Help with planning a cable run for data cables

[JohnW2]

...

Can we be sure that that's part of the 'fixed installation', rather than, say, the lead of a power tool that was being used at the time?

Kind Regards, John

 

[motorbiking]

I really wouldn't bother future proofing. The limiting factor isn't really the cable its the protocol. There's no reason you couldn't get 10gbps through cat 6. At work. we have servers running dual 40gbit over copper.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I just assumed the building regulations available to us muggins wasn't the whole thing, and you needed to "buy" some literature that goes into detail.

No - all the actual regulations and all the Approved Documents are freely available online.

I suppose I really ought to contact building control but I don't really see why I should have to. In this day and age all guidance/regulations should be available online.

Yes, but if they are not you can email your Building Control - quicker and easier than searching online but with the bonus that you don't feel guilty about doing it, as it's not a lazy cop-out, it's what you're forced to do...

 

[JohnW2]

Try your LABC.

It's not an issue that concerns me personally, but, if only as a matter of curiosity, I'd be interested to hear if anyone here knows the answer.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Can we be sure that that's part of the 'fixed installation', rather than, say, the lead of a power tool that was being used at the time?

S'pose not..

 

[JohnW2]

I must admit I am a bit confused with regards to this aspect of the building regulations because I have looked at the Approved Document Part A on the government website and when I searched for notches there was nothing.

Indeed, as I said - but as I also said, if you look at section 1B6 (page 10) of the 1992 version (click here) , you'll find it!

But looking online paints a different picture. I just assumed the building regulations available to us muggins wasn't the whole thing, and you needed to "buy" some literature that goes into detail.

No. As you've now been told, what is available on-line is "it"!

I suppose I really ought to contact building control but I don't really see why I should have to. In this day and age all guidance/regulations should be available online.

If you and I are right that the Regs and official guidelines are all silent on this matter, then all you could probably get by contacting BC would be some individual's personal opinion/view - and that might not be the opinion/view that you want to hear!

For what it's worth, if I were in your position, I don't think I would be concerned, and would probably simply apply common sense.

Kind Regards, John

 

[sevenupcan]

I really wouldn't bother future proofing. The limiting factor isn't really the cable its the protocol. There's no reason you couldn't get 10gbps through cat 6. At work. we have servers running dual 40gbit over copper.

Like I said, it's not just to future proof it but incase I change my mind or make a mistake. Thanks for your thoughts though.

 

[sevenupcan]

Can't believe there are so many forum discussions on these types of questions regarding building regulations with people bickering, it makes me laugh, I've seen some really nasty comments on forums. It shouldn't be that hard to explain formally (in my opinion).

If you and I are right that the Regs and official guidelines are all silent on this matter, then all you could probably get by contacting BC would be some individual's personal opinion/view - and that might not be the opinion/view that you want to hear!

For what it's worth, if I were in your position, I don't think I would be concerned, and would probably simply apply common sense.

I hear you.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If you and I are right that the Regs and official guidelines are all silent on this matter, then all you could probably get by contacting BC would be some individual's personal opinion/view - and that might not be the opinion/view that you want to hear!

Unless you're looking at notifiable work where you need BC to agree that you've complied with Part A, in which case it's exactly what you want to hear.

In writing.

Before you start.

 

[sevenupcan]

Unless you're looking at notifiable work where you need BC to agree that you've complied with Part A, in which case it's exactly what you want to hear.

In writing.

Before you start.

I can imagine how that conversation will go when I ask them to provide me with it in writing.

Have you ever done that or heard it being done?

 

[JohnW2]

Unless you're looking at notifiable work where you need BC to agree that you've complied with Part A, in which case it's exactly what you want to hear. ... In writing. ... Before you start.

As the OP asks, have you ever actually tried that? (in relation to a matter not addressed in Building Regs or Approved Docs)

I've never personally tried it in relation to BC, but when I have attempted comparable things in other fields, any written answer I get (if they don't simply refuse) has been so full of caveats, disclaimers and vagueness as to be totally useless. One can often get more sensible/useful answers verbally, but the moment one asks for them in writing ..... !!

If Part A is silent on the matter, and there are no other relevant regs/guidances, I really can't see that anyone could ever accuse one of not "complying" with Part A (even though "complying" with a guideline is a rather odd concept), even if one had not 'asked' up-front.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Part A is not a guideline, it is a regulation.

And if BC decide work does not comply then you're going to be thrust into orders of magnitude more bother than asking them up-front what they think complies.

 

[sevenupcan]

I agree with your sentiment, but the Gov.uk website says

"The Department for Communities and Local Government publishes guidance called ‘Approved Documents’ on ways to meet building regulations."

 

[JohnW2]

Part A is not a guideline, it is a regulation.

Yes, sorry, I was not clear enough. Part A is (like Part P) so brief/vague that the only way one can attempt to demonstrate compliance with it is by demonstrating compliance with some other regulations/guidelines/whatever. In the case of Part P, we usually rely on compliance with BS7671. In the case of Part A, and maybe in my ignorance, the only thing I could cite "compliance" with would be the guidelines in Approved Doc P. That's what I was trying to say.

And if BC decide work does not comply then you're going to be thrust into orders of magnitude more bother than asking them up-front what they think complies.

True though that is, IF there are no explicit regs, or even guidelines (maybe there are?) then I very much doubt whether you would be able to get BC to commit themselves in writing to a ('bin ding') unqualified/"uncaveated" statement that something would comply. Verbally, perhaps, but in writing, I doubt it. ... and, of course, once one has asked the question, on cannot "un-ask" it!

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

I agree with your sentiment, but the Gov.uk website says ... "The Department for Communities and Local Government publishes guidance called ‘Approved Documents’ on ways to meet building regulations."

I think you are probably making the same mistake which I probably appeared to be making. BAS was talking about Part A of the Building Regs (which is regulation/law), not Approved Doc A. However, as I've just written, Part A says so little that one needs to look to some other regulations or guidelines in order to find a way of "complying with Part A" in relation to any matter of detail.

The Approved Docs also make it clear that adherence to those guidelines is not mandatory, and is not the only way of satisfying the Building Regs. For example, we nearly all rely on compliance with BS7671, not Approved Doc P, for demonstrating compliance with Part P of the Building Regs.

Kind Regards, John