

 

[Sharpend]

I think you are right in doing so .

Sharpie ,  do these things actually come under BS7671      or  do they come under  the BS,s  Sidewinder deals with ? 

Well I’m guessing the fact that Sidney has brought it up under a BS7671 issue then they may do? 

 

[Evans Electric]

Not these Machinery Directives  etc   in the Sidewinders  world  then .

 

[binky]

All I want is the designer to either give me a risk assessment or agree to fit RCD socket-outlets.

I know he won't want to stick his name down to anything as he will take full liability in the unlikely event of someone getting a fatal shock. Due to the varied layouts and nature of telephone exchanges you cannot guarantee that some will just use a socket for maintenance and anything could be plugged in for general use, potentially some for outdoor use.

I'm just covering my arse.

Don't blame you for arse covering, but you could make a comment on cert to achieve that. I would put RCD socket by entrance doors - easiest place to plug portable gear into if doing anything outside. To me that offers best of both worlds, and shouldn't be difficult to achieve at fairly minimal cost.

 

[binky]

I tend to agree Binky ,    I feel the same about the  "cables buried less than 50mm deep in walls"  lettuced ..which  , at a stroke  ensures  100%  RCD  in certain circumstances . 

It was never clear to me if that includes cables that are loose in a cavity wall, or just applies to those plastered over in a wall chase? To me a loose cable is unlikely to get damaged by a drill because it can move. But you are right, it's easier to RCD everything to save arguments.

I've been having an argument about buried cables under solid concrete - how much more mechanically protected can you get than 6" of solid concrete? Another part of that argument was cables that have been in place for over 10 years buried just under the top layer of grass in an old church (not fitted by me) . Council electrical engineer fella was arguing that their gardeners might damage the cables - s'funny how they haven't done that in 10 years, so whilst it wasn't correct to start with, history tells us that it isn't a problem??

 

[Sidney]

With ADS where do we stop, you cannot account for every scenario and even if you could then we have to take into account the ingenuity of idiots who will find a way.

It just annoys me that someone makes a sweeping statement that the sockets are for maintenance only but will not sign a bit of paper stating so. As part of the design they have no doubt assessed the risks in their heads so why not stick it down in black and white? (I know the answer already as we all do...)

I've got a meeting next week with our directors, this will be interesting as they're normally self serving and like to take it dry from the customer in the off chance we might get more work.

 

[Evans Electric]

What happens if you  note the lack of compliance  on your completion cert  and let them get on with it .  

 

[Sidney]

Would a note on a cert stand up in a court of law if the worst should happen?

More so could I live knowing that if I'd pushed harder someone have made it home to their family?

All what ifs I know but isn't this why we install circuits with safety in mind?

 

[Sharpend]

If it were I, then I'd be making a reference note on the certificate relating to the attached letter that outlined my concerns and possible non compliance. 

 

[Tony S]

I think you are right in doing so .

Sharpie ,  do these things actually come under BS7671      or  do they come under  the BS,s  Sidewinder deals with ? 

Conformance to specific aspects of BS 6701 is a requirement of the Wiring Regulations (BS 7671) and is applicable in virtually all premises.  In addition, it addresses cabling external to buildings and should be followed by anyone installing cabling.

 

[Sidney]

Conformance to specific aspects of BS 6701 is a requirement of the Wiring Regulations (BS 7671) and is applicable in virtually all premises.  In addition, it addresses cabling external to buildings and should be followed by anyone installing cabling.

We use 6701 on a daily basis, cost a few quid to buy, annoying when it mainly states refer to BS 7671... 

 

[Evans Electric]

Oh  Another rip off then .   !!