Earth Bonding in bathroom

[EFLImpudence]

Why is it 600mm from entry if you only need 1 then why cant it be anywhere i

IT ISN'T

Also, the 600mm. only applies to internal meters; not to the point of entry although covered by 'where practicable'.

All strictly true, but I suspect that (since the figure appears elsewhere in the paragraph)

It is only mentioned once in 544.1.2 - in relation to a meter outlet.

many/most people interpret "as near as practicable to the point of entry" as meaning "<600mm if practicable".

They may but they are mistaken as there is no need to do that.

Indeed, in many situations, it could probably argued (maybe by a Jobsworth) that "as near as practicable to the point of entry" was actually a fair bit less than 600mm from the point of entry!

I agree but that is not what it says.

As in the OP - 'As near as practicable to the point of entry' may be in the bathroom above the point of entry .
(It is not known why this may be the case in this thread - but it could be concrete floors downstairs and upgrading)

 

[JohnW2]

many/most people interpret "as near as practicable to the point of entry" as meaning "<600mm if practicable".

They may but they are mistaken as there is no need to do that.

Well, they need to put some interpretation on 'as near as practicable', which is obvioulsy pretty subjective, but I don't think that "<600mm if possible" is too bad stab.

Indeed, in many situations, it could probably argued (maybe by a Jobsworth) that "as near as practicable to the point of entry" was actually a fair bit less than 600mm from the point of entry!

I agree but that is not what it says.

What doesn't it say - it certainly says "as near as practicable to the point of entry"? Again, it's down to a subjective interpretation of 'practicable', but if there is, say, a bit of perfectly accessible metal pipe sticking out of the kitchen wall/floor under the sink, one might struggle to argue that it was not 'practicable' to bond very close to the point of entry, unless there were genuine serious difficulties in getting a bonding conductor to there!

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

Well, they need to put some interpretation on 'as near as practicable', which is obvioulsy pretty subjective, but I don't think that "<600mm if possible" is too bad stab.

It doesn't matter, does it?
If the actual point of entry is, say, behind a cupboard or under the floor then where it emerges is good enough for bonding - as near as practicable.
If the actual point of entry is directly in front of you then do it there.

practicable
&#712;prakt&#618;k&#601;b(&#601l/Submit
adjective
able to be done or put into practice successfully.

Indeed, in many situations, it could probably argued (maybe by a Jobsworth) that "as near as practicable to the point of entry" was actually a fair bit less than 600mm from the point of entry!

I agree but that is not what it says.

What doesn't it say -

It doesn't mention 600mm. with regard to the point of entry which you said could be argued.

it certainly says "as near as practicable to the point of entry"? Again, it's down to a subjective interpretation of 'practicable', but if there is, say, a bit of perfectly accessible metal pipe sticking out of the kitchen wall/floor under the sink, one might struggle to argue that it was not 'practicable' to bond very close to the point of entry, unless there were genuine serious difficulties in getting a bonding conductor to there!

As above. It does seem rather obvious to me.
As near as practicable to the point of entry.
If not practicable at the point of entry then as as near as you can.

 

[JohnW2]

It does seem rather obvious to me. As near as practicable to the point of entry. If not practicable at the point of entry then as as near as you can.

I think the issue is that one (wo)man's "practicable" may be another (wo)man's "impracticable" (is that the right word, or "not practicable", or what?!).

What do you think is their intent? For example, can "practicable" just be a matter of convenience? For example, if the incoming pipe was easily accessible for connecting bonding just 50mm from the point of entry, but the route for getting a bonding conductor from there to the MET would be 'a pig' (but not impossible), would you regard that as "not practicable" (and therefore bond somewhere more convenient)?

Kind Regards, John

 

[aveatry]

and yes concrete floor downstairs so it went up wall in hall above CU then in ceiling and across to kitchen via the bathroom which is above kitchen, so the bonding is in bathroom AND then it gos down to the kitchen for another bond very close to the point of entry.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Just seen OP's latest but:

What do you think is their intent?

Ah. Judging by other regulations - who knows.

However, I think the definition of practicable is apt - " able to be done or put into practice successfully".

For example, can "practicable" just be a matter of convenience?

I suppose it could.

For example, if the incoming pipe was easily accessible for connecting bonding just 50mm from the point of entry, but the route for getting a bonding conductor from there to the MET would be 'a pig' (but not impossible), would you regard that as "not practicable" (and therefore bond somewhere more convenient)?

That's obviously a matter of degree and up to the individual to justify or an adjudicator (who he?) to decide.


Suppose I guessed correctly about this thread; someone has to install main bonding which was missing.
There are concrete floors and the decor downstairs cannot be disturbed, CU under stairs in the middle of the house - cannot even get to the outside, which would be a long way around the outside of the building three sides of a semi.
One of your 'pigs'.
So, into the ceiling above the CU with the rest of the wiring, along the void to the bathroom and there is the pipe two metres above the point of entry in the kitchen.

 

[westie101]

But is this extra bond unsafe or causing a problem? If neither I can't see the point of removing it just because"the book doesn't say it's needed"

If nothing else the "book" provides a minimum safe wiring design, but I very much doubt it suggests anything in excess of minimum requirements is not to be acceptable.

We often make decisions as designers and engineers on out system to exceed minimum requirements in certain situations.

 

[EFLImpudence]

and yes concrete floor downstairs so it went up wall in hall above CU then in ceiling and across to kitchen via the bathroom which is above kitchen, so the bonding is in bathroom AND then it gos down to the kitchen for another bond very close to the point of entry.

All is well, then.

 

[EFLImpudence]

But is this extra bond unsafe or causing a problem? If neither I can't see the point of removing it just because"the book doesn't say it's needed"

OP wants to remove it because it is in the way.

If nothing else the "book" provides a minimum safe wiring design, but I very much doubt it suggests anything in excess of minimum requirements is not to be acceptable.

There is no point bonding a pipe to itself further along.

We often make decisions as designers and engineers on out system to exceed minimum requirements in certain situations.

And the converse is also true.
Bond sink pipe to bath pipe without thinking and realising it is the same pipe.

 

[JohnW2]

However, I think the definition of practicable is apt - " able to be done or put into practice successfully".

Except that one still has to make judgments. There are plenty of those 'a pig' situations in which the bonding could be connected "successfully" very close to the point of entry, but at the cost of a lot of hassle, swearing and maybe money. There are surely very few, if any situations in which it would be totally impossible to "successfully" bond near the point of entry, if one was prepared to expend enough time, energy and cost etc.?

Suppose I guessed correctly about this thread; someone has to install main bonding which was missing.
There are concrete floors and the decor downstairs cannot be disturbed, CU under stairs in the middle of the house - cannot even get to the outside, which would be a long way around the outside of the building three sides of a semi. One of your 'pigs'. ... So, into the ceiling above the CU with the rest of the wiring, along the void to the bathroom and there is the pipe two metres above the point of entry in the kitchen.

I thought that the bonding conductor took that tour of the house (from MET) (and attached to a few other pipes on the way!) on its way to eventually bond the pipe close to the point of entry in the kitchen. If so, there's nothing wrong with that, is there?

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

There is no point bonding a pipe to itself further along.

I once saw a house in which every pipe fitting, whether compression or soldered, had a G/Y bridging across it!

Kind Regards, John

 

[aveatry]

the extra ones on the bath hot and cold have been left its just the extra one that went from the bath cold to the very same cold for the shower that is now removed

 

[aveatry]

I thought that the bonding conductor took that tour of the house (from MET) (and attached to a few other pipes on the way!) on its way to eventually bond the pipe close to the point of entry in the kitchen. If so, there's nothing wrong with that, is there?

Kind Regards, John

Yes that is how it all runs
An was all done by Mr twisty earths around the back of the junction boxes in the atic for the upstairs lighting circut 1997 when the whole house was re wired which is a 1960s semi

 

[EFLImpudence]

However, I think the definition of practicable is apt - " able to be done or put into practice successfully".

Except that one still has to make judgments. There are plenty of those 'a pig' situations in which the bonding could be connected "successfully" very close to the point of entry, but at the cost of a lot of hassle, swearing and maybe money.

Perhaps, but it may be done 'successfully' without that hassle and expense.

I know you don't think there is any difference in bonding at a certain point or two metres away.

There are surely very few, if any situations in which it would be totally impossible to "successfully" bond near the point of entry, if one was prepared to expend enough time, energy and cost etc.?

What would be the advantage of expending all that if the room above were easy to access?

Suppose I guessed correctly about this thread; someone has to install main bonding which was missing.
There are concrete floors and the decor downstairs cannot be disturbed, CU under stairs in the middle of the house - cannot even get to the outside, which would be a long way around the outside of the building three sides of a semi. One of your 'pigs'. ... So, into the ceiling above the CU with the rest of the wiring, along the void to the bathroom and there is the pipe two metres above the point of entry in the kitchen.

I thought that the bonding conductor took that tour of the house (from MET) (and attached to a few other pipes on the way!) on its way to eventually bond the pipe close to the point of entry in the kitchen. If so, there's nothing wrong with that, is there?

No, nothing; nor did I think there was anything wrong before the OP found the kitchen bit.

 

[EFLImpudence]

its just the extra one that went from the bath cold to the very same cold for the shower that is now removed

That's fine.